﻿1864.] 
  HUXLEY 
  ZIPHIUS. 
  389 
  

  

  of 
  Fos, 
  in 
  the 
  Department 
  of 
  the 
  Bouches 
  du 
  Rhone 
  ; 
  but 
  it 
  is 
  said 
  

   by 
  Cuvier 
  to 
  be 
  completely 
  fossilized. 
  

  

  The 
  less 
  complete 
  fragments 
  of 
  skulls 
  distinguished 
  by 
  the 
  specific 
  

   name 
  of 
  planirostris 
  were 
  procured 
  at 
  Antwerp 
  during 
  the 
  excava- 
  

   tion 
  of 
  some 
  docks. 
  

  

  As 
  the 
  figures 
  show, 
  and 
  as 
  Cuvier 
  expressly 
  states 
  in 
  the 
  text, 
  

   the 
  u 
  posterior 
  wall 
  of 
  the 
  nostrils," 
  even 
  in 
  the 
  more 
  perfect 
  of 
  the 
  

   two 
  specimens 
  of 
  this 
  species, 
  is 
  so 
  mutilated 
  that 
  no 
  judgment 
  re- 
  

   specting 
  its 
  true 
  form 
  can 
  be 
  arrived 
  at 
  ; 
  and 
  as 
  the 
  posterior 
  part 
  of 
  

   the 
  solitary 
  specimen 
  called 
  Ziphius 
  longirostris 
  (of 
  unknown 
  origin) 
  

   is 
  equally 
  deficient, 
  it 
  follows 
  that 
  the 
  only 
  positive 
  character 
  (apart 
  

   from 
  the 
  close 
  resemblance 
  to 
  Hyperoodon) 
  attributed 
  to 
  the 
  genus 
  

   by 
  Cuvier 
  — 
  the 
  overhanging 
  posterior 
  wall 
  of 
  the 
  nostrils 
  — 
  cannot 
  

   be 
  predicated, 
  with 
  certainty, 
  of 
  two 
  of 
  the 
  three 
  species 
  included 
  in 
  it. 
  

  

  In 
  1846, 
  Professor 
  Van 
  Beneden* 
  published 
  a 
  note 
  upon 
  two 
  fos- 
  

   sils 
  obtained 
  during 
  the 
  Antwerp 
  excavations, 
  of 
  which 
  one 
  exactly 
  

   resembled 
  the 
  Ziphius 
  planirostris 
  of 
  Cuvier, 
  whilst 
  the 
  other 
  was 
  

   like 
  Z. 
  longirostris, 
  but 
  had 
  the 
  advantage 
  of 
  being 
  more 
  complete 
  

   than 
  Cuvier's 
  specimen, 
  the 
  distal 
  end 
  being 
  preserved. 
  

  

  " 
  The 
  end 
  of 
  the 
  snout 
  is 
  much 
  produced, 
  and 
  terminates 
  in 
  a 
  

   very 
  acute 
  point. 
  Towards 
  the 
  middle 
  of 
  its 
  length 
  it 
  is 
  compressed, 
  

   and 
  its 
  height 
  is 
  almost 
  double 
  its 
  width. 
  These 
  dimensions, 
  on 
  the 
  

   other 
  hand, 
  hardly 
  differ 
  at 
  its 
  extremity." 
  

  

  After 
  noting 
  the 
  differences 
  between 
  this 
  specimen 
  and 
  the 
  fore- 
  

   going, 
  Professor 
  Van 
  Beneden 
  observes 
  : 
  — 
  

  

  " 
  These 
  differences 
  indicate 
  modifications 
  of 
  sufficient 
  importance 
  

   to 
  lead 
  us 
  to 
  suppose 
  that 
  these 
  animals 
  cannot 
  belong 
  to 
  one 
  and 
  

   the 
  same 
  genus, 
  and 
  that, 
  instead 
  of 
  a 
  species, 
  we 
  have 
  here 
  a 
  new 
  

   genus." 
  

  

  Cuvier 
  appears 
  to 
  have 
  considered 
  his 
  Ziphius 
  to 
  be 
  an 
  extinct 
  

   genus 
  ; 
  but 
  many 
  attempts 
  have 
  since 
  been 
  made 
  to 
  refer 
  existing 
  

   species 
  to 
  it. 
  Thus, 
  at 
  p. 
  26 
  of 
  the 
  ' 
  Zoology 
  of 
  the 
  Erebus 
  and 
  Terror' 
  

   (Parts 
  III. 
  IV. 
  & 
  V., 
  " 
  Mammalia," 
  1846), 
  Dr. 
  Gray 
  observes 
  :— 
  

  

  " 
  Physeter 
  hidens 
  (Sowerby) 
  has 
  been 
  referred 
  to 
  this 
  genus 
  [Hy- 
  

   peroodon] 
  ; 
  but 
  the 
  form 
  of 
  the 
  head 
  and 
  the 
  position 
  of 
  the 
  fins, 
  the 
  

   teeth 
  and 
  the 
  form 
  of 
  the 
  skull, 
  show 
  it 
  is 
  a 
  Ziphius." 
  

  

  But 
  neither 
  the 
  form 
  of 
  the 
  head, 
  nor 
  the 
  position 
  of 
  the 
  fins, 
  nor 
  

   the 
  teeth 
  of 
  any 
  species 
  of 
  Cuvier's 
  Ziphius 
  are 
  known 
  with 
  certainty 
  ; 
  

   so 
  that 
  Dr. 
  Gray's 
  reference 
  of 
  the 
  Physeter 
  hidens 
  of 
  Sowerby 
  thereto 
  

   must 
  have 
  been 
  based 
  upon 
  the 
  form 
  of 
  the 
  skull 
  only. 
  The 
  only 
  

   Cuvierian 
  Ziphius 
  the 
  skull 
  of 
  which 
  is 
  well 
  preserved 
  is 
  Z. 
  cavi- 
  

   rostris, 
  which 
  differs 
  widely 
  from 
  Physeter 
  hidens. 
  

  

  Dr. 
  Gray 
  further 
  considers 
  the 
  Dolphin 
  from 
  the 
  Seychelle 
  Islands, 
  

   with 
  a 
  solid 
  rostrum 
  of 
  ivory-like 
  density, 
  named 
  by 
  De 
  Blainville 
  

   densirostris, 
  to 
  be 
  another 
  species 
  of 
  Ziphh 
  s 
  (Z. 
  Seychellensis, 
  Gray) 
  ; 
  

   and 
  he 
  affirms 
  it 
  to 
  be 
  " 
  exactly 
  like 
  the 
  fos 
  oi 
  'l 
  from 
  D'Anvers 
  " 
  (Z. 
  c. 
  

   p. 
  28), 
  or 
  Cuvier's 
  Z. 
  planirostris. 
  With 
  this 
  identification, 
  how- 
  

   ever, 
  I 
  can 
  by 
  no 
  means 
  concur, 
  the 
  structure 
  of 
  the 
  beak 
  of 
  Delphinus 
  

   densirostris 
  being 
  widely 
  different 
  from 
  that 
  of 
  Ziphius 
  planirostris. 
  

  

  * 
  Bulletin 
  de 
  l'Academie 
  Koyale 
  de 
  Belgique, 
  torn. 
  xiii. 
  l 
  e 
  partie, 
  p. 
  257. 
  

  

  