SCIDllID^— 8PKRMOPHILUS BMPETRA. 



843 



genu8 Arctomys. The only point of (iiscrepancy is the "palinae Hino vestigio 

 poUicis", which is almost ecjually valid against tiic reference of Pallas's Muh 

 empetra to any American species of Arctomys. While it is difficult to satis- 

 factorily make out what Pennant's original Quebec Marmot is, the statement 

 "larger than a Rabbit" shows it was not A. parryi* It was in all proba- 

 bility based on a northern example of Arctomys nionax. Sabine, in 1822, 

 while citing Mus empetra of Pallas, and all the reference subsequently, to 

 that time, based on it, as well as Pennant's and Forster's Quebec Marmot, 

 was the first to describe r specimen of the northern form of Arctomys monax 

 under the specific name empetra, Sabine himself, however, noticed the dis- 

 crepancies between Forster's account of his Quebec Marmot and his own 

 Arctomys empetra, and also refers to the want of agreement between Pallas's 

 account of Mus empetra and his own specimen. He says : — " But that speci- 

 men [Forster's] was only eleven inches, and the tail three inches long; it 

 could not therefore have been fully grown. Pallas described the animal from 

 a specimen in the Leyden Mu.seum, and gave it the name Empetra; this did 

 not exceed a foot in length, and its tail was only two inches and a half long. 

 .... The chestnut color of the head is mentioned by Forster, and there- 

 fore is probably to be found in some instances, though on the specimen I 

 have seen there is no such appearance." — {Trans. Linn. Sac. xiii, 1822, pp. 

 585,586.) Richardson, in 1825, in describing Arctomys jMirryi, distinctly 

 identifies Forster's Quebec Marmot with his A. parryi,^ but makes no refer- 

 ence to the Mus empetra of Pallas, nor to the empetra of Schreber, Gmelin, 

 and other early systematic authors. Excepting Pallas's unfortunate reference 

 to Pennant's almost unrecognizable Quebec Marmot, the whole account of 

 his Mus empetra relates unquestionably to the animal subsequently known 

 as Parry's Marmot, and it hence becomes necessary to adopt the name empetra 

 in place of parryi for that species. 



Parry, in 1825, barely alludes to his meeting with an animal he termed 



'The Quebec Marmot of Penaant's llntt edition of bis Syiiopslsof QnB<]riipet|g(l7Tl) is uot by any 

 meana the Quebeu Marmot of the Hecond vditi<^n of bis Arctic Zoulugy (17S2). In tbe latter, tbe ilescrip- 

 tioD is BO far modified as to also cover tbe Mu» empetra of I'allaa nnd the QnelHtc Marmot of Forster. Ho 

 says: — "The specimen which I formerly saw at Mr. Brook's, ulivv, appeared lurf^vr than a Rabbit; bnt 

 the specimen in the Boyal Society's Musenm [Forster's specimen] was only eleven inches long from the 

 nose to tbe tail, and the tail three inches. This probably was a yonng oue."~( Jrc«o ZoUlogy, vol. i, 

 1792, p. las.) 



t" Forster, in 1^e»P\iUuop\ical DiiNMCftoiif, describes a specimen of (be ^.parryi procured from 

 ChnrobiU, under :b>. i lame of tbe Quebec Mu.'mot, at tbe same time expressing his doubts of its identity 

 with that onima'. '— v Kiciiaroson, Pang's Second Toy. App. p. 318.) 



