Skelettestreit.

Abstract

Michael Stolberg claims there was a broad movement in the sixteenth century toward sexing skeletons and offers Felix Platter's singular 1583 female skeleton and Caspar Bauhin's 1597 reproduction of that skeleton as evidence. He admits that these illustrations did not become a standard feature of anatomical textbooks, though he maintains (erroneously) that the descriptions of these skeletons became "canonical." Stolberg does not appreciate the extent to which Platter's female skeleton was an anomaly. Distinctively female-sexed skeletons flooded Europe after about 1730, and, importantly, anatomists at the time perceived that these depictions were radically new. Indeed, widespread and protracted debates erupted over the exact features of the female skeleton. These anatomical illustrations emerged within a novel political climate, where sex in the body was newly seen as grounding gender roles in new social regimes. The story of the European study of sexual differences is not one of slow and steady accretion of positive knowledge, as Stolberg implies. That story is fraught with changing reinterpretations and relocations of difference, and new meanings attached to new kinds of sameness and difference within differing cultural contexts. It is wrong to judge foundational shifts in scientific culture merely by firsts.