7 



ogies so ooni'idently traced by us to day are f^rounded on many 

 neurological studies, the results oi' which were not available 

 to the investigators of the earliei- period. 



Unfortunately for coiriparative anatoniy, the conclusions of 

 Miclucho-Niaclay were accepted by Get^enbaur, and were incorpora- 

 ted by him in the second edition of his Grundzii^e ('70), and 

 were continued in the smaller Grundriss ('74). Appearing also, 

 of course, in the French translation of the former work by Vogt, 

 and in tlie English translation of the latter by Eell, the errors 

 were, through these several channels, given the widest possi- 

 ble distribution among investigators, with all the prestige of 

 Gegenbaur's authority behind them. Gegenbaur has rectified 

 the mistake in the latest form assumed by his text-book ('98), 

 but it probably 7/111 be many years before the miscliief is fully 

 undone. 



Stied^ {'7c) devoted himself to a correction of the 

 erroneous conceptions promulgated by K'iclucho-N^aclay and 

 Gegenbaur. After carefully considering the subject-matter at 

 issue, he embodied his conclusions in a table in which the 

 homologies of the several brain-segments are properly set forth. 

 The work of this author had the effect, at least, of directing 

 the attention of anatomists once more to the fact that the 

 homologies of the fish-brain were really in question, resulting, 

 ultimately, in the true interpretation prevailing at the present 

 time. 



Rohon ('77), although writing several years after the 



