List of giant squid specimens and sightings

This list of giant squid specimens and sightings is a comprehensive timeline of recorded human encounters with members of the genus Architeuthis, popularly known as giant squid. It includes animals that were caught by fishermen, found washed ashore, recovered (in whole or in part) from sperm whales and other predatory species, as well as those reliably sighted at sea. The list also covers specimens incorrectly assigned to the genus Architeuthis in original descriptions or later publications.
Tales of giant squid have been common among mariners since ancient times, but the animals were long considered mythical and often associated with the kraken of Nordic legend. The giant squid did not gain widespread scientific acceptance until specimens became available to zoologists in the second half of the 19th century, beginning with the formal naming of Architeuthis dux by Japetus Steenstrup in 1857, from fragmentary Bahamian material collected two years earlier (#14 on this list). In the same work, Steenstrup also named a second species, Architeuthis monachus, based on a preserved beak, the only part saved from a carcass that washed ashore in Denmark in 1853 (#13). The giant squid came to public prominence in 1861 when the French corvette Alecton encountered a live animal (#18) at the surface while navigating near Tenerife. A report of the incident filed by the ship's captain was almost certainly seen by Jules Verne and adapted by him for the description of the monstrous squid in his 1870 novel, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Seas.
The giant squid's existence was established beyond doubt only in the 1870s, with the appearance of an extraordinary number of complete specimens—both dead and alive—in Newfoundland waters (beginning with #21). These were meticulously documented in a series of papers by Yale zoologist Addison Emery Verrill. Two of these Newfoundland specimens, both from 1873, were particularly significant as they were among the earliest to be photographed: first a single severed tentacle—hacked off a live animal as it "attacked" a fishing boat (#29)—and weeks later an intact animal in two parts (#30). The head and limbs of this latter specimen were famously shown draped over the sponge bath of Moses Harvey, a local clergyman, essayist, and amateur naturalist. Harvey secured and reported widely on both of these important specimens—as well as numerous others (most notably the Catalina specimen of 1877; #42)—and it was largely through his efforts that giant squid became known to North American and British zoologists. Recognition of Architeuthis as a real animal led to the reappraisal of earlier reports of gigantic tentacled sea creatures, with some of these subsequently being accepted as records of giant squid, the earliest stretching back to at least the 17th century.
For a time in the late 19th century, almost every major specimen of which material was saved was described as a new species. In all, some twenty species names were coined. However, there is no widely agreed basis for distinguishing between the named species, and both morphological and genetic data point to the existence of a single, globally distributed species, which according to the principle of priority must be known by the earliest available name: Architeuthis dux.
It is not known why giant squid become stranded on shore, but it may be because the distribution of deep, cold water where they live is temporarily altered. Marine biologist and Architeuthis specialist Frederick Aldrich proposed that there may be a periodicity to the strandings around Newfoundland, and based on historical data suggested an average interval between mass strandings of some 30 years. Aldrich used this value to correctly predict a relatively small stranding event between 1964 and 1966 (beginning with #169). The appearance of specimens around New Zealand has been linked to the El Niño–Southern Oscillation, with multiple strandings in the Cook Strait in 1879–1880 (beginning with #47) and 1982–1984 coinciding with or immediately following extreme negative peaks of the Southern Oscillation Index. Although strandings continue to occur sporadically throughout the world, few have been as frequent as those in Newfoundland in the late 19th century. A notable exception was a 15-month period between 2014 and 2015, during which an unprecedented 57 specimens were recorded from Japanese coastal waters of the Sea of Japan (beginning with #563).
Though the total number of recorded giant squid specimens now runs into the hundreds, the species remains notoriously elusive and little known. Attempts to capture a glimpse of a live giant squid—described as "the most elusive image in natural history"—were mooted since at least the 1960s. Efforts intensified significantly towards the end of the century, with the launch of several multi-million-dollar expeditions in the late 1990s, though these were all unsuccessful. The first years of the 21st century saw a number of breakthroughs in live giant squid imaging that ultimately culminated in the first recordings of live animals (#548 and 549) in their natural deep-water habitat—from both a remote camera system and a crewed submersible—in July 2012. Despite these recent advances and the growing number of both specimens and recordings of live animals, the species continues to occupy a unique place in the public imagination. As Roper et al. (2015:83) wrote: "Few events in the natural world stimulate more excitement and curiosity among scientists and laymen alike than the discovery of a specimen of Architeuthis."
The genus Architeuthis has a cosmopolitan or bi-subtropical distribution, and carcasses are known to wash ashore on every continent except Antarctica. The greatest numbers of specimens have been recorded in: the North Atlantic around Newfoundland (historically), northern Spain (more recently), Norway, the northern British Isles, and the archipelagos of the Azores and Madeira; the South Atlantic off South Africa and Namibia; the northwestern Pacific off Japan (especially more recently); and the southwestern Pacific around New Zealand and Australia.
The vast majority of specimens are of oceanic origin, including marginal seas broadly open to adjacent ocean, especially the Tasman Sea and Sea of Japan, but also the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea, among others. A handful are known from the far western Mediterranean Sea (#383, 447, 498, and 550), but these records do not necessarily indicate that the Mediterranean falls within the natural range of the giant squid, as the specimens may have been transported there by inflowing Atlantic water. Similarly, giant squid are unlikely to naturally occur in the North Sea owing to its shallow depth (but see #107 and 113, the only known English strandings). They are generally absent from equatorial and high polar latitudes (but see #215 and 249 from equatorial Atlantic waters, and specimens from northern Norway or #102 from the edge of the Arctic Circle off western Greenland).
According to Guerra et al. (2006), 592 confirmed giant squid specimens were known as of the end of 2004. Of these, 306 came from the Atlantic Ocean, 264 from the Pacific Ocean, 20 from the Indian Ocean, and 2 from the Mediterranean Sea. The figures for specimens collected in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans further broke down as follows: 148 in the northeastern Atlantic, 126 in the northwestern Atlantic, 26 in the southeastern Atlantic, 6 in the southwestern Atlantic, 43 in the northeastern Pacific, 28 in the northwestern Pacific, 10 in the southeastern Pacific, and 183 in the southwestern Pacific.
Guerra & González (2009) reported that the total number of recorded giant squid specimens stood at 624. Guerra et al. (2011) gave an updated figure of 677 specimens (see table below). Paxton (2016a) put the total at around 700 as of 2015, of which c. 460 had been measured in some way. This number has increased substantially in recent years, with 57 specimens recorded from the Sea of Japan over an extraordinary 15-month period in 2014–2015 (beginning with #563). The giant squid nevertheless remains a rarely encountered animal, especially considering its wide distribution and large size, with Richard Ellis writing that "each giant squid that washes up or is taken from the stomach of a sperm whale is still an occasion for a teuthological celebration".
Preserved giant squid specimens are much sought after for both study and display. In the mid-1960s, marine biologist and giant squid expert Frederick Aldrich of the Memorial University of Newfoundland organised a "squid squad" with the intent of securing specimens for study. In the 1980s, Aldrich resorted to distributing eye-catching "Wanted" posters offering rewards for "finding and holding" specimens stranded on the Newfoundland coast, "the value being dependent on their condition". Aldrich (1991:459) wrote that "[s]uch efforts were not futile, for in the intervening years I have secured either the specimens or information on 15 animals", though according to Hoff (2003:85) the rewards went unclaimed. Largely through Aldrich's efforts, the Marine Sciences Research Laboratory at Logy Bay, Newfoundland, assembled a substantial early collection of giant squid; as of 1971, it held 8 specimens, with the remains of 3 displayed together in a tank by the main entrance.
Guerra et al. (2011:1990) estimated that around 30 giant squid were exhibited at museums and aquaria worldwide, while Guerra & Segonzac (2014:118–119) provided an updated list of 35 (21 in national museums and 14 in private institutions; see table below). The purpose-built Museo del Calamar Gigante in Luarca, Spain, had by far the largest collection on public display (4 females and 1 male), but many of the museum's 14 or so total specimens were destroyed during a storm on 2 February 2014. At least 13 specimens were exhibited in Japan as of February 2017, of which 10 had been acquired since 2013.
A number of fragmentary giant squid remains were displayed as part of "In Search of Giant Squid", a Smithsonian travelling exhibition curated by Clyde Roper that visited a dozen US museums and other educational institutions between September 2004 and August 2009. The exhibition opened its national tour at Yale University's Peabody Museum of Natural History, which has maintained a strong association with the giant squid from the time of the Newfoundland strandings in the 1870s. Preparations for the Peabody exhibition, overseen by site curator Eric Lazo-Wasem, uncovered giant squid material in the museum's collections that was not previously known to be extant, including original specimens from Addison Emery Verrill's time.
In the late 19th century, the giant squid's popular appeal and desirability to museums—but scarcity of preserved specimens—spawned a long tradition of "life-sized" models that continues to the present day. Verrill's description of the famous Catalina specimen of 1877 (#42), which he personally examined in New York City the same year, served as the basis for the earliest models. The second Portugal Cove specimen, from 1881 (#60), was probably also used as a reference, as it was seen by Verrill shortly before he began modelling. Following Verrill's design, his draughtsman James Henry Emerton built the very first giant squid model for the Peabody Museum of Natural History in 1883. A second, near-identical model was soon delivered to the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University, and a third was made for the International Fisheries Exhibition, held in London in 1883. The Verrill and Emerton models were followed by six similar examples, again based on the Catalina specimen, produced by Ward's Natural Science Establishment of Rochester, New York, of which two were sold internationally: to London's Natural History Museum and the Oceanographic Museum of Monaco. The original Peabody Museum model was discarded around 1964 and replaced two years later by one based on both the Logy Bay specimen of 1873 (#30) and on several Newfoundland specimens from the 1960s, particularly the one found off Conche in October 1964 (#169).
Real giant squid specimens have traditionally been preserved in either solutions of alcohols (particularly ethanol and isopropyl alcohol) or in formalin. More recently, concerns about the fire and health risks posed by these substances have led to alternative preservative fluids being explored, such as propylene glycol (#254), glycerol (#495), and the hydrofluoroether Novec 7100. Additionally, methods such as plastination have made it possible to display authentic giant squid specimens in a dry state. A giant squid was first plastinated in 2000 and this specimen, nicknamed "Wheke" (#429), has been on display at the Muséum national d'histoire naturelle in Paris since 2008; two further specimens were plastinated in 2004, as were various parts of a 2015 specimen from Japan (#609). Several other individuals have been prepared for display by more conventional drying methods, such as hard curing (e.g. #598, 603, and 617), though this necessarily results in greatly shrunken specimens. At least one giant squid has been entirely embedded in acrylic, a process that rendered its flesh translucent (#632). Beginning in 2005, a specimen nicknamed "Cal" (#495) was uniquely displayed at Melbourne Aquarium encased in a 3.5-tonne block of ice (reportedly the largest man-made ice block in the world); it was turned into a conventional wet specimen several years later. Additionally, a number of other specimens have been temporarily placed on public display in a frozen or chilled state (e.g. #564, 585, 592, 603, 662, 669, 675, 677, 679, and 680).
Giant squid size—long a subject of both popular debate and academic inquiry—has often been misreported and exaggerated. Reports of specimens reaching or even exceeding 18 m (59 ft) in total length are widespread, but no animals approaching this size have been scientifically documented in recent times, despite the hundreds of specimens available for study. The 55 ft (16.76 m) "Thimble Tickle specimen" (#45) reported by Verrill (1880a:191) is often cited as the largest giant squid ever recorded, and the 55 ft 2 in (16.81 m) (or 57 ft [17.37 m]) specimen described by Kirk (1888) as Architeuthis longimanus (#62)—a strangely proportioned animal that has been much commented on—is sometimes cited as the longest. It is now thought likely that such lengths were achieved by great lengthening of the two long feeding tentacles, analogous to stretching elastic bands, or resulted from inadequate measurement methods such as pacing.
Based on a 40-year data set of more than 50 giant squid (Architeuthis dux) specimens, Roper & Shea (2013:114) suggest an average total length (TL) at maturity of 11 m (36 ft) and a "rarely encountered maximum length" of 14–15 m (46–49 ft). Of the nearly 100 specimens examined by Clyde Roper, the largest was "46 feet (14 m) long". O'Shea & Bolstad (2008) give a maximum total length of 13 m (43 ft) for females based on the examination of more than 130 specimens, measured post mortem and relaxed, as well as beaks recovered from sperm whales (which do not exceed the size of those found in the largest complete specimens). Steve O'Shea estimated the maximum total length for males at 10 m (33 ft). Yukhov (2014:242) gives a maximum total length of 11.8 m (39 ft) for the species, based on records from the southern hemisphere; Remeslo (2011) gives 13.1 m (43 ft). McClain et al. (2015) regard a 12-metre (39 ft) specimen from Asturias, Spain (#480), as the "longest scientifically verified" and "largest recorded and well-preserved specimen in the contemporary, peer-reviewed literature". Charles G. M. Paxton performed a statistical analysis using literature records of giant squid specimens and concluded that "squid with a conservative TL of 20 m [66 ft] would seem likely based on current data", but the study has been heavily criticised by experts in the field.
O'Shea & Bolstad (2008) give a maximum mantle length (ML) of 225 cm (7.38 ft) based on the examination of more than 130 specimens, as well as beaks recovered from sperm whales (which do not exceed the size of those found in the largest complete specimens), though there are recent scientific records of specimens that slightly exceed this size (such as #371, a 240 cm (7.9 ft) ML female captured off Tasmania, Australia; see also #647, with an estimated 2.15–3.06 m ML). Remeslo (2011) and Yukhov (2014:248) give a maximum mantle length of 260 cm (8.5 ft) for females from southern waters. Questionable records of up to 500 cm (16 ft) ML can be found in older literature. Paxton (2016a) accepts a maximum recorded ML of 279 cm (9.15 ft), based on the Lyall Bay specimen (#47) reported by Kirk (1880:312), but this record has been called into question as the gladius of this specimen (which should approximate the mantle length) was said to be only 190 cm (6.2 ft) long.
Including the head and arms but excluding the tentacles (standard length), the species very rarely exceeds 5 m (16 ft) according to O'Shea & Bolstad (2008). Paxton (2016a) considers 9.45 m (31.0 ft) to be the greatest reliably measured SL, based on a specimen (#46) reported by Verrill (1880a:192), and considers specimens of 10 m (33 ft) SL or more to be "very probable", but these conclusions have been criticised by giant squid experts.
O'Shea (2003b) put the maximum weight of female giant squid at 275 kg (606 lb), based on the examination of some 105 specimens as well as beaks recovered from sperm whales (which do not exceed the size of those found in the largest complete specimens; some of the heaviest recent specimens include #491 and 524). Giant squid are sexually size dimorphic, with the maximum weight for males estimated at 150 kg (330 lb), though heavier specimens have occasionally been reported (see #412 for a 190 kg (420 lb) specimen). Similarly, Remeslo (2011) and Yukhov (2014:248) give maximum masses of 250–260 kg (550–570 lb) and 150 kg (330 lb) for females and males, respectively, based on records from southern latitudes. Roper & Jereb (2010:121) give a maximum weight of up to 500 kg (1,100 lb), and "possibly greater". Discredited weights of as much as a tonne (2,200 lb) or more are not uncommon in older literature (see e.g. #22, 114, and 117).
The giant squid and the distantly related colossal squid (Mesonychoteuthis hamiltoni) are recognised as having by far the largest eyes of any living animal, and comparable to the largest eyes known from the fossil record. Historical reports of "dinner plate–sized" eyes (e.g. #37) are largely corroborated by modern measurements, with an accepted maximum diameter of at least 27 cm (11 in) and a 9 cm (3.5 in) pupil (based on #248).
The taxonomy of the giant squid genus Architeuthis has not been entirely resolved. Lumpers and splitters may propose as many as eight species or as few as one, with most authors recognising either one cosmopolitan species (A. dux) or three geographically disparate species: A. dux from the Atlantic, A. martensi from the North Pacific, and A. sanctipauli from the Southern Ocean. Historically, some twenty species names (not counting new combinations) and eight genus names have been applied to architeuthids (see Type specimens). No genetic or physical basis for distinguishing between the named species has been proposed, though specimens from the North Pacific do not appear to reach the maximum dimensions seen in giant squid from other areas. There may also be regional differences in the relative proportions of the tentacles and their sucker counts. The mitogenomic analysis of Winkelmann et al. (2013) supports the existence of a single, globally distributed species (A. dux). The same conclusion was reached by Förch (1998) on the basis of morphological data.
The literature on giant squid has been further muddied by the frequent misattribution of various squid specimens to the genus Architeuthis, often based solely on their large size. In the academic literature alone, such misidentifications encompass at least the oegopsid families Chiroteuthidae (misidentification #[8]—Asperoteuthis lui), Cranchiidae (#[5] and [6]—Mesonychoteuthis hamiltoni), Ommastrephidae (#[1]—Sthenoteuthis pteropus and #[2]—Dosidicus gigas), Onychoteuthidae (#[7], [11], and [13]—Onykia robusta), and Psychroteuthidae (#[4]—indeterminate species), with the familial identity of one record remaining unresolved (#[3]). Many more misidentifications have been propagated in the popular press, involving—among others—Megalocranchia cf. fisheri (#[12]; Cranchiidae), Thysanoteuthis rhombus (#[10]; Thysanoteuthidae), and an egg mass of Nototodarus gouldi (#[9]; Ommastrephidae). This situation is further confused by the occasional usage of the common name 'giant squid' in reference to large squids of other genera.
The present list generally follows "Records of Architeuthis Specimens from Published Reports", compiled by zoologist Michael J. Sweeney of the Smithsonian Institution and including records through 1999, with additional information taken from other sources (see Full citations). While Sweeney's list is sourced almost entirely from the scientific literature, many of the more recent specimens are supported by reports from the news media, including newspapers and magazines, radio and television broadcasts, and online sources.
Earlier efforts to compile a list of all known giant squid encounters throughout history include those of marine writer and artist Richard Ellis. Ellis's first list, published as an appendix to his 1994 work Monsters of the Sea, was probably the first such compilation to appear in print and was described in the book's table of contents as "the most complete and accurate list of the historical sightings and strandings of Architeuthis ever attempted". Ellis's much-expanded second list, an appendix to his 1998 book The Search for the Giant Squid, comprised 166 entries spanning four and a half centuries, from 1545 to 1996. Records which appear in Ellis's 1998 list but are not found in Sweeney & Roper's 2001 list have a citation to Ellis (1998a)—in the page range 257–265—in the 'Additional references' column of the main table.
In addition to these global specimen lists, a number of regional compilations have been published, including Clarke & Robson (1929:156), Rees (1950:39–40) and Collins (1998) for the British Isles; Sivertsen (1955) for Norway; Aldrich (1991) for Newfoundland; Okiyama (1993) for the Sea of Japan; Förch (1998:105–110) for New Zealand; Guerra et al. (2006:258–259) for Asturias, Spain; [TMAG] (2007:18–21) for Tasmania, Australia; and Roper et al. (2015) for the western North Atlantic. Works exhaustively enumerating all recorded specimens from a particular mass appearance event include those of Verrill (1882c) for Newfoundland in 1870–1881 and Kubodera et al. (2016) for the Sea of Japan in 2014–2015. Though the number of authenticated giant squid records now runs into the hundreds, individual specimens still generate considerable scientific interest and continue to have scholarly papers unto themselves.
The list includes records of giant squid (genus Architeuthis) either supported by a physical specimen (or parts thereof) or—in the absence of any saved material—where at least one of the following conditions is satisfied: the specimen was examined by an expert prior to disposal and thereby positively identified as a giant squid; a photograph or video recording of the specimen was taken, on the basis of which it was assigned to the genus Architeuthis by a recognised authority; or the record was accepted as being that of a giant squid by a contemporary expert or later authority for any other reason, such as the perceived credibility of the source or the verisimilitude of the account.
Purported sightings of giant squid lacking both physical and documentary evidence and expert appraisal are generally excluded, with the exception of those appearing in the lists of Ellis (1994a:379–384), Ellis (1998a:257–265), or Sweeney & Roper (2001) (see e.g. "attacks" of #32 and 106). In particular, "sea monster" sightings—many of which have been attributed to giant squid by various authors—fall short of this standard. Compositing and other forms of photo manipulation have been used to perpetrate hoaxes involving giant squid and these are occasionally circulated as records of actual news events, often accompanied by fictional background stories. Such records are likewise excluded, as are speculative misidentifications with no scientific basis.
The earliest surviving records of very large squid date to classical antiquity and the writings of Aristotle, Pliny the Elder, and possibly Antipater of Sidon. But in the absence of detailed descriptions or surviving remains, it is not possible to assign these to the giant squid genus Architeuthis with any confidence, and they are therefore not included in this list (in any case, giant squid records from the Mediterranean are exceedingly rare). Basque and Portuguese cod fishermen observed what were likely giant squid carcasses in the waters of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland as early as the 16th century, but conclusive evidence is similarly lacking. The earliest specimens identifiable as true giant squid are generally accepted to be ones from the early modern period in the 17th and 18th centuries, and possibly as far back as the 16th century (#1).
All developmental stages from hatchling to mature adult are included. In the literature there is a single anecdotal account of a giant squid "egg case", but this is excluded due to a lack of substantiating evidence (see misidentification #[9] for possible egg mass later determined to be that of the arrow squid, Nototodarus gouldi). Indirect evidence of giant squid—such as sucker scars found on sperm whales—falls outside the scope of this list.
Specimens misassigned to the genus Architeuthis in print publications or news reports are included, but are clearly highlighted as misidentifications.
Records are listed chronologically in ascending order and numbered accordingly. This numbering is not meant to be definitive but rather to provide a convenient means of referring to individual records. Specimens incorrectly assigned to the genus Architeuthis are counted separately, their numbers enclosed in square brackets, and are highlighted in pink ( ). Records that cover multiple whole specimens, or remains necessarily originating from multiple individuals (e.g. two lower beaks), have the 'Material cited' cell highlighted in grey ( ). Animals that were photographed or filmed while alive (all from the 21st century) have the 'Nature of encounter' cell highlighted in yellow ( ). Where a record falls into more than one of these categories, a combination of shadings is used. Where an image of a specimen is available, this is indicated by a camera symbol (📷) that links to the image.
The total number of giant squid records listed across this page and successive lists is 714, though the number of individual animals covered is greater (the additional number exceeding 250) as some records encompass multiple specimens (indicated in grey). Additionally, 13 records relate to specimens misidentified as giant squid (indicated in pink).
The following table lists the nominal species-level taxa associated with the genus Architeuthis, together with their corresponding type specimens, type localities, and type repositories. Binomial names are listed alphabetically by specific epithet and presented in their original combinations.
The following abbreviations are used in the List of giant squid table.
Oceanic sectors used in the main table follow Sweeney & Roper (2001): the Atlantic Ocean is divided into sectors at the equator and 30°W, the Pacific Ocean is divided at the equator and 180°, and the Indian Ocean is defined as the range 20°E to 115°E (the Arctic and Southern Oceans are not distinguished). An additional category has been created to accommodate the handful of specimens recorded from the Mediterranean Sea.
Abbreviations used for measurements and counts follow Sweeney & Roper (2001) and are based on standardised acronyms in teuthology, primarily those defined by Roper & Voss (1983), with the exception of several found in older references. Following Sweeney & Roper (2001), the somewhat non-standard EL ("entire" length) and WL ("whole" length) are used in place of the more common TL (usually total length; here tentacle length) and SL (usually standard length; here spermatophore length), respectively.
Institutional acronyms follow Sweeney & Roper (2001) and are primarily those defined by Leviton et al. (1985), Leviton & Gibbs (1988), and Sabaj (2016). Where the acronym is unknown, the full repository name is listed.
The following images relate to pre–20th century giant squid specimens and sightings. The number below each image corresponds to that given in the List of giant squid table and is linked to the relevant record therein. The date on which the specimen was first documented is also given (the little-endian day/month/year date format is used throughout).