Cultures of Death and Politics of Corpse Supply: Anatomy in Vienna, 1848–1914

Abstract

SummaryNineteenth-century Vienna is well known to medical historians as a leading centre of medical research and education, offering easy access to patients and corpses to students from all over the world. This article seeks to explain how this enviable supply with cadavers was achieved, why it provoked so little opposition at a time when Britain and the United States saw widespread protests against dissection, and how it was threatened from mid-century. To understand permissive Viennese attitudes we need to place them in a longue durée history of death and dissection, and to pay close attention to the city's political geography as it was transformed into a major imperial capital. The tolerant stance of the Roman Catholic Church, strong links to Southern Europe and the weak position of individuals in the absolutist state all contributed to an idiosyncratic anatomical culture. But as the fame of the Vienna medical school peaked in the later 1800s, the increased demand created by rising student numbers combined with intensified interdisciplinary competition to produce a shortfall that professors found increasingly difficult to meet. Around 1900, new religious groups and mass political parties challenged the long-standing anatomical practice by refusing to supply cadavers and making dissection into an instrument of political struggle. This study of the material preconditions for anatomy at one of Europe's most influential medical schools provides a contrast to the dominant Anglo-American histories of death and dissection.

When the dead teach: Exploring the postvital life of cadavers in Danish dissection labs

“…First, it underscores that practices, as well as the conditions that shape them, change over time. For instance, today bodies are supplied through voluntary donation in most European countries (McHanwell et al 2008;Riederer et al 2012) including Denmark, whereas they used to be supplied through governmental appropriation of bodies from criminals and the poor or via extralegal ways of procuring cadavers, such as grave robbery (Richardson 2000;Sappol 2002;Buklijas 2008;Nystrom 2014;Olejaz Tellerup 2013). These changes in supply are interesting as they tell us something about the intersections of the medical use of cadaveric material, ways of understanding corporeal afterlife, and the practising of rituals and values related to the management of the dead.…”

Cadaver, Carcase, or Carrion?

“…In the Western world, for historical and religious reasons, different words have been applied to dead human bodies vis-à-vis other species. 3 However, in light of the current concept of “One Health” and the etymology summarized above, we suggest that the use of cadaver in forensic veterinary reports is preferable to carcase . It follows that the description “cadaver showing advanced postmortem change” is more suitable than the word carrion .…”

Architecture for Anatomy: History, Affect, and the Material Reproduction of the Body in Two Medical School Buildings

“…By the mid-19th century, however, Vienna had become a burgeoning international centre for medical education, largely because of ready access to cadavers. Here the tolerant stance assumed by the Catholic Church, the influence of Southern European cultural assumptions around the body and soul after death, and the weak position of individuals in the absolutist state contributed to a notable permissiveness of cadaveric dissection (Buklijas, 2008). Tied, as it was, to Austria during this period, Semmelweis’ Anatomy Department represents an even more marked shift away from both ethical and material constraints on student use of cadavers.…”