1. 1. In cats under chloralose or local anesthesia responses to somatic, auditory and visual stimuli were recorded in the orbital gyrus. Stimulation of splanchnic and vagal nerves gave rise to responses in the same area. 2. 2. Mapping of the somatic orbital gyrus showed an antero-posterior bilateral organization of the body projection, with a large medial focus where all somatic inputs converge. 3. 3. The ipsilateral response latency is 2–3 msec longer than the contralateral (8–10 msec). 4. 4. No disappearance of responses occurred when contralateral repetitive stimuli were applied at frequencies of the order of 6/sec. When paired shocks were applied to the same paw the recovery cycle began at 80 msec and was complete at 250 msec. 5. 5. Nembutal anesthesia did not modify the distribution and bilaterality of orbital somatic responses but altered their amplitude. 6. 6. The classical vagal projection is included in the convergent somatic focus; it is less extensive than the somatic projection. The orbital gyrus is also a projection zone for the thoraco-abdominal, the recurrent laryngeal, and the superior laryngeal components of the vagus nerve. 7. 7. Cortical ablations indicated the independence of orbital projections from SI, SII and motor somatic areas. 8. 8. Messages from the opposite side of the body relay in the VP ipsilateral to the orbital cortex. Messages from the same side have a double crossed pathway, relaying successively in the contralateral VP and the contralateral orbital gyrus before traversing the corpus callosum to reach the orbital gyrus. 9. 9. Somatic responses in the orbital cortex showed the same modifications as primary cortical responses during different phases of sleep and wakefulness. 10. 10. Micro-electrode studies of the convergent focus showed that the majority of units activated by somatic stimuli discharge at short latency and have low fatigability. Somato-visceral convergence was observed. The effective peripheral stimulus was frequently of a nociceptive type and showed a large peripheral field. No responses to tactile stimuli were observed. 11. 11. The possible significance of this somatic orbital projection is discussed.