40 Mr. W.S. Macueay on the Comparative Anatomy 
the following words of Hermann :—‘‘ Sed Dasypodis Manisque 
armatum corpus et in globum sese contrahendi instinctus ex 
eAdem Mammalium classe statim Erinaceum revocant Dasypodi 
connexum quique non modo proximeé distantes Sorzces Talpas- 
que sed et interjecté Hystrice omnem Glirium familiam post se 
trahit.” I shall next, in compliance with this hint, place the 
principal animals of the three groups in such a way as that the 
zoologist can determine for himself, whether any or what rela- 
tions of analogy exist between them. 
EDENTATA Cuv. GLIRES Linn. INSECTIVORA. 
Echidna* Cuv....... Echimys Geof. . . . . . Mygale Cuv. 
{ omithortynehs BL. ne = Spalax GUtld Nelle!) jot Talpa L. 
Myrmecophaga Z. .... SciurusZ. ....... Tupaia Raff. 
Chlamyphorus Har. . . . Hydrochcerus Zra.. . . Centenes Jil. 
Das ypuseli wee leases ayes lehaine< in Aes 6.00.6 Erinaceus L. 
I do not attempt to dilate upon this very important subject, 
because I have not yet bestowed upon it the attention which it 
requires. ‘The zoologist is left therefore to form his own con- 
clusions, when he may have studied those very interesting pages 
of Hermannt, in which this learned naturalist gives his reasons 
at length (unfortunately too long to quote here) for the existence 
of relations between Erinaceus and Hystriv, between Sorea and 
Mus, between Sorer and Elephas, between Mygale and Castor, 
Sorex and Talpa, and finally, between Spalax and Talpa. If 
these relations be true in nature, they are all analogical and 
expressed in the above table, except the relation between Sorea 
and Talpa, which is one of affinity. 
In some such manner as this would it appear that Nature, 
* Echidna is, according to Cuvier, connected with Myrmecophaga by means of its 
extensible tongue and habits. Myrmecophaga is connected with Dasypus, according 
to the same authority, by means of the singular genus Orycteropus. 
+ Tab. Aff. Anim. p. 78 et seq.; p. 90 et seq. : 
passing 
