Topic

History of Medical Illustration

Medical illustration is the purposeful making of images to explain bodies, diseases, procedures, instruments, or therapeutic ideas. Surviving examples range from schematic manuscript figures to printed anatomical atlases, microscope plates, clinical portraits, surgical diagrams, and public-health graphics. They mattered because they allowed selected observations to travel farther than a dissection table, hospital ward, or laboratory.

This selective history begins with Persian and European manuscript traditions around 1390, follows print and professional illustration chiefly in Europe and North America, and includes a nineteenth-century case from Canton (Guangzhou). It is not a universal sequence from inaccurate pictures to photographic truth: every image was made for an audience, through a technique, by people whose labour and access to bodies shaped what could be seen.

Scope: Selected manuscript, print, microscopic, pathological, photographic, surgical, and public-health traditions, c. 1390 to the late twentieth century
Places and dates: Shiraz and Isfahan; Venice, Padua, Basel, London, Paris, and Vienna; Canton (Guangzhou); Baltimore; c. 1390–late twentieth century
Historical weight: Images turned local observations into portable claims, but also concealed choices about the normal body, patient identity, body supply, artistic credit, cost, and institutional power.

Read the topic Back to topics

Definition and Method

A medical image is made evidence, not found ready-made

An illustration can preserve a specimen or procedure after the event and can separate layers that no single viewer could see at once. That power comes from selection: the maker decides the viewpoint, boundary, colour, label, scale, sequence, and degree of simplification.

Historians distinguish a portrait of one observed specimen from a composite or ideal figure assembled from several observations. Neither is automatically more truthful. The first may preserve distracting accident; the second may clarify a relationship while suppressing bodily variation. Eighteenth-century anatomists themselves debated this choice, and Martin Kemp shows how different atlases made their claims to accuracy through visibly different styles. (Kemp, 2010)

The category also has porous boundaries. A hand drawing, engraving, wax model, photograph, radiograph, and computer rendering do not record the body in the same way. This page centres images made or deliberately arranged to explain medical knowledge; machine-produced diagnostic images are treated as an adjacent history on the site's medical imaging page.

A useful history therefore asks not only whether a picture looks lifelike, but who commissioned it, what body or object was available, which technique translated the observation, how image and caption worked together, who could afford or access it, and what the picture left out.

Manuscript and Early Print, c. 1390–1491

Schematic bodies organized knowledge rather than imitating a view

Calling a manuscript figure "primitive" because it lacks modern perspective mistakes its task. Many diagrams mapped systems, treatment points, wounds, or learned correspondences; they were aids to ordering and retrieving knowledge, not substitutes for a photograph.

Mansur ibn Ilyas mapped five bodily systems

In Shiraz around 1390, the Persian physician Mansur ibn Ilyas composed Tashrih-i badan-i insan (Anatomy of the Human Body). Its full-page figures organize bones, nerves, muscles, veins, and arteries; a further figure shows a pregnant body. The earliest dated surviving copy known to the National Library of Medicine was made by the scribe Hasan ibn Ahmad in Isfahan on 8 December 1488. The scribe's role in making the images is unknown. (Savage-Smith, NLM)

The figures record circulation as well as origin

Mansur's diagrams combine Arabic and Persian labels. Their genealogy is unresolved: the skeleton and other figures resemble earlier Latin diagram sets, but no evidence establishes the route by which the model travelled. The NLM account therefore treats the pregnant figure as a possible contribution by Mansur, not a proven invention, and warns that the text itself rarely discusses its pictures.

The Wound Man functioned like a visual index

In European surgical manuscripts from about 1400, the so-called Wound Man gathered arrows, blades, bites, fractures, and other injuries on one body, with labels or letters directing readers to treatments in the accompanying text. The image entered print in the Venetian Fasciculus medicinae of 1491 alongside urine, bloodletting, zodiac, and disease figures. Jack Hartnell's study shows that print did not simply replace manuscript culture: images moved between both media and were repeatedly copied and rearranged. (Hartnell, 2017)

Print Anatomy, 1491–1543

Print multiplied visual arguments but did not standardize them at once

Printing allowed a labelled figure to circulate in many copies, but a printed picture was not automatically uniform or accurate. Blocks wore, images were reduced or copied, colour might be applied by hand, and the expense of large pages and skilled cutters limited what publishers would attempt. The history belongs to paper makers, designers, block cutters, printers, colourists, publishers, and booksellers as well as physicians.

The best-known landmark is Andreas Vesalius's seven-book De humani corporis fabrica, printed by Johannes Oporinus in Basel in 1543. Vesalius, then professor at Padua, made repeated human dissection central to his authority. Yet he did not simply overthrow Galen: he used Galenic text extensively while confirming some claims and rejecting others when the bodies he examined differed. Contemporary responses included both praise and condemnation. (National Library of Medicine)

Nor did Vesalius single-handedly draw and print the Fabrica. Jan Stephan van Calcar is securely connected with Vesalius's earlier Tabulae anatomicae sex (1538) and with his portrait, but the Fabrica's complete authorship remains unresolved; the NLM attributes the images to several artists associated with a Venetian workshop rather than to one named master. This uncertainty matters because the book's authority was a collective achievement even though its title page privileged the anatomist.

c. 1390, Shiraz: Mansur ibn Ilyas composes an illustrated Persian anatomy arranged by bodily systems.
1491, Venice: the printed Fasciculus medicinae brings manuscript-derived diagnostic and surgical diagrams to a wider book market.
1543, Basel: the Fabrica integrates a long Latin anatomical argument with more than two hundred woodcuts.
1665, London: Robert Hooke's Micrographia makes engraved views produced through a microscope into public experimental evidence.
1774, Birmingham and London: William Hunter publishes life-size plates of dissected pregnant bodies after more than two decades of work.
1827–1838, Paris and London: Robert Carswell builds a teaching archive of pathological watercolours and publishes a colour lithographic atlas.
1894–1911, Baltimore: Max Brödel's hospital collaborations lead to a durable university training programme for medical artists.

Microscopy, 1665 and After

The microscope did not draw what the observer saw

Robert Hooke's Micrographia, published in London in 1665 under the authority of the Royal Society, joined verbal observations to large etched plates of cork, insects, needles, and other objects. Hooke was not the first microscopist, but the book's scale and detail made the mediated microscopic view unusually persuasive and widely discussed. (Greenberg and Vetter, NLM)

The plate was several translations removed from the object. An observer selected and illuminated a specimen, adjusted an imperfect lens, decided what counted as artefact, drew across repeated views, and then worked with an etcher and printer. Enlargement could reveal structure while disguising the small field of view and the labour required to stabilize it. The image was therefore part of the experiment, not a transparent copy of it.

Later medical microscopy added further conventions: thin sections, fixatives, stains, measured magnification, comparative plates, and eventually photomicrography. A histological figure could isolate a cell boundary or show a typical tissue arrangement more clearly than a raw photograph, but only if readers understood how the specimen had been prepared. For that longer technical and clinical sequence, see the history of microscopy in medicine.

Bodies, Birth, and Disease, 1774–1838

Atlases joined observation to costly systems of production

William Hunter's name concealed a production team

William Hunter's Anatomy of the Human Gravid Uterus (1774) contained thirty-four life-size plates developed over about twenty-four years. Jan van Rymsdyk made many of the red-chalk drawings; engravers translated them to copper; John Baskerville printed the elephant-folio volume. Hunter named some collaborators but omitted van Rymsdyk from the preface, an example of how an anatomist could control the public authorship of collective image-making. (Hughes, 2023)

Particular bodies supported a claim to exact sight

Hunter presented many plates as records of particular dissections, rather than ideal composites. The book's primary source is now digitized in full by Wellcome Collection, but it records the bodies as anatomical preparations rather than as complete lives. Its visual specificity should not be mistaken for biographical transparency. (Hunter, 1774, digitized by Wellcome Collection)

Robert Carswell made pathology portable

Between 1827 and 1838, Robert Carswell and several other named or initialled artists made roughly one thousand watercolour and ink drawings of diseased structures, many with dates, locations, or case notes. Commissioned before Carswell took up a professorship in London, much of the collection was made in Paris hospitals and became a teaching archive. The UCL catalogue's attribution work also corrects the easy assumption that every sheet bearing Carswell's collection name was drawn by Carswell. (UCL Special Collections)

Patients and Portraits, 1830s–1910

Clinical pictures moved between case record, portrait, and display

Nineteenth-century clinical images were not confined to textbooks. They could classify a condition, document an operation, advertise an institution, solicit funds, preserve a sitter's identity, or do several of these things at once.

Lam Qua painted named people as well as remarkable cases

Beginning in the 1830s, the Cantonese painter Lam Qua made oil portraits of patients treated at the Canton Hospital, commissioned by the American medical missionary Peter Parker. Yale holds eighty-six portraits, many depicting large tumours or other visible conditions. Parker displayed them while promoting his missionary work in the United States and Britain. Some sitters have been identified through Parker's journals and published reports; many catalogue titles remain numbers. (Yale Medical Historical Library)

The archive does not answer every ethical question

Yale's collection documents commission, circulation, and in some cases the patients' names and clinical stories; it does not establish a modern process of informed consent for portrait-making, display, or later reuse. It is therefore safer to state what the record preserves than to declare either consent or coercion. The pictures also arose in a treaty-port world of missionary medicine and unequal Western power in Qing China, not in a culturally neutral clinic.

Photography created another interpretation, not an escape from one

From the later nineteenth century, photographs entered dermatology, surgery, psychiatry, pathology, and case records. Exposure time, pose, dress, backdrop, cropping, caption, and the clinician's choice of a "typical" case all shaped meaning. Research on English asylum photographs from about 1885 to 1910 also warns against treating every patient as a passive specimen: photographs could communicate a patient's identity or self-presentation as well as a doctor's category. (Rawling, 2017)

Photography therefore supplemented rather than abolished drawing. A drawing could cut away obstructing tissue, combine successive operative stages, or distinguish overlapping structures with controlled line and colour. Conversely, a photograph could preserve details the observer did not initially notice. Historians still disagree about exactly what should count as "medical photography," and Lukas Engelmann argues that some images are more revealing as parts of uncertain experimental systems than as finished representations of a disease. (Engelmann, 2021)

Profession and Public, 1894–Twentieth Century

Medical artists gained training programmes and new audiences

German-trained artist Max Brödel joined Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore in 1894. Working with Howard Kelly and other surgeons, he observed operations and dissections and developed composite views that could show a surgeon's approach together with underlying sectional anatomy. In 1911, philanthropic support from Henry Walters helped establish Hopkins's Department of Art as Applied to Medicine with Brödel as director. The date marks institutionalisation of a North American profession, not the invention of collaboration between medicine and art. (Miller, 2023)

Formal training joined anatomy, observation, drawing, printing, and later photography, animation, and digital media. It also made some artists more visible as authors, though credit remained unequal: illustrations often circulated under the clinician's or publisher's name, and pharmaceutical sponsorship and advertising shaped some twentieth-century work.

At the same time, health departments and voluntary organizations recruited commercial artists and graphic designers for mass campaigns. Posters about tuberculosis, sexually transmitted infections, malaria, water, vaccination, and later HIV/AIDS borrowed the attention-seeking devices of advertising. They offered practical messages but could also attach blame to women, poor people, racialized groups, or foreign places. The National Library of Medicine's global poster exhibition emphasizes that each image belongs to a specific sponsor, audience, political setting, and print culture. (Sappol, An Iconography of Contagion)

Bodies, Provenance, and Ethics

Visual precision could rest on coercive access

An image can preserve anatomical knowledge while erasing how the body or patient entered the teaching room. Provenance—the documented origin and chain of custody of a body, specimen, photograph, or drawing—is therefore part of the image's medical history, not an optional moral appendix.

British body-supply law burdened the poor

The legal and social history varied by jurisdiction. In Britain, executed murderers supplied a small legal stream of bodies after 1752, while expanding anatomy schools also relied on grave robbery. The Anatomy Act of 1832 licensed dissection and made bodies left unclaimed in institutions available. Janet Philp's study stresses that reform protected anatomists and stabilized supply while continuing to place the burden on people who died in poverty; it was not a simple transition to voluntary donation. (Philp, 2022)

The Pernkopf atlas is a documented warning

Eduard Pernkopf, a committed National Socialist and dean in Vienna after the 1938 Anschluss, directed an exceptionally detailed topographical atlas. A University of Vienna investigation found that its anatomy institute received at least 1,377 bodies of executed people during Nazi rule. Because preparations were anonymized, the use of those bodies as models cannot be matched plate by plate; scholarship concludes that their use cannot be excluded for a large portion of the atlas. Stating both the documented crime and the surviving uncertainty is more accurate than calling every figure a proven portrait of a named victim. (Hildebrandt, 2006)

Access and reuse remain contested

Scholars, librarians, anatomists, surgeons, and descendants do not all agree that a compromised image should be destroyed, hidden, or used. In the Pernkopf debate, proposals have included retention with full disclosure, commemoration, alternatives for learners, and constrained use when clinically necessary. The debate shows why accuracy does not settle legitimacy. Similar questions apply to clinical photographs and anatomical collections, especially when names, consent, or provenance were not recorded.

Interpretive Cautions

How to read a historical medical image

Identify purpose before judging resemblance

A wound diagram, anatomical portrait, operative sequence, microscopic plate, and health poster solve different problems. Ask what action the picture invited—memorize, identify, compare, dissect, operate, donate, or change behaviour—before ranking it by modern realism.

Reconstruct the production chain

The credited physician may not have drawn the image. Look for artists, patients, dissectors, technicians, engravers, printers, colourists, sponsors, publishers, and cataloguers. Changes between drawing, plate, print, photograph, scan, and digital file can be historically consequential.

Read image, caption, case, and provenance together

A picture rarely establishes diagnosis, consent, identity, or priority by itself. Captions and case notes can narrow meaning, but they too were made for particular institutions and audiences. Where names or origins are absent, the absence should remain visible rather than be repaired with a confident story.

Reading Path

Where to go next on Historia Medica

These pages trace the anatomical, optical, institutional, and ethical contexts that shaped medical illustration.

History of Anatomy
Start with the discipline that made the opened body a central source of medical evidence and visual teaching.
Andreas Vesalius
Follow the early modern relationship between dissection, print, and the authority of anatomical images.
History of Microscopy in Medicine
See how instruments, stains, slides, and drawings made the small-scale body part of medical explanation.
Medical Imaging Through History
Compare hand-made illustration with machine-made images, from X-rays to CT, MRI, ultrasound, and digital archives.
Medical Museums and Anatomical Collections
Explore the objects, specimens, displays, and ethical debates that shaped medicine's visual culture.

Scholarly books on images, bodies, and print

Sachiko Kusukawa, Picturing the Book of Nature: Image, Text, and Argument in Sixteenth-Century Human Anatomy and Medical Botany (University of Chicago Press, 2012)
A close study of pictures as arguments and of the technical, financial, and collaborative conditions of Renaissance book production. University of Chicago Press.
Andrea Carlino, Books of the Body: Anatomical Ritual and Renaissance Learning, translated by John Tedeschi and Anne C. Tedeschi (University of Chicago Press, 1999)
Places early modern anatomy within legal, religious, educational, and bodily practice rather than treating dissection as an isolated scientific breakthrough. University of Chicago Press.
Michael Sappol, Dream Anatomy (National Library of Medicine, 2006)
An illustrated catalogue and interpretive essay on anatomical imagery, dissection, print techniques, spectacle, and the imagination from the fourteenth century onward. National Library of Medicine catalogue record.
Martin Kemp, "Style and Non-Style in Anatomical Illustration: From Renaissance Humanism to Henry Gray," Journal of Anatomy 216, no. 2 (2010): 192–208
A comparative account of the visual choices by which atlases claimed usefulness, realism, ideality, or restraint. PubMed Central.

References

References and checked sources

The digitized Hunter atlas is a contemporary primary source and is used here for what the published object contains, not as neutral proof of its production history. The other entries are peer-reviewed studies, scholarly histories, and collection records used to establish chronology, attribution, circulation, and ethical context.

Emilie Savage-Smith, "Mansur ibn Ilyas, Tashrih-i badan-i insan [Anatomy of the Human Body]"
Historical and manuscript description, including the dated 1488 NLM copy and the uncertain genealogy of its figures: National Library of Medicine.
Jack Hartnell, "Wording the Wound Man," British Art Studies, no. 6 (2017)
Peer-reviewed analysis of manuscript and printed Wound Man traditions and the 1491 Fasciculus medicinae: British Art Studies.
National Library of Medicine, "Vesalius, Andreas. De corporis humani fabrica libri septem (Basel: Johannes Oporinus, 1543)"
Collection history and cautious attribution of the Fabrica's illustrations: Historical Anatomies on the Web.
Martin Kemp, "Style and Non-Style in Anatomical Illustration: From Renaissance Humanism to Henry Gray," Journal of Anatomy 216, no. 2 (2010): 192–208
Peer-reviewed visual and intellectual history of anatomical atlases: PubMed Central.
Robert Hooke, Micrographia (London, 1665), with Stephen Greenberg and Cecelia Vetter, "Hooke's Books"
Digitized-book context, print process, and publication history: National Library of Medicine.
William Hunter, Anatomia uteri humani gravidi tabulis illustrata / The Anatomy of the Human Gravid Uterus Exhibited in Figures (Birmingham and London, 1774)
Digitized primary source and catalogue record: Wellcome Collection.
Alicia Hughes, "Authorship, Image-Making, and Excess: William Hunter's Anatomia uteri humani gravidi tabulis illustrata (1774)," Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies 46, no. 2 (2023): 213–237
Peer-reviewed open-access study of Hunter, van Rymsdyk, engravers, and editorial control: University of Glasgow.
University College London, "Carswell Illustrations"
Collection-level description and artist attributions for drawings made chiefly from 1827 to 1838: UCL Library.
Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library, "Lam Qua Paintings"
Collection history, patient identifications, commission, and later display of the Canton Hospital portraits: Yale University.
Katherine D. B. Rawling, "'She Sits All Day in the Attitude Depicted in the Photo': Photography and the Psychiatric Patient in the Late Nineteenth Century," Medical Humanities 43, no. 2 (2017): 99–110
Peer-reviewed study of case-book photographs, institutional use, and patient self-presentation: White Rose Research Online.
Lukas Engelmann, "Picturing the Unusual: Uncertainty in the Historiography of Medical Photography," Social History of Medicine 34, no. 2 (2021): 375–398
Peer-reviewed analysis of category, purpose, and uncertainty in medical photographs: University of Edinburgh Research Explorer.
Mark M. Miller, "Medical Illustration Historic Roots: Illuminating Medicine & Science—Part I," Missouri Medicine 120, no. 6 (2023): 417–422
Professional history of Max Brödel and institutional training at Johns Hopkins: PubMed Central.
Michael Sappol, "An Iconography of Contagion" (National Library of Medicine exhibition, 2008)
Curatorial history of public-health posters, advertising conventions, audiences, and stigma: National Library of Medicine.
Janet Philp, "Bodies and Bureaucracy: The Demise of the Body Snatchers in 19th Century Britain," The Anatomical Record 305, no. 4 (2022): 827–837
Peer-reviewed account of the 1832 Anatomy Act, body supply, and class: PubMed record and DOI.
Sabine Hildebrandt, "How the Pernkopf Controversy Facilitated a Historical and Ethical Analysis of the Anatomical Sciences in Austria and Germany," Clinical Anatomy 19, no. 2 (2006): 91–100
Peer-reviewed account of the Vienna investigation, the bodies of executed victims, remaining attribution uncertainty, and the debate over use: PubMed record and DOI.