ene 
-— - ele mmm n - 
imeem 
TP i M 
a pgp aam 
"et 
eem 
E 
| 
f 
of two British Species of Plecotus. 59 
possibly may have been confounded with the other species. 
This circumstance is indeed rendered the more probable from 
the fact that different authors, describing the Long-eared Bat, 
have assigned to it different dimensions. On the continent, the 
larger species appears to have been the one observed, of which 
very correct descriptions and measurements are given by Geof- 
froy in the Annales du Muséum, and by Desmarest in the Nouveau 
Dictionnaire d Histoire Naturelle, and Encyclopédie Méthodique*, 
. as referred to in the synonyms above quoted ; but of our Eng- 
lish authors, some appear to have seen one and some the other 
species. Thus we find Donovan (Brit. Quad. vol. i. pl. 44.) 
asserts the Long-eared Bat to be ** one of the largest species of 
the genus that inhabits England ;" whilst Shaw (Gen. Zool. vol. i. 
p.123.) observes, that it is-smaller than the short-eared or com- 
mon sort. This last opinion seems indeed to be the more pre- 
valent of the two... Daines Barrington, Berkenhout, Pennant, 
and Bewick, all fix the length of this species at no more than 
one inch and three-quarters ; to which the two last add, “extent 
of wing seven inchest." I may also observe, that the figure 
given by Fleming (Philos. of Zool. pl. 1. fig. 1.), though still 
incorrect with respect to some of the relative dimensions, yet 
on the whole more nearly approaches to my P. brevimanus. | 
The concise descriptions of Linnzus, Brisson, and other of 
* In this last work, Desmarest speaks of a small variety of the Plecotus auritus, 
found in Egypt, which would appear to border closely upon my new species, and may 
_ be the same with it; but from the very few particulars that are given respecting it, it 
is utterly impossible to decide with certainty upon this point. 
+ It is hardly possible that these measurements can be correct. If the length i is 
meant to include that of the body and tail together, as would appear at least from 
Daines Barrington’s account (Miscellanies, p. 165.), this bat must be very much 
smaller than even my Plecotus brevimanus, yet its extent of wing would be greater. 
If the length of the body alone is intended, it would nearly equal my P. auritus, while 
its extent of wing would be more than three inches less. 
12 the 
