THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF NEUROPHYSIOLOGY 



27 



TAB 11; 1 



FIG. iq. Left: Jiri Pfochaska of Prague, the proponent of 

 automatic reflexion in the medulla and spinal cord. Ri«ht: 

 Prochaska's illustration of the spinal roots and their ganglia. 



The definitive study of the relationship of the medul- 

 lated axon to the nerve cell followed in 1889 and was 

 the work of von Kolliker (140), profes.sor of anatomy 

 in Wiirzburg. From this wealth of accumulated 

 knowledge, a generalized concept of neuron behavior 

 became possible and in i8gi a clear formulation was 

 achieved by Waldeyer-Hartz (141). The neuron 

 theory was established. In reviewing thfse basic steps 

 that had to be taken before any unravelling of central 

 nervous system pathways could proceed with cer- 

 tainty, one is struck by the fact that so many of the 

 contributors (Schwann, Remak, von Helinholtz, 

 Kolliker) were pupils of Johannes Miiller. 



Another of the early stumbling blocks to an under- 

 standing of the spinal cord was the difTerentiation of 

 motor and sensory function. It was early suspected 

 that the ganglia of the spinal roots were in some way 

 involved in this question. Galen had thought that the 

 presence of a ganglion indicated that the nerve was 

 powerfully motor in action and here the matter rested 

 for some centuries. In 1783 Alexander Monro (129) 

 noted that the spinal ganglia were formed on the 



140. VON Kolliker, Rudolf Albert (1817-1905). Mikro- 



skopische Analomie. Leipzig, 1850- 1854. 

 14L Waldever-Hartz, Heinrich Wilhelm Gottfried 



(1836- 1 921). Uber einige neuere Forschungen im Gebiete 



der Anatomic des Centralnervensystems. Deutsche med. 



Wchnschr. 17: 12 13, 1244, 1287, 1331, 1352, 189L 



posterior roots and that their coalescence with the 

 anterior roots occurred peripherally to these swellings. 

 But like Galen he thought that they were concerned 

 with 'muscular' nerves and defended them as such 

 against the suggestion by James Johnstone (142) that 

 their action was to cut ofT sensation. This rather 

 bizarre concept had received .some consideration in 

 the mid-eighteenth century. 



The presence of ganglia suggested to several minds 

 a specialization of function in the nerves on which 

 they were formed. Both Prochaska C'43) 3"^ 

 Soemmering (144) had drawn attention to the re- 



142. Johnstone, James (i 730-1802). Essay on the use of the 

 ganglions of the nerves. Phil. Trans. 54: 177, 1765. 



143. Prochaska, Jiri (1749-1820). De Structura .Nervorum. 

 Prague: Gerle, 1780-1784. 3 vol. 



144. Soemmering, Samuel Thomas (1755-1830). De bast 

 encephali et originibus nervorum cranio egredienlum. Got- 

 tingen : Vandenhoeck, 1778. 



