434 FUNCTIONS OF THE SENSORIUM COMMUNE, [ch.iv. 



men were also of a contrary opinion ; that is to say, that the 

 nerves do not communicate with each other through their 

 anastomoses, but in the brain only. Amongst these were 

 Perault, Astruc, Kau Boerhaave, Haller, Whytt, Van Swieten, 

 Monro, Marherr, Thaer, La Roche, and Martin j^ add to these 

 Tissot,^ who specially lays stress on the following arguments of 

 Whytt: firstly, that all the nerve-fibrils from their commence- 

 ment to their termination are entirely separate from each 

 other, so that they have no communication, and are connected 

 with each other by their investing membrane only. Secondly, 

 that there is sympathy between parts, the nerves of which 

 have no anastomoses with each other. Thirdly, that there 

 ought to be many sympathies of parts, the nerves of which 

 are seen to be closely interwoven and connected with eacli 

 other, and yet no such sympathies are manifested. Fourthly, he 

 adds also to these arguments of Whytt, another, namely, that 

 if the trunk of a nerve be divided, the consensus of its 

 branches is destroyed. That eminent man, therefore, attempts 

 by these arguments to establish the doctrine, that consensus 

 of the nerves takes place in the sensorium commune only, and 

 in no degree in the nerves. Yet nevertheless, in the next 

 page^ he observes, that it may be assumed as a demonstrated 

 truth, that consensus is most frequently noted in the nerves 

 between which the communicating branches are numerous; 

 still he does not believe that consensus takes place through 

 these communicating branches, but that they contribute some- 

 thing to it, of the nature of which we are as yet ignorant. 



It is difficult to decide on a point regarding which so many 

 persons have disagreed, and which is as yet involved in so much 

 obscurity. The first glance at the anastomoses or communi- 

 cations of the nerves leads us to think, that they are consti- 

 tuted to maintain some consensus and interchange of their 

 functions, and no other probable reason can be assigned for so 

 many anastomoses of the nerves and of their funiculi.* With 

 regard to the arguments which eminent men have advanced in 

 favour of a contrary doctrine, they establish nothing as far as I 



1 Instit. Neurolog., sect, i, p. 87. 



^ Loc. cit. 



3 2ten Bandes 2ter Theil, § 6, Nro. 4. 



* These may be seen delineated in my treatise * De Structura Nervorum.' 



