On the Influence of Muscular Attachments. 



61 



from the outer and upper aspect of the external condyle, but not 

 from the popliteal surface ; to a slight extent from the lower end 

 of the external supracondyloid septum ; while some of the fibres of 

 the plantaris arose from the superficial surface of the tendon of the 

 gastrocnemius. Neither of these origins extended above the level 

 of the condyle, on which they passed so far forward as almost to 

 appear in front of the lower end of the supracondyloid ridge. 



The immediate effect of the extension of the adductor magnus 

 muscle into the popliteal space, and the presence of a middle head to 

 the gastrocnemius, was to disturb the relation betw^een the popliteal 

 artery and vein, for in directing its course to the middle line of the 

 popliteal space, the artery became separated from the vein by the 

 interposition of the middle head of the gastrocnemius. 



In the left limb, the attachments of the adductor magnus and 

 biceps flexor cruris were almost identical with those found in the 

 right limb, but as regards the gastrocnemius and plantaris muscles, 

 their points of origin were normal. After the two femora were 

 macerated, they yielded the following measurements : — 



Collection, ..... University of Edinburgh. 



Sex, ....... 



Age, 



Total oblique length, .... 



Diameter of femoral head, 



Diameters of sub-trochanteric region — 



Antero-posterior, .... 



Transverse, ..... 

 Platymeric Index, .... 

 Diameters of middle region of shaft — 



Antero-posterior, .... 



Transverse, ..... 

 PiLASTRic Index, .... 

 Popliteal Index, .... 

 (i) Popliteal width at 4 cm., 

 (u) Maximum bicondyloid width, . 



inn ^xlO^ 

 u= 100, = . . . . 



u 

 Distance of linea aspera from external condyle, 



"mn," 



"mp," 



Distance of nutrient foramina from lower end 



Female. 

 Adult. 



Right. 



440 



46 



24 

 30 



80 



Left. 

 440 

 46 



24 

 31 



77-7 



28 

 26 

 107-6 

 75-6 

 37 

 76-5 



28 



27 



lOS-7 



72-5 

 39 



77 



J,8'S 50-6 



100 

 30 



28 



89 

 29 



27-5 



of femur. 



165-282 175 



I must confess that the examination of these figures was 

 somewhat of a disappointment to me, for I fully expected to 

 find marked alterations in the popliteal diameters of the 

 bones, in view of the pronounced muscular abnormalities 

 which they presented. But this is not the case. In spite 



