254 DR. C' !• roESYTH MAJOR ON [Mar. 19, 



connaissance, cette espece n'a ete trouvee sur cette grande terre et 

 il est probable que la provenance avait ete dounee d'une maniere 

 approximative par Peron et Lesueur, ce qui n'etonne pas quand on 

 salt combien, a cette epoque, on attachait peu d'importance aux 

 questions de Greographie zoologique." ' From the description they 

 give of this Lemur - it is quite evident that we have not only the 

 same species as that described by Peters and by Giinther, but also 

 the one described by Sclater and by .Schlegel ; but both the last- 

 named writers, and especially the latter's statement about the 

 occurrence of the species on the West Coast of Madagascar, are 

 overlooked. 



In the same article ^ the two "French zoologists mention a second 

 species of Lemur from Anjuan, under the name of L. mongoz L. 

 { = L. nigrifrons E. Geoffr. S.-H.), adding that the type of 

 Geoffroy's L. anjuancnsis, in the Paris Museum, is a synonym of 

 the former. As Giinther had already pointed out "*, E. Geoffroy's 

 diagnosis of his L. cmjuanensis * can be applied to more than one 

 species. Schlegel made, with regard to the " Lemur de I'ile 

 d' Anjuan, Lemur anjuauensis," the vague statement that persons 

 who have seen specimens pronounced them not to be different 

 from the ordinary L. coUaris ; although he refers to Peters's 

 description, he overlooks that the description of the female in the 

 ' Eeise nach Mossambique ' corresponds exactly with his own 

 description of the female from Bembatoka \ With regard to 

 E. Geoffroy's L. anjuanetisis, in the absence of a more accurate 

 description, we must rely on Milne-Edwards's and Oustalet's 

 assertion, that the type is distinct from the same author's L. albi- 

 manus. As a consequence, the name L. anjuanensis cannot stand 

 for the Lemur described from Anjuan by Peters and by Giinther, 

 nor as a synonym of L. mongoz L. 



Bearing in mind what Milne-Edwards, Grandidier's colla- 

 borator in the work on Madagascar, asserts about the patria of 

 L. alhimanus (see above), we must assume that the plates of 

 "i^e?7mrrtZ6MHrtvms "in the 'Histoirede Madagascar,' issued two years 

 later, in 1890 ^, were drawn after specimens from Anjuan. The 



2 " Les males different beaucoup des femelles, lis ont tous une fraise jaune ; 

 les femelles oat la poitrine blanche, la teinte dii corps varie plus oii moins du 

 gris au roux, raais les caracteres que nous venons d'indiquer sont coastants et 

 se remarquent meme chez les jeunes sujets" {op. cit. p. 223). 



' Op. cit. p. 222. 



* Op. cit. p. 216. 



" " Pelage roux-vif en dessus, gris-roux sur les membres : les parties ante- 

 rieures du tronc cendrees " (Ann. du Mus. vol. xix. p. 161). I. Greoflroy S.-H.'s 

 diagnosis is slightly more complete : " Gris en dessus et en dessous jusqu'aux 

 epaules ; roux en dessus et en dessous dans tout le reste du corps ; queue et 

 cuisse rougeatres" (Cat. Meth. p. 73, 1851). Whatever the habitat of this 

 type of L. aujiianensis may be, the above diagnoses, insufficient as they are, 

 support Milne-Edwards's and Oustalet's view that this species is different from 

 L. albimanus. 



6 Op. cit. p. 309. 



' Pis. 156, 157, 162-164, 165, figs. 1 2. 



