184 <A. E. Verrill—Cephalopods of the North Atlantic. 
lished an outline figure of the lower jaw, copied from a draw-' 
Ing furnished to him by Steenstrup. Harting states that the 
pen or “gladius” of this specimen is six feet long. Many im- 
ple parts of this specimen were secured, and I regret that 
ave been unable to see the figures and description of it, re- 
’ 
arting, in the important memoir referred to, describes 
specimens of two species, both of which are evidently quite 
distinct from all those enumerated above. 
The first of these (his plate 1) is represented by the jaws and 
and described, and were referred to Architeuthis dux by Hart- 
ing. But the character of the dentition (plate Iv, fig. 8) is $0 
totally different from what I have found in A. monachus that 
it will be necessary to refer this species to a different genus, if 
not to a distinct family. The form of the lower jaw is quite 
unlike that of A. dua, for the beak is very acute, the cutting 
edge is concave, the notch shallow and broad, and the alar 
tooth is somewhat prominent. The size is about the same as 
our No. 5. The suckers figured are from the sessile arms, am! 
agree pretty nearly with those of A. monachus. The edges 
strengthened by an oblique, strongly denticulated ring. The 
‘ : e 
slender pedicels, attached obliquely on ‘one side. The lingual 
teeth (see fig. 8, copied from Harting) 
rows, and resemble closely those of Loligo (fig. 7). In fact, I 
cannot find, in the figures and description, any character by 
which this species can be separated from Loligo, and at the same 
time it is evident that it is a specics distinct from all others 
known. I would, therefore, propose to designate it by the 
name of Loligo Hartingii. 
The other species described by Harting was from the Indian 
Ocean, and belongs to the genus Mnoploteuthis. ; 
Mr. Kent, in the article already referred to,* mentions ® 
sessile arm of a giant cephalopod, which has been long pr 
served in the British Museum, but of which the origin 
* Proceedings Zoological Society of London for 1874, p. 178. 
ee ee 
