THE CHARACIDAE. 23 



described in detail. The fact that different authors have associated different 

 members of the Characidae with the herring, trout, cyprinids, and poecilids 

 indicates in a measure their versatility. 



Literature. 



The earliest observations on Characins are recorded on some ancient 

 monuments of Egypt. Heckel (Die fische Aegyptens chronologisch der 

 zeitfolge ihrer ersten und spateren wissenschaftlichen kenntnissnahme nach 

 geordnet, p. 213 of Abbildungen und beschreibungen der fische Syriens, 1843) 

 identifies Dislichodus nilolicus and Citharinus geoffroyi from mural decorations 

 of graves near the Pyramids. Boulenger (Fishes of the Nile, 1907, p. 156) finds 

 that Citharinus citharus Geoffroy is represented on the mural paintings of the 

 tombs at Giza and Sapara, at Deir el Gebrawi, and on the tomb of Ti at Sakkara. 



The American Characins were firs.t brought to the notice of naturalists by 

 Marcgrav, who, in 1648 in his Historiae rerum naturalium Braziliae, 4, described 

 the following : — 



Curimata, p. 156 = ProchUodus argenteus (Agassiz). 

 Tareira do Rio, p. 157 = Hoplias malabaricus (Bloch). 

 Piraya, p. 164 = Pygocentrus piraya (Cuvier). 



Maturaque, p. 169 = Hoplias malabaricus (Bloch). 

 Piabucu, p. 170 = Piabucus dcntatus (Koelreuter). 



Piaba, p. 170 = An Anostomus (?) 



Ten years later, in 1658, Piso followed this account in his Historiae naturalis 

 et medicae Indiae Occidentalis libri quinque, which is but a second edition of 

 the former work, with figures and descriptions of the same species: — 



Piabucu, p. 66, Piaba, p. 67, Maturaque, p. 67, Tareira II do Rio, p. 68, Piranha, p. 69, 

 Curimata, p. 70. 



The detailed history of the African section of the family will not be given 

 here. 1 The number of known African species is far smaller than the number 

 of American species which exceeds six hundred. 



In Seba's Locupletissimi verum naturalium thesauri accurata descriptis, 



1 Boulenger (Fishes of the Nile, 1907, p. 117) indicates that the Salmo nilolicus Linn6, Syst. nat., 

 ed. 12 is not the Salmo niloticus of Hasselquist. The date, 1757, of Hasselquist, however, being pre- 

 Linnean, the name Salmo nilolicus must be applied to the species of LinnS ed. 10. The S. nilolicus of 

 the Systema ed. 12, which is the same as that of ed. 10, is, according to Boulenger, identical with Mylelcs 

 baremose Joannis, and the latter = Alestcs baremose of Boulenger, p. 117, should stand as Mylelcs nilo- 

 licus. Further according to Boulenger, p. 141, the Salmo nilolicus of Hasselquist is Salmo aegyptiacus 

 of Gmelin. The name Salmo nilolicus being a synonym of Mylelcs niloticus cannot be used for any 

 other species and the oldest name after Hasselquist should be applied to his species. This oldest name 

 is Salmo aegyptiacus and since this is a Distichodus the species should be Dislichodus aegyptiacus instc ad 

 of Distichodus niloticus as given by Boulenger, p. 14 1 . 



