OCR Text |
Show 1873.] ' FISHES OF BENGAL.' 747 Now that the lists of the fish have been discovered, the next question is, where are the type specimens ? Some are believed to be in the British-Museum collection presented by Mr. Waterhouse; others also seem to have been given by the Zoological Society. I am now having as close a search as I can made for any papers or records bearing on this question, and trust that any one who can afford information will communicate it to the Society. M y reason for wishing this is that I hope shortly to commence a thorough reexamination of m y collection of Indian fishes now in England (numbering about 12000 specimens in spirit, besides skins), and I wish to compare them with undoubted types. Then, again, as to Sykes's types some confusion appears to exist. I long since observed the following in his ' Fishes of the Dukhun' (p. 355):-"Both Mr. Riippell and Mr. Yarrell, who have done m e the favour to look over m y fishes, express their belief that the present fish," &c. N o w the species he was alluding to was the Cyprinus nukta, of which no figure has been given ; but where is the specimen 1 It is evident he brought his collection to England : some (perhaps types) he presented to the East-India Museum; others he either retained or may have given to friends, who, it is possible, presented them in their own names to museums or institutions. Any information on this point is therefore most desirable. M y belief that the British Museum possessed some of Sykes's types was confirmed by seeing the following remarks in ' The Catalogue of the Fishes,' 1864, vol. v. p. 46 : -" a, b. Eight and a half to nine and a half inches long. From Colonel Sykes's collection. Types of Schilbe pabo, Sykes." The same of Glyptosternum lonah, p. 187, stated to be a type, but scarcely agreeing with the definition given by Sykes. However, it was asserted to be the type; and as such 1 accepted it. I was therefore, I must confess, very much surprised at observing the following from Dr. Gunther in the 'Proc. Zool. Soc' Dec. 1871 :- "Although I searched carefully the Museum (before and after the transfer of its fish-collection to the British Museum) for types of Colonel Sykes's paper, I failed to discover them." I drew attention to this in a paper read before the Asiatic Society of Calcutta, July 3rd, 1872, and published in their Journal, as I have a very great interest in examining types of Indian species for the purpose of comparison with m y own specimens. In the 'Proc. Zool. Soc' Dec. 3, 1872, p. 877, Dr. Gunther re-remarks, " I must take this early opportunity to modify a statement made by m e in P. Z. S. 1871, p. 763, to the effect that I had failed to discover in the East-India Museum the types of the Dukkun species described by Colonel Sykes. This is true as regards the majority of these fishes ; but at the time I wrote this I had forgotten that in 1864 I believed that I had found two or three of his types. Although not the true names (if any) were attached to the bottles when they were transferred to the Museum, the name of Colonel Sykes was written on the labels ; and I still believe the specimens to be typical." Perhaps Dr. Giinther is correct in his surmise ; but it would have |