2 REMARKS ON THE FIGURES OF PLATE XLVII. 
of form are in minus number. Every condition of develop- 
ment whatever is “anomalous,” and unaccountable to him 
who is totally unacquainted with any condition of form, 
and who will deny that as we progress in experience of the 
things which are, “normally,” we may hope to find the 
proper serial place for those things which are, “abnormally.” 
And what, after all, is this mystery of normal and 
abnormal variety in the same species? Is it more to be 
marvelled at than that variety of form which we find 
characterising various species by fitness and design? 
When fig. A, or fig. B, shall manifest a plus or minus 
variety in any region of series to that condition of form 
which it now proves; when the numerical series of either 
cervix, thorax, loms, sacrum or caudex, shall be produced 
either plus or minus to its ordimary cast; and that those 
varieties upon the figure of either A or B shall prove to 
be only those which happen to individualise the skeleton 
fabrics of certain other animal species, then it is plain 
that the only way to gain a full acquaintance with all 
modes of special varieties, whether these be fitting or 
unfitting to the individual or to the many, is to study the 
law itself, in reference to the material of that whole quan- 
tity of serial uniformity upon which the law operates; and 
it is this method which, not beimg artificial or invented to 
suit with preconceived hypothesis, but bemg natural and 
according to fact and experience, will therefore yield an 
interpretation according to truth. If, for example, the law 
of metamorphosis shall subtract a costa from the present 
quantity of fig. A, which figure shall now be struck minus 
and various to fig. B, wherein the homologue of this lost 
costa still persists, then fig. B must be regarded as a plus, 
and hence, explicative form to fig. A, the minus form. 
And, pursuing this chainwork of connected and simple 
evidence, we say, that fig. A, or B, in each of which we 
now find the number of twelve thoracic costo-vertebral 
quantities, are both to be regarded as minus and special 
to either fig. A, or B, when these or their like shall pro- 
duce thirteen or fourteen thoracic quantities, for in this 
latter condition of development they will stand as plus 
fabrics to what they are at present. 
Again, when fig. A, or B, as these structures now present 
to us, or as they or their like may present in plus costal 
condition, shall be compared with that skeleton fabric 
which deyelopes a surplusage of thoracic archetypes in any 
number which shall exceed those “ normal,” or even those 
“anomalous,” to the special design of figs. A, and B, then 
it is clear that figs. A and B must be accounted special 
to such a surplus skeleton axis, because they are minus 
quantities compared to the same. In support of this 
reading of the law of form, which creates minus specialities 
from out of the material of a plus whole quantity, we ask 
the question whether or not it be the fact, that when figs. 
A and B produce cervical and lumbar ribs, these surplus 
costal quantities involve within their own dimensions the 
“transverse processes” of cervix and lumbar spine, and 
shorten those regions of the skeleton axis in the same 
ratio? 
Now the length of a serial axis is likewise wholly de- 
pendent upon the numerical position of that terminal unit 
whose original quantity is subjected to the operation of 
the law of subtraction or metamorphosis. It is a fact 
that the sacro-caudal form of the human species is by no 
means fixed as to the serial number of its quantities. The 
skeleton axis of fig. A produces thirty-three serial quanti- 
ties, whereas that of fig. B developes thirty-four, and we 
have ourselves numbered in many other human forms as 
much as thirty-seven. Therefore we say, that this variation 
of formation in human type must be read in company with 
the whole sum of variations which are to be found in the 
transcendental animal type, and all variations will, when 
summed. together, prove that they are the minus quan- 
tities of some plus original series.* It is this series which 
we are proceeding in search of. And _ as it will not 
advance our present views to digress loosely from the 
anatomical investigation of the caudal entity (for in such 
condition it is created, more or less, for all animals), so 
shall we here be little concerned, whether in former times it 
stood out plus for “the first man,” or whether Tamerlane 
the Tartar, Attila the Hun, young Ammon the Mace- 
donian, or any other character + before or since their 
time, had been familiarised with the visible presence of it 
produced from their outward person.t As the physiologist 
now-a-days finds it, so is he to discourse of it; for it is 
true that the ens cannot be disguised to analogical 
inquiry, even though it be termed xoxkvé, as the vanish- 
ing point of human skeleton series, while we know it, 
under the name caudex, as finishing the serial axis of gra- 
duated quantities in other animals.§ 
* Jf variation as to the number of osseous pieces found in two or more skeleton forms of the higher classes of animals, such as mammals, ~ 
birds, reptiles, and osseous fishes, be accounted a sufficient reason for distinguishing them as species, then the like reason for establishing specific 
character between two or more forms of human type is also apparent. 
Not only do human forms vary as to the number of ribs, but they likewise 
manifest infinite varieties in respect to the number of vertebra. And we may venture to assert that there is no one class or species of skeleton 
form throughout the four great groups of animals which can he said to present a fixed character as to the number of osseous elements. 
+ “ Homo sapiens ferus tetrapus, mutus, hirsutus.”—Linneus, Systema Nature. 
t “Les marchands de Tripoly qui trafiquent en esclaves noirs, m’assurérent aussi, que ceux de ce pays étoient plus farouches, plus forts et 
plus difficiles a dompter, que de tout autre; qu’ils ayoient presque tous des queues, les femmes comme les hommes.”—Maillet, Tel/iamed, de 
V Origine de V Homme et des Animaua, §c., Tome second, sixiéme journée, page 178. ; 
§ “La Nature n’est qu’un seul acte. Cet acte comprend les phénoménes passés, présens et futurs ; sa permanence fait la durée des choses,” 
—I. B. Robinet, Vue Philos, de la Gradation Nat. des Formes de lV’ Etre, p. 2, chap. i. 
