History and Progress of Comparative Anatomy. 159 



loid, and the mastoid portions, and the lithoid or petrous por- 

 tions of the temporal bones ; and he remarks the peculiar situa- 

 tion and shape of the wedge-hke or sphenoid bone. Of the eth- 

 moid, which he omits at first, he afterwards speaks more at 

 large in another treatise. The malar he notices under the name 

 of zygomatic bone ; and he describes at length the upper maxil- 

 lary and nasal bones, and the connection of the former with the 

 sphenoid. He gives the first clear account of the number and 

 situation of the vertebrae, which he divides into cervical, dor^ 

 sal, and lumbar, and distinguishes from the sacrum and coccyx. 

 Under the head Bojics of the Thorax, he enumerates the ster- 

 num, the ribs (ul 7rAgyg<«<), and the dorsal vertebrae, the connec- 

 tion of which with the former he designates as a variety of di- 

 arthrosis. The description of the bones of the extremities and 

 their articulations concludes the treatise. 



Though in myology Galen appears to less advantage than in 

 osteology, he nevertheless had carried this part of anatomical 

 knowledge to greater perfection than any of his predecessors. 

 He describes a frontal muscle, the six muscles of the eye, and a 

 seventh proper to animals ; a muscle to each ala nasi, four 

 muscles of the lips, the thin cutaneous muscle of the neck, which 

 he first termed platysma myoides, or muscular expansion, two 

 muscles of the eyelids, and four pairs of muscles of the lower 

 jaw, the temporal to raise, the masseter to draw to one side, and 

 two depressors, corresponding to the digastric and internal pte- 

 rygoid muscles. After speaking of the muscles which move 

 the head and the scapula, he adverts to those by which the 

 windpipe is opened and shut, and the intrinsic or proper muscles 

 of the larynx and hyoid bone. Then follow those of the tongue, 

 pharynx, and neck, those of the upper extremities, the trunk, 

 and the lower extremities successively ; and in the coui-se of this 

 description he swerves so little from the actual facts, that most 

 of the names by which he distinguishes the principal muscles 

 have been retained by the best modern anatomists. It is chiefly 

 in the minute account of these organs, and especially in refe- 

 rence to the minuter muscles, that he appears inferior to the 

 moderns. 



The angiological knowledge of Galen, though vitiated by the 



