504 DR. J. E. GRAY ON THE VIVERRIDZ. [Nov. 8, 
that he died so young, and could not continue his researches ; for I 
have no doubt he would have thrown great light on the structure of 
the skulls of this group, as he always followed my studies like a 
shadow. Thus when I published my “ Arrangement of the Hollow- 
horned Ruminants’ in 1846 (Ann. N. H. xviii. p. 227), he shortly 
after read his paper on their skulls (see Proc. Zool. Soc. 1850, p. 164); 
when I commenced the study of the species of Edentata by a mo- 
nograph of Bradypus in Proc. Zool. Soe. 1849, p. 65, he read 
his paper on the skull of Edentata in 1851. Being an observant 
and careful osteologist, he observed many particulars that a general 
zoologist would have overlooked; but this limitation of his study 
confined his views ; so that he would not allow such genera as Saiga, 
Pantholops, or Tamandua (which have such striking external cha- 
racters), because he did not observe such differences in the skulls as 
he considered of generic importance. 
The impulse that Cuvier gave to zoology by the study of the ske- 
letons and teeth of Mammalia, as shown in the ‘ Ossemens Fossiles,’ 
made such an impression on the succeeding students of zoology, that 
most of them, overlooking the importance that Cuvier himself attached 
to external characters, have confined themselves far too exclusively 
to the characters offered by these parts, overlooking the fact that 
bones and teeth are liable to vary like other parts of the animal, 
aud that characters in the teeth that may be of great importance in 
most groups may be of comparatively little value in the others. Thus 
in the Paradoxuri, which every one must allow form a very natural 
group, well characterized by its habits as well as its external character, 
the skulls and the flesh-teeth offer such variations in form in the 
different species that they would be considered as good generic 
characters in any other tribe of Viverride. 
The notes on the skull and teeth in this paper are always taken 
from those of the adult animal, unless it is stated to the contrary. 
The Viverride have been divided into many genera, some only 
containing a single species, while one or two other genera have been 
left as magazines containing a number of heterogeneous species which 
had not been particularly examined. The characters of some of the 
published genera have not been made out on any uniform plan. In- 
deed that is the system of the day, to search out some animal which 
has some striking character, and to form it into a genus, leaving 
the greater number of species in the family under the old generic 
denomination, which, when examined with care, have quite as dis- 
tinct characters. This is an evil which requires remedying, and I 
have tried to obviate it by submitting all the species of the group to 
the same kind of revision as M. Geoffroy submitted the old species 
when he rearranged the collection in the Jardin des Plantes more 
than half a century ago. 
M. Temminck, in the ‘ Esquisses Zoologiques,’ p. 100, has inquired 
if H. widdringtonit is a species or a local variety. He had never seen 
the animal; but this shows the spirit in which he seems always to 
have looked on the species described by others which were not in 
his museum. In the same work he gives a short résumé of the spe- 
