301 
to adopt some uniform method of illustrating cross sections in topo- 
graphical anatomy. 
In deciding which method should be adopted as a standard, two 
questions arise for consideration. 1) Should the upper (cephalic) 
surface of the section, or the lower (caudal) be represented? 2) 
Should the dorsal or the ventral side of the section be placed 
toward the top of the page? In regard to the first question, it may 
be said that, except for the sake of uniformity, it would matter little 
which plan were adopted. The majority of anatomists, however, 
following the example of BRAUNE, have usually represented the upper 
surface of the section (i. e., the section as viewed from above). 
Since, moreover, the eye of the observer is usually in a plane above 
(cephalad to) the region under examination, the upper (cephalic) sur- 
face most nearly represents the relations as actually met. It is 
therefore desirable to adopt this method as the general rule, to be 
departed from only when special considerations make it necessary. 
The second question, however, is not so easily answered. There 
is no uniformity whatever among anatomists in regard to the matter. 
Many, herealso following BRAuNnE’s example, represent sections with 
the ventral surface placed toward the top of the page. The majority, 
perhaps, use sometimes one method, sometimes the other. Only a few 
(including KÖLLIKER, SCHÄFER and Barker) uniformly represent the 
dorsal toward the top of the page. The latter method, nevertheless, 
as I shall attempt to show, is decidedly preferable, both from prac- 
tical and from theoretical considerations. 
For example, let us consider a transverse section of the human 
body at the level of the eleventh thoracic vertebra. It is represented 
ventral surface upward in Fig. 1, and dorsal surface upward in Fig. 2. 
Which, from the medical standpoint, is the more desirable as a uniform 
method of illustration? At first glance it would appear that Fig. 1 
represents the most practical position, since the cadaver is dissected 
chiefly with the ventral surface upward. This perhaps is the reason 
for the adoption of this form by many anatomists. But is it really 
the most practical? Consider the attitude of the cadaver toward the 
student, or of the patient to the physician and surgeon. Is it not 
usually a facing position, i. e. with the ventral surface nearest, 
and the dorsal surface furthest away? And this relation, it will be 
noted, is represented, not in Fig. 1, but in Fig. 2. The latter shows 
the relations as one would actually see them, if the body were trans- 
parent, in facing a person either standing, sitting, or recumbent. It 
may be observed that with reference to one’s own body, the relations 
