316 MR. O. THOMAS ON SPECIMENS FORMERLY [May 3,1 



Besides these cases there are a large number of instances, such as 

 the young Opossum figured on Plates xxxi. & xxxvi., where 

 although it is impossible to fix on individual specimens as their 

 originals, yet practically the Lidth de Jeude collection does contain 

 specimens fairly corresponding with them. Further research again 

 will, I hope, reveal some few more cases of close identities, as I 

 cannot feel that I have by any means exhausted the possibilities in 

 this direction. 



It would appear certain, then, that so large a number of resem- 

 blances as the above cannot be merely an accident, especially when 

 some of the more remarkable cases are taken into account, and I 

 can, therefore, only reiterate my belief that these are the actual 

 specimens from which Seba took his figures. 



But besides its extreme interest, this fact has a special scientific 

 importance, for in many cases systematic names have been given, 

 primarily or solel}', to Seba's figures, and therefore, where the 

 originals of these figures can be identified, the specimens are clearly 

 the types of the species. 



The tracing of such names, however, can only be properly done 

 in connection with the systematic working out of the different 

 groups, and the following cases are therefore only those of which 

 I now have clear evidence and are perhaps but a small proportion 

 of those which really exist. 



Names of Species founded on Seba's figures, for which typical 

 specimens have been identified, 



Chrysechloris azirea^, Ziinm. Geogr. Glesch. ii. p. 391 (1780). 



Eounded on Seba, XXXII. 4 & 5. 



Specimen 67.4.12.564. 

 " Vespertilio " vampyrus ^, Linn. Syst. Nat. (10) p. 31 (1758). 



Founded on LVII. 1 & 2. 



Specimen 67.4.12.325. Pferopus edulis, spec, y, Cat. Chir. B. M. p. 51. 

 Kerivoula piofa, Pall. Spic. Zool. iii. p. 7. Founded on LVI. 2 & 3. 1 



Specimens 67.4.12.342-3. I ^ of Cat. Chii-. B. M. p. 334. f 



Noctilio leporinus, Linn. Syst. Nat. (10) i. p. 32 (1758). Founded on IN. 1. 



Specimen 67.4.12.339. / of Cat. Chir.B. M. p. 396. 

 Bidelphys philander, Linn. t. c. p. 54. Founded on XXXVI. 4. 1 



Specimen 67.4.12.414. g of Cat. Mars. p. 338. J 



Bidelphys murina, Linn. t. c. p. 55. Founded on XXXI. 1 & 2. 1 



Specimens 67-4 12.541 & 2. x and z of Cat. Mars. p. 347. J 



Bidelphys dorsigera, Linn. I. c. Founded on XXXI. 5. 



Specimen 67.4.12.546. /' (of B. murina) Cat. Mars. p. 347. 

 Bidelphys hrevicaudata, Erxl. Syst. R. A. p. 80. Founded on XXXI. 6. 1 



Specimen 67.4.12.540. b of Cat. Mars. p. 358. ] 



^ Linnaeus's name " asiatica " is equally founded on this specimen, but, being 

 erroneous, is not admissible. 



^ This will affect the name of the species, which will have to stand as 

 Tteropus vani'pyi'us, L. Even if the identification of the specimen is wrong, 

 however, Seba's LVII. 1 & 2 clearly represent what has been known as Ft. 

 edulis, Geoff., so that the change would have to take place in any case. 



■* The male specimen accidentally omitted from the list in the Catalogue. 



