252 



NOTES 



P. 136. 1. 11-12 from top. 



a Nobiliff. Cartefio excogitata 

 fa brie a] See note to vol. I p. 120. 1. 13 

 from top and Steno's Discovrs Svr L' 

 Anatomie Dv Cerveav, which was de= 

 livered in Paris in 1665 (XVIII vol. II 

 p. 1 in the present Edition). 



XII 



LYMPHATICORUM VARIETAS. 



The investigations, on which this Trea« 

 rise is based, were most likely made by 

 Steno in collaboration with Swammer* 

 dam, some time in the years of 1662 and 

 1663; one of the drawings is likewise 

 due to Swammevdam (see the Treatise). 

 Steno had planned an exhaustive work 

 on the lymphatic system, but never rea» 

 lized his plan. The text of this Treatise 

 is, at any rate as far as the latter part 

 is concerned, no doubt composed long 

 after the time when the investigations 

 were made, probably during Steno's stay 

 in Copenhagen in 1672—1674. TheTrea* 

 tise appeared in Thomse Bartholini Acta 

 Medica Et Philosophica Hafniensia. vol. 

 II Hafniae 1675 as No. XCVII pp. 240 

 -241. 



XIII 



APOLOGIAS PRODROMUS, QVO 



DEMONSTRATOR, JUDICEM 



BLASIANUM G, REI ANATOMICAL 



IMPERITUM ESSE, & AFFECTU* 



UM SUORUM SERVUM. 



This Tract is the last of Steno's 

 writings relative to his controversy with 

 Blaes about the priority of the discovery 

 of the parotid duct; concerning this con* 

 troversy see the Introduction and the 

 previous Treatises passim. This pam= 



phlet was caused by a little book, with 

 the title of Novus Ductus Salivalis Bla= 

 sianus, In lucem protractus A M. Nico= 

 lao Hoboken, Ultrajectino, Philofophiae 

 & Medicines Doctore ac Practice Ul« 

 trajecti 1662, which Nicolaas Hoboken 

 (1632—1678), a young friend of Blaes, 

 published in his defence. In his pamphlet 

 Hoboken stood forth as a judge in the 

 quarrel between the two men. The judg* 

 ment he pronounced was entirely in 

 favour of Blaes; a decision at which he 

 arrived all the more easily, as he did 

 not enter into any investigations of his 

 own in the matter in question. Hobo= 

 ken's pamphlet consists of a preface, 

 written by himself; an anagram on Ste= 

 no's name (see below); a letter from 

 Hoboken to Blaes; a letter from Blaes 

 to Hoboken; three testimonials from 

 former pupils of Blaes; a letter from 

 Blaes to Th. Bartholin, dated Amster* 

 dam July 16, 1661 (reprinted in Thomse 

 Bartholini Epist. Medicin. Cent. HI. 

 Hafnia; 1667. Epist. XLIII pp. 158- 

 184); and last a letter from Hoboken 

 to Blaes. About Hoboken, see Biogr. 

 Woordenboekder Nederlanden, vol. VIII 

 2 p. 841. 



P. 145. 1. 6-7 from top. 



Ductus Salivalis] Hoboken has 

 Ductus illius Salivalis. 



P. 145. 1. 12 from bottom. 



in ipfa Apologia] The Apology iU 

 self never appeared, as a reconcilement 

 between Steno and Blaes took place 

 before that time. 



P. 145. 1. 1 1 from bottom. 



me infelici puero comparando] 

 Hoboken has (p. 38): Infelix puer atqve 

 impar congreffus Achillil 



