.jpg){kind=link}
Giglioli's Whale (Amphiptera pacifica) is a purported species of whale observed by Enrico Hillyer Giglioli. It is described as having two dorsal fins, a feature which no known whales have. The species is not recognized by the general scientific community.
On September 4, 1867 on board a ship called the Magenta about 1200 miles off the coast of Chile, the zoologist spotted a species of whale which he could not recognize. It was very close to the ship (too close to shoot with a cannon) and was observed for a quarter of an hour, allowing Giglioli to make very detailed observations. The whale looked overall similar to a rorqual, 60 feet (18 m) long with an elongated body, but the most notable difference was the presence of two large dorsal fins about 6.5 feet (2 m) apart. No known whales have twin dorsal fins; the rorqual only has a single fin and some other whales have none. Other unusual features include the presence of two long sickle-shaped flippers and a lack of furrows present under the throats of rorquals.
Another report of a two finned whale of roughly the same size was recorded from the fishing boat Lily off the coast of Aberdeenshire inScotland the following year. In 1983 between Corsica and the French mainland, French zoologist Jacques Maigret sighted a similar looking creature.
Although it has not been proven to exist, it was given a "classification" by Giglioli. However, scientists would most likely classify the whale under Balaenopteridae, large baleen whales.
The whale may have been a genetic mutation, similar to humans born with Polydactyly. Another cryptid with two dorsal fins is the fabled Rhinoceros dolphin.
Given the species's alleged size (60 feet) and attributes (it resembles a rorqual), it is extremely doubtful such a species would not have been taken (and reported) by modern commercial whalers. If the animals exists, it is almost certainly as malformed individuals rather than a distinct species.
After his lunch on 4 September 1867, the young naturalist Enrico Hillyer Giglioli observed a remarkable baleen whale with two dorsal fins far off the coast of Chile. Due to the unusual fins and an apparent lack of ventral pleats, Giglioli felt the whale was sufficiently distinct to name Amphiptera pacifica and hoped other, luckier naturalists would shortly acquire a specimen*. This never happened. The hypothetical whale is now almost forgotten, aside from being listed as a nomen dubium in databases, but there are still believers. Raynal & Sylvestre (1991) argued that Amphiptera is a valid entity, has been observed on multiple occasions and may be distinct enough to warrant its own ‘family’ (Amphipteridae). While some cetaceans can be surprisingly cryptic, the notion that one of the world’s largest and most unmistakable animals has almost entirely avoided human detection is a tough sell. Additionally, anecdotal evidence – even from experts – is notoriously problematic and cannot be used to describe new species. I’m just not satisfied with leaving Giglioli’s Whale as a nomen dubium, and I suspect the animal he saw was a remarkable representative of a rare, but known, species.
The critical information for identifying Giglioli’s whale comes from an illustration included in his 1870, which unfortunately is missing from the Google Books edition. The only copy I can find is from Raynal’s website, and while I can’t vouch for how well it represents the original, all the important details are reasonably visible.
Giglioli’s Whale bears an uncanny resemblance to Caperea marginata - which I refuse to call ‘Pygmy Right Whale’ because that name is the worst – specifically, a stranded 3 meter individual whose dissection was documented at Te Papa’s blog. Caperea was first described in 1846, however knowledge of its external appearance appeared to be quite rudimentary as of Beddard (1901). Giglioli was also only 22 when he observed the whale – having inherited the position of ship’s naturalist after the death of Filippo de Filippi (Croce 2002) – and didn’t appear to have a specialized interest in cetaceans. So not only is it unlikely for Giglioli to have ever heard of Caperea, even if he did the species probably would have been known only from baleen plates and ear bones at the time.