9 8 



NA TURE 



{May 29, 1884 



of virus, increasing in strength on every transmis- 

 sion, is at the same time inoculated into a dog. This 

 latter will then be found capable of resisting the most 

 fatal virus, having become completely refractory to rabies, 

 no matter whether the virus, derived from a case of com- 

 mon rabies {rage des rues), is introduced by intravenous 

 inoculation or by trephining." 



THE MAMMALIA OF INDIA AND CEYLON 

 Natural History of the Mammalia of India and Ceylon. 

 By Robert A. Sterndale, F.R.G.S., F.Z.S. (Calcutta: 

 Thacker, Spink, and Co. ; London : Thacker and Co 

 1884.) 



'T'HIS book may fairly be described as an attempt by 

 A an unscientific writer to compile a scientific work. 

 The author is favourably known as a describer of Indian 

 wild sports, and his observations on the habits of animals 

 are generally good and often original. His best known 

 publication, " Seonee or Camp Life in the Satpura Range," 

 although not quite equal to Forsyth's delightful " High- 

 lands of Central India," rises above the level of ordinary 

 Indian sporting works. In the volume now published he 

 has attempted the somewhat ambitious task of compiling 

 a popular manual of Indian mammalia, comprising not 

 only those described in Jerdon's "Mammals of India" 

 (which is restricted to the kinds found in the Indian 

 Peninsula and the Himalayas!, but also the species living in 

 Assam, Burmah, Ceylon, and " the countries bordering the 

 British Indian Empire on the north." By including some 

 (not all) of the mammals described by A. Milne-Edwards 

 from Eastern Tibet, several of those recorded by various 

 authors from Kashgaria, Afghanistan, and Persia, and 

 some Malay types, the total number of species enumerated 

 is brought up to 4S2. This number, however, is partly 

 made up by nominal species, the writer having compiled 

 his lists from various authorities of unequal value. 



Had Mr. Sterndale confined his descriptions to the 

 larger and better known mammals of India and the sur- 

 rounding countries, he might possibly have achieved 

 greater success. He has bestowed much labour upon the 

 book, and has in some cases, but unfortunately not in all, 

 had recourse to good and recent information. Thus he 

 adopts Flower's and Mivart's classification of the Car- 

 m'vora, and Alston's arrangement of the rodents, whilst 

 he places the dugong in the Cetaeea, and Galeopithecus 

 amongst the lemurs. 



The actual descriptions of species are for the most part 

 taken from other writers, and the same may be said of 

 localities, which, however, are not always correct, even in 

 the case of the larger and better known animals. Thus 

 the markhor {Capra falconeri v. megaceros) is said to be 

 found in Ladakh, where it does not occur, although 

 common in Astor and Gilgit, and the hog-deer, Axis 

 porcinus, is stated to exist " throughout India, though 

 scarce in the central parts," whereas it is not known with 

 certainty to inhabit any part of the peninsula of India 

 except the plains of the Ganges and Indus. Many other 

 instances might be quoted. Mr. Sterndale is not even 

 aware that Tragitlus kanchil exists in Tenasserim, 

 although its occurrence there was well known to Blyth 

 at least twenty-five years ago. He is unaware also that 

 Cam's lufius has been obtained in Gilgit, and Nectoe;ale 



elegans in Sikkim. But although Tragulus kancliil does 

 not receive a number and separate notice as one of the 

 Indian mammalia, Mustela nudipes, a purely Malay in- 

 sular type, not recorded from continental Asia, is included 

 in the list as No. 190, with the remark that " this species 

 may be discovered in Tenasserim." There is a want of 

 system in the admission and exclusion of species through- 

 out. Thus Macacus thibetanus (No. 23) and Nemorkcedits 

 edwardsii (No. 453) are described, whilst Semnopitkecus 

 roxellana, Elaphodus cephalophus, and Cervicitis lachry- 

 mans are ignored, although all are from the same country 

 in Eastern Tibet, and described in the same work by 

 one author. Similarly whilst some Andaman and Nicobar 

 bats, e.g. Rhinolophus andamanensis (No. 48) and Phyllo- 

 rhina nicobarensis (No. 63) are included, no mention is 

 made of four Megacheiroptera from the same islands, viz. 

 Pteropus nicobaricus, Cynoplerus brachyotus, C. scherzeri, 

 and C. brachysoma. 



As might be anticipated, the micro-mammalia are not 

 treated in a manner that will afford much aid to a student. 

 The writer is unacquainted with Mr. Oldfield Thomas's 

 important paper on the rats and mice, and with Mr. 

 Dobson's work on the Insectivora. The account of the 

 latter order and of the Rodentia is full of errors. The 

 mistakes in the case of the bats are even less excusable, 

 for Dobson's catalogue is quoted, and, to some extent, 

 followed. Had Mr. Sterndale simply taken all his names, 

 descriptions, and localities from Dobson he would have 

 been safe. But he appears to have found a difficulty in 

 making the names and the arrangement in Jerdon's 

 " Mammals " fit into Dobson's scheme, and he has adopted 

 a compromise, with the result that, besides repeating several 

 mistakes of Jerdon's, he has added not a few of his own. 

 Thus, to take a few examples, he gives as two distinct 

 species No. 54, Hipposideros armiger, and No. 64, 

 Phyllorhina armigera, although he notices that Hippo- 

 sideros and PJiyllorhina are the same genus. He quotes 

 as distinct species No. 92, Scotophilus fuliginosus, and 

 No. 119, Miniopterus sckreibersii, shown by Dobson to 

 be identical. Similarly No. 58, Hipposideros larvatus, is 

 the same as No. 59, H. vulgaris. But perhaps the most 

 characteristic instance of error is in the last species in the 

 order No. 121, Nyctophilia geoftroyi. This is taken from 

 Jerdon, and no trace of it is said to be found " in Dobson's 

 monograph, which is so exhaustive as far as Asiatic 

 species are concerned." As the bat in question (A'', timor- 

 ie/isis) is peculiar to the Australian region, it is naturally 

 omitted in Dobson's "Monograph of Asiatic Chiroptera" 

 but it is included in his General (British Museum) " Cata- 

 logue of Chiroptera." Jerdon's mistake in classing the 

 species as Indian was founded on what looks very like a 

 printer's error in Blyth's " Catalogue of Mammalia in the 

 Museum of the Asiatic Society." 



These details will show the character of the work : 

 mistakes such as those enumerated are to be found 

 throughout. At least a dozen omissions have been noted 

 besides those already mentioned. The book is well 

 printed and illustrated, and many details of osteology, 

 &c, described and figured, so that it is important to show 

 why, despite its merits, it falls far short of what is required 

 in an exhaustive account of Indian mammalia. 



There are two portions of the work of which it is pos- 

 sible to speak in terms of high praise. First, wherever 



