OCR Text |
Show 516 DR. J. B. <;nvv O N TORTOISES. [June 6, appear to be rare in " Burmah," or rather, I believe, in Arracan ; then I should be very glad to adopt it, as it would erase a very imperfectly described nominal species from the list. The interesting part of his notes is where Mr. Theobald says that Testudo phayrei is a true Testudo, with a regular sternum and separate caudal shield ; therefore Mr. Blyth was in error when he informed me and Dr. Gunther that Manouria emys was the same as his T. phayrei, an idea adopted by Mr. Theobald in his ** Catalogue of the Reptiles of Pegu,' and in his ' Catalogue of the Reptiles in the Museum of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,' where, after having seen the specimens, he placed it as Manouria emys. It is to be observed that if the head should prove to be the same as the one on which m y genus Scapia is founded, it will go to more firmly establish the propriety of having formed the genus Scapia, as Testudo phayrei has, according to Mr. Theobald, the hitherto unobserved combination of normal sternal shields, like Testudo, and separate caudal shields, like Manouria and the freshwater Tortoises, so that it forms a section or genus by itself. Mr. Theobald believes that the skull on which Scapia falconeri was established belonged to this species. He may possibly be right; for it is a head of a large Land-Tortoise, of which we do not know the body, and which may perhaps come from India, or rather Hindostan ; and Testudo phayrei is a large Land-Tortoise, the head or skull of which has not been described, although we now learn that the typical specimen has the head on it, and the general form and external characters of the skull are usually to be seen through the skin. I should probably have made this suggestion myself when I established the genus from the skull, and mentioned the characters by which it was known from the skulls of all the large Land-Tortoises then known ; but the necessity of referring to the undescribed head of T. phayrei did not occur to me, as at that period I believed, on the authority of Mr. Blyth and Mr. Theobald, who had the specimens at their command, that it was the same as Manouria, with which I did compare it. Mr. Theobald must excuse m y not adopting his suggestion till an accurate comparison has been made between the skull of T. phayrei and Scapia, more especially as Mr. Theobald has already, with " culpable haste," referred the two typical specimens of T. phayrei to two species, indeed I may say genera, to which he now says they do not belong. It is to be hoped some competent zoologist will make the comparison which Mr. Theobald and his friends seem disinclined to do. Mr. Theobald further suggests that the skull which I described may have formerly belonged to a thorax in the Indian Museum. I must say I see no evidence of the fact worthy of a moment's notice, and it is a curious idea when they have not proved the identity of the two species ; and the account of the state of the specimen and the manipulation it had undergone is so contradictory as to be utterly unworthy of credit. I must leave the question to the former and present curators of that museum, who know better their rules and manner of conducting the institution. |