THE SYMPATHETIC SYSTEM 261 



are really more in the physiology than in the anatomy of 

 the subject. As Blandin says, "It is only fair to say 

 that no one has attached so much importance to this idea 

 and upheld it with more intelligence." I will add that I 

 consider Bichat's theories as the basis of the modern con- 

 ception of the nervous regulation of vegetative life. Practi- 

 cally speaking this conception is found in the writings of 

 Bichat all that is necessary is to make a few corrections. 



CORRECTIONS TO BE MADE ON THE THEORIES 

 OF BICHAT. 



Following the guiding idea, that is, the exposition of the 

 historical facts which lead to our present day knowledge 

 of the vegetative nervous systems, I will now indicate 

 the changes that have been found necessary. 



Bichat believed in the independence of the two systems; 

 in that respect he was wrong, for while it was a good thing 

 to show this independence, more relative than real, we 

 must not lose view of the fact that in reality the cerebro 

 spinal system contains both centres of the vegetative and 

 animal life and in the same manner Bichat exaggerated 

 the relative autonomy of the ganglionic centres. 



Another point, Bichat is very indefinite in the classifi- 

 cation of the ganglionic nervous systems which make up 

 the sum total of the vegetative nervous system. It is 

 necessary to say, as did Winslow, that the vagus belongs 

 mostly to the vegetative life. 



This said, let us repeat that Bichat's works are to be 

 considered more as an outline than a complete description. 

 Bichat died young, and in justice's sake we must say that 

 his theories stayed and that they were the starting point 

 of our modern conceptions. After him we must go to 

 Claude Bernard, then to the modern Russian and English 



