336 Prof. J. Reinhardt on the Fin- Whale 



Now^ as to the " Tunnolik " of the Greenlanders, it must be 

 admitted that if this really is identical with the Ostend whale, 

 as has hitherto been usually supposed, it must, no doubt, as 

 science stands at present^ be considered a species quite dis- 

 tinct from the ^^ Steypirey^r " or Balcenojytera Sihhaldii. But 

 the question is, whether this supposition is true ; and though 

 with respect to this whale we are still limited to the very same 

 materials that were formerly at Eschricht's disposal, yet they 

 may be found sufficient to answer this question. What made 

 Eschricht suppose that his '^ Tunnolik " might be the same 

 species as the Ostend whale was the resemblance which he 

 found between Dubar's figures of the pectoral fin of the latter 

 and the fin which Mr. Moller sent him from Greenland*. 

 Now this correspondence is so great, indeed, that at a time 

 when only a single fin-whale with such a pectoral fin was 

 known, he surely was justified in making such an inference 

 and in disregarding the discrepancy that seemed to exist 

 as to the place of the dorsal fin, and to explain it as caused 

 only by a mistake in the measurement of one or other of these 

 two whales, which had taken place under very unfavourable 

 circumstances. But the matter appears in another light now 

 that a pectoral fin, like that of the Ostend whale, characterized 

 by the uncommonly elongated and slender form of the pha- 

 langes, is found also in the Physalus section. 



The pectoral fin of the skeleton of B. Sibhaldii which ori- 

 ginally belonged to Lidth de Jeude is stated by Flower to 

 have four phalanges in the index, five in the third finger, five 

 in the fourth, and three in the fifth j the fin of the skeleton at 

 Hull agrees with this, except that the third finger has six 

 phalanges f. It is, however, observed expressly by Flower, 

 that, the phalanges of both skeletons being artificially articu- 

 lated, we cannot be sure that they are arranged in their 

 natural order of succession, or that they are all present ; 

 Eschricht found, indeed, when he examined the skeleton at 

 Hull in 1846, seven phalanges in the third finger, or one 

 more than Flower J. Accordingly one phalanx seems to have 

 been lost during the time that has elapsed since Eschricht 

 had an opportunity of studying this skeleton. Thus it becomes 

 very probable that the still smaller number of phalanges in 



* See K. D. Vid. Selsk. Skr. ser. 4. vol. xii. (1846) pp. 379, 380, and 

 ser. 5. vol. i. (1849) p. 138. 



t Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1864, p. 413, and 1865, p. 473. The meta- 

 carpal bones are not included in the number of the phalanges in these 

 statements j and the same is the case in all the following statements where 

 nothing is said to the contrarv. 



X K. D. Vid. Selsk. Skr. ser. 5. vol. i. p. 130. 



