THE BOOK OF THE PIKE 



period indeed, when contrasted with the recorded his- 

 tory of the European pil<e reaching well beyond the 

 thirteenth century. There is an earlier mention of the 

 pike, though Le Sueur records it in the same year with 

 the pickerels, and we will have to let his date stand. 

 The muskellunge, the Great Lakes fish, is mentioned 

 by Mitchell in 1824; the Ohio fish by Rafinesque in 

 1 81 8; the Wisconsin fish, though often mentioned in 

 sporting journals, was not, to the best of my knowl- 

 edge, described by a scientist until Jordan put his 

 capable hand to the task in 1888. Naturally, there is 

 considerable confusion regarding the matter of the 

 muskellunge, the differences between the various fish 

 being so slight, forms seeming almost to intergrade, 

 that it is wise to postpone the discussion to a later 

 chapter, when we can take up the whole question 

 carefully. 



As will be seen from the foregoing paragraph, if we 

 do not possess ancient ichthyic lore relative to the pike 

 family, we have confusion worse confounded in regard 

 to descriptions of the various fish. As I have searched 

 the early manuscripts and scientific journals, I have 

 been more than once cast all adrift by contradictory 

 statements and overlapping descriptions. We need 

 some wise, scientific angler to straighten out this 

 whole matter of pike history and description, and also 

 to collect the Indian legends regarding the storied 

 northern fish. 



I have already mentioned Henshall's book, "Bass, 

 Pike, Perch, and Other Game Fishes of America," as 

 readable a work and as authentic as any I know. 

 However, it is to magazines of the outdoor class that 

 we must go for angling information, though unfortu- 



30 



