the Mascarene Viverrid Galidictis. 115 



These discrepancies, coupled with Buffon's statement that the 

 animal came from the Coromandel coast, no precise locality 

 having been cited by Sonnerat, suggest the possibility of 

 Buffon having procured a second specimen. If not, Sonnerat 

 must have told him that he picked up the specimen on that 

 coast of India. But even if two specimens were concerned, 

 it seems obvious that they belonged to the same species, 

 though possibly subspecifically distinct. However that may 

 be, since Gmelin described Sonnerat's " Chat sauvage de 

 Flnde" as Viverra fasciata, and Desmarest gave the name 

 striata to the same animal, Fischer had no choice but to drop 

 striata as a synonym of fascial a. 



Subsequently the species was described by F. Cuvier as 

 "La Genette rayd de l'lndie," Viverrafasciata, Ginel. (Diet. 

 Sci. Nat. xviii. p. 322, 1820). He quoted at length the 

 description given by Buffon in the Supplement, stating that 

 he had not himself seen the animal, which was no longer in 

 existence — or, at all events, not available for examination. 



So far all seems clear. But in 1826 E. Geoffroy St. Hilaire 

 (Diet. Class. Nat. Hist. x. p. 214, and Cat. des Mamm. 

 ]). 98*) gave the name Mustela striata to a specimen pre- 

 sented to the Paris Museum by Sonnerat and stated, no doubt 

 rightly and on Sonnerat's authority, to have come from 

 Madagascar. 



The discrepancies in the information as to the locality 

 given by Sonnerat presumably to Buffon, and almost cer- 

 tainly to Geoffroy St. Hilaire, coupled with F. Cuvier's 

 declaration as to the disappearance of the example described 

 by Buffon, have an important bearing on the conclusion, 

 supported by other facts, that the types of V. fasciata, Gmel. 

 ( = striata, Desm.), and of Mustela striata, Geoffr., were 

 different individuals. Geoffroy St. Hilaire desciibed the 

 colour of M. striata as dark brown with five white longitu- 

 dinal lines above, the tail white, and the underside of the 

 body greyish white. It is significant that he made no men- 

 tion whatever of Desmarest's Viverra striata, or of Buffon's 

 and Sonnerat's figures and descriptions, although he must 

 have been well acquainted with the works of these three 

 compatriot naturalists. Nor did I. Geoffroy St. Hilaire, 

 when discussing his father's species, suggest identity between 

 the animals in question (Mag. de Zool. 2nd ser. i. 1839, 

 pp. 32-33, pi. xviii.)- The same applies to Cuvier, who 



* The latter work I have not seen. 



