THE WHALEBONE WHALES OF THE WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC, 35 
Linnzeus’s Systema Naturx, may be conveniently divided into three classes. In the 
first class belong the general natural histories, commonly covering the whole field 
of geography, zodlogy, botany, anthropology, and often other branches of science 
as well. These works are descriptive rather than systematic, and frequently contain 
reflections on and discussions of philological, theological, and political subjects. 
The second class comprises works relating more strictly to animals, plants, and 
minerals, but in which little or no attempt is made to classify the various natural 
objects described. Finally, we have the formal natural histories, the precursors of 
the systematic works of the present time. As zodlogies of this third class do not 
make their appearance before the beginning of the eighteenth century, we shall look 
in vain for any systematic treatment of the subject under consideration in advance 
of that time. 
' In the two centuries, 1553-1758, the whale fishery received the largest share 
of attention. Discussions of the identity of the unicorn, involving descriptions 
of the Narwhal, occupy the next place, while little less extensive were the in- 
quiries regarding the origin of ambergris and the nature of the whale which 
swallowed Jonah. The industrial treatises cover nearly the whole period, but 
those on the unicorn seem to have had their origin about the middle of the seven- 
teenth century, and those on ambergris and on Jonah’s whale in the later decades 
of that century. 
None of the early naturalists, such as Rondelet (1554), Gesner (1551), or 
Belon (1551), made any reference to the observations of the American explorers 
or to American cetaceans in any wise. American cetology opens in 1590 with 
Acosta’s fable of the Florida Indians, who, as he learned from “some expert men,” 
captured whales by driving plugs into their blowholes.' This fable was repeated 
by De Bry in 1602, who published a plate showing the Indians engaged in this 
marvellous whale fishery.” Lescarbot quotes from Acosta in 1609* and Nierem- 
berg also tells the story in 1635, but seems inclined to discredit it.“ Du Tetre 
also repeats it in 1667. 
Rochefort’s Natural History of the Antilles, published in 1658, contains the 
next reference to baleen whales in North American waters. A translation of his 
remarks has already been given on p. 30. Though his description is far from 
satisfactory, it seems to have reference to some species of Finback whale. This is 
the more probable as Du Tetre in his History of the Antilles, published in 1667, 
has a fuller description under the same heading, as we have already seen in the 
preceding chapter, pp. 30, 31. 
Highteenth Century. 
In 1703, La Hontan, in his New Voyages to North America, enumerates 
(1) “Balenots, or little whales”; (2) “a fish almost as big as a whale, called 
‘ AcostTA, J., Hist. nat. y moral de las Indias, Seville, 1590, pp. 158-162. 
2 De Bry, T., Idea vera et genuina, Preecipuarum Historiarum omnium, ut et variorum Rituum, 
Ceremoniarum (etc.) gentis Indicz, Frankfort, 1602, pl. 1. 
* Nova Francia. English ed., 1609, p. 269. 
‘NrerReEMBERG, J. E., Historia naturee, Antwerp, 1635, p. 26r. 
