My observations on the history of development of 

 man . . . are intended for the second volume of 

 the book. I made up my mind to publish the history 

 of development now before changing my place of 

 resistance. However, these materials remained 

 unfinished for a long time because I could not 

 complete description of the development of the 

 lower classes of animals (111) . . . therefore 

 I am not confident of completing this manuscript 

 in five years. 



When Baer arrived in Petersburg and wanted to resume the work, 

 he did not have the necessary books, because his own library 

 still was not available. During resettlement he did not take 

 his library with him and received it only a year later in 

 late autumn of 1835. He began unpacking the books and putting 

 them in order in the winter of 1835/36. Since Baer could 

 only outline his section on man, Borntrager grew impatient 

 and published the second volume incomplete. Following this, 

 Baer left the manuscript unchanged and turned to other 

 scientific work. In Ms autobiography he wrote: "I am sorry, 

 that in the hope of filling these gaps in the history of the 

 development of invertebrates I did not print the other work, 

 'The Special Investigation of the Earlier Stages of the Human 

 Ovum'." 



Stieda wrote that "directly after Baer's death in November 

 1876, when I was busy putting his remaining literature in order, 

 I found this manuscript together with the titled volumes." 

 Stieda could not devote time to the manuscript then either 

 and only prepared it for press twelve years after Baer's death. 

 The published text, as Stieda wrote, exactly repeats the con- 

 tents of the manuscript. The publisher did not make any changes 

 or additions but only put Baer's outlines next to the text. 

 Explanation of the drawings and Tables IV-VII published in 

 the second volume of UBER ENTWICKLUNGSGESCHICHTE were 

 without explanation. The first two tables (IV and V) relate 

 to the text of the second volume, and the other two (VI and 

 VII) illustrated the final fourth part. Stieda included in 

 his preface the suggestion that the reader understands that 

 the work had been written fifty years earlier. This note of 

 Stieda' s was more significant for the reader of the second 

 half of the twentieth century since more than hundred years 

 had elapsed after Baer's writing on his embryological work. 



442 



