1897] STEENSTRUP 163 
furnishing the museum with pelagic and other material from almost 
every part of the ocean. Several parts of this ‘“ Plankton” have 
since been worked upon by his pupils and others (¢.g., Boas on the 
Pteropoda, Traustedt on the Salpae, Liitken on the Dolphins and 
the ‘‘ hemi-metamorphoses of fishes,” Bovallius on the Hyperidae, 
etc.). With this series of studies may also be reckoned the memoir 
of Steenstrup and myself on the parasitic Entomostraca of the 
ocean with several other forms of the same tribe ; also the former’s 
anti-critical note on the genera Sileniwm, Lestevra and Pegasimallus, 
and his papers (too numerous to be enumerated here) on Cepha- 
lopoda (Notae teuthologicae, ete.) in the Transactions and Proceed- 
ings of the Academy of Science, in the Videnskabelige Meddelel- 
ser fra den naturhistoriske Forening, and elsewhere in popular 
journals. I shall dwell, however, more particularly only on two 
points. Firstly, there is his surprising demonstration that the 
apparently abnormal development of one or occasionally two arms 
in male cuttlefishes, hitherto overlooked or not understood, was in 
fact the homologue of the well-known “ hectocotyle” in the pelagic 
Octopoda, His eager desire to throw the light of his genius and of 
his science on obscure problems, led him also to investigate the tale 
of the wonderful sea-monk, the monster that was cast ashore in our 
vicinity in the sixteenth century, described and figured by Belon, 
Rondelet and Gesner, and playing an important part in the semi- 
mystic Natural History of the Renaissance. Nobody had been 
able to decipher this enigmatical monster until Steenstrup deprived 
it of its fabulous investment, demonstrated it to be simply a decapod 
giant cuttlefish. Specimens of this same kind (Architeuthus) have 
been thrown on our shore, formerly and later on the shores of Ice- 
land, Faroe, Jutland, Newfoundland and Japan, and happily one of 
our captains did find such an animal floating in the Atlantic, and 
secured to Steenstrup some of its most important parts. Steen- 
strup’s full account of these remains was partly in print, though 
never completely published; but some of his plates have been 
placed in the hands of his fellow-zoologists. To the other purely 
zoological articles of Steenstrup, I shall only allude briefly, namely, 
to those on Sphenopus (Sabella marsupialis Gm.), on Philichthys, 
Rhizochilus, Xenobanalus, Pachybdella and Peltogaster, on the enig- 
matical objects correctly interpreted as the “gillrakers” of Selachus 
maximus, on the natural systematic place of the walrus, etc. His 
interpretation of the wandering of the eye in young flounders has 
not been accepted with unanimity, but still has some trustworthy 
points to fall back upon. Our common memoir on the Mola-tribe 
(Orthagoriscus) and its larval stages, has not been published in its 
complete form; perhaps it may be so still. Several palaeonto- 
logical papers on mammals, birds and reptiles (turtles) found in our 
