Petrus Arctaedius was born in Anundsjö, Sweden, in 1705. The records of the parish of Anundsjö give the date of his birth, as the 27th February (Old Style), therefore March 10th in modern reckoning. He was the second child of Olaus Arctaedius and his second wife Helena née Sidena. Olaus Arctaedius had held the curacy of the parish for four years before his son was born, having previously lived at Hernösand, where he was ordained in 1696. Olaus was the elder son of Petrus Martini Arctaedius (ca. 1635 to ca. 1716), who having matriculated from the University of Abo, in Finland, in 1656, later became a master at the Pitea School, at Hernösand, where he took Holy Orders in 1663. In later life, this Petrus and his wife Anna (née Grubb) lived at the coastal village of Nordmaling where he had held the living since 1690.

Thus Petrus Arctaedius the future naturalist, was descended on his father's side through two generations of clergymen. His mother had a similar background being the daughter of Petrus Sidenius of Stockholm, a teacher of philosophy and a Court Chaplain. The family, which consisted of the parents and their three surviving children out of the five born to them, Anna Marie the eldest, Petrus, and the youngest, Elizabeth, lived at Anundsjö until 1716, when they moved to Nordmaling. Here Olaus Arctaedius took charge of the parish from his father, who, aged nearly eighty, was blind and very feeble, and incapable of discharging his duties without assistance. The move took place in September 1716, and the eleven year old Petrus Arctaedius now found the waters of the Gulf of Bothnia near at hand. Instead of the rather limited flora and fauna of the inland Anundsjö, which had apparently already awakened in him a latent interest in nature, there now unfolded the abundant life of the sea shore, an unfailing source of specimens and of interest, and behind the shore the pleasant surroundings of the village of Nordmaling. As Lönnberg comments "As the climate of Nordmaling, . . . considering its high latitude, is remarkably kindly, there would be, . . . greater opportunities afforded the lad than before of studying nature in her various aspects and of watching the ways and life of animals, birds, and fishes in their several natural surroundings."

In the same year, Petrus went to the school at Hernösand where apparently he kept pace with his fellow students in his studies but without particular distinction. Linnaeus tells us that even at this time his recreation was found in the dissection and study of fishes and the collecting of plants, rather than in more usual boyish amusements. As soon as he had mastered the rudiments of Latin, however, a whole realm of scholarship lay open to him, an opportunity which he put to good use, especially in reading the works of the earlier alchemists. In due course, Arctaedius's progress in his conventional studies allowed him to progress through the senior school (the Gymnasium) at Hernösand, and in 1724 to the University at Uppsala where his name is still preserved on the University register.

Not unnaturally, the intention had been that he should follow in the paternal tradition in reading theology, but his own inclinations to the study of natural science, probably influenced by his studies of alchemical writings, eventually led him to reject his father's advice and take up the study of chemistry. He is said to have been the only student of this subject at the University at the time. As a student in the Faculty of Medicine, he was granted a Royal scholarship, but, owing to a scarcity of instruction in natural science at the University at that time, he must have been largely dependent on his own private studies to acquire knowledge of the subject. Lönnberg comments at length on the sparseness of academic instruction in the Natural Science; apparently the only two professors qualified in any way to lecture were largely engaged in other studies. Lars Roberg, a notable anatomist and zoologist was not even responsible for teaching zoology and Lönnberg states that there is no record of his having given any public lectures at all. Another professor at Uppsala, Olaf Rudbeck, although charged with the teaching of natural history, was apparently preoccupied during the first three years of Artedi's college years, with the study of languages. Linnaeus himself gave some account of the situation at the University in those days. "Rudbeck gave a course certainly, about his Birds of Sweden, . . . and Roberg lectured privately on the Problemata of Aristoteles in the light of the principles of Descartes, but no one heard or saw any Anatomy, nor any Chemistry; I myself never had the opportunity of attending a single lecture on Botany, either private or public."

Four years after Arctaedius had commenced his University career, Linnaeus arrived at Uppsala with the intention of studying natural science. On his arrival he inquired for the names of other students engaged in similar studies and the name of Arctaedius was foremost in everyone's mind in this connection. At the time, however, Arctaedius was at his home at Nordmaling, whither he had been summoned by the news of an illness of his father, which eventually ended in his death. This illness of his father seems to have detained him at Nordmaling throughout the winter, and he did not return to Uppsala until probably March 1729. Linnaeus was anxious to meet his fellow student but when their first meeting took place is unknown, although it must have been soon after his return. Linnaeus, writing after Artedi's death left an account of his impressions of Arctaedius at this first meeting (Lönnberg's translation), " I saw him before me, lofty of stature and spare of figure; his hair was long and his face reminded me of John Ray's; he struck me as humble-minded, not hasty in forming an opinion, but yet prompt, firm and withal mature, a man of old-world honor and faith. It rejoiced me to remark that our talk turned at once upon stones, plants, and animals, and I was much moved at having so many of his scientific observations confided to me without the least hesitation or reserve upon that very first occasion on which we met. I sought his friendship, and so far was he from withholding it, that he promised me his services too, if such I needed, a promise he afterwards most loyally kept. This sacred friendship, thus spontaneously sealed, we fostered uninterruptedly for seven years in Uppsala, at all times with the same fidelity, but with ever-increasing warmth and attachment. He was my closest and most intimate friend and I was his."

This contact with Arctaedius must have been of immeasurable help to Linnaeus; Arctaedius was the older by several years and had been pursuing his studies, as we have seen, largely on his own initiative for four years before Linnaeus's arrival. Furthermore, the material help that one could give the other was obviously supplemented by the mental stimulation that each exerted. Linnaeus, who speaks of himself as a young man "small of stature, boisterous, hasty and of ready wit," found a complementary character in the tall Arctaedius, rather retiring by nature, a serious studious worker whose accuracy could always be relied on. As Linnaeus concludes, the difference between them often materialized in Artedi, despite his slowness and tendency to procrastinate, having the advantage over Linnaeus in the end, "by reason of my having to begin my work all over again because some important fact had escaped my memory." Moreover, the attainments of Arctaedius were not confined to his chosen field of natural sciences, and he is reported as being "exceeding well versed in litterae humaniores and in modern languages, he was a profound philosopher, and possessed a sound knowledge of medicine, he had the power, moreover of giving the most admirable addresses on very various subjects, wherein he displayed keen judgment and a thorough acquaintance with the topic, so that none of his hearers, on leaving the lecture room, could fail to accord him the distinction of being a very great and learned man."

The two young men, who's characters and attainments complemented one another so well, who saw one another daily to discuss their theories and discoveries in natural science, found in their association the spur to further work and study. The spirit of friendly rivalry drove them on in competition, but eventually the natural interests of each made one or the other pre-eminent in a particular field. Thus, Arctaedius excelled in alchemy, ichthyology, and herpetology, while he yielded the fields of botany, birds, and insects to Linnaeus. Parenthetically, one might comment here that in thus dividing the world of natural science between them they were following, if unconsciously, the precedent of John Ray and Francis Willughby, the English naturalists of the previous century.

Early in 1734, Artedi--it was during his later years in the University of Uppsala that he changed his family name from Arctaedius to the now more familiar Artedi--having been studying at Uppsala for ten years, and being no longer in receipt of a scholarship, resolved to travel abroad in search of further material for his studies, and to complete his education. Because at the time such a project was beyond his means, he wrote to his brothers-in law, Peter Biur and Jonas Liungberg, for assistance. Most generously they approved of his plans and provided him with the necessary equipment and money. The only obstacle now in Artedi's way was the necessity for any student going abroad to pass an examination in theology. On July 17th he was duly examined in theology and at the end of the month an Academic Certificate was issued allowing him to travel. Having written to Linnaeus, who was then traveling in Dalarna (western central Sweden), to inform him that he was to take charge of such of his books as he was unable to carry with him, and that they were to become Linnaeus's property "if Fate ordained that he should never come back to his native land again," Artedi sailed from Stockholm in the beginning of September 1734. His objective was London.

Little seems to be known of Peter Artedi's stay in London, except that he had evidently been made welcome by a number of learned men. He expressed to Linnaeus, after his visit, his appreciation of the consideration and kindness he had received from the savants he had met, and appeared to have become an admirer of the country and the English in general. The one naturalist who was mentioned by name was Sir Hans Sloane, whose name and museum of natural specimens and artistic objects acted as a magnet, drawing many scholars to London, and with whom Artedi left a manuscript account of the fishes of the Baltic which survives today. Sloane's collection of natural history material must have been almost embarrassingly rich for the Swedish student, and we have evidence in the Ichthyologia that he made some use of this collection to fill in the major lacunae in his already partly written essays on fishes. Thus in the Genera piscium, a good deal of his account of the Order Branchiostegi, an order which embraced the modern tetraodontiform fishes, the lumpsuckers and the anglers, was evidently written during his stay in London. In this case, almost alone in this part of the work, Artedi mentions where he had seen the specimens he described. Thus, there are four references to tetraodontiform fishes seen at Sir Hans Sloane's, and others are recorded at Mr. Lillia's and at the Spring Garden, the Naggshead (sic), the White Bear, and the Green Dragon at Stepney. Artedi saw further specimens at Don Saltero's Coffee House in Chelsea; the proprietor of this establishment, James Salter, may have served Sloane in some capacity and probably obtained from him some of the "objects of curiosity," with which he adorned his Coffee House. His "museum" at Chelsea was a meeting place of many of the dilettanti of the time (De Beer, 1953) and Artedi evidently made good use of his visit there to examine an additional specimen of a pufferfish (Tetraodon sp.). Brief references in the Ichthyologia to dates during his London stay give us little information as to how or where he spent his time. Soon after his arrival in November 1734, he examined a whale in London, which he thought to be a Greenland whale, and on the 15th May 1735, Artedi visited Sir Hans Sloane at Bloomsbury in London. At Whitsun of that year (2 Pentecostes) he went to the town of Stratford. This place should not be confused with the better known Stratford-on-Avon, but almost certainly indicates a visit to the Stratford on the east side of London, then a small town in semi-rural surroundings. Who it was that Artedi visited here we are not told but one well known resident with similar interests was George Edwards, the author of the History of Birds (1743-1751), who in December 1733, under the patronage of Sloane, had been appointed Librarian to the Royal College of Physicians. Edwards's home had been in Stratford from his birth in 1693 until he accepted this post. It is therefore possible that Artedi visited Edwards at Stratford, although another scholar of the period living in the vicinity was Dr. John Fothergill of Upton Park, now in West Ham. Finally, we can assume that a good deal of Artedi's time was occupied with the preparation of the Ichthyologia, for the general preface of the whole volume, surely a passage that would only have been written with the end of his work in sight, ends "Scripsi Londini 1735."

By July, Artedi was in Holland, and on the eighth of that month met Linnaeus in Leiden, where the latter was staying whilst his tabular Systema naturae (the first of many editions) was being printed with assistance from J. F. Gronovius. Artedi's intention had been to qualify for a degree in Holland before returning to Sweden but his financial situation was precarious, and he was presumably faced with the possibility of returning home immediately unless some patronage could be obtained. It was the latter possibility that arose. Linnaeus had already been unsuccessfully approached by Albertus Seba, a wealthy Dutchman, of German origin, to study the fishes and other animals in his cabinet, and he now introduced Artedi to Seba with this purpose in mind. Seba, a successful pharmacist and merchant, with a magnificent collection of natural specimens, and unnatural curiosities, had already published two folio volumes of his work, usually known as the Thesaurus (the first volume, published in 1734, dealt with plants, quadrupeds, and birds; the second, 1735, with reptiles). The purpose of Artedi's engagement was to study and write a succeeding volume or volumes concerning the fishes and other, mainly invertebrate animals. The third and fourth volumes were not published, in fact, until 1758 and 1765 respectively, long after Seba's death.

Lönnberg tells us that before the approach to Seba was made, Artedi worked some while with Linnaeus contributing to the Systema naturae his survey of the fishes, including descriptions of genera, and also a revised classification of the umbelliferous plants. However, as soon as these matters were settled, Artedi was introduced to Seba on July 17th. Then the friends separated, Artedi staying in Amsterdam and Linnaeus returning to Leiden but later moving to Amsterdam until mid-September. The terms reached with Seba included a "promise of a fair and honorable remuneration," a passage that later led to some recrimination. Artedi then evidently commenced his studies on the Seba collection. Despite the fact that from mid-July until mid-September both were working in Amsterdam, Linnaeus says they met only once, and Engel (1937) suggests that this was shortly after the 31st of July, when Linnaeus took a newly completed botanical work to Artedi for criticism and discussion. However, it appears that Artedi monopolized the visit, and he took the opportunity to read aloud his Philosophia Ichthyologia to Linnaeus who commented (1788): "I was not allowed to depart until I had looked through all his ichthyological works and communicated to him those criticisms which occurred to me concerning the laws of systematization which he had there evolved" (Lönnberg's, 1905, translation). Apparently, by this time Artedi had formulated the plan of publishing the whole of his ichthyological works in one, and according to Lönnberg he was proposing to complete his engagement with Seba before revising and publishing his notes.

Artedi was staying in a lodging house in the Warmoesstraat, near the Nieuwebrugsteeg in the dock area on the river front of Amsterdam, where apparently (Engel, 1951) he had a number of fishes and insects belonging to Seba. It appears from this that Artedi was possibly working on Seba's material in his lodgings rather than at Seba's house. This would seem to be a curious state of affairs, as Seba had a large house in Amsterdam, his children had married and left home, and furthermore he had always had one or more apprentice apothecaries living on his premises. Possibly it suited both parties better, for according to one account quoted by Engel (1951) of Artedi's way of life, he lived a lonely life, went to a tavern from three until nine, worked from nine at night to three in the morning and slept from three to noon. On the evening of September 27th, Artedi spent the evening at Seba's house, in congenial company, and according to Linnaeus stayed late engaged in conversation and started for his lodgings at one o'clock. Somewhere on his path along the unlighted canals of Amsterdam he missed his way, fell into a canal and drowned. The accident was discovered next day, and his body was taken to the City Hospital. From documents quoted by Engel (1951), his death was notified as a pauper, by an Anna Molenbeek (probably a servant of Artedi's landlord) on 1 October 1735. He was buried at St. Anthony's church on Sunday the second of October.

Linnaeus, then at Hartekamp, had been informed of Artedi's death on the 29th of September by a mutual friend Claudius Sohlberg, and hastened to Amsterdam. He told of his emotions in his biography of Artedi (1738), translated by Lönnberg (1905), at seeing the body of his late friend, and of his remembrance of their mutual promises to act as literary executors to one another.

Later accounts of the proceedings over Artedi's possessions and objects are confused. The official record quoted by Engel (1937), classified Artedi as a pauper, his estate unable to pay for his grave, but Linnaeus says that Seba "very liberally" contributed a sum of 50 guilders towards the costs, the phrase being meant ironically according to Lönnberg. An inventory of Artedi's possessions at his landlord's house, prepared by the public notary of Amsterdam has been published by Engel, and it includes several manuscripts on fishes, others on minerals, mammals and amphibians, boxes of fishes and insects, and several books some of which were Seba's property, besides Artedi's personal effects. It now transpired that Artedi had not received any payment from Seba for his work, and was heavily in debt to his landlord for unpaid lodgings, so when Linnaeus attempted to possess the manuscripts as Artedi's moral, if not legal, literary executor, he found the landlord unwilling to deliver them to him without full settlement of the amount outstanding. Linnaeus by his own account then wrote to Artedi's family asking their permission to act as his friend's executor, which consent was given readily. Even then the demands of the landlord were in Linnaeus's opinion excessive but by negotiation he reduced the amount by half, although he was still unable to settle the account. Linnaeus's account of the proceedings (quoted by Engel, 1951) continues: "when I offered that he might keep all the movables, that Artedi had been able to bring with him, except the manuscripts, for twenty guilders, the landlord declined. So I sent to Seba, that he might render the defunct the last deed of Christian charity to pay only this small sum. He could take to him all things left behind, with the papers, till the money arrived for me from my native country, so that these things could not be dispersed by the landlord, who every moment threatened to sell them by public auction. But the happy man modestly withdrew . . . not (being) desirous to meddle any further with this affair. He rather advised that the things might be dispersed by auction, as he was sure that he would without any doubt obtain everything; nobody in Amsterdam would care for these Observations. And then he would freely communicate them to me. But I thought this advice ambiguous and dangerous." Linnaeus then turned to his own patron George Clifford who purchased the manuscripts (and presumably all the other effects), had them copied, and the copies given to Linnaeus.

The above account is derived from Linnaeus's own early record of the transactions, but as Engel (1951) has pointed out, his own later accounts contained many discrepancies, notably concerning the amount outstanding. In a letter of 1752, he wrote that the landlord's claim was for 320 guilders, which was reduced to 100 guilders by the procurators, which he then borrowed and paid. But as Engel observes, Linnaeus had elsewhere claimed to have reduced the claim through negotiation with the landlord, while the procurator would have acted through a judicial court. It seems probable that Linnaeus was less than fair with his account of Seba's position in the affair, although the latter's actions were hardly above reproach. Seba was a successful merchant probably not liberal with his money, he had apparently never paid Artedi for approximately seven weeks work, and Artedi had been forced to live in debt, yet at his death his effects disclosed that he still had some English currency, so evidently he had not been sufficiently poor to change this for guilders. Seba then had contributed fifty guilders for his funeral, and was being asked to pay a high price for Artedi's manuscripts at the valuation of a lodging-house keeper; not surprisingly he declined. He probably knew better than Linnaeus the value of such items at an auction. Linnaeus, however, evidently distrusted Seba's intentions if he did buy the manuscripts, and besides, he was activated by strong emotional feelings in his attempt to save them for publication. Altogether it was an unsavory wrangle probably with faults on both sides, but owing to the intervention of Clifford, Artedi's manuscripts were saved and were published by Linnaeus three years later.

Five of the manuscripts of Artedi that Clifford purchased at Linnaeus's request were published in 1738 under the general title of the Ichthyologia by Linnaeus, who added a brief introduction and biography of the author. Engel (1951) has published an interesting inventory of Artedi's possessions made by the public notary on the 30th September 1735 (three days after his death), and this mentions by name the following manuscripts: Historia piscium universalis, Synonymologia manuscript, Prolegomena institutionum, and Historia literaria ichthiologiae. In addition, other manuscripts were listed as follows: a booklet titled Ichthyologia, which Engel suggests might have been a rough notebook on specimens examined by Artedi; a Manuscriptum Thunusis, which Engel suggests, with reservations, might have been a description of a tunny (Thunnus), although this seems unlikely to the present author; a manuscript on minerals, another on mammals, a third on amphibians, a fourth of medical notes, and two other unidentified manuscripts. The first four were almost certainly published in the Ichthyologia, although as Nybelin remarks, Linnaeus must have supplied the published titles to the parts, and I identify them as follows: the Historia piscium universalis became the Genera piscium (Pars III); the Synonymologia, the Synonymia nominum piscium (Pars IV); the Prolegomena institutionum, the Philosophia ichthyologia (Pars II); while the Historia literaria ichthiologiae is obviously the Bibliotheca ichthyologica (Pars I). This still leaves the fifth part, the Descriptiones specierum piscium, unidentified unless it was the rough notebook Ichthyologia mentioned above, as seems probable.

Earlier it was suggested that the major part of the Ichthyologia was in manuscript form before Artedi left England for Holland, as the general introduction is dated from London 1735. When Linnaeus visited Artedi about the end of July that year he tells us that Artedi read aloud to him the Philosophia Ichthyologia, and that he had already decided to publish his ichthyological works in one volume. Thus it seems that Artedi 's Ichthyologia can owe only a minimum to Linnaeus whose editorial hand was probably devoted to slight revisions and corrections. There is no doubt, however, that the sections dealing with genera and particularly species are unfinished, as neither includes any reference to the many species the author had examined in Seba's Museum.

Other Artedian manuscripts survived to be published after his death. Merriman (1941) gives an account of the discovery of a copy of Artedi's manuscript on the Seba collection, a copy apparently which belonged to Seba's son in-law R. W. van Homrigh who eventually published the third and fourth volumes of Seba's Thesaurus. Also, as Engel has pointed out, a copy of Artedi's notes for Seba may have been in the possession of the Gronovius family; Laurens Gronovius mentioned this manuscript in his Museum ichthyologicum (1754). There is in the sale catalogue of the Museum Gronovianun (1778) also mention of two copies of Artedi's Ichthyologia, with many manuscript notes and annotations which Engel (1951) suggests implicitly may have been Artedi's notes or a copy thereof. Artedi's notes on Seba's fishes appeared in the third volume of Seba's Thesaurus, where many of the descriptions are plainly his work. Further Artedi works that survived for publication later were a treatise on mammals and an account of the fishes of the Baltic published by Nybelin (1934), and an early work of Artedi's dated February 24th 1729, on the plants of Nordmaling, which was published in 1905.

Without doubt, Artedi's short life had been sufficient for him to produce work that influenced ichthyology as a science more than that of any other man, but his influence also extended far beyond this single aspect of zoology.

Let us consider first his influence on his field of the study of fishes, where his work laid the foundation on which others built. Before Artedi stretched a long line of naturalists whose publications he himself critically reviewed in the Bibliotheca ichthyologica many of them encyclopedists adding to the work of others their own, often sparse, original material, others such as Rondelet (1507-1566) described fishes and their anatomy from their own researches and dissections. To the latter school belonged Willughby, the 17th-century English naturalist whose work, greatly enlarged and improved, was posthumously published as the Historia piscium by John Ray, who modestly described himself as editor. Partly owing to Willughby's early death, the work when published contained an agglomeration of fish descriptions relatively few of which the authors had studied themselves. Some had been culled from Marcgrave's (1648) figures of South American fishes, others from earlier European authors, and this very unevenness prevented their work from being a satisfactory key to the fishes of the world. This was the situation when Artedi commenced his studies as a young man, and although he pays a sincere, and well deserved tribute to Ray's and to Willughby's work, as an active student of living fishes he must have felt its short-comings. His own work, when published, was concerned primarily with the fishes he had examined himself, and in his Descriptiones specierum (the fifth part of the Ichthyologia), his description s of the species show his intimate knowledge derived from close examination and dissection of actual specimens. Günther (1880) spoke of them as "descriptions which even now are models of exactitude and method," a summary which holds good today. The species Artedi described in this section were nearly all those which could be found on the shores of the Baltic or in the freshwaters of Sweden, and in some cases he actually cites the locality of origin of the specimen. In thus describing so meticulously the fishes of his native land, Artedi laid a sure foundation, based on actual observation, for later work on the Old World Boreal fish fauna.

Nor was this his only contribution to ichthyology's immediate progress. His critical review of the literature preceding his time, published as the first part of the Ichthyologia, was remarkably complete, and displayed an acute perception of the value of the works be reviewed. This, with the complementary Synonymia nominum piscium in which Artedi listed each species with a complete synonymy, clarified the existing literature and literary references to fish species, and together represent a considerable achievement as a bibliographic study.

It was, however, in the Philosophia Ichthyologia that Artedi's genius as an ichthyologist and a zoologist is most apparent. Here he defined the terms he proposed to use in connection with his studies, firstly his definition of a fish and of ichthyology, then the external characters of the fish: fins, body and head shape, scalation, with all naturally occurring variations. In fact, Artedi's characters for the study of fishes, with only minor alterations or additions, are those used by modern workers. For instance, the utilization of gill rakers, vertebrae, and lateral line scales, were all given prominence by Artedi as characters for the discrimination of genera and species. He then dealt with the division of fishes into classes, families or orders, and remarked on the impracticability of any division not relying on natural features present in the fish. Thus he rejected any arrangement based on habitat of the animal, as Rondelet's divisions between river fish, marsh fish, sea fish, etc. In order to arrive at a workable arrangement Artedi recommended that the genera should first be clearly defined and grouped together according to their natural features, then these groups would fall of themselves into a natural sequence.

Artedi then entered into a discussion as to what should constitute a genus, and his opening statement leaves no doubt as to the strict limits which he set to the concept of the genus: "Genus in Historia naturali est Analogia quaedam Specierum vertarum, quae in Figura, Situ, Numero vel Proportione Partium ita conveniunt; ut ab omnibus aliorum generum speciebus in aliqua minimum parte different." He then modified this definition as it could be applied to fishes, and discussed the characters to be made use of in setting generic limits. He advocated the use of such characters as the number of branchiostegal rays, the position and number of fins, shape of scales, and certain internal features, and he warned against placing undue reliance on only a few of the characters. It was from this position that the use of a single generic name, strictly defined by a generic diagnosis, became possible, and this considerable step was taken by Artedi in his Genera piscium.

It is clear from reading Artedi's Philosophia that he was aware of the application of much that he advocated as a system of classification, to wider fields of natural history in general. Indeed, its universal application is stated by Artedi himself in several places. Further, in the Philosophia there are a number of references to Linnaeus's Fundamenta botanica (presumably inserted by Linnaeus as editor) where opinions put forward by Artedi coincide with those expressed in the other work. There are also a number of points of similarity between Artedi's observations and the method of Linnaeus as outlined in his Methodus (see Schmidt, 1952). A similarity is perhaps not to be wondered at in view of the intimacy of the authors who in the course of numerous discussions had come to hold similar views as to the system that should guide their attempts to classify natural history. This stimulating friendship between Linnaeus and Artedi, which was discussed earlier, had far reaching results. Both possessed a native genius for the study of natural science, and their two minds both approaching the same problem with a differing outlook, formed a complementary union. Their work, as Stearn (1959) says, "reflects their temperaments. Artedi's is remarkable for monographic depth and thoroughness, Linnaeus's for encyclopedic breadth and variety." Of Artedi's contribution to the final synthesis of the Linnaean method, there can be no doubt that it was considerable. Probably without Artedi's stimulation in his formative years, the Linnaean method would not have taken shape so early in Linnaeus's career; possibly it might never have crystallized at all.

Artedi, P. 1738.

Ichthyologia sive opera omnia piscibus scilicet: Bibliotheca ichthyologica. Philosophia ichthyologica. Genera piscium. Synonymia specierum. Descriptiones specierum. Omnia in hoc genere perfectiora, quam antea ulla. Posthuma vindicavit, recognovit, coaptavit & edidit Carolus Linnaeus, Med. Doct. & Ac. Imper. N.C. Wishoff, Leiden.

Bruun, A. 1935.

Flying Fishes (Exocoetidae) of the Atlantic. Dana Rept., Copenhagen, 8.

De Beer, G. R. 1958.

Sir Hans Sloane and the British Museum. Trustees of the British Museum, London.

Engel, H. 1937.

The life of Albert Seba. Svenska Linné-Sällsk. Årsskr., 20: 75-100.

Engel, H. 1951.

Some Artedi documents in the Amsterdam Archives. Svenska Linné-Sällsk. Årsskr., 33-34: 51-66.

Gill, T. N. 1872.

Arrangement of the Families of Fishes, or Classes Pisces, Marsipobranchii, and Leptocardii. Smiths. Misc. Coll., 247, xlvi + 49 pp.

Günther, A. C. L. G. 1880.

An Introduction to the Study of Fishes. Adam and Charles Black, Edinburgh.

Linnaeus, C. 1738.

Vita Petri Artedi, In: P. Artedi, Ichthyologia sive opera omnia piscibus scilicet: Bibliotheca ichthyologica. Philosophia ichthyologica. Genera piscium. Synonymia specierum. Descriptiones specierum. Omnia in hoc genere perfectiora, quam antea ulla. Posthuma vindicavit, recognovit, coaptavit & edidit Carolus Linnaeus, Med. Doct. & Ac. Imper. N.C. Wishoff, Leiden.

Lönnberg, E. 1896.

Linnean type-specimens of birds, reptiles, batrachians and fishes in the Zoological Museum of the Royal University in Upsala. K. Svenska Vetensk. Akad. Handl., 22, 4(1):1-45.

Lönnberg, E. 1905.

Peter Artedi--a bicentenary memoir written on behalf of the Swedish Royal Academy of Science (translated by W. E. Harlock). Uppsala & Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksells Boktryckeri.

Merriman, D. 1938.

Peter Artedi--systematist and ichthyologist. Copeia, 1938(1):33-39.

Merriman, D. 1941.

A rare manuscript adding to our knowledge of the work of Peter Artedi. Copeia, 1941(2):64-69.

Nybelin, O. 1934.

Tvenne Opublicerade Artedi-manuskript. Svenska Linné-Sällsk. Årsskr., 17: 35-90.

Nybelin, O. 1955.

Strödda bidrag till Artedis biografi. Svenska Linné-Sällsk. Årsskr., 37-38:85-96.

Schmidt, K. P. 1952.

The methodus of Linnaeus, 1736. J. Soc. Bibl. Nat. Hist., 2:369-374.

Seba, A. 1734-1765.

Locupletissimi rerum naturalium thesauri accurata descriptio, et iconibus artificiosissimis expressio, per universam physices historiam. Opus, cui, in hoc rerum genere, nullum par exstitit. Ex toto terrarum orbe collegit, digessit, descripsit, et depingendum curavit. Amsterdam: Janssonius van Waesberge, J. Wetstein, & Gul. Smith, Vol. 1, 1734; Vol. 2, 1735. Janssonius van Waesberge, Vol. 3, 1759. H. C. Arksteum & H. Merkum, & Petrum Schouten, Vol. 4, 1765.

Stearn, W. T. 1959.

Four supplementary Linnaean Publications, In: Appendix to the Ray Society's facsimile of Linnaeus's Species Plantarum, 2: 72-102.

Wheeler, A. C. 1958.

The Gronovius fish collection: a catalogue and historical account. Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Hist. Ser., 1(5): 185-249, pls. 26-34.