/ 



G18 Mr. A'. Cabrera on the 



Thunberg et de Delalande, sont tellement intimes, qu'ayar 

 sous les yeux, d'un cote, I'^tat adulte du premier, sans sojit 

 jeune S,ge, et, de I'autre, le tr^s jeune dge de la seconde sanli 

 son etat adulte, on devait etre porte a attribuer a de simple/s 

 differences d^age les differences que I'on apercevait entre i(s \^ 

 pelage de Tune et celui de Fautre. M. E^dd^ric Guviee 

 n'iiesita done pas a les r6unir, et c'est par suite de cette cona* 

 fusion qu'il donna I'Afrique australe pour patrie au (7. pyg- 

 erythrus'. espece n'ayant en realite pour type qu'un individii- 

 achete de marchands qui ignoraient enti^renieiit son originei, 

 et dont la veritable patrie reste aujourd'hui m^me inconnue.^i 



I. Geoffroy, who saw the type of jyygerythrus and compare^ 

 it with adult specimens of the grey form collected by Verreauij 

 in South Africa, emphasized the difference between them iij 

 his "Synopsis" included in the same book (pp. 19-34)) 

 describing the Cuvier species as very distinct from the Gap<i 

 one "par son pelage vert jaunatre et non gris." 



We must, consequently, leave the name pygerythrus for a 

 red-vented Cercopithecus with green fur, the typical habitat 

 of which is unknown, and adopt another for the grey-colourer 

 form found in South Africa. Desmoulins, who suspectet 

 before Geoffroy the distinction between them, calls the lalte; 

 C. pusillus, attributing this name to Delalande*. Unforj 

 tunately the name of tiie French traveller appeared, no doubi 

 accidentally, italicized like that of the animal, thus: " Cerco- ! 

 jnthecus pusi/lus Delalande" ; and it was on account of this I 

 that 1. Geoffroy considered the term a non-binomial one and j 

 rejected it, calling the species C. lalandii. Mr. Oldfield j 

 Thomas, to whom I applied for his opinion on the subject, 

 thinks the apparently uncorrect name is a printer's fault, 

 as the whole article in which it appeared is written in con- 

 formity with the principles of binomial nomenclature ; and 

 I entirely agree with his decision. We must therefore call 

 the South-African monkey G. pusillus. < i 



Long before the publication of this name, as early, in fact, , j 

 as in 1811, the same animal was mentioned by Lichtenstein (V 

 as C. glaucus ; but no description being given, this name is 

 merely a nomen nudum. 



Now, it we consider all tlie Cercopi'theci with red vent 

 local forms of a single species, the green one, being 

 described the first, will be typical, and C. pusillus will be- 

 come C. pyg'vythrus p)usillus. As for the true pygeryOirus^ 

 1 think it can be identified with one of the green subspecies. 



* Dictionn. Class. d'Hist. Isat. vii. (1825) p. 568. 





