4 Journal of Comparative Neurology. 



man, as Forel remarks very wittily, with figures still more 

 schematized than Meynet's, Forel made an attempt to leave 

 the ground of speculation and to study attentively what serial 

 sections of the brain show and what they don't show. The 

 scientific training which he has shown in his dissertation and 

 afterwards in his work on the ants, found congenial encourage- 

 ment with von Gudden, whose assistant he had become in the 

 Lunatic Asylum of Munich. 



I am perhaps too enthusiastic about Forel's paper on the 

 tegmentum. Yet I believe it is to this paper that I owe nearly 

 all my education for anatomical studies. Edinger's classical 

 lectures as an introduction, then Forel's papers and Burdack's 

 famous work ought to form the first school for the study of the 

 numerous monographs and for original work. The writer of 

 the present sketch had the chance of getting the late Prof. 

 Meynert's copy of Forel's paper. The numerous remarks by 

 TVIeynert's own hand show with what attention the famous mast- 

 er studied the work of his critical pupil. 



It is impossible to give here a fair review of the paper on 

 the tegmentum. I hope that the reader of this paper is already 

 familiar with it or, if not, he will be sufficiently rewarded by 

 reading it in the original. Forel has a great advantage over 

 most writers on anatomy of the braim French being his native 

 and I might say natural language, his education and mental 

 tendancies being German, he handles the difficult subject with 

 an astonishing simplicity of stile without becoming inexact and 

 superficial. Let me mention the characteristic features of 

 Forel's paper. 



The speculative anatomy of Meynert and especially of 

 Luys are entirely abandoned and purely anatomical methods are 

 used. The defective nomenclature which has been and for a 

 long time will be a great impediment for the progress of our 

 science, is examined and careful definitions are put in the place 

 of vaguely used terms. It seems that too often names were 

 created first and then applied to fibres and nuclei which would 

 best suit the hypothesis, whereas we should try to analyze 

 the elements first and give them a name when we have recog- 



