THE ZOOLOGY OP BRITISH INDIA. 307 



Amongst tliese may be noticed as of primary importance the 

 types of the species described by Dr. Gray in his catalogues of 

 the Reptiles in the National Collection, and in other publications — 

 amounting to upwards of one hundred in number. There was 

 likewise a large accumulation of unnamed specimens. In 1860, 

 the entire collection of Eeptiles belonging to the late East Indian 

 Company was transferred to the National Collection, and its treasures 

 were thereby greatly augmented. Dr. Griinther has likewise enjoyed 

 free access to the Museum of the Eoyal College of Surgeons, of the 

 University of Oxford, and to other scientific institutions where typical 

 specimens of Indian Ophiology are preserved, besides having received 

 valuable assistance in the shape of notes and drawings from 

 Mr. Walter Elliot, Mr. Hodgson, Capt. Beddome, and other well- 

 known Indian Naturalists. Yet, with all these advantages, it must 

 not be supposed that his task was an easy one. To arrange and 

 describe some 500 species of animals of any order, cannot be in any 

 case otherwise than a work of great labour. But this labour was 

 greatly increased in the present case by the absolute novelty of the 

 subject — no previous attempt having ever been made to give even a 

 general sketch of the Herpetology of South-eastern Asia. Moreover, 

 many of the actually named species of the Indian Eeptilian 

 Fauna have been so inaccurately and incompletely described, that they 

 have been altogether omitted in general works on Herpetology, or 

 included amougst the synonyms of other species. These it was 

 necessary to re-discover and characterize anew, a task often pre- 

 senting more difficulties than the description of absolutely new 

 species. 



With regard to the arrangement of the references to previous 

 writers, introduced by Dr. Giiuther into the present work, we must 

 also say a few words. While our author has carefully recorded all 

 the different specific denominations under which each species has 

 been described, he has omitted those in which the genus is simply 

 altered. In reference to this point, we call particular attention to 

 the following weighty observations, given by Dr. Giinther, as em- 

 bodying his reasons for adherence to this rule. 



" Changes in the generic nomenclature are frequently ventured 

 " upon now-a-days in the most unscrupulous manner by persons who, 

 *' having seen only a small proportion of the species, copy the 

 " delusive characters of their new genera from the original descrip- 

 "tions, and with these most slender materials attempt to break up 



Y 2 



