in those times there was a shortage of scientific 

 investigations to cover all the history of 

 development of one species; no comparative 

 embryology was established, that valuable 

 relation of embryology to morphology in general, 

 as well as a sufficiently clear understanding 

 of the great significance of this branch of 

 knowledge for all studies about organic life. 

 In this case there was also no commonly 

 implemented terminology, and also no easily 

 concluded and understood statement of the 

 history of development such as the Systema 

 Naturae, from which they could implement further 

 follow-up investigations. All of that was given 

 by Baer, and he can with great fairness more 

 than anyone else be called the father of 

 scientific embryology. 9 



Another known embryologist and histologist, Albert von 

 Kolliker, in GRUNDRISS qpR ENTWICKLUNGSGESCHICHTE 

 DES MENSCHEN UND DER HOHEREN TIERE, has expressed 

 the following about Baer's work: "Baer went on along the 

 way of Wolff and Pander, and in the richness of the 

 excellent he studied the facts as well as the reliable 

 and broad generalizations; his work represents the best of 

 what is available in the' embryo logical literature of all 

 times and people. 10 



In 1927, on the centenary of Baer's election to the 

 Petersburg Academy of Science, the academician V. I. Verandskii 

 wrote that 



Of course the naturalist does not create a new 

 branch of science from his mind; ... He takes 

 his and others' material, adds to it his 

 impression, and under his steam the unformulated 



9. W. Waldeyer, "Uber K. E. von Baer und seine Bedeutung fur 

 die Naturwissenschaften," AMTL. BERICHT D. 50. 

 VERSAMML. DEUTSCH, NATURFORSCH. U. ARZTE IN 

 MUNCHEN, 1877, p. 10. 

 10. A. Kolliker, GRUNDRISS D£R ENTWICKLUNGSGESCHICHTE 

 DES MENSCHEN UND DER HOHEREN TIERE. FUR 

 STUDIERENDE UND ARZTE (Leipzig: W. Engelmann, 

 1880), 1884. 



306 



