212 



nerian Transactions, vol. i. ; and undoubtedly, in their want of pro- 

 cesses and cartilaginous structure, have much resemblance to those 

 of chondropterygious fishes. One of the vertebrae adherent to the 

 ci'anium, measured only two inches across ; while that of the Bask- 

 ing shark, in the same situation, is about seven inches in diameter. 

 Dr Barclay's paper is accompanied by an engraving of the omoplates, 

 and upper portion of the pectoral fin, which are accurately given, 

 from a drawing made from the recent remains, by the late Mr John 

 T. Urquhart, an accomplished draughtsman, and able naturalist. I. 

 know the representation to be correct, for I saw and handled the 

 specimen. The substance of this part was a firm, but flexible carti- 

 lage, and seemed to have been placed in the muscles ; just as Cuvier 

 describes the omoplates of sharks to be : " Leur omoplates eout sus-. 

 pendues dans le chair, en arriere des Branchies, sans articuler ni au 

 crane ni k I'espine." 



The Orkney animal seems to have had two circular spiracles on 

 each side of its neck, about 1^ inch in diameter ; whereas the 

 Basking shark has Jive linear spiracles on each side, a foot or more 

 in length. 



The cranium, which I also very carefully examined, was far too 

 small for that of a Basking shark of even one-fourth the usual 

 length of that species. It measured in its dried state no more than 

 twelve inches in length, and its greatest diameter was only seven 

 inches. A Basking shark of thirty-six feet long would have had a 

 head of at least five feet in length ; and the diameter of the cranium, 

 at the angles of the mouth, would have measui-ed probably five feet. 

 These proportions positively shew, that the Orkney animal could 

 not possibly be confounded by intelligent men, accustomed to see the 

 Basking shark, with that fish. There was a hole on the top of the 

 cranium, something similar to the blow-hole of the cetaceans ; but 

 its lateral spiracles and cartilaginous bones forbid us to refer it to 

 the order of cetacea. 



Everything proves the Orkney animal to have been a chondropte- 

 rygious Jish, different from any described by naturalists ; but it 

 has no pretensions to the denomination of Sea-serpent or Sea-snake, 

 although its general form, and probably its mode of progression in 

 the ocean, may give it some resemblance to the order of Serpentes. 

 Certainly, it cannot be confounded with any known shark ; nor does 

 it belong to the family of Squalidse. 



