from different faculties. He was characterized by unusual 

 breadth of erudition. From 1836 to 1861, he read a great 

 number of general and special courses: zootomy, system of 

 animal palaeotology (or as he called it, zoology of first- 

 living world) , comparative anatomy, anatomy of man, natural 

 history of man, natural history of echinodermata (polyps) ; 

 polyps and corals, natural history of insects and, at last, 

 embryology (history of development) . The latter subject 

 was stated at first by Kutorgaya (1836/37) according to 

 Burdach (it is necessary to remember, that the corresponding 

 chapters of "Physiology" of Burdach were written by Baer) , 

 and then (in 1843 and 1844/45) — by the observations of Rathke, 

 Baer, Purkinje and Valentin. (Imperatorskii Sanktpeterburgskii 

 Universitet v techenie pervykh pyatidesyati let ego sushchsto- 

 vovaniya) (Imperial Sanktpeterburg University during the 

 first years of the existence) Historical reprint, composed 

 by V. V. Grigorev. SPb, 1870, 432 pages) (464) . 



(115) The biographers of Baer overlooked these inves- 

 tigations or did not evaluate them as they should be. Inform- 

 ing about the trip of Baer to the coasts of the Mediterranean 

 Sea in 1845 and 1846 for embryological investigations, 

 B. E. Raikov wrote: "As to his purposes, nothing was fulfilled 

 Material, collected in the Mediterranean Sea, remained unworked 

 out, and the trials to return back to the study of embryology 

 within a ten-year interval did not achieve any results." 

 ("Russian biologists-evolutionists before Darwin", V. II, 

 1951, p. 68). The only exception in the evaluation of the 

 mentioned investigations of Baer is their statement in T. P. 

 Platova article "Development of the study about the cell in 

 Russia within 40-50 years of the 19th Century" (Tr. In-ta 

 istorii estestvozn. V. IV, 1952, pp. 332-372) . The negligence 

 of the last embryological work of Baer, can be explained only, 

 by that in the vast literature legacy of Baer (his works, 

 concerning embryological questions, occupy no less than 125 

 printed pages) it is easy to lose a paragraph in 10 columns 

 under ? modest title "Extract from the report of academician 

 Baer from Trieste". However, in this article incomplete 

 observations were stated which, later on, were discontinued, 

 although their significance was so great, that the contents of 

 the article served as sufficient detailed statement. This is 

 necessary in order to bring to light the observations and 

 ideas of Baer and to call to mind the priority of the Russian 



646 



