Notes, ii. 13 — 14. 179 



3. That is to say, it is an involuntary reflex action. 



4. This is an unfortunate statement, borrowed however from Hippocrates [Kuhn^s ed. 

 i. 319 ; iii. 752). Firstly, the presence of flesh, i.e. of muscular tissue, is not essential 

 for reunion after section ; secondly, the eyelid does contain muscular tissue ; and, 

 lastly, cuts both in it and in the prepuce can be made to unite bytproper appliances. 

 It is true, however, as Frantzius points outs, that owing to the looseness of the 

 subcutaneous tissue in these .parts, the inflammatory swelling after a wound is very 

 considerable, and keeps the edges of the wound widely apart, so that it requires • 

 careful attention to produce reunion. Still such can be brought about wheij desirable ; 

 but in the case of the prepuce it is usually the object of the surgeon to prevent reunion. 



6. Because a hard skin, as stated farther on, cannot move with due rapidity. Compare 

 what he says (iii. 3, Note 8) as to the motion of the epiglottis, and (ii. 12, Note 2) of 

 the ears. The mobility of the lid does really stand in direct relation with the delicacy 

 of the' integument which forms it. Thus the skin of the lower lid {Todd''s Cycl. iii. 94) 

 is naked and finer than that of the upper lid in birds and chelonia, and as already 

 noted (Note 2) is the more moveable one. 



6. Cf. ii. 9, Note 9. 



7. " Upon thick skins, the hair is generally harsh and thick, .... and the case 

 is similar in those animals that are covered with scales or scutes " {^H. A. iii. 10, 2). 

 The character of the hair seems really to tvary with the thickness of the skin, cf. Low, 

 Domest. Anim. p. 368. 



8. Or rather, of a moveable upper eyelid. 



9. And by all other birds also (cf. H. A. ii. 12, 7). 



10. Cf. ii.2, Note 6. 



1 1 . There are exceptions among fishes, particularly in sharks. 



12. A. 's knowledge of Crustacea was confined, or nearly so, to Podophthalmata, in 

 which the eyes are supported on moveable peduncles. Insects have, almost invariably, 

 sessile and motionless eyes ; and though in a few instances the eyes are on peduncles, 

 these peduncles are not moveable like those of Crustacea. The mobility of the eyes of 

 Crustacea, as compared with Insecta, is to be looked on as an atonement for the smaller 

 mobility of their heads, which are fused with the thorax. 



(Ch. 14.) 1. Birds as a rule have no eyelashes. There are however a few exceptions ; 

 the ostrich, as here mentioned, and the rhea ; some parrots also, owls, and hombills. 

 But in these "they are rather feathers with short barbs than true eyelashes" (Otven). 

 As to the ostrich, cf. iv. 14, Note 2. 



2. Cf. ii. 2, Note 6. 



3. So far as I can ascertain it is true that man is the only mammal with a distinct 

 marginal lower eyelash, with the exception of some monkeys, an exception elsewhere 

 (J7. A. ii. 8, 4) recognised by A., and some few antelopes. In very many mammals, 

 especially the smaller kinds, there are no eyelashes at all. In the larger kinds, as a rule, 

 the upper lash is well developed and marginal, while the lower lash is represented, as 

 A. rightly says, by some long straggling hairs set below the lid, not on its margin. 



4. In the horse the stump is short and furnished with long hair ; while in the ass it 

 is long, and the hair short except at the extremity. It is, however, evident that the rule 

 which A. lays down is far from being of universal application. Still the idea is not 

 so utterly absurd as it appears at first sight. For the tail of an animal, consisting in 

 great part of tegumentary tissues, is in reality liable to vary with . other tegumentary 

 structures, such as hair, teeth, horns. The variations however which occur simultaneously 

 in this group of structures are not always such as can be explained by the law of organic 



