Dr. Aiulerson on Trionjx gangeticus, Cuvi'cr. 221 



belong to two genera. It sliould be borne in mind, lioAvcvcr, 

 that Dr. Gray has no practical acqnaintance with the skull 

 of his T.javanicus^ Geoft'., which is the last name but one 

 which he has adopted for the Testudo gotaghol of Buchanan 

 Hamilton, and which he named in the ' Illustrations of Indian 

 Zoology ' Trionyx javanicuSj Schweigger, although he now 

 states that Schweigger " never uses such a name." In the 

 ' Synopsis Eeptilium,' p. 48, and in the ' Catalogue of Shield 

 Reptiles,' p. 67, the same species appears under the name T. 

 javanicus^ Geotf. ; but Dr. Gray's knowledge of tlie species 

 had aj^parently undergone a change in the interval between 

 the publication of the Catalogue and its Supplement, because 

 in the latter (p. 104) the species is brought on the stage as 

 Potamoclielys stellataj Geoff. 



Dr. Gray remarks of the skull of Emyda imnctafa (Suppl. 

 Cat. Sh. Rept. p. 117) that it is very like that of Putamoclielyfi. 

 I have before me a skull which I removed with my own hands 

 from an adult specimen of the common yellow-spotted Emyda 

 of the Ganges. This skull, although it is larger than Dr. Gray's 

 figure of Potamoclielys stellata^ Geoff'., I am prepared to prove 

 is generically identical with the skull which that figure repre- 

 sents ; in other words. Dr. Gray's figure of the skull of Pota- 

 mochi'lys steJIata, Geoff., is the skull of an Emyda closely 

 allied to Emyda punctata. 



It is to be desired that Dr. Gray should state whence he 

 obtained the figure of the skull of his so-called Potamoclielys 

 stellata, Geoft\, because in Avriting of the species he distinctly 

 states, " I have not been able to examine any skulls of it." 

 Has Dr. Gray copied the skull from Prof. Wagler's figure 

 without any acknowledgment, and without, any grounds that 

 justified him in referring the skull of an Emyda to the body of 

 a true Trionyx^ the skull of which had been already figured 

 and described by Cuvier as Trionyx gancjeticus '? 



The foregoing insight into the character of the ^ Supplement 

 to the Catalogue of Shield Reptiles in the Collection of the 

 British Museum' is unfortunately not an isolated instance of 

 the many inaccuracies which distinguish it. Only a very 

 short time ago I pointed out that Dr. Gray's genera Manouria 

 and Scajjia, refer to one animal, the shell constituting the former 

 and the skull the latter genus, the two genera being the 

 equivalent of the genus Testudo* \ The correctness of what 



* A paper of mine appeared in this Jonrnal, vol. A'iii. p. ."24 (1871), 

 under the misnomer, " On Testudo P/un/rci, Tlieob. and Dr. Gray," whereas 

 it should have been " Ou Trioai/.c I'/iaj/rci" &c. The whole internal 

 evidence of the paper proved the absurdity of the title, which I believe 

 was drawn out by the editors of the ' Annals.' [Whatever Ur. Anderson 



