doi:10.

1093/brain/awm326 Brain (2008), 131, 583^590

OCC ASIONAL PAPER

Famous Russian brains: historical attempts to
understand intelligence
Alla A. Vein and Marion L. C. Maat-Schieman

Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands

Correspondence to: Alla A. Vein, MD, PhD, Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center,
Albinusdreef 2, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.
E-mail: a.a.vein@lumc.nl

Russian scientists are certainly among those who contributed actively to the search for the neuroanatomical
basis of exceptional mental capacity and talent. Research into brain anatomy was one of the topics of special
interest in various Russian universities. A number of independent reports on the study of famous Russian brains
appeared both in Russia and abroad. Collecting and mapping brains of elite Russians in a structured manner
began in Moscow in 1924 with the brain of V. I. Lenin. In 1928, the Moscow Brain Research Institute was founded,
the collection of which includes the brains of several prominent Russian neuroscientists, including V. M.
Bekhterev, G. I. Rossolimo, L. S.Vygotsky and I. P. Pavlov. The fact that the brain of two of the most outstanding
scholars of Russian neurology and psychiatry, A.Ya. Kozhevnikov (1836^1902) and S. S. Korsakov (1854^1900), have
been studied is largely unknown. A report of the results of this study was published by A. A. Kaputsin in 1925
providing a detailed neuroanatomical assessment of the brains. A considerable weight, a predominance of the
left hemisphere and a particularly complex convolution of the frontal and parietal lobes of both brains were
reported, the assumption being that these brain parameters can serve as an indicator of mental capacity. The
names Kozhevnikov and Korsakov are among those most cherished by Russian neuroscientists; they are also
familiar to Western colleagues. The (re)discovery of the records of the brain autopsies is meaningful, maybe
not so much from a neuroanatomical point of view as from a historical perspective.

Keywords: neuroanatomy; elite brains; intelligence; Russia

Abbreviations: GI = gyrification index.

Received August 3, 2007. Revised December 4, 2007. Accepted December 13, 2007. Advance Access publication January 8, 2008

Introduction
‘Periculosum est credere et non credere’
– it is dangerous to believe as well as to disbelieve.’
Blaise Pascal
The search for the biological roots of extraordinary capacity
has been going on for many centuries. From the 18th
through the late 20th century, there was particular interest
in the brain and its remarkable convolutions. Generations
of prominent scientists, from Flechsig and Retzius to
Vogt and Economo, were advocates of a structural–
morphological approach to brain research (Hagner, 2004).
Russian scientists are certainly among those who contrib-
uted actively to the search for the neuroanatomical basis
of exceptional mental capacity and talent. Conventionally,
it is thought that collecting and mapping the brains of
famous Russians began in Moscow in 1924, starting with
V. I. Lenin’s brain and the foundation in 1928 of the
Moscow Brain Research Institute (Spivak, 2001; Richter,
2007). In fact, it began much earlier in the universities.
Collections in medical faculties included (among those of
other celebrities) the brains of medical professors, many of
whom had bequeathed this organ for scientific purposes.
This was a tradition not unknown in other European
countries and in the 19th century it was quite a respectable
thing to do. Many eminent men in Europe willingly
acceded to this service to science by giving permission for
their brains to be removed, weighed and studied
(Gere, 2003; Taylor, 1996). The systemic investigation of
brains of geniuses started in Europe after 1830. The main

ß The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Guarantors of Brain. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
584 Brain (2008), 131, 583^590
parameters for brain examination were weight and patterns
of gyral convolutions, an approach introduced in 1836 by
the French psychiatrist, J. B. M. Parchappe (1800–67). He
emphasized ‘exact measurement’ as opposed to the vague
inspections of phrenologists (Hagner, 2003). In the 1850s,
Rudolf Wagner (1805–64) carried out a methodological
study of the brains of deceased Göttingen professors and
this became the actual starting point for the dissection of
the brains of numerous eminent scientists, writers, artists
and politicians (Bentivoglio, 1998; Hagner, 2003). In 1876,
French scientists founded the Mutual Autopsy Society of
Paris (Societé d’autopsie mutuelle) in order that their
donated bodies would be dissected by other members,
and that psychological and biological characteristics would
be correlated (Hecht, 2003; Dronkers et al., 2007). In 1901,
during the International Association of Academies in Paris,
the initiative was taken to establish a Brain Commission
after which Brain Institutes appeared in Europe (Madrid,
Leipzig, Vienna, Zurich, Frankfurt/Main, Budapest), in the
USA (Philadelphia) and also in St Petersburg (Richter,
2000; Hagner, 2004).
The fact that the brains of two of the most outstand-
ing scholars of Russian neurology and psychiatry,
A. Ya. Kozhevnikov (1836–1902) and S. S. Korsakov
(1854–1900), were studied is largely unknown. This paper
will deal with the history and the results of this work in
the context of a brief history of the study of elite brains
in Russia.
Interest in brain anatomy in Russia
In Russia there was always a vivid interest in anatomy; in
fact the very first state public museum was The
Kunstkamera in St Petersburg founded by Tsar Peter the
Great (1714), displaying some 2000 anatomical specimens
purchased in Holland (Gokhman and Kozintsev, 1980).
Research into brain anatomy was one of the topics of
special interest being performed in various Russian
universities including Moscow, St Petersburg, Kiev, Kazan
and Tomsk, etc. In 1783, the Anatomical Museum of
Moscow University was founded. D. N. Zernov (1843–
1917), a Moscow University professor, who made a huge
contribution to the Anatomical Museum by creating a vast
collection of brain preparations. He produced the best
classification of fissures and sulci of the brain for the time.
He also demonstrated the absence of differences in the
structure of the brains of representatives of different
nationalities and races and was a fervent opponent of
Cesare Lombroso (1836–1909) (Zernov, 1887; Sapin, 1986;
Etingen, 1997). One of the most prominent scientists in this
field was V. A. Betz (1834–94), professor at Kiev University.
He described a particular type of pyramidal neurons located
within the fifth layer of the primary motor cortex, which
were later named after him—Betz cells. Betz introduced a
new principle of cellular structure in relation to the laminar
division of the cerebral cortex and marked the beginning of
A. A. Vein and M. L. C. Maat-Schieman
Fig. 1 A. Ya. Kozhevnikov (1836^1902) in the audience of Moscow
Clinic for Nervous Diseases.Photo taken March 19, 1898çphoto
from Historical Museum of Moscow Medical Academy (with
permission).
research into the cytoarchitectonics of the cerebral cortex
(Sapin, 1986; Richter, 2007). Along with numerous centres,
Moscow and St Petersburg (psycho)neurological schools
maintained a leading position in anatomical research of
the brain. The Moscow neurological school was founded in
1869 by A. Ya. Kozhevnikov (Fig. 1). He enjoyed a broad
range of scientific interests, though his early work was
primarily in the fields of neuroanatomy and neuromor-
phology, concentrating on amyotrophic lateral sclerosis,
aphasia, myasthenia, familial spastic paralysis and cysticer-
cosis of the brain (Vein, 2007). Kozhevnikov gathered
a—for that time—unique collection of anatomical,
histological and comparative anatomical specimens of the
nervous system. These served as the basis for the
Neurological Museum that opened in 1892
(Grashchenkov, 1960; Archangel’skii, 1965). The psycho-
neurological school in St Petersburg was dominated by the
authority of V. M. Bekhterev (1857–1927). He authored
fundamental works on anatomy and physiology of the
brain. Bekhterev had formulated and popularized the idea
that man should be regarded as ‘a single whole,’ ‘a biosocial
entity’ whose understanding requires the study of human
consciousness and psychology. From his attempts to
combine research in neurology, psychiatry, neurophysiol-
ogy, neuroanatomy, neuropsychology, neurosurgery, etc.,
one might consider him to be the founder of the
multidisciplinary approach to brain exploration, to which
end a Psychoneurological Institute was founded in
St Petersburg in 1907 (Akimenko, 2007).
Russian elite brains
Bekhterev was interested in correlating the special features
of a brain and the brilliant qualities of its owner. An
example of this approach was the study of the brain of
the eminent Russian chemist, the creator of the
Famous Russian brains
Fig. 2 D. I.Mendeleev (1834 ^1907). Photo from Bechterew W. von,
Weinberg R.Das Gehirn des Chemikers D. J.Mendelejew.In: Roux W,
editor. Anatomische und entwicklungsgeschichtliche monographien.
Heft1.Leipzig:Verlag vonWilhelm Engelmann; 1909. p 22.
periodic table of elements, D. I. Mendeleev (1834–1907)
(Fig. 2), first reported at the scientific session of the
Psychoneurological Institute (May 1, 1908) and published
in 1909 (Bekhterev and Weinberg, 1908; Bechterew & and
Weinberg, 1909). The authors presented an exceedingly
detailed description of Mendeleev’s brain, weighing 1570 g
(Fig. 3), the main conclusion being that there was a strong
development of the left frontal and parietal lobes compared
to the rest of the brain. Interestingly, the authors compared
his brain with those of two famous Russian musicians
which were available to them—the composer A. P. Borodin
(1833–87), and the pianist, composer and conductor,
A. G. Rubinstein (1829–94). The anterior part of the left
gyrus temporalis superior of Mendeleev’s brain was far less
developed in comparison with this region in the brains of
these musicians. According to the authors, this was a sign
of his modest musical capacity (Bekhterev and Weinberg,
1908). The brains of Borodin and Rubinstein are still
preserved in the Anatomical Museum of the Military
Medical Academy in St Petersburg (Etingen, 1997).
There are several other independent reports on the study
of famous Russians brains both in Russia and abroad. On
dissecting the brain of the legendary general Skobelev
[M. D. Skobelev (1843–82) was a Russian general famous
for his conquest of Central Asia and his heroism during the
Brain (2008), 131, 583^590 585
Fig. 3 Brain of D. I.Mendeleev. Photo from Bechterew W. von and
Weinberg R.Das Gehirn des Chemikers D. J.Mendelejew.In: Roux W,
editor. Anatomische und entwicklungsgeschichtliche monographien.
Heft1.Leipzig:Verlag vonWilhelm Engelmann; 1909. p 22.
Russian–Turkish War of 1877–78], Zernov reported finding
no extraordinary features in the convolutions (Zernov,
1887). There were reports on the brain of the Russian
novelist, Ivan Turgenev (1818–83), the weight of which
reached an incredible 2021 g, and of the mathematician,
Sofia Kovalevskaya [Sofia Kovalevskaya (1850–91) was the
first major Russian female mathematician and a student of
Karl Weierstrass in Berlin. In 1884, she was appointed
professor at Stockholm University, the third woman in
Europe to become a professor], the first famous woman
whose brain was examined (Retzius, 1900; Bentivoglio, 1998).
One-half of the brain of a leading Russian satirical writer of
the 19th century, M. E. Saltykov-Schedrin (1826–89), the
brains of two eminent Russian scientists N. N. Zinin
(1812–80) and V. V. Pashutin (1845–1901); and the brains
of the poets, H. Tumanyan (1869–1923) and V. Bryusov
(1873–1924), were examined in 1915 and in 1924–25,
respectively, and the results reported (Smirnov, 1915a, b;
Etingen, 1997; Spivak, 2001). In the years immediately
following the Bolshevik Revolution, some very daring,
almost reckless, scientific projects were financed. Soviet
scientists promised a victory over sleep, old age and even
death. Various efforts were undertaken to ‘diagnose genius’.
During his lifetime, V. I. Lenin (1870–1924) had been
considered a genius. The undertaking to perform a detailed
examination of his brain was launched immediately after his
death. The work was started in 1925 by the famous German
neuroanatomists, Oskar and Cécile Vogt, who analysed the
brain’s cytoarchitecture, based on the discovery made by the
Russian neuroanatomist, Betz (Richter, 2007). All Russian
participants in this project were representatives of the
Kozhevnikov neurological school and associates of Moscow
University Neurological Institute.
In 1925, the director of the Moscow University
Neurological Institute, Professor G. I. Rossolimo
(1860–1928), was honoured for his 40 years of work.
586 Brain (2008), 131, 583^590 A. A. Vein and M. L. C. Maat-Schieman

Afterwards, a massive volume of collected works of the

participants of this meeting was published with papers
in Russian, French or German, containing sections on various
topics, including social psychoneurology; morphology; phy-
siology; psychology; pathology; clinical neurology, etc.
Among the published papers, there were two reports on
the study of the brains of six prominent professors of
Moscow University, which were kept in the collection of
the Neurological Institute (Kapustin, 1925; Gindze, 1925a,
b). With the permission of Rossolimo, A. A. Kapustin
reported on the study of the brains of the founders of
Russian neurology and psychiatry, Kozhevnikov and
Korsakov. In 1926, the same report was published in
the journal Clinical Archive of Genius and Talent (of
Europathology) (Kapustin, 1926; Sirotkina, 2002).
Fig. 4 Brain of A. Ya. Kozhevnikov. Photo from Clin Arch Genius
Talent (of Europathol) 1926; 2: 107^14.
Description of the brains of Kozhevnikov
and Korsakov
Alexey Yakovlevich Kozhevnikov
Kozhevnikov is mainly known for his description in 1894 of
Epilepsia partialis continua, or so-called ‘Kozhevnikov
syndrome’ (Kozhevnikov, 1894). He was the head of the
first Russian independent Department for Neurological and
Mental diseases (1869) and later (1890) the very first
specialized Clinic for Nervous Diseases in Russia and
Europe. Kozhevnikov was the author of the first textbook of
neurology in Russia in 1883. The creation of the Moscow
Neurology School may be considered Kozhevnikov’s greatest
achievement. An elite core of Russian neurologists and
psychiatrists gathered around him, including S. S. Korsakov,
V. K. Rot, G. I. Pribytkov, V. A. Muratov, G. I. Rossolimo,
L. S. Minor, L. O. Darkshevich and many others. During the
last 3 years of his life, Kozhevnikov suffered from prostate
cancer. He died on January 10, 1902 (Lisitsin, 1961). Fig. 5 S. S. Korsakov (1854 ^1900). Photo from Historical Museum
of Moscow Medical Academy (with permission).
Brain of Kozhevnikov
[This is a short literal translation from Russian by one of
the authors (A.A.V.)] the right hemisphere to the occipital pole equalled 29 cm, and
On dissection, Kozhevnikov’s brain (Fig. 4) weighed the distance from the frontal pole to the sulcus Rolandicus
1520 g. All measurements revealed a noticeable dominance was 16.5 cm. Accordingly, the length of the frontal lobe
of the left hemisphere over the right one. There were a huge represented 56.8% of the right hemisphere. For the left
number of ‘sulci’ of the third category in the regions of the hemisphere these measurements amounted to 30 and
frontal lobes and part of the parietal lobes. In addition to 17.5 cm, respectively, thus the length of the left frontal lobe
the basic sulci, including the sulcus frontalis medius was 58.3%, superior to that of the right one, i.e. the left frontal
(Eberstaller), sulcus frontalis obliquus (Marchand), sulcus lobe exceeded the right one in length by 1.5%.
frontomarginalis (Wernicke) and sulcus supraorbitalis
(Broca), the left frontal lobe showed more than 20 small Sergey Sergeievich Korsakov
sulci creating a very complicated convoluted aspect. Many Korsakov (Fig. 5) was one of Kozhevnikov’s most out-
small sulci (up to 30) were located in the region of the right standing pupils. He was 33 years old when Kozhevnikov
frontal lobe. Similarly, in the region of the parietal lobes a appointed him director of the psychiatric division of his
large number of small sulci could be distinguished. The department, thus making him the first professor of
angulus Rolandicus of the right hemisphere was equal to Psychiatry in Russia. Korsakov was the author of numerous
70 and that of the left hemisphere 75 . When measured works in psychiatry, neuropathology, forensic medicine and
along the fissura pallii, the distance from the frontal pole of a textbook on psychiatry. He studied the effects of
Famous Russian brains
Fig. 6 Brain of S. S. Korsakov. Photo from Clin Arch Genius Talent
(of Europathol) 1926; 2: 107^14.
alcoholism on the nervous system and described alcoholic
polyneuritis with distinctive mental symptoms (‘cerebro-
pathia psychica tokaemica’), later called ‘Korsakov’s syn-
drome’. He was the first to produce a clear description of
paranoia. Korsakov was among the leaders of more humane
patient management by applying no-restraint principles.
Until his premature death, he was the head of the Moscow
University Clinic of Psychiatry, and is considered to be the
founder of the Moscow psychiatric school (Ovsyannikov
and Ovsyannikov, 2007).
After two heart attacks at the age of 44, Korsakov
consulted a specialist in Vienna in 1898. Hypertrophy of
heart associated with obesity and myocarditis was estab-
lished. Korsakov died from heart failure at the age of 46
(Banshchikov, 1967).
Brain of Korsakov
On dissection, Korsakov’s brain (Fig. 6) weighed 1603 g. At a
second measurement on January 26, 1924, the weight was
1355 g. The angulus Rolandicus of the right hemisphere
equalled 80 and that of the left 85 . On all measurements, a
noticeable superiority of the left hemisphere was observed. In
the region of the left frontal lobe, 25 small sulci were
discernible in addition to the four main gyri. The fissura
centralis anterior of the right frontal lobe was interrupted by
more than 30 small fissures. The surface of the parietal lobes
showed a similar complexity and the same peculiarities of the
configuration of the sulci and gyri. The distance from the
frontal pole to the occipital pole along the fissura pallii was
27 cm and the distance from the frontal pole to the sulcus
Rolandicus along the same line equalled 15 cm. Accordingly,
the length of the frontal lobe represented 55.5% of that of the
right hemisphere. For the left hemisphere, the same distances
were 28 and 16 cm, respectively. Thus, the length of the left
frontal lobe amounted to 57.1% of that of the left hemisphere.
The length of the left frontal lobe exceeded that of the right
one by 1.6%.
Brain (2008), 131, 583^590 587
The author concluded that both brains had common
features, including considerable weight, predominance of
the left hemisphere, and complicated convolutions of the
frontal and parietal lobes. There was speculation on the
correlation between intellectual capacities and size and
structure of the brain.
Pantheon of brains
In 1927, Bekhterev came up with a plan to organize ‘The
Pantheon of Brains’ in Leningrad in order to collect elite
brains (Vol’fson, 1928; Richter, 2007). It was a severe irony of
fate that precisely when the question about creating the
Pantheon had been positively solved, the very initiator of this
creation, Bekhterev, suddenly passed away. The circum-
stances are still questionable. On December 17, 1927, the
First All-Union Congress of Neuropathologists and
Psychiatrists was held in Moscow. Bekhterev, along with L.
S. Minor and G. I. Rossolimo, was elected as honourable
chairmen of the congress. On December 23rd, the last day of
the congress, Bekhterev gave a presentation during the
afternoon session. In the evening, symptoms of a gastro-
intestinal disorder started and 24 hs later, Bekhterev died of
(as officially stated) acute heart failure. Without any further
post-mortem pathoanatomical investigation, his brain was
removed, in accordance with his will, and his body was
cremated the next day (Lerner et al., 2005). However, the
idea did not fade away. In 1928, the neuroanatomical
laboratory of Vogt and his Russian colleagues were
reorganized into the Moscow Brain Research Institute
(Fig. 7), where the structured collecting and mapping of
the brains of famous Russians started. Bekhterev did not see
his plan come to fruition, but his own brain enriched the
collection of the Moscow Institute (the weight of his brain
was 1720 g) (Spivak, 2001). The collection acquired the
brains of Soviet politicians, famous writers, poets, musicians,
etc. It is not surprising that these included the brains
of prominent Russian neuroscientists, such as neurologist,
G. I. Rossolimo (1860–1928)—1543 g; physiologist,
I. P. Pavlov (1849–1936)—1517 g; neurologist, M. B. Kroll
(1879–1939)—1520 g; psychiatrist, P. B. Gannushkin
(1875–1933)—1495 g; psychologist, L. S. Vygotsky
(1896–1934) (Bogolepova, 1993). During the Soviet period,
the work of the Moscow Brain Research Institute continued
behind closed doors. The collection was still expanding
as recently as 1989, when it acquired the brain of
A. D. Sakharov [A. D. Sakharov (1921–89) was an eminent
Soviet nuclear physicist, dissident and human rights activist.
He was an advocate of civil liberties and reforms in the
Soviet Union. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in
1975]—1440 g (Spivak, 2001).
Discussion
Since the 19th century, scientists have attempted to
establish why particular brains are especially productive.
588 Brain (2008), 131, 583^590
Fig. 7 Museum of the Moscow Brain Research Institute (photo A. A. Vein, 2007).
The results were unsatisfactory, none of the studies
revealing a strong relationship between brain size or
structure and function (Bentivoglio, 1998). Rather than
being abandoned, however, this approach achieved high
popularity in Russia, as well as in Europe and the USA.
The names of Kozhevnikov and Korsakov are among
those most cherished by Russian neuroscientists.
Kozhevnikov was the founder of the main journal of
neurology and psychiatry in Russia—Zhurnal Nevropatologii
i Psikhiatrii (1900). He named the new journal after his
former student Korsakov, who died at a young age that
same year. These two scholars are considered to be the
‘fathers of Russian neurology and psychiatry’. The (re)dis-
covery of the records of the autopsies of their brains is,
therefore, meaningful, perhaps not so much from a
neuroanatomical point of view as from a historical
perspective.
Although there are no records to this effect, it is quite
plausible that it was the wish of Kozhevnikov and Korsakov
to donate their brains to scientific study. When the detailed
description of the gross anatomy of the brain of these
outstanding scientists was published, similar works
appeared in Russia, which had the same descriptive
approach. This method was broadly used in Russia,
Europe and the USA (Bekhterev and Weinberg, 1908,
Smirnov 1915a, b; Gindze, 1925a, b; Hagner, 2004).
Kapustin, along with other Russian neurologists, was
presumably using two sources: Zernov’s (1877) classifica-
tion of brain anatomy and ‘The anatomy of the central
nervous organs in health and in disease’ by H. Obersteiner,
translated into Russian in 1888 and widely consulted
(Obersteiner, 1888). In Russia, Basle Nomina Anatomica
remained standard terminology until 1955 (Sapin, 1986).
Most cerebral structures are easily recognizable, though
there are few terms, e.g. ‘angulus Rolandicus’, which are
difficult to trace nowadays. In the case of the brains of
Kozhevnikov and Korsakov, their considerable weight,
predominance of the left hemisphere and particularly
complex convolutions of the frontal and parietal lobes
were reported. The conclusion that these features were
unusual was based on comparisons with other studies of
A. A. Vein and M. L. C. Maat-Schieman
weight and gross anatomy of the brain published in Russia
and abroad. The author of the paper praised the
achievements and the intellectual abilities of both scholars
and subsequently made the assumption that the size and
complexity of their brain anatomy could serve as an
indicator of their mental capacity. These data were to a
certain extent compatible with other reports on the brains
of prominent scientists. The celebrated Swedish anatomist,
G. M. Retzius (1842–1919), described unusual ‘secondary’
gyri in the frontal cortex and exceptional growth near
the posterior part of the Sylvian fissure of the brains
of outstanding scientists, including Kovalevskaya (Retzius,
1900; Finger, 1994). The American anatomist, E. A. Spitzka
(1876–1922), who published the description of the brains of
137 famous individuals, showed that eminent people from
‘the exact sciences’ had the heaviest brains (Spitzka, 1905).
The complex convolution of the frontal and parietal lobes
of the left hemisphere was also described in scientists such
as Kant (1694–1778), Gauss (1777–1855), Helmholtz
(1821–94), Mendeleev (1834–1907), Haeckel (1834–1919),
Lombroso (1835–1909), Gyldén (1841–96), Giacomini
(1841–98) and von Monakow (1853–1930) (Bekhterev and
Weinberg, 1909; Gindze, 1925a, b; Finger, 1994; Hagner,
2004). The data, however, lacked uniformity. As long ago as
1887, Zernov gave a visionary warning to avoid prejudice
when examining the brains of the famous, an opinion close
to the conclusions reached by Rudolf Wagner in his
pioneering work (Zernov 1887, Finger, 1994). In 1925,
another professor at Moscow University, Gindze, pointed
out that both in Russia and abroad, descriptions and
categorizations of the brains of gifted individuals were
highly inconsistent (Gindze, 1925a). Nevertheless, the
interest in this problem was not abandoned completely.
Thus, there was a great deal of scientific and public interest
in the anatomical structure of Albert Einstein’s brain. The
posterior parts of the parietal lobes of Einstein’s brain were
extensively developed, but none of the other neuroanato-
mical features of his brain proved to be exceptional
(Diamond et al., 1985; Witelson et al., 1999; Hagner,
2004). At the end of the 20th century, there was still
considerable interest in the macroanatomical investigation
Famous Russian brains
of the brain. Zilles et al. (1988) analysed the degree of
cortical folding, using a gyrification index (GI), which
happened to be greatest in the prefrontal and the parieto-
temporo-occipital association cortex in human. The inter-
action between association cortices within parietal and
frontal brain regions was suggested to be essential in
understanding the biology of intelligence (Jung and Haier,
2007). The work of the Moscow Brain Research Institute
continued, although hardly any results of the research on
elite brains were revealed. It was not until the 1990s that a
series of publications from the Institute appeared describing
the brains of gifted individuals (In most of the Russian
papers of the 90s the gifted individuals are coded, without
identifying the names). Although no difference was
demonstrated in brain weight, the cytoarchitectonics of
some cortical fields was reported to be more complicated in
the group of gifted individuals (Bogolepova, 1993, 1996;
Bogolepova and Bogolepov, 1997; Bogolepova and
Malofeeva, 2004). Moreover, recent publications on brain
size and cognitive abilities have appeared revealing some
positive correlations (van Valen, 1974; Gibson, 2002).
A post-mortem study of the brains of 100 non-neurological
cancer patients showed positive correlations between verbal
intelligence and cerebral volume in right-handed men and
women as well as in non-right-handed women (Witelson
et al., 2006). Tisserand et al. (2001) report smaller head size
to be associated with lower intelligence, lower general
cognitive functioning and slower speed of information
processing though no relation was found between head size
and memory function. A recent meta-analysis of 37
neuroimaging studies demonstrates a consistent relationship
between brain volume and intelligence (McDaniel, 2005).
Nevertheless, there is still no competent explanation for
how the brain provides for exceptional mental capacities.
This, therefore, remains a subject of interest, not only from
a historical perspective.
Postscript
The author of this paper (A.A.V.) has recently (2007)
undertaken an attempt to trace the dissected brains of
Kozhevnikov and Korsakov. Requests and personal visits
were made to different departments of Moscow Medical
Academy (previously Moscow University Medical Faculty):
Historical Museum, Department of Anatomy and
Anatomical Museum, Clinic for Nervous diseases, Clinic
for Mental (Psychiatric) diseases as well as to the Institute
of Brain Research and its museum. Sadly, no traces of these
preparations could be found; in all probability, they are lost
forever.
Acknowledgements
The authors are extremely grateful to Prof J. Voogd for his
critical advice and help in the preparation of this
manuscript.
Brain (2008), 131, 583^590 589
References
Akimenko MA. Vladimir Michailovich Bekhterev. J Hist Neurosci 2007;
16: 100–10.
Archangel’skii GV. Istoriya nevrologii ot istokov do XX veka.[History of
neurology from the beginning to the XX century]. Moskva: Medizina;
1965.
Banshchikov VM. S. S. Korsakov. 1854–1900. (Giznj i tvorchestvo).
[S. S. Korsakov 1854–1900. (Life and work).] Moskva: Medizina; 1967.
Bechterew W.von, Weinberg R, Das Gehirn des Chemikers D.J.
Mendelejew. In: Roux W, editor. Anatomische und entwicklungs-
geschichtliche monographien. Heft 1 Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm
Engelmann; 1909. p. 22.
Bentivoglio M. Cortical structure and mental skills: Oskar Vogt and the
legacy of Lenin’s brain. Brain Res Bull 1998; 47: 291–6.
Bekhterev VM, Weinberg RL Iz. Psicho-Nevrologicheskogo Instituta.
[From the Psychoneurological Institute]. Obozrenie Psikhiatrii,
Nevrologii i Experimentalnoi Psikhologii [Rev Psychiatry Neurol Exp
Psychol] 1908;10: 637–9.
Bogolepova IN. Knowledge about human brain mass. Zh Nevropatol
Psikhiatr Im S S Korsakova 1993; 93: 106–8.
Bogolepova IN. Features of the architectonics of motor speech fields of the
brain of gifted people in relation to the study of the individual
variability of the structure of the human brain. Neurosci Behav Physiol
1996; 26: 189–93.
Bogolepova IN, Bogolepov NN. The brain of V. V. Maiakovski.
Zh Nevropatol Psikhiatr Im S S Korsakova 1997; 97: 47–50.
Bogolepova IN, Malofeeva LI. Variability in the structure of field 39 of the
lower parietal area of the cortex in the left and right hemispheres of
adult human brains. Neurosci Behav Physiol 2004; 34: 363–7.
Diamond MC, Scheibel AB, Murphy GM Jr, Harvey T. On the brain of a
scientist: Albert Einstein. Exp Neurol 1985; 88: 198–204.
Dronkers NF, Plaisant O, Iba-Zizen MT, Cabanis EA. Paul Broca’s historic
cases: high resolution MR imaging of the brains of Leborgne and
Lelong. Brain 2007; 130 (Pt 5): 1432–41.
Etingen LE. Vischaya forma prirody. [The highest form of nature].
Chelovek 1997; 4.
Finger S. Origins of neuroscience: a history of explorations into
brain function. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1994.
p. 462.
Gere C. A brief history of brain archiving. J Hist Neurosci 2003; 12:
396–410.
Gibson KR. Evolution of human intelligence: the roles of brain size and
mental construction. Brain Behav Evol 2002; 59: 10–20.
Gindze BK. K voprosu o somaticheskom issledovanii liz vidauchichsay
psichicheskich sposobnostei. [On the question of somatic diagnostic of
the persons with the outstanding intellectual qualities.] Clin Arch
Genius Talent (of Europathol) 1925a;.1: 107–14.
Gindze BK. K voprosu ob izuchenii arterij golovnogo mozga vidauchichsay
ludei. [On the research of the brain arteries of the outstanding
people.] Collected works in honour of celebration of the 40th
anniversary of Professor G.I.Rossolimo’s clinical work. Moscow:
Gosizdat; 1925b.
Gokhman II, Kozintsev AG.Sistematicheskoe opisanie kollektsii otdela
antropologii MAE. [A systematic description of the collections of the
Department of Anthropology of MAE.] // Issledovaniya po paleoan-
tropologii i kraniologii SSSR. Leningrad: Nauka; 1980.
Grashchenkov NI. Relationships between British and Russian medicine and
neurology, and the role of the National Hospital, Queen Square, London
in the development of Russian neuropathology. J Neurol Neurosurg
Psychiatry 1960; 23: 185–90.
Hagner M. Geniale gehirne. Zur Geschichte der elitehirnforschung.
(The brains of geniuses. On the history of elite brain research).
Göttingen, Wallstein Verlag 2004; pp. 375.
Hagner M. Skulls, rains, and memorial cilture: on cerebral biographies of
scientists in the nineteenth century. Sci Context 2003; 16: 195–218.
Hecht JM. The end of the soul: scientific modernity, atheism, and
anthropology in France. New York: Columbia University Press; 2003.
590 Brain (2008), 131, 583^590
Jung RE and Haier RJ. The parieto-frontal integration theory (P-FIT) of
intelligence: converging neuroimaging evidence. Behav Brain Sci 2007;
30: 135–154.
Kapustin AA. O mozge uchenich v svayzi s problemoi vzaimootnosheniay
mezgu velichinoi mozga i odarennostju. [On the brain of the scientists
in respect to the correlation of the brain size and talent] Collected works
in honour of celebration of the 40th anniversary of Professor G. I.
Rossolimo’s clinical work. Moscow; Gosizdat; 1925.
Kapustin AA. O mozge uchenich v svayzi s problemoi vzaimootnosheniay
mezgu velichinoi mozga i odarennostju. [On the brain of the scientists
in respect to the correlation of the brain size and talent]. Clin Arch
Genius Talent (of Europathol) 1926; 2: 107–14.
Kozhevnikov AYa Osobyj vid kortikaljnoj epilepsii. [Special form of
cortical epilepsy] Medizinskoe obozrenie 1894; 14 19–21.
Lerner V, Margolin J, Witztum E. Vladimir Bekhterev: his life, his work
and the mystery of his death. Hist Psychiatry 2005; 16: 217–27.
Lisitsin YuP. Kozhevnikov AYa i moskovskaya shkola nevro
patologov.[Kozhevnikov AYa and Moscow neurological school.]
Moskva: Medgiz; 1961.
McDaniel M. A. Big-brained people are smarter: meta-analysis of the
relationship between in vivo brain volume and intelligence. Intelligence
2005; 33: 337–46.
Obersteiner H. Rukovodstvo k izucheniu stroeniay zentraljnoj nervnoj
sistemy. [The anatomy of the central nervous organs in health and in
disease.] Moskva: M.University; 1888. p. 363.
Ovsyannikov SA, Ovsyannikov AS. Sergey S. Korsakov and the beginning
of Russian psychiatry. J Hist Neurosci 2007; 16: 58–65.
Retzius G. Das gehirn des mathematikers Sonja Kowalewski. Biologische
Untersuchungen neue Folge 1900; 9: 1–16.
Richter J. The Brain Commission of the International Association of
Academies: the first international society of neurosciences. Brain Res
Bull 2000; 52: 445–57.
Richter J. Pantheon of brains: the Moscow Brain Research Institute
1925–1936. J Hist Neurosci 2007; 16: 138–49.
Sapin MR. Human anatomy. Moscow: Medizina; 1986.
Sirotkina I. Diagnosing literary enius: a cultural history of psychiatry in
Russia, 1880–1930. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press;
2002.
Smirnov BL. Opisanie mozgov V.V.Pashutina i M.E. Saltykova-
Schedrina. [Description of the brains of V. V. Pashutin and
A. A. Vein and M. L. C. Maat-Schieman
M. E. Saltykov-Schedrin] Bulletin de l’Ácademie Imperiale des
Sciences 1915a;31: 14–54.
Smirnov BL. Opisanie mozga professora N. N. Zinina [Description of the
brain of Professor N. N. Zinin) Bulletin de l’Ácademie Imperiale des
Sciences, Peterburg 1915b;76: 951–76.
Spitzka EA. Report of a study of the brains of six eminent scientists and
scholars belonging to the American Anthropometric Society; together with
a brief desription of the skull of one of them. Am J Anat 1905; 4: III–IV.
Spivak M. Posmertnaia diagnostika genial’nosti: Eduard Bagritskii, Andrei
Belyi, Vladimir Maiakovskii v kollektsii Instituta mozga. Materialy iz
arkhiva G. I. Poliakova [The posthumous diagnosis of genius: Eduard
Bagritskii, Andrei Belyi, Vladimir Maiakovskii in the collection of the
Institute of the Brain. Materials from the Archive of G. I. Poliakov].
Moscow: Agraf; 2001.
Taylor IT. In the minds of men. Toronto: TFE Pub; 1996.
Tisserand DJ, Bosma H, Van Boxtel MPJ, Jolles J. Head size and cognitive
ability in nondemented older adults are related. Neurology 2001; 56:
969–71.
Van Valen L. Brain size and intelligence in man. Am J Phys Anthropol
1974; 40: 417–23.
Vein AA. The Moscow clinic for nervous diseases. Walking along the
portraits. J Hist Neurosci 2007; 16: 42–57.
Vol’fson BIa. ‘Pantheon mozga’ Bekhtereva i ‘Institut genial’nogo
tvorchestva Segalina’. [Bekhterev’s Pantheon of Brain and Segalin’s
Institute of Genius] Clin Arch Genius and Talent (of Europathol). 1928;
1:52–60.
Witelson SF, Beresh H, Kigar DL. Intelligence and brain size in 100
postmortem brains: sex, lateralization and age factors. Brain 2006; 129
(Pt 2): 386–98.
Witelson Sf, Kigar DL, Harvey TH. The exceptional brain of Albert
Einstein. Lancet 1999; 353: 2149–53.
Zernov DN. Individualjnje tipy mozgovych izvilin u cheloveka [Individual
type of cerebral gyri in man]. Moskva: M. University; 1877. p. 80.
Zernov DN. K voprosu ob anatomicheskich osobennostaych mozga
intelligentnych ludei. [On the problem of anatomical peculiarities of
the brain of the intelligent men] Works of the 2nd Russian Congress of
the Physicians. Moskva: M.University; 1887.
Zilles K, Armstrong E, Schleicher A, Kretschmann HJ. The human pattern
of gyrification in the cerebral cortex. Anat Embryol (Berl) 1988; 179:
173–9.