Talk:The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp

message: The entry stated that the observers were not medical professionals, then several lines later contended that they were colleagues of Doctor Tulp. I chose to delete the second statement. If there is information that the observers were indeed doctors, please correct this.
JNW 03:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Identity of Observers

message: Is this a painting technique? I found a literal translation of it as "shadow of death" from the Wikipedia page for  "O Antiphons".  It would be nice if this were explained. Nowax 21:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  umbra mortis 

message: The article states that Kindt died from being "strangled", however his own article says he was sentenced to hanging. While the cause of death is, in a sense, strangulation, being hung and being strangled are two rather different methods of death. -- MacAddct1984 18:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone once edited this article saying that criminals of the time in the Netherlands were strangled, rather than hanged. This abstract says 'hung' [sic] rather than 'strangled'; however it is possible this is a case of lax language rather than a definitive statement. It would be useful to clear the matter up unambiguously. — BillC  talk 22:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death of [[Aris Kindt]] 

message: Not sure whether that really fits in the article, but I thought I'd at least mention it here. ---- Daniel Mietchen 05:24, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki version of the painting 

message: Not sure whether this is relevant enough to enter the article. There is also a 2014 photograph by  Nikita Shalennyi, titled "Where is Your Brother?" inspired by this painting:  or  (slider). bamse (talk) 22:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nikita Shalennyi 2014 photograph 

message: 1) "One person is missing: the Preparator, whose task it was to prepare the body for the lesson. In the 17th century an important scientist such as Dr. Tulp would not be involved in menial and bloody work like dissection, and such tasks would be left to others. [b]It is for this reason that the picture shows no cutting instruments.[/b] 
But there is an instrument, held in Dr. Tulp's hand?
2) The analysis part leaves much to be desired:
a) For example, why is the hand being dissected rather than the abdomens which are usually dissected before anything else. What is the significance of the dissection of the hand and the fact that the man was a criminal, a thief who presumably used his hands to commit robbery?
b) And why are several observers in the painting staring at the atlas and not the victim or the doctor? Why are they not looking at the hand that is being dissected or the corpse at all? Hmmmm 
c)  The hand that is being dissected, why does it look like the right hand and why is it so large compared to the left hand resting on the operating table? Rembrandt would not make a mistake, would he?
You see the atlas? It's an anatomy atlas and they're all staring at it. And the hand is painted like a depiction in the atlas. Rembrandt includes something that we (audience) can't see; only they can: the depiction of a hand. Due to this mistake we no longer look through the doctors' eyes. We see him, Aris Kindt. The victim. We are with him, not with them.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 00:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sapere aude 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070926154457/http://www.handsurg.eu/resources/rembrandt_en.pdf to http://www.handsurg.eu/resources/rembrandt_en.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This is my first time to evaluating and editing an article on Wikipedia. Place remind me if there’s any mistake. The subject is a famous picture named The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp, which is an oil painting that painted by Rembrandt in 1632. Through this picture, I can see how anatomy, visual culture and art bring together. I learned what is autopsy and what is visual culture in past few weeks during the IAH209 class as well. After that, this picture also showed up in our week 3’s lecture materials. This subject has a clearly written lead section, which is given reader a briefly introduction about the picture such as who did this oil painting, what happened in the picture and why the painting is important. The article is well structured. There are one big heading on the very top of the article and seven subheadings to split the whole article to few parts. By click the contents; readers can jump into different subheadings that they are interested in. This article has 11 citations, 3 references, and 3 external links. This article is natural, balance and unbiased, because there’s no any personal view in the whole article. The article just tells the reader some facts such as the painting’s background, what the corpse is and some related works. There are seven sources in the talk page; they all provided some useful information. One of editor thinks the Aris Kindt died was not from being “strangled” and believes Kindt was sentenced to hanging. The editor by provided some evidence to support his opinion. After that, another editor by providing some extra information and ask questions to help the article more complete. Those are all useful suggestions for this article. From my evaluation, I think there may have a subheading named "Influence", which talks about “what’s the influence about this painting for human and society?”
--Xiaoxiao0727 (talk) 05:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evaluation by Xiao Zhang 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Rembrandt_-_The_Anatomy_Lesson_of_Dr_Nicolaes_Tulp.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for June 9, 2022. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2022-06-09. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 13:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD 

message: The following text in the article lacks citations, and the final sentence seems to be pure speculation. 
“ In the 17th century an important scientist such as Tulp would not be involved in menial and bloody work like dissection, and such tasks would be left to others. It is for this reason that the picture shows no cutting instruments. Instead we see in the lower right corner an enormous open textbook on anatomy, possibly the 1543 De humani corporis fabrica (Fabric of the Human Body) by Andreas Vesalius.”
While it may have been true in the 1530s that the anatomist would not have participated in dissection, by the 1630s I’m not convinced that it was still true. Does anyone have sources to provide to substantiate the claims of this portion of the article? (Wiki user MorbidAnatomy; not presently signed in)
2600:6C4A:767F:9D12:6C7C:8A7A:2DDD:5838 (talk) 23:35, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation and speculation