1892.] NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 231 



"which could be seen by dissection I feel convinced that Aristotle 

 made the dissections for himself and reported what he saw. He 

 may not always have seen aright in nice point;;, and he certainly 

 did not understand what he saw as it is understood in the light of 

 modern science ; but there is no ground for assuming that he did 

 not see what would be apparent to any one who took the least 

 pains to look, even if with unpractised eye. A striking confirma- 

 tion of the correctness of his observation in matters of anatomy 

 was aflTorded by the repeated statement that the fid-iiayo^ (Lophhis 

 piseatorlus) has its gall bladder upon the intestine, not upon the 

 liver. A dissection of this fish by Dr. Charles H. Gilbert proved 

 the statement of Aristotle to be correct. I believe that a reading 

 of Aristotle in the original accompanied by dissections of the ani- 

 mals in question would bring one to a much better understanding 

 of his anatomical terms, which are much in need of some such 

 elucidation. 



It is quite otherwise when he comes to the habits of the fishes 

 and other matters than anatomical knowledge. Here he has to 

 depend upon the observations of the fishermen and others, and what 

 he has to say simply records the prevalent beliefs. Of course much 

 of this fisherman's lore is real knowledge gained from observation, 

 but it has also a considerable share of myth. 



Another great source of difficulty is corruption of the text. 

 Considering all the time and the vicissitudes that the Mss. of Aristotle 

 have passed through it is always more or less problematical as to 

 whether in any given passage we have just what Aristotle said. 



For the nomenclature and systematic arrangement of the species, 

 the identification of my specimens, and for all matters purely zoo- 

 logical in character I am indebted to Dr. David S. Jordan, at whose 

 suggestion the work was undertaken. The specimens obtained are 

 in the museum of the University of Indiana. 



Explanatory jS'otes. 



1. The following order of statement has been adopted: (1) Sci- 

 entific name by Dr. Jordan. (2) M. G. (Modern Greek) name or 

 names heard by me in Greece, if any ; each name followed immediately 

 by a small figure in parenthesis indicating the number of specimens 

 secured under that name. (3) A reference to the page of Aposto- 

 lides' book (La Peche en Grece par Nicolas Chr. Apostolides, Ath- 

 ens, 1883), where the species is given, followed by the scientific 



