THE SPERM WHALES, GIANT AND PYGMY. 733 
I. age compressed, truncated in front. Blowers in front of the upper part 
the head. Skull elongate. Dorsal hump rounded. Pectoral fin 
xe truncated. Catodontina 
1: TODON. The atlas adii transverse, nearly twice as broad as 
high; te pane canal subtrigonal, narrow below. 
2 EURON. The atlas subcircular, rather broader than — the 
central d circular, in the middle of the body, widened abov 
II. € dede rounded in front. Blowers at the back of the forehead. 
nall, inferior. Dorsal fin compressed, falcate. Pectoral elon- 
ri rene Physeterina. 
3. PuysETER. Head large, elongate, rather depressed in fron 
4. Kocia. Head moderate, blunt and high in front. Skull iier and 
broad. The septum that divides the crown of the skull very sinuous, 
pies so as to form a funnel-shaped concavity. 
5. EvPHYsETES. Head moderate, blunt and high in front. Skull short 
and broad. The septum that divides the crown of the skull simple, lon- 
gitudinal, only slightly curved.” 
No animal has ever been seen in recent times in which the 
alleged characters of frontal blow-hole and falciform dorsal 
have been found associated with the structural characters 
and size of Physeter, and as Dr. Gray himself remarks, 
“there is not a bone, nor even a fragment of a bone, nor any 
part that can be proved to have belonged to a specimen of 
this gigantic animal, to be seen in any museum in Europe. 
Commenting on this, Flower adds that “if the Linnean genus 
Physeter is to be kept in abeyance until the discovery of 
Sibbald’s Balena macrocephala tripinna [the only basis for 
the so-called Physeter tursio], it is to be feared that it may 
ultimately disappear altogether from zoological literature.’ 
Heartily concurring in this view, and coinciding with the 
most judicious cetologists that the Sibbaldian animal was 
simply distinguished on account of a misapprehension as to 
its relations, je that it was, as Eschricht has observed,* an 
old cachalot with worn teeth, the name Physeter is retained 
for it as that proposed by the founder of zoological tax- 
onomy. In this case the name Physeterine of course must 
be connected with the same form. The factitious genus 
as, from some misunderstanding, remarked that “ Eschricht nt rg to 
believe Mid cM described a Killer or Orca gladiator, under the above 
