中日接受西方解剖学之比较研究
|
摘要
中日两国医学近代化的过程,实际上就是有效吸收西方医学的过程,而解剖学又是西医学的基础,因此,对两国接受西方解剖学的研究是两国医学近代化研究的基本课题。目前关于中日两国接受西方解剖学的比较研究还十分薄弱,本文就这一问题展开了讨论,并获得了许多新的结果,提出了一些新的看法。
1.回顾了中日两国传统解剖学的发展状况和知识水平。疏理了中国古代解剖学的发展脉络,认为中医学理论的创立有一定的解剖基础,在特定的时段内,中国古代的解剖学并不比西方逊色多少。日本传统的解剖学知识水平与中国基本一致。
2.全面系统地介绍了17-19世纪前半期传入中日两国的解剖学知识。首先对传入中国的解剖学知识水平进行了全面考察。以往学术界一直认为,《泰西人身说概》和《人身图说》介绍的是盖仑的旧解剖学,明末传入的是欧洲中世纪的解剖学。经笔者多方考证,并与维萨留斯原著对照,得出上述两部著作反映的是维萨留斯体系之下的解剖学,加上传教士其他著作中介绍解剖学知识,明末传入的解剖学知识是欧洲16世纪的解剖学。对传入日本的解剖学知识作了全面介绍和考查,首次对《解体新书》等日本解剖学著述与汉医学及汉文化的联系进行了分析和探讨。
3.首次对17-19世纪前半期两国接受西方解剖学的状况进行了多方位比较。首先对中日两国最早的解剖学译著以及17世纪西方解剖学在中日两国的反响进行了比较。认为西方解剖学传入中国的时间早于日本,传入的内容比日本系统和全面,中国学者对于西方解剖学的认识水平也高于日本。同时指出,传入的初期,传统医学对于接受西方解剖学曾起过积极的作用,通过对译者、和解剖图、受入群体差异的比较,揭示了两国翻译传统、文化传统对接受西方解剖学的影响。接着对中日历史上两位传统医学家王清任和山协东洋的解剖工作及其思想进行了比较,展示了传统医学与西方解剖学之间的互动以及这种互动对接受西方解剖学带来的积极影响。最后对18-19世纪前期中日接受话方解剖学的总体情况进行了比较,中日之间在此期出现了强烈的反差,从引进的内容到认识水平、实践行为上,日本均明显好于中国。此时中日之间产生了很大差距。
4.首次对19世纪后半期两国引进西方解剖学的整体情况进行了比较,揭示了文化土壤、制度、政策对引进西方解剖学与医学的重要作用和影响。探讨了西方解剖学在中国的本土化过程。分析了中国与日本在消化、吸收西方解剖学产生不同效果的原因。
The modernization of the medicine in both China and Japan is actually the assimilating of Western medicine effectively. Anatomy is the basis of Western medicine. So the most important topic on the modernization of the medicine in China and Japan is to investigate how Western anatomy had been accepted in these two countries. However, there has been not profound comparative study on this topic. This paper analyzes the differences and similarities of accepting western anatomy between China and Japan, a series of new results are obtained, some new viewpoints are provided.1. The paper investigates the development situation and knowledge level of anatomy in traditional medicine in both China and Japan. Sequence of ideas of traditional Chinese anatomy are reorganized. The theoretical origination of traditional Chinese medicine is considered of certain anatomic foundation. In specific period of time, traditional Chinese anatomy wasn't inferior much to a Western one. The knowledge level of traditional Japanese anatomy was almost the same as that of China.2. Western Anatomic knowledge introduced into China and Japan from the 17~(th) to the early 19~(th) century is presented thoroughly and systematically. The level of anatomic knowledge introduced into China is reviewed comprehensively. It was mostly considered in academic circles that Taixi Renshen Shuogai (《泰西人身说概》 ,Outline of Human Body of the West) and Renshen Tushuo(《人身图 说》,,Illustrated Explanation of the Human Body), two Chinese translations of western anatomy, introduced the former anatomy of Galen, and the anatomy knowledge introduced in the late Ming Dynasty were those in the medieval Europe. However, by textual researches and comparison between the two Chinese translations of western anatomy and the Vesalius' The Fabric, the author finds that the two translations reflected the anatomic system of Vesalius, and those anatomic knowledge introduced in other works of the missionaries, while the anatomic knowledge introduced in the late Ming Dynasty are actually those flourished in Europe in the 16~(th) century. The anatomic knowledge introduced into Japan is generally reviewed, and the relation between Kaitai Shinsho (《解体新书》 , Ontleedkundige Tafeln, the Dutch edition of Anatomische Tabellen by J. A. Kulmus) , a Chinese translations of western anatomy translated by Japanese in 1774, and traditional Chinese medicine and culture is analyzed and discussed.3. The acceptance situation of Western anatomy in China and Japan from the 17~(th) century to the first half of the 19~(th) century is compared in multiple aspects for the first time. Firstly, the earliest translated works and the reply to Western anatomy in China and Japan in the 17~(th) century are compared. It come to a result that Western anatomy is introduced into China earlier, and the content is more systematic and comprehensive than those of Japan. Chinese scholars' understanding of Western
anatomy was better than Japanese as well. It is also indicated that in the early introduction period, traditional medicine had a positive effect on the acceptance of Western anatomy. And by comparison between translators, anatomic illustrations and acceptance masses, the influence of translative and cultural tradition of the two countries on the acceptance to Western anatomy is disscused. Secondly, anatomic practice and thoughts of two traditional physicians in the history of China and Japan, Wang Qingren and Yamawakei Toyo are compared, disscusing the interaction of traditional medicine and Western anatomy and its positive effects to the acceptance of Western anatomy. Finally, the general situation of the acceptance to Western anatomy in China and Japan from the 18th to the early 19th century is compared. There's a great contrast between China and Japan. The latter was distinctively better, referring to the introduced content, knowledge level and practice. There's a wide difference between the two countries.4. The general situation of the introduction of Western anatomy in the two countries in the second half of the 19th century is compared, revealing the important effects and influences of culture, system and policy to the introduction of Western anatomy and medicine. The nationalization of Western anatomy in China is discussed, and the reason why the absorption of Western anatomy in China and Japan had a different effect is also analyzed.
1.回顾了中日两国传统解剖学的发展状况和知识水平。疏理了中国古代解剖学的发展脉络,认为中医学理论的创立有一定的解剖基础,在特定的时段内,中国古代的解剖学并不比西方逊色多少。日本传统的解剖学知识水平与中国基本一致。
2.全面系统地介绍了17-19世纪前半期传入中日两国的解剖学知识。首先对传入中国的解剖学知识水平进行了全面考察。以往学术界一直认为,《泰西人身说概》和《人身图说》介绍的是盖仑的旧解剖学,明末传入的是欧洲中世纪的解剖学。经笔者多方考证,并与维萨留斯原著对照,得出上述两部著作反映的是维萨留斯体系之下的解剖学,加上传教士其他著作中介绍解剖学知识,明末传入的解剖学知识是欧洲16世纪的解剖学。对传入日本的解剖学知识作了全面介绍和考查,首次对《解体新书》等日本解剖学著述与汉医学及汉文化的联系进行了分析和探讨。
3.首次对17-19世纪前半期两国接受西方解剖学的状况进行了多方位比较。首先对中日两国最早的解剖学译著以及17世纪西方解剖学在中日两国的反响进行了比较。认为西方解剖学传入中国的时间早于日本,传入的内容比日本系统和全面,中国学者对于西方解剖学的认识水平也高于日本。同时指出,传入的初期,传统医学对于接受西方解剖学曾起过积极的作用,通过对译者、和解剖图、受入群体差异的比较,揭示了两国翻译传统、文化传统对接受西方解剖学的影响。接着对中日历史上两位传统医学家王清任和山协东洋的解剖工作及其思想进行了比较,展示了传统医学与西方解剖学之间的互动以及这种互动对接受西方解剖学带来的积极影响。最后对18-19世纪前期中日接受话方解剖学的总体情况进行了比较,中日之间在此期出现了强烈的反差,从引进的内容到认识水平、实践行为上,日本均明显好于中国。此时中日之间产生了很大差距。
4.首次对19世纪后半期两国引进西方解剖学的整体情况进行了比较,揭示了文化土壤、制度、政策对引进西方解剖学与医学的重要作用和影响。探讨了西方解剖学在中国的本土化过程。分析了中国与日本在消化、吸收西方解剖学产生不同效果的原因。
The modernization of the medicine in both China and Japan is actually the assimilating of Western medicine effectively. Anatomy is the basis of Western medicine. So the most important topic on the modernization of the medicine in China and Japan is to investigate how Western anatomy had been accepted in these two countries. However, there has been not profound comparative study on this topic. This paper analyzes the differences and similarities of accepting western anatomy between China and Japan, a series of new results are obtained, some new viewpoints are provided.1. The paper investigates the development situation and knowledge level of anatomy in traditional medicine in both China and Japan. Sequence of ideas of traditional Chinese anatomy are reorganized. The theoretical origination of traditional Chinese medicine is considered of certain anatomic foundation. In specific period of time, traditional Chinese anatomy wasn't inferior much to a Western one. The knowledge level of traditional Japanese anatomy was almost the same as that of China.2. Western Anatomic knowledge introduced into China and Japan from the 17~(th) to the early 19~(th) century is presented thoroughly and systematically. The level of anatomic knowledge introduced into China is reviewed comprehensively. It was mostly considered in academic circles that Taixi Renshen Shuogai (《泰西人身说概》 ,Outline of Human Body of the West) and Renshen Tushuo(《人身图 说》,,Illustrated Explanation of the Human Body), two Chinese translations of western anatomy, introduced the former anatomy of Galen, and the anatomy knowledge introduced in the late Ming Dynasty were those in the medieval Europe. However, by textual researches and comparison between the two Chinese translations of western anatomy and the Vesalius' The Fabric, the author finds that the two translations reflected the anatomic system of Vesalius, and those anatomic knowledge introduced in other works of the missionaries, while the anatomic knowledge introduced in the late Ming Dynasty are actually those flourished in Europe in the 16~(th) century. The anatomic knowledge introduced into Japan is generally reviewed, and the relation between Kaitai Shinsho (《解体新书》 , Ontleedkundige Tafeln, the Dutch edition of Anatomische Tabellen by J. A. Kulmus) , a Chinese translations of western anatomy translated by Japanese in 1774, and traditional Chinese medicine and culture is analyzed and discussed.3. The acceptance situation of Western anatomy in China and Japan from the 17~(th) century to the first half of the 19~(th) century is compared in multiple aspects for the first time. Firstly, the earliest translated works and the reply to Western anatomy in China and Japan in the 17~(th) century are compared. It come to a result that Western anatomy is introduced into China earlier, and the content is more systematic and comprehensive than those of Japan. Chinese scholars' understanding of Western
anatomy was better than Japanese as well. It is also indicated that in the early introduction period, traditional medicine had a positive effect on the acceptance of Western anatomy. And by comparison between translators, anatomic illustrations and acceptance masses, the influence of translative and cultural tradition of the two countries on the acceptance to Western anatomy is disscused. Secondly, anatomic practice and thoughts of two traditional physicians in the history of China and Japan, Wang Qingren and Yamawakei Toyo are compared, disscusing the interaction of traditional medicine and Western anatomy and its positive effects to the acceptance of Western anatomy. Finally, the general situation of the acceptance to Western anatomy in China and Japan from the 18th to the early 19th century is compared. There's a great contrast between China and Japan. The latter was distinctively better, referring to the introduced content, knowledge level and practice. There's a wide difference between the two countries.4. The general situation of the introduction of Western anatomy in the two countries in the second half of the 19th century is compared, revealing the important effects and influences of culture, system and policy to the introduction of Western anatomy and medicine. The nationalization of Western anatomy in China is discussed, and the reason why the absorption of Western anatomy in China and Japan had a different effect is also analyzed.
引文
[1] 于省吾,《甲骨文字释林》,下卷“释心”,台北:大通书局,1891
[2] 范行准著,伊广谦等整理,中国病史新义,中医古籍出版社,1989;1-91
[3] 廖育群,岐黄医道,辽宁教育出版社,1991:56
[4] 马鸿昭,蔡天皎,郝金凯,学习内经骨度篇(中国古代解剖学观点)的体会,中华医学杂志,1956:566-567
[5] 王亚威、莫楚屏,对灵枢经骨度篇有关表面解剖学记载的考证,见:西医学习中医论文选集,人民卫生出版社,1959,207-218
[6] 马鸿昭,蔡天皎,郝金凯,学习内经骨度篇(中国古代解剖学观点)的体会,中华医学杂志,1956:566-567。
[7] 梁伯强,学习内经的一些体会,中华医学杂志,1955;(5):404-405
[8] 黄胜白,二千年前中国的人体解剖学,中医杂志,1955,(4):42-43
[9] 刘儒举,论祖国医学对眼解剖学的贡献,中华医史杂志,1982,12(1):10
[10] 刘广州,祖国医学对于解剖及生理学的认识,中医杂志,1955,(1-3):51-55,50-51,49-51
[11] 参见隋杨上善撰注《黄帝内经太素》,人民卫生出版社,1965
[12] 参见卡斯蒂廖尼著,程之范主译,医学史,广西师范大学出版社,2003:119-121,137,175-177
[13] 山田庆儿,《黄帝内经》的成立,见:古代东亚哲学与科技文化,辽宁教育出版社,1996,234-254
[14] 山田庆儿,中国古代的计量解剖学,见:古代东亚哲学与科技文化,辽宁教育出版社,1996,308-321
[15] 李健民,王莽与王孙庆—记公元一世纪的人体刳剥实验,新史学;1999,10(4):1-30
[16] 范行准,中华医学史,医史杂志,1947,1(2):25
[17] 侯宝璋,中国解剖史,医学史与保健组织,1957,(1):64-73
[18] 据邱光明推算,秦制1斤=253克,西汉1斤=248克,新莽1斤=238克,东汉1斤=220克,三国时期未见衡器出土,魏铜弩机实物上有自重铭文,测算出1斤合393克。为了计算方便,又能反映不同时期的大概情况,今取秦、西汉1斤=250克,王莽、东汉1斤=230克,三国1斤=393克;1斤=16辆,1两=24铢
[19] 何裕民等,走出巫术丛林的中国医学,上海:文汇出版社,1994:175
[20] 侯宝璋,中国解剖史,医学史与保健组织,1957,(1):64-73
[21] 李如辉著,发生藏象学,中国医药出版社,2003年,15
[22] 王树权,《图注八十一难经译》,科学技术出版社,1992,141
[23] 中国医科大学主编,人体解剖学,人民卫生出版社,无年,176
[24] 侯宝璋《中国解剖学史》引述了《甲乙经》中的解剖学记述,有超过《内》、《难》者,笔者查阅了两个《甲乙经》版本,并未见侯文引述的内容。侯文引述的内容则与唐张守节《史记正义》记载相同。
[25] 祝亚平,中国最早的人体解剖图——烟萝子《内境图》,中国科技史料,1992,13(2):62-65
[26] 李攸,《宋朝事实》卷十六,中华书局重印商务印书馆国学基本丛书原本,1955:244
[27] 赵与时,宾退录,卷四,见:宋元笔记丛书,上海古籍出版社,1983:43
[28] 多纪元胤,医籍考,卷二,东京国本出版社,昭和9年,1934;557-566;又转引自黄龙祥,中国针灸学术史大纲,华夏出版社,2001:333
[29] 小川鼎三,明治前日本解剖学史,见:明治前日本医学史,第一卷,增订复刻版,财团法人日本古医学资料,1978:72
[30] 晁公武,《郡斋读书志》,上海古籍出版社,1970
[31] 多纪元胤,医籍考,卷二,东京国本出版社,昭和9年,1934;557-566
[32] 马继兴,宋代的人体解剖图,医学史与保健组织,1957,(2):
[33] 黄龙祥,中国针灸学术史大纲,华夏出版社,2001:175
[34] 高文铸、曾令真校注,华佗先生内照图,见:高文铸主编,华佗遗书,华夏出版社,1995:174-188,以下引文均出此
[35] 宋大仁,宋代医家杨介对于解剖学的贡献,中医杂志,1958,(4):283-286。
[36] 李约瑟著,中国科学技术史,第一卷,总论,科学出版社,1975;491
[37] 斯蒂廖尼著,程之范主译,医学史,上册,广西师范大学出版社,2003:282-285
[38] 靳士英,朱肱《内外二景图》考,中国科技史料,1995,16(4):92-96
[39] 引自《道藏要籍选刊》第三册,真修十书,上海古籍出版社,1989;369-370
[40] 贾静涛,中国古代法医学史,群众出版社,1984;70
[41] 宋慈编,贾静涛校点,洗冤集录,上海科学技术出版社,1981;34-35
[42] 林昭庚,鄢良,针灸医学史,中国中医药出版社,1995;204
[43] 邓铁涛、程之范主编,中国医学通史-古代卷,北京:人民卫生出版社,2000;
[44] 三上义夫,王莽时代人体解剖其当时事情,日本医史学杂志,1943,1311:1-28
[45] 陈邦贤编,二十六史医学史料汇编,中国中医研究院中国医史文献研究所,1982;39
[46] 李约瑟,王莽与科学,见潘吉星主编:李约瑟,天津人民出版社,1998;217-277
[47] 林昭庚,鄢良,针灸医学史,中国医药出版社,1995,203
[48] 林昭庚,鄢良,针灸医学史,中国医药出版社,1995,203
[49] 藤原佐世,《日本国见在书目》,丛书集成初编本,中华书局,1991;74-81
[50] 丹波康赖撰,医心方,人民卫生出版社影印浅仓屋藏版,2000;38-57。以下引文均出此
[51] 武晓冬,脏腑指掌图书校后记,见:郑金生主编,海外回归中医古籍善本丛书,第十二册,人民卫生出版社,2003,629
[52] 黄龙祥,中国针灸学术史大纲,华夏出版社,2001:342
[53] 东洋医学善本丛书,第二十八卷,日本出版社影印本,参见黄龙祥,中国针灸学术史大纲,华夏出版社,2001
[54] 小川鼎三,明治前日本解剖学史,见:日本学士院编,明治前日本医学史,增订复刻版,日本古资料,1978:72
[55] 真柳诚,江户期渡来的中国医书和刻,见:山田庆儿、栗山茂久编,历史中病医学,国际日本文化研究,1997,303
[56] 真柳诚、友部和弘,中国医籍渡来年代总目录,日本研究,第7集,151-183
[57] 小曾户洋,和刻本汉籍医书综合年表——书名索引,日本医史学杂志,37(3):407-415
[58] 酒井,十七、十八世纪日本人的身体观,见:山田庆儿、栗山茂久编,历史中病医学,国际日本文化研究,1997,434
[59] 小川鼎三,明治前日本解剖学史,见:日本学士院编,明治前日本医学史,增订复刻版,日本古资料,1978:72
[2] 范行准著,伊广谦等整理,中国病史新义,中医古籍出版社,1989;1-91
[3] 廖育群,岐黄医道,辽宁教育出版社,1991:56
[4] 马鸿昭,蔡天皎,郝金凯,学习内经骨度篇(中国古代解剖学观点)的体会,中华医学杂志,1956:566-567
[5] 王亚威、莫楚屏,对灵枢经骨度篇有关表面解剖学记载的考证,见:西医学习中医论文选集,人民卫生出版社,1959,207-218
[6] 马鸿昭,蔡天皎,郝金凯,学习内经骨度篇(中国古代解剖学观点)的体会,中华医学杂志,1956:566-567。
[7] 梁伯强,学习内经的一些体会,中华医学杂志,1955;(5):404-405
[8] 黄胜白,二千年前中国的人体解剖学,中医杂志,1955,(4):42-43
[9] 刘儒举,论祖国医学对眼解剖学的贡献,中华医史杂志,1982,12(1):10
[10] 刘广州,祖国医学对于解剖及生理学的认识,中医杂志,1955,(1-3):51-55,50-51,49-51
[11] 参见隋杨上善撰注《黄帝内经太素》,人民卫生出版社,1965
[12] 参见卡斯蒂廖尼著,程之范主译,医学史,广西师范大学出版社,2003:119-121,137,175-177
[13] 山田庆儿,《黄帝内经》的成立,见:古代东亚哲学与科技文化,辽宁教育出版社,1996,234-254
[14] 山田庆儿,中国古代的计量解剖学,见:古代东亚哲学与科技文化,辽宁教育出版社,1996,308-321
[15] 李健民,王莽与王孙庆—记公元一世纪的人体刳剥实验,新史学;1999,10(4):1-30
[16] 范行准,中华医学史,医史杂志,1947,1(2):25
[17] 侯宝璋,中国解剖史,医学史与保健组织,1957,(1):64-73
[18] 据邱光明推算,秦制1斤=253克,西汉1斤=248克,新莽1斤=238克,东汉1斤=220克,三国时期未见衡器出土,魏铜弩机实物上有自重铭文,测算出1斤合393克。为了计算方便,又能反映不同时期的大概情况,今取秦、西汉1斤=250克,王莽、东汉1斤=230克,三国1斤=393克;1斤=16辆,1两=24铢
[19] 何裕民等,走出巫术丛林的中国医学,上海:文汇出版社,1994:175
[20] 侯宝璋,中国解剖史,医学史与保健组织,1957,(1):64-73
[21] 李如辉著,发生藏象学,中国医药出版社,2003年,15
[22] 王树权,《图注八十一难经译》,科学技术出版社,1992,141
[23] 中国医科大学主编,人体解剖学,人民卫生出版社,无年,176
[24] 侯宝璋《中国解剖学史》引述了《甲乙经》中的解剖学记述,有超过《内》、《难》者,笔者查阅了两个《甲乙经》版本,并未见侯文引述的内容。侯文引述的内容则与唐张守节《史记正义》记载相同。
[25] 祝亚平,中国最早的人体解剖图——烟萝子《内境图》,中国科技史料,1992,13(2):62-65
[26] 李攸,《宋朝事实》卷十六,中华书局重印商务印书馆国学基本丛书原本,1955:244
[27] 赵与时,宾退录,卷四,见:宋元笔记丛书,上海古籍出版社,1983:43
[28] 多纪元胤,医籍考,卷二,东京国本出版社,昭和9年,1934;557-566;又转引自黄龙祥,中国针灸学术史大纲,华夏出版社,2001:333
[29] 小川鼎三,明治前日本解剖学史,见:明治前日本医学史,第一卷,增订复刻版,财团法人日本古医学资料,1978:72
[30] 晁公武,《郡斋读书志》,上海古籍出版社,1970
[31] 多纪元胤,医籍考,卷二,东京国本出版社,昭和9年,1934;557-566
[32] 马继兴,宋代的人体解剖图,医学史与保健组织,1957,(2):
[33] 黄龙祥,中国针灸学术史大纲,华夏出版社,2001:175
[34] 高文铸、曾令真校注,华佗先生内照图,见:高文铸主编,华佗遗书,华夏出版社,1995:174-188,以下引文均出此
[35] 宋大仁,宋代医家杨介对于解剖学的贡献,中医杂志,1958,(4):283-286。
[36] 李约瑟著,中国科学技术史,第一卷,总论,科学出版社,1975;491
[37] 斯蒂廖尼著,程之范主译,医学史,上册,广西师范大学出版社,2003:282-285
[38] 靳士英,朱肱《内外二景图》考,中国科技史料,1995,16(4):92-96
[39] 引自《道藏要籍选刊》第三册,真修十书,上海古籍出版社,1989;369-370
[40] 贾静涛,中国古代法医学史,群众出版社,1984;70
[41] 宋慈编,贾静涛校点,洗冤集录,上海科学技术出版社,1981;34-35
[42] 林昭庚,鄢良,针灸医学史,中国中医药出版社,1995;204
[43] 邓铁涛、程之范主编,中国医学通史-古代卷,北京:人民卫生出版社,2000;
[44] 三上义夫,王莽时代人体解剖其当时事情,日本医史学杂志,1943,1311:1-28
[45] 陈邦贤编,二十六史医学史料汇编,中国中医研究院中国医史文献研究所,1982;39
[46] 李约瑟,王莽与科学,见潘吉星主编:李约瑟,天津人民出版社,1998;217-277
[47] 林昭庚,鄢良,针灸医学史,中国医药出版社,1995,203
[48] 林昭庚,鄢良,针灸医学史,中国医药出版社,1995,203
[49] 藤原佐世,《日本国见在书目》,丛书集成初编本,中华书局,1991;74-81
[50] 丹波康赖撰,医心方,人民卫生出版社影印浅仓屋藏版,2000;38-57。以下引文均出此
[51] 武晓冬,脏腑指掌图书校后记,见:郑金生主编,海外回归中医古籍善本丛书,第十二册,人民卫生出版社,2003,629
[52] 黄龙祥,中国针灸学术史大纲,华夏出版社,2001:342
[53] 东洋医学善本丛书,第二十八卷,日本出版社影印本,参见黄龙祥,中国针灸学术史大纲,华夏出版社,2001
[54] 小川鼎三,明治前日本解剖学史,见:日本学士院编,明治前日本医学史,增订复刻版,日本古资料,1978:72
[55] 真柳诚,江户期渡来的中国医书和刻,见:山田庆儿、栗山茂久编,历史中病医学,国际日本文化研究,1997,303
[56] 真柳诚、友部和弘,中国医籍渡来年代总目录,日本研究,第7集,151-183
[57] 小曾户洋,和刻本汉籍医书综合年表——书名索引,日本医史学杂志,37(3):407-415
[58] 酒井,十七、十八世纪日本人的身体观,见:山田庆儿、栗山茂久编,历史中病医学,国际日本文化研究,1997,434
[59] 小川鼎三,明治前日本解剖学史,见:日本学士院编,明治前日本医学史,增订复刻版,日本古资料,1978:72