780 MR. W. T. BLANFORD ON THE [NoV. 3, 



4. A Monograph of the Genus Paradoxurus, F. Cuv. 

 By W. T. Blanford, F.E.S. 



[Received August 19, 1885.] 

 (Plates XLIX. & L.) 



I have recently had occasion to prepare, for a forthcoming work 

 on Indian Mammalia, an account of the species of Paradoxurus 

 inhabiting India, Burma, and Ceylon. In the course of my work 

 I have found it necessary to examine in detail the literature relating 

 to the different forms, and I have come to conclusions differing 

 somewhat from those hitherto published on the subject. It may 

 perhaps be of use to those who have occasion to deal with species 

 belonging to the genus, which are by no means easy to determine, 

 if I state the results of my inquiries and extend them to all the 

 species belonging to this generic type. 



My work has been principally based on the collection of skins 

 and skulls in the British-Museum collection, in examining which I 

 have received much assistance from Mr. Oldfield Thomas, who had 

 already arranged the specimens to a considerable extent, and to 

 whom I am indebted for much information and for many suggestions. 



The latest attempt at an arrangement and definition of the 

 species bel jnging to the genus and its allies was made, so far as I 

 can ascertain, by the late Dr. J. E. Gray in his revision of the 

 genera and species of Viverriue animals. This appeared in the Pro- 

 ceedings of the Society for* 1864, and was republished, with a ievr addi- 

 tional notes and references, in the ' Catalogue of Carnivorous, Pachy- 

 dermatous, and Edentate Mammalia in the British Museum ' (1869). 

 In the classification there adopted, nine species of Paradoxurus are 

 admitted, besides three of Paguma, one of Arctogale, and one of 

 Nandinia. In addition to these eight more " species of this group 

 requiring further examination " are enumerated, and at least three 

 other nominal species are mentioned. So far as I am aware only 

 one species \ P. musschenbroeki, from Celebes, has been described 

 since Dr. Gray's Catalogue appeared ; but in that Catalogue some 

 names previously given are omitted ', amongst which are P. nubice, 

 F. Cuv., P. rubidus, Blyth, and P. tytleri, Tytler. As will be seen 

 in the sequel, my own conclusions as to the species of the genus 

 differ widely from Dr. Gray's, whose Catalogue contains numerous 

 mistakes of various kinds ^ 



^ Except of coui'se P.jerdoni, above, p. 613. 



2 A few uames that have, so far as I can find, never been published are added 

 in the sjTionymy. There may have been a reason, though its nature is not clear, 

 for the insertion of these technically unborn terms, but there is no scientific 

 purpose to be served by repeating them. 



^ I will point o\it two, which are characteristic, and occur in the synonymy 

 of one species, Pagtima grayi, P. Z. S. 1864, p. 541, and Cat. C'arn. &c. Mamm. 

 B. M. 18G9, p. 73. The first is the quotation of " Paradoxurus bondar, Temminck, 

 Mon. ii. p. 332, t. 55. f. 1-4 (skull, not syn.)." as a synonym of Paguma grayi. 

 The late quoted, 55, is a mistake for do, and figures 1-4 for figures 4-6, as is 



