268 Journal of Comparative Neurology. 



my results to some extent into the form of a comparison with 

 Menidia. For the same reason I shall refer the reader to that 

 work so far as possible for bibliographical and critical details. 



The nomenclature of the nerves presents the same difficul- 

 ties here as in Menidia, difficulties arising not only from the 

 diverse names given by different authors to the same nerves, 

 but especially from the fact that with but few exceptions the 

 nerve roots as ordinarily enumerated do not bear any simple 

 relation to the trunks and rami which arise from them. As a 

 rule, therefore, the peripheral nerves do not correspond to the 

 roots which bear the same names and numbers, but fusions and 

 anastomoses of the most puzzling kind occur everywhere. The 

 result is that, so long as the present unphilosophical nomen- 

 clature is employed, it often happens that a given peripheral 

 ramus containing several components must be assigned to one 

 of two or three cranial nerves upon purely arbitrary grounds. 

 The criterion most often appealed to here is priority or anatom- 

 ical authority, with results which are not always permissible. 

 For instance, the communis fibers which go out with the supra- 

 orbital trunk in some fishes are usually reckoned as part of the 

 ophthalmicus superficialis V, instead of the r. ophthalmicus VII, 

 although it is now definitely known that these fibers arise from 

 the geniculate, or facial ganglion. As a matter of fact it is 

 unphilosophical to ally them with either the general cutaneous 

 trigeminal fibers or the lateralis facialis fibers. This communis 

 nerve should have a name of its own. The time is rapidly ap- 

 proaching when we shall have a sufficiently detailed knowledge 

 of the composition of the cranial nerves throughout the Verte- 

 brata to make it possible to construct a typical schema for the 

 nerves of the vertebrate as a whole. And until that time comes 

 matters of nomenclature should be left in abeyance. I shall 

 therefore use in general the same names for the nerves as in 

 the Menidia paper, conforming as far as possible to conven. 

 tional usage. 



Most of the motor nerves have been worked out, but as 

 they conform to previous descriptions and have no direct appli- 



