ABSORPTION. 



21 



of the fluid which they contain, the lymphatics, 

 was posterior to that of the lacteals. The trans- 

 parency of their contents rendered them less 

 conspicuous and less easy of detection, so that, 

 although certain parts of them appear to have 

 been seen by Fallopio, and afterwards by 

 Aselli and others, yet it was not until the year 

 1650, that they were distinctly recognized, and 

 their connexions ascertained. The discovery 

 of the lymphatic system was the subject of a 

 warm controversy between Bartholin and Rud- 

 bek, on the merits of which we are, after so 

 long an interval, scarcely able to decide. It 

 appears, however, to have been the opinion of 

 Haller, and the most distinguished anatomists 

 of the last century, that the lymphatics were 

 detected, in the first instance, by Rudbek ; 

 that Bartholin had some intimation of the dis- 

 covery, that he then took up the subject, and 

 pursued it much farther than it had been done 

 by Rudbek.* 



There is a third individual, on whose behalf 

 a claim of priority has been made, which pos- 

 sesses at least considerable plausibility. We 

 are informed by Glisson, that an English ana- 

 tomist of the name of Joliffe distinctly re- 

 cognized and exhibited the lymphatics of many 

 of the abdominal viscera, previously to the 

 alledged discovery of either Rudbek or Bar- 

 tholin.f But even if we allow Joliffe the full 

 merit both of discovering these vessels, and 

 being aware of their specific nature, it does not 

 appear that he published his discovery, so that 

 it will scarcely affect the rival claims of the 

 former anatomists. The discovery of the ab- 

 sorbent or conglobate glands, as they have been 

 termed, was made, for the most part, at the 

 same time with that of the vessels, as a ne- 

 cessary consequence of the intimate connexion 

 which subsists between them. 



After the existence of the lacteals had been 

 clearly announced by Aselli, and of the lym- 

 phatics by Rudbek and Bartholin, the atten- 

 tion of anatomists was very generally directed 

 to these organs, and discoveries were suc- 

 cessively made, by various individuals, of the 

 presence of the latter in almost every part of 

 the body, and in connexion with almost every 

 one of its organs. The labours of William and 

 John Hunter, of Monro sec , and of Hewson, 

 were among the most important in their re- 

 sults, while we are indebted to Cruikshank, 

 and still more to Mascagni, for their minute 

 descriptions and accurate representations of the 

 absorbent system, in all its parts, and with its 

 various relations and connexions.]; 



' El. Phys., ii. 3. 1 ; Bibl. Anat., t. i. . 378 



and 415 ; and Not. 4. ad . 121. Boer. Prael. 



Bartholin's statement of his claim is contained in 



his " Anat. Reform." p. 621, 2 ; see also his trea- 



Vas. Lymph. Hist. Nov." and Rudbek's 



Nova Exerc. Anat." For the historical part of the 



subject we may refer to Mascagni, Prolegomena, 



and to Meckel, Manuel d'Anat. par Jourdan et 



Breschet, t. i. ch. 2. p. 179 . . 202. 



Anat. Hepat. c. 31. See Haller, Bibl. Anat., 

 t. i. p. 452 , also Mascagni, Prolegomena. 



For the most original and correct description of 



the lacteals, the reader is referred to Haller, El. 



Phys. xxv. 1. 4 . . 8 ; Mascagni, Vas. Lymph. Corp. 



With respect to the minute anatomy of the 

 lacteals, we are informed that they originate 

 from certain small projecting bodies, termed 

 villi, which are attached to the interior surface 

 of the intestines, styled from this circumstance 

 the villous coat. These villi are described as 

 consisting of a number of capillary tubes, 

 which terminate with open mouths, and that 

 by the union of these tubes the branches of 

 the lacteals are composed, which are suffi- 

 ciently large to be visible to the eye. We must 

 remark, however, that although these villi, as 

 constituting the mouths of the lacteals, have 

 been minutely described, and even figures 

 given of the appearance which they exhibit in 

 the microscope, yet that considerable doubt is 

 still entertained of their existence, and that they 

 are even entirely discredited by some anatomists 

 of the first eminence.* Upon the whole we 

 may conclude that the opinion, which has been 

 generally adopted, respecting the capillary 

 termination of the lacteals, is somewhat theo- 

 retical, rather derived from the supposed ne- 

 cessity of such a formation to carry on the 

 functions of the vessels, than from any actual 

 observations that have been made upon them. 



When the lacteals have acquired sufficient 

 magnitude to become visible to the eye, they 

 are seen to proceed along the mesentery, the 

 small vessels running together to form large 

 branches, and these again forming others that 

 are still larger, until the whole of them unite 

 into a few main trunks, which terminate in the 

 receptacle at the lower extremity of the thoracic 

 duct. During their progress, the small vessels 



Hist., p. 1. . 7. art. 8. tab. 1. fig. 7; Sheldon,'on 

 the Absorb. Syst. ch. 2. pi. 3, 4, 5 -, Santorini, 

 Tabulae, No. 13. fig. 3 ; Magendie, Physiol. t. ii. 

 p. 158 . . 0. The translation of Mascagni's work, with 

 copious notes by Bellini, may be advantageously 

 consulted ; it is not accompanied by plates. For 

 the lymphatics we may refer to Haller, ii. 3. 2 ; 

 Meckel, Diss. Epist. de Vasis Lymphaticis ; Hew- 

 son, Enq., ch. 3. pi. 3, 6 ; Mascagni, ps. 1. sect. 

 7. tab. 4 et seq. ; Cruikshank, on the Absorb., p. 

 148 et seq. ; Sosmmering, Corp. Hum. Fabr. t. v. 

 p. 388 et seq. ; many of Mascagni's plates are 

 transferred into Cloquet's valuable '* Manuel." 

 Art. " Inhalation," par Rullier, in Diet, des 

 Sc. Med. t. xxv. 3. Art. " Lymphatique," par 

 Chaussier et Adelon, ibid, t. xxix. p. 249, 260 ; 

 Meckel, Manuel, sect. 6. ch. 2; Quain's Elem. of 

 Anat. p. 560 . .574. In Elliotson's Physiol. ch. 9. 

 p. 140 . . 2, we have a " short account of the first 

 discovery of the absorbent system." Soemmer- 

 ing's treatise, De Morbis Vasorum Absorb, con- 

 tains a most ample and learned catalogue of the 

 various works on absorption, from the earliest 

 period to the date of its publication in 1795. 



* See Lieberkuhn, Diss. de Fabr. Vill. Intest. 

 passim, cum tab. 1, 2; Hewson's Enq., c. 12, 

 pt. 2 ; Cruikshank's letter to Clare, p. 32 . . 4 ; Shel- 

 don on the Absor. Sys., p. 32 . . 8, tab. 1, 2 ; Hedwig, 

 Disq. Ampull. In opposition to these and other 

 authorities, on the affirmative side of the question, 

 we have the strong negative evidence of Mascagni, 

 whose plates do not sanction the description of 

 Lieberkuhn, tab. 1. fig. 1. 3; and tab. 3. fig. 

 1,2,3, 5; and the decided opinion of Magendie, 

 Journ. de Physiol. t. i. p. 3 et alibi. On this sub- 

 ject see the remarks of Haller, not. 9. ad . 91. 

 Boerhaave, Prael. et not. 4. ad $. 103. The ob- 

 servations of Du Vernoi, Mem. Petrop. t. i. p. 262 

 et seq., seem scarcely to have been confirmed. 



