43. Freshwater Sting-Rays of the Ganges. 
By B. L. Cuavupnuri, B.A., B.Sc. 
In the Memoirs of the Indian Museum, Vol. III, No. I, 
Dr. Annandale, while describing a marine representative of the 
“ re jeer sere (H.B.), reserved further remarks for a 
future occasion. also exhibited full-grown specimens from 
fresh Witter of ae same species and embryos of another 
freshwater sting-ray at the ordinary meeting of the Asiatic 
Society of Bengal held on 6th July, 1910 (Proc. As. Soe. 
Beng., Vol. IV, No. 7, 1910, p. exxiv). But owing to other 
pressing work Dr. Annandale is unable to take up the matter 
for the present, and, to avoid delay, it is thought desirable 
that I should draw up an additional note on the subject as 
I had some personal share in the investigation which took 
place in 1910. 
Considerable doubt has existed as to the species of sting- 
rays that inhabit fresh water in India. These rays were ‘first 
noticed in the Ganges by Hamilton (Buchanan), who was, not 
unnaturally, a _ deal s re to find them as high up as 
Bhagalpur. He was engaged in elaborate statistical and 
economic survey oe some Bengal ‘dlisteiots from 1807 to 1814. 
After finishing his work in Rungpur, Dinajpur and Purneah he 
arrived = _Bhagalpur in the beginning of the rainy season of 
18 is in his notes on the fishes of the district Ne 
Bhiadshie that he first mentions freshwater rays. 
Bhagalpur he proceeded up to Behar, Patna, and Shahabad, a 
each of which places he noticed the rays. In 1813 he went up 
the river vid Allahabad to Agra and came back to Gorakhpur. 
uring this journey also he found rays as far up as i. 
n his ‘‘ Account of the Fishes of the Ganges,’’ which was pub- 
lished in 1822, he names two species :—(l1) Raia duviatilis 
and (2) Raia sancur. Of the first he could not give any des- 
cription beyond stating that it resembled Raia lymma, and 
he me ean his inability to furnish a description by saying : 
‘‘T always deferred taking a description until I had an 
pestered of having it drawn, and that opportunity never 
red. I cannot therefore give its specific characters.’ 
Thus only a name was left, without any description or drawing, 
and it is no wonder that in later times, after ssl ose oon 
conjectures, the very existence of the species was dou f 
the second species Buchanan gave a description, car as his 
drawing, unfinished as it was, “had to be left in India, several 
mistakes naturally crept into the description. 
In later days, when Hamilton’s original drawings were 
discovered in the possession of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 
