CLASSIFICATION. 43 



Although other anatomists, and also some clinicians like Giacomini, took up 

 the problem suggested particularly by the work of His, no one followed it with 

 more devotion that Mall. In saying this I am not ignoring the able and extensive 

 treatises on teratology, such as those of Ahlfeld, Ballantyne, Dareste, Saint Hilaire, 

 Schwalbe, and Taruffi. These treatises are more specifically concerned with 

 the problems presented by malformations, while His, Giacomini, and Mall gave 

 especial attention to questions presented by all abortuses, and Giacomini and Mall 

 especially to such as Mall later grouped as pathologic. I realize that I thus raise 

 the question of the relation of uterine pathology to teratology, but that is 

 unavoidable. Moreover, as everyone knows, it is still decidedly unsettled. This 

 attitude was taken also by Mall (1908) when he wrote: 



" Whether the early pathological embryos are young monsters of so extreme a 

 degree that they will not continue to grow, is now the most important question of the 

 capital problem in teratology." 



In this monograph Mall did not attempt to classify the 163 pathologic embryos 

 collected during a period of 15 years. Nevertheless, as his collection grew, some 

 classification became highly advisable. In referring to this matter later, he wrote: 



" In considering a large number of specimens from a scientific standpoint, their 

 classification 1 is one of the most important things. All of our specimens are placed in 

 one of two great divisions normal or pathological. As stated before, the normal ones 

 usually are easily segregated because, for the sake of expediency, we have decided to 

 regard as normal all embryos and fetuses which are normal in form, although they may 

 be inclosed in diseased chorions. These normal specimens are first arranged according 

 to size and subsequently also according to age." 



All normal embryos and fetuses further are placed in one of three grades, 

 according to the preservation of their body form. The basis of this gradation is 

 wholly gross morphologic. Moreover, it would perhaps be more correct to say that 

 the deciding factor is not the degree of normality of form which may once have 

 existed, but the extent to which it is preserved. If the form is preserved perfectly, 

 the embryo or fetus is placed in the first of these grades unless it has a localized 

 anomaly. However, abnormal specimens also are found among the group of 

 normals, and, as already indicated, some of the normal specimens no doubt have 

 developed upon a somewhat diseased endometrium, but so far we have been unable 

 to recognize these in the early stages of development. 



All specimens the form of which is excellently preserved are put into grade 1 

 of the normal, but if the external form is changed slightly, either by external forces, 

 by maceration, or by developmental abnormalities, they are put into grade 2. 

 All other specimens regarded as normal in form, with or without anomalies, fall into 

 grade 3. Abnormalities are noted especially by cross-references, but no separate 

 category of abnormal embryos is maintained. Hence, under this plan, a double 

 monster, such as No. 2107, with six extremities, some of which also are monstrous, 

 with one set of deformed genitalia, and with totally fused trunks, becomes classified 



1 For the earlier classification of the specimens in the Mall Collection see Mall (1900, 1903, and 1904). 



'72 s 



