If one, freed from these prejudices, should now ask why the _cyprinus_ must be our carp, the answer will be, because what we read of the tongue and scales of the _cyprini_ cannot be applied with so much propriety to any species of fish as to the _Cyprinus carpio_ of Linnæus. Aristotle informs us that the _cyprini_ had properly no tongue, but that their soft fleshy palate might very readily be taken for one[112]. Athenæus affirms that they had a tongue, but that it lay in the upper part of the mouth or palate; and in confirmation of this he refers to Aristotle[113]. This assertion of Athenæus however is very dubious; for these words are not to be found in the works of Aristotle which have been preserved, though the same meaning might be indeed forced, in case of necessity, from the passage first quoted. It is possible that Athenæus, as Casaubon[114] has already conjectured, may here, as well as in other parts, allude to some book of Aristotle not now extant. Besides, he calls the fish of which he speaks, not _cyprinus_, but _cyprianus_; and a question therefore arises, whether he may not have meant some other kind. This much at any rate appears certain from the passage of Aristotle, that the _cyprinus_ had a thick fleshy palate; and that indeed is the case with our carp, so that the head, on account of the delicacy and agreeable taste of the palate, is reckoned the most relishing part. By that circumstance however nothing is proved; as it is not peculiar to carp alone, but common to every species of the same family, such as the bream, tench, &c. Fish of this kind, says Bloch, have properly no tongue; that which appears to be one is merely a cartilaginous substance which projects through those band-like parts that enclose it on each side. This proof would have more weight, did we find it related, that in the time of Aristotle, the tongue was considered as an exquisite morsel: but that is not mentioned; and H. Krunitz is mistaken, when he says that Heliogabalus, to satisfy his luxurious appetite, was induced to try a fricassee of the tongues of carp: it consisted only of the tongues of peacocks and nightingales[115]. Had the ancients really used carp on their tables, we must have ascribed to them the discovery of these delicious fish.