Introduction: Throughout history, eponyms have been used in medical sciences to designate anatomical structures although they do not provide any descriptive or functional information, which is equivalent to a mistake in the light of current thinking. Double and triple eponyms have been used to name the same structure, thus creating confusion that leads to believe that a discovery or description was made by several persons at the same time. Although eponyms have been abolished from anatomical terminology for over eight decades and still generate problems in communication and in the teachinglearning process, medical sciences professionals continue to use them. Objective: To analyze some examples of arbitrary assignment of eponyms in morphology that have led to historical errors and perpetuated them. Conclusion: Granting an eponym to an anatomical structure may not reflect the truth about the person who discovered it and may obey to arbitrary factors that induce possible historical errors and injustice. In addition, using them hinders communication between health professionals, as well as the teaching-learning process.