In the year 1808, Gall read to the first class of the Institute a memoir on the anatomy of the brain;[86] and M. Cuvier made a report upon that memoir. But neither in that memoir nor in the report do we find one word of _special anatomy_, of _secret anatomy_, of what might be called _anatomy of the Doctrine_; or, in other terms, and as it would be expressed at the present day, of _phrenological anatomy_. The anatomy of Gall’s memoir is nothing but a very ordinary anatomy. He insists that the cerebral nerves, all of them without exception, rise upwards from the medulla oblongata towards the encephalon; that the cineritious matter produces the white matter: he divides the fibres of the brain into _divergent_ and _convergent_; he supposes that each convolution of this organ, instead of being a full and solid mass, as is generally thought, is merely a fold[87] of nervous or medullary fibres, &c. &c. Such are the questions discussed by Gall; and it is sufficiently clear that, whatever side we take upon these questions, his doctrine assuredly would neither gain nor lose any thing. Whether such or such a nerve ascends or descends; whether the white matter is produced by the gray; or whether, which is, to say the least, quite as probable, this be nonsense; whether this or that fibre goes out or comes in, diverges or converges, &c. &c. the doctrine of the plurality of brains, the doctrine of individual intelligences, will be neither more nor less true, more nor less doubtful.[88] M. Cuvier, in his report, observed: “It is essential to repeat, were it merely for the information of the public, that the anatomical questions we have been considering, have no immediate and necessary connexion with the physiological doctrines taught by M. Gall, as to the functions and relative volume of different parts of the brain; and that all that we have inquired into as to the structure of the brain, might be either true or false, without affording the least conclusion in favour of or against the doctrine.”[89] It is necessary not to make any mistake as to the real point of the question. Gall’s doctrine goes to establish one and only one thing, to wit, _the plurality of intelligences_ and _the plurality of brains_.[90] That is what constitutes the special and peculiar doctrine; that is to say, different from the common doctrine, which admits but one understanding and a single brain. Whatever goes to prove the plurality of understandings and brains belongs to Gall’s doctrine; and whatever does not tend to prove the plurality of understandings and brains is in opposition to that doctrine. Gall’s works then really contain two very distinct anatomies: one is a _general anatomy_, which has nothing in particular to do with his doctrine; the other is a _special anatomy_, which, supposing it to be true, would constitute the basis of his doctrine.