THE HISTORY OF COMPARATIVE ANATOMY 579 



sents numerical values only, and may by itself be seriously 

 misleading. The author of fifty small ephemeral papers is, 

 judged by figures, of greater importance than William Harvey, 

 represented only by two entries, both of great significance. It 

 is hence necessary that any conclusions drawn from the charts 

 should be checked by an examination of the scientific value of 

 the literature dealt with. But it must still be claimed that 

 the figures alone have their value. The fact that much research 

 is published at a particular period, however indifferent most 

 of it may be, is a sure indication of contemporary interests and 

 activities. Most of us have lived long enough to have been 

 advised, as successive means to salvation, to abandon the 

 pleasures of congenial research and follow the cytologist, the 

 protozoologist and the Mendelian. Each of these enthusiasts 

 has in turn presented his " Quicunque vult " with its un- 

 pleasant alternative. The history of our scientific Modes is 

 worth studying, and it can best be studied by statistical 

 methods. By these means we can trace the branches of the 

 subject that were attracting attention at a particular time, 

 and what influence, if any, was exercised by the more important 

 workers. 



Another difficulty is as regards nationality. How are we 

 to compose the claims of parentage, birthplace, and domicile ? 

 Is Cuvier, for example, to be credited to Germany or to France ? 

 We have decided each of these cases on its merits, and have 

 been bound by no fixed rule. In the matter of dates it is 

 often important to record the year or years when the work 

 was actually accomplished, rather than the date of publication, 

 which may be years subsequent to the death of the author. 

 Yet here again publication stands for something — at least it 

 represents a current interest in the subject of the research, an 

 interest which may be productive of further efforts of a similar 

 nature. The same may be said of new editions, even if they 

 are only literal reprints of the first. We have, however, dis- 

 regarded these, but have recorded all re-issues which include 

 new matter. Unedited translations also have been ignored. 

 Place of publication requires careful watching, especially in 

 the case of the early literature, when the publication of scien- 

 tific work was largely in the hands of a few continental book- 

 sellers. Harvey, for example, published his treatise on the 

 Circulation at Frankfort, because he considered its prospects 



