K. BROWN ON THE MAMMALS OF GFwEENLAND. 29 



saying that the animal was not a Mammal. We have, however, 

 no right, when we remember the clear comprehensive style in 

 which Frabicius wrote regarding the Greenland fauna, however 

 much we may be inclined, to say that the whole was erroneous. 



It is unfortunate that when Fabricius referred his Auvekcejak ta 

 the Sea-cow of Steller, he was not acquainted with that animal, 

 and did not know of the horn-plates ; for, if he had, it is impos- 

 sible that he could have found a resemblance to it in the Auve- 

 kaejak. His words regarding it are clear enough, so far as they go — 

 " Rarissimum animal in mari Groenlandico, cujus solum cranium 

 ex parte conservatum commune cum sequent! specie ab incolis 

 dictum nomine Auvekaejak, vidi, inque hoc dentes spurios tales 

 confertim congestos quales Steller" {vid. op. c?V. Adel.* § 189). 

 Again, immediately under the head of " Phoca ursina,''' he says : — 

 ** Groenl. Auvek^jak. — lUam esse animal quod sub nomine hoc 

 memorant incolae non est dubitandum. Dicunt illud in Australiori 

 Groenlandia, licet raro, dari quadrupes pilosum, ferociter omne 

 occurrens dilacerare, et si visum consumere : ursi maritimi more 

 ten-a marique degere, impetuosissime natare, venatores valide 

 infestare. Dentes ut amuleta contra ulcera, ncc non quodammodo 

 ad instrumeuta venatoria adhibentur." There is an evident un- 

 certainty in Fabricius's mind ; and he has listened too much to 

 the idle fables of the natives (who have, as I shall presently show, 

 many of that nature) ; whatever it is, there can, I think, be 

 scarcely a doubt as to the exclusion of Trichechus manatus and 

 Phoca ursina from the Greenland fauna ; nor can their place as 

 yet be supplied by any other species. Prof. Steenstrup thinks that 

 it was a portion of the skull of a Sea-wolf (^Anarrliichas), The 

 situation of the teeth and the nature of this fish's cellular skull 

 well agree with his description of the skull as " full of holes " (" for- 

 hulret," Reinhardt, op, cit., p. 8). Hr. Bolbroe, who understands 

 the Eskimo language intimately, tells me that the word means a 

 " little walrus," and that in all probability it was only the skull of 

 a young walrus, an animal not at all familiar to Fabricius, as they 

 are chiefly confined to one spot, and the natives fear to go near 

 that locality. Fabricius may have only written the description fi-om 

 recollection ; and memory, assisted by preconceived notions, may 

 have led him into error in the description of the long teeth, which 

 after all might, without great trouble, be made to refer to the 

 dentition of the young walrus as described by Macgillivray f and 

 Riippell.J 



This opinion is strengthened by a passage in Fabricius's account 

 of the Walrus, when he again is in doubt whether a certain 

 animal is the young of the walrus or the dugong, " De varietate 



* Adelung: " Geschichte der Schififahrten und Versuche zur Entdeckung 

 des nordostlichen Weges nach Japan und China" (Halle, 1768) is the book 

 Fabricius refers to. There is a wron^ reference in the F. G. to Adelung, 

 viz., 189 for 148. 



I Naturalists' Library (Manunalia), vol. vii. (vol. xiii. of series), p. 220. 

 M'Gillivray's Edin. Journ. of Nat. Hist, and Physical Sciences, Aug. 1838, 

 p. 153 ; Hamilton in Nat. Lib., vol. viii. p. 102. 



J Bulletin Scien. Nat., vol. xvii. p. 280. 



