280 Prof. Eschricht on the Gangetic Dolphin. 



the skeleton, that, as has abeady been observed above, we became 

 aware of the structure being the most peculiar in the whole group 

 of Dolphins — one which " deserved above all others to constitute 

 a distinct genus/' The large advancement which cetology made 

 in the time of Cuvier, and mostly by his aid alone, will at once 

 be acknowledged by comparing his first labours and researches 

 in that direction, with his latest works, published after his death. 

 It was indeed so great, that cetology has not been equally ad- 

 vanced since that period, by the various publications of other 

 authors. And yet Cuvier had not been able to collect a suffi- 

 ciency of whale-skeletons to enable him to settle the Linnsean 

 genus Delphinus, according to the greater or less affinity of the 

 already then very numerous species ; but was obliged to content 

 himself with the suggestion, which we have just quoted, that the 

 Gangetic dolphin, perhaps more than any other dolphin, deserved 

 to constitute a peculiar genus ; without, however, assigning to it 

 any place in the series of toothed whales. Schlegel* placed it 

 nearest the large and more robust, proper dolphins, which he called 

 die TummleTj and of which D. Tursio was the type. J. E. Gray t 

 placed it, somewhat more successfully, nearest to the Inia bolivi- 

 ensis, described by Alcide d'Orbigny J, which inhabits one of the 

 mountain branches of the Amazon, 700 French leagues from the 

 sea. Perhaps A. Wagner § was equally successful in placing it 

 between the Tooth-whale of the Amazon and the Micropteron. 

 They have certainly been far nearer the mark than T was in my 

 arrangement of Cetacea according to their food, in putting it as 

 the extreme limit of toothed whales, while the Hyperoodons and 

 the Cachalot were made to occupy the contrary extreme ||. All 

 who have followed me in the preceding description of the ske- 

 leton of the Gangetic dolphin, will no doubt arrive at the same 

 conclusion, especially if reference is also had to my antecedent 

 account of the Hyperoodon proper (Doglingen^) and of Rhyn- 

 choceti generally**. I now proceed to explain, that our dolphin 

 approaches in most respects nearest to the Hyperoodons, though 



* Abhandluagen aus dem Gebiete der Zoologie und vergleichenden Ana- 

 tomie. 1 Heft. Ley den, 1841, 4to, p. 28. 



t Voyage of the Erebus and Terror. 



X Notice sur un nouveau genre de Cetace. Nouvelles Annales du Mu- 

 seum d'Hist. Nat. tome iii. p. 22. pi. 3. Paris, 1834. 



§ Die S'augthiere in Abbildungen nach der Natur, mit Beschreibungen, 

 von J. C. D. Schreber, fortgesetzt von Job. Andr. Wagner. 7 Theil. Er- 

 langen, 1846. 



II Zoologisch-anatomisch-physiologische Untersucbungen iiber die nor- 

 dischen Wallthiere, p. 7- Leipz. 1849, 4to. 



5[ Fourth Memoir on Whales, in Transact, of the Royal Danish Acad, of 

 Sciences, Sect. Nat. Hist, and Mathemat., vol. ii. 1845. 



** Sixth Memoir on Whales, /. c. 5th series, vol. i. 1849. 



