Hippolito Salviani

Originally published in volume 27, Fishes, Particularly their Structure and Economical Uses.

---

Though the subject of the present Memoir is probably unknown even by name to the vast majority of our readers, he nevertheless possesses such indisputable claims to celebrity, as an early and successful cultivator of Natural History, that his services should be overlooked by none who take an interest in the study of Zoology.

Flourishing in a distant age,—in agitating and troublous times, and confining his chief attention to a somewhat obscure and difficult department of the science, his services seem to have been appreciated only by Ichthyologists; and certainly he has never acquired that notoriety in the general annals of literature which has been bestowed upon much inferior men. Even his name is not inscribed in those long lists which have been accumulated, in the course of ages, in the commonwealth of European celebrity; and still less has it found a place in the annals of British science.¹ Though it may be impossible now to attain, or recover, much of his personal and private history, yet as his beautiful work remains, and as it is universally allowed to be not more elegant than it has been useful, it is clear that the admirers of Natural History owe him a debt of gratitude which is far from haying been paid. His chief production is a splendid illustrated work on Ichthyology; and few attempts could be more appropriate, we conceive, than that in that department of the Naturalist’s Library which is dedicated to Fishes, and in which their faithfully coloured delineation is second only to their accurate scientific description, an endeavour should be made to do justice to the memory and labours of one of the most distinguished revivers of the science in modern times.

The only sketch of Salviani that we have seen, and it is a very slight one, is from the pen of Baron Cuvier. This illustrious Frenchman, great in every department of Natural History, laboured more assiduously in none than in the difficult one of Ichthyology. In his celebrated introductory history of this branch of science, he was naturally led to consider the labours of its early cultivators; and some of his remarks in this admirable summary are so applicable to our present subject, as well as so valuable in themselves, that we shall enrich our pages with a very short epitome of them.

Natural History, he remarks, is a science of facts, and the number it comprehends is so great, that no single individual can collect or verify those which belong even to a single department: they can advantageously be studied only by examining all the authors who have written upon them, and by comparing their statements with nature. It is likewise true, that for the profitable examination of these writers, for a just estimate of the degree of confidence to be reposed in each, for the discovery of the result of their individual labours, and what they derived from those of their predecessors, it is requisite that we should also know the circumstances in which they worked, the time when they lived, the state in which they found the science, the favouring circumstances in which they were placed, both as it regards themselves and their assistants, whether friends, patrons or pupils. These details, arranged in the order of time, and connected by their several links, constitute the history of the science, the necessary basis of any work which would present a general view of the whole.

Three principal epochs may be recognized in the progress of Ichthyology. Like the other branches of Zoology, it was at first, and for many ages, composed only of detached observations. Aristotle, three hundred years before the present era, began to collect the scattered materials into a system, at first very imperfect; founded upon observations and rules which were scarcely verified, and peculiarly destitute of the means whereby one species might be distinguished from another. For more than 1800 years, those who wrote upon the subject almost entirely confined their attention to copying, or commenting upon Aristotle. In the middle of the 16th century, however, Belon, Rondolet, and Salviani returned to the true method of observation, and rectifying and extending the statements of Aristotle, conferred on Ichthyology a real foundation by the description and representation of a certain number of well determined: species. Finally, Willoughby and Ray, at the end of the 17th century, attempted to arrange these species according to a plan founded upon the distinctive characters derived from their organization; and Artedi and Linnæus, in the middle of the 18th, completed this enterprise, by establishing well defined genera, including in them various accurately ascertained species. Since that period Ichthyology has been steadily advancing towards perfection, and will continue to advance, with a rapidity regulated by the ardour and sagacity with which each Naturalist distinguishes what is true, and publishes it, so as to ensure general approbation.

Aristotle, by accumulating the stores of his predecessors, by his own extraordinary assiduity, and by the not less extraordinary assistance afforded him by his distinguished patron Alexander the Great, recognized 117 species of fishes. He dwelt upon their mode of life, their peregrinations, their likings and dislikings, their cunning, amours, and fecundity; the mode in which they are captured, the time they are most in season, and many other details. What is most to be regretted in this mass of valuable information is, that the author never suspected that the nomenclature he employed would become obsolete and obscure, a defect common to all the ancient Naturalists, and which almost compels us to do little more than guess at much, and remain ignorant of the rest. Pliny’s list of aquatic animals amounts to 174; but when we subtract the shell-fish, the cete or whales, and the other animals which are not true fish, there will not remain above 95 or 96, some of which are probably only duplicates of the others: about 30 of them appear to be different from those mentioned by Aristotle.

Upon a careful examination of all the works of the first epoch which remain, it would appear that the ancients had recognized and named about 150 kinds of fish, which amounted to nearly the whole of those which are used in the Mediterranean as articles of food; but they had not fixed precisely their characters, nor had they established any methodical arrangement, so that they themselves were often perplexed in endeavouring to identify them. After the time of Aristotle, no one had engaged in the investigation of their structure; such inquiries ceasing with the Peripatetic school. The Barbarians added nothing. And the nine succeeding centuries were not more favourable; the Monks not occupying themselves with observations, and even Aristotle’s works being for a time unknown to them. But a brighter day at last dawned. Dante and Petrarch did much in the 14th century; the Greeks, driven from Constantinople in the 15th, carried the works of classic ages along with them, printing was invented, America and the Indies were discovered, letters revived, and with them Natural History saw before it a field of boundless extent. Ichthyology was the first branch which revived under these happy auspices; and the first care of its cultivators was to ascertain and understand what was known upon the subject by the ancients. This task accomplished, the second great epoch, as already hinted, arrived; the foundation of modern ichthyology was laid, and chiefly by the labours of men whose works appeared very much at the same time, Belon’s in the year 1555, Rondolet’s in 1554–5, and Salviani’s in 1554–8. From this statement, it is manifest that these distinguished individuals must have laboured very much independently of each other, though they were cotemporaries; and hence each merits a separate consideration, and presents a distinct claim to our respectful regard.

Hippolito Salviani was born in the year 1514, in La Citta di Castello, situated on the Tiber (the ancient Tifernum Metaurense), twenty-seven miles s.w. of Urbino, the capital of the Duchy of that name. He was of noble descent;² and after having finished his general education, he studied medicine; and having visited the cities of Italy, he finally settled at Rome, where, according to Dr. Paul Freher of Nuremberg, he long practised the healing art with great celebrity, and taught the science of medicine in its University with much success, magnum auditorum concursu.³ His varied talents, and peculiar taste for Natural History, obtained for him the friendship of Cardinal Cervini, who procured for him the situation of Physician to Pope Julius HI. Salviani selected the class of fishes as the chief object of his researches, and used every effort to collect such as he could procure in Italy, while he extended the range of his knowledge by obtaining, with the help of his protector, accurate drawings of those which were known in Greece, France, Germany, and Britain. Many notices of his success in these endeavours will be found in the following pages. He established in his own dwelling a regular printing establishment, whence issued his lesser treatises, and where he corrected his great work, entitled Aquatilium Animalium Historia. The date of this elegant volume, on the frontispiece, is 1554, although the impression was not completed till the year 1558. The author had first dedicated his work to his benefactor Cardinal Cervini; but this prelate, one of the presidents of the Council of Trent, having become Pope, under the title of Marcellus II., and having died of apoplexy twenty-one days after his election, he substituted another dedication to his successor, Pope Paul IV.

To these very scanty statements concerning Salviani’s earlier and riper years, the perusal of his work will, as may readily be supposed, supply various additional particulars. These we will not attempt to anticipate; but we may remark, in general, that he was speedily regarded as the principal and most distinguished Naturalist of his day in the Great City. Thus we learn, that when any thing curious in animated nature found its way to Rome, he was almost invariably and immediately apprised of it; and he, in his turn, lost no time in informing all his scientific friends, who immediately resorted to him, to inquire and examine for themselves. He remarks,

I communicate the tidings, not only that I may not deprive them of the gratification which I myself enjoy, but also that from our mutual conversations on these new and strange objects, we may be able more satisfactorily to arrive at correct conclusions.

After all were in this way satisfied, Salviani was in the habit of examining the internal parts of the animal, and of making preparations, always retaining the skin, and preparing, when possible, a stuffed specimen, together with accurate drawings.

Without further preliminary remark, we now turn to Salviani’s great work, and shall consider the more important objects that are there brought under review, in a brief analysis, which we trust will be both useful and interesting.

The work is an immense folio of 500 pages, got up in a style of elegance of execution of which we rarely see an example even in these latter times, and comprising nearly 100 copperplates of the same dimensions, many of which have not been surpassed by the efforts of modern art. To the proper subject-matter of the volume are prefixed various imperial and other documents confirming the copy-right to the author. One of these is from the Emperor Charles V., and another from the Pope; and of this latter, as containing some allusion to our author, as well as illustrating the aspiring spirit and practical working of the ecclesiastical power, and also as exhibiting the views then entertained on the subject of literary property and the rights of authors, a subject of undiminished interest now, we may here quote a part:—

Pope Julius III. &c. Forasmuch as our beloved son, Hippolito Salviani, a Roman citizen, and who for many years has been our ordinary physician, has caused it to be notified to us, that with great labour he has written a history of aquatic animals, and has printed it, together with copperplate figures of the animals, drawn from the life, and engraved at much personal expense, and since he apprehends that a work of this kind may be reprinted without his leave, and greatly to his prejudice, We, wishing to protect him from loss, grant and appoint that the said history and figures be not printed, sold, or kept for sale, by any one without his permission, during the ten years succeeding their first impression; prohibiting all and every one of the faithful in Christendom, of both sexes, both in Italy and beyond it, and especially all booksellers and printers, under the penalty of the greater excommunication, in the countries subject either directly or indirectly to the Roman church, together with the penalty of 500 golden ducats, and the forfeiture of the books. We commit this, moreover, in special charge to our venerable brothers, the Archbishops, Bishops, and their vicars-general, and also to the legates in temporal affairs of the Apostolic see, and likewise to the governors and rulers of the several states themselves, that as often as they, or any of them, shall be required at the instance of the said Hippolito, they shall inflict and execute the foresaid penalties, with all their might, against all contraveners, by ecclesiastical censures, whose severity may be increased, and by other legal measures under the Apostolic see; calling to their help the aid of the civil power, when that may be required.

The whole work is arranged in two great divisions, very different from each other in their plan and character. The former, occupying about one-fifth of the volume (112 pages), is a kind of synoptical account of the whole of the inhabitants of “The World of Waters,” alphabetically arranged, in a sort of continuous table, in which, in a number of successive columns, are supplied many interesting particulars concerning each of them. This statement, however, requires further explanation, and this may be supplied in the words of the author.

After I had formed the resolution of writing a history of aquatic animals, being well aware of the difficulty of the undertaking, I thought it would be advantageous again, to examine with additional care, the authors, both ancient and modern, who had treated of them, and who had committed to writing any thing worthy of notice. After carefully collecting all these particulars, I arranged under their proper heads, in one view, and in alphabetical order, what had previously been widely scattered and existed in the midst of confusion. When after much labour I had completed this task, I found that I had executed a greater and more useful work than I anticipated; for besides a vast collection of materials for my principal object, this other result followed, that having so much under my eye, it was generally easy to illustrate what was obscure, and to correct whatever was erroneous: and having thus experienced so much benefit myself, I determined to arrange it, as in my first book, for the benefit of others.⁴

It will now be more easily understood that upon opening the volume in any part of this first portion, it is seen that the two pages under the eye go together to form part of a continuous alphabetic table, consisting of nine columns; the first three of which, beginning at the left hand, are occupied with the name or names of the animals brought under review, first in Latin, then in classical Greek, and thirdly in the vulgar tongue, whether of Italy, Greece, France, or elsewhere. All these names are not to be considered as an unnecessary display of scholarship, because, in fact, at this and previous periods, when the true principles of classification were unknown, the names were indispensable in relation to that matter, which of all others most confused naturalists, viz., the correct identification of the species; and even after all their care, much uncertainty still remained. The fourth column contains what is denominated the “attributa”, a word of somewhat extended signification, and made to comprehend the properties, qualities, locality, &c. as will immediately be illustrated. The remaining six, contain accurate references to the works of previous authors, wherein the information supplied in the attributa is authenticated, the first five being assigned to those who were regarded as the chief authorities in the science, viz., to Aristotle, Oppian, Pliny, Athenius, and Ælian, and the last not to one, but to all the remaining authorities, or rather authors, not confined to Natural History only, but referring to such travellers, historians, and even poets, as had made interesting allusions to the animals under review. This last list is of course somewhat heterogeneous, and shows the extended reading of the author. It contains numerous references to the writings of such men as Hesiod, Heroditus, Hesychius and Pausanius, Strabo, Dioscorides, Cicero, Galen, and Ausonius; among the poets, to Terence, Ovid, and Virgil, also to Suidas and Massaria; among the Fathers, as they are called, to Clemens Alexandrina, St. Basil, Ambrose, and Isidore of Seville; and among many others, finally, to P. Gyllius and Mathiolus, among more modern authors. It should be observed that these references, though minute and accurate, are not extracts or quotations, but simply references; so that they are useful only when the work mentioned is itself actually consulted.

It should now be noted that this first book, besides proper fishes, contains, as before stated, accounts of the kind just described, of all varieties of aquatic animals,—of such quadrupeds as in popular language are called amphibious, as the beaver, otter, seal, and hippopotamus,—of the whole order of cete or whales,—of reptiles, such as crocodiles, frogs, tadpoles, lizards, saurines, tortoises, &c.—of molluscous animals, as the nautilus and purpura,—of proper shell-fish, as the oyster, &c.—of crustacea, as the crab and lobster,—also of echindermata and polypi, such as the star-fish and sponges; and finally, the group of what may be called sea-monsters, such as the triton, mermaid, the marine horse and elephant, the sea-lion and hyæna, ape, and hare, and the kraken; beings as much involved in obscurity at that time as they have been both before and since.

We shall now supply a few specimens of the information furnished by the author, from which the character of this part of the work, and the state of the science, may be easily inferred; and in doing this, we shall rather follow the modern classification than the alphabetic arrangement. Of the Hippopotamus, or river-horse, we are informed that the nose is very flat, the teeth and tail are like those of the boar, though the former are somewhat less cutting; it has the mane and back of the horse, and neighs like it; the hoof is cleft; the hide impenetrable, except when moistened, and covered with a few hairs; in size it equals the ass; its internal parts are like those of the horse; it inhabits the banks of the Nile, and is amphibious. According to Pliny, it was first exhibited at Rome by Marcus Seaurus. It browses on the corn fields, with much cunning; it has little or no affection for its parents; according to Pausanias, it is as dangerous to man as the crocodile; and according to Pliny, it taught men the use of phlebotomy—mittendi sangwinis rationem docuit. It is accounted sacred in the Papremitanan district. An account of its mode of capture is given by Heroditus; according to Atlian, its flesh is hard and difficult to cook; finally, the diseases in which it may be usefully employed are stated in the references given to Pliny, Nicander, Dioscorides, and Paulus Ægineta. Again, of the seal or sea-calf, we are told that it receives its name from its lowing cry; that it is an imperfect quadruped, with small feet, the fore ones like those of the bear, the hind ones like the tails of fishes, but covered with hair; that it has no external ears, but has the auditory passage; that its eye changes into a thousand colours; that the teeth are like those of the sow, and the tongue is cleft at the point. It has no gall, the kidnies have no internal cavities, but are solid and like those of the ox. It is very fleshy and soft, and its bones cartilaginous; it bas mammæ and milk, and brings forth its young on shore; and, according to Aristotle, at all seasons, like man, having one, two, and sometimes three at a birth. On the same authority, after twelve days, it conducts its young to the watery element, habituating them to it from time to time; and from this quarter it procures its food. It breathes and sleeps—no animal more soundly: it bellows even in its sleep. It is capable of instruction, and may be taught to salute the people by its look and voice, and it answers when called by name. They are accustomed to fight dreadfully with each other. According to Aristotle, the seal belongs to the cetaceous tribes; it lives both on land and in the water. According to Pliny, it is the only marine animal which is not struck by lightning. It is killed with great difficulty, except when struck on the head. How it is taken may be learned from Oppian; its flesh is soft and disagreeable; the elasticity of its skin is great. Pliny states that a strong soporific virtue resides in the right flipper; its other remedial powers may be learned from Pliny and Galen, in the various parts of their writings which are cited.

With regard to the whale tribe, he enumerates the balena, physeter, phalena or capadolio, the tursio, orca, dolphin, and platanista, most of which have kept their places in most of our systems to the present day, and concerning many of them, all obscurity is far from being removed. As an example of the opinions of the time respecting this order, we shall supply the account of the dolphin.

It has neither ears nor apertures in place of ears, yet it hears, which, indeed, is wonderful. It has no appearance of an olfactory organ, and yet has a very acute smell. The snout is flat, the mouth under the snout, and almost in the middle of the abdomen. It has a tongue like that of a pig, has no branchiæ, but a blow-hole; it has lungs, but no gall; it has bones, but no spines; it has a broad flat back; it is covered with a strong hide or skin. It produces its young in the tenth month, during summer, and sometimes two at a birth; its affection towards its young and those of its own kind is remarkable; it grows during ten years, and lives for thirty. Whenever it touches land it dies; it belongs to the class cetacea; it seems a terrestrial and aquatic animal; it breathes like man and groans; raising its blow-hole above the surface of the water, it there sleeps, breathing while sleeping; it is carnivorous and seizes its prey only when it turns upon its back. It is the swiftest of all animals, and is supposed to be in continual motion. It is soothed by music, is very friendly to man, is mindful of kindness conferred. It fishes for its prey In company with men; and is very sagacious in swimming, in foreseeing a storm, also when it is caught, and in preparing a place for its burial. It is accounted a sacred fish; the reason why it is regarded agreeable to Neptune; it is the king of fishes; in what manner it fights with the Amia; how it kills the crocodile in the Nile; it conceals itself in the dog-days; where and by whom it has been bought at a great price. Its flesh is hard and unsavory. According to Oppian, its capture is unlawful; the diseases for which it is a remedy are mentioned.

From among the molluscous animals we may supply his description of the purpura (buccinun, Lin., Purpura, Lamarck) that shell-fish from a vesicular reservoir of which the ancients derived their beautiful purple, “Tyrioque ardebat Murice lana;” and which the discovery of cochineal has now very much superseded.

This animal appears to be of the turbinated family by its projecting wedge-shaped snout, and by the tongue being pushed forward, and extending club-shaped to the extremity. It has seven spines in the circle; it possesses a natural covering; its tongue is very hard, and about an inch long. It is much in request as a dye, this peculiar substance being found near the middle of the fauces in a white vesicle. Both Aristotle and Pliny mention the time and the method by which it is procured. The intensity of the colour is in proportion to its proximity to the sun. It is brought forth in spring, from slime and putrefying matter.⁵ It grows very rapidly, for it attains its full size in a year. It possesses the senses of taste and smell; it is capable of motion but in a slight degree. Aristotle states how and upon what it feeds; it conceals itself in the dog-days. It lives generally seven years, and can exist for fifty days out of the water. The circles of its shells correspond to the years of its existence. In Carteia it has been found weighing ten pounds. It is killed by rain and fresh water. Aristotle describes the method by which it is caught with the net; its flesh is hard. Dioscorides and Galen dwell upon the diseases in which it is useful; there are several species, the best of which is that of Tyre.

Once more, with regard to a true conchifera, the pecten or scallop-shell (Pecten, Lamarck), Salviani tells us its common appellation is St. James’ shell, from the custom of pilgrims wearing it in their hats or about their neck, expressive of their crossing the sea in their way to the Holy Land, or to some distant object of devotion. The pecten is a shell-fish and a bivalve; the shell is striated, whence its name. One of the valves is swelling, the other flat; each shell has two projecting auricles. It has an ovum on one side of its edge, which nearly disappears during spring; for as the season advances the ovum diminishes in size, till at length it quite disappears. It is produced spontaneously, in sandy places, and in spring. It grows rapidly, for it attains its full size in a year. On moving the finger towards it, it gapes, and immediately closes its shell, as if it noticed and observed. It springs about, and is observed to make a noise when it moves; it concealing itself in great heats and colds; it is injured by filth, and acquires a reddish colour. It is sought for during the night by the Urtica: the Cancillus sometimes grows in it. By cooking it becomes digestible, and is very agreeable when stewed with cinnamon and pepper. According to Athenzeus, the white pecten is the best, and the largest of the red and dark coloured best in spring, whilst, according to Pliny, the darkest coloured and the largest are best in summer. They are procured in great perfection near Mytilene. Pliny, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Methymneus speak of their medicinal virtues. It will be noticed that in this description it is said that this shell-fish springs about. Volitat. This statement is given on the testimony of Aristotle, Pliny, and Massaria, and in their works is more largely insisted upon. It is so strange an attribute that it may have been generally regarded as legendary and untrue, and yet the statement has recently been abundantly confirmed. If a basket of the common pecten be placed near the water-edge it will be seen that it is speedily emptied, by its inmates springing from their confinement to their native element. This is effected by the sudden opening and butting of their valves, the lower striking against the sand and acting as a spring.⁶

On the sea-monsters we need not dwell long. Oppian, Pliny; and Ælian are the authorities for the merman, Homo marinus, testifying as to what he really is, and when and where he was seen. The description of the sea-horse is given by Isidore and P. Gyllius; and that of the kraken, the arbor, is from Pliny and Massaria, a sea-monster of vast dimensions, which has been noticed in the Atlantic ocean, not far from Gibraltar.

It will be observed that these descriptions, though alluding to the inhabitants of the ocean, yet really do not refer to true fish, according to the more accurate classification of modern times. None of these latter, however, are omitted in this first book, the whole receiving a full share of attention. On the other hand, the second book or part, being composed only of fishes properly so called, and all these being accompanied by plates prepared from drawings made under the author’s eye, or that of his friends, these other aquatic animals, whether mammalia, reptiles, shell-fish, or zoophites, are wholly excluded from it. Before, then, leaving this portion of the work, we shall adduce a specimen or two of the account it supplies of true fishes, and we shall take these very much as they occur in the alphabetical table. The fish called Acanthias, the Ακανθιας of the Greeks, claims attention from naturalists, as it is the one whose name most approximates, and which probably suggested to Artedi the appellation of his most numerous order the Acanthopterygii, those which have their rays or fins hard, simple, and in form of spines; a name which, being adopted by Baron Cuvier, will probably long retain its distinguished position. These acanthopterygii are the first and most numerous order of the osseous fishes, which are contradistinguished from the chondropterygian or cartilaginous ones, the other great, though less numerous series; and by the simplest and most natural suggestion, this name, which characterizes the largest number of osseous fishes, is applied by our author, as by the ancients, to a fish not of the osseous but cartilaginous series, to a Squalus of Linnæus, the Spinax acanthias of Cuvier, the picked dog-fish. We are informed that the acanthias is so denominated from its osseous spine; that it is of the family of sharks; that its heart is five-cornered; that it has the ova near the præcordia, over the mammæ; that it is not produced in the channel of Negropont, between Boeotia and Eubia. The account here supplied of one of the sturgeons, the accipensor, is very much of the same character.

Its name is adopted by the Romans from the Greeks; it is a small fish, with a great gape, of a triangular figure. This fish is the only one which has the scales turned towards the mouth. The branchiæ are four in number and simple. The gall flows into the intestines. It swims in a course opposite to the current of water; it is not often met with. It feeds in the depths of the Pamphylian Sea and in no other place. It has often been regarded the noblest of fishes, and is brought into feasts by persons crowned with garlands, and accompanied with music.

Lastly, of these true fish we shall give the somewhat more extended account of the common eel, anguilla.

It is long and slippery; its branchiæ are four in number, simple and small. It has only two fins; its skin is very thick; its throat is small, and its stomach; there is gall in the liver. It does not abound in fat. No sexual difference is to be found in them, and they are produced, says Aristotle, spontaneously. It feeds on mud, weeds, and slime, and mostly during the night. It attains the length of thirty feet in the Ganges. According to Aristotle, it lives only in clear water; in lakes, rivers, and the sea also; it descends from rivers into the ocean, and lives separately from other fishes. It has been disputed whether they mutually devour each other. They become very tame, so that, according to Pliny and Ælian, you may supply them with earrings. Its natural period of life is eight years, and it can live out of the water for six days. The sea-eel is more worthy of commendation than the fresh-water one. It is held sacred by the Egyptians, and is sacrificed to the gods by the Beotians. It is exceedingly juicy. Eustachius maintains it is the best of fishes, whilst Galen says it is never good. Aristotle narrates the methods by which it is captured, and observes it-is the only fish which does not float when it is dead.

These extracts describing the true fishes, and those inhabitants of the water which are not so, along with other details, will convey a tolerably accurate idea of the first great division of Salviani’s work. It is an Ichthyological Dictionary of its time, specifying the most important particulars known of each species, and referring to all previous works for the details. Its perusal may remind the reader of more modern systems of natural history, and though it cannot compete with them as to accuracy of information and classification, it probably has the advantage as to general interest and amusement. Besides this principal alphabetic table, there are two other lists, the former of the Greek names, and the other of the vulgar ones in modern languages, both followed by the Latin synonymes. This shows, at all events, the author’s ambition to make his work extensively useful. The English synonymes are probably those he found most difficult; and the very imperfect list would not now prove of much use in Britain; the names are such as these:—barbel, chieven, macrel, perc, polard, sandilz, viver, &c.

We now proceed to the second and larger division of the work, which is written upon quite a different plan. Here the beautiful plates bear the prominent part; they follow each other according to no system, for the time of systems had not yet come; and the appearance of grouping, though apparent, is far from being closely observed. Associated with each plate is a minute description of the animal: first, as of primary importance, a disquisition regarding the name and synonymes, then a description of the external character, and of its nature and habits; then as to the methods in which it is caught, cured, and dressed; next what kind of nutriment and other products it yields; and finally the diseases in which it may be beneficially employed. Our author says,

So that nothing is wanting in my judgment to a perfect history of the animal.

He adds,

There are many who transfer what they read in others to their own works, without considering whether the statements are true or false, following rather the authority of men than the truth of history, as Pliny has done with Aristotle, Solina with Pliny, #lian with Oppian, &c. It has been our determination, however, on the contrary, to state nothing, the truth of which we had not ascertained, and hence we have often been forced to criticise the writings of our predecessors, without, however, the slightest wish to be captious.

It was this fixed determination to subject the authority of men to that of truth, and to reject whatever was unauthenticated and fabulous, and retain only the little that was true, which constituted the marked improvement of the aye, and which together with the advantageous employment of such opportunities as they personally enjoyed, raised the small band of Ichthyologists, of which Salviani was one, to the eminence they have obtained, and to which they have so just a claim.

The number of species represented in the second book amounts only to ninety-nine; and even this number must be reduced. Four of the most striking and best plates represent those molluscous animals now known under the classical appellation of cephalopodia, the sepia of older naturalists, and popularly the singular cuttlefish, from which it has been thought, we believe erroneously, that China ink is prepared. Dismissing these, upon which much that is curious is said, and allowing for the two plates of the singular cetrina, the number of fish is reduced to ninety-four. Baron Cuvier brings them down to ninety-two;⁷ which may possibly be a mistake, but more probably arises from his having considered several plates as nothing more than duplicates of others. Of this reduced number, eighteen species appear to have been previously unnamed and undescribed; and ten more, having no Greek appellation, must have been unknown to Aristotle and the earlier naturalists; so that, considering the small authority of Pliny and later zoologists, a large proportion, and, in fact, a considerable number was brought to notice and described by Salviani. To a few of these our author himself has not ventured to attach a name, though his plates have enabled later Ichthyologists to do so; and thus real progress was made, and the benefit retained in our modern systems.

Thus, then, without aiming at any thing like a complete analysis, have we endeavoured to furnish an account and specimen of this important work, ample to an extent commensurate with the respect we conceive due to our author on the one hand, and to our readers on the other; and by which the latter may at once form a correct estimate of the kind and variety of information they are likely to derive from consulting its pages. We have somewhere seen it observed concerning this volume, that on account of the general accuracy of its plates and descriptions it may be considered as indispensable to the modern Ichthyologist. Its extreme rarity would make this statement, if literally true, not a little distressing. It is so scarce, that for a long time we were not able to lay hands upon it, nor even to hear where a copy could be procured. It is, moreover, true, that much of its valuable information has been filtrated, so to speak, into Aldrovandi’s, and other more recent treatises. In addition, Baron Cuvier supplies on this point a valuable observation. He remarks, that as the author borrows many of his details from the ancients, and as these passages do not always refer to the same species, much caution is required in consulting them. Upon the whole, however, the classical Ichthyologist cannot but esteem the work, and highly prize the opportunity it affords him of clearing up many obscurities which hang over the earlier portion of the history of the science.

In De Bure’s “Bibliographie,” No. 1716, it is said that the Roman is the only edition of this work; but this statement would appear to be incorrect, as we find it stated in the Biographie Universelle, that there was a reprint at Venice in the years 1600–2. The volume, however, is notwithstanding undoubtedly scarce.

Although Salviani devoted a large share of his attention to Ichthyology and other departments of Natural History, we are not to imagine that he confined it to these branches of science. We have read, that he assiduously practised his profession, both publicly and privately, at Rome; and we have learned, too, that he taught the class of physic for twenty-two years. It would likewise appear that he wrote on medical subjects. He published, in the year 1558, a book under the following title, De crisibus ad Galeni censuram liber; of which a second edition appeared in 1589. And amidst these scientific labours he did not forget literature, but opened up a new avenue which dramatists, who were accustomed only to follow in the footsteps of the ancients, might pursue, by depicting the vices of his time, in a comedy which was entitled La Ruffiana, Rome, 1554. He is supposed likewise to have been the author of various satirical and critical productions, which appeared anonymously at the time.

Of his more private history we have been able to procure no gleanings. He had two sons who survived him. The elder, Gaspar, acquired very considerable literary reputation, and was a distinguished member of the Academy of Humorists.⁸ The younger, Salust, trod in the footsteps of his father, and practised physic in Rome with much reputation. On the death of Marcellus II., his successor, Pope Paul IV. confirmed our Salviani in the several appointments he enjoyed; and he continued to discharge their duties with the highest credit till his death, which happened in Rome in the year 1572.