Narrative of the discoveries of Sir Charles Bell in the nervous system / by Alexander Shaw.

Date:
1839
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Narrative of the discoveries of Sir Charles Bell in the nervous system / by Alexander Shaw. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. The original may be consulted at the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh.

    17/244 (page 7)
    thesis be allowed, it will follow, that when the nerves in question, after escaping from the vertebral canal or skull, unite with each other, so that their fibrils are enveloped in the same sheath, they will become compound nerves, and combine the two powers of bestowing motion and sensation. Here, then, is the simple explanation of the princi- ple on wrhicli all these new discoveries have been based. It consists, I repeat, in supposing that, to investigate the functions of the nervous system successfully, we must devote our attention, not to the trunks, as was formerly done, but to the roots of the nerves. Accordingly, whoever was the first to suggest and follow out that new method of prosecuting the subject, must be de- clared the true originator of the recent improvements in this department of physiology. It is by the test of who did the most to establish this law, that we must decide to whom we are indebted for these discoveries. But it will be perceived, that if Sir Charles Bell, in treating of the spinal nerves, really did express the opinions relating to their roots which have been im- puted to him, he can have no claim to be considered a discoverer. The views attributed to him are of such a nature, that, if he entertained them, it is obvious he could not have had any conception of the truth of the principle above described, far less have been the first to propound it. Accordingly, it is but justice to- wards this gentleman to inquire, Whether there he any oundation for the statement in question ? or If this representation of his views be not, on the contrary, 1irectly opposed to what he really has stated ?