28 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SALIVARY GLANDS IN MAN 



be looked upon as a gland having multiple outlets, a point of view 

 evidently determining the usage of the B.N. A. (gl. sublingualis, 

 ductus sublingualis major, ductus sublinguales minores). Whatever 

 may be the value of such a concept to the surgeon or the topographical 

 anatomist, it is not admissible for the embryologist and is futile from 

 the standpoint of the morphologist. The matter is not greatly helped 

 by the adoption of Tiling's terms, glandula sublinguahs polystomatica 

 and glandula sublingualis monostomatica ; for here again the funda- 

 mental error is repeated of confusing in terminology a single gland 

 with a group of glands, although some progress is made in supphing 

 a distinctive name for the territory that is drained by the ductus 

 subungualis major. It would seem desirable, therefore, to limit the 

 term gland to the system of ducts and acini or tubules derived from a 

 single epithehal sprout, except in cases where fusion of sprouts is 

 known to occur and a more or less reticulated gland results. To 

 glands of this t\pe that retain more than one duct, the term poly- 

 slomatic might find a useful application. A series of small glands 

 derived from independent sprouts is better denoted by a plural noun. 

 In the "sublingual" of man three distinct lines of drainage have long 

 been recognized : the ducts of Ri\'inus (sublinguales minores), the 

 duct of Bartholin (sublinguahs major), and a small branch or branches 

 of the subma.xillary duct. Concerning the last, embryological data 

 are as yet lacking, but the variants of the adult would indicate that 

 they are merely outlying lobules of the supramylohyoid portion of 

 the submaxillar}'. His ('85), and independently Chievitz ('85), 

 showed the derivation of the submaxillary gland from the lingual 

 sulcus, and Chievitz also established the origin of the Bartholinian 

 element as an inconstant branch from the proximal portion of the 

 submaxillary duct, terming it glandula sublinguahs. Chievitz further 

 found the early sprouts of the ducts of Rivinus springing from the 

 alveololingual sulcus, and designated them accordingly, the alveolohn- 

 gual glands. As these facts were available, it seems unfortunate 

 that they were not utilized at Basel, instead of confirming in slightly 

 modified terms a mistaken usage, the continuation of which is fertile 

 in misconceptions. 



What, therefore, passes as the sublingual gland is evidently a complex 

 of heterogeneous elements in a common connective tissue investment 



