1080 



SCANDINAVIAN I-ISIiI>. 



supposed to he youiiii' Eels, m uiistake ngainst wliicli 

 lie cautions his readers, but wliieh often crops up, even 

 in modern times. He believed that Eels were born of 

 \vor'nis generated in the sea by decaying \veed and on 

 the shores of fresh water by mud under the influence 

 of heat". According to Puny'' the Eels rub themselves 

 against the rocks, and wliat they thus scrape off their 

 bodies comes to life. According to Kondelet' even 

 Ai'tiENvEUS and Oppian (2nd and 3rd cent., A. D.) had 

 seen Eels knot themselves together in bundles; and 

 they believed that the slime the Eels tiuis pressed out 

 of one anothei''s bodies received animation. The old 

 tale of the Eel])out {Enchclyo'pus, see above, p. 607) 

 as "Eel mother" can be traced in literature back to 

 Albertus Magnus. \\'ith these conjectures the Eel 

 qiicfitUtn A\as dismissed throughout the Middle Ages; 

 and the founder of modern ichthyology, Artedi, re- 

 frained from touching the point in his writings". Ti- 

 selius, a Swedish rector and a contemporary of his, 

 had, however, published at Upsala in 1723 an "Ut- 

 forUg heskrifning cifrer den stora Svea och Gofha SJon 

 Wdtter", where he relates (p. 113) that "in several 

 Eels, close to the small of the jjack and the spine, 

 has been seen a, tine and handsome roe of a reddish 

 appearance". Tliis observation probabl}' refers to the 

 kidneys of the Eel, but perhaps to the true ovaries. 

 The first discoverer of these may thus have been a 

 Swede; but in scientitic literature the Italian Mondini'" 

 and the Danish naturalist O. E. Ml'llek' are generally 

 mentioned as rivals for this honour. The ovaries were 

 more thoroughly investigated by Rathke" and Hohn- 

 BAUM-HoKNSCHUOH ''. The male organs of the Eels 

 were not discovered until more recent times. Hathke 

 indeed speaks in several passages' of such organs, but 



\vhetlier he referred to the true testes, or had any 

 knowledge of their structure, seems more than doubt- 

 ful, for he so expressly states that they are witiiout 

 efferent duct. Sykski ' was the first to publish more 

 accurate information of these organs, and since then 

 Broch* and Rydek' have been the principal contri- 

 butors to the elucidation of ijuestions connected here- 

 witli. 



The first (ibser\ation from which we can derive 

 a positive opinion as to the breeding of the Eel, is 

 old enough, even in a literary sense. Ahistotle was 

 quite aware that the Ke\ goes out to sea, t)ut lie ex- 

 pressly denied that these wanderings were due to sexual 

 instinct, tiie Eel being destitute, in his opinion, l)oth 

 of semen and ova. From the middle of the 17th cen- 

 tury, however, it has l)een known that the Eel breeds 

 in the sea. We are told by Franciscus Redi'": "Now 

 there are other fishes that pass the greater part of their 

 life in fresh water, but resort to the sea for the pur- 

 pose of disburdening themselves of their seed. Thus 

 I have arrived, bj' means of numerous and long con- 

 tinued observations, at the conclusion that year by year, 

 as soon as the rainy season sets in about the nmnth 

 of August, espet-ially on dark and cloudy nights, the 

 Eels repair in great numbers from rivers and lakes to 

 the sea, where they deposit their germs. The small 

 Eels born of these swim up the mouths of the rivers 

 into fresh water earlier or later, according as the 

 weather is more or less severe, towards the end of 

 January or just in the beginning of February-, so that 

 the migration is commonly over by the end of April. 

 They do not arrive in one bod^■. l)ut in several de- 

 tachments and at varying intervals. They come in 

 such numbers tliat some fishermen wiioni I connnis- 



" There (ire several niediieval receipts for tlie breeding of Eels by laying two moist sods with tlie ; 



* //(.«/. Mtmdl Lib. IX, cap. 50. 

 ' De Pise, fitw., p. 199. 

 '' LinNjEUS (^Syst. Nat., 1. c) based his <ipiniou on Fahlberg's conmninication to the Swedish Aca( 



discovery of young in the intestine of Eels, a repetition of tlie old confusion with intestinal worms. 



* De Anguillce ovariis, communicated to the Academy of Bologna in 1777, but not printed until 17 

 .'' Underbrochne Bemiihungeii bet den Intestmalwurmern, Schr. Berl. Ges. Naturf. Freunde. vol. I, 17 

 " Beitr. Gescli. Tliierw., 2:te Abth. (Schr. Naturf. Ges. Danzig, Heft. Ill), pj.. 121, 161, 175; 



Niiturg. 1838, p. 299: Bemerk. hocbtr. Aal, Arch. Anat., Phys. 1850, p. 20.3. 



* De Anyuill. semi et genet:, disp. (ireifsw. 1842. 



* Beitr., 1. c, pp. 183, 186, 196. 



■> (Jber die Reproductions-Organe del- Aale, Sitsber. Akad. Wiss. Wieu, LXIX, i U87-1), p. 315. 



* Mith. Zool. Stat. Neap., Bd. 2, p. 415. 

 ' Bull. U. S. Fish. Comm., 1885, p. 1. 



"■ Francisoi Redi, Optcsculoriim pars tertia, sive de animalctdis vivis qiiw in corpofibus animaliuui vi 

 Ex Etiusci Latinas fecit Pethus Coste, Lugd. Batav. 1729, p. 99. 



voriini reperiitiitui; obsercationef.: 



