section 14 of the book of whales this is a LibriVox recording all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org recording by Mike Botez the book of whales by Frank Evers Bedard chapter 7 part 2 Balenoptera davidzoni of Scaman the sharp-headed finner whale is a small species of which only one example measuring 27 feet was examined it was full grown as is evidenced by the fact that from it was withdrawn a fetus of 5 feet 6 inches in length it had very pointed pectorals with a white band above and near the bases the baleen is pure white 270 laminae on each side of the mouth the longest lamina measuring 10 inches the color of the animal was dull black above white below and the underside of both pectoral and caudal fins was also white the throat had 70 longitudinal folds the blubber of this whale averaged 3 inches in thickness and the yield of oil was about 300 gallons this whale goes about singly and when it spouts it makes a quick faint spout like that of a calf which accounts for its having been considered to be the young of some other species the sulfur bottom whale Balenoptera sebaldius suffureus cope is a huge creature of which an example has been measured and found to be 95 feet in length with a girth of 39 in this individual the ballin was four feet in length and the yield of oil 110 barrels the animal weighed 147 tons it derives its name from the yellowish color of the under parts the back is lighter in color than is usual and is sometimes very light brown approaching to white this whale occurs in the Atlantic as well as in the Pacific as other whales are want to do the sulfur bottom will often follow ships doctor still man relates how a whale of this species followed the ship in which he was a passenger for no less than 24 consecutive days in spite of volley after volley of rifle shots and missiles of all kinds the whale adhered to the ship which caused some anxiety as it was feared that he might unship the rudder or do other damage the only harm that happened was that the whale rose to blow almost into the cabin windows Balenoptera australis the sulfur bottom of Antarctic whalers is according to von Haast nothing more than be musculos a specimen which he describes was thrown up about five miles from Christchurch New Zealand and 67 feet in length as the creature was much injured by sharks the external characters could not be given with even an approach to precision but the skeleton seemed to show clearly that there were no recognizable differences from Balenoptera musculos but then as already said two quite different species might conceivably have a quite similar skeleton showing their specific difference only in color and other outward features the genus Megaptera is distinguished by the following assemblage of characters dorsal fin not very prominent throat plates very numerous scapula with no marked acromion or coracoid process pectoral fin very elongate Megaptera is not widely removed in its structural characters from Balenoptera externally it is to be distinguished by its more ungainly form it's very long pectoral limbs which are fringed along the anterior margin and by the low dorsal fin the tail is also fringed with numerous serrations but they are unconnected with deeper lying parts in the case of the flipper the rounded processes of the margin are the outward expression of the bulging of the inter phalangeal cartilages the skeleton of Megaptera has been described by many the most elaborate account of it with which I am acquainted is contained in a paper by Sir John Struthers generally speaking the differences from Balenoptera are neither numerous nor important the seven cervical vertebrae are not united there are 14 dorsals 10 lambar and 21 caudals the sternum of Megaptera is not widely different from that of Balenoptera it has a somewhat cruciform shape the first rib and that only is attached to it by a single continuous ligamentus connection there are not too distinct attachments as in Balenoptera musculos as described by Struthers and delage the scapula is peculiar in the practical absence of both acromion and coracoid process it is more over higher and not so long as in Balenoptera having more the shape so far of a sternum of Balena the differing proportions of greatest length and height of the sternum of Megaptera and Balenoptera can be appreciated from the following measurements Megaptera length 42 inches height 30 inches Balenoptera musculos length 39 inches height 22 and a half inches the pelvic bone is provided with a small femur a feature in which the present genus resemble certain species of Balenoptera there is however apparently no trace of tibia such as occurs in the Greenland whale the head is often studded with tubercles and so is the margin of the flipper the throat has the longitudinal grooves so characteristic of the family Balenoptera these however vary in number considerably and species seem to have been partly characterized by their numbers some of the numbers given by Scamman and the sex and total length of the whales in question are as follows number one male length 49 feet 7 inches Guler folds 26 number two female length 48 feet Guler folds 21 number three female length 48 feet Guler folds 18 number four female length 52 feet Guler folds question mark they are never so numerous it will be noted as in Balenoptera Scamman has found that this whale varies more than others in the production of oil a circumstance which would seem to be dependent on the condition of the animal at the time of capture it also depends upon sex and the period of breeding for the female when accompanied by a cub to whom she is given suck has less blubber than at other times the baleen on the whale as in the case of Rorquals is no longer than two to three feet the only species of the genus that can be safely allowed at present is Megaptera longimana Rudolfi of which the following must then be regarded as merely synonyms Balena bops Fabricius be Pescop demulon be La Landi Fisher Balenoptera capensis Smith Balenoptera leucopteron lesson Megaptera nove Zeelandia Gray Megaptera bar maesterie Drey Megaptera americana Drey Balena Antarthica Temenck M. Cousira Gray M. Versabilis Cope M. Osphia Cope not withstanding the immense variety of names given in the above synonyms sir W flower and most others think that there is but a single humpbacked whale of universal range as to a goodly number of the late Dr. Gray's species captain scammons observes we have frequently recognized upon the California coast every species here described and even in the same school or gram moreover we have experienced the greatest difficulty in finding any two of these strange animals externally alike or possessing any marked generic or specific differences if there are differences of color scamon goes on to remark the number of species must be quite indefinite as every combination and permutation of black white and gray are to be found in their color it is pointed out however by M. M. van beneden and Jervé in their osteography the set assay that the southern form of Megaptera which has been termed M. La landi differs from the northern by certain features in the scapula in the former animal there is a distinct though small projection from the margin of the blade bone in front which occupies the place of an acromion and what is more remarkable than acromion like that of platanista that is arising from the edge of the scapula of this process there is no trace in the northern Megaptera but on the other hand the faint process not so well marked and lying lower down on the bone occupying in fact rather the position of a rudimentary coracoid process the name hump backed applied to this station is due to the low dorsal fin in the relative size of which however there seems from the various figured published to be some differences it is however to be distinguished from the rorquals proper by its ungainly form and the great length of the pectoral fins 13 feet or so its color is usually black pure white on the under surface of the tail and flipper in this position observes mr. Lidiker it is neither very timorous nor very fierce and is consequently easy to capture it seems thus to have an intuitive knowledge of the poorness of its oil and the shortness of its bone acting upon this it will swim fearlessly round boats and when these whales are in herds as is sometimes the case some caution has to be exercised to avoid collision with them the humpback is much addicted remarks captain's come on to breaching bolting and finning which vices mean it should be explained leaping out of the water shooting out diagonally and striking the water with its flukes during the breeding season Megaptera is remarkable for its amorous antics at such times their caresses are of the most amusing and novel character and these performances have doubtless given rise to the fabulous tales of the swordfish and thrusher attacking whales when lying side by side of each other the Megapteras frequently administer alternate blows with their long fence which love pets may on a still day be heard at a distance of miles they may also be seen to roll about in the water and beat them themselves with their long flippers but this seems to be due to an anxiety to read themselves of the parasites which infest them these whales like others are also to be noted for their affection towards their young the fact that they will leap clean out of the water appears to distinguish the whales of this genus from any other whale bone whales Goldberg states that this whale carries its young for 10 to 12 months only one rarely two are produced at the time there is some relation between size and time of gestation for Balenoctara Sebaldi a larger species carries its young over a year other Balenoctar has have the same period of gestation as Megaptera the fall as in whales generally is born one-third to one-quarter of the length of the mother Dr. Gray thinks that Balenoctar a Jubartus of Lassipidae equal Balena bops of Linaeus is the same whale as the common Rorquil Balenoctar musculos it seems however to be likely from the figure bad enough it is true that Lassipidae gives of it especially on account of the words up on the face that the animal is really the humpback it is related by Lassipidae that the animal was in his time let alone by the Icelanders probably the real reason is that which protects it at the present time ie the inferiority of its valuable productions but the author whom we quote observes that the whale was held to be the friend of man like the Amazonian dolphin referred to on page 271 it is related that when the frail barks of the natives are surrounded by the ferocious and carnivorous cetacea of the north which threatens danger the Megaptera will endeavor to rescue its friends from the danger which environs them and will accompany them until they arrive close to shore and have escaped the sperm whales of whose real ferocity Lassipidae is fully convinced the genus Racheonectis may be thus defined dorsal fin non throat plates reduced to two scapula high this genus was described some years since by cope I am able to write the following brief notice of the principal characters of the skeleton after examining a complete skeleton in the British Museum the skull of the whale is on the whole Rorkel like it is however narrower anteriorly than in Rorkels and this is accounted for on a lateral view by the fact that the pre maxillaries are as it were pinched up in the middle line by the maxillaries and are quite visible from the side in this feature the skull of Racheonectis resembles that of right whale in Balinoptera those bones are hardly visible on a lateral view of the skull in other respects the skull of Racheonectis differs but slightly from that of Balinoptera in the vertebral column the atlas was missing the remaining vertebrae are quite independent of each other as in the Rorkels and they have the wide lateral foramina formed by the transverse processes which is so conspicuous a feature of those vertebrae in Balinoptera and Megaptera I counted 14 dorsal vertebrae 14 lambar and 21 quaddles the ribs are also 14 and the first two are incompletely soldered together not so completely as in the Huenterius temeniki figured by Gray in his catalog the mode of fusion was different on the two sides of the body but as this feature is probably a mere variation and not distinctive of species or of genus it is not worthwhile to give a detailed description of the arrangement the sternum is like that of a Rorkel it is cross-shaped but the arms of the cross are very short and the posterior termination is almost a fine point the pelvis consisted of but a single bone but a rudimentary femur may have disappeared the one species is racionectus glaucus cope question mark equals agafellus as is the case with so many whales this species varies somewhat in color it varies from a mottled gray to black the length of a full-grown example is from 40 to 44 feet but individuals somewhat larger than this have been met with such individuals would yield some 20 barrels of oil but as many as 70 barrels have been obtained from a larger specimen the baleen reaches a length of 14 to 16 inches and is light in color sometimes nearly white the gray whale is limited so far as is known to the Pacific coast of North America in the summer it is found in the Arctic regions in the winter it descends to warmer latitudes but does not migrate below 20 degrees north it is essentially a coast species frequenting shoal waters and has been observed to lie and play among the breakers in water no more than 13 feet deep during the season of gestation they will even lie in water of two feet waiting a ground until the rising tide floated them off alien also stated that the whales bask on the shore in the rays of the Sun the pursuit of this whale is distinctly dangerous for the animal will if her young be injured pursue the boat and overturn it or stave it in with a stroke of the flux apart from such danger owing to the deliberate attacks of the whale the whalers undergo much risk on account of the fact that the whales are pursued in shallow water which naturally gets turbid through the struggles and the rapid movements of the whale and thus renders it difficult to see the exact position of the creature and to escape from its rushes or strokes of its ponderous tail the pursuit of this whale only dates from the year 1846 and from that year to 1874 or 1875 Scammon thinks that about ten thousand eight hundred must have been destroyed extinct Balanites there are three important facts with regard to the extinct representatives of the whale bone whales firstly none are known from an earlier period than the myosin a secondly the earliest forms appear to be Balanopterids and lastly the more ancient whales are not longer than existing forms on the contrary this is a group which has increased considerably in size one of the best known forms as it is represented by a nearly complete skeleton is the myosin a and Pliosin a placeosatus P. Cuvieri was a smallish whale not more than 21 feet long and distinctly belongs to the Balanopterid type the chief interest attaching to this whale is the length of the frontal so very abbreviated in other recent whales and the share which the Parihettles take in the formation of the roof of the skull in the living whale bone whales these bones are covered in by the supra occipital like the modern Balanoptera this genus comprises both large and small species Cope states that Pliosatus Brial Monte was some 60 feet in length Mesoteras of Cope was thought by him to be somewhat intermediate between Balanoptera and Balena it was the characters of the thinner whales Balanoptera with the narrow maxillary bones of the true Balena it is a large species with a skull of 18 feet long evidently so far a Balena there is an enormous thickening of the supercellary part of the frontal bone the existing genre are also known as fossils and of section 14 recording by Mike Botez section 15 of the book of the whales this is a little box recording all of the box recordings and the public domain for more information auto volunteer please visit LibriVox.org recording by Nuria the book of the whales by Frank Eva's bedded chapter 8 part 1 the toothed whales are Odontoketi this group contains by far the largest number of whales it embraces all the dolphins sperm whales beaked whales etc it contrasts markedly with the Mr. Koketi the differences being so great that more than one naturalist as already said is disposed to give the two a different line of descent the most characteristic feature of the Odontoketi and the one which has given to it its name is the possession of functional teeth these are never totally absent in any member of this group though they may be as in the narrow whale among the true dolphins and in the syphioid whales greatly reduced in number correlated with the presence of teeth is the absence of Berlin the skull is always more or less asymmetrical and this asymmetry is often greatly exaggerated especially in sperm whales the maxile overlap the frontal bones the nasals share in the asymmetry of the skull and one only is sometimes developed in connection with this is the single begin footnote it is said to be double in the kogia potzi but the left spherical is 10 times larger and footnote blowhole either median in position or sperm whale on the left side may be mentioned the rips have always either bony or cartilaginous sternum moieties which articulate with the usually composite sternum a fair number moreover thus articulate the rips to more or fewer of them have both a capitular and a tubercular head articulating respectively with the transverse process and with the centrum of the vertebrae the true ramai of the mandible unite by a longer or shorter but always definite synthesis not a mere fibrous union such as is met within the whale bone whales so sharply defined are the odontoketi from the mr. Koketi that intermediate types are so sadly to seek and both divisions in fact have each specialized on their account in the same kind of direction and parallel lines we have great headed kittakians in both groups the carolot responds to the right way and they are giants and pygmies among the families of each the small kogia is a near ally of the bulky carolot the somewhat drawfish neo-balana is not far off from the leviathan of the green lensees they are otodonkitas without a dorsal fin and otodonkitas with that fin the rock has respond to the letter the green land whale to the former the pectoral fin is large in megaptera and globicephalus small in neo-balana and fuzeta the throat is grooved for extensile purposes in baleinopteridae and in the cfiidae all these are parallelisms and not evidence of affinity so at least it seems to us broadly speaking it would seem that the mr. koketi were to be derived from the odontoketi and not vice versa if only on account of the teeth visible in the embryos of the toothless whales on this view we might look upon those toothed whales in which the teeth are diminishing as the nearest approach among the otodonkitas to a mr. koketa in this case it is clear that the cifioids would occupy that position for it is in that group that the teeth are the poorest in their development but there's no hint in any of them of appearing whale bone neither can any other definite structures be laid hold of which support considerations derived from the dwindling teeth it seems to trivial a matter to rise the question of the nearly perfect symmetry of the skull of beradius and of the distinct lacrimal and mala bones in the cifioids as well as the right whales the fact seems to be that the meeting point between the two great divisions of the whale tribe if there is such a meeting point and the group is not deflected is to be sought for no nearer than the eocene period among the zoolodons and yet there are other considerations which seem to suggest that a renewed search for affinities between the two groups among more recent forms should produce some result in contra distinction to the otodonkitas the whale bone whales are a limited group which as pointed out here page 119 are so closely related to run genus with another that it is really difficult to form them into more than one family this suggests a recent origin for in groups which there's a reason to regard as ancient there's often greater difference between the component genera gaps having arisen through the extinction of certain forms the problem may therefore be approached by endeavoring to ascertain which of existing otodonkitas is the older group or genus as the case may be mr lidica has recently described an exceedingly interesting fossil from the eocene of the Caucasus under the name of enuopsis caucasia this kitesion is represented only by the hinder portion of a cranium and also by some fragments of jaws and several vertebrae but these remains though not abundant seem to fix the systematic position of the animal of which they give such an incomplete idea and to prove that it should be relegated as its name denotes for the neighboring of inia the freshwater dolphin of south america in this extinct animal and in pontice of the tertiaries of argentine and the maxillary bones are more deeply excavated than an dolphins and their posterior border is squarely marked off and extends further back the lower jar too of enuopsis seems to have been slender and to have possessed very numerous teeth as in the existing platinist today these facts doof you seem to point to the great age of whales most nearly allied to the existing platinist today no whale bone whales do not get back so far in time it will be seen from what immediately follows that in some respect the platinist today are the most primitive of existing otodonticus it will be seen from what immediately follows that in some respects the platinist today are the most primitive of existing otodonticus the mode of attachment of the ribs to the dorsal vertebrae has been used in the classification of the otodonticus as a matter of fact there is an interesting series of modifications in these attachments which does the way with any hard and fast lines of classifications though to some extent the groups can be defined from the facts what we may consider in the meantime to be the typical arrangement occurs in dolphins in orca gladiator for example the first group has both capitulum and tuberculum the formers attached to the center of the last cervical the letter to the transverse process of the first dorsal vertebra the next six ribs are similarly attached by two heads to the transverse process of each vertebra and to the center of the vertebra behind the last five have but one head the tubercular which is of course attached to the transverse process of its vertebra kogia though a sperm whale has many definite characters upon which we shall comment later the first eight ribs have a double attachment the capitulum is inserted onto the center of each vertebrae and the tuberculum to transverse process of vertebra behind the next five are attached to process of centrum only each to a longish process of the centrum but there is no real difference from what we find in dolphins for the process to which the last ribs are attached gradually moves down the transverse process until it comes to a rise from the centrum instead of from the neural arch kogia belongs to the same division as fusetta but there are apparent differences between the two whales and the fact now under consideration the first rib has only the tubercular attachment the next eight have the double articulation of kogia but the capitular head in the letter ribs of the series is partly inter-central it articulates with both central the one that bears its tuberculum and the one behind in case of the nynth dorsal vertebrae the facet upon the centrum is raised in the tenth it is more prominent and the transverse process to which the tuberculum should be attached has become rudimentary and joins the raised facet already mentioned but not so as to receive any part of the rib which does articulate only with the centrum in the last rib the tubercular process has entirely disappeared and the capitular head of the now one-headed rib is alone left the difference between fusetta and kogia seems to be great and as a consequence between fusetta and the dolphins but the very interesting condition which sir william flour has described in inia which over the apparent gap and as i shall attempt to show presently so does kogia in the inia the first seven ribs have the usual two attachments but the capitular head at first inter-central comes to be upon the same vertebra as which bears the tubercular head moreover the facet upon the centrum becomes waste the two articular facets upon the eighth dorsal vertebra approach near together and in the next become completely fused here after the ribs are attached by about one head which is really be it observed produced by a fusion between the capitulum and the tuberculum not by disappearance of one or the other now in the fusetta we have a trace of this arrangement the case of the 10th rib for there the transverse process is still present and fuses with the central facet though it takes no actual share in the formation of the surface for the articulation of the rib in kogia the facet on the centrum of vertebra seven and still more on vertebra eight is a little raced so that here is left a trace of the arrangement obtaining in inia the dolphins it has totally vanished so that the fact that in the posterior ribs of the dolphins the tubercular head alone and in kogia the capitular head alone remains is not really a fundamental difference but only one of degree there are two extremes united by such intermediate forms as fusetta and the civioids both springing from some such original form as is exemplified by inia we arrived therefore at the conclusion that the transverse process of the lumbar vertebra of these whales are compound structures partly belonging to the neural arch and partly to the centrum but that as a rule one of these elements preponderates us even the one which enters into their formation this series of facts obviously leads to the interference that in inia we have a primitive form of autodonkete at any rate the different disposition of the ribs in existing autodonketes can be derived from such original form there are other facts which point in the same direction not merely is the freedom from any trace of fusion a character in which the cervical region of the vertebra column may be considered to be present primitive characters for the mere freedom of these vertebrae is found in other whales both toothed and whale bone e.g. monodon balanoptera but the great length of this region of the body is important there is in this ketakyan and in the platanista a distinct neck the atlas vertebra too is more typically mammalian looking than in other whales and the second vertebra has a better autonoid process than is found elsewhere but inia is very far from being an ideal basal form with which to commence the autodonkete series its teeth are extremely numerous though possessing indeed an additional cusp the sternum may be like that one of the manatee but is not typically mammalian it has been pointed out that the serenia are not ancestral whales the reduced lumbar region is against the present view of the position of the inia there are moreover other facts which will be found referred to under the description of this whale still one cannot at any rate in the present state of our knowledge get much nearer to the basal autodonkete but this seems to bring us near to the origin of whale bone whales the most primitive type of the letter seems to be the little neobalana see page 141 but neobalana offers no hints in the structure of its skeleton of a toothed whale ancestry neither does inia or any platanisted show a leaning however slide towards neobalana it seems therefore this question is one that will have to be deferred until we come to deal with the zouglodons as to the origin of the remaining groups of toothed whales from the platanist today that one does not offer so many difficulties the family itself it may be remarked is not a very natural one this comes from the fact of its age the consequent number of extinct genera which have caused gaps sevillian flower thus defined it in 1866 begin quote coastal cartilages not ossified the tubercula and capitular articulations of the ribs blending together posteriorly cervical vertebra all free particularite bones thin not conforming in the mode of arrangement with either of the other sections jaws very long and narrow both with numerous teeth having compound fangs symphysis of mandible very long exceeding half the length of the entire ramus orbit very small lacrimal bones not distinct from the juga pectora limbs large daughter fin rudimentary end of quote at the time that this was written but little of panto poria ostinodelfis as it should really be called was known but with the exception of the vertebral characters the ossified coastal cartilages and the presence of a back fin it corresponds to the definition in fact we may still fairly accept the family as does flower in his most recent expressions of opinion and as does kütenthal and several ways panto poria points towards the true door fence as the finidae of the present volume the attachment of the ribs is purely delfinoid the curious double attachments of the genera platanista and inia not being preserved there are also five lumber vertebrae instead of the reduced lumber region of the ganus inia the prominent docile fin is moreover a characteristic of the door fins as indeed of other groups all the otodoncatus have at least a trace of the elevation laterally of the maxillae this is carried to an extraordinary pitch in the foreground male of hyperrodon platanista two has a pair of thin plates which arch over the front of the head at the base of the snout which are extensions of the maxillae and may be referred to the same category this genus moreover and inia agrees with the spermwares and the cifioids and the permanently collagenous ribs and the door fins the sternor ribs are ossified the length both of the lower jaws themselves and of their synthesis has led to their being described as miniatures of the lower jaw of the kachalot in fact there are many resemblances between the platanistidae and the fusiteridae the connection of both themes to replay end of section 15 section 16 of the book of wales this is a LibriVox recording all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org recording by Mike Botez the book of wales by Frank Evers Bedard chapter 8 part 2 family fusiteridae this family may be thus characterized all or most of the cervicals unkelozed coastal cartilages not ossified pterygoids thick and meeting in the middle line lacrimal bones distinct and large synthesis of mandible lung teeth found in both jaws but those of lower jaw alone functional often very reduced in number pectoral limb smallish throat furrowed by two or more furrows these whales form a small assemblage of forms which are again divided by Sir William flower into the sperm whales and the zephydes van benedin is in favor of uniting them rather more closely the chief anatomical characters which ally the sperm whales to the zephydes and the fewer characters which separate them are given below on page 213 the whales of this group are for the most part if not altogether social the solitary and stranded individuals being as a rule males probably these males are like rogue elephants fierce bulls which have been expelled from the herd all the members of this division of toothed whales range widely none are really restricted in range except the berardius they are equally at home in the calm seas of the tropics amidst the ice flows of north and in the stormy waters of the Antarctic ocean they all possess functional teeth in the lower jaw and they're only their food seems to be chiefly if not invariably cuttlefish and this circumstance accounts for their greater abundance in the tropics for those animals more abound in those latitudes van benedin reminds us that all worked any rate most of the fiseteridae produce spermaceti originally known and once solely obtained from the sperm whale itself the late captain gray commenced at one time to pursue hyperodon for the same substance he founded to be by no means inferior in quality to that of fiseter and to be of the same composition from berardius spermaceti has been also obtained the grooving of the throat which characterizes indeed appears to be universal in these whales may have some relation to the extensility of the gorge required by the enormous quantity of cuttlefish devoured it may be in fact a structure developed by similar needs to those which have produced grooves upon the baleenoptera and to be there for no evidence of affinity 10 000 beaks of the mollusks were obtained from the stomach of a hyperodon we may associate the sperm whales senso stricto in the subfamily fiseterinae which is quite as far as they ought to be separated from the zephydes this subfamily will contain two genre vis-a-vis fiseter and cogea these two genre agree to differ from what may be termed the zephydes by two characters of some little importance these are the presence of numerous teeth in the lower jaw in the existence of only a lacrimal bone there is at any rate only one bone which may of course conceivably represent a fused lacrimal and mallor there are two in zephydes to those two characters which sir william flour uses to ally the sperm whales giant and pygmy we may add the single lateral left blowhole sir are a win at least figures a single blowhole in cogea seamus which is longitudinal as in fiseter but not as shaped as in that creature of the two genre of fiseterines cogea is in many ways the least specialized form it has the blowhole in what is for a whale a more normal position we cannot it seems reasonable to suppose regard the terminal blowhole of the cashelot as primitive because it is so far away from the shrunken nasal bones it must be at most a return to primitive state of affairs the falcate dorsal fin of cogea may be considered in the same light and also generally the more delfinoid form of the head and body the form of the cashelot with its disproportionate head is surely a secondary acquisition in the skull too there are features which seem to point to the same conclusion the elongated rostrum of the cashelot contrasts with a short snout of the pygmy sperm whale and it has been shown that the fetal cashelot is far more like the cogea in the fetal cashelot it has been pointed out by sir are owing that the lacrimal is only united to the squamosal by ligament the bone is thus independent of the squamosal as is the case in the adult cogea in cogea the terroids are not so completely united in the middle line as they are in fiseter a character in which the former genus seems to be at a lower level than fiseter cogea seems to have at any rate in the species k simus a pair of functional teeth in the upper jaw in fiseter there are small teeth apparently non-functional in the upper jaw as in ziphides generally there is one feature in the vertebral column which seems to point to the more basal position of cogea in the series the posterior dorsal vertebrae are not supported by special outgrowths of the centra to which they're attached in fiseter such processes exist in the case of last two ribs as has been explained in detail already on the whole then these various considerations drawn from the different organs of the body lead us to consider cogea to be the most primitive of the sperm whales it is the most dolphin like of those aberrant cetacea for this reason we shall commence the survey of the subfamily with a description of cogea and its species this genus cogea consists of at most three species all of which are small whales 9 to 13 feet in length dorsal thin falcate form delfinoid cervical vertebrae ankylosed juggle not joining squamosal snout short blowhole at forehead this genus of pygmy sperm whales comprises a number of varieties from very various parts of the world which have been much divided up into species and even genre allowing for the present that there is but one genus a conclusion which it will be attempted to justify later we may begin by contrasting it with the giant sperm whale fiseter as to outward form the present whale has a delfinoid aspect produced by the small head and the backwardly situated blowhole the well-developed and falcate dorsal fin and the small size a peculiarity of the genus more strongly marked than in its ally fiseter is the inferior position of the mouth this gives to the creature as seen in the figure of owen a curiously shark-like aspect some little time since a marine monster was stranded on the whale's coast and the newspapers reported that it was undecided by the local zoologists or their own reporter whether the beast was a shark or whale in spite of the superficial resemblance which the ventral mouth of a kojia gives it to a whale it would be probably only a newspaper reporter who would be in doubt on the matter the skull is short and has not the prolonged anterior portion so characteristic of the sperm whale it is however very asymmetrical the pre-maxillary bones are shorter than in fiseter and diverge anteriorly on account of the vomer the lacrimal bone is not in contact with the squamosal indeed a very considerable gap is left between the two the cervical vertebrae are all ankylos together the ribs vary in number between 12 and 14 the sternum is in three pieces and at any rate four ribs are attached to it the scapula has not the concave outer face that it has in fiseter the vertebrae are rather more numerous but not much more so the phalanges also are more numerous than are those of the manus of fiseter the above are the principal generic characters of kojia and they are clearly sufficient to distinguish it generically from fiseter but the question of species is not so easy a one to decide in view of the small amount of material that can be and has been examined the greatest possible number is six which adding the recently described kojia potzi to those enumerated by gill are k previsseps k gray k macliae k flowery k seamus the latter is elevated by gill into a distinct genus calignatus on account of the form of the lower jaw mainly and the presence of two teeth in the upper jaw in addition to the series in the lower jaw i believe that this is a distinct specific form from the others but see no advantage in retaining generic rank for it the whales of this genus are found all over the world but especially abound in the Antarctic half of the globe kojia previsseps of the blaineville probably the same as ufficities macliae craft has 13 pairs of rips teeth confined to lower jaw 14 or 15 on each side not long there is a complete skeleton of this whale at the british museum the vertebral formula is c 7 d 13 l 9 ca 25 the first rib articulates with the last cervical vertebra and the first dorsal there are seven pairs of ribs which have both capitulum and tuberculum the capitulum it may be remarked is not situated between two adjacent centra but is entirely confined to the vertebra lying in front of that which bears the tuberculum i found four ribs to join the sternum the sternum is composed of three pieces not divided at all longitudinally the first sternal rib articulates with the expanded front of the manubrium which is rather cross shaped the two arms being anterior the second rib is attached between the first and second pieces of the sternum the third between this and the next while the last of the sternal ribs articulates at the end of the terminal piece of the sternum the scapula is not so high as in that of fissure but more fan shaped as in the dolphins it is not concave externally it is practically flat the number of phalanges is as follows i 2 2 8 3 8 4 8 v 7 the skull appears to agree with the blaineville's figure the v shaped lacrimal was especially plain and characteristic as compared with owens figure of visitor seamus gray suggests that this species is perhaps the same as ufficities mackley eye of craft i think that this determination is correct craft gives the same number of vertebrae safe for the addition of a 26 quadal a difference obviously of no importance but it must be admitted that the number of phalanges in the hand are not the same but the figure illustrating this point in his whale is of a young whale a fact which may account for some discrepancies koja seamus owen has nine teeth on each half of lower jaw two in upper jaw vertebral formula c 7 d 14 l 5 ca 24 equals 50 this species which inhabits the indian ocean where it was first observed by sir walter elliot has been by dr. gill relegated to a distinct genus largely an account of the peculiar swollen appearance of the mandibles the name which he proposed for this genus is calignatus this does not seem to be at all necessary as the whale is so definitely a koja and as the genus contains at the most so very few species however it seems to be a distinct species and cannot i think be confounded with k gray with which species dr. gray united it sir r owen pointed out that it is even shorter snouted than that species the outline of the occipital behind is if anything convex while the same outline in k brevis seps is concave the occipital condyle 2 stands out more in k seamus the peculiar upturned snout suggested the name furthermore the fewer teeth in the lower jaw and perhaps the two teeth in the upper jaw are marks of specific distinction which cannot be overlooked as to the latter it is possibly not a valid specific character visitor itself has a series of somewhat rudimentary teeth in the upper jaw and it is therefore possible that its near ally koja has the same structural feature however in any case the vertebral formula is quite different the small number of lumbars distinguishes the present form from all others as in k brevis seps the first rib articulates with the last cervical but by ligament only and the first dorsal after this come seven ribs which similarly are possessed of both capitulum and tuberculum the capitulum it should be noted lies between the centra and adjacent vertebrae four ribs reach the sternum which is made up of three pieces partially divided in the middle line the phalangeal formula is as follows i 2 i 5 3 4 4 4 5 2 mr. gill created a species kojia flowery for a pygmy sperm whale from the shores of california it was an individual of some nine feet in length with a very low dorsal fin nothing of its osteology is known except a portion of the lower jaw the teeth in this are rather long and curved back but it would be rushed to allow the species to be a certainly settled one in the absence of further information it seems to be very doubtful whether kojia gray can be regarded as a distinct species it is identified by gray with k semas of owen an identification with which i cannot agree assuming of course that the description of mcclay and of owen are to be depended upon it seems to be much more likely that the supposed k gray is merely k brevisseps dr. gray made a great point of the marked ridge which divides the post-nerial region of the skull utilizing its marked or less marked character to separate the two genre kojia and ufficities the difference does not seem to exist between k brevisseps and k gray there might appear at first sight to be one more rib in k gray than in k brevisseps but that this is actually the case does not seem to be perfectly clear after mentioning dorsal vertebrae 14 mcclay goes on to write the following effect the first rib etc the seven following etc the next five this looks as if 13 were the total number as in k brevisseps the fact that in kojia gray the first rib is only touched to the first dorsal and not the last cervical also maybe perhaps explained by the existence of a ligamentous connection and by youth the smaller number of phalanges too is not a difference of importance as these bones are known to vary in other whales a small species kojia potsy has been recorded by von haast from the shores of new zealand which only measured seven feet two inches in total length its color was black with a grayish wet belly the chief reason for distinguishing it from k gray is the vertebral formula c 7 d 12 l 11 ca 20 there are thus two pairs of ribs less and besides this there are only eight chevron bones the genus fissure may be thus defined head enormous blowhole single on the left side dorsal fin represented by a series of low humps atlas separate from rest of cervicals which are fused snout long juggle joining squamosal in no mammal remarks sir w flower does the cranium depart from the ordinary type to such an extent as in the cash lot the expansion elongation flattening and distortion of many of the cranial bones met with in certain degree in all citations is here carried so far as to render it by no means easy at least in the adult animal to recognize their homologies in the first place the skull is enormously large in proportion to the rest of the body larger than in any whale and a far theory than in any mammal the greenland whale does not really form an exception it is certainly rather longer in proportion but it is not so massive the skull is raised into a great crest behind the vertex being occupied by the maxilla and frontals the asymmetry is chiefly shown in the pre maxillae and the nasals the right pre maxilla is very much the larger the left nasal alone is present the perietal bone if not suppressed is represented merely by a wedge shaped piece of the supraccipital the orbit has unusually solid margins more so than in any other toothed whale this is due to the large size and solidarity of the juggle which however is not as it is in the zephyids divided into two pieces the entire bone apparently represents the separate malar and lacrimal of the zephyids the pterygoids meet for a considerable distance in the middle line the vomer is entirely exposed in front of the palatines the two rami of the lower jaw do not appear to be united at the synthesis by ankylosis the length of the synthesis recalls the platanistidae the vertebral formula of the sperm whale is c 7 d 11 l 8 ca 24 equals 50 the atlas alone is distinct the other cervicals being united with each other and even sometimes with the first dorsal in the freedom of the atlas and the fusion of the remaining six visitor is unique among whales another characteristic feature of the atlas is its quadrangular outline as to the dorsal vertebrae 11 in number if we include the one at the end of the series much resembling the lumbars but bearing a rudimentary rib the first nine have somewhat rudimentary post-zegapophysis rough processes which can be hardly called articular surfaces the pre-zegapophysis are smooth surfaced the heads for the articulation of the ribs are highly characteristic of the sperm whale and differ in detail from those of other whales the first vertebrae bears a strong transverse process of the neural arch for the articulation of the first rib and also a small facet on the hindered edge of the centrum where articulates the head of the second rib the eight following vertebrae have similar processes arising from their neural arches for the articulation of the tubercula of their respective ribs but the corresponding articular facets upon the centra for the capitula of the ribs are not arranged in so uniform a fashion but vary as follows the first four vertebrae have facets upon their centra posteriorly for the reception of the heads of ribs two to five the fifth vertebra has in addition to the posterior facet one small one upon the anterior edge of the centrum so that the capitulum of the fifth rib is inter central articulating as it does with two centra in the sixth vertebrae it is the anterior of the two centrum facets which is the larger in the case of the next vertebrae the posterior facet is still further reduced while the anterior facet is born upon a tubercle the characters of the eighth vertebra are an exaggeration of those of the seventh and in the ninth there is no trace at all of the posterior facet the tenth vertebra is peculiar by reason of the fact that the large tubercle which arises from the centrum and carries the capitular head of the rib bends back above and nearly joins the transverse process of the neural arch a canal nearly complete being formed between the two the rib of this vertebra is in consequence only provided with a capitulum the last dorsal vertebra has a very long lateral process arising from the centrum bearing at its extremity the rudimentary eleventh rib the transverse process has completely disappeared the eight lumbar vertebrae are killed below there are 14 chevron bones a curious matter concerning the ribs was asserted by wall he stated that the ribs of the left side are of larger dimensions than those of the right the asymmetry of the head is thus alleged to be extended to the trunk serw flower so far supported this view by stating that the total weight of the ribs of the right side was 163 pounds nine and a half ounces as against 164 pounds five and a half ounces for those of the left side the sternum of the cash lot is a roughly triangular bone made up of three pieces two of these are paired and anterior and enclosed in the dried skeleton foramen between them the third piece is posterior and smaller and shows some indications of a longitudinal division into two four cartilaginous ribs seem to be attached to the sternum the scapula is higher in proportion to its breadth than any other sedation it is remarkably concave on the outer and convex on the inner side there are six separate carpools if we include the pisiform and the phalangeal formula is as follows one one two five three five four four five three end of section 16 recording by Mike Botez section 17 of the book of whales this is a LibriVox recording all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org recording by Mike Botez the book of whales by Frank Evers Bedard chapter 8 part 3 amber grease amber grease is a well-known product of this whale though the name has obviously no connection with this quality amber grease is a somewhat greasy substance found floating in the sea or more generally washed ashore it is a secretion of the intestine of the cash lot comparable apparently to bizarre stones the fact that the substance was found to contain the beaks of cuttlefish suggested its origin which was confirmed by finding it actually in the alimentary canal of a cash lot when taken from the alimentary canal the substance is greasy and of a disagreeable smell after exposure it hardens and acquires its peculiar sweet earthy odor from certain chemical facts it has been inferred that amber grease is a belliary concretion closely resembling cholesterol but its appearance in the whales is pathological and not natural for those individuals in which it is found were dead or in a sickly condition amber grease has been used as a medicine even as an aphrodisiac it is now solely used in perfumery it is mainly used as a vehicle for various perfumes and it's worth from 15 shilling to 25 shilling per ounce a piece of amber grease has been found worth no less than 500 pounds it weighed 130 pounds a larger piece even than that has been stated to have been in possession of the dutch east india company it weighed 982 pounds the origin of amber grease was known more or less definitely so long ago as the middle of the 16th century that is to say it was known to be the product of a whale though not known to be confined to the sperm whale a section of olaos magnus historia de gentibus septentrionalibus is headed despera matti chati cod umbra digitur et adjus medicinis he describes it as found floating in the sea as being of the blue color with a whitish tinge i.e gray it is held to be the sperm of the whale and is set down as an excellent remedy for syncope and epilepsy but in 1672 the honorable robert boil transcribed the contents of a manuscript found on board a dutch vessel which asserted that this substance is not the scum or excrement of the whale but issues out of the root of a tree which tree howsoever it stands on the land always shoots forth its roots towards the sea seeking the warmth of it thereby to deliver the fattest gum that comes out of it which tree otherwise by its copious fatness might be burnt and destroyed a curious mingling of truth with inaccuracy is shown in the views upon this substance of ser thomas brown he describes in the philosophical transactions volume 13 page 193 a sperm whale cast up on the shore of norfolk in vain he writes it was to rake for ambergris in the punch of this leviathan as greenland discovers and attests of experience dictate that they sometimes swallow great lumps thereof in the sea insufferable fatter denying that inquiry it appears therefore that the author of religio medici knew that ambergris was found in the elementary canal of the sperm whale but thought that it was swallowed by the creature from this perhaps we were derived two alternatives views of the nature of ambergris given in johnson's dictionary edition of 1818 it is described as the excrement of birds washed off rocks and swallowed by birds or honeycombs that have fallen into the sea visitor macrocephalus linus with probable synonyms p cotodon fabricius p gibosus schreber p trampol gerrard p polyclitus couch cotodon australis mcclayy c colnetti gray p polycyphus quay and gamard is really the only species that can be satisfactorily allowed the above list of synonyms shows that there were held to be several species of sperm whales but we may safely follow sir william flower in holding that there is but one species properly definable which is of wide range and maybe also of certain variability of outward form the mysterious high finned cashelot will be considered a few pages further on this single species ranges from china to peru in fact it is a denizen of all the oceans and as a rule it is found far from land preferring the deeper waters this whale cannot be confounded with any other it's thick blunt head a third of the length of the body distinguishes it at once the muzzle however is not so abruptly truncated as is often figured e g by scammon it slopes forward two meters beyond the front end of the jaw the skull however does not correspond in form to the head the whole upper surface of the head is occupied by the case in which lies the sperma city fluid during the life of the animal the males of the whale are considerably larger than the females the size of the former appears however to have been exaggerated bill gives from actual measurements 84 feet as the length but sir w flower thinks that this measurement and similar ones are not always trustworthy from the fact that there is no indication whether they refer to actual length or are taken along the curves of the body from a comparison of various skeletons of old animals it seems that 55 feet possibly 60 is the outside total length of a male sperm whale the color of the whale is black getting gray beneath the blowhole is single and is described as being of the shape of an italic f it is placed near the front end of the snout underneath the blowhole is a longitudinal groove the nature of which is obscure this whale has no defined dorsal fin but a series of lowish humps of which the first is the most prominent the throat has two grooves like those of zephydes whales the tail is very deeply cleft terminally and one flow applies over the other the sperm whale feeds mainly upon cuttlefish but fishes have been found to be also eaten it is said to feed by dropping the huge lower jaw thereby exhibiting its polished white teeth which attract within its reach the swimming food while the creature moves along through the ocean's depth its food is never apparently composed of larger creatures than bonitos and albic ores but the throat is said to be large enough to swallow a man and naturally the cashelot has been identified with the whale of Jonah and also with a leviathan of Job the pectoral fins are not large measuring about six feet in a full grown whale the cashelot will remain underwater from 50 minutes to an hour and a quarter when it spouts it does so for space of about three seconds and the column of vapor ejected can be seen from the mast head at a distance of three to five miles the spouting of the sperm whale can be readily distinguished from that of other whales from the fact that the blowhole is single and the column of breath condensed is also a single fountain not a double jet as in other whales moreover as the blowhole is situated further forward than in other whales the jet is not directed upwards but forwards these characters serve the spouting of a sperm whale to be clearly distinguished this whale is inter tropical in range and is only an accidental visitor to the arctic regions it travels in schools when solitary individuals are seen such as those which have been rarely cast up on our shores they seem to be generally old males this great sea-shouldering whale indulges in a variety of antics it will leap completely out of the water coming down with a heavy splash that can be seen from the mast head of a distance of 10 miles these active leaps are said to be indulged in by the whale for the purpose of reading itself of certain external parasites the whale will also poke its head out of the water to look or listen assuming them a perfectly upright position the great strength of the whale is indicated by its capability of throwing itself out of the water mr aflalo relates the circumstance of having seen an individual hurl itself out three or four times running this great strength is sometimes disastrous to the whale fishes it has been the general belief remarks captain scummon that the sperm whale is excessively timid but if this is the general character there are many exceptions among the larger males for when attacked they have in repeated instances turned up on their pursuers in the most defined manner and their own disfigured jaws which are their principal weapons of defense prove that they either engage in desperate contentions with their kind or with some unknown leviathan inhabiting deep moreover it is we believe a well established fact that ships have been sunk by the deliberate assaults of vicious gray-headed old cashelots captain scummon gives several instances of such assaults the creatures butt at the vessel with their massive forehead and have been known to stave a vessel in but it does not always seem clear whether this is accidental or due to mere confusion on the part of the whale where is the deliberate attack but there is one instance related where the whale attacked one after another a number of boats which had left the vessel for its capture giving chase to each captain scummon thinks that in some cases vessels which have been mysteriously lost at sea have been sunk by cashelots the at least occasional ferocity of cashelots is emphasized by a name given to such whales they are spoken of as eating whales it may be that the males as in so many other kinds of animals fight for the females and that the black bulk of a welling vessel may be mistaken for one of their own kind the solitary males which are thus ferocious may further be comparable to rogue elephants driven out of the herd by their companions a species called by dr gray visitor turcio and with many other names must be mentioned as an appendix to our account of visitor macrosophilus considering that there is not a bone nor even a fragment of a bone that can be proved to have belonged to a specimen of this gigantic animal to be seen in any museum in europe it may seem somewhat unnecessary to devote any space to its consideration yet so much has been written about this mysterious creature that it cannot be passed by in silence the species was established on the good faith of sea bald who was certainly accurate in his accounts of other whales thus there would be a prima facie reason for accepting his dicta improbable though they may sound this creature according to him is a great whale not inferior in size to the cashelot but differing from it in the presence of a large falcate dorsal fin and also apparently by the presence of numerous teeth in the both jaws of equal size one view is that sea bald was deceived by a killer whale into forming this new variety but though orca grows to a larger size none have been recorded of the length of over 50 feet which is the length assigned to visitor turcio the high finned cashelot as this dubious whale has been named is a native of our coasts if of anywhere and an example was stated to have been thrown ashore in orcney in 1687 and other observers have increased the mystery by saying that it often comes ashore in those localities since so good a naturalist as the late mr. thomas bell admits this whale into his book of british mammals we shall allow it a place in the present book as to this fin it has been described as presenting the appearance of the mast of a ship so long and straight it is in addition to this fin there are said to be a few low bosses or humps this perhaps is the secret of the mystery in a stranded cash lot which i saw at birchington some months since it appeared to me that the commencement of the dorsal fin was rather higher than is generally represented a little exaggeration and we have the high finned cash lot at once a street's ferocity etc that is just as suitable according to many to the ordinary cash lot lasse ped prefers to call it visitor molar and says that it grows to a length of 33 meters he further remarks that it travels in herds with a leader the largest of the gamma this beast leads to the attack or retreat and according to a sailor quoted by anderson it gives the signal by a terrible cry of which the echo travels far along the surface of the water of victory or of precipitate fight under the name of visitor microbes lasse ped has described the whale no doubt really identical with a cash lot but which dr gray regards as a high finned cash lot it is remarks count lasse paid one of the largest most cruel and most dangerous inhabitants of the sea the suggestion is made that the story of ursius and andromeda is based upon a ferocious cash lot and that the orca described by a rosto which was to devour angelica chained to a rock upon the coast of britney is referable to this creature there is a story told of the emperor claudius who engaged in battle with his praetorian guards a monster of this species at the port of ostia it can hardly be right to refer this animal to anything but the species visitor macrosophilus for there is no suggestion except by native greenlanders that there are teeth in the upper jaw and probably these teeth are the rudimentary ones so common in the sperm and zephydes whales still it is alleged to possess the hypothetical dorsal fin of the mysterious species to be described later of this whale in december 1723 17 examples were thrown up on the shores of the lb a more remarkable stranding of cash lots occurred on the coast of france in the year 1784 on the 13th of march rites elasaped were seen with great surprise a quantity of fishes throwing themselves out of the water onto the shore and a great number of purposes entered the harbor of andearn the 14th at six o'clock in the morning the sea was high and the wind blew from the southwest with violence extraordinary bellowings were heard towards cape esthen which were audible in the country at a distance of more than four kilometers two men who were coasting along the shore were seized with the terror when they saw at a little distance some enormous animals which were struggling with violence and attempted to resist the foaming waves which rolled them over and hurled them towards the shore the fright of the spectators increased when the first of these cetaceans struggling uselessly with the waves were thrown on the land the terror redoubled when they saw them followed by a very large number of this colossal and living cetaceans there were altogether 32 of the monsters stranded on that occasion it is a curious fact that the majority of these individuals were females they had probably saw the shore for breeding purposes this whale as is related of so many others is said to possess a great tenderness for its offspring as with other whales but one is born at a time but occasionally there are two extinct odontocetes we shall refer here to two extinct cetaceans from the Maya scene of Patagonia of which one at any rate fissodon is apparently a fisseterid as to other its systematic position is not so plain fissodon when it's more fully known will probably have to be placed in a distinct family fissodontidae the general outline of the skull is so much like that of fisseter it is crested as in that whale but the rostrum is shorter and so comes to resemble that of cogia as cogia appears to be a more ancient type of fisseterid than fisseter this likeness is perhaps of some significance its most salient feature is the existence of teeth in both upper and lower jaws in the upper there are some 22 teeth on each side and 24 on each ramus of the mandible a noteworthy point is that some of the upper jaw teeth are implanted in the pre maxillae the total length of the skull is about 10 feet so that it falls short of that of a sperm whale our gyrosetus patagonicus is mainly known from a skull this shows that the animals were about as big as the dolphin genus steno it shows several archaic characters in the first place the occipital scondyle's whereon articulates the first vertebra are in shape more like those of terrestrial mammals instead of being oppressed to the skull as in the cetacea generally the nasal bones too are large and well developed the rostrum is long and slender the skull generally is bilaterally symmetrical it has been pointed out by mr. lidica that the fosae upon the maxillary bones are squared and flattened like those of pontopria as in the platanus tids more over the cervical vertebrae or at any rate cervicals found in association with the skull are all free and longer than is the rule among more modified cetacea the end of the mandible is upturned smooth and without teeth and is unlike that of any existing cetacean end of section 17 recording by mike botez


Thank you very much. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It's a pleasure and a honor to speak after Ada Colau and Saskia Sassen to women who share the concern of a democratic access to city spaces and amenities and governance. Reporting from the front from Barcelona, New York, London or Paris leads to the same observations. Our cities attract always more people on a very limited territory. At the same time as local authorities we fight for welcoming more talents, themes and investments including foreign investments, dear Saskia, that are very mobile and could also settle in another metropolis. Attractiveness is sometimes reduced to that only part, having the most creative people and the richest firms. But following this path does not ensure urban quality at all. Being a class of investments does not guarantee clean air, nice public spaces and a good social mix. In Paris we believe that attractiveness is equally about finding social mixing in every area. Bending cars from the city center and letting everybody participate to city governance. Those three ambitions share two common points. First they require strong municipal involvement, second they refer to what we call the commons. When I thought about who owns the city the concept of commons came as evidence. Similarly to natural entities some urban entities are everybody property and for that reason they have to be the main concern of local authorities. They can be formally, publicly or privately owned but this is not the main point. Not only can the local authorities provide commons it must be everybody's objective. In fact the concept as you may know the concept of commons have been initially invented to analyze the management of natural resources. In fact the concept become famous when Garret Ardyn published an article in science in 1968 where he outlined the tragedy of commons meaning the degradation of the environment when many individuals use a scarce resource in commons. Commons are not only about pasture or oceans. The issue of commons have been extended towards the fields of governance, food distribution, public-private relationship. Eleanor Ostrom won a Nobel Prize in economics in showing how commons can be protected by a system of checks and balance. What about cities? Housing, space and clean air are also scarce and hard to divide up among individuals. How can we govern and allocate them? France has a long and particular story with commons beginning by the fact that the French administrative term for city is commune. This story takes an even more strategic turn in Paris when mixed up with the metropolis challenges. Our concern about commons directly shapes our way of governing urban projects, smart city issues and public space. Governing the commons in the 21st century is radically different from the same task in the 20th century. The emergence of collaborative users, the increase of shared housing and working spaces or open data and open government must completely change our approach of the city governance. In Paris, we have major urban challenges that are mostly linked to the frontier of the ring road, a physical and psychological buyer that separate Paris from the suburbs. This image of one of the gates of Paris illustrates how much the frontier can be hard to overcome. The infrastructure is very heavy to transform. Pedestrian and bike links are hard to create. The buildings are very different from one part of the ring road to the other. And a lot of them serve as screens facing the ring road, even reinforcing the barrier. Therefore, even in Paris, if Paris is quite small and the suburbs are closed to the center, the frontier remains very important in the people's minds. Another problem is the financial potential of each city in the greater Paris. The gap between Paris and the closed suburbs is very high. For example, we have in Paris a middle average of 2,000 euros per inhabitant compared to 1,000 euros per inhabitant in the north of Paris. And there is also a disequilibrium between the west and the east. The west part of the greater Paris having a lot of offices and the east part having more housing with some cities being dormitory towns. We therefore try to work with our neighbors to reduce those gaps by promoting innovative programs all around the greater Paris. So the question is how to extend the scope of urban commons. Basically, we believe that no area of Paris should be reserved to a certain part of population, being rich people or people who own a car. Similarly, the urban process is not reserved to elected representatives and real estate developers. It is even more challenging in Paris where the competition for space is hard. We have one of the highest densities in the world and our surface area is only of 100 km2. We cannot build new districts from scratch and every new construction is contested. The result is that we need negotiated urban planning permanently. I will illustrate these words with four examples of urban strategies in Paris. The first one targets private urban projects. I want to insist on the fact that not only public spaces can be common and we have to go over this dichotomy between public and private space. Public ownership does not guarantee anything. Public administrative buildings are often the least open ones while some private projects can create de facto public spaces. In Paris, we are demanding a lot in our relation to real estate developers about the percentage of social housing, the quality of architecture, the surface of green areas. We believe that many private projects can be of general interest. In November 2014, the mayor of Paris launched a competition called Reinventing Paris. The idea was to change our way of transferring municipal land plots to the private sector. Like many cities, we used to sell our land to the highest bidder. This time, we decided to transfer our land to the most innovative project and we choose 23 different sites that were not strategic anymore for municipal ownership. Those 23 sites were a sample of the urban challenges we have in Paris from old private mansions to wasteland along the ring road. By saying that, the most innovative team will gain the right to buy or run those sites, we had a huge impact on the urban ecosystem way bigger than we had expected. The first being innovative means for the developers to team up with startups, artists, final users and to give a more important role to the architect, making him a real conductor. Then, they had to invent programs that would fit the current metropolitan users and challenge from classical real estate projects, hybrid and mutable spaces, programs including urban agriculture, co-working, incubators, etc. They also had to use new materials and to systematize the rules of existing ones. They had to find innovative financial and legal arrangements such as participatory housing, community land trust, etc. This competition was an occasion for a lot of young architects to be revealed since they were already one step ahead in terms of new programs and new mode of co-working. Among the low rates, there are many famous names as young ones who never built in Paris. We got 815 expressions of interest from all over the world. We finally selected our 22 low rates and they are already beginning to implement their projects. We observed some common trends among all the candidate projects. For example, the rise of urban agriculture but above all, what was striking was the emergence of commons in all projects and especially in those who won. The first fact is that collective spaces have prevailed over individual spaces. Being in housing or office projects, most candidates have focused on shared spaces like guest rooms, kitchens, teleworking spaces, etc. Then, what made the difference among the numerous candidates was the capacity to create commons for the rest of the city. Most low rates offer new public spaces or free services and leisure for the neighborhood. In a way, this is what counts most at the end, to show that private projects are feasible with such an opening towards the city. We are sure that this openness will benefit them at the end because they will be really connected to the area. Here are two examples of winning projects that outline these aspects. The first, the more long building, an old prefecture. As you can see on the picture, it's a very austere building that needed to be opened towards the city and to be more welcoming for the citizen. It is situated in the heart of Paris and has a beautiful view on the Seine River but nobody could benefit from it except the city and state employees. The winning project designed by David Schipperfield transforms the building into an attractive and hybrid place with many public spaces. The program mixes up social and private housing, a youth hostel, a food market, a swimming pool, and a lot of urban agriculture. It creates a new public space in the form of a patio that will allow people to cross the building from the Seine River to the Boulevard. It also creates a public space on the top of the building since the roof will be open to everybody and will be magnified by a work of art from Olafur Eliasson. The entire site will be transferred to the developer but is signed a formal agreement to let those spaces open to the public at all times. Another example of winning project is this original building which is actually a bridge over the Ring Road. Like many other cities, our Ring Road creates major urban challenges and remains a psychological frontier between Paris and the suburbs. Therefore we propose to the candidates to occupy the space over the Ring Road so as to create a link between the two cities. The winning project is called Thousand Trees because it installs two forests over the Ring Road as you can see on the picture. This project has been developed by two architects, Soufoujimoto and also it's a mixed program of offices, shops and housing on the top with one public forest on the bottom of the building that will create the urban link. Here also the developer commits itself in making this forest a common. This project is already a symbol for Paris and it brings a common, the forest in a place where only cars were allowed. This competition is for us a change of paradigm or in the way of managing private projects on the other and we have increased the freedom given to developers and architects in the definition of their project. We have a way, more partnership-based approach together. In the contract, the laureates sign for the transfer of land rights. They commit to implement the innovations they have developed in their projects. For example, about construction materials, facilities open to the neighborhood. I want to speak very shortly. I know that I have not a lot of time about inventing urban intervals. This is a way of occupying spaces which are going to be destroyed or transformed. This is the Saint Vincent de Paul Hospital and we have transformed a previous hospital into a temporary village for three years. It is very interesting to see this place because the result is astonishing. It has become a small utopia in the heart of Paris and people come from the entire city to see it. The mix between emergency shelters and activity have given birth to original collaboration about art and craft objects that are used everywhere in the public space of the village. Creating those intervals extends the scope of commons by opening new spaces to people. Another example is what we have done with the river banks. The left bank, it was like this and now it is like this. We are going to do the same thing with the right bank of Paris, which is creating a lot of polemics in Paris now. I will finish with the Plaza de la République because Plaza de la République is interesting in creating undetermined space. This was the Plaza de la République before transformation and now this is it after transformation. It is a huge space and it can be used by people as they want. For example, you can see children playing on the Plaza de la République, but you can also see this great concentration of people after the attacks against Paris. This is an example of a contestation used of the place. I want to say that collaborative methods are full of promises and we are only at the beginning of commoning in the fields of past separatory housing and commuting. We have to remain watchful regarding all appropriation risks because commons will be the major conflict in the future metropolitan world. Our role as metropolitan authorities is to fight against this appropriation through regulation and negotiation and it requires new tools at every moment. In other words, local governments have to see themselves as platforms, managing the citizen expectations and ensuring that both public and private spaces remain urban commons. This is why the concept of open source and interoperability must be extended to urban planning on the front. We can inspire innovative mode of action for extending the scope of commons. Thank you very much.


against the backdrop of conflicts and natural disasters and large-scale migration, against the backdrop of renewed nationalist and populist movements, against the backdrop of a world that is so rapidly changing, is the need to build a better understanding in the general public about human rights and why they matter. First, it is important that they pay their fair share of taxes, stop tax dodging, because it's the revenues that they pay in taxes that pay for schools, clinics, roads, all the things that mostly poor people need to claim their rights, to lift themselves out of poverty and misery. When companies are going into countries to build business, to invest and so on, they should be asking where are the human rights defenders, how are the women human rights defenders treated in those countries, and then make a decision on whether they're going to invest and help, you know, of course, protect and promote the rights of civil society and human rights defenders, as well as the population as a whole. If we talk about compensation, the business thinks that it's not their responsibility, but it is their responsibility, because it is one supply chain that we are talking about and workers are down to this chain and, you know, the brand and retailers are business in top, so they do have responsibility to take care of all those as well. So the main challenge is the willpower and also the law is not implemented. Ethigies present also a fantastic opportunity, not only to society but to business, because, you know, business cannot be healthy if there is not a healthy society. Business must move away from just compliance, trying to fit in the regulations and think about a fundamental shift where they manage the tension between their commercial interests, human rights and sustainable development. There's a tension there that needs to be balanced. Right now, it's balancing their favour, their profits, their commercial interests way heavily against the rights of workers, suppliers, the human rights of all the people in their supply chain. So move away from corporate social responsibility, move to looking at does my supply chain respect, protect human rights.