1871.] 159 [Wilder. 



tween the proximal parts of the membra, 34, 600, and 36, 16, which 

 had been previously pointed out by Agassiz, 26, 89, and others ; but 

 a more careful study of his works, especially of his later papers upon 

 the subject, 64, and 72, has led me to regard his views as essentially 

 syntropical ; since, in his opinion, the above-mentioned antagonism is 

 purely telical, and involves no idea of a general principle of sym- 

 metry ; so that his comparison of the membra must either be included 

 among the recent general comparisons, or associated with those of 

 Owen and Cleland, in spite of their disagreements in respect to some 

 special homologies. To Humphrey, however, is to be given the 

 credit of indicating the value of comparative anatomy in this discus- 

 sion, as to Goodsir belongs the honor of urging the importance of 

 embryological studies, in order to determine the " morphology of 

 limbs." 



The evident objection to a comparison of two parallel with two 

 crossed bones, led Bourgery, 10, and afterward Cruveilhier, 18, to sug- 

 gest that the tibia was represented by the upper half of the ulna and 

 the lower half of the radius, and the fibula, in like manner, by the 

 upper half of the radius and the lower half of the ulna; but their 

 view has not been adopted by any later writers. 



Equally unnatural and unsupported was the " Torsion" theory of 

 Maclise, 23, and Martins, 33, who at different times, but as it appears, 

 independently, endeavored to preserve the syntropy or serial ho- 

 mology of the membra, the natural attitude of the manus, and at the 

 same time remove the objections to the views of Barclay and Bour- 

 gery by admitting the homology of the convexities of ancon and 

 genu, and the parallel relation of ulna and radius; they assumed that 

 "the humerus was a bone twisted upon its axis for 180°," and that it 

 required to be untwisted in order to make the armus comparable with 

 the skelos. A certain amount of "torsion" has lately been admitted 

 by Gegenbaur, 59, but the conclusions of Maclise and Martins'have 

 been adopted by no other anatomists, and have been objected to by 

 Humphrey, 36, Wilder, 45, and Wyman, 55. 



A reaction from these speculative views took place in 1864, when 

 Prof. Huxley proposed a comparison of the membra, 42, which differs 

 in many respects from all others, even in the manner of its presenta- 

 tion ; since its author appears to have attached so little importance to 

 it that he has never written it out for publication or referred to it in 

 his later works; and so far from believing, like the author of 23, that 

 his method of comparison was to ' ' unravel the gordian knot of that 



