150 
Aquatte Rite 
fishes up to his own day. 
Few writers in biology have accom- 
plished such an array of completed pro- 
ductions in so brief a period of time; 
even Linnzeus, the best-known naturalist 
the world has ever seen, never succeeded 
in overshadowing Ardeti, in so far as the 
science of fishes is concerned. How- 
ever, Linnzus did accomplish one great 
task in this field; for, taking the correctly 
described species of fish by Artedi, he 
not only added other species to the list, 
but he applied correct binomial names to 
them. Moreover, Linneus, in the twelfth 
edition of his System, gives us a classifi- 
cation of fishes which is a very thorough 
one, considering the time it appeared. 
This part of the wonderful achievements 
of Linnzus is too extensive to reproduce 
in a short article like the present one. 
Almost immediately after the works 
of Artedi and Linnzus appeared—in- 
deed, inspired by them—this branch of 
zoological science took on a truly marvel- 
ous forward movement, which was 
manifested in the rapid appearance of 
many works on fishes from many pens 
of writers of very different nationalities. 
Omitting the feeble efforts of Klein and 
Gronow, both of whom were contempo- 
raneous authors with Linnzus, we may 
name such writers as Thunberg; Brum- 
nich (Mediterranean fishes); Kalm 
(American types) ; O. Fabricius (Green- 
land); Osbeck (Fishes of Japan and 
China); Forskal (Red Sea forms); 
Hasselquist (Palestine and Egyptian spe- 
cies), with a great many others, such 
as Duhamel, Pennant, Muller, Parra, 
Cornide, Neidinger, and others of less 
eminence. Next followed the great im- 
press made on ichthyology by the writ- 
ings and complications of such distin- 
guished writers as M. E. Bloch (1723- 
1799), and Lacepede (1756-1826) ; while 
the morphological side of the science re- 
ceived the attention of numerous pens 
of authors skilled in comparative anat- 
omy, wherein fishes were not neglected, 
For example, Hunter worked on the 
nerves ; Camper and Haller took up other 
organs, but also paid some attention to 
piscine neurology. Munro produced a 
mass of excellent work on the general 
anatomy of fish, contrasting it with that 
of our own species. Electrical fish were 
studied by Allamand, Walsh, Reaumur, 
Bancroft and others. Even as early at 
1764, Fleditsch both understood and 
practiced the artificial rearing of salmon 
and trout; and just previous to this time 
a great number of brochures appeared on 
what was being discussed under the gen- 
eral title of the mystery of the common 
eel. 
Another enormous impulse was given 
the study of fishes when Baron Cuvier 
entered the field (1769-1832) ; this was 
at a time almost immediately after the 
writings of Lacepede and Bloch ap- 
peared. It will be remembered that G. 
Cuvier was the author of the great work, 
the Regne Animal, and his interest in 
ichthyology hinged upon his employing 
it in that famous treatise. A. Valenci- 
ennes was a pupil of Cuvier’s, and in the 
year 1820 the former commenced his 
well-known work on the Hirtoire Natur- 
alle des Poissons, the first volume of 
which was published eight years there- 
after. Following Cuvier’s death, Valen- 
ciennes continued the work, producing 
volume after volume, until the twenty- 
second one was out in 1848, which takes 
into consideration the salmon group of 
fishes or the Salmonidae. Notwithstand- 
ing its extent, this series of volumes is 
by no means complete. This does not 
mean, however, that the student of ich- 
thyology can well dispense with it, for 
such is not the case. 
In a brief article like the present one 
