Holt and Calderwood — Report on the Rarer Fishes. 401 



on account of its greater size, is of much higher value than the Homelyn, and is also 

 more valuable than the Thornback, though the latter is often quite as large. It is, 

 in fact, one of the most valuable species of Raia which finds its way into the 

 Grimsby market. Young Blondes, on account, as we suppose, of their 

 comparative rarity and low value, are not universally recognised as distinct from 

 adult Homelyns, but there are fishermen and merchants who can distinguish the 

 two forms at all stages. The name is said to have been derived from the Belgian 

 fishermen, but whether this is really the case we have no means of determining. 

 In our choice of a specific name we wei'e actuated by the desire of approaching 

 the vernacular name as closely as possible, while adheriag to the ordinary rules 

 of scientific nomenclature. Blanda is an epithet descriptive of mental rather than 

 physical condition, and we cannot claim that in this sense it is actually 

 appropriate. Still, considering the host of closely allied species, the name is 

 probably as distinctive as any that could have been coined from the physical 

 characters of the species. 



Remarks on the Synonomy. — As is apparent from the synonomy which we 

 have given above, we consider that Blondes and Homelyns have been pretty 

 generally confused by authors who were acquainted with examples of both species. 



It is possible that even Montague failed to distinguish between them, since he 

 states that his species R. maculata grows to a larger size than R. clavata, whereas 

 tlie Tliornback is larger than the Homelyn in any district of which we have 

 experience. If the author regarded the Blonde as merely a large Homelyn, his 

 statement would be perfectly intelligible, but his specific description is evidently 

 taken from the Homelyn, and not from the larger species. Hence we have no 

 hesitation in retaining the name of R. maculata for the Homelyn, since the 

 correctness of the diagnosis is not impared by any confusion which may possibly 

 have existed in the mind of the author. 



Couch's description is too inexact to enable us to be certain whether it is 

 intended to apply to one species or to both. The specimen selected for special 

 description would appear from its size, and from the roughness of the upper 

 surface, to have been a Blonde, but the colouration of the figure is apparently 

 taken from a Homelyn, and no doubt the author's general remarks are chiefly 

 meant to apply to examples of that species. Day's diagnosis of R. maculata refers 

 chiefly to the Homelyn, but from his remarks on the dentition it is evident that 

 he confused that species with the Blonde. Moreover, his figure which, as appears 

 from the text, was taken from an immature male 25 inches across the disk, must 

 certaiidv have been taken from a Blonde. The author remarks that the spots in 

 this specimen were rather closer together than usual; but it is probable that 

 the drawing does not very accurately represent the original either in markings or 

 some other details. 



TEANS. HOT. DUB. SOC, N.S. VOL. V., PART IX. 3 M 



