The two kidneys have one body and what reason is there for giving them two different names. If the moving air is the gate of life what is its nature? This is the mistake in regaid to the kidneys. The liver is said to have two roads or blood vessels proceeding from the two sides of the ribs; one ascending to the head and eyes, the other going downwards, surrounding the yin-chi, genital organs or organs related to the dark or female principle in nature aud thereafter descending to the big toe. If there are then two vessels, a right and a left, why is it said by others the liver is on the left side of the body and that the left ribs are related to the liver. There can therefore be only one vessel. Why in discoursing do they speak of right and left. How is this? (The Chinese are perfectly at sea in regard to the number, position and function of the various viscera.) The heart is the sovereign. The five functions of the brain are all said to be stored in the heart. But how about the spleen which, according to others, is the seat of the will, the kidney of ingenuity, the liver of policy, the gall bladder of determining, so that in this way all the viscera take part in the mental processes and yet some of the ancients say that the heart only is conoerned about these things. Each part has an intellective apparatus and no one has condescended to tell us what is, or where it is stored. This is a sample of the unintelligible way in which they discourse upon the heart. The stomach is said to govern the digestion of water and the cereals. Others say that the movement of the spleen is the cause of digestion; the upper mouth of the stomach is the pen-mencardiac orifice; food enter the stomach; the delicate air from the pen-men ascends and is relegated to the spleen and thence is dispersed to all the pulses. According to my idea these views have no reason on their side. The lower door of the stomach is the yen-men (pylorus); this is the upper mouth of the small intestines.

The ancients discoursing on the small intestines considered its office that of receiving and storing and the digested matters issued therefrom, and the food entered the small intestines and became faeces; below in the lan-menA Modern Chinese Anatomist 660 (ileo-ccal valve,) that is, the lower door of the small intestines and the fine and coarseare here divided; the faeces went to the largo intestines and passed out at the anus; the water to the bladder and became urine. According to this view the urine percolates out from the fces, fen which would make the urine of a very foetid odour; indeed people have used children's urine as a vehicle for the administration of medicines or people themselves have used their own urine to cure eye diseases; the taste is said to be saltish not fœtid; again if food and water unite together to form fces, the latter should be very thin and we should have diarrhoea. Fowls and ducks have no separate urinary apparatus, food and water pass together. This condition of food and water going together in them is therefore all right; in horses and cows where there is the existence of the small convenience, penis this principle does not hold; in man it is still more so. As regards what the ancients say of the small intestines digesting food and water and passing out by the lan-men(ileo-ccal valve), everybody is convulsed at the very idea. Such views do not need refutation. They have been a subject of ridicule all down the ages.

The pericardium is said to be a delicate tendon like silk fibres connecting the heart and langs. Others say the yellow fat outside the heart is the pericardium. Others say the pericardium is the yellow fat below the heart, above the horizontal membrane (diaphragm)A Modern Chinese Anatomist 664 and below the vertical membrane (mediastinum). Others say it is in the centre of the sternum or thereabouts, having a name but without form. Although it is said to have a name and to be without substance, how is it said that the shao-chueh-yin

A Modern Chinese Anatomist 666pulse is the ching (road or vessel) of the pericardium? So many have discoursed on the pericardium, what after all we would ask is it? How can it be so many different things?

Discoursing of the three divisions is a still greater subject for laughter. The Ling-shuA Modern Chinese Anatomist 667 (one of the oldest of the Chinese medicine books) says that the shou-shao-yinof the three chiau (or divisions of the body)

A Modern Chinese Anatomist 670 is above and the tsu-tai-yang three divisions are below.

According to this view then there are two, three divisions. The Nanching A Modern Chinese Anatomist 672 in its 31st section which is wholly taken up with this subject, says that the upper chiao is above the stomach; it takes in but does not put out things; the middle chiae is placed at the central part of the stomach and its function is to dissolve the food and fluids; the lower chiao is below the umbilicus and separates the urine and fces. It is also said that the three chiao is the road taken by the food and water, thus giving the three chiao a shape or body. The Nanching also says that the space between the two kidneys is that where the air originates and is the root of the three divisions. In this sense, therefore, the three chiao have no form. So we are, according to the Nanching, that it has no form and that it has form and that there are two, three chiaos. Wangshu-ho (a celebrated physician) speaks of the three divisions as having a name without a body thus following the Nanching. Chen-wu-chae of the Sung dynasty (10th century) understood the omentum to be the three divisions Yuen Chun-fu says that the three divisions are the reddish coloured lining of the body (the mucus membrane). U T'ien-minpoints to the hollow in the chest as the three divisions. Chin I-lungsays that in front are three chiao and behind are also three chiao. The ancients, therefore, are quite at sea about these three chiao of the body. The various ideas regarding these san-chiao cannot be calculated on the fingers by nipping the thumb. Whether it has a body or not you see, according to them is uncertain. Why do they say that the ching of the ring finger is the ching of the shou-shao-yang three chiau. There is here the very utmost confusion. Later writers have disputed and given the lie to these statements. The mistake goes back to its origin; when the source is wrong all else proceeding from it is wrong. I have always had a strong inclination for correcting errors but never having seen the viscera I got quite angry with myself. How could I bring out a work and myself never had seen the viscera. To produce such a book under such circumstances would have been foolish and like a man dreaming. If the doctors do not understand the viscera, they are like the blind groping their way along the street, so that no matter with what intelligence and diligence the medical art may be practised, what avails it? For ten years I have been daily engaged in correcting these errors and there has not been one single day that the subject has not occupied my thoughts. In the second year of the reign of Kia Ching (1798) I was thirty years old. Early in the 4th moon I was at Lan-chow , at a place called Tao-ti-chen east of Peking when an epidemic of measles and severe dysentery was raging fiercely among children.