Cited by 224Neurology and Historical StudiesHistory of Medical PracticeHistory of Science and Medicine

Penfield's homunculus: a note on cerebral cartography

Open access
Schott, G D·1993·Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Schott’s historical essay examines how Penfield’s homunculus illustrations, beginning in 1937, became highly influential but remained scientifically ambiguous and mixed observation with artistic convention. It traces their evolution and argues they gave an unjustified impression of single, established cortical maps.

Key findings

  • The first homunculus, published by Penfield and Boldrey in 1937 and drawn by Mrs H P Cantlie, combined motor and sensory features symmetrically; its sizing rationale was unclear, especially the undefined terms “perpendicular” and “vertical,” and the drawing did not distinguish unilateral from bilateral effects.
  • The 1950 Penfield and Rasmussen version separated motor and sensory representations, placed the figure along the cortical surface, and came closer to a map tied to surgically identified brain areas; by 1954, Penfield and Jasper presented multiple homunculi for Rolandic, secondary sensory, and supplementary motor regions while explicitly calling them memory aids or cartoons rather than topographically accurate.
  • Later homunculi in the thalamus and elsewhere, including those associated with Hassler et al. and Creutzfeldt, are described as increasingly artistic devices with doubtful scientific value; animal figurines such as the simiusculus followed the human precedent.
  • Schott argues the homunculus misleadingly suggests a single, settled cortical representation, whereas evidence from animal work indicates multiple somatosensory areas, plasticity, and possible differences between maps of evoked potentials and maps of perceived sensations.

Methods

  • Historical and critical commentary rather than an empirical study; no new experiments or primary data are reported.
  • The analysis draws on published works and illustrations by Penfield and collaborators from 1937, 1950, and 1954, along with related historical and experimental literature.
  • The main approach is interpretive: comparing visual conventions, terminology, cartographic problems, and the scientific claims attached to the homunculus.

Limitations

  • The paper states no formal limitations.
  • Evident from the text: as an editorial-style essay, it offers no systematic review, no new data, and relies on selected historical sources and reproductions.
  • Evident from the text: its central critique is interpretive, and the author acknowledges ongoing ambiguity about what the homunculus was intended to represent.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jnnp.56.4.329

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 17 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingnone given

    The first homunculus was not drawn in relation to the hemispheres at all.

    “This compares with the first homunculus, which was not drawn in relation to the hemispheres at all.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Interpretationreasoning

    There are formidable cartographic difficulties in using a device such as a homunculus as a type of map.

    “there are formidable cartographic diffi- culties in using a device such as an homunculus as a type of map.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Premisecitation

    Patients with damage affecting somatosensory systems show evidence of marked somatotopic reorganisation at thalamic level.

    “patients with damage affecting somatosensory systems show evidence of marked somatotopic reorganisation at thalamic level.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [12]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Premisecitation

    Penfield's data were obtained using comparatively large-diameter stimulating electrodes in patients with brain disease.

    “Penfield's data obtained using comparatively large-diameter stimulating electrodes in patients with brain disease”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1] Hassler R, Mundinger F, Riechert T. Stereotaxis in Parkinson syndrome. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1979: (front cover). source
  • Premisecitation

    Penfield and Jasper were the first to place a homunculus in the thalamus.

    “Penfield and Jasper3 were the first to place a homunculus in this subcortical region”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [3] Penfield W, Rasmussen T. The cerebral corltex of man. New York: Macmillan, 1950:44, 56, 214-15.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 20
  • May combine two claims. 18
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The 1950 homunculus was draped along the cortical surface and interhemispheric fissure, with motor and sensory representations separated, slightly modified and corrected.

    “draped along the cortical surface and interhemispheric fissure.In this homunculus, however, the motor and sensory representations have been separat- ed, slightly modified and corrected”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    In the first homunculus, responses were transposed to the same side of the brain, and it is not possible to distinguish unilateral from bilateral effects of cortical stimulation.

    “responses have been transposed to the same side of the brain for the purposes of representation, and it is not possible from the illustra- tion to distinguish unilateral from bilateral effects of cor- tical stimulation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The first homunculus (1937) was symmetrical in shape and illustrated both motor and sensory features together.

    “It was symmetrical in shape and illustrated both motor and sensory features together”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    Penfield's homunculus is shown with an outline which encompasses the area of cortical representation.

    “Penfield's homunculus is shown with an outline which encompasses the area of cortical representation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The first homunculus appears to relate to length rather than width, but the parts illustrated are enlarged in both dimensions.

    “Whilst the homunculus appears to relate to length rather than width, the parts illustrated are in fact enlarged in both dimensions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    All animal representations are more figurative than accurate, contrasting with the extremely accurate mapping of localised evoked potentials illustrated diagrammatically rather than by means of figurines.

    “All these animal representations are more figurative than accurate, contrasting with the extremely accurate mapping of localised evoked potentials illustrat- ed diagrammatically rather than by means of figurines.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The homunculus has taken over from its authors, and illustration has outstripped the scientific evidence available.

    “It suggests that the homunculus has taken over from its authors, and illustration has out- stripped the scientific evidence available.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    At cortical level, plasticity of maps of outputs of the human motor system has been demonstrated after amputation, paraplegia and hemispherectomy, and changes in sensorimotor representation have been demonstrated in blind braille readers.

    “At cortical level, plasticity of maps of outputs of the human motor system has been demonstrated after amputation, paraplegia and hemispherectomy, and changes in sensorimotor represen- tation have been demonstrated in blind braille readers”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Pascual-Leone et at

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Penfield and Jasper (1954) illustrated three sets of homunculi: motor and sensory in relation to the Rolandic fissure, a purely sensory homunculus in the secondary sensory area near the Sylvian fissure, and a virtually only motor homunculus in the supplementary motor cortex.

    “Penfield and Jasper now illustrated three sets of homun- culi (fig 3), the first set (motor and sensory) in relation to the Rolandic fissure, a second apparently purely sensory homunculus in the secondary sensory area near the Sylvian fissure, and a third homunculus (virtually only motor) in the supplementary motor cortex.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [3] Penfield W, Rasmussen T. The cerebral corltex of man. New York: Macmillan, 1950:44, 56, 214-15.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Penfield and Boldrey confirmed the precise topography of cortical localisation and related stimulation of a discrete part of the brain with motor and sensory phenomena affecting a particular part of the body.

    “They confirmed the precise topography of cortical localisation, and were able to relate stimulation of a discrete part of the brain with motor and sensory phenomena affecting a particular part of the body.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1] Hassler R, Mundinger F, Riechert T. Stereotaxis in Parkinson syndrome. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1979: (front cover). source
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Penfield was aware of individual variation and that the effects of cortical stimulation could change after surgery.

    “Penfield was aware not only of this individual variation but also that the effects of cortical stimulation could change after surgery.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1] Hassler R, Mundinger F, Riechert T. Stereotaxis in Parkinson syndrome. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1979: (front cover). source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Penfield and Rasmussen (1950) made another attempt to illustrate cortical representation.

    “Thirteen years later, in their monograph entitled The cerebral cortex of man, Penfield and Rasmussen made another attempt to illustrate cortical representation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [2] Creutzfeldt OD. Cortex cerebri. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1983: 216.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    These cartographic difficulties include two-dimensional representation of diverse, three-dimensional information both in the periphery and in the brain, the representation of multiple and sometimes overlapping images, and simultaneous representation of bilateral and unilateral data.

    “These difficulties include two-dimensional repre- sentation of diverse, three-dimensional information both in the periphery and in the brain, the representation of multiple and sometimes overlapping images, and simulta- neous representation of bilateral and unilateral data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    It is this unresolvable difficulty which makes the homunculus an unsatisfactory and perhaps even misleading image.

    “it is this unresolvable difficulty which makes the homunculus an unsatisfactory and per- haps even misleading image.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Scientific illustrations of brain function should be accurate and unambiguous to be scientifically valuable.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Inappropriate representation could actually impede scientific advance.

    “inappropriate representation could actually impede scientific advance.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Penfield's homunculus is ambiguous in what exactly it represents and gives an unjustified impression of cortical representation that is both single and established.

    “Thus Penfield's homunculus is not only ambiguous in what exactly it does represent, but also gives an unjustified impression of cortical representation which is both single and established.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The homunculus appears now to have degenerated into a purely artistic device vaguely based on animal experimental work, without any scientific basis to justify the human form portrayed.

    “The homunculus appears now to have degenerated into a purely artistic device vaguely based on animal experimental work, without any scientific basis to justify the human form portrayed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    For the sensory homunculus, Merzenich et al provide evidence for multiple maps representing different functions, and there is evidence in non-human primates that there are as many as seven or more somatosensory areas.

    “For the sensory homunculus, Merzenich et aO provide evidence for multi- ple maps representing different functions, and there is evidence in non-human primates that there are as many as seven or more somatosensory areas”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Merzenich et aO

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [10] Welker C. Receptive fields of barrels in the somatosensory neocortex of the rat. 7 Comtparative Neuirol 1976;166: 173-190. source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The essence of all such drawings is that they are forms of maps, which represent how one collection of points is linked to another.

    “The essence of all such drawings is that they are forms of maps, which represent how one collection of points is linked to another.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [10] Welker C. Receptive fields of barrels in the somatosensory neocortex of the rat. 7 Comtparative Neuirol 1976;166: 173-190. source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In the first homunculus, what was actually represented was ambiguous and confusing.

    “what actually was represented, however, was ambiguous and confusing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    There is uncertainty as to what actually was being represented in the homunculi.

    “there is uncertainty as to what actually was being represented.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Some patients report that the phantom that follows amputation often fades, but it does so in a non-sequential manner.

    “Some patients report that the phantom that follows amputation often fades, but it does so in a non-sequential manner.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    The first figurine was human, with Penfield's homunculus the precedent for the profusion of illustrations of experimental work on animals.

    “Nevertheless, the first figurine was human, with Penfield's homunculus the precedent for the profusion of illustrations of experimental work on animals.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The border between fact and imagination has been blurred in the homunculus, and it has been imbued with character.

    “The border between fact and imagination has been blurred: the homunculus has been imbued with character”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationnone given

    The homunculus as represented by Penfield gives the impression of single motor and sensory maps.

    “the homunculus as represented by Penfield gives the impres- sion of single motor and sensory maps.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    It is clear that both scientifically and graphically there is considerable ambiguity in what Penfield was intending to illustrate.

    “It is clear that both scientifically and graphically there is considerable ambiguity in what Penfield was intending to illustrate.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    With Penfield's stated aim to analyse the data without preconception, it is curiously contradictory to represent meticulous scientific observations by means of a homunculus.

    “With this stated aim, however, it seems curiously contradictory to represent meticulous scientific observa- tions by means of an homunculus.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    In the 1950 illustration, a diagram of a cross-section of the cerebral hemispheres had solid bars at the periphery, the length of the bars giving an indication of the relative cortical areas from which the corresponding responses were elicited.

    “the length of the bars giving an indication of the relative cortical areas from which the corresponding responses were elicited.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [2] Creutzfeldt OD. Cortex cerebri. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1983: 216.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

28 of 28
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Scientific illustrations of brain function should be accurate and unambiguous to be scientifically valuable.

    “Maps, however, are designed to be accurate as well as informative”
1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 14 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Penfield W, Jasper H. Epilepsy and the fiunctional aniatomyii, of the humolani brain. London: J and A Churchill, 1954:105-106; 159.
  2. Melzack R. Phantom limbs, the self and the brain. Canadian Psychology 1989;30,1-16.
  3. Dennett DC. Brainstornms. Philosophical essayNs on miind and psychology. Hassocks, Sussex: Harvester Press 1979:57-59.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schott, G. D.
Corresponding author
Schott, G D
Venue
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1993-04-01
Volume
56
Issue
4
Pages
329-333
ISSN
0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977511501
Cited by
222
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neurology and Historical Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › History of Medical Practice
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › History of Science and Medicine
Keywords
homunculus, cortical mapping, sensory homunculus, motor homunculus
MeSH terms
Brain Mapping, Humans, Medical Illustration, Motor Cortex, Somatosensory Cortex, United States, History, 20th Century

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-11.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-11.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review