1The following is a catalogue of the drawings contained in MS 339: Tooneel, der Indische Zee en Rivier Visschen (Presentation of Indian Sea and River Fishes), consisting of 93 sheets (of several different sizes) carefully pasted onto 48 bound pages (numbered 3-50), including 250 colored figures of marine animals (numbered 1-131, 133-251), the majority of which represent fishes, but also included are 13 figures of crustaceans (one isopod, five stomatopods, and seven decapods), two views each of a crinoid and an ophiuroid, and one of a dugong.

2The inscriptions that accompany the Lamotius figures are written in two different styles. The indications of locality and date are in smaller script with darker ink and with the letters closer together than in the names given to the species figured. The shape of the letters is very much the same, so both types of inscriptions may have been made by the same person (most probably Lamotius) but at different times. The indications of locality and date are most probably written by Lamotius at the time that he made the drawings, as he could have hardly been able to remember later the exact positions of the drawings made aboard the Duyf. As for the names of the animals it is interesting that the “u” sound (like in Flute) is written as the French “ou” and not like the Dutch “oe”. So, for example, the species named by Valentijn (1726a, vol. 3A: 360, number 46) as “Toetetoe” is here written “Toutetou.” The modern orthography in Malay would be “Tutetu”. Since many of Lamotius’s names are exactly the same as those given by Renard (1719, 1754), there seems to have been some connection between the two. It is unlikely that Lamotius ever saw a copy of Renard’s book, since it was published after Lamotius left South Africa (and perhaps after he died). Of course it is possible that Lamotius first wrote the localities in pencil and somebody else inked them later and added Renard’s names. We shall probably never know. In this context, it is important to point out the striking similarity in the style of the written names of the fishes and crustaceans on the Lamotius and Coyett drawings-apparently they were made by the same hand (e.g., compare pls. 60 and 67 in Pietsch, 1995: 46, 55).

3Interesting are Lamotius’s Portuguese names, which he wrote more or less phonetically. His Pesque Pao (fig. 34), which he said to be Portuguese for “Hout of Stok Vis” in Dutch (= wood or stock fish), in correct Portuguese would be “Peixe Pau”. Also peculiar is the use of “Mamel”, for male, and “Femel”, for female; in Malay these would be “laki” or “djantan”, for male, and “perampuan” or “betina”, for female, and in Dutch “mannetje”, for male, and “wijfje”, for female. Lamotius’s indication of gender most closely resembles the French “mâle”, for male, and “femelle”, for female.

4Many of the names used by Lamotius are the proper Malay (or Moluccan) names for the species and cannot therefore be translated. Valentijn (1726a, vol. 3A) is a great help here because in his translations of the Malay names, for example “Ikan Sotera” to “Sotera Visch” (1726a: 393, number 153), he leaves such proper names (i.e., Sotera) as originally written.

5In translating the names, we have indicated in parentheses the name of the language, followed by what we think is the correct modern spelling in that language, along with the English translation(s). For example: Bintang Lauwd (Malay, Bintang laut = star of the sea) of Zee Sterre (Dutch, Zeester = sea star or star fish)). The Dutch word “of”, which means “or”, is not dealt with further in the translations. Names for which we do not know the translation, are cited without comment.

6The numbers used below to indicate the various figures refer first to the manuscript page and second to the actual figure as numbered in the manuscript. For example, 31-71 indicates page 31, figure 71.

7The recent availability of colored figures and photographs of many of the crustaceans figured by Lamotius makes their present identification different from the earlier conclusions of Holthuis (1959). Discussion of the invertebrates in general thus requires more detail and a slightly different style of presentation. Therefore, the invertebrates are treated separately from the vertebrates, but as some particular comments are nevertheless useful for fishes here and there, we give them in the captions facing the appropriate plates.

Crustacea

31-71, 33-75, 35-80, 55-134. Odontodactylus scyllarus (Linnaeus, 1758), Odontodactylidae, Stomatopoda

31-71. Lafetek ijou (Malay, Lafetek hidjau = green Lafetek) 33-75. Lafetek Ijouw of Lauwd (Malay: Lafetek Hidjau = green Lafetek, Laut = sea, thus Green or Sea Lafetek) 35-80. Lafetek Souff (meaning unknown) 55-134. Lafetek Couning (Malay, Lafetek kuning = yellow Lafetek)

8In Lamotius’s collection of figures, the above four all depict the stomatopod Odontodactylus scyllarus (Linnaeus). All four are variations of a single figure that shows the animal in lateral view, facing left. The body and most appendages in the four figures have the same posture. Figures 71 and 75 are practically identical in all details. Figures 80 and 134 form a similar pair and are somewhat different from figures 71 and 75. In figures 71 and 75 the body is uniformly green, except for both lateral thirds of the carapace, viz., the part lying outside the well-marked gastric grooves. Each of the two lateral parts bears large dark spots surrounded by a light margin and forming a kind of mosaic that fills the entire lateral part of the carapace. The cutting edge of the dactylus of the right raptorial claw shows a small denticle or incision; on the edge of the left claw no such denticle can be seen. Between the endo-and exopod of the uropod the ventral uropodal process is visible, but shows only a single tooth; the second tooth is omitted or covered by the endopod. It is especially the coloration of the lateral parts of the carapace that led to the identification of the species. As shown by modern color photographs of Odontodactylus scyllarus, the pattern of large dark spots on a white background in both lateral thirds of the carapace is quite striking. This color pattern either occupies the entire lateral area or is restricted to the anterior half of it. Figures 80 and 134, although definitely based on the same subject, differ in some details quite strongly from the other two figures. The general shape is the same, the coloration of the lateral part of the carapace also. But they differ in showing three strong teeth on the cutting edge of the left raptorial dactylus; the right raptorial claw is partly or entirely hidden by the head and the antennae. The abdomen shows several large dark spots, and the ventral process of the uropods is replaced by a rounded leaf-like appendage; the telson is quite schematized. The figures have also been copied (and embellished) by Fallours; such copies have been published by Renard and by Valentijn as follows:

1. Lafetek Couning (Malay, Lafetek kuning = yellow Lafetek), Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 1, pl. 23, fig. 127; Boddaert, in Renard, 1782: 35, pl. 23, fig. 127 (Lafitik Couning in text).
2. Ijouw Lafetek (Malay, hidjau Lafetek = green Lafetek) Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 1, pl. 38, fig. 195; Boddaert, in Renard, 1782: 50, pl. 38, fig. 195 (Ijouw Lazetek in text).
3. Linquo, sorte d’Écrevisse d’Amboine très bonne et commune (French, Linquo, a kind of crayfish of Ambon, very tasty and very common) Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 2, pl. 28, fig. 137.
4. Garnate, ou Chevrette Mâle (Dutch, garnaal = shrimp; French, ou crevette male = or male shrimp) Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 2, pl. 52, fig. 222.
5. Locki Koening, Geel Kreeftje (Malay, Lokki kuning; Dutch, geel kreeftje: both names = yellow lobster) Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 362, fig. 50; Prévost, 1767: 271, pl. 55, fig. 7.
6. Lokki Laoet Jang Hidjoe, Groen Zee-Kreeftje (Malay, Lokki laut jang hidjau = green sea lobster, both in Malay and Dutch) Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 384, fig. 111; Prévost, 1767: 271, pl. 55, fig. 8.
7. Lokkie Hidjoe Jang Djantan, Manneken van het wit Zee Kreeftje (Malay, Lokki hidjau jang djantan = male of green sea lobster; Dutch, mannetje van het wit zee-kreeftje = male of the white sea lobster) Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 509, fig. 526; Prévost, 1767: 271, pl. 55, fig. 9. In the Dutch translation, Valentijn made the mistake of using the word “wit” (= white) instead of green, an error already pointed out by Prévost, 1767: 271, footnote.

9The copies marked here a, d, and e, are clearly made after Lamotius’s figure 80; those indicated as b, c, f, and g, after his figures 71 and 75. The former (a, d, e) show only the left raptorial claw, the cutting edge of which shows three distinct teeth (in a) or ends in two teeth (in d and e) and the ventral process of the uropods is blade-like (a and e) or entirely aberrant with many rounded blades (d). The figures of the other type (b, c, f, g) have both raptorial claws distinct and without teeth on the cutting edge; the abdomen is uniformly green (b) or has a few small spots (one or two on each somite; c, f, g); the ventral process of the uropods is either absent (b, g), absent in one uropod and blade-like in the other (f), or the tail-fan is entirely aberrant, with the ventral process of the uropods consisting of several blades and the telson short and broad, ending in a transverse row of claw-like curved teeth (c). It is most likely that Lamotius’s figures 71 and 75 are the original figures and that all others are copies. The lateral thirds of the carapace in all show the characteristic design, sometimes (e.g., in b) reduced to a white zig-zag line. Holthuis (1959: 119, 120) incorrectly assigned specimens a, d, and e to the genus Pseudosquilla being influenced by the presence of elongate teeth on the raptorial dactylus; specimens b, c, f, and g, having the dactylus without any teeth on the cutting edge, were also incorrectly assigned, namely to the genus Gonodactylus. At that time, the natural color of Odontodactylus scyllarus was unknown. Prévost (1767) copied all his figures from Valentijn (1726a). Odontodactylus scyllarus has a wide distribution in the Indo-West Pacific (East Africa to Japan, Indonesia, Australia, and New Caledonia). It is common in the Moluccas, and has also been reported from Mauritius. It was described and figured by Rumphius (1705: 5, pl. 3, figs F, G) from Ambon. The name Lokki (also spelled Locky, Lokky, Lokkie, or Lokje) is a local proper name given in Ambon to stomatopods, as was already pointed out by Rumphius (1705: 4-6). The Dutch name given by Rumphius is Zwaantjes kreeft (= little swan lobster); this name is based on the fact that the raptorial claw, held with the dactylus uppermost, has the shape of a swan. It is likely that Lafetek or Lafitik is also a local Moluccan name.

33-74. Lysiosquillina maculata (Fabricius, 1793), Banded mantis shrimp, Lysiosquillidae, Stomatopoda

Lokje Lokje, dorsal view

10The following copies of this Lamotius figure have been published:

1. Lokje-Lokje, Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 1, pl. 42, fig. 208; Boddaert, in Renard, 1782: 53 (pl. 42, fig. 208; pls 41-43, not present in our copy). Boddaert gave the Dutch name Zwaantjes Kreeft (= Little swan lobster).
2. Lokkie-Lokkie, Écrévisse d’Amboine, très-délicate et fort commune; mais ordinairement fort verte (French: Ambon lobster, very tasty and very common, but usually very green) Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 2, pl. 24, fig. 118.
3. ? Locki Koening Betina, Wijfje van het geel Kreeftje (Malay, Lokki kuning betina; Dutch, Wijfje van het gele kreeftje: both names = female of the yellow lobster) Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 416, fig. 218; Prévost, 1767: 271, pl. 55, fig. 6.

11Lamotius’s figure gives a pretty good representation of Lysiosquillina maculata. Renard’s figure 208 is a good copy of it. The figure published by Renard (pt. 2, fig. 116), judging by the position of the legs, is clearly also a copy of the same figure. Valentijn’s figure 218, however, if a copy of Lamotius’s figure, has been changed and embellished so much, that the resemblance (e.g., in the number and posture of the legs) is very minor; therefore it likely is not a true copy of Lamotius’s figure 74. Prévost’s figure is a copy of that published by Valentijn.

12Lysiosquillina maculata is a well-known species with a wide distribution in the Indo-West Pacific region (Western Indian Ocean to Japan, Indonesia, Australia, and Hawaii). It was already reported from Ambon by Rumphius (1705: 4-6, pl. 3, fig. E). The local Ambonese name (Lokki, Lokje, or Lokkie) was already used by Rumphius as Locky. This name is used also for other stomatopods. Lamotius’s use of a Malay name for the specimen pictured by him makes it likely that his painting was made in the Moluccas. The species has also been reported from Mauritius.

34-76, 34-77. Calappa calappa (Linnaeus, 1758), Large box crab, Calappidae, Brachyura, Decapoda

Kraka Radje (Malay, Radja = king), dorsal view (fig. 76) and ventral view (fig. 77).

13As far as we know, no copies of these figures have been published. Lamotius’s illustrations are excellent and there is no doubt about the identity of the species shown. The figures are of the speckled form of Calappa calappa (Linnaeus, 1758). Rumphius (1705: 21, pl. 11, figs 2, 3) described and figured the unspotted form under the Latin name Cancer calappoides and gave the Malay name as Cattam Calappa (= coconut crab), as in dorsal view the species resembles a coconut. Linnaeus adopted the name calappa for the species. The name Kraka used by Lamotius might be a local name for crab. The word Radje or Radja is Malay and means king. Galil (1997: 280) showed that the speckled and plain crabs belong to a single species.

14Calappa calappa has a wide distribution in the Indo-West Pacific region (East Africa to Polynesia) and has been reported both from Mauritius and the Moluccas. Lamotius’s use of a Malay name for the specimen that he figured makes it most likely that his paintings of it were made in the Moluccas.

36-81, 37-83. ? Lauridromia dehaani (Rathbun, 1923), Sponge crab, Dromiidae, Brachyura, Decapoda

36-81. Krake Coulat (Malay, Kulat = fungus or lichen), animal in dorsal view, without sponge. 37-83. Krake Coulat met een sponsachtig deksel (Dutch, with a sponge-like cover), animal in dorsal view with sponge

15Copies of both Lamotius’s figures of this species have been published as follows:

1. Crake Coulat. “Il a une espèce de Surtout d’Eponge, qui couvre sa coque: et dans cette Éponge il se forme des Coquillages rares et très-jolis” (French: It has a kind of sponge overcoat that covers its carapace and in this sponge grow rare and very beautiful shells) Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 1, pl. 36, fig. 190; Boddaert, in Renard, 1782: 49, pl. 36, fig. 190 (in the Dutch text: Crake Coulat, Krab, die het ruggeschild met sponge overdekt heeft = Crab with the carapace covered by a sponge).
2. Craka Coulat, Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 1, pl. 37, fig. 191; Boddaert, in Renard, 1782: 49, pl. 37, fig. 191.
3. Keizer-Krab met blaeuwe pooten (Dutch: Emperor Crab with blue legs) Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 498, fig. 471; Keizers-Krabbe met blaeuwe poten, Prévost, 1767: 278, pl. 57, fig. 16.
4. Spongie-Krabbe (Dutch, sponge crab), Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 507, fig. 515; Spons-Krabbe (Dutch, sponge crab) Prévost, 1767: 276, pl. 57, fig. 12.

16Lamotius’s figure 81, showing the species in dorsal view, without a sponge, is copied by the above sources under b) and c). The sources under a) and d) show copies of Lamotius’s figure 83 of the crab carrying the sponge. Boddaert made a mistake in considering his pl. 37, fig. 191, to be the animal in ventral view. The figures show a dromiid crab that is very close to Dromia dormia (Linnaeus, 1763), the latter species based on a specimen from Ambon described and figured by Rumphius. In 1923, Rathbun showed that over the course of time two species were mixed up under the name Dromia dormia. She kept the name dormia for the species described by Rumphius, but placed it in the genus Dromidiopsis Borradaile, 1900. The second species was given by her a new name Dromia dehaani. In the latest revision of the Dromiidae, McLay (1993) assigned Cancer dormia again to the genus Dromia, but removed Dromia dehaani Rathbun, 1923 from that genus and placed it in a new genus Lauridromia.

17Lewinsohn (1984: 96) gave an excellent enumeration of the differences between the true Dromia dormia and L. dehaani, illustrated by very instructive figures (pl. 1, fig. 1, for L. dehaani, and pl. 2, figs 1, 2, for D. dormia). A comparison of Lamotius’s figure 81 with Lewinsohn’s illustrations makes it most likely that Lamotius’s specimen (and thus those of Renard, Boddaert, Valentijn, and Prévost) actually belong to L. dehaani.

18Lauridromia dehaani has a wide range in the Indo-West Pacific region, viz., from East Africa to Japan and Indonesia, with a recent record from the Eastern Pacific. Although, as far as we know, the species has not yet been reported from Mauritius, it most likely does occur there. Lamotius’s figures of the species are very likely made after Moluccan material, as he used a Malay name.

38-85. Ranina ranina (Linnaeus, 1758), Frog crab, Raninidae, Brachyura, Decapoda

Krake Moira, dorsal view.

19Copies of Lamotius’s figures have been published as follows:

1. Crake Radja (Malay, King crab), Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 1, pl. 37, fig. 192; Boddaert, in Renard, 1782: 49, pl. 37 fig. 192.
2. “Crabbe Fleuronnée de dix pouces de long, très bonne” (French: crabe with a flower pattern, 10 inches long, very tasty) Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 2, pl. 46, fig. 190.
3. Bloem-Krabbe (Dutch, flower crab) Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 390, fig. 139; Prévost, 1767: 279, pl. 57, fig. 18.
4. Katam Radja, Konings-Krabbe (Malay and Dutch, King crab) Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 431, fig. 280; Katam Radja, Koninglyke Krabbe (Dutch, royal crab) Prévost, 1767: 278, pl. 57, fig. 17.
5. Orangie-Krabbe (Dutch, orange crab) Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 503, fig. 501; Oranje Krabbe (Dutch, orange crab) Prévost, 1767: 277, pl. 57, fig. 13.

20As shown above, the figure by Lamotius has been copied repeatedly. The general shape, the position of the legs, and the presence of the flower motive on the carapace can be found in all copies. The species is very characteristic, of large size and edible. It has an extensive distribution in the Indo-West Pacific, extending from South and East Africa to Japan, Indonesia, and Hawaii. It has been reported from the Moluccas and from Mauritius. The Malay name under which it was figured by Lamotius makes it most likely that the figures were made in the Moluccas.

39-87. Birgus latro (Linnaeus, 1767), Robber crab, Coenobitidae, Anomura, Decapoda

Coutatou, Beurs Krabbe, dorsal view.

21No copies have been published of this figure, which is quite well executed and leaves no doubt as to the identity of its subject with the robber crab, Birgus latro. The name Coutatou is a rendering of the native name of the species in Ambon. Rumphius (1705: 8) already remarked that in Ambon the species is named “Catattut” or “Atattut”. The same author also used for it the Dutch name Beurs-Krabbe (Purse crab, referring to the purse-like abdomen).

22The species is known from the tropical West Pacific and the Indian Ocean; it has been reported both from the Moluccas and Mauritius. Lamotius’s use of the Ambonese name makes it most likely that the painting was made by him in the Moluccas.

58-151. ?Elthusa sp. Cymothoidae, Isopoda

Zee-Luijs (Dutch, Sea louse), dorsal view.

23The following figures, possibly copies of Lamotius Zee-Luijs, have been published:

• Pediculi marini, Ruysch, 1718: 14, pl. 7, figs 23, 24.
• Zee Luys, Pou de mer (Dutch and French, Sea louse), Renard, 1719, 1754, pt. 1, pl. 23, fig. 125; Boddaert, in Renard, 1782: 34, pl. 23, fig. 125 (in text Zeeluis, Pou de Mer).
• Zee-Luis Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 370, fig. 73; Prévost, 1767: 273, pl. 55, fig. 14.
• Anac Laoet Jang Terbongkoes, ’t Gebakerde Zeekind (Malay, anak laut jang terbungkus; Dutch, gebakerd zeekind: both names meaning Child of the Sea in Diapers) Valentijn, 1726a, vol. 3A: 404, fig. 184; Prévost, 1767: 150, pl. 19, fig. 179.

24Judging by the figures alone, it would seem rather unlikely that those showing “Sea-Lice” in Ruysch’s, Renard’s, Boddaert’s, Valentijn’s, and Prévost’s publications are actually copies of the one drawn by Lamotius. But the fact that in all these books this “Zee-luis” is the only isopod shown, might point to a common origin. Also, in all figures the cephalon is deeply immersed in pereionite 1. However, the general outline in Lamotius’s figure is much wider than that of any of the other figures. In this respect it comes closest to Renard’s figure, but it is more natural; it is possible that Renard’s figure is a very poor copy of the one by Lamotius. The two figures (23 and 24) published by Ruysch might have been copied from Renard’s figure rather than from that by Lamotius. The copyist who produced the figures published by Ruysch evidently was fascinated by the elongated lateral parts of the first pereionite, which was shown by him as two arms; in figure 24 two small wings were added. The tail-fan, which by Lamotius was shown as an irregular oval, in Renard’s figure became a small bluntly three-lobed appendage, wider than long. Ruysch’s figures have the tail-fan much larger, the three lobes pointed, with the two outer longer and more slender than the median. Finally, the evolution of this creature found its end in Valentijn’s figure 184, “Anac Laoet Jang Terbongkoes”, where the elongate halves of pereionite 1 were shown as two human arms ending in a hand with five fingers, and the cephalon changed to a human face carrying a skull-cap with two ear-like appendages; the tail-fan of this creature is similar to those of the figures in Ruysch. All this shows the ridiculous result of the continuous copying of the figures (see also Holthuis 1959: 97, pl. 11, figs 5, 7-9). Valentijn’s (1726a, vol. 3A: 370, fig. 73) “Zee-Luis” likewise has pereionite 1 narrowly U-shaped and reaching beyond the cephalon, but the general shape of the body is far more natural, especially as far as concerns the abdomen; but it is more slender than Lamotius’s figure. The well-known ichthyologist and carcinologist Pieter Bleeker (1856b) thought that it was possible that a cymothoid, which he had found parasitic on fishes in the Bay of Batavia (Jakarta Bay, Indonesia), belonged to the same species as the specimen figured by Renard and he described it as a new species Livoneca renardi, which later was placed in the genus Mothocya by N. L. Bruce (1986: 1169, figs 49-52). The types of Bleeker’s species, now in the collection of the Leiden Museum, show rather little resemblance to Lamotius’s figure.

25Dr Niel L. Bruce of Wellington, New Zealand, to whom we sent a copy of Lamotius’s figure, responded that the identification “is a near hopeless task without specimens to refer to”. The drawing shows “no clinching detail that allows confident identification of the genus let alone the species. I assume, in absence of host data, that this is a gill-attaching cymothoid. The mouth-attaching parasites are usually more elongate and have subparallel sides. We know that the two most frequently encountered genera of gill parasites in the lndo-West Pacific are Mothocya and Elthusa. I cannot particularly allocate the figured isopod to either of these [genera] other than tending towards Elthusa on account of the relatively wide body shape. Also many Mothocya have rather longer and more prominent uropodal rami than do Elthusa, most particularly so in the case of M. renardi. No such feature is suggested in the drawing by Lamotius. The only further bit of useful information would be to know what species of fish it was taken from. Species of Elthusa are found on diverse hosts, but Mothocya is largely restricted to hosts in the Atheriniformes and Beloniformes”. Fortunately Bleeker did not positively identify his new species Livoneca renardi with Renard’s (and thus Lamotius’s?) drawing, so that the latter does not become an iconotype of Bleeker’s species.

26Livoneca renardi has an extensive Indo-West Pacific distribution, ranging from East Africa to Japan, the Philippines, and Indonesia. As the name given by Lamotius to this species is only in Dutch, there is no way to show whether the figure was made in Mauritius or in the Moluccas.

91-243. Calappa philargius (Linnaeus, 1758), Box crab, Calappidae, Brachyura, Decapoda

Krake Rompe, dorsal view.

27No copy of this figure has been found in either Ruysch’s, Renard’s, Boddaert’s, Valentijn’s, or Prévost’s publications. The last two authors do show a figure of this species, but it is very poor and unnatural, and does not at all resemble Lamotius’s figure, which is of pretty good quality.

28The species has a wide distribution in the Indo-West Pacific, extending from the Indian Ocean to Japan, Indonesia, and Polynesia; it has been reported from both Mauritius and the Moluccas. Judging by the Malay name given to it by Lamotius, the figure most likely was made in the Moluccas.

Echinodermata

40-88; 41-90. ?Phanogenia multifida (J. Müller, 1841), Crinoidea

40-88, 41-90. Matta Lauwd (Malay, Mata Laut = eye of the sea), dorsal and ventral views.

29Professor Michel Jangoux of the Université libre de Bruxelles, who is a specialist in Echinodermata, to whom we submitted Lamotius’s figures, remarked that “it is almost impossible to identify the drawing. However, I presume that the species was a common one and, given the high number of arms, it could be Comaster multifida, known today as Phanogenia multifida (J. Müller).”

30In none of the accounts by Ruysch, Renard, Valentijn, Prévost, or Boddaert, has any echinoderm been figured. The fact that Lamotius used here a Malay name for this animal makes it most likely that he figured it during his stay in the Moluccas.

40-89, 41-91. ?Ophiolepis superba H. L. Clark, 1915, Ophiuroidea

40-89, 41-91. Bintang Lauwd (Malay, Bintang Laut = sea star), ventral (fig. 89) and dorsal (fig. 91) views.

31The peculiar color pattern of the arms of the ophiuroid figured by Lamotius so strongly resembles that of Ophiolepis superba H. L. Clark, 1915, that it very likely is the species shown, as confirmed by Professor Jangoux, especially as this is a common species in the Indonesian area. Based on the fact that Lamotius gave the name of this species in Malay, the figures most likely have been made in the Moluccas.

32The species has a wide distribution in the Indo-West Pacific region and occurs both in the Moluccas and Mauritius. Valentijn mentioned that, when on his home voyage, he visited Lamotius at the Cape of Good Hope, and was shown illustrations of marine animals among which were “Zeestarren” (sea stars). This shows that he then must have seen this collection of plates, as this is the only set that includes Echinodermata.