No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 May 2009
Many of the living forms of Cephalopodous molluscs are now, thanks to the Brighton Aquarium, familiar to us all; and, as the habits and characteristics of the squids, octopods, and cuttles have been duly recorded by Mr. Henry Lee in his amusing book on “The Octopus,” published in 1875, I shall here restrict myself to those points in the structure of the living forms which bear upon the history of the class as a whole, giving merely those anatomical details which are absolutely indispensable for a right comprehension of the nature and affinities of the numerous fossil and extinct members of the order. I may, however, observe, en passant, that the existence of a certain sub-stratum of truth in the old stories of giant Cephalopods was ably proved by Mr. Saville Kent, in the “Popular Science Review,” for 1874, and that specimens have been more recently cast ashore in Trinity and Logie Bays, on the coast of Newfoundland, that may fairly claim to be of enormous dimensions. Thus, in a truly formidable calamary, or squid, the tentacular arms measured 30 feet, the largest suckers being one inch in diameter, the shorter (or pedal) arms were 11 feet long, and the body was 10 feet. Professor Verrill has also described a huge cuttle, estimating the total length at 40 feet, the large tentacles were 26 feet long, with a maximum circumference of 16 inches at their union to the body. A new genus of calamary, allied to the Architeuthis of Steenstrup, with arms measuring over 23 feet, was discovered on the island of St. Paul, in the Indian Ocean, by M. Charles Vélain, the naturalist attached to the French Expedition for the observation of the transit of Venus, at that station. The size attained by some of the fossil species will be noted in the sequel.
page 487 note 2 “The Octopus.” Henry, LeeLondon, 1875.Google Scholar
page 488 note 1 Remarques au sujet de la faune des îles Saint Paul et Amsterdam, etc. Vélain, Charles, Paris, 1878. 8vo.Google Scholar
page 488 note 2 “Head-footed Mollusca,” from кєøαλ ‘head.’ and πoûs ‘foot.’
page 488 note 3 See also Baron Cuvier's Anatomie des Mollusques for details of the structure of the Dibrachiata.
page 488 note 4 On the Pearly Nautilas. Richard, Owen. London, 1832. 4to.Google Scholar
page 488 note 5 Proceedings Royal Society, 1874.
page 489 note 1 Bridgewater Treatise. Geology. 1836.
page 489 note 2 Bronn's Klassen u. Ordnungen d. Thierreich, III., Malacozoa, 2te Abtheil., p. 1344.
page 489 note 3 Système Silurien de la Bohême, vol. ii. texte, v. pp. 962 and 1235. Joachim Barrande. Prague, 1877.
page 490 note 1 My attention has been called by Dr. H. Woodward to a valuable contribution to this subject by Professor H. Govier Seeley, F.G.S., in the report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1864, Bath, Transactions of Sections, p. 100, entitled “On the Significance of the Septa and Siphuncles of Cephalopod Shells;” see also the Quart. Journal of Science, October, 1864.
page 490 note 2 British Association Reports, Liverpool, 1870, Transactions of Sections. Popular Science Review, 1872. See also Note at the end of the present article, p. 499.Google Scholar
page 490 note 3 On my recently calling the attention of Prof. James Hall, LL.D., to these views as to the significance of the septa in the chambered Cephalopods, that distinguished American palæontologist, whilst fully admitting the force of the hypothesis of their production by those natural causes, suggested that the fact of the septa being composed of three distinct layers of shell-substance, viz. an outer nacreous one, an inner porcellanous one, and a third external nacreous deposit, could hardly thus be accounted for. As both the external surfaces were smoothed and polished, apparently by the application of some part of the body of the animal, it was further difficult to conceive how access was obtained to the outer surface of the last formed septa after the animal had once partitioned off its body in the manner supposed.
page 491 note 1 See paper by DrWoodward, S. P. on an Ammonite from the Inferior Oolite with the operculum in situ, “Geologist,” vol. iii. 1860, p. 328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 491 note 2 As the broad-mouthed Nautilus pompilius is the female, it is highly probable that the N. umbilicatus is the male of the same' species. Among Ammonites both tumid and flattened forms have been observed in most species. See “Woodward's Manual of the Mollusca,” p. 83.
page 491 note 3 Céphalopodes, Etudes Générales. Barrande, J.. 1877. Table 1, p. 84.Google Scholar
page 492 note 1 State Reports of the Geology of Ohio.—Palæontology, vol. i. p. 263.Google Scholar
page 492 note 2 Manual of the Mollusca. 2nd edition, 1868. S. P. Woodward.
page 492 note 3 Barrande, ibid.
page 493 note 1 Post-Eocene Period.
page 493 note 2 Ann. and Mag. Natural History, 1845, vol. xv. pp. 257 and 444.Google Scholar
page 493 note 3 Specimens of A. heterophyllus and of A. perarmatus, and many other preserved in the British Museum, show the body-chamber to have been of very large extent.—H. W.
page 493 note 4 This conclusion, however, so contrary to all known zoological laws regulating the distribution of life in time and space, may well be received with great caution, even when given on high authority and apparently borne out by many and widespread facts.—H. W.
page 494 note 1 This must be understood in a modified sense. The fact is the two broadly-expanded (shell-secreting ?) dorsal arms (figured as “sails” in the allegorical representations of the “Argonaut”) closely envelope the shell on either side, so in the lifetime of the animal the shell is almost, if not wholly, concealed; whereas the animal can but partially conceal itself within the shell.—H. W.
page 494 note 2 Voyage of H.M.S. Samarang (Zoology), pp. 6–17, pl. 4. 4to. 1848.
page 495 note 1 Phil. Trans., 1844. On the animal of Belemnite.
page 495 note 2 Phil. Trans., 1848 and 1850.
page 495 note 3 Bridgewater Treatise, 1836.
page 496 note 1 Mem. Geological Surrey, Monograph II., 1864.
page 496 note 2 Octopods, cuttles, and squids were highly esteemed as epicurean dainties in ancient Rome, and the former are now largely consumed as food in the sea-coast towns of France and Italy. While according to Dr. Macdonald the Pearly Nautilus is regarded as an agreeable viand by the inhabitants of the Feejee Islands!
page 497 note 1 Phil. Trans., 1844.
page 497 note 2 Principles of Geology, vol. i. p. 150, ed. 1872.
page 497 note 3 Etudes Générales, etc., Barrande.
page 497 note 4 It must always be borne in mind, when arguing from these early fossil molluscan remains, that we have only the shells preserved to us. We know nothing of the animals. Our argument then is founded on assumption, and must be treated accordingly. See “Distribution of the Cephalopoda in Silurian Countries,” by Barrande, J.. Reviewed in Geol. Mag. 1870, Vol. VII. p. 490.Google Scholar
page 498 note 1 Quarterly Journal Geological Society, London, May 1st, 1878, p. 69.
page 498 note 2 What is a Brachiopod? Brighton and Sussex Natural History Society, Feb. 11th, 1875; GeologicalMagazine, April, May, June, 1878; Annales de la Société Malacologique de Belgique, 1876.
page 499 note 1 Recent Progress in Palæntology, GeologicalMagazine, January, 1878; the Inaugural Address to the Edinburgh Geological Society, November, 1877.