206 THE WHALEBONE WHALES OF THE WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC. 



As the sternum is to be regarded partially in the light of a rudimentary organ, 

 it is not surprising that it varies widely, like all other ludimentary parts. In 

 adults, however, the variation appears to be less than in othei- species of Balcenop- 

 tera. Little stress can be laid upon the form of the sternum of the Massachusetts 

 specimen from a systematic point of view, as there are no other American specimens 

 with which to compare it, and it is not from an adult. 



The scale of Eschricht's figures, copied above, appeals to have been incoi'rectly 

 given by him. 



As I I'emarked at the beginning of this chapter, the American material at 

 command is so meagre as to be unsatisfactory for the solution of the questions 

 at issue. Nevertheless, I think the remarkable correspondence between the careful 

 measurements of Sir Wm. Turnei- on the Scotch skulls, and my measurements of 

 the skull from the coast of Massachusetts, is a sufficient proof of the identity of the 

 latter specimen with B. acuio-rostrata. It is my opinion that the lack of coi-re- 

 spondence in other particulars between the American specimens and those from 

 European waters is due partly to inaccuracies in descriptions, measurements, and 

 drawings, and partly to age and individual variation. 



Regarding the identity of Greenland specimens with those from the United 

 States, I am unable to offer any new proof, not having had any material from the 

 former locality. The opinions of those who have compared Greenland and Euro- 

 pean specimens in the various Eui'opean museums are cited below. 



OPINIONS OF EUROPEAN CETOLOGISTS REGARDING EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN SPECI- 

 MENS OF B. ACVTO-ROSTRATA. 



Lacep^de (1803-4) treats Fabricius's Greenland B. rostrata and Hunter's North 

 Sea specimen as one and the same species, but without critical remarks. It was 

 not long afterward that the species itself all but dropped from view on account of 

 Cuvier's destructive criticism of the species of Finback whales. 



In 1840 and the years immediately succeeding, Eschricht received thi-ee skele- 

 tons of immature females of the small whalebone whale of Greenhind (the first of 

 their kind to arrive in Europe), and as he already had a skeleton of a VaageTival 

 from the coast of Norway, he was in a position to institute comparisons of value. 

 He appears at first to have regarded the Greenland species as distinct, but in his 

 Uutersuchungen (1849) he withdi'aws this opinion in favor of the view that it is 

 the same as the European acnfo-rostrata, specifically if not subspecifieally. He 

 remarks: "In consequence of the new light on the subject, I must, at all events, 

 confine myself to the view that the Greenland and Norwegian dwarf-whales appear 

 to show the same subordinate mutual variations which are found in many species 

 of land-animals in their varied geographical distribution" (p. 174). 



This remark leads the way to considerations of the most fundamental im- 

 portance from a taxonomic point of view. Many such minor geographical valua- 

 tions as those alluded to by Eschricht are at this day commonly recognized as 

 species and subspecies. That they exist among whales as among land animals is 



