Chaps. 39-47.

Chap. 39. (23.)—The Muræna.

The muræna brings forth every month, while all the other fishes spawn only at stated periods: the eggs of this fish increase with the greatest rapidity. [Hardouin says, that though this assertion is repeated by Pliny in c. 74 of the present Book, it is a mistake; we learn, however, from Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. v. c. 11, and Athenæus, B. vii., that the young of the muræna are remarkable for the quickness of their growth.] It is a vulgar [This vulgar belief is, however, followed by Oppian, Halieut. B. i. c. 555; Athenæus, B. vii.; Ælian, Hist. Anim. B. i. c. 50, and B. ix. c. 66; and Nicander, Theriac., who, however, adds, “if indeed it is the truth.” It is also alluded to by Basil, in Hexaem. Homil. vii., and Ambrose, Homil. v. c. 7.] belief that the muræna comes on shore, and is there impregnated by intercourse with serpents. Aristotle [Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. v. c. 11, only quotes this story as he had heard it, and does not vouch for its truth. Doro, as quoted by Athenæus, B. vii., makes the zmyrus and the muræna to be of totally different genera. The zmyrus, he says, is without bone, the whole of it is eatable, and it is remarkable for the tenderness of the flesh. There are two kinds, of which the best, he says, are those which are black.] calls the male, which impregnates the female, by the name of “zmyrus;” and says that there is a difference between them, the muræna being spotted [The common muræna, Cuvier says, is spotted with brown and yellow, but there is a larger kind, with stronger teeth and brown all over, the Muræna Christini, of Risso. This, he has no doubt, is the zmyrus of the ancients. Modern naturalists, he says, have incorrectly called Muræna zmyrus, a small kind of conger, which has yellow spots upon the neck.] and weakly, while the zmyrus is all of one colour and hardy, and has teeth which project beyond the mouth. In northern Gaul all the murænæ have on the right jaw seven spots, [Cuvier has already made some remarks on this passage in one of his Notes to c. of the present Book. See p..] which bear a resemblance to the constellation of the Septentriones, [The Seven Terriones, or plough oxen. The constellation of Ursa Major was thus called by the Romans.] and are of a gold colour, shining as long as the animal is alive, but disappearing as soon as it is dead. Vedius Pollio, [This wretched man was originally a freedman, and though he was on one occasion punished by Augustus for his cruelty, he left him a great part of his property. He died B.C. 15. He is supposed to be the same person as the one against whom Augustus wrote some Fescennine verses, mentioned by Macrobius, Sat. B. ii. c. 4.] a Roman of equestrian rank, and one of the friends of the late Emperor Augustus, found a method of exercising his cruelty by means of this animal, for he caused such slaves as had been condemned by him, to be thrown into preserves filled with murænæ; not that the land animals would not have fully sufficed for this purpose, but because he could not see a man so aptly torn to pieces all at once by any other kind of animal. It is said that these fish are driven to madness by the taste of vinegar. Their skin is exceedingly thin; while that of the eel, on the other hand, is much thicker. Verrius informs us that formerly the children of the Roman citizens, while wearing the prætexta, [Until the Roman youth assumed the toga virilis, they wore the toga prætexta, or senatorial gown. The toga virilis was assumed at the Liberalia, in the month of March; and though no age appears to have been positively fixed for the ceremony, it probably took place, as a general rule, on the feast which next followed the completion of the fourteenth year; though it is not certain that the completion of the fourteenth year was not always the time observed. So long as a male wore the prætexta, he was considered “impubes,” and when he had assumed the toga virilis, he was “pubes.” Hence the word “investis,” or “prætextatus,” (here employed), was the same as impubes.] were flogged with eel-skins, and that, for this reason, no pecuniary penalty [Thus the “impubes” paid, as Hardouin says, “not in money, but in skin.” Isidorus, in his Glossary, says, “‘Anguilla’ is the name given to the ordinary ‘scutica,’ or whip with which boys are chastised at school.” The witty Rabelais says, B. ii. c. 30, “Whereupon his master gave him such a sound lashing with an eel-skin, that his own would have been worth nothing to make bag-pipe bags of.”] could by law be inflicted upon them.

Chap. 40. (24.)—Various Kinds of Flat Fish.

There is another kind of flat fish, which, instead of bones, has cartilage, such, for instance, as the raia, [The ray.] the pastinaca, [The sting-ray; the Raia pastinaca of Linnæus.] the squatina, [The angel-fish; the Squalus squatina of Linnæus.] the torpedo, [The Raia torpedo of Linnæus.] and those which, under their respective Greek names, are known as the ox, [Galen, in his explanation of words used by Hippocrates, speaks of the βοῦς θαλάσσιος, which is also described by Oppian, Halieut. B. ii. l. 141, et seq. He speaks of it as growing to the length of eleven or twelve cubits, and having small, weak teeth, which are not easily seen, and compares it in appearance to the roof of a house. Cuvier thinks, that although its horns are not mentioned, a species of large horned ray is alluded to, which is known by the modern naturalists by the name of Cephalopterus, and he thinks it very likely these horns may have given it its Greek appellation. Indeed Pliny himself, in another place, B. xxxii. c. 53, speaks of it under the name of “cornuta,” the “horned-fish.”] the lamia, [A species of ray, most probably.] the eagle, [Cuvier suggests that this was the mylobates, the Raia aquila of Linnæus, which probably obtained this name on account of the width of the pectoral fins, and its peculiar shape.] and the frog. [Βάτραχος ἁλιεὺς, the sea-frog, the Lophius piscatorius of Linnæus, and the baudroie of the French. Cuvier remarks, that though there is little solidity or firmness in the bones of this animal, it is not properly a cartilaginous fish.] In this number, also, the squali [This is borrowed from Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. v., who, however, says, καὶ πάντα τὰ γαλεώδη; from which Massarius, Turnebus, and Hippolytus Salvianus are inclined to read “galei,” instead of “squali.” Both terms, however, Hardouin says, are used to denote the genus which the French call “chiens de mer,” “dog-fish.”] ought to be included, although they are not flat fish. Aristotle was the first to call these fish by the one generic name of σελάχη, [It is curious that Aristotle, though he was the inventor of this name, has nowhere stated in what it originated. Galen, De Alim. Fac. B. iii. c. 36, says that it is ἀπὸ τοῦ σέλας ἔχειν, from the fact of their shining at night.] which he has given them: we, however, have no mode of distinguishing them, unless, indeed, we choose to call them the “cartilaginous” fishes. All these fish are carnivorous, [Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. viii. c. 5, and De Part. Anim. B. iv. c. 13.] and feed lying on their backs, just as dolphins do, as already [In c. 7 of the present Book.] noticed; while the other fishes, [Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. vi. c. 8.] too, are oviparous, this one kind, with the exception of that known as the sea-frog, is viviparous, like the cetacea. [Cuvier says that it is true that the sea-frog is oviparous; but it is far from being the case that all the cartilaginous fishes but it are viviparous. The rays, for instance, produce large eggs of a square shape, and enveloped with a very hard horny shell. Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. viii. c. 5, and B. ii. c. 16, makes the same exception as to the sea-frog or frog-fish.]

Chap. 41. (25.)—The Echeneis, and Its Uses in Enchantments.

There is a very small fish [This is also from Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. ii. c. 17. Oppian also mentions it, Halieut. B. i. l. 223, et seq., but he gives it all the characteristics of the modern lamprey.] that is in the habit of living among the rocks, and is known as the echeneis. [This is the Echeneis remora of Linnæus, Cuvier says. It has upon the head an organ, by means of which it can attach itself to any body. It is thus enabled to fasten to ships and larger fishes; but as for staying a ship, it has not, as Cuvier remarks, the slightest power over the very smallest boat. All the eloquence, therefore, which Pliny expends upon it, in B. xxxii. c. 1, is entirely thrown away.] It is believed that when this has attached itself to the keel of a ship its progress is impeded, and that it is from this circumstance that it takes its name. [Ἀπὸ τοῦ ἔχειν νῆας. “From holding back ships.”] For this reason, also, it has a disgraceful repute, as being employed in love philtres, [Used for the purpose of bringing back lost love, or preventing inconstancy.] and for the purpose of retarding judgments and legal proceedings—evil properties, which are only compensated by a single merit that it possesses—it is good for staying fluxes of the womb in pregnant women, and preserves the fœtus up to birth: it is never used, however, for food. [Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. ii. c. 17.] Aristotle [Hardouin says that it is very possible that Aristotle may have written to this effect in some one of the fifty books of his that have perished, but that such is not the case in his account given of this fish in his Hist. Anim. B. ii. c. 17, for there he expressly says, “There are some people that say this fish has feet, whereas it has none at all; but they are deceived by the fins, which bear a resemblance to feet.” Cuvier says he cannot see in what way the fins of the remora, or sucking-fish, resemble feet, any more than those belonging to any other fish.] is of opinion that this fish has feet, so strong is the resemblance, by reason of the form and position of the fins.

Mucianus speaks of a murex [Cuvier says, that the shell-fish to which Pliny here ascribes a power similar to that of the remora, is, if we may judge from his description of it, of the genus called Cypræa, and has very little doubt that its peculiar form caused its consecration to Venus, fully as much as its supposed miraculous powers. He also remarks that Hardouin, in his Note upon this passage, supposes an impossibility, in suggesting that the lips of this shell-fish can bite the sides of a ship; these lips or edges being hard and immoveable. For some curious particulars as to the peculiar form of some kinds of Cypræa, or cowry, and why they more especially attracted attention, and were held sacred to Venus, see the discussion on them, in the Defence made by Apuleius against the charge of sorcery, which was brought against him.] of larger size than the purple, with a head that is neither rough nor round; and the shell of which is single, and falls in folds on either side. [Rondelet, B. xiii. c. 12, says that this kind of shell was formerly used for the purpose of smoothing paper.] He tells us, also, that some of these creatures once attached themselves to a ship freighted with children [Herodotus tells us, B. iii. c. 48, that these were 300 boys of noble families of the Corcyræans, and that they were being sent from Periander of Corinth, to Alyattes, king of Sardes.] of noble birth, who were being sent by Periander for the purpose of being castrated, and that they stopped its course in full sail; and he further says, that the shell-fish which did this service are duly honoured in the temple of Venus, [Venus was fabled to have emerged from the sea in a shell.] at Cnidos. Trebius Niger says that this fish is a foot in length, and that it can retard the course of vessels, five fingers in thickness; besides which, it has another peculiar property—when preserved in salt, and applied, it is able to draw up gold which has fallen into a well, however deep it may happen to be. [Rabelais refers to these wonderful stories about the echeneis or remora, B. iv. c. 62: “And indeed, why should he have thought this difficult, seeing that —— an echeneis or remora, a silly, weakly fish, in spite of all the winds that blow from the thirty-two points of the compass, will in the midst of a hurricane make you, the biggest first-rate, remain stock still, as if she were becalmed, or the blustering tribe had blown their last; nay, and with the flesh of that fish, preserved with salt, you may fish gold out of the deepest well that ever was sounded with a plummet; for it will certainly draw up the precious metal.”]

Chap. 42. (26.)—Fishes Which Change Their Colour.

The mæna changes [Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. viii. c. 34; Ælian, Hist. Anim. B. xii. c. 48. Rondelet is of opinion that this mæna was the fish still called menola by the people of Liguria and Rome. It was a fish little valued, and we find it called by Martial, “inutilis mæna,” B. xii. Epigr. 30. Cuvier says, that if it does not change from white to black, as Pliny states, its colours are much more lively in the spring. It also has an offensive smell at certain times, as is noticed by Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. viii. c. 30, and to which Martial alludes in the above epigram. Ovid also mentions it as a fish of no value; held, in all probability, in the same degree of estimation as a sprat with us. It is, no doubt, the Sparus mæna of Linnæus.] its white colour, and in summer becomes swarthy. The phycis [We learn from Aristotle, B. viii. c. 30, that the phycis was a whitish fish, which in the spring assumed a variegated colour. In an Epigram of Apollonides it is called “red;” and Speusippus, as quoted in Athenæus, B. v., says that it is similar to the perch and the channe. Ovid speaks of it as frequenting the shore, and Oppian represents it as dwelling among the sea-weed on the rocks. It also lived on shrimps, and its flesh was light and wholesome; while its most singular property was that of making its nest among the fucus or sea-weed, whence its name. All these characteristics, Cuvier says, are to be found, from what Olivi states, in the “ go ” of the Venetians, found in the Adriatic, the Gobius of Linnæus; the male of which in the spring makes a nest of the roots of the zostera in the mud, in which the female lays her eggs, which are fecundated by itself, and then protected by it against the attacks of enemies. This is probably the fish that is alluded to by Ovid, Halieut. l. 121, “The fish that imitates, beneath the waves, the pretty nests of the birds.”] also changes its colour, and while at other times it is white, in spring it is parti-coloured. This last is the only fish that builds itself a nest; it makes it of sea-weed, and there deposits its eggs.

Chap. 43.—Fishes Which Fly Above the Water.—The Sea-swallow.—The Fish That Shines in the Night.—The Horned Fish.—The Sea-dragon.

The sea-swallow, [This name, Cuvier observes, is still common on the coasts of the Mediterranean, to two kinds of flying fish, the Dactylopterus, or Trigla volitans of Linnæus, and the Exocœtus volitans of Linnæus. It is to the first, he thinks, that the ancients more especially gave the name of swallow, although Salvianus and Belon are of the contrary opinion. Oppian, Halieut. B. ii. ll. 457-461, ranks the sea-swallow with the scorpion, the dragon, and other fish the spines of which produce mortal wounds, and Ælian, B. ii. c. 5, states to the same effect. But the exocœtus has no spines, while the dactylopterus has terrible ones on its præopercules. Speusippus also, as quoted in Athenæus, B. vii., gives no less decisive testimony, in saying that the sea-cuckoo, the trigla, and the sea-swallow, have a strong resemblance to each other; the fact being that the dactylopterus is of the same genus as the sea-cuckoo, the Trigla cuculus of Linnæus.] being able to fly, bears a strong resemblance to the bird of that name; the sea-kite [Ovid, Halieut. l. 96, speaks of this fish as having a black back. Cuvier therefore suggests that it may possibly be the perlon, the Trigla hirundo of Linuæus, the back of which is of a dark brown, and the great size of the pectoral fins of which may have given rise to the notion of its being able to fly. It is also very possible, he says, that it may have been the exocœtus, the back of which is of a blue colour.] too, flies as well.

(27.) There is a fish that comes up to the surface of the sea, known, from the following circumstance, as the lantern-fish: [Lucerna. Probably, as Cuvier says, one of those numerous molluscs, or zoophytes, which give out a brilliant light, and perhaps the Pyrosoma of Péron. No period being found in the MSS. after the word “milvus”—“kite,” it was long thought that this passage applied to the sea-kite; and it is owing to this circumstance that we find the ichthyologists enumerating a Trigla lucerna. The correction, however, is approved of by Cuvier, who says that he has found none of the genus triglæ to give forth a light; except, indeed, when, like other fish, it begins to be putrid.] thrusting from its mouth a tongue that shines like fire, it emits a most brilliant light on calm nights. Another fish, which, from its horns, has received its name, [Probably the “cornuta,” mentioned in the Note on the sea-ox in c. 40; see p.. Cuvier says that it was long supposed that the fish here alluded to might be the Malarmat of the Mediterranean, the Trigla cataphracta of Linnæus, the muzzle of which is divided into two horns; but then they are only half an inch long, instead of a foot and a half. He is of opinion, therefore, that it is the great horned ray, now known as the cephalopterus, which, being often fifteen feet and more in diameter, answers much better to the description of its size implied by Pliny from the length of its horns. It is also mentioned under the name of cornuta in B. xxxii. c. 53, in company with the saw-fish, the sword-fish, the dog-fish, and other large fishes.] raises them nearly a foot and a half above the surface of the water. The sea-dragon, [Cuvier is of opinion, that Rondelet is correct in his suggestion that this is the sea-spider, called the “vive” in France, the viver or weever with us, and the Trachinus draco of Linnæus, which fish is still called δράκαινα by the modern Greeks. Pliny, in c. 48 of the present Book, charges the sea-spider with doing much mischief, by means of the spines or stickles on its back. Now Ælian, B. ii. c. 50, and Oppian, Halieut. l. 458, say the same of the sea-dragon; and this is a well-known property of the modern vive, the Trachinus draco of Linnæus. Pliny speaks more especially, in B. xxxii. c. 53, of the wounds which it makes with the spines or stickles of its opercules, which the vive is also able to inflict; and in addition to this, it has the power of burrowing into the sand in a most incredibly short space of time.] again, if caught and thrown on the sand, works out a hole for itself with its muzzle, with the most wonderful celerity.

Chap. 44. (28.)—Fishes Which Have No Blood.—Fishes Known as Soft Fish.

The varieties of fish which we shall now mention are those which have no blood: they are of three kinds [Cuvier remarks, that this division of the bloodless fish by Aristotle into the mollusca, testacea, and crustacea, has been followed by naturalists almost down to the present day.] —first, those which are known as “soft;” next, those which have thin crusts; and, lastly, those which are enclosed in hard shells. The soft fish are the loligo, [The Sæpia loligo of Linnæus; the calmar of the French, or ink-fish.] the sæpia, [The Sæpia officinalis of Linnæus; the seche of the French; our cuttle-fish.] the polypus, [The Sæpia octopodia of Linnæus, or eight-footed cuttle-fish.] and others of a similar nature. These last have the head between the feet and the belly, and have, all of them, eight feet: in the sæpia and the loligo two of these feet are very long [Cuvier remarks, that this account of the arms or feelers of the sæpia and loligo is very exact.] and rough, and by means of these they lift the food to their mouth, and attach themselves to places in the sea, as though with an anchor; the others act as so many arms, by means of which they seize their prey. [“Quibus venantur.” Hardouin suggests that the proper reading would be “quibus natant”—“by means of which they swim;” for Aristotle says, in the corresponding passage, “with the fins that surround the body they swim.”]

Chap. 45. (29.)—The Sæpia, the Loligo, the Scallop.

The loligo is also able to dart above the surface of the water, and the scallop does the same, just like an arrow as it were. In the sæpia, [Plautus has a line in his Rudens, which shows that when the sæpia was cooked for table, it was customary to take the eyes out. “Bid them knock out his eyes, just as the cooks do with the sæpia.”] the male is parti-coloured, blacker than the female, and more courageous. If the female is struck with a fish-spear, the male comes to her aid; but the female, the instant the male is struck, takes to flight. Both of them, as soon as ever they find themselves in danger of being caught. discharge [Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. iv. c. 2, states to a similar effect, as also Ælian, Hist. Anim. B. i. c. 34; Oppian, Halieut. B. iii. l. 156.] a kind of ink, which with them is in place of blood, [This so-called ink, Cuvier says, is neither their blood nor their bile, but a liquid that is secreted in a bag peculiar to the animal. It is said, that it is from the juices of certain polypi of the Eastern seas, that the genuine Indian or Chinese ink is made; but M. Abel Remusat assures us that he has found nothing in the Chinese writers to confirm this conjecture.] and thus darkening the water, take to flight.

Chap. 46.—The Polypus.

There are numerous kinds of polypi. The land [This, as Hardouin says, is the polypus which is found on the sea-shore, and which more frequently comes on dry land than the other kinds.] polypus is larger than that of the sea; they all of them use their arms [The arms of the polypus have numerous names with the Latin authors. Ovid calls them “flagella,”—“whips;” others again, “cirri”—“curls;” “pedes”—“feet;” “crura”—“legs;” and “crines”—“hair.”] as feet and hands; and in coupling they employ the tail, which is forked [This, Cuvier says, is quite unintelligible; for all the polypi have an oval body, of the shape of a bag, and there is nothing in them that bears any resemblance to a tail, forked or otherwise.] and sharp. The polypus has a sort of passage in the back, [This channel, Cuvier says, is in form of a funnel reversed, by means of which the animal draws in and ejects the water that is requisite for its respiration, and discharges the ink and other excretions. It is in the fore-part of the body, and at the orifice of the bag, and not on the back, as Pliny says; but, as Cuvier remarks, it was very easy for a person to be deceived in this matter, as the head, being in form of a cylinder, and fringed with the so-called feet, cannot be said to be distinguished into an upper and lower side.] by which it lets in and discharges the water, and which it shifts from side to side, sometimes carrying it on the right, and sometimes on the left. It swims obliquely, [Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. iv. c. 2, says that the animal is obliged to do so, on account of the situation of the eyes.] with the head on one side, which is of surprising hardness while the animal is alive, being puffed out with air. [But Aristotle says, καθάπερ ἐμπεφυσημένην, “ as though it were puffed out with air.”] In addition to this, they have cavities [“Acetabulis.” The acetabulum was properly a vinegar cruet, in shape resembling an inverted cone; from a supposed similarity in the appearance, it is here applied to the suckers of the polypus. The Greek name is κοτυληδὼν.] dispersed throughout the claws, by means of which, through suction, they can adhere to objects; which they hold, with the head upwards, so tightly, that they cannot be torn away. They cannot attach themselves, however, to the bottom of the sea, and their retentive powers are weaker in the larger ones. These are the only [Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. ix. c. 59.] soft fish that come on dry land, and then only where the surface is rugged: a smooth surface they will not come near. They feed upon the flesh of shell-fish, the shells of which they can easily break in the embrace of their arms: hence it is that their retreat may be easily detected by the pieces of shell which lie before it. Although, in other respects, this is looked upon as a remarkably stupid kind of animal, so much so, that it will swim towards the hand of a man, to a certain extent in its own domestic matters it manifests considerable intelligence. It carries its prey to its home, and after eating all the flesh, throws out the debris, and then pursues such small fish as may chance to swim towards them. It also changes its colour [Cuvier says, that the changes of colour of the skin of the polypus are continual, and succeed each other with an extreme rapidity; but that it has not been observed, any more than the chameleon, to take the colour of objects in its vicinity.] according to the aspect of the place where it is, and more especially when it is alarmed. The notion is entirely unfounded that it gnaws [This notion is mentioned by Athenæus, Pherecrates, Alcæus, Hesiod, Oppian, and Ælian.] its own arms; for it is from the congers that this mischance befalls it; but it is no other than true that its arms shoot forth again, like the tail in the colotus [Cuvier says, that Pliny states, in B. xxix. c. 28, that the colotis, or colotes of the Greeks, is the same as their ascalabotes, the “stellio” of the Latins. This stellio is the same as the “gecko” of the moderns, and the species known in Italy and Greece is the same as the “wall gecko” of the French, or the tarente of the Provencals. From what Pliny says here about its tail, it would appear to have been a lizard; but its identity with the stellio, Cuvier says, is very doubtful. It will be mentioned more at length in B. xi. c. 31.] and the lizard. [It is very true, Cuvier says, that the tail of the gecko and lizard will grow again after it has been cut off, but without vertebræ. As to the arms of the polypus, he says, it is very possible, seeing that the horns of the snail, which belongs to the same family, will grow again.]

Chap. 47.—The Nautilus, or Sailing Polypus.

Among the most remarkable curiosities is the animal which has the name [This account of the nautilus, Cuvier says, the Argonauta argo of Linnæus, wonderful as it may appear, has been often confirmed by modern observation.] of nautilus, or, as some people call it, the pompilos. Lying with the head upwards, it rises to the surface of the water, raising itself little by little, while, by means of a certain conduit in its body, it discharges all the water, and this being got rid of like so much bilge-water as it were, it finds no difficulty in sailing along. Then, extending backwards its two front arms, it stretches out between them a membrane [This, Cuvier says, is not a membrane between the two feet or tentacles, but a distinct membranous delatation of the extremity of each of those two organs.] of marvellous thinness, which acts as a sail spread out to the wind, while with the rest of its arms it paddles along below, steering itself with its tail in the middle, which acts as a rudder. Thus does it make its way along the deep, mimicking the appearance of a light Liburnian [These vessels have been already remarked upon in Note 33 to c. 5 of the present Book.] bark; while, if anything chances to cause it alarm, in an instant it draws in the water, and sinks to the bottom. [Aristotle, Hist. Anim. B. vi. c. 61.]