TRANSACTIONS OF SECTION T). 465 



amorphous mass of data. Our object was a threefold one : (1) to represent by 

 a curve the activities of comparative anatomists year by year from the sixteenth 

 century to 1860; (2) to separate out the performances of each European coun- 

 try; (3) to determine which groups of animals and what aspects of the subject 

 engaged the attention of workers from time to time. In other words, it seemed 

 possible to reduce to geometrical form the activities of anatomists as a whole, 

 and the relative importance in time and interest of each country and subject. 

 We do not propose in this preliminary note to dwell on the difficulties of the 

 work — they have been numerous, and relate chiefly to the difficulty in assioninu- 

 certain workers to their appropriate countries, and in making due allowance 

 for others whose output has been disproportionate to the influence they have 

 exercised. 



For the period between the years 1543 and 1860 we have made records of 

 6,304 papers which deal wholly or partly with the anatomy of animals, as apart 

 from those having a systematic interest only. It is inevitable that we have 

 missed many, but the number can hardly bear any serious proportion to those we 

 have recorded. In Fig. 1 each division in the horizontal direction represents 

 fifty years, and the height of the chart in any year represents the number of 

 papers published in that year. In assigning a paper to any particular year we 

 have had to consider whether the date of publication bears a close relation to the 

 completion of the work. In some cases publication may be many years subse- 

 quent to the death of the author, and our method has been to chart the actual 

 or approximate year in which the work was finished rather than the date of 

 publication. At the same time we feel that the date of publication does stand 

 for something — it represents at least a current interest in the subject of the 

 research. We give four specimen charts (Figs. 1-4), selected from the number 

 that have been made. 



An examination of Fig. 1 shows that only intermittent research was carried 

 on before the year 1650, but that in the next fifty years there was considerable 

 activity, culminating at about 1683, and thereafter subsiding. There is no 

 doubt that this sudden revival was due almost exclusively to the Academia 

 Naturae Curiosorum founded in 1652, the Royal Society of "London (1660), the 

 French Academy of Science (1666), and, to a much less extent, the Collegium 

 Anatoniicum of Amsterdam (c. 1665). From 1700 to 1750 work is steadily 

 maintained, but at a lower numerical level, and the second revival begins at 

 1750, gradually increases in volume up to 1800, and then suddenly swings up to 

 a very high maximum between 1835 and 1840, finally declining somewhat con- 

 siderably down to 1860, beyond which we have collected no data. 



If now we consider the achievements of individual countries, we find that 

 the second revival was initiated by France (Fig. 2), followed closely by 

 Germany (Fig. 3), and at some distance by England (Fig. 4). The last coun- 

 try, however, reaches her maximum first, then Germany, and finally France. 

 Havmg passed the maximum point, France progressivelv declines up to 1860, 

 but both England and Germany, having reached their "lowest point by 1850, 

 show signs of recovery. It should be stated that Holland and Denmark take a 

 distmct part in the seventeenth-century revival, and that Italy is undoubtedly 

 concerned in initiating the similar movement in the nineteenth century 

 Germany claims 2,066 records, France 1,507, England 1,171, Italy 373, Holland 

 214, Switzerland 170, and Denmark 155. 



An analysis of authorities shows in England the Hunterian school in 

 splendid isolation— an example which was not driven home until, more than 

 thirty years after the death of Hunter, Owen published his first anatomical 

 paper. In France, on the other hand, the work of Buffon, Vicq d'Azyr, and 

 (Juvier is promptly and steadily followed up. Germany is almost devoid of 

 pioneers in the eighteenth century, but her record from 1800 includes an almost 

 unbroken succession of well-known workers, and it is this solidarity which makes 

 the German chart so impressive. England claims fifteen writers with a mini- 

 mum of ten papers to their credit, Germany 39, and France 35. The most 

 voluminous writers on comparative anatomy have been Owen, Home, G. St 

 Hilaire, J. Miiller, Dufour, Rathke, Duvernoy, Uuvier, Meckel, Blainville 

 Milne Edwards, Hyrtl, and Brandt. The earlier writers were very largely 

 Italian, but from 1650 onwards Denmark, England, France, Germany Holland 

 and Switzerland successively enter the field ' ' 



1915. 



