372 MAXIDID.1!. 



Museum, may be thus described : — The head ovate, convex above 

 and on the sides. The end of the uose, the side of the face, inclu- 

 ding the orbit, to the back of the ears, the throat, underside of the 

 body, and the inside of the legs bald, with a few very slender, elon- 

 gated hairs on the front of the chin. The forehead with one scale, 

 and five series of scales behind it. The ears large, with a well-de- 

 veloped, oblong, nearly flat conch behind ; an oblong prominence for 

 a tragus in front of the small auditory aperture. The fore and hind 

 legs covered with series of scales down to the base of the toes ; 

 the toes united to the claws. The palms of the fore feet and the 

 soles of the hind feet hard, callous, well developed. The fore feet 

 with five elongated conical claws, which are strongly inflexed on both 

 palms ; the inner and outer small, then the second and fourth, and 

 the centre or third the largest. The hind feet with five short, coni- 

 cal , compressed claws ; the inner and outer small, the three middle 

 larger, tlie middle one being rather the largest. The skin of the 

 back, between the bases of the scales, bald ; the lower part of the 

 scales and the middle of the scales striated. The tongue elongate, 

 exsertile, flat, linear, tapering to the tip, which is rounded. The 

 eyelids soft, distinct, not ciliated, but the outer surface entirely 

 covered with very short bristles. 



Professor Sundevall, in his Monograph, places considerable re- 

 liance on the form of the claws, and on the comparative size and 

 form of the claws of the fore and hind feet, as a specific distinction. 

 The specimens which I have examined from the same locality seem 

 to differ verj^ much in this respect. 



Manis Dahnannii was described from specimens from China, which 

 looked like the young of M. laticauda. It is probably the same as 

 the many-scaled species from India, or at least must be very nearly 

 allied to it, more especially as the large size of the cars, which caused 

 Hodgson to call it M. aurifcf, is mentioned. 



Dr. Sundevall states that his M. javanica is from Java, and he 

 believes that it is common there ; but he describes all the scales as 

 fulvescent. I have never seen any Javan or Sumatran specimen of 

 that colour. They are always dark brown, while the Indian species 

 is always pale-coloured ; and I am inclined to believe that it must 

 have been the Indian species that was described. 



There are two skuUs of this species in the British Museum, re- 

 ceived from Mr. Hodgson as belonging to his M. aurita ; they are 

 very solid, considerably stouter in proportion to their length than 

 the skull of M. indica figured by Cuvier, and they have very broad 

 nasal bones, which are rounded at the hinder end. 



Professor Sundevall believes that the skeleton of Pangolin a courte 

 queue, or, as he quotes it, " Pangolin des Indes," figured and de- 

 scribed by Cuvier in the ' Ossemens Fossiles,' is the skeleton of his 

 M. javanica. I think this a mistake. Compare the skull with the 

 skull of M. javanica figured by Rapp, which I am assured was taken 

 out of the skin which he figures (which is the true M. javanica of 

 this essay). I believe that the M. javanica of Sundevall is an Indian 

 and not a Javan species : and it differs from the Indian species 



