Editorial. 521 



full import of which other neurologists have been slowto appreciate. 

 This rete, which is the most important -structure in putting the 

 various elements of the nervous system into functional relation- 

 ship, GoLGi insists must be regarded as a network whose elements 

 are in protoplasmic continuity. And this, he maintains, is at 

 variance with the fundamental postulate of the neurone doctrine. 

 This matter of terminology is in our opinion of minor significance, 

 but the question of fact involved is of the greatest importance; 

 for the truth of Golgi's contention is now generally recognized, 

 in so far at least as the recognition of the great importance of the 

 neuropil, or rete nervosa diffusa. 



Whatever may prove to be the truth regarding the anatomical 

 structure of the neuropil, or Punktsuhstanz, neurologists are giving 

 more and more attention to it as the medium of interneuronic com- 

 munication. Indeed it is probable that by far the most important 

 nervous functions take place here rather than in the cell bodies. 

 Sherrington's doctrine of the synapse illustrates the extreme 

 fruitfulness of this conception when applied in concrete physiologi- 

 cal problems. 



GoLGi maintains that all of our physiological knowledge is 

 opposed to the idea of physiological independence of neurones 

 within this reticulum, but that a given rete must function more or 

 less as a whole. Such a rete is found in the granular layer of the 

 cerebellum and in the deeper layers of the cerebral cortex. In the 

 fascia dentata of the hippocampus we have the mechanism in 

 question in diagrammatic form (see the accompanying figure). 

 Between the cortical cells and the fimbria the fibers break up into 

 a reticulum. "Everything in this relation speaks in favor of the 

 cumulative action of the cells of the whole stratum of the fascia 

 dentata and against any individual action whatever of the cells 

 themselves." 



The evidence in favor of the existence and functional impor- 

 tance of such a rete nervosa diffusa as Professor Golgi describes, 

 at least in some parts of the central and peripheral nervous system, 

 is growing. At the same time, whether or not we call the elements 

 which compose this rete neurones, it remains true that the concep- 

 tions comprised under the term "neurone doctrine" are by no 

 means valueless. The doctrine itself in its original form has been 

 of the greatest assistance in the solution of knotty problems of 

 nervous structure and its usefulness is by no means outgrown. 



