No. 604] SOURCES OF ANATOMICAL LITERATURE 1! 



fluid, primarily elaborated by the brain, condensed in the 

 testes and from there conveyed to the spermatic duct. 

 Osteology was somewhat better known, although the 

 skull, pelvis, forearm and leg were regarded as being 

 formed of one bone each, or at times eight bones were 

 assigned to the head in the male and six in the female. 

 Something was known of the tendons and ligaments. The 

 spleen and heart were regarded as the organs of reason. 

 Ancient Chinese medical literature consists of a large 

 number of works, none of which are of any scientific im- 

 portance. There is no modern Chinese anatomical lit- 

 erature. 



What little of anatom.y was known in ancient India is 

 contained in the writings of Atreya, a physician who 

 wrote a good description of the bones of the human body, 

 and who is said to have taught in the Taxila University 

 during the sixth century b.c. ; as well as in the writings of 

 the surgeon Susruta, of a somewhat later date. 'As the 

 writings of these men have been interpreted by Charaka, 

 ancient East Indian anatomy regarded the body of man 

 as possessing seven skins, seven elements, 300 bones, 24 

 nerves, 3 fluids, 107 joints, or T^S movable joints and 142 

 immovable ones, 000 liuanioiils, 00 tendons, 40 principal 

 blood vessels with 700 brniidu's. and 500 muscles. The 

 blood vessels and nerves-' i-adiated out from the um- 

 bilicus as a center. Nothing was known of the courses of 

 these structures within the body. 



There is a later publication of about a.d. 800 entitled 

 "Amarakosha," which discusses somewhat the nature of 

 the human body but there is no later treatise which might 

 be termed anatomical, and there is no modern East In- 

 dian anatomical literature. 



While engaged in a biographical study of the men who 

 have contributed to the advancement of our knowledge of 

 vertebrate anatomy, the writer has been attracted by a 

 number of interesting facts relating to the sources of 

 anatomical literature, which, he believes, are not generally 



