Sea Monsters Unmasked, and Sea Fables Explained
by Henry Lee · English · Gutenberg #36677 · 398,916 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Sea Monsters Unmasked, and Sea Fables Explained
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Sea Monsters Unmasked, and Sea Fables Explained
Author: Henry Lee
Release date: July 9, 2011 [eBook #36677]
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/36677
Credits: Produced by Jeannie Howse, Anna Hall, Bryan Ness and the
Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
(This file was produced from images generously made
available by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SEA MONSTERS UNMASKED, AND SEA FABLES EXPLAINED ***
Produced by Jeannie Howse, Anna Hall, Bryan Ness and the
Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
(This file was produced from images generously made
available by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)
[Illustration: THE SEA SERPENT, AS FIRST SEEN FROM H.M.S. 'DAEDALUS.'
_Frontispiece._]
(_International Fisheries Exhibition_ LONDON, 1883)
SEA MONSTERS UNMASKED
BY
HENRY LEE, F.L.S., F.G.S., F.Z.S.
SOMETIME NATURALIST OF THE BRIGHTON AQUARIUM
AND
AUTHOR OF 'THE OCTOPUS, OR THE DEVIL-FISH OF FICTION AND FACT'
ILLUSTRATED
LONDON
WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED
INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES EXHIBITION
AND 13 CHARING CROSS, S.W.
1883
PREFACE.
As I commence this little history of two sea monsters there comes to my
mind a remark made to me by my friend, Mr. Samuel L. Clemens--"Mark
Twain"--which illustrates a feeling that many a writer must have
experienced when dealing with a subject that has been previously well
handled. Expressing to me one day the gratification he felt in having
made many pleasant acquaintances in England, he added, with dry humour,
and a grave countenance, "Yes! I owe your countrymen no grudge or
ill-will. I freely forgive them, though one of them did me a grievous
wrong, an irreparable injury! It was Shakspeare: if he had not written
those plays of his, I should have done so! They contain _my_ thoughts,
_my_ sentiments! He forestalled me!"
In treating of the so-called "sea-serpent," I have been anticipated by
many able writers. Mr. Gosse, in his delightful book, 'The Romance of
Natural History,' published in 1862, devoted a chapter to it; and
numerous articles concerning it have appeared in various papers and
periodicals.
But, for the information from which those authors have drawn their
inferences, and on which they have founded their opinions, they have
been greatly indebted, as must be all who have seriously to consider
this subject, to the late experienced editor of the _Zoologist_, Mr.
Edward Newman, a man of wonderful power of mind, of great judgment, a
profound thinker, and an able writer. At a time when, as he said, "the
shafts of ridicule were launched against believers and unbelievers in
the sea-serpent in a very pleasing and impartial manner," he, in the
true spirit of philosophical inquiry, in 1847, opened the columns of his
magazine to correspondence on this topic, and all the more recent
reports of marine monsters having been seen are therein recorded. To
him, therefore, the fullest acknowledgments are due.
The great cuttles, also, have been the subject of articles in various
magazines, notably one by Mr. W. Saville Kent, F.L.S., in the 'Popular
Science Review' of April, 1874, and a chapter in my little book on the
Octopus, published in 1873, is also devoted to them. In writing of them
as the living representatives of the kraken, and as having been
frequently mistaken for the "sea-serpent," my deductions have been drawn
from personal knowledge, and an intimate acquaintance with the habits,
form, and structure of the animals described. It was only by watching
the movements of specimens of the "common squid" (_Loligo vulgaris_),
and the "little squid" (_L. media_), which lived in the tanks of the
Brighton Aquarium, that I recognised in their peculiar habit of
occasionally swimming half-submerged, with uplifted caudal extremity,
and trailing arms, the fact that I had before me the "sea-serpent" of
many a well-authenticated anecdote. A mere knowledge of their form and
anatomy after death had never suggested to me that which became at once
apparent when I saw them in life.
It is a pleasure to me to acknowledge gratefully the kindness I have
met with in connection with the illustrations of this book. The
proprietors of the _Illustrated London News_ not only gave me permission
to copy, in reduced size, their two pictures of the _Daedalus_ incident,
but presented to me electrotype copies of all others small enough for
these pages--namely, "Jonah and the Monster," Egede's "Sea-Serpent," and
the Whale as seen from the _Pauline_. Equally kind have been the
proprietors of the _Field_. To them I am greatly indebted for their
permission to copy the beautiful woodcuts of the "Octopus at Rest," "The
Sepia seizing its Prey," and the arms of the Newfoundland squids, and
also for "electros" of the two curious Japanese engravings, all of which
originally appeared in their paper. From the _Graphic_ I have had
similar permission to copy any cuts that might be thought suitable, and
the illustrations of the sea-serpent, as seen from Her Majesty's yacht
_Osborne_ and the _City of Baltimore_, are from that journal. Messrs.
Nisbet most courteously allowed me to have a copy of the block of the
_Enaliosaurus_ swimming, which was one of the numerous pictures in Mr.
Gosse's book, published by them, already referred to. And last, not
least, I have to thank Miss Ellen Woodward, daughter of my friend, Dr.
Henry Woodward, F.R.S., for enabling me to better explain the movements
and appearances of the squids when swimming, and when raising their
bodies out of water in an erect position, by carefully drawing them from
my rough sketches.
HENRY LEE.
SAVAGE CLUB;
_July 21st, 1883_.
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
_Frontispiece._--The Sea Serpent as first seen from H.M.S. _Daedalus_.
FIG. PAGE
1. Beak and Arms of a Decapod Cuttle 16
2. The Octopus (_Octopus vulgaris_) 18
3. The Cuttle (_Sepia officinalis_) 21
4. Hooked Tentacles of _Onychoteuthis_ 23
5. Japanese fisherman attacked by a Cuttle 29
6. Arms of a great Cuttle exhibited in a Japanese fish-shop 29
7. Facsimile of De Montfort's "_Poulpe colossal_" 32
8. Gigantic Calamary caught by the French despatch vessel
_Alecton_, near Teneriffe 39
9. Tentacle of a great Calamary (_Architeuthis princeps_)
taken in Conception Bay, Newfoundland 43
10. Head and Tentacles of a great Calamary (_Architeuthis
princeps_) taken in Logie Bay, Newfoundland 44
11. Jonah and the Sea Monster 55
12. Sea Serpent seizing a man on board ship 58
13. Gigantic Lobster dragging a man from a ship 58
14. Pontoppidan's "Sea Serpent" 63
15. The Animal drawn by Mr. Bing as having been seen by Egede 66
16. The Animal which Egede probably saw 67
17. The Sea Serpent of the Wernerian Society (_facsimile_) 69
18. A Calamary swimming at the surface of the sea 77
19. The Sea Serpent passing under the quarter of H.M.S.
_Daedalus_ 81
20. The Sea Serpent and Sperm Whale as seen from the _Pauline_ 91
21. The Sea Serpent as seen from the _City of Baltimore_ 93
22. The Sea Serpent as seen from H.M. yacht _Osborne_. Phase 1 94
23. The Sea Serpent as seen from H.M. yacht _Osborne_. Phase 2 94
24. Skeleton of the _Plesiosaurus_, restored by Mr. Conybeare 98
25. The Sea Serpent on the Enaliosaurian hypothesis 100
SEA MONSTERS UNMASKED.
THE KRAKEN.
In the legends and traditions of northern nations, stories of the
existence of a marine animal of such enormous size that it more
resembled an island than an organised being frequently found a place. It
is thus described in an ancient manuscript (about A.D. 1180), attributed
to the Norwegian King Sverre; and the belief in it has been alluded to
by other Scandinavian writers from an early period to the present day.
It was an obscure and mysterious sea-monster, known as the Kraken, whose
form and nature were imperfectly understood, and it was peculiarly the
object of popular wonder and superstitious dread.
Eric Pontoppidan, the younger, Bishop of Bergen, and member of the
Royal Academy of Sciences at Copenhagen, is generally, but unjustly,
regarded as the inventor of the semi-fabulous Kraken, and is constantly
misquoted by authors who have never read his work,[1] and who, one after
another, have copied from their predecessors erroneous statements
concerning him. More than half a century before him, Christian Francis
Paullinus,[2] a physician and naturalist of Eisenach, who evinced in his
writings an admiration of the marvellous rather than of the useful, had
described as resembling Gesner's 'Heracleoticon,' a monstrous animal
which occasionally rose from the sea on the coasts of Lapland and
Finmark, and which was of such enormous dimensions, that a regiment of
soldiers could conveniently manoeuvre on its back. About the same date,
but a little earlier, Bartholinus, a learned Dane, told how, on a
certain occasion, the Bishop of Midaros found the Kraken quietly
reposing on the shore, and mistaking the enormous creature for a huge
rock, erected an altar upon it and performed mass. The Kraken
respectfully waited till the ceremony was concluded, and the reverend
prelate safe on shore, and then sank beneath the waves.
[1] 'Natural History of Norway.' A.D. 1751.
[2] Born 1643; died 1712.
And a hundred and fifty years before Bartholinus and Paullinus wrote,
Olaus Magnus,[3] Archbishop of Upsala, in Sweden, had related many
wondrous narratives of sea-monsters,--tales which had gathered and
accumulated marvels as they had been passed on from generation to
generation in oral history, and which he took care to bequeath to his
successors undeprived of any of their fascination. According to him, the
Kraken was not so polite to the laity as to the Bishop, for when some
fishermen lighted a fire on its back, it sank beneath their feet, and
overwhelmed them in the waters.
[3] Olaus Magnus has sometimes been mistaken for his brother and
predecessor in the archiepiscopal see, Johan Magnus, author of a
book entitled 'Gothorum, Suevorumque Historia.' Olaus was the last
Roman Catholic archbishop of the Swedish church, and when the
Reformation, supported by Gustavus Vasa, gained the ascendancy in
Sweden, he remained true to his faith, and retired to Rome, where
he wrote his work, 'Historia de Gentibus Septentrionalibus,' Romae,
1555. An English translation of this book was published by J.
Streater, in 1658. It does not contain the illustrations.
Pontoppidan was not a fabricator of falsehoods; but, in collecting
evidence relating to the "great beasts" living in "the great and wide
sea," was influenced, as he tells us, by "a desire to extend the popular
knowledge of the glorious works of a beneficent Creator." He gave too
much credence to contemporary narratives and old traditions of floating
islands and sea monsters, and to the superstitious beliefs and
exaggerated statements of ignorant fishermen: but if those who ridicule
him had lived in his day and amongst his people, they would probably
have done the same; for even Linnaeus was led to believe in the Kraken,
and catalogued it in the first edition of his 'Systema Naturae,' as
'_Sepia Microcosmos_.' He seems to have afterwards had cause to
discredit his information respecting it, for he omitted it in the next
edition. The Norwegian bishop was a conscientious and painstaking
investigator, and the tone of his writings is neither that of an
intentional deceiver nor of an incautious dupe. He diligently
endeavoured to separate the truth from the cloud of error and fiction by
which it was obscured; and in this he was to a great extent successful,
for he correctly identifies, from the vague and perplexing descriptions
submitted to him, the animal whose habits and structure had given rise
to so many terror-laden narratives and extravagant traditions.
The following are some of his remarks on the subject of this gigantic
and ill-defined animal. Although I have greatly abbreviated them, I have
thought it right to quote them at considerable length, that the modest
and candid spirit in which they were written may be understood:[4]
"Amongst the many things," he says, "which are in the ocean, and
concealed from our eyes, or only presented to our view for a few
minutes, is the Kraken. This creature is the largest and most
surprising of all the animal creation, and consequently well
deserves such an account as the nature of the thing, according to
the Creator's wise ordinances, will admit of. Such I shall give at
present, and perhaps much greater light on this subject may be
reserved for posterity.
"Our fishermen unanimously affirm, and without the least variation
in their accounts, that when they row out several miles to sea,
particularly in the hot summer days, and by their situation (which
they know by taking a view of different points of land) expect to
find eighty or a hundred fathoms of water, it often happens that
they do not find above twenty or thirty, and sometimes less. At
these places they generally find the greatest plenty of fish,
especially cod and ling. Their lines, they say, are no sooner out
than they may draw them up with the hooks all full of fish. By this
they know that the Kraken is at the bottom. They say this creature
causes those unnatural shallows mentioned above, and prevents their
sounding. These the fishermen are always glad to find, looking upon
them as a means of their taking abundance of fish. There are
sometimes twenty boats or more got together and throwing out their
lines at a moderate distance from each other; and the only thing
they then have to observe is whether the depth continues the same,
which they know by their lines, or whether it grows shallower, by
their seeming to have less water. If this last be the case they
know that the Kraken is raising himself nearer the surface, and
then it is not time for them to stay any longer; they immediately
leave off fishing, take to their oars, and get away as fast as they
can. When they have reached the usual depth of the place, and find
themselves out of danger, they lie upon their oars, and in a few
minutes after they see this enormous monster come up to the surface
of the water; he there shows himself sufficiently, though his whole
body does not appear, which, in all likelihood, no human eye ever
beheld. Its back or upper part, which seems to be in appearance
about an English mile and a half in circumference (some say more,
but I chuse the least for greater certainty), looks at first like a
number of small islands surrounded with something that floats and
fluctuates like sea-weeds. Here and there a larger rising is
observed like sand-banks, on which various kinds of small fishes
are seen continually leaping about till they roll off into the
water from the sides of it; at last several bright points or horns
appear, which grow thicker and thicker the higher they rise above
the surface of the water, and sometimes they stand up as high and
as large as the masts of middle-sized vessels. It seems these are
the creature's arms, and it is said if they were to lay hold of the
largest man of war they would pull it down to the bottom. After
this monster has been on the surface of the water a short time it
begins slowly to sink again, and then the danger is as great as
before; because the motion of his sinking causes such a swell in
the sea, and such an eddy or whirlpool, that it draws everything
down with it, like the current of the river Male.
"As this enormous sea-animal in all probability may be reckoned of
the Polype, or of the Starfish kind, as shall hereafter be more
fully proved, it seems that the parts which are seen rising at its
pleasure, and are called arms, are properly the tentacula, or
feeling instruments, called horns, as well as arms. With these they
move themselves, and likewise gather in their food.
"Besides these, for this last purpose the great Creator has also
given this creature a strong and peculiar scent, which it can emit
at certain times, and by means of which it beguiles and draws other
fish to come in heaps about it. This animal has another strange
property, known by the experience of many old fishermen. They
observe that for some months the Kraken or Krabben is continually
eating, and in other months he always voids his excrements. During
this evacuation the surface of the water is coloured with the
excrement, and appears quite thick and turbid. This muddiness is
said to be so very agreeable to the smell or taste of other fishes,
or to both, that they gather together from all parts to it, and
keep for that purpose directly over the Kraken; he then opens his
arms or horns, seizes and swallows his welcome guests, and converts
them after due time, by digestion, into a bait for other fish of
the same kind. I relate what is affirmed by many; but I cannot give
so certain assurances of this particular, as I can of the existence
of this surprising creature; though I do not find anything in it
absolutely contrary to Nature. As we can hardly expect to examine
this enormous sea-animal alive, I am the more concerned that nobody
embraced that opportunity which, according to the following account
once did, and perhaps never more may offer, of seeing it entire
when dead."
[4] 'Natural History of Norway,' vol. ii., p. 210.
The lost opportunity which the worthy prelate thus lamented, with the
true feeling of a naturalist, was made known to him by the Rev. Mr.
Friis, Consistorial Assessor, Minister of Bodoen in Nordland, and Vicar
of the college for promoting Christian knowledge, and was to the
following effect:
"In the year 1680, a Krake (perhaps a young and foolish one) came
into the water that runs between the rocks and cliffs in the parish
of Alstaboug, though the general custom of that creature is to keep
always several leagues from land, and therefore of course they must
die there. It happened that its extended long arms or antennae,
which this creature seems to use like the snail in turning about,
caught hold of some trees standing near the water, which might
easily have been torn up by the roots; but beside this, as it was
found afterwards, he entangled himself in some openings or clefts
in the rock, and therein stuck so fast, and hung so unfortunately,
that he could not work himself out, but perished and putrefied on
the spot. The carcass, which was a long while decaying, and filled
great part of that narrow channel, made it almost impassable by its
intolerable stench.
"The Kraken has never been known to do any great harm, except,"
the Author quaintly says, "they have taken away the lives of those
who consequently could not bring the tidings. I have heard but one
instance mentioned, which happened a few years ago, near
Fridrichstad, in the diocess of Aggerhuus. They say that two
fishermen accidentally, and to their great surprise, fell into such
a spot on the water as has been before described, full of a thick
slime almost like a morass. They immediately strove to get out of
this place, but they had not time to turn quick enough to save
themselves from one of the Kraken's horns, which crushed the head
of the boat, so that it was with great difficulty they saved their
lives on the wreck, though the weather was as calm as possible; for
these monsters, like the sea-snake, never appear at other times."
Pontoppidan then reviews the stories of floating islands which suddenly
appear, and as suddenly vanish, commonly credited, and especially
mentioned by Luke Debes in his 'Description of Faroe.'
"These islands in the boisterous ocean could not be imagined," he
says, "to be of the nature of real floating islands, because they
could not possibly stand against the violence of the waves in the
ocean, which break the largest vessels, and therefore our sailors
have concluded this delusion could come from no other than the
great deceiver, the devil."
This accusation, the good bishop, in his desire to be strictly
impartial, will not admit on such hear-say evidence, but is determined
to, literally, "give the devil his due;" for he warns his readers that
"we ought not to charge that apostate spirit without a cause; for," he
adds, "I rather think that this devil who so suddenly makes and unmakes
these floating islands, is nothing else but the Kraken."
Referring to a monster described by Pliny, he repeats his belief that
"This sea-animal belongs to the Polype, or Star-fish species;" but he
becomes very much "mixed" between the _Cephalopoda_ and the _Asteridae_,
between the pedal segments, or arms, of the cuttle radiating from its
head, and the rays of a Star-fish radiating from a central portion of
the body. He evidently inclines strongly towards a particular Star-fish,
the rays of which continually divide and subdivide themselves, or, as he
describes it, "which shoots its rays into branches like those of trees,"
and to which he gave the name of "Medusa's Head," a title by which, in
its Greek form, _Gorgonocephalus_, it is still known to zoologists.
"These Medusa's Heads," he says, "are supposed by some seafaring people
here, to be the young of the Sea-Krake; perhaps they are its smallest
ovula." After considering other reports concerning the Kraken, he
arrives at the following definite opinion:
"We learn from all this that the Polype or Starfish have amongst
their various species some that are much larger than others; and,
according to all appearance, amongst the very largest inhabitants
of the ocean. If the axiom be true that greatness or littleness
makes no change in the species, then this Krake must be of the
Polypus kind, notwithstanding its enormous size."
His diagnosis is correct; but it is stated with a modesty which his
detractors would do well to imitate; and his concluding words on this
subject place him in a light very different from that in which he is
popularly regarded:
"I do not in the least insist on this conjecture being true," he
writes, "but willingly submit my suppositions in this and every
other dubious matter to the judgment of those who are better
experienced. If I was an admirer of uncertain reports and fabulous
stories, I might here add much more concerning this and other
Norwegian sea-monsters, whose existence I will not take upon me to
deny, but do not chuse, by a mixture of uncertain relations to make
such account appear doubtful as I myself believe to be true and
well attested. I shall therefore quit the subject here, and leave
it to future writers on this plan to complete what I have
imperfectly sketched out, by further experience, which is always
the best instructor."
It is easy to recognise in Pontoppidan's description of the Kraken, the
form and habits of one of the "Cuttle-fishes," so-called. The appearance
of its numerous arms, with which it gathers in its food, and which grow
thicker and thicker as they rise above the surface, is just what would
take place in the case of one of the pelagic species of these mollusks
raising its head out of the sea. The rendering of the water turbid and
thick by the emission of a substance which the narrator supposed to be
faecal matter, is exactly that which occurs when a cuttle discharges the
contents of the remarkable organ known as its ink-bag; and the strong
and peculiar scent mentioned as appertaining to it, is actually
characteristic of its inky secretion. The musky odour referred to, is
more perceptible in some species than in others. In one of the Octopods
(_Eledone moschatus_), it is so strong, that the specific name of the
animal is derived from it.
The ancient Greeks and Romans, who were well acquainted with the
various kinds of cuttles and regarded them all as excellent food, and
even as delicacies of the table, applied the word "polypus" especially
to the octopus. But Pontoppidan evidently uses it as descriptive of all
the cephalopods. It must not be forgotten, however, that when he wrote,
science was only slowly recovering from neglect of many centuries'
duration. In the enlightened times of Greece and Rome, natural history
flourished, and as in our day, attracted and occupied the attention of
the man of science, and afforded recreation to the man of business and
the politician. Aristotle wrote 322 years before the birth of Christ,
and his works are monuments of practical wisdom. When we consider the
period during which he lived, and the isolated nature of his labours,
and compare them with the information which he possessed, we are
astonished at his sagacity and the great scope and general accuracy of
his knowledge. Pliny, 240 years later, lived in times more favourable
for the cultivation of science; but with all his advantages made little
improvement on the work of the great master. And then, later still, the
sun of learning set; and there came over Europe the long night of the
dark ages which succeeded Roman greatness, during which science was
degraded and ignorance prevailed; and it is not till the middle of the
sixteenth century, that the zoologist finds much to interest and
instruct him. When we further reflect, that until within the past five
and twenty years--till our large aquaria were constructed--Aristotle's
knowledge of the habits and life-history of marine animals, and amongst
them the cephalopods, was incomparably greater and more perfect than
that possessed by any man who had lived since he recorded his
observations, we cannot help feeling that in some departments of
knowledge there is still lost ground to be recovered.
In the old days of the Caesars, a Greek or Roman house-wife who was
accustomed to see the cuttle, the squid, and the octopus daily exposed
for sale in the markets, would of course have laughed at the idea of
mistaking the one for the other; but there are comparatively few persons
in our own country, at the present day, except those who have made
marine zoology their study, whose ideas on the subject are not
exceedingly hazy. This want of technical knowledge is not confined to
the masses; but is common, if not general, amongst those who have been
well educated, and is frequently apparent even in leaders in the daily
papers--the productions, for the most part, of men of receptive minds,
trained discrimination, and great general knowledge. As the subject is
one in which I have long felt especial interest, I venture to hope that
I may succeed in making clear the difference between the eight-footed
octopus and its ten-footed relatives, and thus enable the reader to
identify the member of the family from which we are to strip the dress
and "make up" in which it masqueraded as the Kraken, and cause it to
appear in its true and natural form.
One of the great primary groups or divisions of the animal kingdom is
that of the soft-bodied mollusca; which includes the cuttle, the oyster,
the snail, &c. It has been separated into five "classes," of which the
one we have especially to notice is the _Cephalopoda_,[5] or
"head-footed,"--the animals belonging to it having their feet, or the
organs which correspond with the foot of other molluscs, so attached to
the head as to form a circle or coronet round the mouth. Some of these
have the foot divided into eight segments, and are therefore called the
_Octopoda_:[6] others have, in addition to the eight feet, lobes, or
arms, two longer tentacular appendages, making ten in all, and are
consequently called the _Decapoda_.
[5] From the Greek words _cephale_, the head; and _poda_, feet.
[6] From _octo_, eight; and _pous_ (_poda_), feet.
Of the ten-footed section of the cephalopods, there are four "families;"
two only of which exist in Britain--the _Teuthidae_, and the _Sepiidae_.
The _Teuthidae_ are the Calamaries, popularly known as "Squids," and are
represented by the long-bodied _Loligo vulgaris_, that has internally
along its back a gristly, translucent stiffener, shaped like a
quill-pen; from which and its ink it derives its names of "calamary"
(from "_calamus_," a "pen"), "pen-and-ink fish," and "sea-clerk." The
_Sepiidae_ are generally known as the Cuttles proper. As a type of them
we may take the common "cuttle-fish," _Sepia officinalis_, the owner of
the hard, calcareous shell often thrown up on the shore, and known as
"cuttle-bone," or "sea-biscuit."
It must here be remarked, that as these head-footed mollusks are not
"fish," any more than lobsters, crabs, oysters, mussels, &c., which
fishmongers call "shell-fish," are "fish," the word "fish" is
misleading, and should be abandoned; and secondly, that the names
"cuttle" and "squid," as distinctive appellations, are unsatisfactory.
The word "cuttle" is derived from "cuddle," to hug, or embrace--in
allusion to the manner in which the animal seizes its prey, and enfolds
it in its arms; and "squid" is derived from "squirt," in reference to
its habit of squirting water or ink. But as all the known members of the
class, except the pearly nautilus, _Nautilus pompilius_, have these
habits in common, the distinguishing terms are hardly apposite. As,
however, they are conventionally accepted and understood, I prefer to
use them. As with other mollusks, so with the cephalopods, some have
shells, and some are naked or have only rudimentary shells. The
Argonaut, or paper nautilus, has been regarded as the analogue of the
snail, which, like it, secretes an _external_ shell for the protection
of its soft body; and the octopus as that of the garden slug, which,
having organs like those of the snail, as the octopus has organs like
those of the shell-bearing argonaut, has no shell. The cuttles and
squids may be compared to some of the sea-slugs, as _Aplysia_ and
_Bullaea_, and to some land-slugs, as _Parmacella_ and _Limax_, which
have an _internal_ shell.
The argonaut and the other families of the cephalopods do not come
within the scope of this treatise; we will therefore confine our
attention to the three above mentioned. Of the anatomy and homology of
the _Octopus_, _Sepia_, and _Calamary_ we need say no more than will
suffice to show in what manner they resemble each other, and wherein
they differ, in order that we may the more clearly perceive to which of
them the story of the Kraken probably owes its origin.
The octopus, the sepia, and the calamary are all constructed on one
fundamental plan. A bag of fleshy muscular skin, called the mantle-sac,
contains the organs of the body, heart, stomach, liver, intestines, a
pair of gills by which oxygen is absorbed from the water for the
purification of the blood, and an excurrent tube by which the water thus
deprived of its life-sustaining gas is expelled. The outrush of water
with more or less force, from this "syphon-tube," is also the principal
source of locomotion when the animal is swimming, as it propels it
backward--not by the striking of the expelled fluid against the
surrounding water, as is generally supposed; but by the unbalanced
pressure of the fluid acting inside the body in the direction in which
the creature goes. Into this syphon-tube, or funnel, opens, by a special
duct, the ink-bag; and from it is squirted at will the intensely black
fluid therein secreted. I doubt very much the correctness of the
statement mentioned by Pontoppidan and others, that the cuttle ejects
its ink with a desire to lie hidden and in ambush for its intended prey,
or with the intention to attract fish within its reach by their
partiality for the musky odour of this secretion. It may be so, but
during the long period that I had these animals under close observation
at the Brighton Aquarium, I never witnessed such an incident. I believe
that the emission of the ink is a symptom of fear, and is only employed
as a means of concealment from a suspected enemy. I have found, that
when first taken, the _Sepia_, of all its kind, is the most sensitively
timid. Its keen, unwinking eye watches for and perceives the slightest
movement of its captor; and if even most cautiously looked at from
above, its ink is belched forth in eddying volumes, rolling over and
over like the smoke which follows the discharge of a great gun from a
ship's port, and mixes with marvellous rapidity with the surrounding
water. But, like all of its class, the _Sepia_ is very intelligent. It
soon learns to discriminate between friend and foe, and ultimately
becomes very tame, and ceases to shoot its ink, unless it be teased and
excited. By means of the communication between the ink-bag and the
locomotor tube, it happens that when the ink is ejected, a stream of
water is forcibly emitted with it, and thus the very effort for escape
serves the double purpose of propelling the creature away from danger,
and discolouring the water in which it moves. Oppian has well described
this--
"The endangered cuttle thus evades his fears,
And native hoards of fluids safely wears.
A pitchy ink peculiar glands supply
Whose shades the sharpest beam of light defy.
Pursued, he bids the sable fountains flow,
And, wrapt in clouds, eludes the impending foe.
The fish retreats unseen, while self-born night
With pious shade befriends her parent's flight."
Professor Owen has remarked that the ejection of the ink of the
cephalopods serves by its colour as a means of defence, as corresponding
secretions in some of the mammalia by their odour.
It is worthy of notice that the pearly nautilus and the allied fossil
forms are without this means of concealment, which their strong external
shells render unnecessary for their protection.
From the sac-like body containing the various organs, protrudes a head,
globose in shape, and containing a brain, and furnished with a pair of
strong, horny mandibles, which bite vertically, like the beak of a
parrot. By these the flesh of prey is torn and partly masticated, and
within them lies the tongue, covered with recurved and retractile teeth,
like that of its distant relatives, the whelk, limpet, &c., by which the
food is conducted to the gullet. Around this head is, as I have said,
the organ which is equivalent to the foot in other molluscs--that by
which the slug and the snail crawl--only that the head is placed in the
centre, instead of in the front of it, and it is divided into segments,
which radiate from this central head. These segments are very flexible,
and capable of movement in every direction, and are thus developed into
arms, prehensile limbs, by which their owner can seize and hold its
living prey. That this may be more perfectly accomplished, these arms
are studded along their inner surface with rows of sucking discs, in
each of which, by means of a retractile piston, a vacuum can be
produced. The consequent pressure of the outer atmosphere or water,
causes them to adhere firmly to any substance to which they are applied,
whether stone, fish, crustacean, or flesh of man.
But, although in all these highly-organised head-footed mollusks the
same general build prevails, it is admirably modified in each of them to
suit certain habits and necessities. Thus the octopus, being a shore
dweller, its soft and pliant, but very tough body, having merely a very
small and rudimentary indication of an internal shell (just a little
"style") is exactly adapted for wedging itself amongst crevices of
rocks. A large, rigid, cellular float, or "sepiostaire," such as _Sepia_
possesses, or a long, horny pen such as _Loligo_ has, would be in the
way, and worse than useless in such places as the octopus inhabits. Its
eight long powerful arms or feet are precisely fitted for clambering
over rocks and stones, and as its food of course consists principally of
the living things most abundant in such localities, namely, the
shore-crabs, its great flexible suckers, devoid of hooks or horny
armature, are exactly adapted to firm and air-tight attachment to the
smooth shells of the crustacea.
[Illustration: FIG. 1.--BEAK AND ARMS OF A DECAPOD CUTTLE.
_a_, the eight shorter arms; _t_, the tentacles; _f_, the funnel, or
locomotor tube.]
Unlike the octopus, which is capable only of short flights through the
water, the "cuttles" and "squids," such as _Sepia_ and _Loligo_, are all
free swimmers. For them it is necessary for accuracy of natation that
their soft, and in the squids long bodies, should be supported by such a
framework as they possess. In _Sepia_, the mantle-sac is flattened
horizontally all along its lateral edges so as to form a pair of fins,
which nearly surround the trunk. These fins could never be used, as they
are, to enable the animal to poise itself delicately in the water by
means of their beautiful undulations, which I have often watched with
delight, if their attached edges were not kept in a straight line on
either side. Then, these ten-footed or ten-armed genera have not,
because they need them not, eight long, strong and highly mobile arms
like those of the octopus, nor have they large suckers upon them.
Whereas a great length of reach is an advantage to the octopus, animals
which are purely swimmers, and which hunt and overtake their prey by
speed, would be impeded by having to drag after them a bundle of stout,
lengthy appendages trailing heavily astern. Their eight pedal arms are
short and comparatively weak, though strong enough, in individuals such
as are regarded on our own coasts as fullgrown, to seize and hold a fish
or crustacean as strong as a good sized shore-crab. But, as compensation
for the shortness of the eight arms, they are provided with two others
more than three times the length of the short ones. These are so slender
that they generally lie coiled up in a spiral cone in two pockets, one
on each side, just below the eye, when the animal is quiescent, and are
only seen when it takes its food. These long, slender tentacular arms
are expanded at their extremity, and the inner surface of their enlarged
part is studded with suckers--some of them larger in size than those on
the eight shorter arms. As the food of these swimmers consists, of
course, chiefly of fish, their sucking disks are curiously modified for
the better retention of a slippery captive. A horny ring with a sharply
serrated edge is imbedded in the outer circumference of each of them,
and when a vacuum is formed, the keen, saw-like teeth are pressed into
the skin or scales of the unfortunate prisoner, and deprive it of the
slightest chance of escape.
The manner in which the eight-armed and ten-armed cephalopods capture
their prey is similar in principle and plan, but differs in action in
accordance with their mode of life. The ordinary habit of the octopus is
either to rest suspended to the side of a rock to which it clings with
the suckers of several of its arms, or to remain lurking in some
favourite cranny; its body thrust for protection and concealment well
back in the interior of the recess; its bright eyes keenly on the watch;
three or four of its limbs firmly attached to the walls of its hiding
place--the others gently waving, gliding, and feeling about in the
water, as if to maintain its vigilance, and keep itself always on the
alert, and in readiness to pounce on any unfortunate wayfarer that may
pass near its den. To a shore-crab that comes within its reach the
slightest contact with one of those lithe arms is fatal. Instantaneously
as pull of trigger brings down a bird, or touch of electric wire
explodes a torpedo or a mining fuse, the pistons of the series of
suckers are simultaneously drawn inward, the air is removed from the
pneumatic holders, and a vacuum created in each: the crab tries to
escape, but in a second is completely pinioned: not a movement, not a
struggle is possible; each leg, each claw is grasped all over by
suckers, enfolded in them, stretched out to its fullest extent by them;
the back of the carapace is completely covered by the tenacious disks,
brought together by the adaptable contractions of the limb, and ranged
in close order, shoulder to shoulder, touching each other; and the
pressure of the air is so great that nothing can effect the relaxation
of their retentive power but the destruction of the air-pump that works
them, or the closing of the throttle-valve by which they are connected
with it. Meanwhile the abdominal plates of the captive crab are dragged
towards the mouth; the black tip of the hard horny beak is seen for a
single instant protruding from the circular orifice in the centre of the
radiation of the arms; and, the next, has crushed through the shell, and
is buried deep in the flesh of the victim.
[Illustration: FIG. 2.--THE OCTOPUS (_Octopus vulgaris_).]
Unlike the skulking, hiding octopus, its ten-armed relative, the
_Sepia_ loves the daylight and the freedom of the upper water. Its
predatory acts are not those of a concealed and ambushed brigand lying
in wait behind a rock, or peeping furtively from within the gloomy
shadow of a cave; but it may better be compared to the war-like Comanche
vidette seated gracefully on his horse, and scanning from some elevated
knoll a wide expanse of prairie, in readiness to swoop upon a weak or
unarmed foe. Poised near the surface of the water, like a hawk in the
air, the _Sepia_ moves gently to and fro by graceful undulations of its
lateral fins,--an exquisite play of colour occasionally taking place
over its beautifully barred and mottled back. When thus tranquil, its
eight pedal arms are usually brought close together, and droop in front
of its head, like the trunk of an elephant, shortened; its two longer
tentacular arms being coiled up within their pouches and unseen. Only
when some small fish approaches it does it arouse itself. Then, its eyes
dilate, and its colours become more bright and vivid. It carefully takes
aim, advancing or retreating to such a distance as will just allow the
two hidden tentacles to reach the quarry when they shall be shot out.
Next, the two highest or central feet are lifted up, and the three
others on each side are spread aside, so that they may be all out of the
way of the two concealed tentacles, presently to be launched forth; and
then, in a moment--so instantaneously that the eye of an observer, be he
ever so watchful, can hardly see the act--this pair of tentacles, side
by side, are projected and withdrawn, as if in a flash. The fish or
shrimp has vanished, the suckers of the dilated ends of the tentacles
having adhered to it, and left it, as they re-entered their pouches,
within the fatal "cuddle," or embrace, where it is torn to pieces by the
devouring beak.[7] This action of the tentacles of the decapods is the
most rapid motion that I know of in the whole animal kingdom--not
excepting even that of the tongue of the toad and the lizard. These long
tentacles are not used when the food is within reach of the shorter
arms.
[7] See an excellent article in the _Field_, Sept. 2, 1876, on the
'Ten Footed Cuttle' (_Sepia officinalis_), by the late Mr. W. A.
Lloyd, an earnest and accomplished aquatic zoologist; eccentric,
but in all that relates to the construction and management of an
aquarium a master of his craft. It was his wish that in any future
edition of my little book on the Octopus, or other writings on the
cephalopods, I should use the woodcuts which illustrated his
articles on Sepia and Octopus. By the kind permission of the
proprietors of the _Field_, I reproduce them in suitable size for
these pages.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.--THE CUTTLE (_Sepia officinalis_).]
The calamaries or squids of our British Seas seize their prey in the
same manner as _Sepia_, and the description of one will suffice for
both. But there exist two groups of them, which are armed with curved
and sharp-pointed hooks or claws, either in addition to, or instead
of suckers. In the one group (_Onychoteuthis_), the hooks are
restricted to the extremities of the pair of tentacles, in the other
(_Enoploteuthis_), both the tentacles and the shorter arms have hooks.
Professor Owen, in his description of these hook-armed calamaries in the
_Cyclopaedia of Anatomy_, notices also another structure which adds
greatly to their prehensile power (Fig. 4.). "At the extremity of the
long tentacles a cluster of small, simple, unarmed suckers may be
observed at the base of the expanded part. When these latter suckers are
applied to one another the tentacles are securely locked together at
that part, and the united strength of both the elongated peduncles can
be applied to drag towards the mouth any resisting object which has been
grappled by the terminal hooks. There is no mechanical contrivance which
surpasses this structure; art has remotely imitated it in the
fabrication of the obstetrical forceps, in which either blade can be
used separately, or, by the inter-locking of a temporary blade, be made
to act in combination."
The cephalopods obtain and eat their food very much like the rapacious
birds. They are the falcons of the sea. Some of them, like
_Onychoteuthis_, strike their prey with talons and suckers also, others
lay hold of it with suckers alone; but they all tear the flesh with
their beaks, and swallow and digest their food in the same manner as the
hawk or vulture.
[Illustration: FIG. 4.--HOOKED TENTACLES OF _Onychoteuthis_.]
The _Sepia_, the owner of the broad, flattened bone, has a decided
predilection for the vicinity of the shore, and for comparatively
shallow water. It there attaches its grape-like eggs to some convenient
stone or growing alga, and delights occasionally to sink to the bottom,
and there to rest half covered by the sand, a habit for which the form
of its body is well adapted. But the calamaries--they of the horny
pen--prefer the wide waters of the open ocean; and although they, too,
especially the smaller species, are common upon the coasts, they are
frequently met with far out at sea, and away from any land. The
elongated and almost arrow-like shape of their bodies enables them to
glide through the water with great rapidity, and the momentum exerted by
a vigorous out-rush from their syphon-tube is sometimes so great that
when the opposite pressure thus produced is so exerted as to cause them
to take an upward direction they leap out of the water to so great a
height as to fall on the decks of ships; and are, therefore, called by
sailors, "flying squids." Their spawn is very different from that of
either octopus, or sepia. It consists of dozens of semi-transparent,
gelatinous, slender, cylindrical sheaths, about four or five inches
long, each containing many ova imbedded in it (making a total number of
about 40,000 embryos), all springing from a common centre and resembling
a mop without a handle. I have never seen any of these "sea-mops"
attached to anything, and the pelagic habits of the calamaries render it
probable that they are left floating on the surface of the sea.
Having made ourselves acquainted with the structure and habits of these
three divisions of the eight-footed and ten-footed mollusks, let us take
evidence as to the size to which they are respectively known to attain,
and the degree in which they may be regarded as dangerous to man.
An octopus from our own coasts having arms two feet in length may be
considered a rather large specimen; and Dr. J. E. Gray, who was always
most kindly ready to place at the disposal of any sincere inquirer the
vast store of knowledge laid up in his wonderful memory, told me that
"there is not one in the British Museum which exceeds this size, or
which would not go into a quart pot--body, arms and all." The largest
British specimen I have hitherto seen had arms 2 ft. 6 in. long. We have
sufficient evidence, however, that it exceeds this in the South of
France, and along the Spanish and Italian coasts of the Mediterranean;
and my deceased friend John Keast Lord tells us in his book, 'The
Naturalist in British Columbia,' that he saw and measured, in
Vancouver's Island, an octopus which had arms five feet long.
I have often been asked whether an octopus of the ordinary size can
really be dangerous to bathers. Decidedly, "Yes," in certain situations.
The holding power of its numerous suckers is enormous. It is almost
impossible forcibly to detach it from its adhesion to a rock or the flat
bottom of a tank; and if a large one happened to fix one or more of its
strong, tough arms on the leg of a swimmer whilst the others held firmly
to a rock, I doubt if the man could disengage himself under water by
mere strength, before being exhausted. Fortunately the octopus can be
made to relax its hold by grasping it tightly round the "throat" (if I
may so call it), and it may be well that this should be known.
That men are occasionally drowned by these creatures is, unhappily, a
fact too well attested. I have elsewhere[8] related several instances of
this having occurred. Omitting those, I will give two or three others
which have since come under my notice. Sir Grenville Temple, in his
'Excursions in the Mediterranean Sea,' tells how a Sardinian captain,
whilst bathing at Jerbeh, was seized and drowned by an octopus. When his
body was found, his limbs were bound together by the arms of the animal;
and this took place in water only four feet deep.
[8] See 'The Octopus; or, the Devil-fish of Fiction and of Fact.'
1873. Chapman and Hall.
Mr. J. K. Lord's account of the formidable strength of these creatures
in Oregon is confirmed by an incident recorded in the _Weekly Oregonian_
(the principal paper of Oregon) of October 6th, 1877. A few days before
that date an Indian woman, whilst bathing, was held beneath the surface
by an octopus, and drowned. The body was discovered on the following day
in the horrid embrace of the creature. Indians dived down and with their
knives severed the arms of the octopus and recovered the corpse.
Mr. Clemens Laming, in his book, 'The French in Algiers,' writes:--"The
soldiers were in the habit of bathing in the sea every evening, and from
time to time several of them disappeared--no one knew how. Bathing was,
in consequence, strictly forbidden; in spite of which several men went
into the water one evening. Suddenly one of them screamed for help, and
when several others rushed to his assistance they found that an octopus
had seized him by the leg by four of its arms whilst it clung to the
rock with the rest. The soldiers brought the 'monster' home with them,
and out of revenge they boiled it alive and ate it. This adventure
accounted for the disappearance of the other soldiers."
The Rev. W. Wyatt Gill, who for more than a quarter of a century has
resided as a missionary amongst the inhabitants of the Hervey Islands,
and with whom I had the pleasure of conversing on this subject when he
was in England in 1875, described in the _Leisure Hour_ of April 20th,
1872, another mode of attack by which an octopus might deprive a man of
life. A servant of his went diving for "poulpes" (octopods), leaving his
son in charge of the canoe. After a short time he rose to the surface,
his arms free, but his nostrils and mouth completely covered by a large
octopus. If his son had not promptly torn the living plaister from off
his face he must have been suffocated--a fate which actually befell some
years previously a man who foolishly went diving alone.
In _Appleton's American Journal of Science and Art_, January 31st,
1874, a correspondent describes an attack by an octopus on a diver who
was at work on the wreck of a sunken steamer off the coast of Florida.
The man, a powerful Irishman, was helpless in its grasp, and would have
been drowned if he had not been quickly brought to the surface; for when
dragged on to the raft from which he had descended, he fainted, and his
companions were unable to pull the creature from its hold upon him until
they had dealt it a sharp blow across its baggy body.
A similar incident occurred to the government diver of the colony of
Victoria, Australia. Whilst pursuing his avocation in the estuary of the
river Moyne he was seized by an octopus. He killed it by striking it
with an iron bar, and brought to shore with him a portion of it with the
arms more than three feet long.
Mr. Laurence Oliphant, in his 'China and Japan,' describes a Japanese
show, which consisted of "a series of groups of figures carved in wood,
the size of life, and as cleverly coloured as Madame Tussaud's
wax-works. One of these was a group of women bathing in the sea. One of
them had been caught in the folds of a cuttle-fish; the others, in
alarm, were escaping, leaving their companion to her fate. The
cuttle-fish was represented on a huge scale, its eyes, eyelids, and
mouth being made to move simultaneously by a man inside the head."
An attack of this kind is most artistically represented in a small
Japanese ivory-carving in the possession of Mr. Bartlett, of the
Zoological Gardens.[9]
[9] This carving was figured in illustration of an interesting
paper by Professor Owen, C.B., F.R.S., &c., "On some new and rare
Cephalopoda," in the Transactions of the Zoological Society, April
20, 1880.
The Japanese are well acquainted with the octopus; for it is commonly
depicted on their ornaments, and forms no unimportant item in their
fisheries.
I have recently had an opportunity of inspecting a most curious
Japanese book, in the possession of my friend Mr. W. B. Tegetmeier,
which is chiefly devoted to the representations of the fisheries and
fish-curing processes of the country. It is in three volumes, and is
entitled, 'Land and Sea Products,' by Ki Kone. It is evidently ancient,
for it is slightly worm-eaten, but the plates, each 12 inches by 8
inches, are full of vigour. Two of these illustrate in a very
interesting manner the subject before us, and by the kindness of Mr.
Tegetmeier I am able to give facsimiles of them, which appeared with an
article by him on this book, in the _Field_ of March 14th, 1874. Fig. 5
represents a fisherman in a boat out at sea: a gigantic octopus has
thrown one of its arms over the side of the boat; the man, who is alone,
has started forward from the stern of the boat, and has succeeded, by
means of a large knife attached to a long handle, in lopping off the
dangerous limb of his enemy. As Mr. Tegetmeier says, "From the extreme
matter of fact manner in which all these engravings are made, and the
total absence of exaggeration in any other representation, I cannot but
regard the relative sizes of the man, the boat, and the octopus, as
correctly given, in which case we have evidence of the existence of
gigantic cephalopods in Japanese waters." The only doubt I have is
whether the fisherman correctly described his assailant as an octopus,
and whether it was not a calamary. Fig. 6 is a vivid picture of a
fishmonger's shop in a market, under the awning of which may be seen two
arms of a gigantic cuttle hung up for sale as food. These are evidently
of most unusual size, judging from the action of the lookers on; the one
to the left, with a tall stand or case on his back, like a Parisian
cocoa-vendor, is holding out his hand in mute astonishment; whilst the
attention of the smaller personage in the right-hand corner is directed
to the suspended arms of the cuttle by the man nearest to him, who is
pointing to them with upraised hand. In another plate in this most
interesting work a Japanese mode of fishing for cuttles is delineated. A
man in a boat is tossing crabs, one at a time, into the sea, and when a
cuttle rises at the bait he spears it with a trident and tosses it into
the boat.
[Illustration: FIG. 5.--JAPANESE FISHERMAN ATTACKED BY A CUTTLE.]
[Illustration: FIG. 6.--ARMS OF A GREAT CUTTLE EXHIBITED IN A JAPANESE
FISHMONGER'S SHOP.]
The octopus, therefore, though not abundant on our own coasts, is found
in every sea in the temperate zone; and in so far as that it secretes an
ink with which it can render the water turbid, and has many radiating
arms with which it can seize and drown a man, it possesses certain
attributes of the Kraken; but we have no authentic knowledge of its ever
attaining to greater dimensions than I have stated, nor does it bask on
the surface of the sea. It is not amongst the _Octopidae_ therefore that
we must look for a solution of the mystery.
The basking condition is fulfilled by the _Sepia_; and its flattened
back, supported and rendered hard and firm to the touch by the
calcareous _sepiostaire_ beneath the skin, is broader in proportion than
that of the octopus or the squid. Thus _Sepia_ might pass as a
microscopic miniature of the great Scandinavian monster. But it lacks
the character of size. We have no reason to believe that any true
_Sepia_ exists, as the family is now understood, that has a body more
than eighteen inches long. If it were otherwise it would be more likely
to be known of this family than of its relatives, for its lightly
constructed and well known "cuttle-bone" would float on the surface for
many weeks after the death of its owner, and large specimens of it would
be seen and recognised from passing ships.
As we can find no species of the _Octopidae_ or _Sepiidae_ which can
furnish a pretext for the stories told of the Kraken, we must try to
ascertain how far a similitude to it may be traced in the third family
we have discussed, the _Teuthidae_.
The belief in the existence of gigantic cuttles is an ancient one.
Aristotle mentions it, and Pliny tells of an enormous polypus which at
Carteia, in Grenada--an old and important Roman colony near
Gibraltar--used to come out of the sea at night, and carry off and
devour salted tunnies from the curing depots on the shore; and adds that
when it was at last killed, the head of it (they used to call the body
the head, because in swimming it goes in advance) was found to weigh 700
lbs. AElian records a similar incident, and describes his monster as
crushing in its arms the barrels of salt fish to get at the contents.
These two must have been octopods if they were anything; the word
"polypus" thus especially designates it, and moreover, the free-swimming
cuttles and squids would be helpless if stranded on the shore. Some of
the old writers seem to have aimed rather at making their histories
sensational than at carefully investigating the credibility or the
contrary of the highly coloured reports brought to them. These were, of
course, gross exaggerations, but there was generally a substratum of
truth in them. They were based on the rare occurrence of specimens,
smaller certainly, but still enormous, of some known species, and in
most cases the worst that can be said of their authors is that they were
culpably careless and foolishly credulous.
Unhappily so lenient a judgment cannot be passed on some comparatively
recent writers. Denys de Montfort, half a century later than
Pontoppidan, not only professed to believe in the Kraken, but also in
the existence of another gigantic animal distinct from it; a colossal
_poulpe_, or octopus, compared with which Pliny's was a mere pigmy. In a
drawing fitter to decorate the outside of a showman's caravan at a fair
than seriously to illustrate a work on natural history,[10] he depicted
this tremendous cuttle as throwing its arms over a three masted vessel,
snapping off its masts, tearing down the yards, and on the point of
dragging it to the bottom, if the crew had not succeeded in cutting off
its immense limbs with cutlasses and hatchets. De Montfort had good
opportunities of obtaining information, for he was at one time an
assistant in the geological department of the Museum of Natural History,
in Paris; and wrote a work on conchology,[11] besides that already
referred to. But it appears to have been his deliberate purpose to
cajole the public; for it is reported that he exclaimed to M. Defrance:
"If my entangled ship is accepted, I will make my 'colossal poulpe'
overthrow a whole fleet." Accordingly we find him gravely declaring[12]
that one of the great victories of the British navy was converted into a
disaster by the monsters which are the subject of his history. He boldly
asserted that the six men-of-war captured from the French by Admiral
Rodney in the West Indies on the 12th of April, 1782, together with four
British ships detached from his fleet to convoy the prizes, were all
suddenly engulphed in the waves on the night of the battle under such
circumstances as showed that the catastrophe was caused by colossal
cuttles, and not by a gale or any ordinary casualty.
[10] 'Histoire Naturelle generale et particuliere des Mollusques,'
vol. ii., p. 256.
[11] 'Conchyliologie Systematique.'
[12] 'Hist. Nat. des Moll.,' vol. ii., pp. 358 to 368.
[Illustration: FIG. 7.--FACSIMILE OF DE MONTFORT'S "_Poulpe colossal_."]
Unfortunately for De Montfort, the inexorable logic of facts not only
annihilates his startling theory, but demonstrates the reckless falsity
of his plausible statements. The captured vessels did not sink on the
night of the action, but were all sent to Jamaica to refit, and arrived
there safely. Five months afterwards, however, a convoy of nine
line-of-battle ships (amongst which were Rodney's prizes), one frigate,
and about a hundred merchantmen, were dispersed, whilst on their voyage
to England, by a violent storm, during which some of them unfortunately
foundered. The various accidents which preceded the loss of these
vessels was related in evidence to the Admiralty by the survivors, and
official documents prove that De Montfort's fleet-destroying _poulpe_
was an invention of his own, and had no part whatever in the disaster
that he attributed to it.
I have been told, but cannot vouch for the truth of the report, that De
Montfort's propensity to write that which was not true culminated in his
committing forgery, and that he died in the galleys. But he records a
statement of Captain Jean Magnus Dens, said to have been a respectable
and veracious man, who, after having made several voyages to China as a
master trader, retired from a seafaring life and lived at Dunkirk. He
told De Montfort that in one of his voyages, whilst crossing from St.
Helena to Cape Negro, he was becalmed, and took advantage of the
enforced idleness of the crew to have the vessel scraped and painted.
Whilst three of his men were standing on planks slung over the side, an
enormous cuttle rose from the water, and threw one of its arms around
two of the sailors, whom it tore away, with the scaffolding on which
they stood. With another arm it seized the third man, who held on
tightly to the rigging, and shouted for help. His shipmates ran to his
assistance, and succeeded in rescuing him by cutting away the creature's
arm with axes and knives, but he died delirious on the following night.
The captain tried to save the other two sailors by killing the animal,
and drove several harpoons into it; but they broke away, and the men
were carried down by the monster.
The arm cut off was said to have been twenty-five feet long, and as
thick as the mizen-yard, and to have had on it suckers as big as
saucepan-lids. I believe the old sea-captain's narrative of the incident
to be true; the dimensions given by De Montfort are wilfully and
deliberately false. The belief in the power of the cuttle to sink a ship
and devour her crew is as widely spread over the surface of the globe,
as it is ancient in point of time. I have been told by a friend that he
saw in a shop in China a picture of a cuttle embracing a junk,
apparently of about 300 tons burthen, and helping itself to the sailors,
as one picks gooseberries off a bush.
Traditions of a monstrous cuttle attacking and destroying ships are
current also at the present day in the Polynesian Islands. Mr. Gill, the
missionary previously quoted, tells us[13] that the natives of Aitutaki,
in the Hervey group, have a legend of a famous explorer, named Rata, who
built a double canoe, decked and rigged it, and then started off in
quest of adventures. At the prow was stationed the dauntless Nganaoa,
armed with a long spear and ready to slay all monsters. One day when
speeding pleasantly over the ocean, the voice of the ever vigilant
Nganaoa was heard: "O Rata! yonder is a terrible enemy starting up from
ocean depths." It proved to be an octopus (query, squid?) of
extraordinary dimensions. Its huge tentacles encircled the vessel in
their embrace, threatening its instant destruction. At this critical
moment Nganaoa seized his spear, and fearlessly drove it through the
head of the creature. The tentacles slowly relaxed, and the dead monster
floated off on the surface of the ocean.
[13] _Leisure Hour_, October, 1875, p. 636.
Passing from the early records of the appearance of cuttles of unusual
size, and the current as well as the traditional belief in their
existence by the inhabitants of many countries, let us take the
testimony of travellers and naturalists who have a right to be regarded
as competent observers. In so doing we must bear in mind that until
Professor Owen propounded the very clear and convenient classification
now universally adopted, the squids, as well as the eight-footed
_Octopidae_, were all grouped under the title of _Sepia_.
Pernetty, describing a voyage made by him in the years 1763-4,[14]
mentions gigantic cuttles met with in the Southern Seas.
[14] 'Voyage aux Iles Malouines.'
Shortly afterwards, during the first week in March 1769, Banks and
Solander, the scientific fellow-voyagers with Lieutenant Cook
(afterwards the celebrated Captain Cook), in H.M.S. _Endeavour_, found
in the North Pacific, in latitude 38 deg. 44' S. and longitude 110 deg. 33' W.,
a large calamary which had just been killed by the birds, and was
floating in a mangled condition on the water. Its arms were furnished,
instead of suckers, with a double row of very sharp talons, which
resembled those of a cat, and, like them, were retractable into a sheath
of skin from which they might be thrust at pleasure. Of this cuttle they
say, with evident pleasurable remembrance of a savoury meal, they made
one of the best soups they ever tasted. Professor Owen tells us, in the
paper already referred to, that when he was curator of the Hunterian
Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons, and preparing, in 1829, his
first catalogue thereof, he was struck with the number of oceanic
invertebrates which Hunter had obtained. He learned from Mr. Clift that
Hunter had supplied Mr. (afterwards Sir Joseph) Banks with stoppered
bottles containing alcohol, in which to preserve the new marine animals
that he might meet with during the circumnavigatory voyage about to be
undertaken by Cook. Thinking it probable that Banks might have stowed
some parts of this great hook-armed squid in one of these bottles for
his anatomical friend, he searched for, and found in a bottle marked
"J. B.," portions of its arms, the beak with tongue, a heart ventricle,
&c., and, amongst the dry preparations, the terminal part of the body,
with an attached pair of rhomboidal fins. The remainder had furnished
Cook and his companions Banks and Solander with a welcome change of diet
in the commander's cabin of the _Endeavour_. As the inner surface of the
arms of the squid, as well as the terminals of its tentacles, were
studded with hooks, Professor Owen named it _Enoploteuthis Cookii_. He
estimates the diameter of the tail fin at 15 inches, the length of its
body 3 feet, of its head 10 inches, of the shorter arms 16 inches, and
of the longer tentacles about the same as its body--thus giving a total
length of about 6 ft. 9 in. Although individuals of other species, of
larger dimensions, are known to have existed, this is the largest
specimen of the hook-armed calamaries that has been scientifically
examined. It would have been a formidable antagonist to a man under
circumstances favourable to the exertion of its strength, and the use of
its prehensile and lacerating talons.
Peron,[15] the well-known French zoologist, mentions having seen at sea,
in 1801, not far from Van Diemen's Land, at a very little distance from
his ship, _Le Geographe_, a "Sepia," of the size of a barrel, rolling
with noise on the waves; its arms, between 6 and 7 feet long, and 6 or 7
inches in diameter at the base, extended on the surface, and writhing
about like great snakes. He recognised in this, and no doubt correctly,
one of the calamaries. The arms that he saw were evidently the animal's
shorter ones, as under such circumstances, with neither enemy to combat
nor prey to seize at the moment, the longer tentacles would remain
concealed.
[15] 'Voyage de Decouvertes aux Terres Australes.'
Quoy and Gaimard[16] report that in the Atlantic Ocean, near the
Equator, they found the remains of an enormous calamary, half eaten by
the sharks and birds, which could not have weighed less, when entire,
than 200 lbs. A portion of this was secured, and is preserved in the
Museum of Natural History, Paris.
[16] 'Voyage de l'Uranie: Zoologie,' vol. i., part 2, p. 411. 1824.
Captain Sander Rang[17] records having fallen in with, in mid-ocean, a
species distinct from the others, of a dark red colour, having short
arms, and a body the size of a hogshead.
[17] 'Manuel des Mollusques,' p. 86.
In a manuscript by Paulsen (referred to by Professor Steenstrup, at a
meeting of Scandinavian naturalists at Copenhagen in 1847) is a
description of a large calamary, cast ashore on the coast of Zeeland,
which the latter named _Architeuthis monachus_. Its body measured 21
feet, and its tentacles 18 feet, making a total of 39 feet.
In 1854 another was stranded at the Skag in Jutland, which Professor
Steenstrup believed to belong to the same genus as the preceding, but to
be of a different species, and called it _Architeuthis dux_. The body
was cut in pieces by the fishermen for bait, and furnished many
wheelbarrow loads. Mr. Gwyn Jeffreys[18] says Dr. Moerch informed him
that the beak of this animal was nine inches long. He adds that another
huge cephalopod was stranded in 1860 or 1861, between Hillswick and
Scalloway, on the west of Shetland. From a communication received by
Professor Allman, it appears that its tentacles were 16 feet long, the
pedal arms about half that length, and the mantle sac 7 feet. The
largest suckers examined by Professor Allman were three-quarters of an
inch in diameter.
[18] 'British Conchology,' vol. v., p. 124.
[Illustration: FIG. 8.--GIGANTIC CALAMARY CAUGHT BY THE FRENCH DESPATCH
VESSEL 'ALECTON,' NEAR TENERIFFE.]
We have also the statement of the officers and crew of the French
despatch steamer, _Alecton_, commanded by Lieutenant Bouyer, describing
their having met with a great calamary on the 30th of November, 1861,
between Madeira and Teneriffe. It was seen about noon on that day
floating on the surface of the water, and the vessel was stopped with a
view to its capture. Many bullets were aimed at it, but they passed
through its soft flesh without doing it much injury, until at length
"the waves were observed to be covered with foam and blood." It had
probably discharged the contents of its ink-bag; for a strong odour of
musk immediately became perceptible--a perfume which I have already
mentioned as appertaining to the ink of many of the cephalopoda, and
also as being one of the reputed attributes of the Kraken. Harpoons were
thrust into it, but would not hold in the yielding flesh; and the animal
broke adrift from them, and, diving beneath the vessel, came up on the
other side. The crew wished to launch a boat that they might attack it
at closer quarters, but the commander forbade this, not feeling
justified in risking the lives of his men. A rope with a running knot
was, however, slipped over it, and held fast at the junction of the
broad caudal fin; but when an attempt was made to hoist it on deck the
enormous weight caused the rope to cut through the flesh, and all but
the hinder part of the body fell back into the sea and disappeared. M.
Berthelot, the French consul at Teneriffe, saw the fin and posterior
portion of the animal on board the _Alecton_ ten days afterwards, and
sent a report of the occurrence to the Paris Academy of Sciences. The
body of this great squid, which, like Rang's specimen, was of a deep-red
colour, was estimated to have been from 16 feet to 18 feet long, without
reckoning the length of its formidable arms.[19]
[19] In the accompanying illustration, the size of the squid is
exaggerated, but not so much as has been supposed.
These are statements made by men who, by their intelligence, character,
and position, are entitled to respect and credence; and whose evidence
would be accepted without question or hesitation in any court of law.
There is, moreover, a remarkable coincidence of particulars in their
several accounts, which gives great importance to their combined
testimony.
But, fortunately, we are not left dependent on documentary evidence
alone, nor with the option of accepting or rejecting, as caprice or
prejudice may prompt us, the narratives of those who have told us they
have seen what we have not. Portions of cuttles of extraordinary size
are preserved in several European museums. In the collection of the
Faculty of Sciences at Montpellier is one six feet long, taken by
fishermen at Cette, which Professor Steenstrup has identified as
_Ommastrephes pteropus_. One of the same species, which was formerly in
the possession of M. Eschricht, who received it from Marseilles, may be
seen in the museum at Copenhagen. The body of another, analogous to
these, is exhibited in the Museum of Trieste: it was taken on the coast
of Dalmatia. At the meeting of the British Association at Plymouth in
1841, Colonel Smith exhibited drawings of the beak and other parts of a
very large calamary preserved at Haarlem; and M. P. Harting, in 1860,
described in the Memoirs of the Royal Scientific Academy of Amsterdam
portions of two extant in other collections in Holland, one of which he
believes to be Steenstrup's _Architeuthis dux_, a species which he
regards as identical with _Ommastrephes todarus_ of D'Orbigny.
Still there remained a residuum of doubt in the minds of naturalists
and the public concerning the existence of gigantic cuttles until,
towards the close of the year 1873, two specimens were encountered on
the coast of Newfoundland, and a portion of one and the whole of the
other, were brought ashore, and preserved for examination by competent
zoologists.
The circumstances under which the first was seen, as sensationally
described by the Rev. M. Harvey, Presbyterian minister of St. John's,
Newfoundland, in a letter to Principal Dawson, of McGill College, were,
briefly and soberly, as follows:--Two fishermen were out in a small punt
on the 26th of October, 1873, near the eastern end of Belle Isle,
Conception Bay, about nine miles from St. John's. Observing some object
floating on the water at a short distance, they rowed towards it,
supposing it to be the _debris_ of a wreck. On reaching it one of them
struck it with his "gaff," when immediately it showed signs of life, and
shot out its two tentacular arms, as if to seize its antagonists. The
other man, named Theophilus Picot, though naturally alarmed, severed
both arms with an axe as they lay on the gunwale of the boat, whereupon
the animal moved off, and ejected a quantity of inky fluid which
darkened the surrounding water for a considerable distance. The men went
home, and, as fishermen will, magnified their lost "fish." They
"estimated" the body to have been 60 feet in length, and 10 feet across
the tail fin; and declared that when the "fish" attacked them "it reared
a parrot-like beak which was as big as a six-gallon keg."
All this, in the excitement of the moment, Mr. Harvey appears to have
been willing to believe, and related without the expression of a doubt.
Fortunately, he was able to obtain from the fishermen a portion of one
of the tentacular arms which they had chopped off with the axe, and by
so doing rendered good service to science. This fragment (Fig. 9), as
measured by Mr. Alexander Murray, provincial geologist of Newfoundland,
and Professor Verrill, of Yale College, Connecticut, is 17 feet long and
3-1/2 feet in circumference. It is now in St. John's Museum. By careful
calculation of its girth, the breadth and circumference of the expanded
sucker-bearing portion at its extremity, and the diameter of the
suckers, Professor Verrill has computed its dimensions to have been as
follows:--Length of body 10 feet; diameter of body 2 feet 5 inches. Long
tentacular arms 32 feet; head 2 feet; total length about 44 feet. The
upper mandible of the beak, instead of being "as large as a six-gallon
keg" would be about 3 inches long, and the lower mandible 1-1/2 inch
long. From the size of the large suckers relatively to those of another
specimen to be presently described, he regards it as probable that this
individual was a female.
[Illustration: FIG. 9.--TENTACLE OF A GREAT CALAMARY (_Architeuthis
princeps_) TAKEN IN CONCEPTION BAY, NEWFOUNDLAND, OCT. 26, 1873.]
In November, 1873--about three weeks after the occurrence in Conception
Bay--another calamary somewhat smaller than the preceding, but of the
same species, also came into Mr. Harvey's possession. Three fishermen,
when hauling their herring-net in Logie Bay, about three miles from St.
John's, found the huge animal entangled in its folds. With great
difficulty they succeeded in despatching it and bringing it ashore,
having been compelled to cut off its head before they could get it into
their boat.
[Illustration: FIG. 10.--HEAD AND TENTACLES OF A GREAT CALAMARY
(_Architeuthis princeps_) TAKEN IN LOGIE BAY, NEWFOUNDLAND, NOV. 1873.]
The body of this specimen was over 7 feet long; the caudal fin 22
inches broad; the two long tentacular arms 24 feet in length; the eight
shorter arms each 6 feet long, the largest of the latter being 10 inches
in circumference at the base; total length of this calamary 32 feet.
Professor Verrill considers that this and the Conception Bay squid are
both referable to one species--Steenstrup's _Architeuthis dux_.
Excellent woodcuts from photographs of these two specimens were given in
the _Field_ of December 13th, 1873, and January 31st, 1874,
respectively, and I am indebted to the proprietors of that journal for
their kind and courteous permission to copy them in reduced size for the
illustration of this little work.
For the preservation of both of the above described specimens we have to
thank Mr. Harvey, and he produces additional evidence of other gigantic
cuttles having been previously seen on the coast of Newfoundland. He
mentions two especially, which, as stated by the Rev. Mr. Gabriel, were
cast ashore in the winter of 1870-71, near Lamaline on the south coast
of the island, which measured respectively 40 feet and 47 feet in
length; and he also tells of another stranded two years later, the total
length of which was 80 feet.
In the _American Journal of Science and Arts_, of March 1875, Professor
Verrill gives particulars and authenticated testimony of several other
examples of great calamaries, varying in total length from 30 feet to 52
feet, which have been taken in the neighbourhood of Newfoundland since
the year 1870. One of these was found floating, apparently dead, near
the Grand Banks in October 1871, by Captain Campbell, of the schooner
_B. D. Hoskins_, of Gloucester, Mass. It was taken on board, and part of
it used for bait. The body is stated to have been 15 feet long, and the
pedal or shorter arms between 9 feet and 10 feet. The beak was forwarded
to the Smithsonian Institution.
Another instance given by Professor Verrill is of a great squid found
alive in shallow water in Coomb's Cove, Fortune Bay, in the year 1872.
Its measurements, taken by the Hon. T. R. Bennett, of English Harbour,
Newfoundland, were, length of body 10 feet; length of tentacle 42 feet;
length of one of the ordinary arms 6 feet: the cups on the tentacles
were serrated. Professor Verrill also mentions a pair of jaws and two
suckers in the Smithsonian Institution, as having been received from the
Rev. A. Munn, with a statement that they were taken from a calamary
which went ashore in Bonavista Bay, and which measured 32 feet in total
length.
On the 22nd of September, 1877, another gigantic squid was stranded at
Catalina, on the north shore of Trinity Bay, Newfoundland, during a
heavy equinoctial gale. It was alive when first seen, but died soon
after the ebbing of the tide, and was left high and dry upon the beach.
Two fishermen took possession of it, and the whole settlement gathered
to gaze in astonishment at the monster. Formerly it would have been
converted into manure, or cut up as food for dogs, but, thanks to the
diffusion of intelligence, there were some persons in Catalina who knew
the importance of preserving such a rarity, and who advised the
fishermen to take it to St. John's. After being exhibited there for two
days, it was packed in half-a-ton of ice in readiness for transmission
to Professor Verrill, in the hope that it would be placed in the Peabody
or Smithsonian Museum; but at the last moment its owners violated their
agreement, and sold it to a higher bidder. The final purchase was made
for the New York Aquarium, where it arrived on the 7th of October,
immersed in methylated spirit in a large glass tank. Its measurements
were as follows:--length of body 10 feet; length of tentacles 30 feet;
length of shorter arm 11 feet; circumference of body 7 feet; breadth of
caudal fin 2 feet 9 inches; diameter of largest tentacular sucker 1
inch; number of suckers on each of the shorter arms 250.
The appearance of so many of these great squids on the shores of
Newfoundland during the term of seven years, and after so long a period
of popular uncertainty as to their very existence had previously
elapsed, might lead one to suppose that the waters of the North Atlantic
Ocean which wash the north-eastern coasts of the American Continent
were, at any rate, temporarily, their principal habitat, especially as a
smaller member of their family, _Ommastrephes sagittatus_, is there
found in such extraordinary numbers that it furnishes the greater part
of the bait used in the Newfoundland cod fisheries. But that they are by
no means confined to this locality is proved by recent instances, as
well as by those already cited.
Dr. F. Hilgendorf records[20] observations of a huge squid exhibited for
money at Yedo, Japan, in 1873, and of another of similar size, which he
saw exposed for sale in the Yedo fish market.
[20] 'Sitzungsberichte der Gesellschaft naturforschender Freunde zu
Berlin,' pp. 65-67, quoted by Professor Owen, _op. cit._
When the French expedition was sent to the Island of St. Paul, in 1874,
for the purpose of observing the transit of Venus, which occurred on the
9th of December in that year, it was fortunately accompanied by an able
zoologist, M. Ch. Velain. He reports[21] that on the 2nd of November a
tidal wave cast upon the north shore of the island a great calamary
which measured in total length nearly 23 feet, namely: length of body 7
feet; length of tentacles 16 feet. There are several points of interest
connected with its generic characters, and M. Velain's grounds for
regarding it as being of a previously unknown species, but they are too
technical for discussion here. This specimen was photographed as it lay
upon the beach by M. Cazin, the photographer to the expedition.
[21] 'Comptes Rendus,' t. 80, 1875, p. 998.
The following account of the still more recent capture of a large squid
off the west coast of Ireland was given in the _Zoologist_ of June 1875,
by Sergeant Thomas O'Connor, of the Royal Irish Constabulary:--
"On the 26th of April, 1875, a very large calamary was met with on
the north-west of Boffin Island, Connemara. The crew of a 'curragh'
(a boat made like the 'coracle,' with wooden ribs covered with
tarred canvas) observed to seaward a large floating mass,
surrounded by gulls. They pulled out to it, believing it to be
wreck, but to their astonishment found it was an enormous
cuttle-fish, lying perfectly still, as if basking on the surface of
the water. Paddling up with caution, they lopped off one of its
arms. The animal immediately set out to sea, rushing through the
water at a tremendous pace. The men gave chase, and, after a hard
pull in their frail canvas craft, came up with it, five miles out
in the open Atlantic, and severed another of its arms and the head.
These portions are now in the Dublin Museum. The shorter arms
measure, each, eight feet in length, and fifteen inches round the
base: the tentacular arms are said to have been thirty feet long.
The body sank."
Finally, there is in our own national collection, preserved in spirit
in a tall glass jar, a single arm of a huge cephalopod, which, by the
kindness and courtesy of the officers of the department, I was permitted
to examine and measure when I first described it, in May, 1873. It is 9
feet long, and 12 inches in circumference at the base, tapering
gradually to a fine point. It has about 300 suckers, pedunculated, or
set on tubular footstalks, placed alternately in two rows, and having
serrated, horny rings, but no hooks; the diameter of the largest of
these rings is half an inch; the smallest is not larger than a pin's
head. This is one of the eight shorter, or pedal, and not one of the
long, or tentacular, arms of the calamary to which it belonged. The
relative length of the arms to that of the body and tentacles varies in
different genera of the _Teuthidae_, and it is not impossible that this
may be the case even in individuals of the same species. But, judging
from the proportions of known examples, I estimate the length of the
tentacles at 36 feet, and that of the body at from 10 to 11 feet: total
length 47 feet. The beak would probably have been about 5 inches long
from hinge socket to point, and the diameter of the largest suckers of
the tentacles about 1 inch. So much for De Montfort's "suckers as big as
saucepan-lids." From a well defined fold of skin which spreads out from
each margin of that surface of the arm over which the suckers are
situated, Professor Owen has given to this calamary the generic name of
_Plectoteuthis_, with the specific title of _grandis_ to indicate its
enormous size. No history relating to this interesting specimen has been
preserved. No one knows its origin, nor when it was received, but Dr.
Gray told me that he believed it came from the east coast of South
America. It has, however, long formed part of the stores of the British
Museum, and, although previously open to public view, was more recently
for many years kept in the basement chambers of the old building in
Bloomsbury, which were irreverently called by the initiated "the spirit
vaults and bottle department," because fishes, mollusca, &c., preserved
in spirits were there deposited. I hope the public will have greater
facility of access to it in the new Museum.
Here, then, in our midst, and to be seen by all who ask permission to
inspect it, is, and has long been, a limb of a great cephalopod capable
of upsetting a boat, or of hauling a man out of her, or of clutching one
engaged in scraping a ship's side, and dragging him under water, as
described by the old master-mariner Magnus Dens. The tough, supple
tentacles, shot forth with lightning rapidity, would be long enough to
reach him at a distance of a dozen yards, and strong enough to drag him
within the grasp of the eight shorter arms, a helpless victim to the
mandibles of a beak sufficiently powerful to tear him in pieces and
crush some of his smaller bones. For, once within that dreadful embrace,
his escape, unaided, would be impossible. The clinging power of this
_Plectoteuthis_ is so enormously augmented by the additional surface
given by the expanded folds to the under side of the arms, that I doubt
if even one of the smaller whales, such as the "White Whale," or the
"Pilot Whale," could extricate itself from their combined hold, if those
eight supple, clammy, adhesive arms, each 9 feet long, and 5 inches in
diameter at the base on the flat under surface, and armed with a battery
of 2400 suckers, were once fairly lapped around it.
Ought it to surprise us, then, that an uneducated seafaring population,
such as the fishermen of Fridrichstad, mentioned by Pontoppidan,
absolutely ignorant of the habits and affinities, and even unacquainted
with the real external form of such a creature, should exaggerate its
dimensions and invest it with mystery? All that they knew of it was that
whilst their friends and neighbours, whom we will call Eric Paulsen,
Hans Ohlsen, and Olaf Bruhn were out fishing one calm day, a shapeless
"something" rose just above the surface of the tranquil sea not far from
their boat. They could see that there was much more of its bulk under
water, but how far it extended they could not ascertain. Mistrusting its
appearance, and with foreboding of danger, they were about to get up
their anchor, when, suddenly, from thirty feet away, a rope was shot on
board which fastened itself on Hans; he was dragged from amongst them
towards the strange floating mass; there was a commotion; from the
foaming sea upreared themselves, as it seemed to Eric and Olaf, several
writhing serpents, which twined themselves around Hans; and as they
gazed, helpless, in horror and bewilderment, the monster sank, and with
a mighty swirl the waters closed for ever over their unfortunate
companion. The men would naturally hasten home, and describe the
dreadful incident--their imagination excited by its mysterious nature;
the tale would spread through the district, losing nothing by
repetition, and within a week the fabled Kraken would be the result.
The existence, in almost every sea, of calamaries capable of playing
their part in such a scene has been fully proved, and this vexed
question of marine zoology set at rest for ever. The "much greater light
on this subject," which, as Pontoppidan sagaciously foresaw, was
"reserved for posterity," has been thrown upon it by the discoveries of
the last few years; and the "further experience which is always the best
instructor," and which he correctly anticipated would be possessed by
the "future writers," to whom he bequeathed the completion of his
"sketch," has been obtained. Viewed by their aid, and seen in the
clearer atmosphere of our present knowledge, the great sea-monster which
loomed so indefinitely vast in the mist of ignorance and superstition,
stands revealed in its true form and proportions--its magnitude reduced,
its outline distinct, and its mystery gone--and we recognise in the
supposed Kraken, as the Norwegian bishop rightly conjectured that we
should, an animal "of the Polypus (or cuttle) kind, and amongst the
largest inhabitants of the ocean."
THE GREAT SEA SERPENT.
The belief in the existence of sea-serpents of formidable dimensions is
of great antiquity. Aristotle, writing about B.C. 340, says[22]:--"The
serpents of Libya are of an enormous size. Navigators along that coast
report having seen a great quantity of bones of oxen, which they
believe, without doubt, to have been devoured by the serpents. These
serpents pursued them when they left the shore, and upset one of their
triremes"--a vessel of a large class, having three banks of oars.
[22] 'History of Animals,' book 8, chap. 28.
Pliny tells us[23] that a squadron sent by Alexander the Great on a
voyage of discovery, under the command of Onesicritus and Nearchus,
encountered, in the neighbourhood of some islands in the Persian Gulf,
sea-serpents thirty feet long, which filled the fleet with terror.
[23] 'Naturalis Historiae,' Lib. vi., cap. 23.
Valerius Maximus,[24] quoting Livy, describes the alarm into which,
during the Punic wars, the Romans, under Attilius Regulus (who was
afterwards so cruelly put to death by the Carthaginians), were thrown by
an aquatic, though not marine, serpent which had its lair on the banks
of the Bagrados, near Ithaca. It is said to have swallowed many of the
soldiers, after crushing them in its folds, and to have kept the army
from crossing the river, till at length, being invulnerable by ordinary
weapons, it was destroyed by heavy stones hurled by balistas, catapults,
and other military engines used in those days for casting heavy
missiles, and battering the walls of fortified towns. According to the
historian, the annoyance caused by it to the army did not cease with its
death, for the water was polluted with its gore, and the air with the
noxious fumes from its corrupted carcase, to such a degree that the
Romans were obliged to remove their camp. They, however secured the
animal's skin and skull, which were preserved in a temple at Rome till
the time of the Numantine war. This combat has been described, to the
same effect, by Florus (lib. ii.), Seneca (litt. 82), Silvius Italicus
(l. vi.), Aulus Gellius (lib. vi., cap. 3), Orosius, Zonaras, &c., and
is referred to by Pliny (lib. viii., cap. 14) as an incident known to
every one. Diodorus Siculus also tells of a great serpent, sixty feet
long, which lived chiefly in the water, but landed at frequent intervals
to devour the cattle in its neighbourhood. A party was collected to
capture it; but their first attempt failed, and the monster killed
twenty of them. It was afterwards taken in a strong net, carried alive
to Alexandria, and presented to King Ptolemy II., the founder of the
Alexandrian Library and Museum, who was a great collector of zoological
and other curiosities. This snake was probably one of the great boas.
[24] 'De Factis, Dictisque Memorabilibus,' Lib. i., cap. 8, 1st
century.
The "_Serpens marinus_" is figured and referred to by many other
writers, but as they evidently allude to the Conger and the Murena, we
will pass over their descriptions.
The sea-serpents mentioned by Aristotle, Pliny, and Diodorus were,
doubtless, real sea-snakes, true marine ophidians, which are more common
in tropical seas than is generally supposed. They are found most
abundantly in the Indian Ocean; but they have an extensive geographical
range, and between forty and fifty species of them are known. They are
all highly poisonous, and some are so ferocious that they more
frequently attack than avoid man. The greatest length to which they are
authentically known to attain is about twelve feet. The form and
structure of these _hydrophides_ are modified from those of land
serpents, to suit their aquatic habits. The tail is compressed
vertically, flattened from the sides, so as to form a fin like the tail
of an eel, by which they propel themselves; but instead of tapering to a
point, it is rounded off at the end, like the blade of a paper-knife, or
the scabbard of a cavalry sabre. Like other lung-breathing animals which
live in water, they are also provided with a respiratory apparatus
adapted to their circumstances and requirements--their nostrils, which
are very small, being furnished, like those of the seal, manatee, &c.,
with a valve opening at will to admit air, and closing perfectly to
exclude water.
Leaving these water-snakes of the tropics, we come, next in order of
date, upon some very remarkable evidence that there was current amongst
a community where we should little expect to find it, the idea of a
marine monster corresponding in many respects with some of the
descriptions given several centuries later of the sea-serpent. In an
interesting article on the Catacombs of Rome in the _Illustrated London
News_ of February 3rd, 1872, allusion is made by the author to the
collection of sarcophagi or coffins of the early Christians, removed
from the Catacombs, and preserved in the museum of the Lateran Palace,
where they were arranged by the late Padre Marchi for Pope Pius IX.
There are more than twenty of these, sculptured with various
designs--the Father and the Son, Adam and Eve and the Serpent, the
Sacrifice of Abraham, Moses striking the Rock, Daniel and the Lions, and
other Scripture themes. Amongst them also is Jonah and the "whale." A
facsimile of this sculpture (Fig. 11) is one of the illustrations of the
article referred to. It will be seen that Jonah is being swallowed feet
foremost, or possibly being ejected head first, by an enormous sea
monster, having the chest and fore-legs of a horse, a long arching neck,
with a mane at its base, near the shoulders, a head like nothing in
nature, but having hair upon and beneath the cheeks, the hinder portion
of the body being that of a serpent of prodigious length, undulating in
several vertical curves. This sculpture appears to have been cut between
the beginning and the middle of the third century, about A.D. 230, but
it probably represents a tradition of far greater antiquity.
[Illustration: FIG. 11.--JONAH AND THE SEA MONSTER.
_From the Catacombs of Rome._]
We will now consider the accounts given by Scandinavian historians, of
the sea-serpent having been seen in northern waters. Here, I suppose, I
ought to indulge in the usual flippant sneer at Bishop Pontoppidan. I
know that in abstaining from doing so I am sadly out of the fashion; but
I venture to think that the dead lion has been kicked at too often
already, and undeservedly. Whether there be, or be not, a huge marine
animal, not necessarily an ophidian, answering to some of the
descriptions of the sea-serpent--so called--Pontoppidan did not invent
the stories told of its appearance. Long before he was born the monster
had been described and figured; and for centuries previously the
Norwegians, Swedes, Danes, and Fins had believed in its existence as
implicitly as in the tenets of their religious creed. Olaus Magnus,
Archbishop of Upsala, in Sweden, wrote of it in A.D. 1555 as
follows:[25]--
"They who in works of navigation on the coasts of Norway employ
themselves in fishing or merchandize do all agree in this strange
story, that there is a serpent there which is of a vast magnitude,
namely 200 foot long, and moreover, 20 foot thick; and is wont to
live in rocks and caves toward the sea-coast about Berge: which
will go alone from his holes on a clear night in summer, and devour
calves, lambs, and hogs, or else he goes into the sea to feed on
polypus (octopus), locusts (lobsters), and all sorts of sea-crabs.
He hath commonly hair hanging from his neck a cubit long, and sharp
scales, and is black, and he hath flaming, shining eyes. This snake
disquiets the shippers; and he puts up his head on high like a
pillar, and catcheth away men, and he devours them; and this
happeneth not but it signifies some wonderful change of the kingdom
near at hand; namely, that the princes shall die, or be banished;
or some tumultuous wars shall presently follow. There is also
another serpent of an incredible magnitude in an island called Moos
in the diocess of Hammer; which, as a comet portends a change in
all the world, so that portends a change in the kingdom of Norway,
as it was seen anno 1522; that lifts himself high above the waters,
and rolls himself round like a sphere.[26] This serpent was thought
to be fifty cubits long by conjecture, by sight afar off: there
followed this the banishment of King Christiernus, and a great
persecution of the Bishops; and it shewed also the destruction of
the country."
[25] 'Historia de Gentibus Septentrionalibus,' Lib. xxi. cap. 43.
[26] "Coils itself in spherical convolutions" is a better
translation of the original Latin.
The Gothic Archbishop, amongst other signs and omens, also attributes
this power of divination to the small red ants which are sometimes so
troublesome in houses, and declares that they also portended the
downfall, A.D. 1523, of the abominably cruel Danish king, Christian II.,
above mentioned. His curious work is full of wild improbabilities and
odd superstitions, most of which he states with a calm air of
unquestioning assent; but as he wrote in the time of our Henry VIII.,
long before the belief in witches and warlocks, fairies and banshees,
had died out in our own country, we can hardly throw stones at him on
that score. It is a most amusing and interesting history, and gives a
wonderful insight of the habits and customs of the northern nations in
his day.
Amongst his illustrations of the sea monsters he describes are the two
of which I give facsimiles on the next page. In Fig. 12 a sea-serpent is
seen writhing in many coils upon the surface of the water, and having in
its mouth a sailor, whom it has seized from the deck of a ship. The poor
fellow is trying to grasp the ratlins of the shrouds, but is being
dragged from his hold and lifted over the bulwarks by the monster. His
companions, in terror, are endeavouring to escape in various directions.
One is climbing aloft by the stay, in the hope of getting out of reach
in that way, whilst two others are hurrying aft to obtain the shelter of
a little castle or cabin projecting over the stern. I am strongly of the
opinion that this is but the fallacious representation of an actual
occurrence. Read by the light of recent knowledge, these old pictures
convey to a practised eye a meaning as clear as that of hieroglyphics to
an Egyptologist, and my translation of this is the following: The crew
of a ship have witnessed the dreadful sight of a serpent-like form
issuing from the sea, rising over the bulwarks of their vessel, seizing
one of their messmates from amongst them, and dragging him overboard and
under water. Awe-stricken by the mysterious disappearance of their
comrade, and too frightened and anxious for their own safety to be able,
during the short space of time occupied by an affair, which all happened
in a few seconds, to observe accurately their terrible assailant, they
naturally conjecture that it must have been a snake. It was probably a
gigantic calamary, such as we now know exist, and the dead carcases of
which have been found in the locality where the event depicted is
supposed to have taken place. The presumed body of the serpent was one
of the arms of the squid, and the two rows of suckers thereto belonging
are indicated in the illustration by the medial line traversing its
whole length (intended to represent a dorsal fin) and the double row of
transverse septa, one on each side of it.
[Illustration: FIG. 12.--A SEA SERPENT SEIZING A MAN ON BOARD SHIP.
_After_ OLAUS MAGNUS.]
[Illustration: FIG. 13.--A GIGANTIC LOBSTER DRAGGING A MAN FROM A SHIP.
_After_ OLAUS MAGNUS.]
In Fig. 13 an enormous lobster is in the act of similarly dragging
overboard from a vessel a man whom it has seized by the arm with one of
its great claws. From the crude image of a lobster having eight minor
claws and two larger ones, to that of a cuttle having eight minor arms
and two longer ones, the transition is not great; and I believe that
this also is a pictorial misrepresentation of a casualty by the attack
of a calamary similar to that above described, possibly another view of
the same incident. The idea is that of a sea animal capable of suddenly
seizing and grasping a man, and we must remember that we have evidence,
in the writings of Pontoppidan and others, that, even two centuries
later than Olaus Magnus, the Norsemen's knowledge of the cuttles was
exceedingly vague and indistinct. Any one who has seen, as I frequently
have at the Brighton Aquarium, and as they doubtless had whilst
lobster-catching, the threatening and ferocious manner in which a
lobster will brandish, and, if I may use the term, "gnash" its claws at
an intruding hand, even if held above the surface of the water, can well
imagine a party of fishermen discussing such a tragic occurrence as the
foregoing, and differing in opinion as to the identity of the creature
which had caused the catastrophe, some maintaining that it must have
been a sea-serpent, and others shaking their heads and asserting that
nothing but a colossal lobster could have done it.
Pontoppidan, in writing his history of Norway, of course had before him
the statements of Olaus Magnus; but, though their author was an
archbishop, he did not accept them with the childlike simplicity
generally ascribed to him. Quoting, and, singularly enough, misquoting,
the Swedish prelate as referring to a sea-serpent, when he is
describing, incorrectly, one of the _Acalephae_, or sea-nettles,
Pontoppidan says:--
"I have never heard of this sort, and should hardly believe the
good Olaus if he did not say that he affirmed this from his own
experience. The disproportion makes me think there must be some
error of the press.... He mixes truth and fable together according
to the relations of others; but this was excusable in that dark age
when that author wrote. Notwithstanding all this, we, in the
present more enlightened age, are much obliged to him for his
industry and judicious observations."
Of the sea-serpent Pontoppidan writes:--
"I have questioned its existence myself, till that suspicion was
removed by full and sufficient evidence from creditable and
experienced fishermen and sailors in Norway, of which there are
hundreds who can testify that they have annually seen them. All
these persons agree very well in the general description; and
others who acknowledge that they only know it by report or by what
their neighbours have told them, still relate the same particulars.
In all my inquiry about these affairs I have hardly spoke with any
intelligent person born in the manor of Nordland who was not able
to give a pertinent answer, and strong assurances of the existence
of this fish; and some of our north traders that come here every
year with their merchandize think it a very strange question when
they are seriously asked whether there be any such creature: they
think it as ridiculous as if the question was put to them whether
there be such fish as eel or cod."
The worthy Bishop of Bergen did his best to sift truth from fable, but
he could not always succeed in separating them. Many stupendous
falsehoods were brought to him, and some of them passed through his
sieve in spite of his care. Of these are the accounts of the "spawning
times" of the sea-serpent, its dislike of certain scents, &c. We must
pass over all this, and confine ourselves to the evidence offered by him
of its having been seen.
The first witness he adduces is Captain Lawrence de Ferry, of the
Norwegian navy, and first pilot in Bergen, who, premising that he had
doubted a great while whether there were any such creature till he had
ocular demonstration of it, made the following statement, addressed
formally and officially to the procurator of Bergen:--
"Mr. JOHN REUTZ--
"The latter end of August, in the year 1746, as I was on a voyage,
on my return from Trundhiem, on a very calm and hot day, having a
mind to put in at Molde, it happened that when we were arrived with
my vessel within six English miles of the aforesaid Molde, being at
a place called Jule-Naess, as I was reading in a book, I heard a
kind of a murmuring voice from amongst the men at the oars, who
were eight in number, and observed that the man at the helm kept
off from the land. Upon this I inquired what was the matter, and
was informed that there was a sea-snake before us. I then ordered
the man at the helm to keep to the land again, and to come up with
this creature of which I had heard so many stories. Though the
fellows were under some apprehension, they were obliged to obey my
orders. In the meantime the sea-snake passed by us, and we were
obliged to tack the vessel about in order to get nearer to it. As
the snake swam faster than we could row, I took my gun, that was
ready charged, and fired at it; on this he immediately plunged
under the water. We rowed to the place where it sunk down (which in
the calm might be easily observed) and lay upon our oars, thinking
it would come up again to the surface; however it did not. Where
the snake plunged down, the water appeared thick and red; perhaps
some of the shot might wound it, the distance being very little.
The head of this snake, which it held more than two feet above the
surface of the water, resembled that of a horse. It was of a
greyish colour, and the mouth was quite black, and very large. It
had black eyes, and a long white mane, that hung down from the neck
to the surface of the water. Besides the head and neck, we saw
seven or eight folds, or coils, of this snake, which were very
thick, and as far as we could guess there was about a fathom
distance between each fold. I related this affair in a certain
company, where there was a person of distinction present who
desired that I would communicate to him an authentic detail of all
that happened; and for this reason two of my sailors, who were
present at the same time and place where I saw this monster,
namely, Nicholas Pedersen Kopper, and Nicholas Nicholsen
Anglewigen, shall appear in court, to declare on oath the truth of
every particular herein set forth; and I desire the favour of an
attested copy of the said descriptions.
"I remain, Sir, your obliged servant,
"L. DE FERRY.
"Bergen, 21st February, 1751.
"After this the before-named witnesses gave their corporal oaths,
and, with their finger held up according to law, witnessed and
confirmed the aforesaid letter or declaration, and every particular
set forth therein to be strictly true. A copy of the said
attestation was made out for the said Procurator Reutz, and granted
by the Recorder. That this was transacted in our court of justice
we confirm with our hand and seals. _Actum Bergis die et loco, ut
supra._
"A. C. DASS (_Chief Advocate_).
"H. C. GARTNER (_Recorder_)."
[Illustration: FIG. 14.--PONTOPPIDAN'S "SEA SERPENT."]
The figure of the sea-serpent (Fig. 14) given by Pontoppidan was drawn,
he tells us, under the inspection of a clergyman, Mr. Hans Strom, from
descriptions given of it by two of his neighbours, Messrs. Reutz and
Teuchsen, of Herroe; and was declared to agree in every particular with
that seen by Captain de Ferry, and another subsequently observed by
Governor Benstrup. The supposed coils of the serpent's body present
exactly the appearance of eight porpoises following each other in line.
This is a well-known habit of some of the smaller cetacea. They are
often met with at sea thus proceeding in close single file, part only of
their rotund forms being visible as they raise their backs above the
surface of the water to inhale air through their "blow-holes." Under
these circumstances they have been described by naturalists and seamen
as resembling a long string of casks or buoys, often extending for
sixty, eighty, or a hundred yards. This is just such a spectacle as that
described by Olaus Magnus--his "long line of spherical convolutions,"
and also as one reported to Pontoppidan as being descriptive of the
sea-serpent:--
"'I have been informed,' he says, 'by some of our sea-faring men
that a cable[27] would not be long enough to measure the length of
some of them when they are observed on the surface of the water in
an even line. They say those round lumps or folds sometimes lie one
after another as far as a man can see. I confess, if this be true,
that we must suppose most probably that it is not one snake, but
two or more of these creatures lying in a line that exhibit this
phenomenon.' In a foot-note he adds: 'If any one enquires how many
folds may be counted on a sea-snake, the answer is that the number
is not always the same, but depends upon the various sizes of them:
five and twenty is the greatest number that I find well attested.'
Adam Olearius, in his Gottorf Museum, writes of it thus: 'A person
of distinction from Sweden related here at Gottorf that he had
heard the burgomaster of Malmoe, a very worthy man, say that as he
was once standing on the top of a very high hill, towards the North
Sea, he saw in the water, which was very calm, a snake, which
appeared at that distance to be as thick as a pipe of wine, and had
twenty-five folds. Those kind of snakes only appear at certain
times, and in calm weather.'"
[27] Six hundred feet.
I believe that in every case so far cited from Pontoppidan, as well as
that given by Olaus Magnus, the supposed coils or protuberances of the
serpent's body, were only so many porpoises swimming in line in
accordance with their habit before mentioned. If an upraised head, like
that of a horse, was seen preceding them, it was either unconnected with
them, or it certainly was not that of a snake; for no serpent could
throw its body into those vertical undulations. The form of the vertebrae
in the ophidians renders such a movement impossible. All their flexions
are horizontal; the curving of their body is from side to side, not up
and down.
The sea-monster seen by Egede was of an entirely different kind; and
his account of it--let sceptics deride it as they may--is worthy of
attention and careful consideration. The Rev. Hans Egede, known as "The
Apostle of Greenland," was superintendent of the Christian missions to
that country. He was a truthful, pious, and single-minded man,
possessing considerable powers of observation, and a genuine love of
natural history. He wrote two books on the products, people, and natural
history of Greenland,[28] and his statements therein are modest,
accurate, and free from exaggeration. His illustrations are little, if
at all, superior in style of art to the two Japanese wood-cuts shown on
page 29, but they bear the same unmistakable signs of fidelity which
characterise those of the Japanese.
[28] 'Des alten Groenlands neue Perlustration,' 8vo., Frankfurt,
1730, and 'Det Gamle Groenlands nye perlustratione eller Naturel
Historie.' 4to., Copenhagen, 1741.
In his 'Journal of the Missions to Greenland' this author tell us that--
"On the 6th of July, 1734, there appeared a very large and
frightful sea monster, which raised itself so high out of the water
that its head reached above our main-top. It had a long, sharp
snout, and spouted water like a whale; and very broad flappers. The
body seemed to be covered with scales, and the skin was uneven and
wrinkled, and the lower part was formed like a snake. After some
time the creature plunged backwards into the water, and then turned
its tail up above the surface, a whole ship-length from the head.
The following evening we had very bad weather."
The high character of the narrator would lead us to accept his
statement that he had seen something previously unknown to him (he does
not say it was a sea-serpent) even if we could not explain or understand
what it was that he saw. Fortunately, however, the sketch made by Mr.
Bing, one of his brother missionaries, has enabled us to do this. We
must remember that in his endeavour to portray the incident he was
dealing with an animal with the nature of which he was unacquainted, and
which was only partially, and for a very short time, within his view. He
therefore delineated rather the impression left on his mind than the
thing itself. But although he invested it with a character that did not
belong to it, his drawing is so far correct that we are able to
recognise at a glance the distorted portrait of an old acquaintance, and
to say unhesitatingly that Egede's sea-monster was one of the great
calamaries which have since been occasionally met with, but which have
only been believed in and recognised within the last few years. That
which Mr. Egede believed to be the creature's head was the tail part of
the cuttle, which goes in advance as the animal swims, and the two side
appendages represent very efficiently the two lobes of the caudal fin.
In propelling itself to the surface the squid raised this portion of its
body out of the water to a considerable height, an occurrence which I
have often witnessed, and which I have elsewhere described (see pp. 23
and 27). The supposed tail, which was turned up at some distance from
the other visible portion of the body, after the latter had sunk back
into the sea, was one of the shorter arms of the cuttle, and the suckers
on its under side are clearly and conspicuously marked. Egede was, of
course, in error in making the "spout" of water to issue from the mouth
of his monster. The out-pouring jet, which he, no doubt, saw, came from
the locomotor tube, and the puff of spray which would accompany it as
the orifice of the tube rose to the surface of the water is sketched
with remarkable truthfulness. In quoting Egede, Pontoppidan gives a copy
(so-called) of this engraving, but his artist embellished it so much as
to deprive it of its original force and character, and of the honestly
drawn points which furnish proofs of its identity.
[Illustration: FIG. 15--THE ANIMAL DRAWN BY MR. BING AS HAVING BEEN SEEN
BY HANS EGEDE.]
[Illustration: FIG. 16.--THE ANIMAL WHICH EGEDE PROBABLY SAW.]
Pontoppidan records other supposed appearances of the sea-serpent, but
from the date of his history I know of no other account of such an
occurrence until that of an animal "apparently belonging to this class,"
which was stranded on the Island of Stronsa, one of the Orkneys, in the
year 1808:--
"According to the narrative, it was first seen entire, and measured
by respectable individuals. It measured fifty-six feet in length,
and twelve in circumference. The head was small, not being a foot
long from the snout to the first vertebra; the neck was slender,
extending to the length of fifteen feet. All the witnesses agree in
assigning it blow-holes, though they differ as to the precise
situation. On the shoulders something like a bristly mane commenced
which extended to near the extremity of the tail. It had three
pairs of fins or paws connected with the body; the anterior were
the largest, measuring more than four feet in length, and their
extremities were something like toes partially webbed. The skin was
smooth and of a greyish colour; the eye was of the size of a
seal's. When the decaying carcass was broken up by the waves,
portions of it were secured (such as the skull, the upper bones of
the swimming paws, &c.) by Mr. Laing, a neighbouring proprietor,
and some of the vertebrae were preserved and deposited in the Royal
University Museum, Edinburgh, and in the Museum of the Royal
College of Surgeons, London. An able paper," says Dr. Robert
Hamilton, in his account of it,[29] "on these latter fragments and
on the wreck of the animal was read by the late Dr. Barclay to the
Wernerian Society, and will be found in Vol. I. of its
Transactions, to which we refer. We have supplied a wood-cut of the
sketch" (of which I give a _facsimile_ here) "which was taken at
the time, and which, from the many affidavits proffered by
respectable individuals, as well as from other circumstances
narrated, leaves no manner of doubt as to the existence of some
such animal."
[29] Jardine's Naturalists' Library: 'Marine Amphibia,' p. 314.
[Illustration: FIG. 17.--THE "SEA SERPENT" OF THE WERNERIAN SOCIETY.
(_Facsimile._)]
Well! one would think so. It looks convincing, and there is a savour of
philosophy about it that might lull the suspicions of a doubting
zoologist. What more could be required? We have accurate measurements
and a sketch taken of the animal as it lay upon the shore, minute
particulars of its outward form, characteristic portions of its skeleton
preserved in well-known museums, and any amount of affidavits
forthcoming from most respectable individuals if confirmation be
required. And yet,
"'Tis true, 'tis pity;
And pity 'tis 'tis true,"
the whole fabric of circumstances crumbled at the touch of science.
When the two vertebrae in the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons
were examined by Sir Everard Home he pronounced them to be those of a
great shark of the genus _Selache_, and as being undistinguishable from
those of the species called the "basking shark," of which individuals
from thirty to thirty-five feet in length have been from time to time
captured or stranded on our coasts. Professor Owen has confirmed this.
Any one who feels inclined to dispute the identification by this
distinguished comparative anatomist of a bone which he has seen and
handled can examine these vertebrae for himself. If they had not been
preserved, this incident would have been cited for all time as among the
most satisfactorily authenticated instances on record of the appearance
of the sea-serpent. As it is, it furnishes a valuable warning of the
necessity for the most careful scrutiny of the evidence of well-meaning
persons to whom no intentional deception or exaggeration can be imputed.
In 1809, Mr. Maclean, the minister of Eigg, in the Western Isles of
Scotland, informed Dr. Neill, the secretary of the Wernerian Society,
that he had seen, off the Isle of Canna, a great animal which chased his
boat as he hurried ashore to escape from it; and that it was also seen
by the crews of thirteen fishing-boats, who were so terrified by it that
they fled from it to the nearest creek for safety. His description of it
is exceedingly vague, but is strongly indicative of a great calamary.
In 1817 a large marine animal, supposed to be a serpent, was seen at
Gloucester Harbour, near Cape Ann, Massachusetts, about thirty miles
from Boston. The Linnaean Society of New England investigated the matter,
and took much trouble to obtain evidence thereon. The depositions of
eleven credible witnesses were certified on oath before magistrates, one
of whom had himself seen the creature, and who confirmed the statements.
All agreed that the animal had the appearance of a serpent, but
estimated its length, variously, at from fifty to a hundred feet. Its
head was in shape like that of a turtle, or snake, but as large as the
head of a horse. There was no appearance of a mane. Its mode of
progressing was by vertical undulations; and five of the witnesses
described it as having the hunched protuberances mentioned by Captain de
Ferry and others. Of this, I can offer no zoological explanation. The
testimony given was apparently sincere, but it was received with
mistrust; for, as Mr. Gosse says, "owing to a habit prevalent in the
United States of supposing that there is somewhat of wit in gross
exaggeration or hoaxing invention, we do naturally look with a lurking
suspicion on American statements when they describe unusual or disputed
phenomena."
On the 15th of May, 1833, a party of British officers, consisting of
Captain Sullivan, Lieutenants Maclachlan and Malcolm of the Rifle
Brigade, Lieutenant Lister of the Artillery, and Mr. Ince of the
Ordnance, whilst crossing Margaret's Bay in a small yacht, on their way
from Halifax to Mahone Bay, "saw, at a distance of a hundred and fifty
to two hundred yards, the head and neck of some denizen of the deep,
precisely like those of a common snake in the act of swimming, the head
so far elevated and thrown forward by the curve of the neck, as to
enable them to see the water under and beyond it. The creature rapidly
passed, leaving a regular wake, from the commencement of which to the
fore part, which was out of water, they judged its length to be about
eighty feet." They "set down the head at about six feet in length
(considerably larger than that of a horse), and that portion of the neck
which they saw at the same." "There could be no mistake--no delusion,"
they say; "and we were all perfectly satisfied that we had been favoured
with a view of the true and veritable sea-serpent." This account was
published in the _Zoologist_, in 1847 (p. 1715), and at that date all
the officers above named were still living.
The next incident of the kind in point of date that we find recorded
carries us back to the locality of which Pontoppidan wrote, and in which
was seen the animal vouched for by Captain de Ferry. In 1847 there
appeared in a London daily paper a long account translated from the
Norse journals of fresh appearances of the sea-serpent. The statement
made was, that it had recently been frequently seen in the neighbourhood
of Christiansand and Molde. In the large bight of the sea at
Christiansand it had been seen every year, only in the warmest weather,
and when the sea was perfectly calm, and the surface of the water
unruffled. The evidence of three respectable persons was taken, namely,
Nils Roe, a workman at Mr. William Knudtzon's, who saw it twice there,
John Johnson, merchant, and Lars Johnoen, fisherman at Smolen. The
latter said he had frequently seen it, and that one afternoon in the
dog-days, as he was sitting in his boat, he saw it twice in the course
of two hours, and quite close to him. It came, indeed, to within six
feet of him, and, becoming alarmed, he commended his soul to God, and
lay down in the boat, only holding his head high enough to enable him to
observe the monster. It passed him, disappeared, and returned; but, a
breeze springing up, it sank, and he saw it no more. He described it as
being about six fathoms long, the body (which was as round as a
serpent's) two feet across, the head as long as a ten-gallon cask, the
eyes large, round, red, sparkling, and about five inches in diameter:
close behind the head a mane like a fin commenced along the neck, and
spread itself out on both sides, right and left, when swimming. The
mane, as well as the head, was of the colour of mahogany. The body was
quite smooth, its movements occasionally fast and slow. It was
serpent-like, and moved up and down. The few undulations which those
parts of the body and tail that were out of water made, were scarcely a
fathom in length. These undulations were not so high that he could see
between them and the water.
In confirmation of this account Mr. Soren Knudtzon, Dr. Hoffmann,
surgeon in Molde, Rector Hammer, Mr. Kraft, curate, and several other
persons, testified that they had seen in the neighbourhood of
Christiansand a sea-serpent of considerable size.
Mr. William Knudtzon, and Mr. Bochlum, a candidate for holy orders, also
gave their account of it, much to the same purport; but some of these
remarks are worthy of note for future comment. They say, "its motions
were in undulations, and so strong that white foam appeared before it,
and at the side, which stretched out several fathoms. It did not appear
very high out of the water; the head was long and small in proportion to
the throat: as the latter appeared much greater than the former,
probably it was furnished with a mane."
Sheriffe Goettsche testified to a similar effect. "He could not judge of
the animal's entire length; he could not observe its extremity. At the
back of the head there was a mane, which was the same colour as the rest
of the body."
We must take one more Norwegian account, for it is a very important
one. The venerable P. W. Deinbolt,[30] Archdeacon of Molde, gives the
following account of an incident that occurred there on the 28th of
July, 1845:
[30] Hitherto erroneously printed "Deinboll."
"J. C. Lund, bookseller and printer; G. S. Krogh, merchant;
Christian Flang, Lund's apprentice, and John Elgenses, labourer,
were out on Romsdal-fjord, fishing. The sea was, after a warm,
sunshiny day, quite calm. About seven o'clock in the afternoon, at
a little distance from the shore, near the ballast place and Molde
Hooe, they saw a long marine animal, which slowly moved itself
forward, as it appeared to them, with the help of two fins, on the
fore-part of the body nearest the head, which they judged by the
boiling of the water on both sides of it. The visible part of the
body appeared to be between forty and fifty feet in length, and
moved in undulations, like a snake. The body was round and of a
dark colour, and seemed to be several ells in thickness. As they
discerned a waving motion in the water behind the animal, they
concluded that part of the body was concealed under water. That it
was one continuous animal they saw plainly from its movement. When
the animal was about one hundred yards from the boat, they noticed
tolerably correctly its fore parts, which ended in a sharp snout;
its colossal head raised itself above the water in the form of a
semi-circle; the lower part was not visible. The colour of the head
was dark-brown and the skin smooth; they did not notice the eyes,
or any mane or bristles on the throat. When the serpent came about
a musket-shot near, Lund fired at it, and was certain the shots hit
it in the head. After the shot it dived, but came up immediately.
It raised its neck in the air, like a snake preparing to dart on
his prey. After he had turned and got his body in a straight line,
which he appeared to do with great difficulty, he darted like an
arrow against the boat. They reached the shore, and the animal,
perceiving it had come into shallow water, dived immediately and
disappeared in the deep. Such is the declaration of these four men,
and no one has cause to question their veracity, or imagine that
they were so seized with fear that they could not observe what took
place so near them. There are not many here, or on other parts of
the Norwegian coast, who longer doubt the existence of the
sea-serpent. The writer of this narrative was a long time
sceptical, as he had not been so fortunate as to see this monster
of the deep; but after the many accounts he has read, and the
relations he has received from credible witnesses, he does not dare
longer to doubt the existence of the sea-serpent.
"P. W. DEINBOLT.
"Molde, 29th Nov., 1845."
We may at once accept most fully and frankly the statements of all the
worthy people mentioned in this series of incidents. There is no room
for the shadow of a doubt that they all recounted conscientiously that
which they saw. The last quoted occurrence, especially, is most
accurately and intelligently described--so clearly, indeed, that it
furnishes us with a clue to the identity of the strange visitant.
Here let me say--and I wish it to be distinctly understood--that I do
not deny the possibility of the existence of a great sea serpent, or
other great creatures at present unknown to science, and that I have no
inclination to explain away that which others have seen, because I
myself have not witnessed it. "Seeing is believing," it is said, and it
is not agreeable to have to tell a person that, in common parlance, he
"must not trust his own eyes." It seems presumptuous even to hint that
one may know better what was seen than the person who saw it. And yet I
am obliged to say, reluctantly and courteously, but most firmly and
assuredly, that these perfectly credible eye-witnesses did not correctly
interpret that which they witnessed. In these cases, it is not the eye
which deceives, nor the tongue which is untruthful, but the imagination
which is led astray by the association of the thing seen with an
erroneous idea. I venture to say this, not with any insolent assumption
of superior acumen, but because we now possess a key to the mystery
which Archdeacon Deinbolt and his neighbours had not access to, and
which has only within the last few years been placed in our hands. The
movements and aspect of their sea monster are those of an animal with
which we are now well acquainted, but of the existence of which the
narrators of these occasional visitations were unaware; namely, the
great calamary, the same which gave rise to the stories of the Kraken,
and which has probably been a denizen of the Scandinavian seas and
fjords from time immemorial. It must be remembered, as I have elsewhere
said, that until the year 1873, notwithstanding the adventure of the
_Alecton_ in 1861, a cuttle measuring in total length fifty or sixty
feet was generally looked upon as equally mythical with the great
sea-serpent. Both were popularly scoffed at, and to express belief in
either was to incur ridicule. But in the year above mentioned, specimens
of even greater dimensions than those quoted were met with on the coasts
of Newfoundland, and portions of them were deposited in museums, to
silence the incredulous and interest zoologists. When Archdeacon
Deinbolt published in 1846 the declaration of Mr. Lund and his
companions of the fishing excursion, he and they knew nothing of there
being such an animal. They had formed no conception of it, nor had they
the instructive privilege, possessed of late years by the public in
England, of being able to watch attentively, and at leisure, the habits
and movements of these strangely modified mollusks living in great tanks
of sea-water in aquaria. If they had been thus acquainted with them, I
believe they would have recognised in their supposed snake the elongated
body of a giant squid.
[Illustration: FIG. 18.--A CALAMARY SWIMMING AT THE SURFACE OF THE SEA.]
When swimming, these squids propel themselves backwards by the
out-rush of a stream of water from a tube pointed in a direction
contrary to that in which the animal is proceeding. The tail part,
therefore, goes in advance, and the body tapers towards this, almost to
a blunt point. At a short distance from the actual extremity two flat
fins project from the body, one on each side, as shown in Figs. 16 and
18, so that this end of the squid's body somewhat resembles in shape the
government "broad arrow." It is a habit of these squids, the small
species of which are met with in some localities in teeming abundance,
to swim on the smooth surface of the water in hot and calm weather. The
arrow-headed tail is then raised out of water, to a height which in a
large individual might be three feet or more; and, as it precedes the
rest of the body, moving at the rate of several miles an hour, it of
course looks, to a person who has never heard of an animal going tail
first at such a speed, like the creature's head. The appearance of this
"head" varies in accordance with the lateral fins being seen in profile
or in broad expanse. The elongated, tubular-looking body gives the idea
of the neck to which the "head" is attached; the eight arms trailing
behind (the tentacles are always coiled away and concealed) supply the
supposed mane floating on each side; the undulating motion in swimming,
as the water is alternately drawn in and expelled, accords with the
description, and the excurrent stream pouring aft from the locomotor
tube, causes a long swirl and swell to be left in the animal's wake,
which, as I have often seen, may easily be mistaken for an indefinite
prolongation of its body. The eyes are very large and prominent, and the
general tone of colour varies through every tint of brown, purple, pink,
and grey, as the creature is more or less excited, and the pigmentary
matter circulates with more or less vigour through the curiously moving
cells.
Here we have the "long marine animal" with "two fins on the forepart of
the body near the head," the "boiling of the water," the "moving in
undulations," the "body round, and of a dark colour," the "waving motion
in the water behind the animal, from which the witnesses concluded that
part of the body was concealed under water," the "head raised, but the
lower part not visible," "the sharp snout," the "smooth skin," and the
appearance described by Mr. William Knudtzon, and Candidatus Theologiae
Bochlum, of "the head being long and small in proportion to the throat,
the latter appearing much greater than the former," which caused them to
think "it was _probably_ furnished with a mane." Not that they _saw_ any
mane, but as they had been told of it, they thought they _ought to have
seen it_. Less careful and conscientious persons would have persuaded
themselves, and declared on oath, that they _did see it_.
I need scarcely point out how utterly irreconcileable is the
proverbially smooth, gliding motion of a serpent, with the supposition
of its passage through the water causing such frictional disturbance
that "white foam appeared before it, and at the side, which stretched
out several fathoms," and of "the water boiling around it on both sides
of it." The cuttle is the only animal that I know of that would cause
this by the effluent current from its "syphon tube." I have seen a
deeply laden ship push in front of her a vast hillock of water, which
fell off on each side in foam as it was parted by her bow; but that was
of man's construction. Nature builds on better lines. No swimming
creature has such unnecessary friction to overcome. Even the seemingly
unwieldy body of a porpoise enters and passes through the water without
a splash, and nothing can be more easy and graceful than the feathering
action of the flippers of the awkward-looking turtle.
We now come to an incident which, from the character of those who
witnessed it, immediately commanded attention, and excited popular
curiosity. In the _Times_ of the 9th of October, 1848, appeared a
paragraph stating that a sea-serpent had been met with by the _Daedalus_
frigate, on her homeward voyage from the East Indies. The Admiralty
immediately inquired of her commander, Captain M'Quhae, as to the truth
of the report; and his official reply, as follows, addressed to Admiral
Sir W. H. Gage, G.C.H., Devonport, was printed in the _Times_ of the
13th of October, 1848.
"H.M.S. _Daedalus_, Hamoaze,
October 11th, 1848.
"Sir,--In reply to your letter of this date, requiring information
as to the truth of the statement published in the _Times_
newspaper, of a sea-serpent of extraordinary dimensions having been
seen from H.M.S. _Daedalus_, under my command, on her passage from
the East Indies, I have the honour to acquaint you, for the
information of my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, that at 5
o'clock P.M. on the 6th of Aug. last, in lat. 24 deg. 44' S. and long.
9 deg. 22' E., the weather dark and cloudy, wind fresh from the N.W.
with a long ocean swell from the W., the ship on the port tack,
head being N.E. by N., something very unusual was seen by Mr.
Sartoris, midshipman, rapidly approaching the ship from before the
beam. The circumstance was immediately reported by him to the
officer of the watch, Lieut. Edgar Drummond, with whom and Mr. Wm.
Barrett, the Master, I was at the time walking the quarter-deck.
The ship's company were at supper. On our attention being called to
the object it was discovered to be an enormous serpent, with head
and shoulders kept about four feet constantly above the surface of
the sea, and, as nearly as we could approximate by comparing it
with the length of what our main-topsail yard would show in the
water, there was at the very least sixty feet of the animal _a
fleur d'eau_, no portion of which was, to our perception, used in
propelling it through the water, either by vertical or horizontal
undulation. It passed rapidly, but so close under our lee quarter
that had it been a man of my acquaintance I should easily have
recognised his features with the naked eye; and it did not, either
in approaching the ship or after it had passed our wake, deviate in
the slightest degree from its course to the S.W., which it held on
at the pace of from twelve to fifteen miles per hour, apparently on
some determined purpose.
"The diameter of the serpent was about fifteen or sixteen inches
behind the head, which was without any doubt that of a snake; and
it was never, during the twenty minutes it continued in sight of
our glasses, once below the surface of the water; its colour dark
brown, and yellowish white about the throat. It had no fins, but
something like the mane of a horse, or rather a bunch of seaweed,
washed about its back. It was seen by the quartermaster, the
boatswain's mate, and the man at the wheel, in addition to myself
and the officers above mentioned.
"I am having a drawing of the serpent made from a sketch taken
immediately after it was seen, which I hope to have ready for
transmission to my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty by
to-morrow's post.--PETER M'QUHAE, Captain."
The sketches referred to in the captain's letter were made under his
supervision, and copies of them, of which he certified his approbation,
were published in the _Illustrated London News_ on the 28th of October,
1848. I am kindly permitted by the proprietors of that journal to
reproduce two of them, reduced in size to suit these pages--one showing
the relative positions of the "serpent" and the ship when the former was
first seen (_Frontispiece_), and the other (Fig. 19) representing the
animal afterwards passing under the frigate's quarter. An enlarged
drawing of its head was also given, which I have not thought it
necessary to copy.
[Illustration: FIG. 19.--THE "SEA SERPENT" PASSING UNDER THE QUARTER OF
H.M.S. 'DAEDALUS.']
Lieutenant Drummond, the officer of the watch mentioned in Captain
M'Quhae's report, published his memorandum of the impression made on his
mind by the animal at the time of its appearance. It differs somewhat
from the captain's description, and is the more cautious of the two.
"I beg to send you the following extract from my journal. H.M.S.
'Daedalus,' August 6, 1848, lat. 25 deg. S., long. 9 deg. 37' E., St. Helena
1,015 miles. In the 4 to 6 watch, at about 5 o'clock, we observed a
most remarkable fish on our lee-quarter, crossing the stern in a
S.W. direction. The appearance of its head, which with the back fin
was the only portion of the animal visible, was long, pointed and
flattened at the top, perhaps ten feet in length, the upper jaw
projecting considerably; the fin was perhaps 20 feet in the rear of
the head, and visible occasionally; the captain also asserted that
he saw the tail, or another fin, about the same distance behind it;
the upper part of the head and shoulders appeared of a dark brown
colour, and beneath the under-jaw a brownish-white. It pursued a
steady undeviating course, keeping its head horizontal with the
surface of the water, and in rather a raised position, disappearing
occasionally beneath a wave for a very brief interval, and not
apparently for purposes of respiration. It was going at the rate of
perhaps from twelve to fourteen miles an hour, and when nearest was
perhaps one hundred yards distant; in fact it gave one quite the
idea of a large snake or eel. No one in the ship has ever seen
anything similar; so it is at least extraordinary. It was visible
to the naked eye for five minutes, and with a glass for perhaps
fifteen more. The weather was dark and squally at the time, with
some sea running.--EDGAR DRUMMOND, Lieut. H.M.S. 'Daedalus;'
Southampton, Oct. 28, 1848."
Statements so interesting and important, of course, elicited much
correspondence and controversy. Mr. J. D. Morries Stirling, a director
of the Bergen Museum, wrote to the Secretary of the British Admiralty,
Captain Hamilton, R.N., saying that while becalmed in a yacht between
Bergen and Sogne, in Norway, he had seen, three years previously, a
large fish or reptile of cylindrical form (he would not say "sea
serpent") ruffling the otherwise smooth surface of the fjord. No head
was visible. This appears to have been, like the others from the same
locality, a large calamary. Mr. Stirling unaware, doubtless, that Mr.
Edward Newman, editor of the _Zoologist_, had previously propounded the
same idea, suggested that the supposed serpent might be one of the old
marine reptiles, hitherto supposed only to exist in the fossil state.
This letter was published in the _Illustrated News_ of October 28th, and
four days afterwards, November 2nd, a letter signed F.G.S. appeared in
the _Times_, in which the same idea was mooted, and the opinion
expressed that it might be the _Plesiosaurus_. This brought out that
great master in physiology, Professor Owen, who in a long, and, it is
needless to say, most able letter to the _Times_, dated the 9th of
November, 1848, set forth a series of weighty arguments against belief
in the supposed serpent, which I regret that I am unable, from want of
space, to quote _in extenso_. The reasoning of the most eminent of
living physiologists of course had its influence on those who could best
appreciate it; but, as it went against the current of popular opinion,
it met with little favour from the public, and has been slurred over
much too superciliously by some subsequent writers. He suggested also
that the creature seen might have been a great seal, such as the leonine
seal, or the sea-elephant (the head, as shown in the enlarged drawing,
was wonderfully seal-like), but it was generally felt that this
explanation was unsatisfactory. The nature of his criticism of the
official statement will be seen from Captain M'Quhae's reply, which was
promptly given in the _Times_ of the 21st of November, 1848, as
follows:--
"Professor Owen correctly states that I evidently saw a large
creature moving rapidly through the water very different from
anything I had before witnessed, neither a whale, a grampus, a
great shark, an alligator, nor any of the larger surface-swimming
creatures fallen in with in ordinary voyages. I now assert--neither
was it a common seal nor a sea-elephant, its great length and its
totally differing physiognomy precluding the possibility of its
being a '_Phoca_' of any species. The head was flat, and not a
'capacious vaulted cranium;' nor had it a stiff, inflexible
trunk--a conclusion at which Professor Owen has jumped, most
certainly not justified by the simple statement, that no portion of
the sixty feet seen by us was used in propelling it through the
water either by vertical or horizontal undulation.
"It is also assumed that the 'calculation of its length was made
under a strong preconception of the nature of the beast;' another
conclusion quite contrary to the fact. It was not until after the
great length was developed by its nearest approach to the ship, and
until after that most important point had been duly considered and
debated, as well as such could be in the brief space of time
allowed for so doing, that it was pronounced to be a serpent by all
who saw it, and who are too well accustomed to judge of lengths and
breadths of objects in the sea to mistake a real substance and an
actual living body, coolly and dispassionately contemplated, at so
short a distance, too, for the 'eddy caused by the action of the
deeper immersed fins and tail of a rapidly moving gigantic seal
raising its head above the surface of the water,' as Professor Owen
imagines, in quest of its lost iceberg.
"The creative powers of the human mind may be very limited. On
this occasion they were not called into requisition; my purpose and
desire throughout being to furnish eminent naturalists, such as the
learned Professor, with accurate facts, and not with exaggerated
representations, nor with what could by any possibility proceed
from optical illusion; and I beg to assure him that old Pontoppidan
having clothed his sea-serpent with a mane could not have suggested
the idea of ornamenting the creature seen from the 'Daedalus' with a
similar appendage, for the simple reason that I had never seen his
account, or even heard of his sea-serpent, until my arrival in
London. Some other solution must therefore be found for the very
remarkable coincidence between us in that particular, in order to
unravel the mystery.
"Finally, I deny the existence of excitement or the possibility of
optical illusion. I adhere to the statements, as to form, colour,
and dimensions, contained in my official report to the Admiralty,
and I leave them as data whereupon the learned and scientific may
exercise the 'pleasures of imagination' until some more fortunate
opportunity shall occur of making a closer acquaintance with the
'great unknown'--in the present instance most assuredly no ghost.
"P. M'QUHAE, late Captain of H.M.S. 'Daedalus.'"
Of course neither Professor Owen, nor any one else, doubted the
veracity or _bona fides_ of the captain and officers of one of Her
Majesty's ships; and their testimony was the more important because it
was that of men accustomed to the sights of the sea. Their practised
eyes would, probably, be able to detect the true character of anything
met with afloat, even if only partially seen, as intuitively as the Red
Indian reads the signs of the forest or the trail; and therefore they
were not likely to be deceived by any of the objects with which sailors
are familiar. They would not be deluded by seals, porpoises, trunks of
trees, or Brobdingnagian stems of algae; but there was one animal with
which they were not familiar, of the existence of which they were
unaware, and which, as I have said, at that date was generally believed
to be as unreal as the sea-serpent itself--namely, the great calamary,
the elongated form of which has certainly in some other instances been
mistaken for that of a sea-snake. One of these seen swimming in the
manner I have described, and endeavoured to portray (p. 77), would
fulfil the description given by Lieutenant Drummond, and would in a
great measure account for the appearances reported by Captain M'Quhae.
"_The head long, pointed and flat on the top_," accords with the pointed
extremity and caudal fin of the squid. "_Head kept horizontal with the
surface of the water, and in rather a raised position, disappearing
occasionally beneath a wave for a very brief interval, and not
apparently for purposes of respiration._" A perfect description of the
position and action of a squid swimming. "_No portion of it perceptibly
used in propelling it through the water, either by vertical or
horizontal undulations._" The mode of propulsion of a squid--the
outpouring stream of water from its locomotor tube--would be unseen and
unsuspected, because submerged. Its effect, the swirl in its wake, would
suggest a prolongation of the creature's body. The numerous arms
trailing astern at the surface of the water would give the appearance of
a mane. I think it not impossible that if the officers of the _Daedalus_
had been acquainted with this great sea creature the impression on their
mind's eye would not have taken the form of a serpent. I offer this,
with much diffidence, as a suggestion arising from recent discoveries;
and by no means insist on its acceptance; for Captain M'Quhae, who had a
very close view of the animal, distinctly says that "the head was,
without any doubt, that of a serpent," and one of his officers
subsequently declared that the eye, the mouth, the nostril, the colour,
and the form were all most distinctly visible.
In a letter addressed to the Editor of the _Bombay Times_, and dated
"Kamptee, January 3rd, 1849," Mr. R. Davidson, Superintending Surgeon,
Nagpore Subsidiary Force, describes a great sea animal seen by him
whilst on board the ship _Royal Saxon_, on a voyage to India, in 1829.
The features of this incident are consistent with his having seen one of
the, then unknown, great calamaries.
Dr. Scott, of Exeter, sent to the Editor of the _Zoologist_ (p. 2459),
an extract from the memorandum-book of Lieutenant Sandford, R.N.,
written about the year 1820, when he was in command of the merchant ship
_Lady Combermere_. In it he mentions his having met with, in lat. 46,
long. 3 (Bay of Biscay), an animal unknown to him, an immense body on
the surface of the water, spouting, not unlike the blowing of a whale,
and the raising up of a triangular extremity, and subsequently of a head
and neck erected six feet above the surface of the water. This was
evidently a great squid seen under circumstances similar to those
described by Hans Egede (p. 67).
In the _Sun_ Newspaper of July 9th, 1849, was published the following
statement of Captain Herriman, of the ship _Brazilian_:
"On the morning of the 24th February, the ship being becalmed in
lat. 26 deg. S., long. 8 deg. E. (about forty miles from the place where
Captain M'Quhae is said to have seen the serpent), the captain
perceived something right astern, stretched along the water to a
length of twenty five or thirty feet, and perceptibly moving from
the ship, with a steady sinuous motion. The head, which seemed to
be lifted several feet above the water, had something resembling a
mane running down to the floating portion, and within about six
feet of the tail. Of course Captain Herriman, Mr. Long, his chief
officer, and the passengers who saw this came to the conclusion
that it must be the sea-serpent. As the 'Brazilian' was making no
headway, to bring all doubts to an issue, the captain had a boat
lowered, and himself standing in the bow, armed with a harpoon,
approached the monster. It was found to be an immense piece of
sea-weed, drifting with the current, which sets constantly to the
westward in this latitude, and which, with the swell left by the
subsidence of a previous gale, gave it the sinuous snake-like
motion."
Captain Harrington, of the ship _Castilian_, reported in the _Times_ of
February 5th, 1858, that:
"On the 12th of December, 1857, N.E. end of St. Helena distant ten
miles, he and his officers were startled by the sight of a huge
marine animal which reared its head out of the water within twenty
yards of the ship. The head was shaped like a long nun-buoy,[31]
and they supposed it to have been seven or eight feet in diameter
in the largest part, with a kind of scroll or tuft of loose skin,
encircling it about two feet from the top. The water was
discoloured for several hundred feet from its head, so much so that
on its first appearance my impression was that the ship was in
broken water."
[31] See illustration, p. 67.
Evidently, again, a large calamary raising its caudal extremity and fin
above the surface, and discolouring the water by discharging its ink.
This was immediately followed by a letter from Captain Frederick Smith,
of the ship _Pekin_, who stated that:
"On December 28th, 1848, being then in lat. 26 deg. S., long. 6 deg. E.
(about half-way between the Cape and St. Helena), he saw a very
extraordinary-looking thing in the water, of considerable length.
With the telescope, he could plainly discern a huge head and neck,
covered with a shaggy-looking kind of mane, which it kept lifting
at intervals out of water. This was seen by all hands, and was
declared to be the great sea-serpent. A boat was lowered; a line
was made fast to the 'snake,' and it was towed alongside and
hoisted on board. It was a piece of gigantic sea-weed, twenty feet
long, and completely covered with snaky-looking barnacles. So like
a huge living monster did this appear, that had circumstances
prevented my sending a boat to it, I should certainly have believed
I had seen the great sea-serpent."
In September, 1872, Mr. Frank Buckland published, in _Land and Water_,
an account by the late Duke of Marlborough, of a "sea-serpent" having
been seen several times within a few days, in Loch Hourn, Scotland. A
sketch of it was given which almost exactly accorded with that of
Pontoppidan's sea-serpent, namely, seven hunches or protuberances like
so many porpoises swimming in line, preceded by a head and neck raised
slightly out of water. Many other accounts have been published of the
appearance of serpent-like sea monsters, but I have only space for two
or three more of the most remarkable of them.
On the 10th of January, 1877, the following affidavit was made before
Mr. Raffles, magistrate, at Liverpool:
"We, the undersigned officers and crew of the barque 'Pauline' (of
London), of Liverpool, in the county of Lancaster, in the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, do solemnly and sincerely
declare that, on July 8, 1875, in lat. 5 deg. 13' S., long. 35 deg. W., we
observed three large sperm whales, and one of them was gripped
round the body with two turns of what appeared to be a huge
serpent. The head and tail appeared to have a length beyond the
coils of about thirty feet, and its girth eight feet or nine feet.
The serpent whirled its victim round and round for about fifteen
minutes, and then suddenly dragged the whale to the bottom, head
first.
"GEO. DREVAR, Master; HORATIO THOMPSON, JOHN HENDERSON
LANDELLS, OWEN BAKER, and WILLIAM LEWARN.
"Again, on July 13, a similar serpent was seen, about two hundred
yards off, shooting itself along the surface, head and neck being
out of the water several feet. This was seen only by the captain
and one ordinary seaman.
"GEORGE DREVAR, Master.
"A few moments after it was seen some 60 feet elevated
perpendicularly in the air by the chief officer and the following
seamen:--Horatio Thompson, Owen Baker, Wm. Lewarn. And we make this
solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true."
In the _Illustrated London News_, of November 20th, 1875, there had
previously appeared a letter from the Rev. E. L. Penny, Chaplain to
H.M.S. _London_, at Zanzibar, describing this occurrence and also the
representation of a sketch (which I am kindly permitted to reproduce
here), drawn by him from the descriptions given by the captain and crew
of the _Pauline_. "The whale," he said, "should have been placed deeper
in the water, but he would then have been unable to depict so clearly
the manner in which the animal was attacked." He adds that, "Captain
Drevar is a singularly able and observant man, and those of the crew and
officers with whom he conversed were singularly intelligent; nor did any
of their descriptions vary from one another in the least: there were no
discrepancies." The event took place whilst their vessel was on her way
from Shields to Zanzibar, with a cargo of coals, for the use of H.M.S.
_London_, then the guard ship on that station.
It is impossible to doubt for a moment the genuineness of the
statement made by Captain Drevar and his crew, or their honest desire to
describe faithfully that which they believed they had seen; but the
height to which the snake is said to have upreared itself is evidently
greatly exaggerated; for it is impossible that any serpent could
"elevate its body some sixty feet perpendicularly in the air"--nearly
one-third of the height of the Monument of the Great Fire of London. I
have no desire to force this narrative of the master and crew of the
_Pauline_ into conformity with any preconceived idea. They may have seen
a veritable sea-serpent; or they may have witnessed the amours of two
whales, and have seen the great creatures rolling over and over that
they might breathe alternately by the blow-hole of each coming to the
surface of the water; or the supposed coils of the snake may have been
the arms of a great calamary, cast over and around the huge cetacean.
The other two appearances--1st, the animal "seen shooting itself along
the surface with head and neck raised" (p. 77), and 2nd, the elevation
of the body to a considerable height, as in Egede's sea monster, (p.
67), would certainly accord with this last hypothesis; but, taking the
statement as it stands, it must be left for further elucidation.
[Illustration: FIG 20.--THE "SEA SERPENT" AND SPERM WHALE AS SEEN FROM
THE 'PAULINE.']
On the 28th of January, 1879, a "sea-serpent" was seen from the s.s.
_City of Baltimore_, in the Gulf of Aden, by Major H. W. J. Senior, of
the Bengal Staff Corps. The narrator "observed a long, black object
darting rapidly in and out of the water, and advancing nearer to the
vessel. The shape of the head was not unlike pictures of the dragon he
had often seen, with a bull-dog expression of the forehead and eyebrows.
When the monster had drawn its head sufficiently out of the water, it
let its body drop, as it were a log of wood, prior to darting forward
under the water. This motion caused a splash of about fifteen feet in
length on either side of the neck much in the 'shape of a pair of
wings.'" This last particular of its appearance, as well as its
movements, suggest a great calamary; but, as one with "a bull-dog
expression of eyebrow, visible at 500 yards distance," does not come
within my ken, I will not claim it as such.
[Illustration: FIG. 21.--THE "SEA SERPENT" AS SEEN FROM THE 'CITY OF
BALTIMORE.']
In June 1877 Commander Pearson reported to the Admiralty, that on the
2nd of that month, he and other officers of the Royal Yacht _Osborne_,
had seen, off Cape Vito, Sicily, a large marine animal, of which the
following account and sketches were furnished by Lieutenant Haynes, and
were confirmed by Commander Pearson, Mr. Douglas Haynes, Mr. Forsyth,
and Mr. Moore, engineer.
"Lieutenant Haynes writes, under date, 'Royal Yacht _Osborne_,
Gibraltar, June 6': On the evening of that day, the sea being
perfectly smooth, my attention was first called by seeing a ridge
of fins above the surface of the water, extending about thirty
feet, and varying from five to six feet in height. On inspecting it
by means of a telescope, at about one and a-half cables' distance,
I distinctly saw a head, two flappers, and about thirty feet of an
animal's shoulder. The head, as nearly as I could judge, was about
six feet thick, the neck narrower, about four to five feet, the
shoulder about fifteen feet across, and the flappers each about
fifteen feet in length. The movements of the flappers were those of
a turtle, and the animal resembled a huge seal, the resemblance
being strongest about the back of the head. I could not see the
length of the head, but from its crown or top to just below the
shoulder (where it became immersed), I should reckon about fifty
feet. The tail end I did not see, being under water, unless the
ridge of fins to which my attention was first attracted, and which
had disappeared by the time I got a telescope, were really the
continuation of the shoulder to the end of the object's body. The
animal's head was not always above water, but was thrown upwards,
remaining above for a few seconds at a time, and then disappearing.
There was an entire absence of 'blowing,' or 'spouting.' I herewith
beg to enclose a rough sketch, showing the view of the 'ridge of
fins,' and also of the animal in the act of propelling itself by
its two fins."
[Illustration: FIG. 22.--THE "SEA SERPENT" AS SEEN FROM H.M. YACHT
'OSBORNE.'
PHASE I.]
[Illustration: FIG. 23.--THE "SEA SERPENT" AS SEEN FROM H.M. YACHT
'OSBORNE.'
PHASE 2.]
It seems to me that this description cannot be explained as applicable
to any one animal yet known. The ridge of dorsal fins might, possibly,
as was suggested by Mr. Frank Buckland, belong to four basking sharks,
swimming in line, in close order; but the combination of them with long
flippers, and the turtle-like mode of swimming, forms a zoological
enigma which I am unable to solve.
This brings us face to face with the question: "Is it then so
impossible that there may exist some great sea creature, or creatures,
with which zoologists are hitherto unacquainted, that it is necessary in
every case to regard the authors of such narratives as wilfully
untruthful, or mistaken in their observations, if their descriptions are
irreconcileable with something already known?" I, for one, am of the
opinion that there is no such impossibility. Calamaries or squids of the
ordinary size have, from time immemorial, been amongst the commonest and
best known of marine animals in many seas; but only a few years ago any
one who expressed his belief in one formidable enough to capsize a boat,
or pull a man out of one, was derided for his credulity, although
voyagers had constantly reported that in the Indian seas they were so
dreaded that the natives always carried hatchets with them in their
canoes, with which to cut off the arms or tentacles of these creatures,
if attacked by them. We now know that their existence is no fiction; for
individuals have been captured measuring more than fifty feet, and some
are reported to have measured eighty feet, in total length. As marine
snakes some feet in length, and having fin-like tails adapted for
swimming, abound over an extensive geographical range, and are
frequently met with far at sea, I cannot regard it as impossible that
some of these also may attain to an abnormal and colossal development.
Dr. Andrew Wilson, who has given much attention to this subject, is of
the opinion that "in this huge development of ordinary forms we discover
the true and natural law of the production of the giant serpent of the
sea." It goes far, at any rate, towards accounting for its supposed
appearance. I am convinced that, whilst naturalists have been searching
amongst the vertebrata for a solution of the problem, the great unknown,
and therefore unrecognized, calamaries by their elongated, cylindrical
bodies and peculiar mode of swimming, have played the part of the
sea-serpent in many a well-authenticated incident. In other cases, such
as some of those mentioned by Pontoppidan, the supposed "vertical
undulations" of the snake seen out of water have been the burly bodies
of so many porpoises swimming in line--the connecting undulations
beneath the surface have been supplied by the imagination. The dorsal
fins of basking sharks, as figured by Mr. Buckland, or of ribbon-fishes,
as suggested by Dr. Andrew Wilson, may have furnished the "ridge of
fins;" an enormous conger is not an impossibility; a giant turtle may
have done duty, with its propelling flippers and broad back; or a marine
snake of enormous size may, really, have been seen. But if we accept as
accurate the observations recorded (which I certainly do not in all
cases, for they are full of errors and mistakes), the difficulty is not
entirely met, even by this last admission, for the instances are very
few in which an ophidian proper--a true serpent--is indicated. There has
seemed to be wanting an animal having a long snake-like neck, a small
head and a slender body, and propelling itself by paddles.[32]
[32] It must be noted, however, that in almost every case, except
that of the _Osborne_, the paddles were _supposed_, not _seen_, and
were invented to account for an animal of great length progressing
at the surface of the water at the rate of twelve to fifteen miles
an hour without its being possible to perceive, upon the closest
and most attentive inspection, any undulatory movement to which its
rapid advance could be ascribed. As the great calamaries were
unknown, their mode of swift retrograde motion, by means of an
outflowing current of water, was of course unsuspected.
The similarity of such an animal to the _Plesiosaurus_ of old was
remarkable. That curious compound reptile, which has been compared with
"a snake threaded through the body of a turtle," is described by Dean
Buckland, in his _Bridgewater Treatise_, as having "the head of a
lizard, the teeth of a crocodile, a neck of enormous length resembling
the body of a serpent, the ribs of a chameleon, and the paddles of a
whale." In the number of its cervical vertebrae (about thirty-three) it
surpasses that of the longest-necked bird, the swan.
The form and probable movements of this ancient saurian agree so
markedly with some of the accounts given of the "great sea-serpent,"
that Mr. Edward Newman advanced the opinion that the closest affinities
of the latter would be found to be with the _Enaliosauria_, or marine
lizards, whose fossil remains are so abundant in the oolite and the
lias. This view has also been taken by other writers, and emphatically
by Mr. Gosse. Neither he nor Mr. Newman insist that the "great unknown"
must be the _Plesiosaurus_ itself. Mr. Gosse says, "I should not look
for any species, scarcely even any genus, to be perpetuated from the
oolitic period to the present. Admitting the actual continuation of the
order _Enaliosauria_, it would be, I think, quite in conformity with
general analogy to find some salient features of several extinct forms."
[Illustration: FIG 24.
_Plesiosaurus Dolichodeirus restored by The Rev. W. D. Canybeare._]
The form and habits of the recently-recognized gigantic cuttles account
for so many appearances which, without knowledge of them, were
inexplicable when Mr. Gosse and Mr. Newman wrote, that I think this
theory is not now forced upon us. Mr. Gosse well and clearly sums up the
evidence as follows: "Carefully comparing the independent narratives of
English witnesses of known character and position, most of them being
officers under the crown, we have a creature possessing the following
characteristics: 1st. The general form of a serpent. 2nd. Great length,
say above sixty feet. 3rd. Head considered to resemble that of a
serpent. 4th. Neck from twelve to sixteen inches in diameter. 5th.
Appendages on the head, neck, or back, resembling a crest or mane.
(Considerable discrepancy in details.) 6th. Colour dark brown, or green,
streaked or spotted with white. 7th. Swims at surface of the water with
a rapid or slow movement, the head and neck projected and elevated above
the surface. 8th. Progression, steady and uniform; the body straight,
but capable of being thrown into convolutions. 9th. Spouts in the manner
of a whale. 10th. Like a long nun-buoy." He concludes with the
question--"To which of the recognized classes of created beings can this
huge rover of the ocean be referred?"
I reply: "To the Cephalopoda. There is not one of the above judiciously
summarized characteristics that is not supplied by the great calamary,
and its ascertained habits and peculiar mode of locomotion.
"Only a geologist can fully appreciate how enormously the balance of
probability is contrary to the supposition that any of the gigantic
marine saurians of the secondary deposits should have continued to live
up to the present time. And yet I am bound to say, that this does not
amount to an impossibility, for the evidence against it is entirely
negative. Nor is the conjecture that there may be in existence some
congeners of these great reptiles inconsistent with zoological science.
Dr. J. E. Gray, late of the British Museum, a strict zoologist, is cited
by Mr. Gosse as having long ago expressed his opinion that some
undescribed form exists which is intermediate between the tortoises and
the serpents."[33]
[33] Dr. Gray wrote in his 'Synopsis of Genera of Reptiles,' in the
Annals of Philosophy, 1825: "There is every reason to believe from
general structure that there exists an affinity between the
tortoises and the snakes; but the genus that exactly unites them is
at present unknown to European naturalists; which is not
astonishing when we consider the immense number of undescribed
animals which are daily occurring. If I may be allowed to speculate
from the peculiarities of structure which I have observed, I am
inclined to think that the union will most probably take place by
some newly discovered genera allied to the marine or fluviatile
soft-skinned turtles and the marine serpent."
[Illustration: FIG. 25.--THE "SEA SERPENT," ON THE ENALIOSAURIAN
HYPOTHESIS.
_After_ Mr. P. H. GOSSE, F.R.S.]
Professor Agassiz, too, is adduced by a correspondent of the _Zoologist_
(p. 2395), as having said concerning the present existence of the
_Enaliosaurian_ type that "it would be in precise conformity with
analogy that such an animal should exist in the American Seas, as he had
found numerous instances in which the fossil forms of the Old World were
represented by living types in the New."
On this point, Mr. Newman records, in the _Zoologist_ (p. 2356), an
actual testimony which he considers, "in all respects, the most
interesting natural-history fact of the present century." He writes:
"Captain the Hon. George Hope states that when in H.M.S. 'Fly,' in
the Gulf of California, the sea being perfectly calm and
transparent, he saw at the bottom a large marine animal with the
head and general figure of the alligator, except that the neck was
much longer, and that instead of legs the creature had four large
flappers, somewhat like those of turtles, the anterior pair being
larger than the posterior; the creature was distinctly visible, and
all its movements could be observed with ease; it appeared to be
pursuing its prey at the bottom of the sea; its movements were
somewhat serpentine, and an appearance of annulations, or ring-like
divisions of the body, was distinctly perceptible. Captain Hope
made this relation in company, and as a matter of conversation.
When I heard it from the gentleman to whom it was narrated, I
enquired whether Captain Hope was acquainted with those remarkable
fossil animals _Ichthyosauri_ and _Plesiosauri_, the supposed forms
of which so nearly correspond with what he describes as having seen
alive, and I cannot find that he had heard of them; the alligator
being the only animal he mentioned as bearing a partial similarity
to the creature in question."
Unfortunately, the estimated dimensions of this creature are not given.
That negative evidence alone is an unsafe basis for argument against the
existence of unknown animals, the following illustrations will show:
During the deep-sea dredgings of H.M.S. _Lightning_, _Porcupine_, and
_Challenger_, many new species of mollusca, and others which had been
supposed to have been extinct ever since the chalk epoch, were brought
to light; and by the deep-sea trawlings of the last-mentioned ship,
there have been brought up from great depths fishes of unknown species,
and which could not exist near the surface, owing to the distension and
rupture of their air-bladder when removed from the pressure of deep
water.
Mr. Gosse mentions that the ship in which he made the voyage to Jamaica
was surrounded in the North Atlantic, for seventeen continuous hours by
a troop of whales of large size of an undescribed species, which on no
other occasion has fallen under scientific observation. Unique specimens
of other cetaceans are also recorded.
We have evidence, to which attention has been directed by Mr. A. D.
Bartlett, that, "even on land there exists at least one of the largest
mammals, probably in thousands, of which only one individual has been
brought to notice, namely, the hairy-eared, two horned rhinoceros (_R.
lasiotis_), now in the Zoological Gardens, London. It was captured in
1868, at Chittagong, in India, where for years collectors and
naturalists have worked and published lists of the animals met with, and
yet no knowledge of this great beast was ever before obtained, nor is
there any portion of one in any museum. It remains unique."
I arrive, then, at the following conclusions: 1st. That, without
straining resemblances, or casting a doubt upon narratives not proved to
be erroneous, the various appearances of the supposed "Great
Sea-serpent" may now be nearly all accounted for by the forms and habits
of known animals; especially if we admit, as proposed by Dr. Andrew
Wilson, that some of them, including the marine snakes, may, like the
cuttles, attain to an extraordinary size.
2nd. That to assume that naturalists have perfect cognizance of every
existing marine animal of large size, would be quite unwarrantable. It
appears to me more than probable that many marine animals, unknown to
science, and some of them of gigantic size, may have their ordinary
habitat in the great depths of the sea, and only occasionally come to
the surface; and I think it not impossible that amongst them may be
marine snakes of greater dimensions than we are aware of, and even a
creature having close affinities with the old sea-reptiles whose fossil
skeletons tell of their magnitude and abundance in past ages.
It is most desirable that every supposed appearance of the "Great
Sea-serpent" shall be faithfully noted and described; and I hope that no
truthful observer will be deterred from reporting such an occurrence by
fear of the disbelief of naturalists, or the ridicule of witlings.
FINIS.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.
[Illustration: A MERMAID.
_From a Picture by Otto Sinding._]
_International Fisheries Exhibition_ LONDON, 1883
SEA FABLES EXPLAINED
BY
HENRY LEE, F.L.S., F.G.S., F.Z.S.
SOMETIME NATURALIST OF THE BRIGHTON AQUARIUM
AND
AUTHOR OF 'THE OCTOPUS, OR THE DEVIL-FISH OF FICTION AND FACT;'
'SEA MONSTERS UNMASKED,' ETC.
ILLUSTRATED
LONDON
WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED
INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES EXHIBITION
AND 13 CHARING CROSS, S.W.
1883
LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.
PREFACE.
The little book 'Sea Monsters Unmasked,' recently issued as one of the
Handbooks in connection with the Great International Fisheries
Exhibition has met with so favourable a reception, that I have been
honoured by the request to continue the subject, and to treat also of
some of the Fables of the Sea, which once were universally believed, and
even now are not utterly extinct.
The topic is not here exhausted. Other sea fables and fallacies might be
mentioned and explained; but the amount of letter-press, and the number
of illustrations that can be printed without loss for the small sum of
one shilling--the price at which these Handbooks are uniformly
published--is necessarily limited. I have, therefore, thought it better
to endeavour to make each chapter as complete as possible than to crowd
into the space allotted to me a greater variety of subjects less fully
and carefully discussed.
I have the pleasure of acknowledging the kind assistance I have again
received in the matter of illustrations. I gratefully appreciate Mr.
Murray's permission to use the woodcut of Hercules slaying the Hydra,
taken from Smith's 'Classical Dictionary,' and those of the golden
ornaments found by Dr. Schliemann at Mycenae, and figured in the very
interesting book in which his excavations there are described. I have
also to thank the proprietors of the _Illustrated London News_, the
_Leisure Hour_, and _Land and Water_, for the use of illustrations
especially mentioned in the text.
HENRY LEE.
SAVAGE CLUB;
_Sept. 4th, 1883_.
CONTENTS.
PAGE
THE MERMAID 1
THE LERNEAN HYDRA 48
SCYLLA AND CHARYBDIS 59
THE "SPOUTING" OF WHALES 62
THE "SAILING" OF THE NAUTILUS 76
BARNACLE GEESE--GOOSE BARNACLES 98
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
FIG. PAGE
A MERMAID. _From a picture by Otto Sinding_ _Frontispiece_
1. NOAH, HIS WIFE AND THREE SONS, AS FISH-TAILED DEITIES. 2
_From a gem in the Florentine Gallery. After Calmet_
2. HEA, OR NOAH, THE GOD OF THE FLOOD. _Khorsabad_ 3
3. DAGON. _From a bas-relief. Nimroud_ 4
4. DAGON: HALF MAN, HALF FISH. _From Lamy's 'Apparatus 5
Biblicus'_
5. DAGON. _From an agate signet. Nineveh_ "
6. FISH AVATAR OF VISHNU. _After Calmet and Maurice_ 6
7. ATERGATIS, THE GODDESS OF THE SYRIANS. _From a 8
Phoenician Coin_
8. VENUS RISING FROM THE SEA, SUPPORTED BY TRITONS. _After 9
Calmet_
9. VENUS DRAWN IN HER CHARIOT BY TRITONS. _From two 10
Corinthian Coins_
10. DITTO. 11
11. SEAL, DRAWN AS A FISH. _From the Catacombs at Rome_ "
12. MERMAID AND FISHES OF AMBOYNA. _After Valentyn_ 17
13. A JAPANESE ARTIFICIAL MERMAID 27
14. AN ARTIFICIAL MERMAID. _Probably Japanese_ 28
15. PORTRAIT OF A MERMAID SAID TO HAVE BEEN CAPTURED IN JAPAN 29
16. THE DUGONG. _From Sir J. Emerson Tennent's 'Ceylon'_ 43
17. THE MANATEE 45
18. FIGURE OF A CALAMARY, FROM THE TEMPLE OF BAYR-EL-BAHREE 50
19. FIGURE OF AN OCTOPUS ON A GOLD ORNAMENT FOUND BY DR. 51
SCHLIEMANN AT MYCENAE
20. DITTO. 52
21. DITTO. 53
22. DITTO. "
23. HERCULES SLAYING THE LERNEAN HYDRA 57
24. THE PHYSETER INUNDATING A SHIP. _After Olaus Magnus_ 64
25. A WHALE POURING WATER INTO A SHIP FROM ITS BLOW-HOLE. 64
_After Olaus Magnus_
26. SPERM WHALES "SPOUTING" 65
27. THE PAPER NAUTILUS (_Argonauta argo_) SAILING 76
28. DITTO. RETRACTED WITHIN ITS SHELL 81
29. DITTO. CRAWLING 86
30. DITTO. SWIMMING 87
31. SHELL OF THE PAPER NAUTILUS (_Argonauta argo_) 88
32. SHELL OF THE PEARLY NAUTILUS (_Nautilus pompilius_) 89
33. THE PEARLY NAUTILUS (_Nautilus Pompilius_) AND SECTION OF 90
ITS SHELL
34. THE GOOSE-TREE. _From Gerard's 'Herball'_ 104
35. DITTO. _Fac-simile from Aldrovandus_ 110
36. DEVELOPMENT OF BARNACLES INTO GEESE. _Fac-simile from 111
Aldrovandus_
37. SECTION OF A SESSILE BARNACLE. _Balanus tintinnabulum_ 113
38. PEDUNCULATED BARNACLE. _Lepas anatifera_ 115
39. A SHIP'S FIGURE-HEAD PARTLY COVERED WITH BARNACLES 116
40. WHALE BARNACLE. _Coronula diadema_ 117
41. A YOUNG BARNACLE. _Larva of Chthamalus stellatus_ 118
SEA FABLES EXPLAINED.
THE MERMAID.
Next to the pleasure which the earnest zoologist derives from study of
the habits and structure of living animals, and his intelligent
appreciation of their perfect adaptation to their modes of life, and the
circumstances in which they are placed, is the interest he feels in
eliminating fiction from truth, whilst comparing the fancies of the past
with the facts of the present. As his knowledge increases, he learns
that the descriptions by ancient writers of so-called "fabulous
creatures" are rather distorted portraits than invented falsehoods, and
that there is hardly one of the monsters of old which has not its
prototype in Nature at the present day. The idea of the Lernean Hydra,
whose heads grew again when cut off by Hercules, originated, as I have
shown in another chapter, in a knowledge of the octopus; and in the form
and movements of other animals with which we are now familiar we may, in
like manner, recognise the similitude and archetype of the mermaid.
But we must search deeply into the history of mankind to discover the
real source of a belief that has prevailed in almost all ages, and in
all parts of the world, in the existence of a race of beings uniting the
form of man with that of the fish. A rude resemblance between these
creatures of imagination and tradition and certain aquatic animals is
not sufficient to account for that belief. It probably had its origin in
ancient mythologies, and in the sculptures and pictures connected with
them, which were designed to represent certain attributes of the deities
of various nations. In the course of time the meaning of these was lost;
and subsequent generations regarded as the portraits of existing beings
effigies which were at first intended to be merely emblematic and
symbolical.
[Illustration: FIG. 1.--NOAH, HIS WIFE, AND THREE SONS, AS FISH-TAILED
DEITIES.
_From a Gem in the Florentine Gallery. After Calmet._]
Early idolatry consisted, first, in separating the idea of the One
Divinity into that of his various attributes, and of inventing symbols
and making images of each separately; secondly, in the worship of the
sun, moon, stars, and planets, as living existences; thirdly, in the
deification of ancestors and early kings; and these three forms were
often mingled together in strange and tangled confusion.
Amongst the famous personages with whose history men were made
acquainted by oral tradition was Noah. He was known as the second father
of the human race, and the preserver and teacher of the arts and
sciences as they existed before the Great Deluge, of which so many
separate traditions exist among the various races of mankind.
Consequently, he was an object of worship in many countries and under
many names; and his wife and sons, as his assistants in the diffusion of
knowledge, were sometimes associated with him.
According to Berosus, of Babylon,--the Chaldean priest and astronomer,
who extracted from the sacred books of "that great city" much
interesting ancient lore, which he introduced into his 'History of
Syria,' written, about B.C. 260, for the use of the Greeks,--at a time
when men were sunk in barbarism, there came up from the Erythrean Sea
(the Persian Gulf), and landed on the Babylonian shore, a creature named
Oannes, which had the body and head of a fish. But above the fish's head
was the head of a man, and below the tail of the fish were human feet.
It had also human arms, a human voice, and human language. This strange
monster sojourned among the rude people during the day, taking no food,
but retiring to the sea at night; and it continued for some time thus to
visit them, teaching them the arts of civilized life, and instructing
them in science and religion.[34]
[34] Berosus, lib. i. p. 48.
[Illustration: FIG. 2.--HEA, OR NOAH, THE GOD OF THE FLOOD.
_Khorsabad._]
In this tale we have a distorted account of the life and occupation of
Noah after his escape from the deluge which destroyed his home and
drowned his neighbours. Oannes was one of the names under which he was
worshipped in Chaldea, at Erech ("the place of the ark"), as the sacred
and intelligent fish-god, the teacher of mankind, the god of science and
knowledge. There he was also called Oes, Hoa, Ea, Ana, Anu, Aun, and
Oan. Noah was worshipped, also, in Syria and Mesopotamia, and in Egypt,
at "populous No,"[35] or Thebes--so named from "Theba," "the ark."
[35] Nahum iii. 8.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.--DAGON. _From a bas relief. Nimroud._]
The history of the coffin of Osiris is another version of Noah's ark,
and the period during which that Egyptian divinity is said to have been
shut up in it, after it was set afloat upon the waters, was precisely
the same as that during which Noah remained in the ark.
Dagon, also--sometimes called Odacon--the great fish-god of the
Philistines and Babylonians, was another phase of Oannes. "Dag," in
Hebrew, signifies "a male fish," and "Aun" and "Oan" were two of the
names of Noah. "Dag-aun" or "Dag-oan" therefore means "the fish Noah."
He was portrayed in two ways. The more ancient image of him was that of
a man issuing from a fish, as described of Oannes by Berosus; but in
later times it was varied to that of a man whose upper half was human,
and the lower parts those of a fish. The image of Dagon which fell upon
its face to the ground before "the ark of the God of Israel," was
probably of this latter form, for we read[36] that in its fall, "the
head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off upon the
threshold: only the _stump_ (in the margin, "_the fishy part_") of Dagon
was left to him." This was evidently Milton's conception of him:
"Dagon his name; sea-monster, upward man
And downward fish."[37]
[36] 1 Samuel v. 4.
[37] 'Paradise Lost,' Book i. l. 462.
[Illustration: FIG. 4.--DAGON. _After Calmet._]
[Illustration: FIG. 5.--DAGON. _From an Agate Signet. Nineveh._]
In some of the Nineveh sculptures of the fish-god, the head of the fish
forms a kind of mitre on the head of the man, whilst the body of the
fish appears as a cloak or cape over his shoulders and back. The fish
varies in length; in some cases the tail almost touches the ground; in
others it reaches but little below the man's waist.
[Illustration: FIG. 6.--FISH AVATAR OF VISHNU.
_After Calmet and Maurice._]
In one of his "avatars," or incarnations, the god Vishnu "the
Preserver," is represented as issuing from the mouth of a fish. He is
celebrated as having miraculously preserved one righteous family, and,
also, the Vedas, the sacred records, when the world was drowned. Not
only is this legend of the Indian god wrought up with the history of
Noah, but Vishnu and Noah bear the same name--Vishnu being the Sanscrit
form of "Ish-nuh," "the man Noah." The word "avatar" also means "out of
the boat." In fact the whole mythology of Greece and Rome, as well as of
Asia, is full of the history and deeds of Noah, which it is impossible
to misunderstand. In all the representations of a deity having a
combined human and piscine form, the original idea was that of a person
coming out of a fish--not being part of one, but issuing from
it, as Noah issued from the ark. In all of them the fish denoted
"preservation," "fecundity," "plenty," and "diffusion of knowledge."[38]
As the image was not the effigy of a divine personage, but symbolized
certain attributes of Divinity, its sex was comparatively unimportant,
although it is possible that, combined with the fecundity of the fish,
the idea of Noah's wife, as the second mother of all subsequent
generations, according to the widely-spread and accepted traditions of
the deluge, may have influenced the impersonation.
[38] Some writers are of the opinion that the legend of Oannes
contains an allusion to the rising and setting of the sun, and that
his semi-piscine form was the expression of the idea that half his
time was spent above ground, and half below the waves. The same
commentators also regard all the "civilizing" gods and goddesses
as, respectively, solar and lunar deities. The attributes
symbolized in the worship of Noah and the sun are so nearly alike
that the two interpretations are not incompatible.
Atergatis, the far-famed goddess of the Syrians, was also a
fish-divinity. Her image, like that of Dagon, had at first a fish's body
with human extremities protruding from it; but in the course of
centuries it was gradually altered to that of a being the upper portion
of whose body was that of a woman and the lower half that of a fish.
Gatis was a powerful queen of Sidon, and mother of Semiramis. She
received the title of "Ater," or "Ader," "the Great," for the benefits
she conferred on her people; one of these benefits being a strict
conservation of their fisheries, both from their own imprudent use, and
from foreign interference. She issued an edict that no fish should be
eaten without her consent, and that no one should take fish in the
neighbouring sea without a licence from herself. It is not improbable
that she and her celebrated daughter, who is said by Ovid and others to
have been the builder of the walls of Babylon, were worshipped together;
for that Atergatis was the same as the fish-goddess Ashteroth, or
Ashtoreth, "the builder of the encompassing wall," we have, amongst
other proofs, a remarkable one in Biblical history. In the first book of
Maccabees v. 43, 44, we read that "all the heathen being discomfited
before him (Judas Maccabeus) cast away their weapons, and fled unto the
temple that was at _Carnaim_. But they took the city, and burned the
temple with all that were therein. Thus was _Carnaim_ subdued, neither
could they stand any longer before Judas." In the second book of
Maccabees xii. 26, we are told that "Maccabeus marched forth to
_Carnion_, and to the temple of _Atargatis_, and there he slew five and
twenty thousand persons." In Genesis xiv. 5, this city and temple are
referred to as "_Ashteroth Karnaim_."
Fig. 7 is a representation of Atergatis on a medal coined at Marseilles.
It shows that when the Phoenician colony from Syria, by whom that city
was founded, settled there, they brought with them the worship of the
gods of their country.
[Illustration: FIG. 7.--ATERGATIS.
_From a Phoenician coin._]
Atergatis was worshipped by the Greeks as Derceto and Astarte. Lucian
writes[39]:--"In Phoenicia I saw the image of Derceto, a strange sight,
truly! For she had the half of a woman, and from the thighs downwards a
fish's tail." Diodorus Siculus describes (lib. ii.) the same deity, as
represented at Ascalon, as "having the face of a woman, but all the rest
of the body a fish's." And this very same image at Ascalon, which
Diodorus calls Derceto, or Atergatis, is denominated by Herodotus[40]
"the celestial Aphrodite," who was identical with the Cyprian and Roman
Venus. Of all the sacred buildings erected to the goddess, this temple
was by far the most ancient; and the Cyprians themselves acknowledged
that their temple was built after the model of it by certain Phoenicians
who came from that part of Syria.
[39] 'Opera Omnia,' tom. ii. p. 884, edit. Bened. de Dea. Syr.
[40] Lib. i. cap. cv.
[Illustration: FIG. 8.--VENUS RISING FROM THE SEA, SUPPORTED BY TRITONS.
_After Calmet._]
Thus the worship of Noah, as the second father of mankind, the
repopulator of the earth, passed through various phases and
transformations till it merged in that of Venus, who rose from the sea,
and was regarded as the representative of the reproductive power of
Nature--the goddess whom Lucretius thus addressed:
"Blest Venus! Thou the sea and fruitful earth
Peoplest amain; to thee whatever lives
Its being owes, and that it sees the sun:"
and to whom refers the passage in the Orphic hymn:
"From thee are all things--all things thou producest
Which are in heaven, or in the fertile earth,
Or in the sea, or in the great abyss."
Under this latter phase--the impersonation of Venus--the fish portion of
the body was discarded, and the cast-off form was allotted in popular
credence to the Tritons--minor deities, who acknowledged the supremacy
of the goddess, and were ready to render her homage and service by
bearing her in their arms, drawing her chariot, etc., but who still
possessed considerable power as sea-gods, and could calm the waves and
rule the storm, at pleasure.
[Illustration:
FIG. 9. FIG. 10.
VENUS DRAWN IN HER CHARIOT BY TRITONS. _From two Corinthian coins._]
Figs. 9 and 10 are from two Corinthian medals, each shewing Venus in a
car or chariot drawn by Tritons, one male, the other female. On the
obverse of Fig. 9, is the head of Nero, and on that of Fig. 10, the head
of his grandmother Agrippina.[41]
[41] It is worthy of note that the fish was also adopted as an
emblem by the early Christians, and was frequently sculptured on
their tombs as a private mark or sign of the faith in which the
person there interred had died. It alluded to the letters which
composed the Greek word [Greek: Ichthys] ("a fish") forming an
anagram, the initials of words which conveyed the following
sentiment: [Greek: Iesous], Jesus; [Greek: Christos], Christ;
[Greek: Theou], of God; [Greek: gios], Son; [Greek: Soter],
Saviour. But it doubtless bore, also, the older meaning of
"preservation" and "reproduction," of which the fish was the
symbol, and betokened a belief in a future resurrection, as Noah
was preserved to dwell in, and populate, a new world. In 'Sea
Monsters Unmasked,' page 55, I gave a figure, copied by permission
from the _Illustrated London News_, of a rough sculpture in the
Roman catacombs, of Jonah being disgorged by a sea-monster. Near to
it was found, on another Christian tomb, one of these designs of
the "fish;" and it is not a little curious that, whereas the animal
depicted as casting forth Jonah is not a whale, but a sea-serpent,
or dragon, the _ichtheus_ in this instance is apparently not a
fish, but a seal.
[Illustration: FIG. 11.--CHRISTIAN SYMBOL. _From the Catacombs at
Rome._]
The article referred to appeared in the _Illustrated London News_ of
February 3rd, 1872, and the woodcut (fig. 11), an electrotype of
which was most kindly presented to me by the proprietors of that
paper, was one of the sketches that accompanied it.
From the very earliest period of history, then, the conjoined human and
fish form was known to every generation of men. It was presented to
their sight in childhood by sculptures and pictures, and was a
conspicuous object in their religious worship. By the lapse of time its
original import was lost and debased; and, from being an emblem and
symbol, it came to be accepted as the corporeal shape and structure of
actually-existent sea-deities, who might present themselves to the view
of the mariner, in visible and tangible form, at any moment. Thus were
men trained and prepared to believe in mermen
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/36677