the Mascai-eiie Viverrid Gixlidlctis. 115 



These discrepancies, coupled with Buffou's statement that the 

 animal came from the Cororaandel coast, no precise locality 

 having been cited by Sounerat, suggest the possibility of 

 Biiflon having procured a second specimen. If not, Soiinerat 

 must have told him that he piclced 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 

 rinde " as Viverra fasciata, and Desmarest gave tlie name 

 striata to the same animal, i^'ischer liad no choice but to drop 

 striata as a synonym oi fasciata. 



Subsequently the species was described by F. Cuvier as 

 "La Genette ray^ de Plndie," Viverra fasciata, Gmel. (Diet, 

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

 description given by Buli'on in the Supplement, stating tliat 

 lie 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. Geoftroy St. Hilaire 

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

 }). 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 

 JMadagascar. 



The discrepancies in the information as to the locali'y 

 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, Geoff r., were 

 different individuals. Geoffroy St. Hilaire described 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 Desmaresf's Viverra striata, or of Buffon^s 

 and Sonnerat's figures and descriptions, although he must 

 luive been well acquainted with the works of these three 

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

 when discussing his fathti-'s species, suggest identity between 

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

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



* The latter work I have not seen. 



