chap, vii.] CERVICAL AURICLES. 179 



Several cases analogous to the above, though differing in the extent 

 of the development, are on record '. Kostanecki and MlELECKl (I. c), 

 who give references to the literature of the subject, consider together 

 with Virciiow and others, that there is no doubt that these super- 

 numerary auricles may properly be regarded as "heterotopic" partial 

 repetitions of the external ears. According to a view which has been 

 held by the majority of writers- on the subject, and which is in part 

 alternative to that given above, it is suggested that the cartilages 

 contained in these appendages are in reality parts of one or other of the 

 usually undeveloped branchial arches behind the hyoid. As against 

 this suggestion it is to be remembered that in the subsequent develop- 

 ment of the neck these arches are pushed in far from the surface, whereas 

 the cartilages in question are always superficial. The usual histology 

 of these bodies is in favour of the view that they are repetitions of the 

 ear-cartilages, but on the other hand a specimen of cervical auricle 

 in Mus. Coll. Surg. (No. 373, c) contains not only cartilage but also 

 a small bone of convplex form. But whether or not any part of such 

 cervical auricles truly represents any part of the gill-bars, it is clear 

 that these external projections having the structure of the ear, con- 

 sidered from the point of view of Variation must be regarded as partial 

 repetitions of the ears, and there is a considerable probability that they 

 stand to the sinus cervicalis in a relation similar to that which the 

 normal external ear bears to the hyo-mandibular cleft, being according 

 to the terminology here proposed, examples of repetition by forward 

 Homceosis. 



In this connexion the question of correlation between supernume- 

 rary auricles of the neck and cervical fistuhe is especially important. 

 If it is true that such auricles are repetitions of the ears, it might, on 

 the analogy of other cases of repetition, be expected that they would 

 usually be found bounding the external openings of tistuhe. As a 

 matter of fact they have several times been found in such a position, but 

 the connexion between these two variations is by no means a close one, 

 for cervical fistula? are not as a rule accompanied by cervical auricles, 

 nor are cervical auricles generally associated with cervical fistula', such 

 collocation being mi the whole exceptional. It should also be men- 

 tioned that in a few cases small cartilaginous or bony structures have 

 been found imbedded in the neighbourhood of cervical fistula 1 , but that 

 similar structures have also occurred independently of any fistula". 



In many domestic animals both cervical fistula' and auricles art- 

 well known and have been described by Heusinger 3 from whom the 

 following account is chiefly taken. 

 146. Pig- Cervical auricles are not uncommon and have been referred 



1 A figure is given by Sutton, J. B., in III. Med. Xnr.<, 1880 (repeated in 

 "Evolution and Disease," by the same author 1890, p. 83), representing a large 

 supernumerary auricle on the right side of the neck of a girl. The structure 

 is represented as helicoid in form, closely resembling the normal ear. It i< 

 unfortunate that no description of this specimen is given: in the absence of such 

 •description this quite unprecedented case cannot be accepted without reserve. 



2 Dermoids of many kinds occurring in the cervical region of Man and other 

 animals are by many writers considered to arise by modification of tissues occluded 

 from the walls of the branchial clefts. 



3 Heusinger, Deut. Arch. f. Thiermed., 1876, n. 



i — — *j 



