Monthly Archives: September 2024

El Mysterious Case de Apple 228

By José Pardo-Tomás

The Museo Pedagógico in Montevideo [fig. 1], named after José Pedro Varela (1845-1879), considered the founder of republican, public, compulsory, secular and free education in Uruguay, is located in the heart of the city. Since its foundation in 1889, it has occupied a neoclassical palace whose upper floor also housed, for a time, the Internado Normal de Señoritas [Normal Boarding School for Young Ladies], for the female teachers who were trained there. Wandering through the current dense and extensive permanent exhibition, with the kind guidance of William Tedesco, one of its teaching staff, it is impossible not to be fascinated by the abundance and variety of the materials on display.

fig. 1 Museo Pedagógico de Montevideo façade

In spite of this, we cannot deviate much from the purpose that has led us here; we are looking for the possible existence in the museum of “pomonas”, that is, one of those collections of models that reproduce the species and varieties of fruits that are produced in a certain territory. These are figures moulded in wax, plaster, papier-mâché or other materials, with the purpose of faithfully reproducing the fruits in their natural size, colour and appearance. From the middle of the eighteenth century onwards, this type of collection aroused the interest of private collectors and then expanded its uses and, therefore, its audiences. As is well known, the context in which most of these collections were produced was due to the extraordinary demand from institutions dedicated to the teaching of horticulture due to la frénésie taxinomique, floristique et horticole du XIXe siècle, in the fortunate expression of Denis Diagre-Vanderpelen.

However, as we have said, there was also a certain demand for these fruit models in other areas and from a period before the appearance of these specialized educational institutions. Our aim, as we have already shown in another post on this blog, is twofold. First, to locate collections of fruit models from different historical provenances and with different uses, both historical and current, in order to reconstruct their circulation and the different exhibition regimes they have known. Second, to find material evidence of the existence of a production of these fruit models on a local scale, by local craftsmen and workshops, in order to respond to the local demand of collectors, museums or schools, before and after the irruption in the market of the large firms producing pedagogical materials dedicated to the teaching of horticulture and fruit growing.

fig. 2 Montevideo, Museo Pedagogico Botany Showcase

In the Pedagogical Museum, in the room dedicated to Clemente Estable (1894-1976), founder of the Institute of Biological Research of Montevideo, didactic materials related to science teaching are exhibited. In it, there is a little – or, depending on how you look at it, a lot – of everything: things you would expect and surprising things. Most of the materials are generally recognizable as coming from the great manufacturers of didactic models for the teaching of natural sciences; some of them (including one from this same museum) has been reported, in another post on this blog, by Susana V. García, one of the great specialists on the subject. In the room we are referring to, the plates, murals and spectacular botanical models of Vilmorin, Auzoux, Deyrolle, etc. are immediately recognizable [fig. 2]. But there does not seem to be what we are looking for; something corroborated by the museum staff consulted: there is no memory of a collection of fruit models.

However, on the second shelf to the right of the display case with the “Botany” sign and in which the spectacular Deyrolle models of enormous flowers, designed to show in detail the reproductive organs of angiosperms, attract attention, we are struck by an ‘odd couple’: two models representing apples, but of very different size and modelled with different materials [fig 3]. On the right, an apple of enormous size, an articulated model designed to open longitudinally and show the inside of the fruit, perhaps also from Deyrolle, although for the moment it has not been possible to confirm this.

fig. 3a Apples, Montevideo Museo Pedagogico

fig. 3b Apple 228, Montevideo Museo Pedagogico

But the model on the left is the one that really catches our attention: an apple of natural size and colour, which looks like it was moulded in plaster. It has a label attached to the lower left side with a number “228”; nothing else. In the old inventories of the materials that initially formed the museum, there is a brief record 228 “apple”, also another that says “tomato” and a third, “onion”. There are no further indications, neither of the material, nor of the origin, nor of the manufacturer. Currently, neither the tomato nor the onion are exhibited in the showcases of the “Clemente Estable” room, but in a photographic album dating from 1894, five years after the museum was inaugurated, there is a photograph of a showcase in which these two models are visible (but not the apple) [fig. 4]. In the collection of eighty-two Vilmorin moulages now in the Muséum d’Auxerre, there are several models of onions and tomatoes; but there are none of apples. There are several hypotheses about the provenance of these three models.

fig. 4 Album 1894 Showcase, Montevideo Museo Pedagogico

On the one hand, they could come from Deroylle, although botanical models of this type were not very frequent in his catalogue, unlike his pièces d’anatomie botanique, which can be found in almost all the didactic collections that have survived to the present day, in pedagogical museums such as the one in Montevideo, as well as in primary schools, secondary schools, colleges and universities. Without going any further, in Montevideo, collections of these pieces can be found both in the Faculty of Agronomy of the University of the Republic (I thank Victoria Valtierra, researcher at the Botany Laboratory for kindly providing me with the information and photographs of the 6 models that are preserved), and in the fascinating Museum of Natural History “Dr. Carlos A. Torres de la Llosa”, located in the IAVA building (“Alfredo Vázquez Acevedo” Institute), which I had the pleasure of visiting with two exceptional guides: Erika del Pino and Martín Batallés.

On the other hand, the three models could have come from the collection offruit and vegetable moulages that the French horticultural company Vilmorin-Andrieux et Cie. had been producing since 1850. The relationship of Vilmorin-Andrieux firm with the region of the Río de La Plata region went back at least to the years 1848-53, when Vilmorin himself had proposed to Aimé Bonpland to become the go-between the French company and the horticulturists of the vast region on both sides of the Uruguay River. In those years, Bonpland went from Corrientes to Montevideo not only to collect his annual pension sent from the Muséum de Paris, but also to collect goods that he had bought, by catalogue, from Vilmorin. These orders for his chacra (estate) in Santa Ana do not seem to have included moulages, but only fruit, vegetable seeds and ornamental flower bulbs, as can be deduced from the catalogue, the invoices and the two letters of Vilmorin found among Bonpland’s documents preserved in the Museo de Farmacobotánica “Juan A. Domínguez”, at the University of Buenos Aires. In any case, this and other episodes prove a long-standing and wide circulation of Vilmorin’s catalogues and products in the vast Cuenca del Plata region, comprised between Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Brazil.

Finally, a third hypothesis that cannot be ruled out or confirmed for the moment: in those initial years of the Museum there may have been an artisan workshop in Montevideo dedicated to the manufacture of moulages. There is no doubt that local demand in those years was growing and not limited to fruit models, judging by what we know from other areas, such as the medical world. Specifically, I am referring to the possible existence of anatomical moulages in the collection of the old faculty of medicine, whose chair of anatomy began to operate in 1876.

We will therefore have to continue searching. Solving the mysterious case of apple 228 will bring us closer to a better understanding of the contexts of production, circulation and exhibition of fruit models: an imitation of the territory of nature which Pomona governed and which, for more than a century and a half, attracted collectors, artists, horticulturists, merchants and teachers.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Georges (Jorge) Engerrand (1877-1961), global prehistory and European collections in Mexico City, by Nathalie Richard

The history of European prehistory collections in Mexico City is not easy to recount. These specimens were moved several times. They are now mainly kept at the Museo nacional de las culturas del mundo (MNCM). A few pieces are also on display in a showcase at the UNAM’s Museo de geología.  At the MNCN, part of these series was displayed in a room dedicated to universal prehistory, which is now closed. They are now stored in the deposit of the museum (Fig. 1).

Figure 1 – European prehistoric tools in the storage area of the National Museum of World Cultures in Mexico City. @Photo by the author.

The journey of these objects towards their current location is full of uncertainties, as the archives are fragmentary. But several clues suggest that the earliest pieces to arrive in Mexico city are linked to the life and work of Georges Engerrand.

Georges Engerrand, anarchism and prehistory.

Born in Libourne in 1877, Georges Engerrand studied natural sciences at Bordeaux University between 1895 and 1898 (Campbell 1962). During these years, he was involved in anarchist circles, published several articles in Les Temps nouveaux and sided for Captain Dreyfus in the events that were causing deep divisions in France at the time. A pacifist and Dreyfus supporter, he refused to do his compulsory military service. Risking imprisonment, he fled to Brussels in 1898, where he joined up with Elisée Reclus, one of the leading figures in the intellectual anarchist circles of the time.

Engerrand stayed in the Belgian capital for almost 10 years, teaching geology and prehistory at several establishments, including the Université nouvelle de Bruxelles or Ecole libre d’enseignement supérieur (1894-1919), an institution founded by socialists and anarchists where Reclus taught (Elmer 2022; Mosquete 2004). During this period, he wrote a thesis in geology and numerous publications, mainly on geology and prehistory (Newcombe 1961). His book Six leçons de préhistoire (Bruxelles, Larcier, 1905), a summary intended for a broad readership, was awarded a prize by the Belgian Academy of Sciences.

A supporter of evolutionism, Engerrand was an advocate of a science-based prehistory, founded primarily on the geological (stratigraphic) study of the sites. He associated the development of this discipline with the drive to emancipate humanity through science, in essays marked by a rationalist conception that he shared with many anarchist intellectuals. The Spanish translation of his 1905 book, Nociones de la primeras edades de la humanidad (Barcelona, Publicaciones de la escuela moderna, 1905), was prefaced by E. Reclus.

During his time in Brussels, Engerrand became friends with the Belgian prehistorian Aimé Rutot (1847-1933). He endorsed his hypotheses about the existence of a very ancient human being whose crude tools, known as eoliths, would be found in geological layers dating from the Tertiary period, older than the Lower Palaeolithic (De Bont 2003).

Engerrand and the first course in global prehistory in Mexico.

The reasons for G. Engerrand’s decision to move to Mexico are not precisely known, but it is possible that he viewed this country as a new opportunity for his career and for the advancement of the international anarchist rationalist project (Graham 1961, Rutsch 2010). He arrived in 1907 to join the Instituto Geológico Nacional as a geologist, and became chief geologist of the “tertiary-quaternary” section, a position he held until 1915. In this capacity, he undertook numerous field trips, during which he also made archaeological discoveries. In 1909, for example, he found at Concepción, in the state of Campeche, a lithic industry without ceramics, the shape of which was reminiscent of the oldest knapped flints found in Europe (Engerrand & Urbina 1909). This typological comparison led him to postulate the existence of an early prehistory in Mexico, but the lack of a geological context for the Concepción discovery made him extremely cautious in his conclusions.

In 1909-1910, Engerrand was appointed professor of prehistory at the Museo Nacional (now the Museo Nacional de Antropología, named Museo Nacional de Arqueología, Historia y Etnologia in 1910), a position he held alongside his work at the Instituto de Geología until 1914. In this capacity, he gave lectures on global prehistory, placing Mexican pre-Hispanic archaeology in a broader chronological framework and in a global geographical context, while promoting the stratigraphic method. A general outline of the course kept in the archives set out a 4-year programme, with three hours per week from 1909 onwards (Archivo histórico del Museo nacional de Antropología, vol. 289, 11707 DIRcur). The first year was a general introduction to geology and its links with prehistory, outlining the history of the discipline, discussing the uses of ethnographic comparison, presenting known paleoanthropological data and the biological theories about human origins, and ending with a guide to field work. The second year focused on Tertiary and Quaternary lithic industries in Europe. One section was devoted to eoliths, using a vocabulary forged by Rutot. The third year covered the art, fauna, flora and human races of the European Quaternary era. It included a section entitled “An attempt to reconstruct the life and mentality of prehistoric man in the light of known facts”, and then focused on the Neolithic period. The fourth year dealt with the transition from prehistory to history and with extra-European prehistory, with a special focus on the American continent. The debates going on in the United-States over the existence of an American Palaeolithic were discussed, as well as the research carried out in Brazil and Argentina on the same topic. The question of the transition from prehistory to pre-Hispanic cultures concluded the course.

Engerrand was also involved in the work of the Escuela Internacional de Arqueología y Etnología Americanas, which operated in Mexico from 1910 to 1917 and in which Franz Boas played a central coordinating role (Ruiz 2003, Rutsch 2010, Taladoire 2022). Engerrand became its director in 1912-1913 and, along with others, promoted stratigraphic methods in order to establish a more precise chronological sequence for Mexican sites. The political instability of the period of the Mexican Revolution, his designation as a foreigner (although he had obtained Mexican nationality and changed his French first name “Georges” to Hispanic “Jorge”), and some interpersonal conflicts forced him to leave Mexico for the United States in 1917. He ended his career there as a professor at the University of Texas.

History of collections

The history of the European prehistoric collections in the public institutions of Mexico City is linked to the first course in global prehistory given by Engerrand. However, the archives and collections that have been found to date are incomplete, and we have clues rather than evidence on this subject.

Nevertheless, the historical archives of the National Anthropology Museum show that the matter of setting up a collection to complement Engerrand’s course was raised as early as November 1909. To this effect, the museum’s director wrote to the Secretary of Public Education asking for a collection of “general prehistory” to be purchased from a specialized dealer in Belgium, the Comptoir ethnographique de Bruxelles. The collection consisted of 730 items “que le Profesor de Prehistoria de este Museo […] juzga non solo única, por su importancia y rareza, sino indispensable para la enseñanza de su clase, que carece en absoluto de arsenal prehistórico”. The museum was notified of the Ministry’s approval a few days later (Archivo histórico del Museo nacional de Antropología, vol. 267, 10495). But the archives remain silent on the follow-up to the transaction.

However, the objects that I was able to see or that feature in the MNCM’s inventories bear significant indications. They suggest that pieces arrived from Belgium in relation to Engerrand’s teachings and ideas and strongly point at the Brussels Comptoir ethnographique as the provider.

Many of these objects come from sites that were emblematic of the research carried out by Belgian prehistorians in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, such as the Trou de Chaleux, Spiennes, Boncelles and Mesvin. However, unlike sites such as La Madeleine or Solutré in France, these Belgian sites were not subsequently considered to have played a key role in the development of the discipline. Several, such as Boncelles, present a questionable stratigraphy.

In addition to the name of the site, these objects bear an indication referring to industries whose names were coined by Belgian prehistorians and adopted by Aimé Rutot (Fig. 2). In the Spanish translation of his 1905 work, Nociones de la primeras edades de la humanidad, Engerrand endorsed this vocabulary (more clearly than in the French version, since these names were not accepted in France). He adopted the divisions proposed by his friend Rutot to designate certain ancient prehistoric cultures, based on the names of Belgian sites, for example “Mesvinian” (Mesvin site) or “Strepyen” (Strepy site) (Fig. 3).

Figure 2 – Flint tool marked “Bergerac, Strepyen”, MNCM @photo by the author.

These names associated with Rutot were also used in the outline of the prehistory course given in Mexico City. Coined by Belgian prehistorians, they were not adopted by the majority of the international scientific community. Most of them were abandoned between the two world wars.

Figure 3 – Table of prehistoric industries according to Rutot, reproduced in Engerrand’s Nociones de la primeras edades de la humanidad (1905).

Moreover, the content of the remaining series at the MNCN reveals that 53% of the stone tools came from Belgian sites, and more than 80% from sites listed in the catalogue of the Comptoir ethnographique de Belgique for 1909 (Fig. 4). This specialized shop was owned by Louis Exsteens, a dealer in Brussels who was close to the prehistorian Aimé Rutot and sold series organized according to his classification.

Figure 4 – Collections on sale at the Comptoir ethnographique de Bruxelles in 1909.

Conclusion

Although it leaves a number of questions unanswered, this paper shows that the Nacional Museum of Mexico bought a collection of European prehistoric artefacts in 1909 from a specialized dealer, in order to complete its collections and provide specimens in relation to the creation of a new course on prehistory. This story is emblematic of the reasons that may have fostered the circulation of prehistoric series from Europe to Latin America before the First World War. It underlines the importance of a flow of archaeological objects that is the reverse of the one most often studied by historians of science and collections.

These objects arriving in the Mexican collections testify of the European conception of prehistory as a global phenomenon, whose traces were likely to be discovered all over the world under similar typological forms. In the Americas, such traces had been discovered at an early stage in the United States, where they fuelled heated controversy over their dating, and in Argentina, where the ideas of Fiorentino Ameghino were debated (Meltzer 1983, Podgorny 2015). In Mexico, the assumption of the existence of lithic industries that predated ceramic cultures emerged more strongly at the beginning of the 20th century. In this context, the creation of reference collections, allowing for typological comparisons between American and European objects, was a crucial issue, as shown by the example of Georges Engerrand.

Bibliography

CAMPBELL T. N., « George Charles Marius Engerrand 1877-1961 », American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 64, No. 5, Part 1 (Oct., 1962), pp. 1052-1056.

DE BONT Raf, « The Creation of Prehistoric Man: Aimé Rutot and the Eolith Controversy, 1900–1920 », Isis, vol. 94(4), 2003, p. 604-630.

ELMER Margot, « Construire l’internationalisme. Communication, adaptation et réseaux des étudiants étrangers de l’Université Nouvelle de Bruxelles (1894-1914) », Revue du Nord, 2022/1-2 (n° 442-443), p. 169-195.

ENGERRAND Jorge, & Fernando URBINA, “Nota preliminar acerca de un yacimiento prehistorico ubicado en Concepción(estado de Campeche) acompañada de un resumen frances”, Boletín de La Sociedad Geológica Mexicana, vol. 6, no. 1, 1909, p. 79–87.

GRAHAM John H., “George C. Engerrand in Mexico, 1907-1917”, Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological Society, 1961, Vol. 32, p. 19-31

MELTZER, David J., “The Antiquity of Man and the Development of American Archaeology.” Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 6, 1983, p. 1–51

MOSQUETE Teresa Vicente, “Geografía y ciencia en la Universidad Nueva de Bruselas: 1894-1919”, Historia de las ciencias y de las técnicas, coord. por Luis Español González et al., vol. 2, 2004, p. 937-957.

NEWCOMBE W. W. Jr, “George C. Engerrand in Europe, 1898-1907”, Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological Society, 1961, Vol. 32, p. 9-17.

PODGORNY Irina, “Human Origins in the New World? Florentino Ameghino and the Emergence of Prehistoric Archaeology in the Americas (1875–1912)”, PaleoAmerica: A Journal of Early Human Migration and Dispersal, 1, 2015, p. 68–80.

RUIZ Carmen, Insiders and Outsiders in Mexican Archaeology (1890-1920). Tesis doctoral en filosofía. Texas University, Austin, 2003.

RUTSCH Mechthild, “”Vivir de una vida nueva”. Jorge Engerrand (1877-1961), entre la antropología mexicana y la estadounidense de principios del siglo XX”, Nueva Antropología. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, n° 73, 2010, p. 147-169.

TALADOIRE Eric, “George Charles Marius Engerrand (1877-1961) y la Escuela Internacional de México”, Arqueología, (61), p. 165–183.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the teams at the Museo Nacional de las Culturas del Mundo and the Museo de Geología de la UNAM for their support and assistance with this research.

Irina Podgorny and Nathalie Richard at the ESHS conference

Barcelona, September 6, 2024, 16.30-18.00, #40.109

Tied with Wire: The Stability of the Temporary in the Case of Pedro de Angeli’s Fossil Mammal Collections, Buenos Aires in the 1840s

Irina Podgorny, CONICET and Museo de La Plata

Abstract: In this paper I will present the results of my research on the collections of South American fossil mammals that were sold or donated to different European museums in the 1830s and 1840s. Some of these pieces integrate the skeletons that are still exhibited today in London, Berlin or Paris. Others, however, remain in their boxes in the state in which they were sent, revealing the ways in which they were prepared and packaged, an aspect that complements the information provided in the letters written in the context of these transactions.

“CL”. About a Tag and Specimens on the Move

Nathalie Richard, Le Mans Université, Temos UMR 9016

Abstract: In many collections of prehistoric artefacts around the world, from Mexico City to Buenos Aires, from Paris to Barcelona and Neuchâtel, specimens carry a similar tag. In this communication, I argue that this tag fits well the definition of a “paraobject” put forward by José Beltrán. The “CL” tag is an object which is distinct from the specimen but comes with it. It gives information that is not given by the specimen itself, especially on its history and past moves. Based on research in the collections and archive of different institutions in Latin America and Europe, this paper will first explain what the capital letters “CL” stand for. It will analyse the specific scientific background that justified the travels of specimens carrying such a tag from France to many institutions abroad, as well as the various social and material contexts in which these travels took place. In accordance with one of the main research hypotheses in the EU project SciCoMove, my paper will exemplify that the circulation of scientific specimens was not a one-way process from non-Western “exotic” countries to the Western museums, but that collections also travelled the other way round.

Programme of the conference : https://eventum.upf.edu/94068/programme/science-technology-humanity-and-the-earth-11th-eshs-conference-4-7-september-2024.html

Los modelos anatómicos de Friedrich Ziegler del Museo de Anatomía de la Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad de la República, en Montevideo 

by José Pardo-Tomás

a Juan Ignacio Gil, por otros 25 años de amistad 

Desde hace unas décadas, está en construcción una historia material de la enseñanza de las ciencias y, en concreto, de la medicina, que está cambiando nuestra manera de entender la relación entre los saberes, las prácticas y sus formas de transmisión. Esa vuelta a la materialidad ha implicado e implica también una nueva mirada hacia los objetos que, en el pasado -más o menos reciente- sirvieron para producir y comunicar el conocimiento. Esto ocurre de manera especial en el caso de la medicina moderna, en donde el conocimiento sobre el cuerpo humano se concibe como la base para conseguir una explicación acerca del proceso de enfermar, de sanar o de mantener la salud.  

Por ello no es extraño que los modelos anatómicos hayan ocupado un lugar preeminente entre los objetos al servicio de la producción y comunicación del conocimiento sobre el cuerpo. Por otra parte, el modelo, en tanto artefacto que se propone como representación de la realidad, plantea siempre un cuestionamiento de su estatus epistémico que lleva a la sucesión de formas, de materiales y de técnicas que se presentan como mejoras en la pretensión de representar la realidad con la máxima “objetividad”, para producir y comunicar conocimiento “verdadero” con la máxima eficacia.  

Desde este encuadre teórico, fruto de la atención a la cultura material de la medicina, se entiende el interés de los estudios históricos que se han ocupado de los fabricantes de modelos anatómicos, de las técnicas, materiales y procesos de producción de los mismos y, naturalmente, de la formación de colecciones en espacios y ámbitos de distinto tipo: asistenciales, museísticos, particulares, empresariales –sin olvidar entre ellos los del espectáculo y el entretenimiento– y, por supuesto, los de las instituciones educativas.  

En Montevideo, en el Museo de Anatomía de la Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad de la República, cuyo edificio data de 1911 [fig. 1], existe una colección de ceras embriológicas, magníficamente conservada, aunque hasta ahora no ha sido debidamente estudiada desde el punto de vista histórico. Gracias a las gestiones de Juan Ignacio Gil y a la amable disponibilidad de Lucía Alfonsín, preparadora biológica del museo, pudimos acceder a las totalidad de las piezas exhibidas en las vitrinas de la sala principal del mencionado museo [fig. 2]. Acceder a las piezas sin el obstáculo del vidrio de la vitrina permitió, entre otras cosas, poder leer con claridad lo escrito en las placas metálicas clavadas en los soportes de madera de las piezas [fig. 3]. Placas que son de dos tipos: una delantera, con una breve descripción (en alemán, en el caso de las piezas uruguayas) de qué representa el modelo y otra trasera -lo que orienta la forma en que cada pieza debe ser exhibida- con el nombre y la dirección del fabricante. Gracias a ello, pudimos confirmar la sospecha que la primera contemplación de las piezas nos hizo albergar: se trataba modelos fabricados por Friedrich Ziegler (1860-1936).  

Fig. 1 – Puerta de entrada de la Facultad de Medicina de Montevideo.

Fig. 2 – Sala del Museo de Anatomía de Montevideo.

Fig. 3 – Ceras embriológicas de Ziegler.

El laboratorio y los talleres de ceroplástica Ziegler fueron fundados en 1852, en Freiburg im Bresgau (Baden-Württemberg, Alemania), por Adolf Ziegler (1820-1889), pero alcanzaron su gran éxito internacional bajo la dirección de su hijo Friedrich. A partir de la cera de abejas, materia con la que se formaron los primeros modelos, el laboratorio Ziegler supo conseguir nuevas ceras para modelar, más dúctiles y, a la vez, más resistentes, mediante la incorporación de varios tipos de resinas. A partir de la última década del siglo XIX y primera de la centuria siguiente, los catálogos de la casa Ziegler –que incluían, además de los modelos embriológicos (su gran bestseller), otros anatómicos, zoológicos y botánicos– se repartían por todo el mundo. Un éxito que duró apenas unas décadas, pero que hizo posible que, hoy en día, se encuentren ejemplares Ziegler no solo en museos anatómicos de facultades de medicina de los cinco continentes, sino también en colecciones particulares y en sitos Internet de venta de piezas para coleccionistas.  

Una vez identificada la procedencia de la colección uruguaya, quedaba esclarecer –en la medida de lo posible– el momento de la llegada de la colección a Montevideo, así como su uso y repercusión en las prácticas educativas y de investigación de la facultad. Para ello, resultó imprescindible contar con el conocimiento de la historia de la facultad por parte de Juan Ignacio Gil y con la eficacia y amabilidad de su bibliotecaria, Amparo de los Santos. Entre los tres, no tardamos mucho en localizar la fuente crucial para determinar el momento y las circunstancias de la adquisición por la facultad de las piezas embriológicas de Ziegler. En 1906, Juan Pou Orfila, publicó unas Observaciones sobre enseñanza de la medicina, donde narra el viaje que le había llevado a visitar algunas facultades de medicina de Francia y Alemania [fig. 4a]. El uso en ellas de las colecciones de modelos anatómicos para la investigación y la enseñanza de la anatomía, la embriología, la anatomía patológica, la dermatología e, incluso, las técnicas de intervención quirúrgica. En de su extenso repaso por las colecciones visitadas, merecen una mención especial “los magníficos modelos de cera de Ziegler conocidos, obras maestras de paciencia y exactitud científica”, de los que “el profesor Hertwig se sirve constantemente, en sus lecciones de Embriología”. Y una nota al pie –única referencia en todo el registro de su viaje europeo– indica: “Friedrich Ziegler, Atelier für wissenschaftliche Plastik, Freiburg in Baden” [Juan Pou Orfila, Observaciones sobre enseñanza de la medicina, Montevideo, Imprenta “El Siglo Ilustrado” de Mariño y Caballero, 1906, pp. 45-46).  

Fig. 4a – Ceras embriológicas de Ziegler.

Así pues, no parece demasiado arriesgado suponer que la adquisición de la colección de embriología de Ziegler por la facultad uruguaya arrancara de esta entusiasta recomendación de quien fuera uno de sus más destacados profesores. La suposición queda confirmada por el propio Juan Pou Orfila pocos años después, cuando en 1915 publicó un trabajo en la revista Anales de la Universidad, que también se publicó como libro, en el que afirmaba:  

“Los célebres modelos embriológicos de Ziegler, de Friburgo, son, a este respecto, los más notables y mejores que se conocen. En el mundo entero se les considera como obras maestras de exactitud científica. Podemos dar fe de la utilidad de estas piezas para la demostración, por haberlas usado en los cursos de Embriología e Histología que dimos en nuestra Facultad en los años de 1907 a 1912″ [Juan Pou Orfila, “Libro II. Pedagogía médica”, Anales de la Universidad 26 (núm. 93), 1915, p. 101]. 

La colección uruguaya exhibida en la vitrina consta de 51 piezas. Una serie de 38 ceras sobre soportes individuales de madera que reproduce el desarrollo del embrión (la serie original constaba de 48); comienza con la implantación del huevo (4 piezas, falta la núm. 1) y su desarrollo (22 piezas, faltan los núms. 2, 4, 12), continúa con el primer desarrollo embrionario (10 piezas faltan los núms. 2, 3 y 10) y concluye con el del embrión propiamente dicho (10 piezas, faltan los núms. 5, 8 y 9) [figs. 4a, 4b, 4c]. Otra serie de 13 piezas se hallan agrupadas sobre cuatro plataformas: 5 piezas con el letrero Entwickelung des menslichen Gehirns muestran, en dos plataformas distintas, el desarrollo del cerebro humano, mientras que las otras 8 piezas, dispuestas en otras dos plataformas, reproducen fases del desarrollo cerebral de varias especies de vertebrados. La sala alberga también otros 2 modelos anatómicos fabricados por Ziegler, pero de características muy distintas. Se trata de dos grandes piezas articuladas y giratorias, montadas sobre un soporte de madera que tiene adherida una etiqueta que dice: Modell zur Erläuterung des Faserferlasufes und der Kerne des Mittelhirnes und des verlängerten Markes eines Neugeborenen (Modelo para explicar las férulas de fibras y los núcleos del mesencéfalo y la médula oblonga de un recién nacido) [figs. 5]

Fig. 4b – Ceras embriológicas de Ziegler.

Fig. 4c – Ceras embriológicas de Ziegler.

Fig. 5 – Modelo anatómico articulado.

REFERENCIAS BIBLIOGRÁFICAS 

  • Para una aproximación a la figura y la labor educativa de Juan Pou Orfila, véase la obra de su descendiente, Ricardo Pou Ferrari, actual presidente de la Sociedad Uruguaya de Historia de la Medicina, que en 2006 publicó la biografía Juan Pou Orfila. Crónica de una pasión pedagógica.  

OTRAS REFERENCIAS 

  • En los últimos veinte años, se han recuperado y restaurado diversas colecciones (completas e incompletas) de las ceras embriológicas de los Ziegler. Esto ha hecho posible, además de su exhibición permanente en museos anatómicos de facultades de medicina como la de Montevideo, su inserción en contextos más ricos y dirigidos a audiencias más amplias, en especial en exposiciones temporales. Por citar dos ejemplos descollantes, aunque muy distintos en intención y orientación: Making Visible Embryos creada por Nick Hopwood y Tatjana Buklijas en Cambridge, entre 2008-2010; y Sublime Anatomie creada por Andrea Carlino, Philippe Comar, Anna Luppi, Vincenzo Napolano y Laura Perrone, en Roma, entre 2019 y 2021. 

Friedrich Ziegler’s anatomical models from the Medical School’s Museo de Anatomía, Montevideo. 

by José Pardo-Tomás

to Juan Ignacio Gil, for another 25 years of friendship 

From some decades now, a material history of science education and, specifically, medical education, has been under construction, which is changing our way of understanding the relationship between knowledge, practices and their forms of transmission. This return to materiality has implied a new look at the objects that, in the more or less recent past were used to produce and communicate knowledge. This is particularly true in the case of modern medicine, where knowledge about the human body is conceived as the basis for an explanation of the process of falling sick, of healing or of maintaining health.  

It is therefore not surprising that anatomical models have occupied a pre-eminent place among the objects at the service of the production and communication of knowledge about the body. On the other hand, the model, as an artefact that is proposed as a representation of reality, always poses a questioning of its epistemic status. This leads to the succession of forms, materials and techniques that are presented as improvements in the pretence of representing reality with maximum “objectivity”, in order to produce and communicate “true” knowledge with maximum efficiency.  

From this theoretical framework, the result of attention to the material culture of medicine, we can understand the interest of historical studies dealing with the manufacturers of anatomical models, the techniques, materials and processes of their production, as well as the formation of collections in different areas and spaces: welfare, museums, business –not forgetting those of show business and entertainment–, private collections and, of course, those of educational institutions.  

In Montevideo, in the Medical School’s anatomical museum of the Universidad de la República, whose building dates from 1911 [fig. 1], there is a collection of embryological waxes, magnificently preserved, although until now it has not been properly studied from the historical point of view. Thanks to the efforts of Juan Ignacio Gil and the kind availability of Lucía Alfonsín, the museum’s laboratory preparer, we were able to access all the pieces exhibited in the display cases of the main hall of the museum [fig. 2]. Accessing the pieces without the obstacle of the glass of the display case allowed us to clearly read what was written on the metal plates nailed to the wooden supports of the pieces [fig. 3]. Plates that are of two types: a front one, with a brief description (in German) of what the model represents and a rear one –which guides the way in which each piece must be displayed– with the name and address of the manufacturer. Thanks to this, we were able to confirm the suspicion that the first contemplation of the pieces made us harbour: they were models manufactured by Friedrich Ziegler (1860-1936).  



Fig. 1 – Montevideo Facultad de medicina front door.

Fig. 2 – Montevideo Museo de anatomía room.



Fig. 3 – Ziegler embryological waxes.

The Ziegler ceroplastics laboratory and workshop was founded in 1852, in Freiburg im Bresgau (Baden-Württemberg, Germany), by Adolf Ziegler (1820-1889), and achieved great international success under the direction of his son Friedrich. From beeswax, the material from which the first models were formed, the Ziegler laboratory succeeded in obtaining new modelling waxes, more ductile and, at the same time, more resistant, by incorporating various types of resins. From the last decade of the nineteenth century and the first decade of the following century, the Ziegler catalogues –which included, in addition to embryological models (its great bestseller), other anatomical, zoological and botanical models– were distributed all over the world. A success that lasted only a few decades, but which made it possible for Ziegler’s specimens to be found today not only in anatomical museums of medical schools on five continents, but also on Internet sites for the sale of pieces to private collectors.  

Once the provenance of the Uruguayan collection had been identified, it remained to clarify –as far as possible– the moment of the collection’s arrival in Montevideo, as well as its use and impact on the faculty’s educational and research practices. To do this, it was essential to have the Juan I. Gil’s knowledge of the Montevideo medical history and the efficiency and kindness of medical school’s librarian, Amparo de los Santos. Between the three of us, it did not take long for us to locate the crucial source for determining the time and circumstances of the acquisition of Ziegler’s embryological pieces. In 1906, Juan Pou Orfila published Observaciones sobre enseñanza de la medicina [Observations on the teaching of medicine], in which he narrates the trip that had taken him to visit some medical schools in France and Germany [fig. 4a]. Pou observed there the use of collections of anatomical models for research and teaching of anatomy, embryology, pathology, dermatology and even surgical intervention techniques. In his extensive review of the collections visited, he made special mention of “the magnificent Ziegler wax models, known masterpieces of patience and scientific accuracy”, which “Professor Hertwig constantly uses in his lessons in Embryology”. And a footnote –the only reference in the entire record of his European trip– indicates: “Friedrich Ziegler, Atelier für wissenschaftliche Plastik, Freiburg in Baden” [Juan Pou Orfila, Observaciones sobre enseñanza de la medicina, Montevideo, Imprenta “El Siglo Ilustrado” de Mariño y Caballero, 1906, pp. 45-46).  



Fig. 4a – Ziegler embryological waxes.

Thus, it does not seem too risky to suppose that the acquisition of Ziegler’s embryology collection by the Uruguayan Medical School stemmed from this enthusiastic recommendation made by one of its most outstanding members. The assumption is confirmed by Juan Pou Orfila himself a few years later, when in 1915 he published a paper in the journal Anales de la Universidad –later also published as a book–, in which he stated:  

In this respect, the celebrated embryological models of Ziegler, of Freiburg are the most remarkable and best known. They are regarded all over the world as masterpieces of scientific accuracy. We can attest to the usefulness of these pieces for demonstration, having used them in the courses of Embryology and Histology that we gave in our Medical School from 1907 to 1912.  

[“Los célebres modelos embriológicos de Ziegler, de Friburgo, son, a este respecto, los más notables y mejores que se conocen. En el mundo entero se les considera como obras maestras de exactitud científica. Podemos dar fe de la utilidad de estas piezas para la demostración, por haberlas usado en los cursos de Embriología e Histología que dimos en nuestra Facultad en los años de 1907 a 1912″: Juan Pou Orfila, “Libro II. Pedagogía médica”, Anales de la Universidad 26 (num. 93), 1915, p. 101] 

The Uruguayan collection exhibited in the showcase consists of 51 pieces. A series of 38 waxes on individual wooden supports that reproduce the development of the embryo (the original series consisted of 48). It begins with the implantation of the egg (4 pieces, No. 1 is missing) and its development (22 pieces, Nos. 2, 4, 12 are missing), continues with the first embryonic development (10 pieces Nos. 2, 3 and 10 are missing) and concludes with that of the embryo itself (10 pieces, Nos. 5, 8 and 9 are missing) [Figs. 4a, 4b, 4c]. Another series of 13 pieces is grouped on four platforms. On two of them, 5 pieces with the sign Entwickelung des menslichen Gehirns show the development of the human brain, while the other 8 pieces, arranged on two platforms, reproduce phases of brain development of various species of vertebrates. The same room of the Museum also houses two other anatomical models produced by Ziegler, but with very different characteristics. These are two large articulated and rotating pieces, mounted on a wooden support with a label attached that reads: Modell zur Erläuterung des Faserferlasufes und der Kerne des Mittelhirnes und des verlängerten Markes eines Neugeborenen (Model to explain the fibre splints and nuclei of the midbrain and the medulla oblongata of a newborn baby) [figs. 5]



Fig. 4b – Ziegler embryological waxes.



Fig. 4c – Ziegler embryological waxes.



Fig. 5 – Anatomic articulated model.

REFERENCES 

  • For an approach to the figure and educational work of Juan Pou Orfila, see the book of his descendant, Ricardo Pou Ferrari, current president of the Uruguayan Society for the History of Medicine, who published the biography, Juan Pou Orfila. Crónica de una pasión pedagógica (Montevideo, El Toboso s.r.l., 2006). 
  • In the last twenty years, several collections (complete and incomplete) of the Ziegler embryological waxes have been recovered and restored. This has made possible, in addition to their permanent exhibition in anatomical museums of medical schools such as the one in Montevideo, their insertion in richer contexts addressed at wider audiences, especially in temporary exhibitions. To mention two outstanding examples, although very different in intention and orientation: Making Visible Embryos created by Nick Hopwood and Tatjana Buklijas, in Cambridge, between 2008-2010; and Sublimi Anatomie created by Andrea Carlino, Philippe Comar, Anna Luppi, Vincenzo Napolano and Laura Perrone, in Roma, between 2019 y 2021. 

Moulage de crâne trépané 1740 « Caverne de Baye », Musée de La Plata.

par Séverine Georgin

Attention, un crâne peut en cacher un autre !

Deux crânes trépanés sont aujourd’hui exposés dans une vitrine de la salle d’anthropologie du musée de La Plata. Leur muséographie met en évidence deux techniques de trépanation pratiquées au Pérou au sein d’une vitrine intitulée : « modificaciones corporales » associant la trépanation à d’autres mutilations corporelles comme la déformation crânienne et les altérations dentaires. Des instruments chirurgicaux en pierre taillée et un petit tumi de métal (couteau cérémoniel à lame semi-circulaire utilisé dans le Pérou pré-hispanique) permettent aux visiteurs d’imaginer les techniques utilisées et peut-être les souffrances endurées [Fridberg, 2006]. Les deux étiquettes indiquent qu’il s’agit de répliques et que leur provenance est péruvienne. Le moulage de gauche percé de multiples trous circulaires est en résine, il est récent. Le second moulage en plâtre, avec sa « trepanación rectangular de tipo corte Perú », sa patine et son numéro à l’encre rouge : 1740, intrigue (fig.1). En se rapprochant, une inscription légèrement effacée à l’encre noire se laisse encore lire : « caverne de Baye ».

Fig.1 – Détails du crâne 1740. 2024 © Auteur.

Ces indications trouvent une concordance avec le catalogue de la section anthropologique du musée de La Plata en Argentine rédigé en 1910 par l’anthropologue d’origine allemande Robert Lehmann-Nitsche (1872-1938) [Sardi, Del Papa, 2022]. L’inscription à l’encre noire renvoie à des sépultures hypogées de l’époque néolithique, dans la Marne, à l’est du Bassin Parisien. Ces « cavernes » ont été fouillées au début des années 1870 par le baron Joseph de Baye (1853-1931), un jeune aristocrate féru d’archéologie [Charpy, Homer, 2013]. La référence apposée directement sur le crâne indiquerait donc que le crâne qui aurait servi de modèle proviendrait de France et non du Pérou.

Que nous raconte cette discordance ?

Erreur sur l’étiquette ?

Une recherche sur internet permet de rapidement se rendre compte que la trépanation rectangulaire est un phénomène largement médiatisé et toujours associé à la trépanation péruvienne.

Le moulage 1740 fait écho à un débat initié en 1867, quand le diplomate américain Ephraïm George Squier (1821-1888) avait apporté à Broca (1824-1880) un crâne péruvien trépané, portant une cicatrice fort semblable à celui présenté par le musée de La Plata. Le fameux chirurgien et fondateur de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris (1859) posait un diagnostic [Broca, 1867, 403-408] qui devait sonner comme « un coup de tonnerre dans un ciel serein » [Charon, Thillaud, 2010 : 41], en particulier au sein de l’Académie de médecine où le crâne était présenté. À cette époque, l’opération du crâne, de par sa forte létalité, était mise au ban des pratiques chirurgicales. Le débat, sept ans plus tard devait rallier les préhistoriens quand, en 1873, Barthélémy Prunières, en Lozère, puis Joseph de Baye, dans la Marne, faisaient la découverte de crânes portant d’étranges ouvertures associées à des disques crâniens [Prunières, 1873, 704]. Des peuples jugés « primitifs », préhistoriques ou modernes, étaient capables d’ouvrir le crâne sans provoquer la mort de l’opéré alors que la chirurgie « moderne » échouait.

Le « crâne de Squier », le premier d’une longue série, est devenu depuis lors une sorte d’icône de la trépanation, à laquelle les auteurs écrivant sur le sujet se doivent de faire référence [Arnott, Finger, 2003]. Ces crânes, par leur suggestivité, possèdent donc un intérêt esthétique, scientifique et muséographique certain.

Un crâne provenant de « la caverna Baye [sic.] » ?

La première source permettant de tracer le moulage 1740 est l’acte de donation de la collection Moreno à la province de Buenos Aires, daté de novembre 1877. Le plâtre noté « caverne de Baye » y apparaît comme faisant partie d’un lot de quinze, arrivés de Paris en Argentine en 1874, en remerciement d’un premier envoi de crânes américains fait par le jeune collectionneur Francisco Moreno à Paul Broca [Farro, 2009]. Trois moulages de crânes provenant des grottes de Baye sont listés dans le même document de la manière suivante :

« dos habitantes de la caverna Baye […], « un cráneo trepanado de la caverna ó gruta de Baye [sic., …] ».

Le musée de La Plata a donc bien été en possession d’un crâne en provenance de Baye, en France. Se peut-il que le crâne 1740 actuellement en vitrine soit français ?

Les crânes trépanés des grottes de Baye ont été à de nombreuses reprises décrits dans la littérature. Textes et illustrations fournissent ainsi des informations claires sur la forme des ouvertures trouvées dans ces sépultures.

Fig.2 – Dessin réalisé par Joseph de BAYE dans son mémoire : La trépanation préhistorique, publié en 1876.

Ces ouvertures sont présentées comme circulaires, elliptiques ou irrégulières. Broca décrit deux crânes envoyés par de Baye en 1874: « Vous pouvez voir sur chacun d’eux une grande ouverture elliptique, régulière, aux bords cicatrisés » [Broca, 1874, 553]. En 1876, de Baye, quant à lui, présente cinq crânes ayant « subi des pertes de substance bien caractérisées » dont deux n’ont pas été présentés par Paul Broca. Un premier possède une « ouverture elliptique taillée en biseau », un second une « ouverture, presque ronde ». Des illustrations accompagnent ces deux spécimens. Le troisième, diagnostiqué comme hydrocéphale, est probablement celui décrit par Broca en 1874, le quatrième a « deux ouvertures dans la partie postérieure gauche ». Le dernier avec sa « perte de substance, la plus considérable » ne peut être classé comme trépané selon de Baye [De Baye, 1876, 12-13]. Il n’est donc fait aucune mention d’ouverture rectangulaire sur ces crânes.

Pour conclure, des questions en suspens…

La confusion autour du crâne 1740 est probablement liée au débat sur la trépanation qui mène à des comparaisons fréquentes entre crânes néolithiques et crânes péruviens et conduit naturellement à les associer dans les collections des musées. Mais beaucoup d’inconnues entourent encore ce numéro et les deux crânes qu’il représente. Pour l’instant, l’identité de l’original du moulage reste mystérieux, on ignore ce qui est arrivé au spécimen arrivé en 1874 de France, comment et quand l’erreur s’est immiscée dans la collection.

Le questionnement autour du numéro 1740 nous raconte une histoire de collection somme toute assez banale [Jardin, 2019]. Elle contrarie l’image idéalisée que le visiteur peut se faire de l’ordre et de la pérennité des objets de musée [Podgorny, 2024], mais aussi de la fabrique de la science à partir de ces objets. Ici, l’histoire de la trépanation n’a pas été écrite à partir de l’objet. À l’inverse, le spécimen a été choisi pour sa typicité à partir d’un récit préétabli. L’objet pensé comme une trace tangible de la réalité est ici « réinventé » par la narration du musée. La destinée du moulage 1740 nous rappelle le parcours souvent chaotique des pièces qui portent en elles « les traces de plusieurs strates d’histoire » [Robert, 2010, 188], fruits de débats ancrés dans leur époque, d’arrangements et de sensibilités variées [Appadurai, 2020].

Sources :

« Acta de donación y aceptación de noviembre de 1877 », 1910, Digesto de la Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Buenos Aires, Imprenta Coni Hermanos, p.142. [copie du document communiquée par Susana Garcia]

BROCA Paul, 1867, « Trépanation chez les Incas », Bulletins de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris, II° Série, séance du 4 juillet, pp.403-408.

BROCA Paul, 1874, « Sur les trépanations préhistoriques », Bulletin de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris, Paris, Masson, séance du 2 juillet.

BROCA Paul, 1876, « Sur la trépanation du crâne et les amulettes crâniennes », Association Française pour l’Avancement des Sciences, comptes-rendus de la 8e cession, séance du 28 août 1873, Budapest, Imprimerie Franklin-Társulat, p.140.

DE BAYE Joseph, 1976, La trépanation préhistorique, Paris, Ernest Leroux, p.13.

LEHMANN-NITSCHE Robert, 1911, Catálogo de la sección antropologica, del museo de la Plata, Buenos-Aires, Imprenta Coni Hermano.

PRUNIÈRES Barthélémy, « Sur les objets de bronze, ambre, verre, mêlés aux silex, et sur les races humaines dont on trouve les débris dans les dolmens de Lozère », Association Française pour l’Avancement des Sciences, comptes-rendus de la 2e cession, séance du 28 août 1873, Lyon, Imprimerie Pitrat Ainé.

Références :

APPADURAI, Arjun, 2020, La vie sociale des choses – les marchandises dans une perspective culturelle, Paris, Les Presses du Réel.

ARNOTT Robert, FINGER Stanley, SMITH C.U.M, 2003, Trepanation : History, discovery, theory. Lisse, Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers.

CHARON Pierre, THILLAUD Pierre-Léon, 2010, L’invention de la paléopathologie, une anthologie de la langue française, Saint-Etienne, Publication de l’Université.

CHARPY, Jean-Jacques, HOMER, Isabelle, 2013, « Joseph de Baye, de la Marne au Caucase », Catalogue de l’exposition des Archives départementales de la Marne, Conseil Général de la Marne.

JARDINE Boris, KOWAL Emma, BANGHAM Jenny, 2019, « How collections end. Objects, meaning and loss in laboratories and museums », British Journal for History of Science, Themes, 4, pp. 1-27.

FARRO Máximo, 2009, La formación del Museo de La Plata, Coleccionistas, comerciantes, estudiosos y naturalistas viajeros a fines del siglo XIX, Rosario, Prohistoria ediciones, colección historia de la Ciencia.

FRIDBERG, Diana, 2006, The Enchantment of a Medical Technology, Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology, University of Oxford.

PODGORNY Irina, 2024, « Los museos, un espacio nada permanente », Sabers en acció, 10 janvier.

ROBERT Renaud, 2010, « Histoire d’objets. Objets d’histoire », Dialogues d’histoire ancienne, vol. 41, no. Supplement 4.1, pp. 175-199.

SARDI Marina, DEL PAPA Mariano, 2022, « Escrito en los huesos y el papel. Una revisión de las colecciones antropológicas del Museo de La Plata », Revista del Museo de Antropología, 15 (1).

Remerciements :

Je remercie les différents membres du musée de La Plata qui ont rendu possible mes recherches : Marina Sardi, Mariano Del Papa, Gustavo Barrientos, Andrés Di Bastiano et Juan Cruz Galván de la section anthropologique, Ana Igareta et Mariano Bonomo de la section archéologique. Je remercie chaleureusement Susana Garcia pour son expertise et son aimable guidage au sein des archives et du musée et Irina Podgorny pour ses encouragements et sa formidable bibliothèque. Toute ma gratitude va aussi à ma directrice de thèse Nathalie Richard, Alexia Comte et Chloé Rousseau pour mon intégration et l’organisation du projet SciCoMov.