516 



SCIENCE. 



[X. S. Vol. XXI. No. 5.33. 



vacation. It is hoped that chemical analyses 

 of these samples will throw some light on the 

 subject. 



The following references to the literature 

 may be useful to those who wish to read what 

 has been written regarding these mounds on 

 the Pacific coast: Le Conte, Proceedings Cali^ 

 fornia Academy of Sciences, V., 219 (1873) ; 

 Nature, April 19, 1877, XV., 530; Wallace, 

 Nature, XV., 274; Barnes, American Nat- 

 uralist, September, 1879, XIII., 565; Turner, 

 17th annual report U. S. G. S., Part I., 681. 

 To these may be added Walther's ' Denuda- 

 tion in der Wiiste,' 377, 390. The paper by 

 ]\Ir. Turner contains a good picture of the 

 mounds on the foot-hills near Snelling, Call-' 

 fornia. 



J. C. Branner. 



Stanford University, 

 March 3, 1905. 



yOTES ON THE HISTORY OF NATURAL 

 SCIENCE. 



OPPIAN ON FISHING. 



An early work on angling, dating from the 

 second century of our era, and possessing con- 

 siderable scientific as well as literary merit, 

 is the ' Halieutica,' in five books, by Oppian 

 of Cilicia. Unlike most ancient writers on 

 natural history, Oppian manifests a strict 

 regard for truth, not only avoiding fabulous 

 tales, but often refuting popular errors. To 

 wide and accurate observation the author adds 

 the charm of felicitous description, his treat- 

 ment of the subject-matter being unusually 

 graceful and animated. Concerning modes 

 of fishing and diving, habits of marine ani- 

 mals and general natural history, there is 

 much of interest to modern readers, and in 

 former times the work was held in high es- 

 teem. Appended to the English translation, 

 published in 1722, is a catalogue of the ver- 

 nacular names of fishes mentioned by Oppian, 

 with their common English equivalents — the 

 latter, however, not being always accurately 

 given. A revised Nomenclator of classical 

 names of animals, with synonyms and ety- 

 mology, would 1)0 gladly welcomed by modern 

 systematists. 



HO.MAX ICHTHYOLOGY. 



Amongst early works of interest to ichthyol- 

 ogists, noticed more or less fully by Cuvier 

 in his ' History of Natural Sciences,' there are 

 two or three Roman writings which contain 

 mimerous and valuable observations on aquatic 

 animals. These appeal with equal force to 

 naturalists and classicists of our own day, 

 though the latter appear to be on more 

 familiar terms with them. 



One of these works well worthy of atten- 

 tion is the ' Halieutica ' of Ovid, or commonly 

 attributed to him, a poem which has come 

 down to us in only one third of its entirety. 

 Names are given in this fragment of fifty-three 

 species of fishes, most of which are tolerably 

 well indicated by the descriptions. Cuvier 

 remarks that but for this poem of Ovid, a 

 number of passages in Pliny would be unin- 

 telligible to modern readers; and in the copy 

 belonging to the Harvard Ifuseum, formerly 

 the property of Louis Agassiz, occurs a manu- 

 script note by the latter, referring to Ovid's 

 comment on fossil shells and description of 

 man in his 'Metamorphoses.' 



Another work regarded by Cuvier as ' ex- 

 tremely precious for natural history ' is that 

 bearing the assumed name of the gourmand 

 Apicius, the ninth and tenth books being es- 

 pecially fruitful in information. Various 

 ichthyological notices are contained in the 

 agricultural works {' De re rustica') of Col- 

 lunella, Varro and Cato. Apuleius is credited 

 with having made refined anatomical dissec- 

 tions, and Athenseus gives descriptions of 

 eighty-four species of fishes, arranged in al- 

 phabetical order. It may not be generally 

 known that Cuvier himself assisted in the 

 recension of the text of Elian's ' History of 

 Animals,' his collaborators being the well- 

 known French translators of Pliny. 



SUBTERRANEAN FISHES. 



Lasaulx, in his ' Geology of the Greeks and 

 Koinans,' and Sir Charles Lyell, in the intro- 

 ductory chapter of his ' Principles of Geology,' 

 arc responsible for widespread misconception 

 of Aristotelian views in regard to the nature 

 and origin of fossils. Certain passages in the 



