An Early History of Neuroglial Research: Personalities

Abstract

Neuroscience, like most other divisions of natural philosophy, emerged in the Hellenistic world following the first experimental discoveries of the nerves connecting the brain with the body. The first fundamental doctrine on brain function highlighted the role for a specific substance, pneuma, which appeared as a substrate for brain function and, being transported through the hollow nerves, operated the peripheral organs. A paradigm shift occurred in 17th century when brain function was relocated to the grey matter. Beginning from the end of the 18th century, the existence of active and passive portions of the nervous tissue were postulated. The passive part of the nervous tissue has been further conceptualised by Rudolf Virchow, who introduced the notion of neuroglia as a connective tissue of the brain and the spinal cord. During the second half of the 19th century, the cellular architecture of the brain was been extensively studied, which led to an in-depth morphological characterisation of multiple cell types, including a detailed description of the neuroglia. Here, we present the views and discoveries of the main personalities of early neuroglial research.

Full text

Neuroglia 2018, 1, 245–281; doi:10.3390/neuroglia1010016 www.mdpi.com/journal/neuroglia
Review
An Early History of Neuroglial Research:
Personalities
Alexandr Chvátal 1,2,* and Alexei Verkhratsky 3,4,5,*
1 Scimed Biotechnologies, s.r.o., 25241 Zlatníky-Hodkovice, Czech Republic
2 Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Faculty of Medicine in Plzeň, Charles University, 30605 Plzeň,
Czech Republic
3 Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, M13 9PT Manchester, UK
4 Achucarro Center for Neuroscience, IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, 48011 Bilbao, Spain
5 Center for Basic and Translational Neuroscience, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences,
University of Copenhagen, 2200 Copenhagen, Denmark
* Correspondence: chvatal@fastmail.fm (A.C.); Alexej.Verkhratsky@manchester.ac.uk (A.V.)
Received: 16 July 2018; Accepted: 6 August 2018; Published: 16 August 2018
Abstract: Neuroscience, like most other divisions of natural philosophy, emerged in the Hellenistic
world following the first experimental discoveries of the nerves connecting the brain with the body.
The first fundamental doctrine on brain function highlighted the role for a specific substance,
pneuma, which appeared as a substrate for brain function and, being transported through the
hollow nerves, operated the peripheral organs. A paradigm shift occurred in 17th century when
brain function was relocated to the grey matter. Beginning from the end of the 18th century, the
existence of active and passive portions of the nervous tissue were postulated. The passive part of
the nervous tissue has been further conceptualised by Rudolf Virchow, who introduced the notion
of neuroglia as a connective tissue of the brain and the spinal cord. During the second half of the
19th century, the cellular architecture of the brain was been extensively studied, which led to an in-
depth morphological characterisation of multiple cell types, including a detailed description of the
neuroglia. Here, we present the views and discoveries of the main personalities of early neuroglial
research.
Keywords: neuroglia; neuroscience; history; glial research
1. Brief History of Neuroscience: From Ventricular-Pneumatic Doctrine to Cellular Structure
In the most ancient times, natural philosophy associated human intelligence with the heart and
the cardiovascular system. This cardiocentric doctrine was predominant in ancient Egypt, in Judea,
and in Persia; it was popular in the Hellenic world, and it remained a mainstream concept in Oriental
medicine (most notably in China and in Japan) until the middle of 19th century [1]. In ancient Greece,
Aristotle (384–322 B.C.) was the prominent proponent of the cardiovascular doctrine; Aristotle
introduced the concept of pneuma, an air-like substance that was produced in the heart and that was
distributed through the body. This pneuma, according to Aristotle, was a substrate of intelligence
and cognition, and when released from the blood it triggered peripheral voluntary reactions. Within
this paradigm, the brain was a bloodless organ that served for cooling pneuma and for moderate
passions [2,3].
The first natural philosopher, anatomist, and physiologist who linked the brain with higher
cognitive functions was Alcmaeon of Croton (6th–5th centuries B.C.). Alcmaeon defined intelligence
as the main factor distinguishing between humans and other animals: “Man differs from other
animals, because he alone comprehends, while the other animals perceive but do not understand,
because understanding and perception are different things”, and realised that “all the senses are

Neuroglia 2018, 1 246
connected somehow with the brain” [4]. The brain as an organ of intelligence was recognised by
Plato, by Socrates, and in the writings of the Hippocratic school. The Hippocratic corpus (~60 medical
texts written by the members of Hippocrates’ school in the 5th–4th centuries B.C.) contains a chapter
entitled “On the sacred disease”, which identifies the brain as an organ of cognition.
“It ought to be generally known that the source of our pleasure, merriment, laughter, and
amusement, as of our grief, pain, anxiety, and tears, is none other than the brain. It is specially
the organ which enables us to think, see, and hear, and to distinguish the ugly and the
beautiful, the bad and the good, pleasant and unpleasant...” [5].
Systematic neuroanatomy was introduced by Herophilus of Chalcedon (335–280 B.C.) and
Erasistratus of Cos (304–250 B.C.) who both worked in the Museum of Alexandria (Figure 1A,B).
Herophilus identified nerves (including cranial nerves) and found that nerves connect the body with
the brain. He further discovered the existence of motor and sensory nerves, and realised that motor
nerves originate either in the brain or in the spinal cord. Herophilus was also the first to describe
brain ventricles. Erasistratus continued the neuroanatomical studies of his predecessor, and was the
first to found the direct relations between complexity of the brain and human intelligence [1,6–8].
Erasistratus was also the first to outline the principles of the ventricular-pneumatic theory of brain
function. According to this theory, there are several classes of pneuma; the first type, the vital
pneuma, is produced in the lungs from the inhaled air; this vital pneuma is subsequently distributed
throughout the body by blood vessels, the vital pneuma diffuses to the tissues and sustains their life.
The brain parenchyma converts the vital pneuma into the psychic pneuma, which is concentrated in
the ventricles. The psychic pneuma represents the substrate of nervous function, including cognition.
From the ventricles, the psychic pneuma is sent to the periphery through the hollow nerves; when
released from nerve terminal, the psychic pneuma instigates peripheral responses [1,6–8]. Of note,
Democritus (460–370 B.C.) suggested that the “psyche”, that is, the substrate of nerve function, is
formed by the lightest atoms [3].

Neuroglia 2018, 1 247
Figure 1. Founders of neuroanatomy and neurophysiology: (A) Herophilius, (B) Earsistratus, and (C)
Galen, and the frontispiece of the Renaissance edition of Galen’s works (Galeno. Omnia quae extant
opera.Venezia, eredi di Luca Antonio Giunta, 1556).
The ventricular-pneumatic theory of the brain function was further developed by Claudius
Galen of Pergamon (129–200 A.D., Figure 1C). Galen regarded the pneuma as a special fluid that was
produced by the brain parenchyma from the “vital spirit” produced by the lungs from the air; the
final conversion of vital spirit to pneuma occurred in the choroid plexus, through which pneuma
entered the ventricular system. The ventricles worked as a pump, which maintained the movement
of pneuma through the motor nerves, and the aspiration of pneuma from the sensory nerves. The
pneuma, which completely filled the nerves, made them rigid, which allowed the rapid conduction
of signals similar to the pulse wave propagation through blood vessels. Signalling at the sensory
nerve endings and motor nerve terminals occurred through microscopic pores that allowed free
exchange of pneuma between the nerves and peripheral tissues. At the brain level, pneuma carrying
sensory signals is delivered to the anterior ventricles, whereas the afferent signals to the muscles
originate from the posterior ventricle [9]. Based on experiments on live animals which involved
selective compression or lesioning of different parts of the brain and nerve ligation, Galen
contemplated distinct localisation of functions within different anatomical structures. First, he
demonstrated that damage to the brain parenchyma per se did not cause major deficits unless the
ventricle was opened (apparently causing the escape of the pneuma). He also found that compression
of anterior ventricle led to blindness, whereas compression of the posterior ventricle resulted in
general paralysis. The damage to the ventricles resulted either in serious sensory deficits (anterior
ventricle), or in collapse and death (middle and posterior ventricles).
The ventricular-pneumatic doctrine remained the main theory of neuroscience throughout the
Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Anatomists and medics from both western world (Albertus
Magnus, Tomas Aquinas, Roger Bacon, Petrus de Montagnana, Lodovico Dolce, Ghiradelli of
Bologna, and Theodor Gull of Antwerp) and from Arabic countries (Ibn Sīnā and Ibn Rushd, known
in Europe as Avicenna and Averroes), added further developments by assigning different functions
to different parts of ventricular system (Figure 2). The anterior ventricle was usually associated with
sensory input and sensory processing, the middle ventricle was linked to creativity and imagination,
cognition and intellect, whereas the posterior ventricle was a seat for memory [9]. Leonardo da Vinci,
who was an adept of the ventricular-pneumatic doctrine, made the first three-dimensional cast of the
ventricles by filling them with melted wax (Figure 2C); when the wax was set, the brain tissues were
removed, thus revealing the ventricular system [10]. According to Leonardo’s reckoning the anterior
ventricles were responsible for bridging the sensory inputs with senso commune, while memory
resided in the posterior ventricle.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 248
Figure 2. Pneumo-ventricular doctrine of the brain function. (A) The conceptual scheme of ventricular
localisation of brain functions proposed by Albertus Magnus, as depicted in the later version from the
16th century, made by Gregorius Reisch, who was the Prior of the House of Carthusians at Freiburg
and confessor to the Emperor Maximilian, and who published a concise encyclopaedia of knowledge
in 1503 [11]. (B) Ventricular divisions of brain functions as presented in ‘The Art of Memory’ by
English Paracelcian physician Robert Fludd [12]. (C) The three-dimensional depiction of the
ventricular system as drawn by Leonardo da Vinci. Leonardo made a mould of the brain ventricles
by injecting them with melted wax, which after the removal of soft tissues produced their precise cast
[13]. “Make two vent-holes in the horns of the greater ventricles, and insert melted wax with a syringe,
making a hole in the ventricle of memory; and through such a hole, fill the three ventricles of the
brain. Then when the wax has set, take apart the brain, and you will see the shape of the ventricles
exactly.” (cited from [10]). (D) The concept of brain functions and cross-section of the human head
and cranial nerves according to Leonardo da Vinci. Since Leonardo used his left hand for writing and
wrote from right to left, his drawings with descriptions are presented mirrored in this figure. On the
left is a cross-section of the head with a symbolic image of three ventricles; it is possible to recognize
the names of the individual layers, such as the cerebro (brain), dura mater, and pia mater (meninges),
the cranio (skull), and the pericranio (periosteum). On the right is the “cell” theory of brain functions
and the cranial nerves. In the first ventricle, Leonardo placed imprensiva, a term proposed by himself
(and never used by anybody else) for a structure connecting the senses and senso commune; in the
second ventricle, he placed senso comune; and in the third, he placed memo (memory) [10].
Rene Descartes (1596–1650), who introduced the concept of reflexes, had his own view on the
functioning of the nervous system. He assigned the nervous function to small corpuscles or “a very
fine flame” which was released from nerve endings [14]. According to Descartes, peripheral
stimulation triggered mechanical displacement of nerves that almost immediately caused the central
end of the nerve to twitch. This in turn triggered the release of “animal spirit” or “a very fine flame”
that in the form of minute particles, flew to the ventricles. The same particles carried signals through
the nerves to the periphery. In the nerve endings, these signalling particles were released through

Neuroglia 2018, 1 249
miniature valves and diffused to the muscles, where they were taken up by congruent valves; after
entering the muscles, these said particles initiated and regulated contraction. Descartes also
suggested that volatile movements originate from the pineal gland surrounded by the cerebrospinal
fluid. Small movements of the pineal gland are accordingly able to regulate the flow of the spiritus
animales through a complex system of pipes and valves (Figure 3A).
The first departures form the ventricular-pneumatic views emerged in the 17th century when
Marchello Malpighi and, to a larger extend Thomas Willis, noted the roles for the grey matter and
brain parenchyma in nervous function [15,16]. Localisation of functions in the brain was initially
performed by numerous phrenologists, including Georg Prochaska, Franz Joseph Gall, Johann
Gaspard Spurzheim, and George Combe [17–20]. The first true functional brain centre was discovered
by Paul Broca, who identified the area in the posterior-inferior part of the frontal cortex of the
dominant hemisphere as a centre of speech [21]. Further advances in the localisation of brain
functions were made by Gustav Theodor Fritsch and Edward Hitzig [22], and by systematic studies
of Sir David Ferrier, who produced the first map of functional speciality of various brain regions in
monkeys, including the motor and sensory (vision, heating and taste) areas [23–25]. The
electrophysiological mapping of the motor cortex was finalised by Wilder G. Penfield who invented
the concept of the motor and sensory “homunculus” [26].
Figure 3. Early morphological studies of the nervous system. (A) Nervous structure and the formation
of voluntary movements as proposed by René Descartes. On the left is a diagram of the optic nerve
comprising hollow tube-like structures [14]. On the right is the formation of voluntary movements
regulated by the activity of the pineal gland [27]. (B) Albrecht von Haller, and the excerpt of his book
De partibus corporis humani sensilibus et irritabilibus. Commentarii societatis regiae scientiarum gottingensis
[26] in which he introduces the existence of irritable (irritabilis) and sensible (sensibilis) tissues. (C)
Globular (gland-like) structures of the brain cortex according to Marcello Malpighi (reproduced from
[28]). (D) Cross-section of a nerve (left, [29]) and the structure of the brain tissue after Antoni van
Leeuwenhoek. On the right is a structure of dried pig brain tissue containing two vesicles [30].
These advances in neuroanatomy coincided with the emergence of neurophysiology. Probably
the first true neurophysiologist was Albrecht von Haller, who performed physiological experiments
and developed the theory of irritability and sensitivity [31,32]. By systematic injury to all organs and
parts of organs by spraying with cold, hot or corrosive substances, by stinging, squeezing, and also

Neuroglia 2018, 1 250
by means of electricity, Haller, in observing the stimulus response of the organ part concerned,
classified the two categories of irritable (irritabilis) and sensible (sensibilis) tissues [33]. Haller’s
stimulation experiments, based on the assignment of the criteria irritable and sensitive, led for the
first time to a precise, functional differentiation of the smallest components (fibres) of animal
organisms (Figure 3B). Haller also noticed that in addition to the tissues that were directly responsible
for irritation and sensitivity, there was another type of tissue which belonged to neither group. Haller
called the third type of tissue the “cell tissue fibre” (Zellgewebsfaser), constituting “cellular tissue”
(Zellgewebe). According to him, this was an inert tissue forming a filling or a basic substance, that
encompassed all those components of the organism that Haller was unable to identify as either
sensitive or irritable [34].
The ideas of cellular nature of the nervous tissue were developed in parallel. Starting from the
mid-17th century, the notion of elementary units of life were contemplated by several natural
philosophers, most notable by Pierre Gassendi and Robert Boyle. This coincided with the emergence
of first microscopes that allowed visualisation of life units. The term “cell” was introduced in 1665 by
Robert Hooke [35], who noted the semblance between regular microstructures that he observed in
cork, with the monk’s cells in the monastery dormitories. The first animal cells were visualised and
described by Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (1632–1723), who, by using self-made microscopes, found
bacteria (he called them animalcules or little animals); he also observed erythrocytes, single muscle
fibres, and followed the movements of live spermatozoids [36]. The cellular theory of life was
formalised by Theodor Schwann and Matthias Jakob Schleiden [37,38].
In particular, Theodor Schwann (1810–1882), in his famous book devoted to the cell theory [38],
summarized the properties of tissues as follows:
Upon these more or less important modifications of the cell-life the following classification
of the tissues is based: 1st. Isolated, independent cells, which either exist in fluids, or
merely lie unconnected and moveable, beside each other. 2d. Independent cells applied
firmly together, so as to form a coherent tissue. 3d. Tissues, in which the cell-walls (but not
the cell-cavities) have coalesced together, or with the intercellular substance. Lastly, tissues
in which both the walls and cavities of many cells blend together. In addition to these,
however, there is yet another very natural section of the tissues, namely, the fibre-cells, in
which independent cells are extended out on one or more sides into bundles of fibres. The
naturalness of this group will form my excuse for sacrificing logical classification to it, and
inserting it as the fourth class (4th), consequently, that last mentioned, consisting of tissues,
in which the cell-walls and cell-cavities coalesce, becomes the fifth (5th). (Cited from
English translation; [39] p. 65).
Thus, according to Schwann, all tissues, including nervous and connective tissues, were
composed from cells or their constituents; accordingly, all fibres were parts of the cells and they were
cellular processes.
Probably the first microscopic observations of the cortex were made by Marcello Malpighi, who
noted that nervous tissue is composed from numerous little formations, which he called “globules”
or “little glands” ([40] and Figure 3C); similar structures were mentioned by other contemporary
microscopists including Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (Figure 3D and [41]). Whether these structures
indeed represented neural cells remains unknown. The very first true description of neural cells
belongs to Emanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772) who described (in the 1740s) that the “globules” or
“cerebellulas” (small brains) were independent functional entities that were interconnected with
fibres; these globules and their projected fibres were the substrates for brain function: “From each
cortical gland proceeds a single nerve fibre; this is carried down into the body, in order that it may
take hold of some part of a sensation or produce some action” (quoted from [41]). Swedenborg’s
writings unfortunately were not published until 1882 [42] and hence they did not influence the
developments of cellular neuroscience. The globular structures of different sizes (which sizes vary
between regions of the nervous system) have been also described by Giovanni Maria Della Torre
(Figure 4A and [43]).

Neuroglia 2018, 1 251
Peripheral nerves were first observed under microscope by van Leeuwenhoek, who described
(in 1717, see [44]) small regular circular structures (that represented single axons) in the sagittal slice
of the nerves isolated from cows or sheep (Figure 3D). Felice Gaspar Ferdinand Fontana produced,
in 1780, the very first anatomical description of nerve and neural fibres or axons, noting that the nerve
is composed “of a large number of transparent, uniform, and simple cylinders. These cylinders seem
to be fashioned like a very thin, uniform wall or tunic which is filled, as far as one can see, with
transparent, gelatinous fluid insoluble in water” [44].
Figure 4. The early studies of the elements of the nervous system. (A) Globular structure of the spinal
cord tissue according to Giovanni Maria Della Torre, and the frontispiece of his book [36]. (B) Henri
Dutrochet and his drawings of the globular corpuscules from mollusc cervical ganglia [38]. (C)
Christian Gottfried Ehrenberg and his image of the nerve cell of the leech [41]. (D) Theodor Keuffel
and the excerpt of his book on the structure of the spinal cord [45]. Right: the fibrous substance in the
thin slice of ox spinal cord (top) and in the grey matter only (bottom) Top: a, b, c, d—the pia mater; f,
g—two fibres extending from the pia mater and splitting into two centres (i); h—neurilem. Bottom:
two centres of the grey matter; a—the end of the extension of the pia mater; b—the last fibrils into
which this extension splits; c—the two centres of grey matter.
One of the earliest description of cellular elements of the central nervous system have been made
by Henri Dutrochet (1776–1847), who observed clusters of globular particles (corpuscules globuleux
agglomeres) in the frog brain, which he suggested were the structural elements of the nervous tissue
[46,47]. Dutrochet further concluded that these globular structures (nerve bodies) were
“manufacturers of nervous energy”, while nerve fibres provided “nervous motion”. He further
studied cerebral ganglia of molluscs Helix pomatia and Arion rufus, and reported clusters of spherical
cells that were associated with smaller spherical or ovoid particles (Figure 4B). A century later,
František Karel Studnička speculated that Dutrochet described large ganglion neurones surrounded
by glial cells, which can be further identified as microglia, and thus Dutrochet was the first discoverer
of neuroglia [48]. This inspiring idea however, remains a mere surmise Dutrochet by himself was
oblivious to the existence of supportive cells of the nervous system.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 252
The first documented microscopic images of leech neurones (Figure 4C) were obtained by
Christian Gottfried Ehrenberg [49], while Jan Evangelista Purkyňe identified and imaged nerve cells
of the cerebellum [50], while his pupil Gustav Gabriel Valentin observed neurones with nuclei (Figure
5A,B). In those days, the nerve cells were generally called globules or kugeln (spheres in German).
Robert Bently Todd was the first to name these structures cells; he wrote: “The essential elements of
the grey nervous matter are “vesicles” or cells, containing nuclei and nucleoli”. They have also been
called nerve or ganglion “globules” [51]. In 1873, Camillo Golgi introduced the silver-chromate
staining technique [52], which allowed much more detailed microscopic visualisation of neural cells.
Figure 5. First microscopic images of neural cells. (A) The first drawing of neurones with processes
and nervous structures, made by Gustav Gabriel Valentin [48]. Middle: single globule of the human
yellow matter, terminated by a tail-like process: (a) parenchyma, (b) tail-like process, (c) vesicle-like
core similar to the germinal vesicle, and (d) bodies present on the surface. Right: fibres and globules
in the sheep spinal cord. A thin section of the spinal cord in the cervical region, medulla oblongata: (a)
the undulated longitudinal primitive fibres forming plexuses and (b) globules present in the
interstitial space. (B) Jan Evangelista Purkyně and the first drawings of the Purkinje neurone made
by him for the Congress of Physicians and Scientists Conference in Prague, in 1837. (C) Karl Kupffer
[53] and the first drawing of the cellular elements in the frog spinal cord grey matter, which had
“definite connections with undoubted connective tissue fibres”.
2. The Concept of Neuroglia. The Birth of the Concept
Albrecht von Haller, in his treatise on irritability and sensitivity (see above) also noted that
besides tissues involved in irritation and sensitivity, another type of tissue exists which belong to
neither group and which Haller called as “cell tissue fibre” (Zellgewebsfaser), constituting “cellular
tissue” (Zellgewebe). According to him, this was an inert tissue forming a filling or basic substance
that encompassed all those components of the organism that Haller was unable to identify as either
sensitive or irritable [33]. Haller, most likely for the first time, defined fibre tissue as an inert tissue
forming a filling or basic substance in the brain tissue.
Almost 60 years after Haller’s work, German anatomist Theodor Keuffel (no personal data are
available), who was a student of famous German physician, physiologist, anatomist, and psychiatrist
Johann Christian Reil (1759–1813), published a book, based on his PhD thesis, which was dedicated
to the histological examination of the central nervous system [45,54]. In the spinal cord slices, he

Neuroglia 2018, 1 253
described fine-needled fabric of the finest fibres; the whole fibrous substance was of reticular shape,
as it would correspond to a fibrous network consisting of an innumerable amount of finest fibrils,
which formed anastomoses between themselves in the most varied ways, and to connect with each
other by countless branches (Figure 4D). The fibrous matter in the white, as well as in the grey matter,
expressed a completely uniformly net-like structure without any predominant direction. The fibrils
of the white and grey matter, merged directly with each other, so that it seemed to Keuffel that the
fibrillary mesh ran through the entire cross-section of the spinal cord. The nature of the fibrous
substance, according to him, was a compressed animal substance. What he observed, was probably
the vascular network of the spinal cord, since by using his methods, all neuroglial cells disappeared
and only vessels and the actual connective tissue remained (see also [55]). Thus, the main contribution
of Keuffel was the concept of a histological microstructure that existed in the nervous tissue in
addition to the nervous elements, which led to the conviction that the brain and spinal cord tissue
also contained some sort of fibrillary tissue which was observed in the other organs of the body.
Gabriel Valentin (1810–1883) was a German physiologist; after finishing in the University of
Breslau (now Wroclaw in Poland), he worked as an assistant to Jan Evangelista Purkyně. Valentin
published results of his investigation of the structure if the nervous tissue, which was done most
likely under the influence of Purkyně, in an extensive treatise [56,57]. According to Valentin:
The whole nervous system consists of two primary masses, namely the isolated spheres
of the occupying masses and the isolated, continuous primitive fibres. The former are
probably representatives of the creative, active, higher principle, the latter of the
receiving and guiding, passive, lower principle. Each of these is enveloped by a cell-
tissue sheath, the strength of which determines the intensity of the action of both
heterogeneous parts on each other. These are the pure and peculiar formations of the
nervous system. ([56]; p. 157).
In Valentin’s model, the nervous tissue comprised spheres (Kugeln der Belegungsmassen), which
represent cell bodies, primitive fibres (Primitivfasern), which represent nerve fibres, and intermediate
substance (Zellgewebescheide) containing fibres or threads, which was most likely identical to what
some authors later called as glial sheaths (Gliascheiden). In contrast to Keuffel, who considered this
substance to be fibrous only, Valentin clearly identified it as cellular tissue (Figure 5A). He also
described that the sheaths were always of a cellular nature where the cellular elements were
interconnected by threadlike cellular tissue extensions. Valentin proposed that this whole formation
evidently had the purpose of inhibiting the mutual direct action of the primitive fibres and the
spheres, since he was convinced, on the basis of physiological experiments, that the sheaths had the
properties of an insulator. The main contribution of Valentin was therefore the establishment of the
concept of the nerve tissue structure, which moved towards the later neuroglial concept in two ways:
first, the intermediate filling substance, other than nerve bodies and fibres, had a cellular structure
with thread-like extensions, and second, this intermediate filling substance had insulating properties.
Purkyně’ was the first to provide topographic description of the ganglionic bodies, which from
today’s perspective, corresponds to the agglomerations of various classes of nerve cells in different
areas of the brain, spinal cord, and ganglia, and in which he described nuclei and nucleoli. Among
them were also Purkinje cells, large neurons with many branching dendrites found in the cerebellum
(Figure 5B). However, lesser known in fact, was that Purkyně has also a priority in the description of
the processes of cells in the brain and spinal cord that were in close relationship with nearby blood
vessels. As he pointed out in the extended and less known version of his abstract from the Prague
meeting in 1837:
The processes of the ganglionic cells in the brain and in the spinal cord sometimes
appear to be related to the large number of surrounding blood vessels, but it has never
been proven with certainty, even less could be determined here about the reduction of
very fine brain fibres [58].
What Purkyně most likely observed were the processes of perivascular astrocytes, which are
closely associated with the brain capillaries.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 254
The general view on the structure of the nervous system was significantly, and for a long period
of time, affected by the concept suggested by the German professor emeritus of anatomy and
physiology at Heidelberg, Friedrich Arnold (1803–1890). In his handbook of human anatomy [59] he
stated, that the base substance (Grundmasse), the germinal matter, or the primary substance of the
cellular tissue (Zellgewebe), is recognized, with the aid of good instruments and with moderate
moderation of light, as a dull, finely granulated, molecular substance (moleculare Substanz) between
the threads and bundles of the connective tissue. Concerning the nerve substance, he was convinced
that it was composed of a (i) granular base substance (körnige Grundmasse), (ii) spherical, sphere-like
and disk-shaped bodies, and (iii) primitive fibres and strips. The granular base substance he
characterized as following:
The granular base substance occurs both in the white and grey matter; but in the latter,
it seems, in greater quantity. The fact that it is also found in the marrow mass and here
in no small quantity is proved by the examination of the intact upper marrow of small
animals. The grains or granules are extremely small, measuring 0.0007″′–0.0005″′ [1.1–
1.5 μm] and above, have either a bright and light or a greyish and dark appearance. They
lie randomly between and around the closer and the next form components. In this fine-
grained mass (feinkörnigen Masse), especially in the brain cortex and in the eye retina,
one perceives light-yellowish, larger and smaller bodies of very dull appearance,
rounded shape, and somewhat dark contours; they appear in different numbers,
sometimes more scattered, now in denser masses, and appear in the former case as gaps
in the granular base substance. According to their behaviour, they consist of protein and
fat. I could not prove a compound of a nucleus and a bark or a skin on them; they are
not vesicles, but simple molecular bodies (molekulare Körper). ([59] p. 260).
Terms, such as moleculare Substanz, körnige Grundmasse and feinkörnigen Masse, were found
throughout numerous works of various authors who described the structure of the nervous tissue in
the middle of the 19th century. Most probably, such structures were an artefact resulted from the
improper tissue processing methods used by researchers of that time.
Karel Rokytanský (in German Carl Freiherr von Rokitansky, 1804–1878) was a famous Czech
physician; he studied medicine and worked until the end of his life in Vienna. Nowadays almost
forgotten, Rokytanský extensively studied the pathological changes of the brain connective tissue
[60,61]. In the publication, where he compared the development of tumour stroma with the
development of other tissues, he described the similarity of the structure of brain tumours with brain
connective tissue (Bindegewebs-Substanzen), and also argued for networked cellular formations in
brain melanoma metastases [62]. In a publication dealing with general properties of connective tissue
[63] Rokytanský also suggested that inflammation may significantly affect nerve connective tissue,
which according to him was a storeroom (Lager) and scaffold (Gerüste) or binding substance
(Bindemasse) for neural elements. Describing the scar formation in the brain, he stated:
If, in particular, these conditions are also formed in the brains with the inclusion of the
higher sensory nerves and in the spinal cord, this requires the demonstration of a
connective tissue substance as the basis and starting point of the new formation. A
connective-tissue substance is here present, indeed, as a delicate, soft substance, which
in the tissue appears as shagreened, and accumulates more abundantly in the ganglionic
substance also containing abundant nuclei (Kernen), in which the elements of the brain-
tissue are all embedded. It occurs in the ventricles as the lining of the same, ependyma.
But not only here, rather also on the surface of the brain, it appears as a delicate clothing
of the cerebral cortex, an outer ependyma formation (äussere Ependyma-Formation) that,
similarly as in ventricles, is characterized by the appearance of simple and layered
amyloid bodies (amyloider Körperchen). Accordingly, there is a storage and binding mass
in the nervous centre, which forms a sheaths and a lining on the outer surface and in the
inner spaces. ([63]; p. 136).

Neuroglia 2018, 1 255
Subsequent work of Rokytanský was dedicated exclusively to pathophysiology of nerve
connective tissue [64]. He described different pathological states, when the primary change was an
increase in the number of nuclei and the volume of the connective tissue, which separated the nerve
cells, their fibres and vessels. In physiological conditions, to the contrary, connective tissue formed
an almost homogeneous matrix. In degenerative disorders, he described an increase of the connective
tissue volume and its fibrillation (most likely fibromatosis), which compressed nerve cells and their
processes, thus instigating their subsequent atrophy and disintegration into fat particles
(Fettkörnchen-Agglomerat) and colloid or amyloid bodies (corpora amylacea). Rokytanský found these
degenerative changes in the pons, cerebellar peduncles, cerebral cortex, and even in the cranial
nerves. Besides the extensive investigation of the brain connective substance pathology, Rokytanský
clearly formulated the concept of the connective tissue as a binding substance, where neural elements
are embedded, and a place of the starting point of their new formation. In this sense he might also
influenced another famous pathologist of the time, Rudolph Virchow.
Rudolf Virchow (1821–1902) was a person of Renaissance proportion, being a medic, a cell
biologist, an anatomist and histologist, an anthropologist, a hygienist, and a statesman. He was born
on 13 September 1821 in Schivelbein, which is a small town in Pomerania. Virchow introduced the
concept of cellular pathology epitomised in his widely known aphorism “Omnis cellula e cellula”
(“every cell stems from another cell”; the erroneous belief that this aphorism belongs to Francois-
Vincent Raspail [53,65] could not be verified and we could not find this phrase in Raspail’s writings).
Pathological changes in cells or in cellular groups were, according to this concept, the seat of disease.
In addition, Virchow was well known hygienist and advocate of social health. He was a member of
the German Reichstag, a member of the municipal council of Berlin, and he organised the
construction of modern water and sewage systems in the city of Berlin. Politically, he was at odds
with Otto Bismarck, and their arguments led to a legendary duel in which Virchow, being challenged
by Bismarck (and the argument was about hygienic values of the cities), chose as their weapons two
pork sausages: a cooked sausage for himself, and a cooked sausage tainted with Trichinellala larva for
Bismarck, who refused to fight under those conditions, considering them too dangerous.
When only 25-year-old, Virchow published a short paper dedicated to the structure of the
connective tissue beneath the ependyma of brain ventricles [66]. He confirmed the presence of five
basic elements of this tissue, previously described by Rokytanský [67]. In addition, Virchow also
described small, round bodies, similar to glass beads or to dew drops, which were relatively densely
packed without being interconnected, on the inner surface of the ventricles. If the tissue was well
cleaned of blood, it was possible to observe how these units, being star-shaped, were interconnected
by fine fibres, so that the entire area was covered by a fine net. Ten years later, Virchow published
the same paper again, this time with commentaries [68]; in one of these comments he stated that:
Thus, according to my investigations, the ependyma consists not merely of an
epithelium but essentially of a layer of connective tissue covered with epithelium, and
although this can be easily removed from the surface, it forms no isolated membrane in
the narrower sense of the word, but only the surface of the interstitial connective of the
brain substance protruding above the surface... This connective substance forms in the
brain, the spinal cord and the higher sensory nerves a type of putty (neuroglia), in which
the nervous elements are immersed and which is the main deposition site for Corpora
amylacea… ([68]; p. 890).
However, the term “neuroglia” was not accepted instantly; for a while, many researchers used
the term “nerve connective tissue”. It is still matter of debate as to whether Virchow also observed
cells in what he named neuroglia. In the fresh connective tissue, Virchow have seen fine-grained
material with elongated nuclei, which according to him, was mistaken for a special type of nerve
substance. These elements, however, are far from the meaning of what we today call neuroglial or
glial cells. The same concept of neuroglia, including images (Figure 6), was further elaborated by
Virchow in his Opera Magna, Die Cellularpathologie in ihrer Begründung auf physiologische und
pathologische Gewebelehre, which outlined the foundations of cellular pathophysiology. This book
(which was in fact a stenograph of Virchow’s 20 lectures for students of Berlin Medical University

Neuroglia 2018, 1 256
Charite) was published first in German [69] and shortly afterwards in English [70]. Virchow’s concept
of connective tissue was very similar to that which was published two years earlier by Rokytanský,
who first suggested that the nerve connective tissue is a storeroom, scaffold, and binding material for
elements of neural tissue [63]. However, it is evident from giving a special term for it (neuroglia), that
Virchow was convinced that it significantly differed from other connective tissues in the body.
Virchow’s concept of glia become universally acknowledged, and, albeit in a modified form, it has
survived up to the present day.
Figure 6. Rudolf Virchow and the concept of neuroglia. (A) Rudolf Virchow, the frontispiece of his
book Die cellularpathologie in ihrer begründung auf physiologische und pathologische [69,70] and the title of
lecture 13, in which the concept of neuroglia was presented to the students of the Medical University
of Berlin (Charite) on 3 April 1858. (B) Top: ependyma and neuroglia in the floor of the fourth
ventricle. Between the ependyma and the nerve fibres is “the free portion of the neuroglia with
numerous connective tissue corpuscles and nuclei”. Numerous corpora amylacea are also visible,
shown enlarged below the main illustration (ca). E—ependymal epithelium; N—nerve fibres; v–w—
blood vessels. Bottom: elements of neuroglia from the white matter of the human cerebral
hemispheres. A—free nuclei with nucleoli; b—nuclei with partially destroyed cell bodies; c—
complete cells. Reproduced from [69].
Another important turning point to the cellular concept of the nervous connective tissue was
represented by the research of Baltic-German physiologist and anatomist Georg Bidder (1810–1894)
from the University of Dorpat (now Tartu, Estonia) and his students. Bidder, together with his former
student Karl Kupffer (1829–1902), published an extensive work devoted to the investigation on the
texture of the spinal cord and the development of its form elements [71]. Besides the general historical
overviews, they also described their own results, which were obtained mainly in cold-blooded
animals, that is, fishes and frogs. Bidder and Kupffer were aware of the importance of the connective
tissue in the spinal cord; however, they did not consider elements of the connective tissue to be of
nervous origin. Their work also included two large chapters devoted to connective tissue. As with
other numerous researchers in the field, they were convinced that what they described as a connective
tissue in the brain and in spinal cord shared similar properties with the other connective tissues in

Neuroglia 2018, 1 257
the body; therefore, one extensive chapter contained the detailed information on connective tissue in
general, and in brain and spinal cord in particular. The second extensive chapter contained
information on the methods, and how to distinguish the elements of the connective tissue from neural
elements, neural bodies and nerve fibres. The publication is also important due to the fact that it gives
most likely the first description of the connective tissue (neuroglial) cell in the grey matter of the
spinal cord:
…there is also a third type of fibre associated with cells, which are distributed in large
numbers throughout the grey matter. It has always been thought that these cells are
nerve cells, and they undoubtedly refer to the statement that “the smallest” nerve cells
are found in this part of the spinal cord. These are partly round, partly oblong, some
without processes, some with two or more processes, and thus angular or star-shaped
bodies of 0.003–0.004″′ [6.4–8.5 μm] in diameter, with deep dark contours, and a
generally sharply delimited nucleus in the middle. They are fairly uniformly distributed
throughout the grey matter, and no particular law can be demonstrated in their
arrangement. The processes are often so delicate that they do not present two lateral
boundary lines, but appear as a simple wavy line. The processes of neighbouring cells
often overlap, giving rise to an appearance, as shown by the anastomosing processes of
the bony bodies in a thin bone section. Of particular note, however, is the fact that the
processes of these cells are sometimes associated with those fibres which emanate from
the pointed and grey mass end of the spinal cord epithelial cells. If this connection alone
would be sufficient to refute the nerve-cell nature of these elements, then the deficiency
of the yellow colour, which in the chromic-acid preparation belongs to the
unquestionable nerve-cells, and the missing connection with definite nerve-fibres, speak
against it. Thus, these cells are connective tissue corpuscles, and the fibres associated
with them are the admixtures to the connective tissue known as spiral or elastic fibres.
([71], p. 45)
Unfortunately, this description had no accompanying figure. However, Kupffer’s earlier
dissertation [72] contained results indicating that the connective tissue is an integral part of the spinal
cord grey matter. Investigating the cellular elements in the frog spinal cord grey matter, Kupffler
observed cells which he at first determined to be supposed nerve cells, but afterwards, he also
observed that they had definite connections with undoubted connective tissue fibres. He afterwards
had to classify the considerable part of these cells not as essential nerve elements, but as connective
tissue corpuscles (Figure 5C).
3. Discovery of Glial Cells as Cellular Entities
3.1. Retinal Radial Glia: Samuel Pappenheim, Heinrich Müller, and Max Schultze
Probably the very first description of the histological structure of the retina was published by
Samuel Moritz Pappenheim (1811–1882), who was Purkyně’s assistant in Wroclaw. They published
several papers together on histology and physiology. Pappenheim also published several extensive
monographs, one of which was dedicated to the structure of the eye [73]. All findings, especially the
description of cellular elements, were based on a long period of research, and on the extensive
amount of processed tissues, including bones, eye ball, and eye accessory organs of different species
of animals and of humans. This book also contained the very first detailed description of the
histological structure of the retina, which included the description of radially oriented cells (most
likely radial glial cells, Figure 7A), of dark red granules (probably rhodopsin) and layers of ganglion
cells.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 258
Figure 7. (A). Probably the first image of radial astrocytes of the retina or Muller glial cells made by
Samuel Pappenheim (a—the inner part, b—part of the retina, e—an outer part with a large spherical
base changing into the fibre (c) and into the ending (d), [73], the panel also shows the frontispiece of
his book Die specielle gewebelehre des auges mit rücksicht auf entwicklungsgeschichte und augenpraxis). (B):
Radial astrocytes of the retina by Heinrich Müller [74]. (C): Radial astrocytes of the retina by Max
Schultze [75]. The processes of Müller fibres passing into the outer nuclear layer (s), inner membrane
(x) and the holes in membrana limitans interna (a), the holes in the network of fine membranes for
optic nerves (b), so-called molecular network (c), the nuclei in Müller fibres (d), the space with the cell
nuclei of the inner nuclear layer (e).
Almost 10 years after Pappenheim, Heinrich Müller (1820–1864), who held a chair at the
University of Würzburg, published a preliminary communication on the structure of the retina. In
this paper, he described in detail the layers of the retina by using chromic acid [74]. He provided a
description of the cell layers, of the radial cells extending from the inner to the outer layer, and also
of cellular extensions in the granular layer, with these extensions containing the nuclei. Five years
later, Müller published further descriptions of the retina [76], which contained figures of individual
cellular elements in different species of animals, including radial glial cells, which were subsequently
were named after him (Müller glia, Figure 7B).
Three years after Müller’s descriptions of the retina, German microscopic anatomist Max Johann
Sigismund Schultze (1825–1874), published an advanced treatise on the structure of the retina [75] on
the occasion of his appointment as a professor of anatomy and director of the Institute of Anatomy
in Bonn. Besides the description of other structures, Schultze devoted the whole chapter to radial glial
cells (he named them fibras Muellerianas to emphasize that they were described for the first time in
detail by Heinrich Müller). The treatise, written in Latin, also contained images of retinal structures,

Neuroglia 2018, 1 259
and particularly of radial glial cells, which were of exceptional quality with the minutest details
(Figure 7C).
3.2. Carl Bergmann
German anatomist, physiologist, and biologist Carl Georg Lucas Christian Bergmann (1814–
1865), who was professor of anatomy and physiology at the University of Rostock, published a short
paper about some structural relationships in the cerebellum and spinal cord [77]. In the first part of
this paper, Bergmann confirmed previous descriptions of conical cells surrounding the central canal
of the spinal cord of frog; processes of these cells entered into the grey matter of the spinal cord and
were interconnected with each other (Figure 8A). However, he disagreed with the idea that cell
processes were linked to elements of connective tissue. In the second part of the paper, Bergmann
described the cellular structure of cerebellum of a newborn kitten, the preparation was stained with
chromic acid. Between the grey matter and pia mater, he observed a great number of very fine,
branched, parallel, and radially arranged fibres:
The isolated fibres showed short (probably broken) branches starting at acute angles.
These have partially the direction toward the periphery, but also partly into the interior of
the organ. The latter circumstance may contradict the assumption that the fibrils discussed
belong to the branching of the ganglia bodies, whereas there are other reasons as well.
(Especially in the case of the kitten, where these fibres are so clear, the processes are hardly
to be found directly on the ganglion bodies.) On the other hand, it has become probable
for these branches, which are so different in direction, that the fibres in question form a
net in grey matter. On an isolated fibre, which protrudes by 0.004″′ [85 μm], is nicely visible
ending embedded in the clear substance, the fibre here transients into some finer fibrils.
The picture recalls (only noticeably gentler) the behaviour of the radial fibres of the retina,
where they approach the membrana limitans [77].
Bergmann was the first to describe these fibres of specialized cerebellar astrocytes whose bodies
are located in the layer of Purkyně neurons, with their processes running throughout the molecular
layer, all the way up to the pia mater. These cells are known today as Bergmann glia.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 260
Figure 8. First glioanatomists and their contributions. (A) Carl Bergmann and the excerpt of his paper
[77] describing the anatomy of the cerebellum, including radial glia (Bergmann glial cells). (B) Ludwig
Mauthner and his paper on the connective tissue of the brain [78]. (C) Lionel Beale and his book: New
observations upon the structure and formation of certain nervous centres [79]. (D) The paper of Carl Frommann
[80] and his images of stained neuroglia from the surface of the spinal cord longitudinal cut.
3.3. Ludwig Mauthner
Ludwig Mauthner (1840–1894) who was born in Prague and was professor at Innsbruck
University, and subsequently held a chair in ophthalmology in Vienna, described, in 1861, the cellular
elements of the connective tissue of the brain and the spinal cord [78] in fishes (Figure 8B). Around
the central canal of the spinal cord, he found epithelial cells with large processes (ependymoglial
cells) which, without contact with other cell formations, extended to the periphery of the spinal cord
and disappeared into the fibres of the spinal meninges. Mauthner observed that connective tissue
cells were about 10 times smaller than the ganglion cells (as neurones ware called in those time).
Connective tissue cells appeared in clusters in the ventral horns of the spinal cord, and formed a
network consisting of their fibre-like processes. Similar cells were also observed in the cerebellar
nuclei. Mauthner concluded that connective cells in the grey matter represented the basic elements
of connective tissue; furthermore, he considered them as neural cells and not as the particles of
connective tissue. He also assumed that the formations, which were previously considered to be
connective tissue cells, were in fact larger nuclei of cells whose cytoplasm was so transparent it
seemed that that an empty space surrounded the cell nucleus.
3.4. Lionel Beale
Physician and microscopist Lionel Smith Beale (1828–1906) was a professor at King’s College in
London; he was also a President of the Royal Microscopical Society (Figure 8C). He studied in detail
the structure of the nerve tissue, and wrote numerous publications in which he dealt with the
development, internal structures, and interconnections of neurons. Beale had an opinion that
connective tissue and connective tissue corpuscles are produced from the very same masses of

Neuroglia 2018, 1 261
germinal matter as those from which nerve cells and nerve fibres were developed, and that they are
the remains of nerve cells, nerve fibres, and vessels which were in a state of functional activity at an
earlier period of life. He was also convinced that true nerve fibres, which convey the nerve current
do not lose themselves in the connective tissue or blend with it, nor are they connected with its
corpuscles, but they form networks. In addition, a normal nerve fibre can always be distinguished
from a fibre of connective tissue. However, Beale also considered the connective tissue of the brain
in the following, rather philosophical (and prophetic!) manner:
It is possible that, for many years to come, some observers will persist in terming
everything in which they fail to demonstrate distinct structure, connective tissue, and
all nuclei which are not seen in their specimens to be in connexion with positive vessels,
positive nerve-fibres, or other well-defined tissues besides fibrous tissues, connective-
tissue corpuscles; but there is little doubt that when the changes occurring during the
development of special tissues shall have been patiently worked out by the use of high
powers and better means of preparation, opinions on the connective-tissue question will
be completely changed. The idea of the necessity for a supporting tissue or framework
will be given up, and many structures now included in “connective tissue” will be
isolated, just as new chemical substances year after year are being discovered in the
indefinite “extractive matters”. ([79]; p. 25).
3.5. Carl Frommann
Carl Friedrich Wilhelm Frommann (1831–1892) was a German physician; in 1870 he habilitated
at the University of Heidelberg and became a private lecturer for histology; in 1872 he moved to the
University of Jena, where he was, in 1875, appointed as professor. In 1864 (being in Weimar as an
ordinary doctor) he published a paper summarizing the results of staining of the spinal cord with
silver nitrate [80]. In the longitudinal sections of the white matter of cow spinal cord, the connective
tissue, which, as previously was proposed by Virchow, Frommann called “neuroglia”, appeared to
be a very fine dark-brown network or mesh of interconnected fibres (Figure 8D). The elements of this
web were quite variable, the larger were round, oval or square, the smaller one were usually round,
and were either isolated or grouped; sometimes they formed long narrow rows. The fibre network
was arranged in parallel with the nerve fibres. Cells appeared to be uniformly brown, or with a lighter
core, even without sharp contours; sometimes it seemed that the nucleus was a bit darker than the
protoplasm. The cells were, by means of their processes, connected to the fibre network, and were
also interconnected. On the cross-section of the frozen spinal cord, which was thawed in the silver
solution, the neuroglial web was not usually visible, and the shape of its elements resembled a very
fine granular mass. Similar findings Frommann were also obtained in the human spinal cord.
Concerning the connective tissue fibres, Frommann believed “that all fibres originate from the
cell processes and that they are hollow, and therefore, all white matter connective tissue consists of a
continuous network of channels of varying size, which form cellular collectors and centres by
numerous connections” ([80]; p. 46). In general, however, his papers and books clearly demonstrate
that at his time, there was no clear definition of terms such as “glia”, “glia mass” (for which he used
Leim-masse) and “connective tissue”, as evidenced by some of his statements. For instance, Frommann
claimed that glial fibres (Glifasern) are found inside of the glial mass, or that “it is characteristic of
connective tissue cells, unlike neurones, that they are interconnected with their processes to the fibre
glial networks...” ([81]; p. 9).
3.6. Otto Friedrich Karl Deiters
German neuroanatomist Otto Friedrich Karl Deiters (1834–1863) spent most of his short
professional career in Bonn. Deiters’s most famous work was his treatise on the structure of the
nervous system, which substantially advanced studies of the cellular structure of the nerve tissue
[82]. This book was published two years after Deiter’s untimely death (he perished at 29-year-old
from typhoid), by his colleague Max Schultze, who, on the basis of several Deiter’s illustrations and

Neuroglia 2018, 1 262
notes, attempted to organize the results of his histological research as logically as possible. This book
contains 13 chapters, and chapter 3 is dedicated to the brain connective tissue (Bindesubstanz).
Similarly to his contemporaries, who were convinced of the existence of connective tissue in the brain
and the spinal cord, Deiters sought to find its characteristic features in order to distinguish them from
neurones. He postulated that the connective tissue in the central nervous system (CNS) differed from
that in other organs:
One is accustomed to discuss only the distinction between connective tissue and nervous
tissues in the central organs, or to call anything that is not nervous, briefly connective
tissue. For the time being it would be more correct, as some wish, to separate nervous
elementary parts from those which are not connected with the nervous system. The
further distinction is certainly for the moment indifferent. That the non-nervous tissue
of the central organs does not readily have the character of ordinary connective tissue is
plausible, and here, too, certain conditions are certainly not justified in any way. If,
therefore, many people oppose the designation of such parts as connective tissue, this is
probably nothing more than that the concept of connective tissue is far from exhausted,
and may perhaps reveal unexpected new sides. ([82]; p. 35)
Deiters did not use the term “neuroglia”, although he was well acquainted with Virchow’s
concepts. Deiters provided detailed descriptions of all elements of the nervous connective tissue. The
basic structure of this tissue was spongy mass (schwammige Masse) or porous mass (poröse
Grundmasse), containing several types of fibres. These were either connective tissue fibres
(Bindegewebsfibrillen, elastischen Fasern) or intercellular support fibres (interzelluläre Stützfasern) which
Deteirs suggest to put:
…aside the Mullerian fibres of the retina, and thus to establish another analogy between
this tissue and those of the central nervous system… Thus, it may well be assumed that
such intercellular support fibres may form an essential link in the whole tissue
arrangement… It can generally be established as a law that such a streaky arrangement
of the connective tissue mass goes hand in hand with a regular linear arrangement also
of the nervous parts; such represents the retina, such in the cerebellum, in the Ammon’s
horn (hippocampus), etc. ([82]; p. 43).
Deiters also described and discussed the presence of the formations called “free nuclei” which
could be in fact some transition forms of cells without detectable cytoplasm and processes. He also
described in the connective tissue cellular elements which he named cells of the connective tissue
(Bindesubstanzzelle):
Close to the glossy nucleus, which contains no nucleoli, we can see a mass of outgoing
fibre tracts, which from the beginning have a firm though delicate appearance, a very
sharp, smooth contour, a considerable shine, and which radiate to all sides. These are
easily movable, twisting on isolated cells many times, and are not fragile. They divide
very soon and then ramify in the most varied way under always forked splitting. I do
not think that anyone who sees such an isolated element, will want to think of artifacts,
accidental coagulation. ([82]; p. 46)
Deiters observed these cells in both white and grey matter, in the substantia gelatinosa of the
spinal cord, and in the medulla oblongata (Figure 9). Unfortunately, as stated almost 10 years later by
Franz Boll (see further in text) “in general it is to be noted that the excellent disputes of Deiters, as
well as his positive discovery of the true form of these connective-tissue cells, have been neglected
by almost all his successors in an almost irresponsible manner.”

Neuroglia 2018, 1 263
Figure 9. Otto Deiters and his drawings of connective tissue cells (seemingly astrocyte, middle top—
from the white matter, middle bottom—from the hypoglossal nucleus grey matter) and (at the right)
neurone [82].
3.7. Leopold Besser
German physician Leopold Besser (1820–1906) worked as a provisional intern in the mental
illness clinic in Siegburg, Germany. In 1866 he published a paper, which had a great impact on the
research of neuroglia; this paper described the development of nerve tissue in the neonate brain with
particular emphasis on the role of neuroglia [83]. He demonstrated the emergence of neuroglial cells
not only in grey matter but also in the vicinity of capillaries (Figure 10A) and was convinced of its
importance during nerve tissue development. Besser particularly noted:
This mass of connective tissue of central organs, which Rokytanský called “connective
tissue of ependymal formation” (Bindegewebe der Ependym formation) and Virchow in
1846 suggested to name as “neuroglia”, Kölliker referred to as “connective substance
forming networks”, or “the reticulum” (netzförmige Bindesubstanz, Reticulum), whose
“spongy part” (Schwammigen Theil) were considered by Deiters to be “intercellular
substance” (Intercellularsubstanz), and Hensen named its multi-nuclear elements
“parenchymal cells” (Parenchymzellen), has in the brain of newborns so essential
meaning and its formative character has a determined dimension and form that I have
to name it as “neuroglia of newborns” (Neuroglia des Neugebornen) because it has
properties that the adult reticulum does not have in its normal condition. ([83]; p.309).
Although Rokytanský and Virchow suggested differences between the neuroglia found in
nervous tissue vs connective tissue in the rest of the body (see [84]), the question of connective tissue
containing fibres and loose nuclei on the one hand, and neuroglia on the other hand, still remained
under debate. Besser adopted Virchow’s concept and used term “neuroglia” to emphasize its
different properties from the connective tissue of other organs and systems. In particular, he wrote:
The name neuroglia—Nervenkitt—chosen by Virchow could be discussed with a bit of a
criticism because this matter is far from being putty, clinging or sticking to cover the
nerve elements. It is also not the most important supportive structure because much
more closely arranged vessels are more important for the shape and support of nervous
parts. But this matter has such specific features and is so different from all other types

Neuroglia 2018, 1 264
of connective tissue formations that it is quite justified to stick to a special name. ([83];
p. 310).
Figure 10. (A): Images of connective tissue cells made by Leopold Besser, and the title page of his
paper [83]. Top: vascular neoplasms in the brain of the newborn showing the glial formations located
on the blood vessels. Bottom: formations on the cut of the neonatal cortex (left), including normal and
damaged “glial nuclei” (1) during the cutting process; enlarged “glial nucleus” (right). (B): Images of
connective tissue made by Albert Kölliker [85]. Middle: part of the connective tissue reticulum from
the dorsal columns of the spinal cord, in two places the finest mesh forming reticulum is shown. Right:
connective tissue cells in the grey matter of the human brain.
According to Besser, glial mass contained corpuscles that could be easily observed around
evolving blood capillaries. According to him, the glial matter itself consisted of two separate
structures, which were, however in a mutual “genetic” relationship. Besser named them as “Glia-
Kern” (glial nuclei) and “Glia-Reisernetz” (glial finely branched nets). Beser’s term “net” did not
describe networks formed by the glial cell processes, as we know today, but the glial nets attached to
“glial cores” and from them, growing fibrous felt. According to him, neuroglial origin, development,
transformation, and interrelationship formed the embryology of the nervous basic parts. “Glial
nuclei” (which today’s we recognise as glial cell bodies) were formed by dividing, and before
reaching the size of red blood cells, they remained homogeneous. Shortly thereafter, however, with
their growth, a fine granulation emerged on their surface from which developed protuberances and
branched processes forming networks. The shape of the delicately branched processes seemed to

Neuroglia 2018, 1 265
Besser be round, like the branching of the small twigs of our trees. He was convinced that after death,
these branches changed so much that we could not observe them anymore. These networks, however,
in the course of further development, according to Besser, separated and gave rise to other structures.
Besser was of the opinion that all nerve elements of the human CNS developed from the part of
neuroglia that had morphogenetic properties. According to him, the nuclei of the neurones were
transformed glial nuclei, the neuronal bodies were formed from glial branched networks, and the
neuronal processes were formed from glial processes. Nerve fibres developed from long branches of
proliferating glial nets, and axons were formed by the conversion of fine fibres of branched nets.
Besser also described the involvement of glial cells in the capillary development in the cerebellar
cortex of newborns. As he noted, thousands of these glial structures touched each other in parallel
layers that were stacked together on the capillaries and on the smallest blood vessels. The significance
of Besser is that, besides the conviction that the neuroglia in the nervous tissue and the connective
tissue were different, he also suggested their importance in the development of the CNS, and for the
first time, displayed star-shaped neuroglial cells, probably astrocytes, attached on blood vessels.
3.8. Albert Kölliker
Albert Kölliker (1817–1905), a professor at University of Würzburg, in 1867 published the fifth
edition of his extensive manual on the human microscopic anatomy [85]. This handbook, as well as
its previous editions, contained a detailed summary of contemporary knowledge about the structure
of nerve tissue. Besides the detailed description of the nervous elements of the brain and spinal cord
tissue, that is, nerve fibres and nerve cells, Kölliker also dedicated a relatively large section of this
handbook to the connective tissue (sometimes he referred to it as the supporting tissue—
Stützsubstanz). In the spinal cord he described the connective substance as following:
…here, apart from the pia mater and its processes in the anterior cleft and the adventitia
of larger vessels, there is no ordinary fibrillar connective tissue, but only a simple
binding substance, consisting entirely of nets of star-shaped connective tissue cells
(connective tissue bodies sap cells—Bindegewebskörperchen Saftzellen) or of scaffolds of
coreless fibres and trabeculae resulting from the cell networks, as described in the
general parts (§ 23) as part of the cytogenetic binding substance. These nets and
scaffolds, which I denote by the name of the net-like binding substance (netzförmigen
Bindesubstanz), where they occur singularly as the supporting substance of other tissue
elements, are found in the spinal cord in both substances in such a development that
they form a very significant part of the whole mass of the organ. In other words, they
form a delicate skeleton running through the whole white and grey substance, which I
shall call the reticulum of the central nervous system (Reticulum des zentralen
Nervensystemes), which contains in its numerous gaps the cells and nerve tubes and
carries the blood vessels as well. ([85]; p. 266).
Kölliker believed that fine-grained matter containing numerous nuclei and observed by a
number of authors in nerve connective tissue, was an artefact. Under much larger (up to 300 times)
magnification, he observed that it consisted of connective tissue cells forming a network of structures.
Perhaps under the influence of Deitres, who described and visualized connective tissue cells in some
areas of the brain and spinal cord, Kölliker called one type of cells, which in earlier issues he named
as “cells in the central grey cores of the human spinal cord”, connective tissue cells (Figure 10B). He
also emphasized the role of the mentioned “reticulum” during pathological states, which, according
to him, increased the proportion of interstitial matter that became fibrous.
3.9. Theodor Meynert
Austrian neuroanatomist and psychiatrist Theodor Hermann Meynert (1833–1892) worked
together with Karel Rokytanský in Vienna. He studies the cortical structures of the brain cortex, as
well as the interconnections of certain regions of the brain, through the neural pathways. Meynert
also developed new cell markers and used thin serial slices stained with carmine or gold for

Neuroglia 2018, 1 266
quantitative measurements of neurones and investigation of the brain tissue structure. A
comprehensive summary of his research was published in Stricker’s Manual of histology [86].
Concerning connective tissue, Meynert referred to it as to a basement-substance (Grundgewebe).
Similarly to Besser, he pointed to the inconsistent terminology of his contemporaries, noting:
This basement-substance is called by Rokytanský ependymal formation
(Ependymformation), by Virchow, neuroglia, by Kölliker, connective tissue
(Bindesubstanz), by Deiters, spongy tissue (schwammige Substanz), by Henle and R.
Wagner, fused ganglion-cell substance (zusammengeflossene Ganglienzellenmasse).
Occurring in the olfactory lobe and ammon’s horn, it receives from Clarke the
designation of gelatinous (gelatinöse), from Kupfer that of molecular substance
(moleculare Substanz). (Cited from the English translation [87]; p. 660).
Unlike Deiters, who recognized only loose nuclei in the connective tissue of the cerebral cortex,
Meynert insisted “upon the indisputable fact of the occurrence here of the star-shaped cells, with very
little protoplasm, and a great number of the finest possible processes” (Figure 11A). Moreover, he
also noticed, that “these cells swell up under certain pathological conditions and assume grotesque
forms”. In addition, Meynert was the first to declare that the basic substance of the grey matter of the
cerebral cortex contains spongioform structures made up from the processes of cells other than
neurones.
Figure 11. (A) Images of connective tissue cells located between the nerve fibres, drawn by Theodor
Meynert [88], (B) Brain cortex neurones embedded in the fine-grained connective tissue, by Rudolf
Arndt [89]. (C) Brain cortex neurones embedded in the fine-grained connective tissue, by Ludwig
Stieda [90]. (D) A surface layer containing fibres of white matter with visible axons and multipolar
connective tissue cells, by Jakob Henle and Friedrich Merkel [91].

Neuroglia 2018, 1 267
3.10. Rudolf Arndt
German psychiatrist Rudolf Gottfried Arndt (1835–1900) studied the morphology of the brain
tissue of large vertebrates and humans. He summarised his findings in a series of three papers
[89,92,93]. In the first paper he described five to six layers in the cortex. In the first layer, there were
intertwined parallel fibres, some of which were nervous, another belonging to the fibres of the
connective tissue. The second layer, according to Arndt, consisted mainly of neuroglia, which was
grainy-fibrous (körnig-faserigen) or spongy (schwammigen), and which was, according to him,
differentiated protoplasm, neither nervous nor connective. In the neuroglia were nuclei and loose
thin and thick fibres; some ended with the loops described by Gabriel Valentin. The third layer
contained isolated nuclei and nerve cells with a nucleus, all immersed in neuroglia; their shape was
either round, elliptical or triangular (Figure 11B). From the latter emerged horizontally and inwardly
oriented processes, one thick process pointing to the surface of the cortex, which he considered to be
an axon. Whether these processes served to interconnect cells, passed into nerve fibres, or dissolved
in neuroglial tissue, Arndt was not certain.
The second paper mostly contained polemic about the works of Besser, Meynert, and others that
had been published in the meantime. It also included consideration of the purpose of the corpuscles
of the connective matter, which he believed to be a remnant of the development of nervous mass in
the foetus. Arndt also accepted Besser’s terminology (Gliakern, Gliareiser) and an idea on the
development of nerve tissue elements; he assumed that from these two glial components developed
three brain elements: blood vessels, neurons, and nerve fibres. In the third, shorter paper, Arndt
confirmed his findings from the previous publications and discussed the functional unity of ganglion
bodies and their processes, together with the surrounding granular-fibrous substance:
Concerning the nerve cell of the central organ of an adult, I believe that according to the
foregoing description the ganglion body together with its central processes and the part
of granular-fibrous substance, which is genetically related to it, must be understood.
Whether we will ever get to know them intact is questionable, indeed highly unlikely. It
may not even exist on its own, although this is still quite conceivable, but it is probably
so completely merged with adjacent parts, so intimately interwoven with them by their
finest threads, that together they are only one, their creation form absolutely indivisible
mass. But if this is the case, then we must logically consider the interganglionary
granular-fibrous substance, the terminal fibre-network, as it turns out in the adult, to be
a coalesced protoplasm modified for definite purposes, as an irritable tissue, the actual
carrier of all is central operations. ([89]; p. 329).
Arndt was thus one of the first researchers who hypothesized that the nerve cells and the
surrounding granular-fibrous substance are developmentally related and form a single functional
unit.
3.11. Ludwig Stieda
The Baltic German Ludwig Stieda (1837–1918) was professor of anatomy in Dorpat and
Königsberg. He studied the structure of the neural tissue, predominantly in animals. Stieda published
many works and he summarised his findings in two extensive publications [90,94]. According to him,
the CNS consisted of nerve cell bodies, nerve fibres, connective tissue, blood vessels, and epithelium.
There was no general agreement on the composition and terminology of brain connective tissue or
neuroglia, and Stieda absolutely correctly pointed out that there was no agreement on the
terminology on the nerve cells as well. As he noted, these formations were named by various names,
such as ganglion bodies (Ganglienkörper), nerve bodies (Nervenkörper), ganglion balls (Ganglienkugeln),
occupancy balls (Belegungskugeln), spinal bodies (Spinalkörpen), ganglion cells (Ganglienzellen), or
nerve cells (Nervenzellen). Concerning the connective tissue, Stieda did not distinguished the true
fibrous connective tissue in meninges from what was called connective tissue in the grey matter,
where it, according to him, had a fine-grained appearance and contained nuclei of the basement
substance (Figure 11C). He also did not consider the basement substance to be nervous, but to be a

Neuroglia 2018, 1 268
special category of supportive or connective tissue of the nervous system. Moreover, Stieda could not
confirm the presence of the grained basement substance as a network of cells interconnected with
anastomoses, as was described by other researchers.
3.12. Jakob Henle and Friedrich Merkel
Four years after the publication of Deiters’ monograph on the structure of nerve tissue, Jakob
Henle (1809–1885), who was professor of anatomy in Gottingen, and his son-in-law Friedrich Merkel
(1845–1919), published a paper dealing with the connective tissue of the CNS [91]. Although this
work contained a detailed historical overview of connective tissue research, the authors did not even
mention Deiters’ findings. The goal of the Henle and Merkel study was to determine whether fine-
grained or reticular tissue had the properties of nervous substance, or was only a supportive,
connective, essentially cementing substance. For the study of tissues from various regions of the brain
and spinal cord of several mammals and humans, they used a variety of histological methods, from
carmine staining followed by fixation with chromic acid, to boiling, using differently diluted acids
and bases, or alcohol hardening. Henle and Merkel were convinced that the connective tissue
consisted of a so-called molecular mass and the elements of the connective tissue (Figure 11D), that
is, fibres, cells, and grains or nuclei:
These connective tissue cells could, according to the analogy of the nerve cells, be called
bipolar, as opposed to the multipolar connective tissue cells, from which three or more
fibres emanate. From multipolar cells merging with their processes, the above-
mentioned reticular connective tissue develops; similar cells, growing in several threads,
but usually preferentially in two opposite directions, owe their origin to the confused
fibres of the innermost layer of the pia mater. The fibres can be traced over long distances
and, although they branch out, do not appear to anastomose regularly; they are more of
a felt than a net. The cells are observed in this layer only with difficulty, isolated, hardly
without the help of Carmin absorption. More clearly, because more scattered and less
obscured by fibres, they are found on the border of the pia mater and the cortical layer,
and in the latter itself. ([91]; p. 57).
Although Henle and Merkel referred to the term “neuroglia” only in relation to Virchow’s
results and did not use it at all in the description of their own results, they suggested that the fibrous
networks described by them could be considered as so-called neuroglia or Kölliker’s reticulum.
3.13. Camillo Golgi: Early Studies on Neuroglia
In the early 1870s, Camillo Golgi (1843–1926), while a 27-year-old employee of the University
Clinic in Pavia, published his first brief communication on the connective tissue of the brain [95],
which a year later, was translated to German [96]. Golgi studied the connective cells of the cortical
regions of the human brain, using staining primarily with osmic acid. He observed circular, oval, or
star-shaped cells with a large nucleus, from which several very long processes emerged in different
directions. He even described anastomoses between the processes of neighbouring cells.
During the same year, Golgi began to publish an expanded three-part version of the previous
communication with a detailed description of his findings [97–99]. In the three chapters, it contained
a detailed description of the results obtained in the brain, cerebellum, and spinal cord. Golgi did not
use the terms “neuroglia” or “glial cells” in these publications. The introductory historical overviews
of the findings at the beginning of each chapter are very instructive. Golgi observed the cells
described in the previous publication, in various regions of the brain and spinal cord (Figure 12A),
and he summarized the results as following:
In summary, with the preparations in osmic acid I have demonstrated:
1. That a very thin superficial layer of the brain cortex is exclusively constituted, except
of some bundles of nerve fibres coming from the marrow, from the connective cells

Neuroglia 2018, 1 269
provided with a large number of thin, long and for the most part rigid unbranched
extensions.
2. That identical cells are scattered in considerable numbers in all the layers of the cortex,
forming a continuous support tissue.
3. That many extensions of the connective cells are inserted in the contour of the vessels,
and that there is neither the space nor the perivascular lymphatic network… ([97]; p.
344).
Figure 12. (A) Images of connective tissue cell made by Camillo Golgi [96]. Middle: spinal cord cell
with long longitudinal processes in deeper layers of white matter. Right: cross section of the capillary
showing the connective cell processes closely adjacent to its contour. (B) Images of glial cells by Moritz
Jastrowitz [100]. Isolated spider-like glial cells from the vicinity of the human brain ventricle
ependym.
In addition, Golgi employed several modifications of osmic acid staining, and also described the
pericellular lymphatic space. By using different staining methods on very thin slices of the cortex, he
was able to observe a large number of “elegant” connective cells with 10–30 very thin and long
processes, very rarely branched. These branches separated at a short distance from the cell boundary,
and he never observed more than two or three secondary branches, which were also very long and
unbranched. Golgi also commented on the contents of the neuropil, which, according to today’s
findings, is part of the grey matter that fills the space between the perikarya and the vessels, where
the nerve fibres, the synapses, and the glial cell processes are located, and which appear to be
amorphous under the light microscope. According to Golgi, the so-called fine-grained, possibly
mesh-like, spongy or dotted molecular, amorphous or gelatinous matter originated either as a result
of changes in the dead body, due to reagents or tissue processing. These effects led to the breakdown
of the fibrillary substance, which, in his opinion, was likely to occur not only in the processes of

Neuroglia 2018, 1 270
connective tissue cells but also in the finest protoplasmic processes of neurons. It should be noted,
however, that the above mentioned findings by Golgi were made before his discovery of the
biochemical method of colouring the nerve tissue preparation with potassium dichromate and silver
nitrate in 1873 [101], now known as the Golgi method or reazione nera.
3.14. Moritz Jastrowitz
German neurologist and psychiatrist Moritz Jastrowitz (1839–1912), working as an assistant at
the clinic for mentally and neurotic patients in Berlin, published in 1870–1871 a two-part paper on
the structure of nerve tissue during encephalitis and myelitis in children in the early postnatal period.
In the first part, he described in detail the anamnesis of patients from whom he took brain tissue, and
described the macroscopic tissue changes [102]. In the second part, he examined in detail the
individual elements of nerve tissue and neuroglia, which, according to him, also played an important
role during encephalitis [100].
Jastrowitz in his paper, clearly distinguished neuroglia and connective tissue, which consisted
of spongious structures, fibres, granular (molecular) substances, and also lymphoid cells. The
molecular substance, according to Jastrowitz, was associated with the myelination of nerve fibres,
since during the development of nerve tissue, it was gradually lost. Therefore, he considered it not
only as a supportive matter, but also as an embryonic tissue that was responsible for axonal isolation.
Jastrowitz also believed that molecular substance played a more important role than connective
matter, and therefore recommended not to include it among the other elements of connective tissue
under the common name of “neuroglia”.
The most prominent non-nerve cells, which, according to Jastrowitz, no one had mentioned
before, he found in the ependyma (Figure 12B). As he noticed, “If Virchow’s view, initially expressed
by the ependymal layer of the fourth ventricle, that in it the neuroglia comes to light in its purity, also
applies to this location, then these would be true prototypes of glial cells”. Jastrowitz described these
cells as following:
They generally surpass those of the third layer in volume, not inconsiderably, especially
with respect to the diameter of the base, and differ in shape and size from one another.
Most are spindle-shaped, but also rounded and angular as well as cylindrical shapes are
encountered; they are often narrowed at one end and may be quite pointed at this,
sometimes at both ends. Their length is usually double and even three times their width,
on average for the smaller ones 0.007–0.01: 0.004–5 [length 15–21 μm, width 8.7–10.6 μm]
and for the large ones 0.012–0.017: 0.005–7 [length 25–36 μm, widths 10.6–14.8 μm]. The
protoplasm is a little more granulated and less transparent, usually it contains very large
oval nucleus with several granules larger than nucleoli is often located at one end of the
cell, and particularly is intensively coloured, therefore one easily overlooks its contents
in the tissue. An immense amount of delicate, bright processes extend from them widely
in all directions, often across each other, and finally disappear in the molecular mass,
whose particles usually adhere to them in isolation. Despite the long distances they
travel, divisions are exceptional, but often kinks and bends. They are chiefly those who
give the whole structure a very characteristic appearance, which resembles that of a little
spider. ([100]; p. 169).
Jastrowitz, therefore, named these cells as “spider glial cells” (spinnenähnliche Gliazellen) or
“spider cells” (Spinnezellen). Their number increased toward the surface of the brain ventricle so that
they finally formed the epithelium of the ependyma. Jastrowitz disagreed with Besser, who believed
that the glial elements were made up of separated glial nuclei and glial networks. The glial nuclei
observed by Besser, according to Jastrowitz, corresponded in part to embryonic cells, in part to the
nuclei of connective tissue cells and neurons, and partially to free nuclei.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 271
3.15. Victor Butzke
Russian psychiatrist Victor Butzke (1845–1904), while collaborating with the German pathologist
and histologist Eduard Rindfleisch (see below) at the Pathological-Anatomical Institute in Bonn,
published in 1872 a paper dedicated to the fine microscopic structure of nerve cells and glia and their
interrelationships [103].
Butzke has extensively described other types of cells than nerve cells. As he stated, “not
everything must be considered as a connective substance, or even as a connective tissue, that is not
recognized as a ganglion cell or nerve fibre in the central organs of the nervous system” ([103]; p.
590). He questioned the existence of the so-called “free” nuclei, believing that even these were
surrounded by protoplasm that often passed into the processes, and he also distinguished glial
elements with thin and thicker processes, partially oriented radially, which were found on the surface
of the large brain (Figure 13A). Other glial elements were cells with a relatively large nucleus and
radially emerging thick processes, which, according to Butzke, were scattered among the well-known
real nerve elements of the grey matter of the cerebral cortex, and furthermore, he detached them into
a special category, “real connective tissue corpuscles with their thicker and thinner processes” ([103];
p. 591; Figure 13A). In addition, he also expressed a hypothesis on the physiological role of the glial
network in the nervous tissue, namely, its role in the formation of new connections between nerve
cells:
The fine-grained fibrous mass is therefore not a simple putty substance (Kittsubstanz) for
us, which is only intended to adhere the parts together; it is no longer the simple
intermediate mass (Zwischenmasse) through which the coarser structures pass, but it also
contains one enclosed within it highly subtle tissue in the form of a network, which is
formed by the end fibrils of the ganglion processes and supported by the processes of
the glial corpuscles (Gliakörperchen). I now put forward the hypothesis, which has never
been formulated sufficiently clearly and sufficiently supported by reasons that the
connection between the end branches of the ganglion bodies takes place through this
fine irregular network. I have not seen clearly that connection, so I call my view a
hypothesis. But if you look right where the finest branches are, and you see a network that
starts directly from the final ramifications, what other conclusion could you make? … Nor
are we aware of any facts that suggest that not every physiological connection between
the elementary centres could be fixed, strengthened, and newly formed: in practice and
in learning. But what about the notions of learning, forgetting, practicing, getting used
to, etc., if all the connections of the functioning elements were given once and for all in
rigid anastomoses, or in the entry and exit of nerve fibres into a ganglion body? … But
that is probably no longer so necessary and, in order to come back specifically to the one
organ which I subjected to the more detailed examination, I will ask, if not every
impression which arrives at the brain through the senses and adheres to it is proof
enough that there are suddenly created a hundred new connections that may exist for
life? And is not every new thought that comes to us proof enough that out of the old
connections that already existed, new ones were formed automatically (that is, without
influence from outside), others were strengthened, others disappeared or become
weaker? It is, after all, to quote Master Goethe in the end: “the thought factory is a
weaver masterpiece, where—one stroke strikes a thousand connections.” ([103]; p. 595).
Like Golgi, Butzke also drew attention to the particular funnel-like shape of some of the glial
processes that were adjacent to the vessels or the meninges.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 272
Figure 13. (A) Images of glial cell with richly branched processes (middle) and connective tissue cell
(right) drawn by Victor Butzke [103]. (B) Images of glial cells and neurons drawn by Louis-Antoine
Ranvier [104]. Left: neuroglial cell of the lateral cords of the ox spinal cord. Middle: elements of the
cortical layer of the cat’s brain; a, b, c, and d, four neuroglial cells; n, nerve cell; p its protoplasmic
processes, v its axon. Right top: cells and fibres in the spinal cord. Right bottom: two spinal cord
neurons (A,B) with axons (D) and protoplasmic processes (p), and glial cell (C) between them.
3.16. Louis-Antoine Ranvier
French physician and histologist Louis-Antoine Ranvier (1835–1922), who worked at the Collège
de France in Paris, is universally known as a discoverer of the nodes of Ranvier, which are regularly
spaced discontinuities of the myelin sheath, occurring at varying intervals along the length of a nerve
fibre. It is less known, however, that Ranvier was also interested in the structure of connective tissue.
In 1873, he published a brief note on the spinal cord connective elements [105]. Through a golden
cannula, he perfused white and grey matter of the spinal cord with osmic acid, and thus in stained
longitudinal slices, he visualised homogenous black structures in white matter and marbled black
structures in the grey matter. In white matter, he described neural tubes (axons) with myelin sheaths,
among which he observed fibrils or bundles of connective tissue fibrils. The small bundles of
connective tissue in spinal cord white matter, according to Ranvier, did not produce anastomoses,
but at some points four to eight or even more intersected one another. At this crossing, a round or
oval flattened nucleus with small nucleoles surrounded by granular mass was often observed. This
whole unit Ranvier named as a flattened cell of connective tissue (cellule plate de tissu conjonctif). The
same structures he also described in detail in grey matter. Consequently, Ranvier noted that the
connective tissue of the spinal cord was constituted by bundles of connective fibrils or fibres and flat
cells.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 273
Ten years later, Ranvier published an extended paper containing figures, describing his new
achievements in neuroglial research [104]. Concerning the term “neuroglia” and the meaning of it,
he wrote:
The word neuroglia is detestable and if I use it, it is only because it has passed into the
language of histologists. All know that it designates the connective tissue of the nervous
centres; but if they agree to adopt it, they do not agree on the organisation of the neuroglia
itself, because some believe with Henle and Merkel, that it is formed of elements of the
connective tissue ordinary; others, with Gerlach, that it is composed of elastic fibres or
analogous to certain elastic fibres, that it consists entirely of branched cells of a special
nature of Deiters cells (Boll, Golgi, etc.). Some, finally, think, with Schwalbe, that the cells
which are between the nervous elements of the brain, the marrow, and the optic nerve are
nothing but the lymphatic cells in migration. I myself have maintained that the marrow
neuroglia is composed of fibres of any length, intersecting at certain points, at the levels of
which are generally flattened cells. ([104]; p. 177).
Using the method of hardening the nervous tissue of his own, Ranvier was convinced that the
neuroglial cells do not have the rudimentary forms attributed to them by Deiters. According to him,
their nucleus was well formed, their well-developed cell bodies were membranous, irregularly star-
shaped, and showed shape-related accidents that depended to a large extent on the pressures exerted
by neighbouring elements (Figure 13B). They had numerous processes which, as Ranvier believed,
were nothing but fibres of any length, so distinct in the preparations made by means of the interstitial
injections of osmic acid, and which, in these preparations, appeared to be independent of the cells.
These fibres which passed through the neuroglial cells did not always follow a rectilinear path; a
large number of them described curves or were folded in the shape of a loop.
Ranvier also believed that nerve cells and cells of the neuroglia had a common origin; they both
proceeded from the primitive neuroepithelium, and although they may have had absolutely different
physiological significances, they retained in their structures certain points that betrayed their
common origin. He was also convinced that the granular substance, which various researchers had
attached to the neuroglia, did not exist. Ranvier summarized the composition of the nervous tissue
as follows:
The grey matter of the brain and that of the spinal cord are thus reduced to the same
type. Both are composed of ganglion cells, myelinated nerve fibres, myelin-free nerve
fibres, and neuroglia cells, leaving, of course, the blood vessels and their perivascular
sheath, which belong to the ordinary connective tissue. ([104]; p. 185).
Concerning the general view on the nerve tissue structure, Ranvier’s observations were correct.
However, his description of the neuroglial cells as cells through which passed neuroglial fibres, was
stepped aside and it significantly influenced neuroglial research in the next decade.
3.17. Eduard Rindfleisch
German pathologist and histologist Eduard Rindfleisch (1836–1908), who attained professorship
in Bonn and in Würzburg, recognised the role of nerve connective tissue, which he called “neuroglia
Virchovi”, especially during pathological processes. In his textbook of pathological histology, the third
German edition of which was published in 1873, he dedicated the entire section to neuroglial cells
(Figure 14A) [106]. Rindfleisch joined those researchers who discussed the question what known
elements of the nervous tissue should be considered as the part of the neuroglia. He was convinced,
that
As for the neuroglia of the medullary [white] substance, we may safely affirm that it
comprises whatever elements are met with in the white matter, apart from nerve-fibres
and blood-vessels; hence all the granules and nuclei in the white substance are
neuroglia-cells and nuclei, so the soft fibrous-spongy material into which the nerve
fibres are embedded is also neuroglia. Concerning the relation of these parts of neuroglia

Neuroglia 2018, 1 274
to each other, a maceration of fresh cerebral substance in 1/10 per cent of super-osmic
acid for several days teaches that some of the cells are star-shaped and have numerous,
finely branched processes. These cells are arranged at regular intervals and represent a
network of connective tissue corpuscles in Virchow’s sense. Their finest processes form
by numerous anastomoses the mentioned fibrous-spongy material, the actual nervous
putty (Nervenkitt), so that it can be reasonably not mentioned as a special basic substance
of this connective tissue. ([106]; p. 570).
Rindfleisch, according to his preface to the first edition, “offered his new textbook to the student-
youth of Germany”; therefore, his view on the neuroglia as a connective tissue containing star-shaped
cells forming a network, had a big impact on a new generation of researchers dealing with the
structure of the nervous tissue.
Figure 14. Images of neuroglia drawn by Eduard Rindfleish (A, [106]) and Franz Boll (B [107]).
3.18. Franz Boll
German physiologist and histologist Franz Christian Boll (1849–1879) who held professorships
in Genoa and Rome, is universally known as the discoverer of rhodopsin. In 1873, however, he
published an extensive work describing in detail the structure and development of the brain and
spinal cord [107]. The publication also contained results of his extensive examination of the nervous
connective tissue.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 275
Boll was convinced that the connective tissue, besides connective tissue fibres, also contained
cells (Figure 14B) which were, as he pointed out, for the first time isolated, described, and illustrated
in “their true form” by Deiters. However, he added, the Deiters name and the description of these
cells did not appear in the writings of Henle and Merkel, Stieda, Gerlach, Kolliker, and Frommann,
but the cells were described and illustrated by Jastrowitz, Golgi, and, to a certain extent, by
Rindfleisch. For this reason, Boll was likely to continue to name these cells as the “Deiters’ cells”
(Deiters’schen Zellen); this term was used for some time by other researchers simultaneously with the
name “glial cells”. Today, however, by the term “Deiters’ cells”, or phalangeal cells, are named
supporting cells of the Corti organ in the inner ear, which are not related to glial cells at all. Describing
the glial cells in the ox spinal cord Boll noted that:
These cells are so peculiar that I cannot give them any analogue from the series of other
known histological elements. Characteristic of these is the lack of a body or cell body. At
first sight, some seem to imagine only a confused convolution of fine fibres, in the centre
of which there is a nucleus-like structure. If, however, in most of these cells the actual
cell-body is an absolutely vanishing minimum, the processes of the latter are all the more
pronounced. Each of these cells emits a very large number of very long hair-thin
processes, comparable to the fineness of connective tissue fibrils, of straight or only
slightly tortuous course. The length of these fibrous processes is often very considerable;
not infrequently, individuals are drawn through the entire field of view of the
microscope and even further. Whether these fine processes ramify, I certainly do not
want to decide; I have never received unambiguous pictures of such a place. On the
other hand, on the basis of my experience, I do not necessarily dare deny ramification:
in any case, such is one of the rarer occurrences. The direction of the processes is subject
to countless differences: there are cells from which these fibres emanate multipolarly in
all directions; besides, there are other cells where two dense fibrous bundles are
detached on two opposing poles, and finally a third main form is not uncommon, where
the whole mass of the fibrous processes is directed to one side, while from the opposite
pole of the cell depart only very insignificant fibres, so that these cells offer a surprising
similarity with a fine hair brush (brush cells—Pinselzellen). ([107]; p. 7).
Thus Boll, in addition to the detailed description of glial cell as cells with the long hair-thin
processes, also drew attention to the variety of shapes of the glial cells, and attempted to classify
them. Boll further analysed the structure of the perivascular space. The presence of terminals of glial
processes on the capillary walls before Boll, had already been indicated by Besser, Golgi, and Butzke
(see above). Boll, however, described that capillaries in the brain and spinal cord of humans, cows,
and sheep were surrounded by rows of “brush cells” of various sizes and shapes spreading numerous
processes to the capillary walls. In addition, on the basis of the detailed study of the nerve tissue
development, Boll was convinced that both glial and nerve cells were histologically distinct
elementary parts of the CNS.
3.19. Hans Gierke
German anatomist Hans Paul Bernhard Gierke (1847–1886) attained professorship at the
Imperial University of Tokyo and in Breslau (Wrocław). Already in 1882, he published his paper on
the elements of the CNS, where he described nerve cells and neuroglia studied predominantly by the
carmine method, which he, based on numerous experiments, considered to be the most suitable for
tissue staining [108]. According to Gierke, “The skeleton for the nervous elements of the central
organ, the network in which they are embedded, is composed of two different substances, the fibrillar
connective tissue and Virchow’s so-called neuroglia, which is considered to be a subspecies of the
reticular connective tissue.” [108]. He also included in his paper a detailed description and pictures
of several forms of neuroglial cells (Figure 15), and discussed their relationship to nerve cells and
fibres. In addition, Gierke was convinced that: “The neuroglia develops from elements of the
ectoderm like the nerve cells and like the cells of the epidermis. Even this histogenetic fact speaks for

Neuroglia 2018, 1 276
a peculiar position of the neuroglia, even more so its appearance, its behaviour against reagents and
the arrangement of the elements.” [108].
Figure 15. Images of glia drawn by Hans Gierke [108,109]. Left: neuroglial cells from the white matter
(1–3) and from the grey matter (4); proliferating neuroglial cell (5,6). Right top: large glial cell from
the bottom of the fourth ventricle; bottom left: glial cell from the grey matter of the spinal cord; bottom
right: glial cell from the white matter of the spinal cord.
A year later, Gierke published an updated paper devoted to the supportive substance of the
nervous system [110]. He described different types of neuroglial cells in the various regions of the
brain and spinal cord, and at the same time, he moved forward in questioning what should be
considered to be neuroglia:
The supporting substance consists of unformed and shaped elements, both of which
must be grouped under the term Neuroglia. The unformed part, the basic substance
(Grundsubstanz), has not yet received the due attention it deserves. It is the basis of the
grey matter in which everything else is stored and quantitatively occupies about the
third part of it…. The shaped elements of the supportive substance are cells and their
processes. ([110]; p.362).
In two years Gierke published results of the investigation of supportive substance of the CNS in
two extensive publications [109,111]. He described in detail many modifications of his carmine
staining method, which he still considered to be the best. Gierke made an attempt to clearly define
the connective tissue and neuroglia. First of all, he was convinced that free grains observed in the
connective tissue by Jastrowitz and Boll did not exist. Concerning the connective tissue, Gierke wrote:
The nervous elements of the central organs are not directly next to each other, but are
separated from each other by a different mass, which can be named with a very
indifferent name as a supporting substance (Stutzsubstanz) of the central nervous
system. It is often called connective tissue (Bindegewebe) by the authors, and indeed
regarded as “reticular connective tissue” (retikulären Bindesubstanz) in terms of its
histological significance, and is presented as a subspecies of it in addition to the

Neuroglia 2018, 1 277
cytogenous connective substance of the mucous membranes and of many glands and
the jelly-tissue… In any case, it is desirable not to name it that way any longer, but I shall
name it in the following to have the shortest possible expression, with the name
“neuroglia” (or nerve putty), or glia, introduced by Virchow. The supporting substance
of the central organs consists of two components, the unformed and the shaped
substance; both must be grouped together under the name of neuroglia, although of
course the term “nerve putty” is less suitable for the cellular elements than for the matrix
substance. When we shorten, as is customary, that word, we have in the terms “glial
substance” and “glial cells” very convenient names, which I do not find at all like
Ranvier in the above-quoted little work “detestable”. ([109]; p. 452).
Gierke also tried to find out the general characteristics of the glial cells:
First, what is common to all glial cells? In most cases characteristic of them are the
processes. Just as in the central nervous system, no nerve cells without processes occur,
so are cells of the support substance without such unthinkable. In order to be able to
take part in the formation of the framework for the embedded nervous elements, the
glial cells must connect by means of processes with other similar elements. I can also say
with the utmost certainty that there are absolutely no glial cells in the central nervous
system, which are without processes, and which therefore lie isolated, without
connection to the general scaffold. With regard to the number of processes, certain
details are not to be specified. Most of the cells have very many, but even with very few
occur. Cells with a single process, if they exist at all, are very rare; they might perhaps
appear on the surface of the cerebral cortex as an exception. Bipolar cells occur in certain
places, especially where long sutures are needed. The cell-body can then grow so much
in the formation of the growing processes, that it only makes a small swelling in the
middle of them, indeed one finds horn-threads in those places, which have no trace of a
cell-body, but detectable in of the imaginary way. … Glial cells with three or very few
processes proceeding to different sides occur in all parts of the central organ; yet they
are much rarer than those with many processes. ([109]; p. 466).
In general, due to the staining methods, which reached its borders, Gierke’s investigations did
not bring extraordinary new information about the glial cells, if compared to the works of his
predecessors. It became evident that the carmine staining has reached its limits, and in the following
years, it withdrew its place in favour of the “black reaction” staining invented by Golgi.
4. Recapitulation
The notions of the passive elements of the CNS have emerged in the second half of 18th century,
and at the beginning of 19th century. The idea of the brain connective tissue (Bindegewebs-Substanzen)
was first introduced by Karel Rokytanský, and then it was developed by Rudolf Wirchow into the
concept of neuroglia. In the course of the second half of the 19th century, many neuroanatomists
dedicated their efforts to study neuroglia; as a result, numerous morphologically distinct cell types
have been described. The turn of research toward neuroglia has been precipitated by the
development of staining techniques which allowed much more precise morphological analysis of
neural cells. This allowed several major types of neuroglia to be distinguished; in addition, the
theories of glial roles in the physiology and pathophysiology of the nervous system began to evolve.
Detailed descriptions of these studies will be covered in our papers that are to follow.
Author Contributions: All authors participated equally in writing this commentary.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References

Neuroglia 2018, 1 278
1. Crivellato, E.; Ribatti, D. Soul, mind, brain: Greek philosophy and the birth of neuroscience. Brain Res. Bull.
2007, 71, 327–336.
2. Clarke, E. Aristotelian concepts of the form and function of the brain. Bull. Hist. Med. 1963, 37, 1–14.
3. Gross, C.G. Aristotle on the brain. Neuroscientist 1995, 1, 245–250.
4. Codellas, P.S. Alcmaeon of croton: His life, work, and fragments. Proc. R. Soc. Med. 1932, 25, 1041–1046.
5. Hippocrates. On the sacred disease. In The Medical Works of Hippocrates; Chadwick, J., Mann, W.N.T., Eds.;
Blackwells: Oxford, UK, 1950; pp. 179–189.
6. Longrigg, J. Greek Rational Medicine: Philosophy and Medicine from Alcmaeon to the Alexandrians; Routledge:
New York, NY, USA, 1993.
7. Von Staden, H. Herophilus: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge,
UK, 1989.
8. Wills, A. Herophilus, erasistratus, and the birth of neuroscience. Lancet 1999, 354, 1719–1720.
9. Manzoni, T. The cerebral ventricles, the animal spirits and the dawn of brain localization of function. Arch.
Ital. Biol. 1998, 136, 103–152.
10. Pevsner, J. Leonardo da Vinci’s contributions to neuroscience. Trends Neurosci. 2002, 25, 217–220.
11. Reisch, G. Margarita Philosophica; Johann Schott: Freiburg, Germany, 1503.
12. Fludd, R. Utriusque Cosmi Majoris Scilicet et Minoris Metaphysica, Physica Atque Technica Historia in duo
Volumina Secundum Cosmi Differentiam Divisa. Tomus Primus de Macrososmi Historia in duo Tractatus Divisa;
Oppenhemii, Aere Johan-Theodori de Bry, Typis Hieronymi Galleri: Frankfurt, Germany, 1617–1621.
13. Da Vinci, L. Corpus of the Anatomical Studies in the Collection of Her Majesty, the Queen, at Windsor Castle;
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich: Windsor, UK, 1978–1980.
14. Descartes, R.; Schuyl, F. De Homine; Petrum Leffen, Franciscum Moyardum: Ludguni Batavorum (Leiden),
The Netherlands, 1662.
15. Malpighi, M. Opera Omnia; Royal SocietyTomis Duobus: London, UK, 1687.
16. Willis, T. De Anima Brutorum Quae Hominis Vitalis ac Sentitiva est: Exercitationes Duae; Typis E.F. Impensis
Ric. Davis: Oxon, UK, 1672.
17. Combe, G. The Constitution of Man Considered in Relation to External Objects, 8th ed.; MacLahlan Steward &
Co.: Edinburgh, UK, 1847.
18. Gall, F.J. On the Functions of the Brain and Each of Its Parts: With Observations on the Possibility of Determining
the Instincts, Propensities and Talents, or the Moral and Intellectual Dispositions of Men and Animals, by the
Configuration of the Head, Trans, Winslow Lewis, Jr.; Marsh, Capen & Lyon: Boston, UK, 1835.
19. Gall, F.J.; Spurzheim, J.G. Anatomie et Physiologie du Système Nerveux en Général et du Cerveau en Particulier
Avec des Observations sur la Possibilité de Reconnaître Plusieurs Dispositions Intellectuelles et Morales de L’homme
et des Animaux par la Configuration de Leurs Têtes, 4 Vols., with an Atlas of 100 Engraved Plates; Schoell: Paris,
France, 1810–1819.
20. Prochaska, G. Functions of the Nervous System (English Translation by T. LAYCOCK, 1851); Sydenham’s
Society Series: London, UK, 1784.
21. Broca, P. Perte de la parole, ramolissement chronique et destruction partielle du lobe anterieur gauche du
cerveau (sur la siege de la faculte du langage). Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société D’anthropologie de Paris 1861,
2, 235–238.
22. Fritsch, G.T.; Hitzig, E. Über die electrische erregbarkeit des grosshirns. Arch. Anat. Physiol. Wiss. Med. 1870,
37, 300–322.
23. Ferrier, D. Experiments in the brain of monkeys. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B. 1875, 23, 409–430.
24. Ferrier, D. The Functions of the Brain; Smith, Elder: London, UK, 1876.
25. Ferrier, D. The Croonian Lectures on Cerebral Localisation; Smith, Elder & Co.: London, UK, 1890.
26. Penfield, W.; Bouldrey, E. Somatic motor and sensory representation in the cerebral cortex of man as
studied by electrical stimulation. Brain 1937, 60, 389–443.
27. Descartes, R. L’homme, et un Traité de la Formation du Foetus du Mesme Autheur. Avec les Remarques de Louys
de la Forge, 1st ed.; Nicolas Le Gras: Paris, France, 1664.
28. Bidloo, G.; de Lairesse, G. Anatomia Humani Corporis; Joannis à Someren, Joannis à Dyk, Henrici & Theodori
Boom: Amstelodami, The Netherlands, 1685.
29. Leeuwenhoek, A.V. Alle de Briefen van Antoni van Leeuwenhoek/The Collected Letters of Antoni van Leeuwenhoek
1673–1696 (Eleven Volumes), Edited, Illustrated, and Annotated by Committees of Dutch Scientists; Swets &
Zeitlinger: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1939–1983.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 279
30. Van Leeuwenhoek, A. Send-Brieven, Zoo aan de Hoog Edele Heeren van de Koninklyke Societeit te Londen;
Adriaan Beman: Te Delft, The Netherlands, 1718.
31. Von Haller, A. Elementa Physiologiae Corporis Humani, in 8 Volumes; Marci-Michael Bosquet & Sociorum:
Lausanne, Switzerland, 1757–1778.
32. Chvatal, A. Jiri Prochaska (1749–1820): Part 2: “De structura nervorum”—Studies on a structure of the
nervous system. J. Hist. Neurosci. 2015, 24, 1–25.
33. Von Haller, A. De Partibus Corporis Humani Sensilibus et Irritabilibus. Commentarii Societatis Regiae Scientiarum
Gottingensis; Vadenhoek: Gottingen, Germany, 1753.
34. Dierig, S. Neuronen-Doktrin und Neuroglia. PhD Thesis, Inaugural-Dissertation, University of Konstanz,
Konstanz Germany, 1994.
35. Hooke, R. Micrographia; Folio Society: London, UK, 2017.
36. Shapiro, S. Antony van Leeuwenhoek; a review of his life and work. J. Biol. Photogr. Assoc. 1955, 23, 49–57.
37. Schleiden, M.J. Beiträge zur phytogenesis. Arc. Anat. Physiol. Wiss. Med. 1838, 137–176.
38. Schwann, T. Mikroskopische Untersuchungen über die Übereinstimmung in der Struktur und dem Wachstum der
Tiere und Pflanzen; Sanderschen Buchhandlung: Berlin, Germany, 1839.
39. Schwann, T. Microscopical Researches into the Accordance in the Structure and Growth of Animals and Plants;
Sydenham Society: London, UK, 1847.
40. Malpighi, M. De Cerebri Cortice. In De Viscerum Structura Exercitatio Anatomica; Giacomo Monti: Bologna,
Italy, 1666.
41. Gross, C.G. Emanuel Swedenborg: A neuroscientist before his time. Neuroscientist 1997, 3, 142–147.
42. Swedenborg, E. The Brain, Considered Anatomically, Physiologically and Phylosopically. (Translated and Edited
by R.L. Tafel), in 4 Volumes; James Speirs: London, UK, 1882.
43. Torre, G.M.D. Nuove Osservazioni Microscopiche; C. R. Somasco: Napoli, Italy, 1776.
44. Bentivoglio, M. 1896–1996: The centennial of the axon. Brain Res. Bull. 1996, 41, 319–325.
45. Keuffel, G.G.T. Uebr das ruckenmark. Arch. Physiol. 1811, 10, 123–202.
46. Dutrochet, M.H. Recherches Anatomiques et Physiologiques sur la Structure Intime des Animaux et des Végétaux,
et sur leur Motilité; J.B.Bailliere: Paris, France, 1824.
47. Dutrochet, M.H. Mémoires Pour Servir a L’historie Anatomique et Physiologique des Végétaux et des Animaux. II;
J.-B. Bailliere: Paris, France, 1837; p. 688.
48. Studnička, F.K. Aus der vorgeschichte der zellenteorie. H. Milne edwards, H. Dutrochet, F. Raspail, j.E.
Purkinje. Anatomischer Anzeiger 1932, 73, 390–416.
49. Ehrenberg, C.G. Beobachtungeiner Auffallenden Bisher Unerkannten Strukfurdes Seelenorgans bei Menschen und
Thieren; Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschchaft: Berlin, Germany, 1836.
50. Purkinje, J.E. Neueste beobachtungen uber die struktur des gehirns. In Opera omnia; Purkynova Spolecnost:
Prague, Chec Republic, 1837; Volume 2, 3.
51. Todd, R.B. The Descriptive and Physiological Anatomy of the Brain, Spinal Cord, Ganglions and Their Coverings;
Sherwood, Gilbert and Piper: London, UK, 1845.
52. Golgi, C. Opera Omnia; Hoepli: Milano, Italy, 1903.
53. Tan, S.Y.; Brown, J. Rudolph virchow (1821–1902): “Pope of pathology”. Singap. Med. J. 2006, 47, 567–568.
54. Keuffel, G.G.T. De Medulla Spinali. Doctoral Dissertation, Halae, Magdeburg, Germay, 1810.
55. Weigert, C. Kenntnis der Normalen Menschlichen Neuroglia; Moritz Diesterweg: Frankfurt, Germany, 1895.
56. Valentin, G. Über den verlauf und die letzten enden der nerven. Nova Acta Academiae Caesareae Leopoldino-
Carolinae Germanicae Naturae Curiosorum. Verhandlungen der Kaiserlich Leopoldinisch-Carolinischen Deutschen
Akademie der Naturforscher 1836, 18, 51–240.
57. Chvatal, A. Discovering the structure of nerve tissue: Part 2: Gabriel Valentin, Robert Remak, and Jan
Evangelista Purkyně. J. Hist. Neurosci. 2015, 24, 326–351.
58. Purkyně, J.E. Untersuchungen aus der nerven-und hirnanatomie. Isis 1838, 581–584.
59. Arnold, F. Handbuch der Anatomie des Menschen; Verlag Herder: Freiburg, Germany, 1844.
60. Rokitansky, C. Ueber die dendritischen vegetationen auf synovialhäuten. Zeitschrift der Kaiserlichen
Königlichen Gesellschaft der Aerzte zu Wien 1851, 7, 1–8.
61. Rokitansky, K. Über die entwickelung der krebsgerüste mit hinblick auf das wesen und die entwickelung
anderer maschenwerke. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mathematisch-
Naturwissenschaftliche Classe. Wien 1852, 8, 391–405.
62. Rokitansky, K. Über den zottenkrebs. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Neuroglia 2018, 1 280
Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Classe. Wien 1852, 8, 513–535.
63. Rokitansky, K. Über das auswachsen der bindegewebs-substanzen und die beziehung desselben zur
entzündung. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mathematisch-
Naturwissenschaftliche Classe. Wien 1854, 13, 122–140.
64. Rokitansky, K. Über bindegewebs-wucherung im nervensysteme. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie
der Wissenschaften. Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Classe. Wien 1857, 24, 517–536.
65. Wright, N.A.; Poulsom, R. Omnis cellula e cellula revisited: Cell biology as the foundation of pathology. J.
Pathol. 2012, 226, 145–147.
66. Virchow, R. Ueber das granulirte ansehen der wandungen der gehirnventrikel. Allgemeine Zeitschrift für
Psychiatrie und Psychisch-Gerichtliche Medicin 1846, 3, 242–250.
67. Rokitansky, C. Handbuch der Pathologischen Anatomie. II. Band; Braumüller & Seidel: Wien, Austria, 1844.
68. Virchow, R. Ueber das granulirte ansehen der wandungen der gehirnventrikel. In Gesammelte Abhandlungen
zur Wissenschaftlichen Medicin.; Virchow, R., Ed.; Meidinger Sohn & Comp.: Frankfurt, Germany, 1856; pp.
885–891.
69. Virchow, R. Die Cellularpathologie in Ihrer Begründung auf Physiologische und Pathologische Gewebelehre 20
Vorlesungen, Gehalten Während d. Monate Febr., März u. April 1858 im Patholog. Inst. Zu Berlin; August
Hirschwald: Berlin, Germany, 1858..
70. Virchow, R.L.K. Cellular pathology; John Churchill: London, UK, 1860; p. 511.
71. Bidder, F.H.; Kupffer, C. Untersuchungen über die Textur des Rückenmarks und die Entwicklung Seiner
Formelemente; Breikopf und Härtel: Leipzig, Germany, 1857; p. 151.
72. Kupffer, C. De Medullae Spinalis Textura in Ranis Ratione Imprimis Habita Indolis Substantiae Cinereae; Typis
Viduae, J.C. Schünmanni et C. Mattiesseni: Dorpati Livonorum, 1854.
73. Pappenheim, S. Die Specielle Gewebelehre des Auges mit Rücksicht auf Entwicklungsgeschichte und Augenpraxis;
Georg Philipp Aderholz: Breslau, Poland, 1842.
74. Müller, H. Zur histologie der netzhaut. Zeitschrift für Wissenschaftliche Zoologie 1851, 3, 234–237.
75. Schulze, M. Observationes de Retinae Structura Penitiori; Published Lecture at the Univeesity of Bonn: Bonn,
Germany, 1859.
76. Müller, H. Anatomisch-Physiologische Untersuchungen über die Retina des Menschen und der Wirbelthiere;
Wilhelm Engelmann: Leipzig, Germany, 1856.
77. Bergmann, C. Notiz über einige structurverhältnisse des cerebellum und rückenmarks. Zeitschrift für
Rationelle Medicin 1857, 8, 360–363.
78. Mauthner, L. Über die sogenannten bindegewehskörperchen des centralen nervensystems. Sitzungsberichte
der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Classe. Wien 1861, 43, 45–54.
79. Beale, L. New Observations upon the Structure and Formation of Certain Nervous Centres, Tending to Prove That
the Cells and Fibres of Every Nervous Apparatus form an Uninterrupted Circuit; John Churchill and Sons:
London, UK, 1864.
80. Frommann, C. Ueber die färbung der binde- und nervensubstanz des rückenmarkes durch argentum
nitricum und über die struktur der nervenzellen. Archiv für Pathologische Anatomie und Physiologie und für
Klinische Medicin 1864, 31, 129–153.
81. Frommann, C. Untersuchungen über die Normale und Pathologische Anatomie des Rückenmarks. Zweiter Theil;
Friedrich Frommann: Jena, Germany, 1867.
82. Deiters, O. Untersuchungen über Gehirn und Rückenmark des Menschen und der Säugethiere; Vieweg:
Braunschweig, Germany, 1865.
83. Besser, L. Zur histogenese der nervösen elementartheile in den centralorganen des neugebornen menschen.
Archiv für Pathologische Anatomie und Physiologie und für Klinische Medicin 1866, 36, 305–334.
84. Chvatal, A. Discovering the structure of nerve tissue: Part 3: From jan evangelista purkyne to ludwig
mauthner. J. Hist. Neurosci. 2017, 26, 15–49.
85. Kölliker, A. Handbuch der Gewebelehre des Menschen für ärtze und Studirende, 5th ed.; Engelmann: Leipzig,
Germany, 1867.
86. Meynert, T. Vom gehirne der säugethiere. In Handbuch der Lehre von den Geweben des Menschen und der Thiere.
Zweiter Band; Stricker, S., Ed.; Wilhelm Engelmann: Leipzig, Germany, 1872; pp. 694–809.
87. Meynert, T. The brain of mammals. In A Manual of Histology; Ed. by S. Stricker; William Wood & Company:
New York, NY, USA, 1872; pp. 650–766.
88. Meynert, T. Der bau der gross-hirnrinde und seine örtlichen verschiedenheiten, nebst einem pathologisch-

Neuroglia 2018, 1 281
anatomischen corollarium. I. Vierteljahrsschrift für psychiatrie in ihren beziehungen zur morphologie und
pathologie des central-nervensystems der physiologischen psychologie. Statistik und Gerichtlichen Medicin
1867, 1, 77–124.
89. Arndt, R. Studien über die architektonik der grosshirnrinde des menschen. III. Archiv für Mikroskopische
Anatomie 1869, 5, 317–331.
90. Stieda, L. Studien uer das centrale nervensystem der wirbelthiere. Zeitschrift für Wissenschaftliche Zoologie
1869, 20, 273–456.
91. Henle, J.; Merkel, F. Uber die sogenannte bindesubstanz der centralorgane des nervensystems. Z. Med.
1869, 34, 49–82.
92. Arndt, R. Studien über die architektonik der grosshirnrinde des menschen. Archiv für Mikroskopische
Anatomie 1867, 3, 441–476.
93. Arndt, R. Studien über die architektonik der grosshirnrinde des menschen. II. Archiv für Mikroskopische
Anatomie 1868, 4, 407–526.
94. Stieda, L. Studien über das Centrale Nervensystem der Wirbelthiere; Wilhelm Engelmann: Leipzig, Germany,
1870.
95. Golgi, C. Sulla sostanza connettiva del cervello. Gazzetta Medica Italiana, Lombardia 1870, 19, 145–146.
96. Golgi, C. Ueber die bindesubstanz im gehirne. Schmidt’s Jahrbücher der in-und Ausländischen Gesammten
Medicin 1871, 150, 3–4.
97. Golgi, C. Contribuzione alla fina anatomia degli organi centrali del sistema nervoso. I. Rivista Clinica di
Bologna 1871, 1, 338–350.
98. Golgi, C. Contribuzione alla fina anatomia degli organi centrali del sistema nervoso. II. Rivista Clinica di
Bologna 1871, 1, 371–380.
99. Golgi, C. Contribuzione alla fina anatomia degli organi centrali del sistema nervoso. III. Rivista Clinica di
Bologna 1872, 2, 38–46.
100. Jastrowitz, M. Studien über die encephalitis und myelitis des ersten kindesalters. Archiv für Psychiatrie und
Nervenkrankheiten 1871, 3, 162–213.
101. Golgi, C. Sulla struttura della sostanza grigia del cervello. Gazzetta Medica Italiana, Lombardia 1873, 6, 244–
246.
102. Jastrowitz, M. Encephalitis und myelitis des ersten kindersalters. Archiv für Psychiatrie und
Nervenkrankheiten 1870, 2, 389–414.
103. Butzke, V. Studien uber den feineren bau der grosshirnrinde. Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten
1872, 3, 575–600.
104. Ranvier, L.A. De la névroglie. Archives de Physiologie Normale et Pathologique 1883, 3S, 1, 177–185.
105. Ranvier, L.A. Sur les éléments conjonctifs de la moelle épinière. Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Séances
de l’Académie des Sciences 1873, 77, 1299–1302.
106. Rindfleisch, E. Lehrbuch der Pathologischen Gewebelehre zur Eeinführung in das Studium der Pathologischen
Anatomie; Wilhelm Engelmann: Leipzig, Germany, 1873.
107. Boll, F. Die histiologie und histiogenese der nervösen centralorgane. Archiv für Psychiatrie und
Nervenkrankheiten 1873, 4, 1–138.
108. Gierke, H. Beiträge zur kenntniss der elemente des centralen nervensystems. Breslauer Aerztliche Zeitschrift
1882, 4, 157–160, 172–177.
109. Gierke, H. Die stützsubstanz des centralnervensystems. I. Theil. Archiv für Mikroskopische Anatomie 1885,
25, 441–554.
110. Gierke, H. Die stützsubstanz des centralen nervensystems. Neurologisches Centralblatt 1883, 2, 361–369; 385–
392.
111. Gierke, H. Die stützsubstanz des centralnervensystems. II. Theil. Archiv für Mikroskopische Anatomie 1886,
26, 129–228.
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).