508 PROF. FLOWER ON PHOCA HISPIDA. [Julie 6, 



quoted by Erxleben), in which a brief description (p. 312) is given 

 of "der rauhe Seehund," which is latinized in the figure (pi. 86) 

 into Phoca hispida, although this name is not given in the text. 

 This is evidently founded upon the "Rough Seal" of Pennant 

 (Synopsis of Quadrupeds, p. 341, 1771), the description of which is 

 a mere reproduction of Crantz's account of the Neitseh. There is 

 nothing either in Schreber's description or figure to identify the spe- 

 cies ; and it has since been thought (as by A. Wagner in his edition 

 of this part of Schreber's work, 1846) to refer to a totally distinct 

 animal, viz. Halichcerus grypus. 



Erxleben, in his ' Systema Regni Animalis : Classis I. Mammalia' 

 (1777), describes Phoca vitulina, P. grcenlandica, P. barbata, and 

 P. hispida. The brief description of the latter is taken from Schreber 

 (which, as mentioned above, is mainly derived from Crantz), who is 

 given as the authority for the name ; but P.fcetida (Midler, Prodr. 

 Zool. Dan.) is given as a synonym. 



This brings us back to Gmelin in 1788, who adopts the species 

 and nomenclature of Erxleben. 



In 171)0 Fabricius published an elaborate paper on the Greenland 

 Seals *, in which he redescribes his P. fcetida, but withdraws the 

 name he had bestowed upon it in favour of P. hispida, as he believes 

 that it is the same species as that described by Schreber, Erxleben, 

 and Gmelin under that name, which, he says, has therefore the 

 priority over his own. In this paper figures are given of the skulls 

 of P. grcenlandica and P. barbata, Halichcerus grypus and Cysto- 

 phora cristata, but unfortunately none of P. hispida ; or its specific 

 identity would have been absolutely determined. 



Although the name of P. fcetida was thus definitely withdrawn 

 by its author, it has been revived and adopted by many recent 

 zoologists, as the table of synonyms (p. 509) will show. 



Nilsson, in 1820, not being able to satisfy himself that the spe- 

 cies had been clearly determined by either of these names, when 

 giving the first thoroughly accurate and detailed account of its cha- 

 racters, renamed it P. annellataf. This name has also been adopted 

 by many modern authors. 



In the 'Memoires du Museum' (tome xi. 1824) Fr. Cuvier (being 

 apparently unacquainted with Nilsson' s work) gave figures of the 

 skulls of all four species of Phoca, three views of each, on one page 

 (tab. 12), and therefore well adapted for comparison. Although 

 they are taken from rather immature specimens, and not all of cor- 

 responding ages, they give the most characteristic differences clearly, 

 and there is no difficulty in recognizing the species now under con- 

 sideration in that to which the name of hispida is applied, apparently 

 the designation under which it was received from Reinhardt (see 

 fig. 3> <7» h an d 0- I" tne same memoir the name of P. discolor is 

 proposed for a Seal which had lived in the Jardin des Plautes, and 



* In ' Skrivter af Naturhistorie Selskabet,' Copenhagen, 1st vol. 



t Skand. Fauna, i. p. 302, 1820 ; see also " Entwurf einer systernatischen Ein- 

 theilung und speeiellen Beschreibung der Pkoken, von Nilsson, aus dem Schwe- 

 cHschen ubersetzt ton W. Peters," "Wirgmann's Arehiv, viii. 1st vol. p. 301 (1811). 



