8. ARCTOPHOCA. 81 



animal was entirely without under-fur — a fact which has been con- 

 firmed by Mr. Allen, who suggests that the skin of the young re- 

 ceived from Monterey is the skin of the young Eumetopias Stelleri, 

 which, I think, is very probable. But this only shows the difficulties 

 that must occur in the study of animals from the very imperfect ma- 

 terials which until lately existed. 



The Sea-lion of Steller has been one of the zoological paradoxes. 

 Professor Nilsson, like most preceding authors, regarded it as a va- 

 riety of the Otaria juhata ; and therefore I supposed it might be a 

 second species of the restricted genus Otaria. Dr. Peters has solved 

 the enigma by uniting it and the Seal which I described from Cali- 

 fornia, observing that the skull in the Berlin Museum, figured by 

 D' Alton under the name of " Steller's Sea-lion " (Phoca juhata), was 

 received from Kamtschatka, and a second skull of an old male in the 

 Berlin Museum was received from Mr. Brandt as coming from 

 Behring's Straits. 



The figure of Pander and D'Alton is so imperfect that it would 

 have been impossible to determine the species it represents without 

 the examination of the- original skull ; and then one sees that it 

 may have been intended for the species to which it is referred. The 

 same observation is applicable to the figure of the skull of Stel- 

 ler's Sea-bear. 



It is to be regretted that these skulls escaped the researches of 

 Professor Nilsson, who visited most museums in Europe to examine 

 the typical specimens. 



The specimen of CallorJiinus ursinus now in the Museum was re- 

 ceived from St. Petersburg as Otaria leonina, or Leo marinus of 

 Steller, from Berhing's Straits; so they evidently confound two 

 species under that name. 



8. ARCTOPHOCA. 



Arctophoca, Peters. 



Dr. Peters described this subgenus from a specimen sent from 

 Chili by Dr. Philippi. It chiefly difiers from Zalophus in the palate 

 being much narrower, but rather wider behind, and the teeth rather 

 far apart. I have not seen any skull agreeing with these cha- 

 racters. 



" With abundant under-fur." 



According to figures, the form of the skull and the large size of 

 the orbit are very similar to those of Phocarctos HooTceri, but the 

 number and form of the teeth are difierent. 



In the ♦ Monatsbericht,' May 1866, p. 276, t. 2. a, h, c, Dr. 

 Peters described and figured with considerable detail a skull of a 

 Sea-bear (sent to the Berlin Museum by Dr. Philippi, who obtained 

 it at Juan Eernandez Island) under the name of Otaria Philippi, 

 forming for it a subgenus which he calls Arctophoca. ' In his revi- 

 sion of that paper, published in the same work for November 1866, 

 p. 671, he places it as a synonym or subspecies of what he calls 

 Otaria fallclcindica, which is my Arctocephalus nigrescens, and not 



