Sphyrmia barracuda; its Morphology, Habits, and History. 105 



drawn. I have not seen this, nor have I had opportunity to examine 

 Rondelet's original figure pubUshed in the Latin edition of his book in 

 1554. His figure in the French translation of the above work is the 

 earliest examined in the course of this research, but there is no reason 

 to doubt that it is not identical with that in the 1554 folio. The figure 

 is small and not very distinctive. Cuvier and Valenciennes say that 

 the head is too long. This figure was copied by Gesner in the fourth 

 volume of his'^Historia Animalium" (1558). Aldrovandi (1613), how- 

 ever, had a new drawing made for his book, but our French critics say 

 that it was made from a dried specimen. While in some ways an 

 improvement on the preceding figures, it is not a good drawing, the 

 head especially being poor. These writers also say that Bloch's figure 

 — which I have not examined — is the best made up to that time, but 

 that it is faulty in some respects. 



However, of the figures studied, Salviani's (1554) is far and away the 

 best portrayal of the sphyraena, either European or American, made 

 prior to the time of publication of Cuvier and Valenciennes' elegant 

 drawing to be referred to later. Occupying a whole page in Salviani's 

 folio, it is well drawn and well printed. There are some defects. The 

 teeth are not figured absolutely correctly and the ventral and caudal 

 fins are not well done, but the figure as a whole is distinctly good. 

 The eye is fine, the head generally well done, the lower jaw is longer and 

 has a distinct lump at the upturned end. The point of the upper jaw 

 is plainly upturned and slightly hollowed out for the reception of the 

 great tooth at the point of the lower jaw. The fins are well placed, 

 as is also the lateral line. Most noticeable is the absence of the 

 first dorsal fin and this absence is severely criticized by Cuvier and 

 Valenciennes. However, Salviani distinctly says that there are two 

 dorsal fins, "the first on its middle, the hinder one, however, towards 

 the caudal." In the dead fish, this is always sunk in the sheath, and 

 so it was in the specimen from which Salviani' s artist made his draw- 

 ing. It is greatly to be regretted that this striking figure was not 

 studied until the present paper was in press. Had it been seen earlier 

 it would have been reproduced herein. 



The earliest figure of the American fish which has come to Ught in 

 the course of this research is Rochefort's drawing of the becune taken 

 from the edition of his book published in 1665. It is a poor figure, 

 giving only in very general outline the form of the fish and the relative 

 position of the fins. The most striking defect consists in the absence 

 of one set of the paired fins, just which it is hard to say. However, 

 historically it is of enough interest to be reproduced herein as figure 15, 

 plate V. There is reason to think that this figure appeared in the 

 first edition of Rochefort's work in 1558, which I have not been able 

 to consult. 



The next ancient figure is that in volume ii of Sloane's ''Voyage to 

 Jamaica" (1725), table 247, figure 3. This, however, is so poorly 



