| OCR Text |
Show 780 MR. W. T. BLANFORD O N T H E [Nov. 3, 4. A Monograph, of the Genus Paradoxurus, F. Cuv. By W . T. BLANFORD, F.R.S. [Received August 19, 1885.] (Plates XLIX. & L.) I have recently had occasion to prepare, for a forthcoming work on Indian Mammalia, an account of the species of Paradoxurus inhabiting India, Burma, and Ceylon. In the course of m y work I have found it necessary to examine in detail the literature relating to the different forms, and I have come to conclusions differing somewhat from those hitherto published on the subject. It may perhaps be of use to those who have occasion to deal with species belonging to the genus, which are by no means easy to determine, if I state the results of m y inquiries and extend them to all the species belonging to this generic type. M y work has been principally based on the collection of skins and skulls in the British-Museum collection, in examining which I have received much assistance from Mr. Oldfield Thomas, who had already arranged the specimens to a considerable extent, and to whom I am indebted for much information and for many suggestions. The latest attempt at an arrangement and definition of the species belonging to the genus and its allies was made, so far as I can ascertain, by the late Dr. J. E. Gray in his revision of the genera and species of Viverrine animals. This appeared in the Proceedings of the Society for 1864, and was republished, with a few additional notes and references, in the ' Catalogue of Carnivorous, Pachydermatous, and Edentate Mammalia in the British Museum ' (1869). In the classification there adopted, nine species of Paradoxurus are admitted, besides three of Paguma, one of Arctogale, and one of Nandinia. In addition to these eight more " species of this group requiring further examination " are enumerated, and at least three other nominal species are mentioned. So far as I am aware only one species 1, P. musschenbroeki, from Celebes, has been described since Dr. Gray's Catalogue appeared ; but in that Catalogue some names previously given are omitted", amongst which are P. nubia, F. Cuv., P. rubidus, Blyth, and P. tytleri, Tytler. As will be seen in the sequel, my own conclusions as to the species of the genus differ widely from Dr. Gray's, whose Catalogue contains numerous mistakes of various kinds3. 1 Except of course P.jerdoni, above, p. 613. 2 A few names that have, so far as I can find, never been published are added in tbe synonymy. There may have been a reason, though its nature is not clear, for the insertion of these technically unborn terms, but there is no scientific purpose to be served by repeating them. 3 I will point out two, which are characteristic, and occur in the synonymy of one species, Paguma grayi, P.Z.S. 1864, p. 541, and Cat. Carn. &c. M a m m. B. M. 1869, p. 73. The first is the quotation of " Paradoxurus bondar, Temminck, Mon. ii. p. 332, t. 55. f. 1-4 (skull, not syn.)," as a synonym of Paguma grayi. The late quoted, 55, is a mistake for 65, and figures 1-4 for figures 4-6, as is |
