7 
OBSERVATIONS, &c. 25% 
I REMARKED, that although in fome parts of the body, ten- 
dinous membranes, fuch as thofe between the cartilages of the 
ribs, or the apaneurofes palmares, or fafcie late of the thighs, 
ferved merely for the defence of the parts, or as fheaths to them, 
as they were connected to them by the cellular fubftance only, 
yet, in general, they ferved, befides the mere purpofe of de- 
fence, to furnifh a greater extent of furface for the attachment 
of oblique flefhy fibres. 
I sHEWED them, that wherever tendinous membranes run 
longitudinally on the furfaces of mufcles, flefhy fibres, placed: 
obliquely, were found ; that in many mufcles, as in the femi- 
membranofus, or flexor pollicis longus, flethy fibres paffed ob- 
liquely from the inner part of the tendon on one fide, to the 
inner part of the tendon on the other fide of the mufcle, or 
fuch mufcles were femi-penniform, (See T. 1. fig. 1.) ; that in 
other mufcles, as in the re@tus extenfor cruris, or flexor pollicis 
pedis longus, a third tendinous membrane was found in the 
middle of the mufcle, between which and the inner parts of 
the tendons on the two fides of the mufcle, the flefhy fibres 
pafled obliquely, and produced a complete penniform appear- 
ance, (fee T. 1. fig. 2.); and fome mufcles, as the foleus, might 
be called compound penniform, becaufe, on cutting them 
lengthways, we difcovered feveral longitudinal tendinous mem- 
branes, to both fides of which oblique flefhy fibres were con- 
nected. See T. 1. fig. 3. 
I aLtLeceD, that the direction, length and number of fi- 
bres in fuch mufcles had not been fufficiently attended to by 
anatomifts or by furgeons; and that, in many inftances, the 
breadth of thefe mufcles had been miftaken for their length ; 
that in confequence of fuch inattention, they would find the 
celebrated Louis * attempting to difcard the double incifion of 
the foft parts in the amputation of the thigh, although, from 
the obliquity and fhortnefs of the mufcular fibres which cover. 
lia the 
* Acad. Roy. de Chirurg. T. 2. p. 357. 
