CHAEACTEE OF THE HEAD. 351 



note how many and what ludicrous blunders had been 

 made in details, while there was a fair general correct- 

 ness. 



Viewed in this light, it will be manifest how ineflScient 

 the sketch made on board the Dcedalus must be for 

 minute characters ; and particularly those which in the 

 diagnosis above I have marked with italics. Yet these 

 are the characters mainly relied on to prove the mammalian 

 nature of the animal Some of these characters could 

 not possibly have been determined at two hundred yards' 

 distance. I say " mainly relied on ; " because there is 

 the mane-like appendage yet to be accounted for. This is 

 a strong point certainly in favour of a mammalian, and 

 of a phocal nature ; whether it decides the question, 

 however, I wUl presently examine. 



The head in either of the large sketches (those, I mean, 

 in which the creature is represented in the sea) does not 

 appear to me at all to resemble that of a seal ; nor do I 

 see a " vaulted cranium." The summit of the head does 

 not rise above the level of the summit of the neck ; in 

 other words, the vertical diameter of the head and neck 

 are equal, while there are indications that the occiput 

 considerably exceeds the neck in transverse diameter. 

 This is not the case with any seal, but it is eminently 

 characteristic of eels, of many serpents, and some lizards. 

 Let the reader compare the lower figure {Illustrated 

 London News, Oct 28, 1848) with that of the Broad- 

 nosed Eel in YarreU's British Fishes, (Ed. iL, vol ii, 

 p. 396.) The head of some of the scincoid lizards (the 



