« הקודםהמשך »
animal, whose mouth is not at all connected with the respiratory apparatus, could assist sucking, it is difficult to conceive. The last appears to me to afford the desired explanation. But although Dr. Jacob and Geoffrey St. Hillaire have told us how the animal may, and, in all probability, does suck under water, neither they, or any other observers, have told us how the young Cetacean breathed all this time ; and the question of John Hunter still remains to be explained; unless we believe that sucking is merely carried on between the periods of respiration, which will occupy generally from two to five minutes—an opinion, to my mind, very improbable.
During our sojourn in the Mediterranean, I had several opportunities of dissecting small Cetacea, and almost daily opportunities of observing the motions of hundreds of these animals; and to this motion, during the act of respiration, I would call the attention of physiologists, as it may offer some explanation of the mode of sucking. When the animal comes up to breathe, it protrudes the blow-hole above the water-line, and then making a graceful curve, by describing a semicircle, or, at least, the segment of a very large circle, it raises the extremity of its body and tail completely out of the water in its descent, so as to carry that portion of its under or abdominal surface, in which the nipples are placed, fairly out of the water into the air. In this way, shoals of them proceed at a rapid pace, never, however, raising the entire body out of the water, but cutting the water-line with their pectoral region, which is generally half emerged. This exact motion cannot be seen in rough weather, when the surface is much disturbed, and when Cetaceans are on the alert, as those in the Mediterranean generally are; nor could it be well seen from the high deck of a vessel. But I have observed it so often in perfect calms, when in a boat amongst a shoal of them, and having applied my eye as nearly on a level with the surface as I could, that I am convinced on the subject.
Now, it appears to me, that the young one, when it lays hold on the teat, need not necessarily relinquish it each time either it or the mother comes up to breathe. And I am informed by experienced whalers, that they have constantly seen the young ones attached to the mothers for a considerable time, and remaining so while the latter rose to blow. These men had no object in de
ception, nor any theory to favour and advance ; and the excellent work of Scoresby, on the Whale Fishery and Arctic Regions, would lead us to suppose 'such to be the case with the large Cetacea there.
We know of other animals which suckle while they progress; such as the marsupial—the monkey tribe skip from tree to tree with the young ones attached to the teats—those animals denominated flying squirrels, and the cheiroptera; viz. the vampire bat, and even the common one of that species, will fly about with the young ones adherent. Nay, we know of Indians and Hottentots who carry their children slung on their backs, and attached to their enormous breasts. And why should not a whale be capable of a similar privilege ? Closet zoologists, supposing that both mother and young could not breathe at the same time, have gone so far as to state that the old one turned on her back to allow the young one to draw the breast; others, that they lie on the side for a similar purpose.
But this being a position they could not long maintain, would be rather too much of natural affection, even in a whale ; as though it might be very convenient for the young one, inevitable drowning would be the consequence to the old, if that position were long sustained.
It appears then, if I am correct, that the young remain attached to the mother during a certain period, as other mammiferæ, and that each time the animal rises to the surface, it lifts the breasts, and consequently the young one, above the water, so that, in fact, all the young one has to do is to hold on, and it is both suckled and assisted to respire at the same time. Perhaps the sulcus in which the nipple is lodged may exert some power of retaining the lips of the animal in situ, by its margin grasping the extremity of the young one's mouth. Perhaps the reason for the parts being placed so low in the abdomen is, that she
may lift the young one above the water. The original communication upon this subject, of which this is but a brief, and from the nature of these volumes an imperfect sketch, was made to the Obstetrical Society of this city; a society that continues to increase the long and well-earned reputation that has for more than half a century been accorded to that par-,
ticular branch of science in Ireland, and that reflects upon its talented and enterprizing founder, Dr. Evory Kennedy, a lustre that he so well deserves. Since then, some of our most enlightened physiologists have taken up the topic in their public lectures, and approved of the explanation that I have offered upon this hitherto undecided question; and these considerations have induced me to give it in a popular form, unconnected with anatomical details, a place in this Appendix.
There is one other subject naturally arising out of any investigation of the Cetacea of the Mediterranean—that is, the story of Jonah; and on this I would suggest the following explanation of what sceptics have long been in the habit of dwelling upon as one of the fallacies of inspired writ. That Jonah could be preserved for three days and three nights, in the belly of a whale, was in itself a miracle, and as such we are bound to believe it—even as the old woman said who answered a casuist, that were she informed by the same Divine authority that Jonah swallowed the whale, she would believe it. Now, although it be a miracle, yet the Almighty generally works his wonders by natural means. First, it is said that the gullet or esophagus of even the largest Cetacea could not admit a man's body ;-this is answered by the very expression used in Scripture, that “the Lord prepared a great fish.” Secondly, the whale although an aquatic animal, yet breathing air by means of lungs, it would be naturally obliged to come to the surface to respire, nearly as often as man is compelled to perform that function, and so, were Jonah placed behind the enormous cavity of the posterior nares, beneath the blow-hole, he could, even by natural means, be supplied with air. Thirdly, the whole story has by some been described as an allegory; and these persons have particularly dwelt upon the account of the sea-weeds surrounding his head, to show that it must have been on the shore that Jonah was thrown, alleging that, the whale feeding on small mollusca, it was impossible for sea-weed to entangle round the prophet's head ;---in contradiction of this, it is particularly worthy of remark, that some of the very largest whales that inhabit the Mediterranean, are graminiverous ruminating animals, consequently feeding on Algæ and other marine plants.
I.- PAGE 253.
ON THE REMOVAL OF CLEOPATRA'S NEEDLE.
It has been long incumbent on the British government to bring one or other of the Alexandrian obelisks, called Cleopatra's Needles, to England, especially from the number of accounts, and diversity of opinions promulgated by travellers and writers, many of whom, from the commencement of the present century, have attributed the prostration of the fallen obelisk to a different nation or individual.
The cause of the obelisk not having been brought home after the Egyptian campaign, may be learned by the following extracts, with which I have been favoured by Captain Larcom, R.N., from papers of his father, who then commanded H.M.S. Hind, and the present Admiral Hollis, then commanding H. M. S. Thames.
“ H. M. S. Hind, Egypt, 1802. “The French had partially cleared away the rubbish from around the prostrate obelisk called Cleopatra's Needle, and it was determined to attempt the transport of this obelisk to England, as a lasting memorial of the triumphs of the British army in Egypt. Subscriptions were entered into by the officers of the
army, and the naval squadron then at Alexandria, for this purpose. On the part of the army, the obelisk was completely cleared from the surrounding ruins, a road commenced to the port, and a pier in progress to the deeper water, and all preparations in forwardness for embarkation, while the navy had weighed the hull of a small Venetian frigate, the · Leobon, that had been sunk by the French during the siege, in the old harbour, calked and rendered her sea-worthy for the voyage. The weight had been estimated, and the position it ought to оссиру in the hold of the vessel; it being intended that when firmly placed at the proper height from the keel, and there secured by shores, &c. that the vacant spaces should be filled up with bags of cotton, and to those who had seen the stowage of vessels in the cotton trade, not a doubt remained of the feasibility of the plan proposed to be adopted; but at this stage of the proceedings, in March, 1802, an order arrived from General
Fox, the commander of the forces in the Mediterranean, and Lord Keith, the naval commander-in-chief on the station, forbidding the removal of the obelisk, on the plea that it would give offence to the Turkish government ; thus was lost to England the honour of having erected in her capital a trophy peculiarly appropriate to the conquerors at the Nile and at Alexandria.”
“ H. M. S. Thames, Egypt, 1802. “ It was the intention of the heads of the army
navy, who were left in Egypt after the peace had taken place with France, in 1801, to have taken the fallen obelisk to England, as a trophy of the very gallant achievements of those brave men who were employed in the reduction of Egypt, and for which purpose a subscription was raised, and one of the French frigates which had been sunk during the siege of Alexandria, was got up, and fitted to embark it on board; but most unfortunately, from some secret and unaccountable cause, the scheme met the positive disapprobation of the two commanders-in-chief of the army and navy, who were at Malta, and the two commanding officers at Alexandria were ordered to desist in their plan of sending the obelisk to England. I carried the orders to Egypt. The only public reason given for it, was a supposition that it might give offence to the Turks, but this was not the case, as it had been previously guarded against, by a formal permission being asked, which was most readily granted by the Aga who commanded in Egypt, observing at the same time that the Turks cared not if we took every stone in the country; but he very sarcastically asked us if we had no stone-quarries in England, that we were taking so much trouble to carry such a useless mass there as the obelisk appeared to him to be. This order to discontinue our scheme was a great disappointment to every one, as it had become quite an amusement, and both the sailors and soldiers were volunteers for the work. As we had then nothing to do, it was proposed to raise the base of the fallen obelisk, which was an immense square mass of granite; and it was accordingly done, so as to introduce under it a flat marble slab of about five feet square, with an inscription on it in French, Italian, Latin, and English-describing the battle of Aboukir-the landing of the French in Egypt under Buonaparte --the subsequent reduction of Egypt by the English army,