CAR ETTA. 439 



OBSERV. Although the name Caretta was framed as early as 1820, 

 this genus was really distinguished and characterized as a natural 

 group, by Dumeril and Bibron, fifteen years later, and not by Fitz- 

 inger, who wrote eight years after the second volume of the " Erpe- 

 tologie genrale" was published, and who, moreover, never character- 

 ized the genus. 



A better name than Caretta could not have been selected to desig- 

 nate this genus, viewed in the same light as Caouana for the Logger- 

 head ; and, it having priority over its competitor, Eretmochelys, there is 

 no plausible reason for rejecting it. To say that its present limits are 

 not those originally ascribed to it by Merrem, is mere trifling. Was 

 the Shell Tortoise, Caretta imbricata, not included in it by Merrem 

 himself? How many genera of the older writers have met with the 

 same fate, and yet have been universally adopted, although in a re- 

 stricted sense. 



Hence, we cannot perceive why the name Eretmochelys should 

 "now be retained," and on what ground "no one has a right to change 

 it hereafter."* 



There are several well-marked species of Carets distributed over the 

 warm temperate and torrid zones of both hemispheres. The typical 

 one, and, perhaps, the most ancient on scientific record, is that of the 

 West Indies, or Caretta imbricata, MERR. The East Indian species, 

 Caretta squamosa, must have been known to navigators and traders 

 before the discovery of America by Columbus; but its history is inter- 

 woven with that of C. imbricata. to such an extent as to make it a 

 difficult task to divide the various synonyms between the two. We 

 dare say most of the writers of the eighteenth century have spoken 

 of the two indiscriminately, whether they drew their descriptions or 

 observations from specimens or simply quoted their predecessors. At 

 any rate, if the specimens were before them, they never questioned the 

 identity of the two species, hence, never instituted a series of critical 

 comparisons, owing, perhaps, to the fact, that the materials at their 

 command were in too fragmentary a condition. 



The Carets of the Polynesian Sea constitute likewise a peculiar 

 species, distinct both from C. imbricata and C. squamosa. Further- 

 more, we should not be surprised at hearing of the existence of more 

 than one species in the South Pacific Ocean. The specimens brought 

 home by the U. S. Exploring Expedition seem to foretell that such is 



* Contrib. to tie Nat. Hist, of the U. S. of Amer. I, 1857, 380, 



