Masaccio's Trinity

neutrum, and ut nunc and simpliciter. The more technical chapters devoted to explaining these theoretical concepts are nicely balanced by an excellent introductory chapter on Galenic medicine in the Renaissance, and a fascinating closing chapter on Renaissance discussions of whether neutral bodies really do exist in nature and whether ageing bodies and convalescing bodies provide practical examples of neutral bodies. But was there really a continuous history of the "idea" of the neutral body? Though the author admits that each commentary introduces conceptual changes and is itself a reflection of new contemporary issues, he never directly addresses the problem of essentialism that inevitably arises when writing the history of an idea. Even though Joutsivuo wisely focuses upon texts and interpretations rather than ideas, one is still left wondering whether all his commentators really are talking about the same thing. Joutsivuo is also rather free with his use of the categories "scholastic" and "humanist". In order to highlight the impact of humanism on discussions of the neutral body, he contrasts the views of Renaissance expositors with those of scholastic commentators on the matter. But this assumes that there was indeed an identifiable "scholastic" interpretation of the neutral body, which some Renaissance expositors were closer to than others. Yet, as the author's own research shows, there was as much diversity of opinion among scholastic commentators as among Renaissance expositors. Does the concept of the neutral body in the Renaissance really tell us anything new about medical humanism? Joutsivuo's work is certainly valuable in confirming what we already know about the novelty of humanist exegesis, its concentration on philological and inter-textual analysis, its new historical sensitivity, its concern for discovering the origins of ideas, and its interest in establishing the integrity of an author's entire output. But as Joutsivuo admits in his conclusion, his story tends to reaffirm the traditional picture that, though new sources and translations were used and new literary techniques adopted, university medicine was stubbornly resistant to the broader philosophical challenges of Renaissance humanism. These are but minor quibbles with an exemplary piece of scholarship. The impeccable explication of text, the copious footnoting, and the excellent appendices make this an invaluable reference tool that will be treasured by scholars of early modern medicine for a long time to come.