334 SHOULDER-GIRDLE IN MONOTREMES, 



thicker than the costal. The latter origin is by a series of fleshy 

 slips from the 7th to the 14th ribs, in a slightly irregular curved 

 line, the convexity of which is forward .... Insertion by a short 

 wide, thin flat tendon in an oblique line upon the humerus, half 

 way up the pectoral crest, and thence along the ento-condylar 

 ridge to the elbow." 



" Dorso-epitrochlearis. The forearm slip from the latissinius is 

 very well developed. It is given off obliquely from the lower 

 border of the muscle, a little more than an inch from its humeral 

 insertion, and mounts upon the back of the forearm, crossing the 

 limb over the most prominent ridge of the latter. It appears to 

 end in fascia over the middle of the back of the forearm, but may 

 be traced, without unduly forcing the dissection, to pretty definite 

 insertion into the ulna itself, at about the middle of the bone. 

 The slip is of a nearly uniform width of about a third of an inch, 

 and is tliin and flat ; it has tlie usual action." 



Meckel — "Latissimus dorsi, musculus longissimus et latissimus, 

 a processibus spinosis vertebrarum dorsalium lumbariumque 

 oiuninm, nee non costarum inferiorum undecini parte posteriori et 

 media ortus, ad dimidium marginis ulnaris ossis humeri inferius 

 tendit, cui tendine lato, crasso et forti, inseritur." 



CuviER and Laurillard, in PI. 266, tig. 1, show the latissimus 

 dorsi as (l.) grand dor.sal and (l') idem, portio costale ; " Cuvier 

 la desige aussi par opposition a la portion anterienre et superieure, 

 qu' il appelle portion spinale." [Note to the figure.] 



With regard to the divisions of the latissimus dorsi we do not 

 hesitate to say that the view taken by Mivart, that the scapular 

 portion of the latissimus (in Echidna) is the representative of the 

 dorso-epitrochlear, is entirely wrong. 



Concerning that portion of the muscle described by Mivart as 

 "posterior dor.sal," we quite agree with him, that this is part of 

 the true latissimus dorsi, and we do not agree with the conclusions 

 airived at by Westling with regard to this muscle and the dorso- 

 epitrochlear ; still less do we agree with Fewkes, who regards this 



