THE "WHAJLEBONE WHALES OF THE WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC. 263 



Nordhvaleu, published in conjunction with Prof. Reinhardt in 1861, he men- 

 tions the " Noi'dcaper " as " probably the same species as that from the coasts of 

 Nantucket aud New England which the Anglo-Americans already call 'Ricrht 

 whale.' " ' ^ = 



The question was first forced on the attention of cetologists in 1865, when 

 Cope published the description of his B. cisarciica {22, 168). Cope did not examine 

 the Sail Sebastian skeleton on which B. biscayensis was based, but remarks regai'd- 

 ing his B. cisarctica as follows : " This species may readily occur on the European 

 coasts, and is, no doubt, allied to, or the same as, the species pursued by the 

 Biscay whalers, which Eschricht says is related to the australis. This does not 

 appear to have been described, though catalogued without reference by Gray and 

 Flower under the name of biscayensis {22, 1 69)." It is stated by Cope, however, 

 that he did study the skeleton of B. australis in the Jardin des Flantes, and that 

 his species is "strongly separated " from that form. 



Van Beneden in 1867 quotes Cope's opinion as to the probal)]e identity of the 

 B. cisarctica with the Biscay whale, and remarks that Cope holds this view '' avec 

 beaucoup de raison.r He also adds : " It is then from America that we should hear 

 the facts regarding the history of this animal which during centuries visited our 

 [European] coasts, and which has contributed largely to the prosperity of our 

 hardy neighbors of the North [the Dutch, etc.] " {3, sep. 8). 



In his memoir on the Taranto whale, Gasco remarks in 1878 : " Although so 

 brief, the summary reported by Prof. Cope on the whale captured opposite Phila- 

 delphia in 1862 leaves no doubt as to the determination of the Taranto whale. 

 Tbey ai'e counterparts {sorelle) ; both belong to Balmna biscayemis Eschricht " 

 {47). The same statement is repeated in the Comptes liendns Acad. Paris, 87 

 1887, p. 410. He also states that he compared a replica of a cast of the earbone of 

 the type of B. cisarctica belonging to the Civic Museum of Milan with that of the 

 Taranto whale and found that they vveie identical {4-7, 25). 



In 1879, Gasco published a desci'iption of the type of "J^. biscaye7isis." He 

 appears to take for granted the identity of that species with B. cisarctica, and in 

 the course of his article, (juotes a conversation with Cope, whom he met in Paris. 

 Cope is repoi'ted as saying that the Philadelphia whale (type of B. cisarctica) 

 exactly resembles that of Tarento {'' B. biscayensis'''') {48, 581, footnote 2). 



The Osteographie of Van Beneden and Gervais, which bears the date of 1880, 

 does not contain as much original matter regarding the Atlantic Right whale as is 

 the case with other species. The authors state that they examined neither the 

 type of "^. biscayensis''^ nor that of B. cisarctica, but that they "do not doubt" 

 that the two species are identical (5, 103). Later in the same work they remark : 

 "This whale [B. cisarctica'] is no other than the Balcena biscayensis" {8, 236). 



In 1883, Holder summed up the opinions regarding the affinities of B. bis- 

 cayensis and B. cisarctica {61, 117). He includes the opinions of most of the 

 authors above cited and adds some independent testimony. Among these addi- 



' Page 469. 



