14 
ZOOLOGICAL LITERATURE. 
cranial and dental characters of various genera^ and after having 
expressed his conviction that the Primates are composed of two 
very natural suborders — viz. Anthropoidea^ including Man and 
all the Apes^ Monkeys, and Baboons, as well as the Marmosets ; 
and Lemur'oidea, containing the Lemurs, Lemurines, and the 
Aye- Aye, — he arranges the latter suborder into the following 
families, subfamilies, and genera; the subfamilies and genera 
are characterized, and the synonymy of the genera is completely 
worked out : 
Family 1. Lemuridas. 
Subfamily 1. Indri&ince, with three genera, viz. Indris (Geoflr. St. Hil.), 
Propithecus (Benn.), Microrhynckiis (Jourd.). 
Subfamily 2. Lemurince, with five genera : 
a. Lemur (Geolfr. St. Ilil.). 
b. Hapalemur (I. Geoffr. St. Hil.). The skull of this Lemur (LT. griseus) 
is described, and the mandible and dentition are figured, p. 613. 
c. Microcehus (Geoffr. St. Hil.). Mr. Mivart enumerates six species, of 
which the synonymy is given, viz. M. myoxinm (Peters) ; Galago minor 
(Gray)=i<^i^e»mr tmtrinus (Gray), the skull and dentition described and 
figured on p. 615 ; Cheirogaleus smithii (Gray) ; Lemur pusillus (Geofir. St. 
Hil.) = Galago madagascariensis (Geofh*.) ; Cheirogaleus typicus (Smith) ; 
Lemur furoifer (Blainv.), with figures of the dentition, p. 621. 
d. Cheirogaleus (Geoffr. St. Hil.) : Ch. milii. 
e. Lepilemur (I. Geoffr. St. Hil,). 
Subfamily 3. NycticehincOy with four genera, viz. Nycticehus (Geofir. St. 
Hil.), Lons (Geofh*. St. Hil.), Perodicticus (Benn.), Arctocehus (Gray). 
Subfamily 4. GalaginincBy with the genus Galago y in which four siibgenera 
are admitted, viz. Otolemur (Goquerel), Otogale (Gray), Otolictius (111.), and 
Hemigalago (Dahlb,). 
Family 2. Tabsidaj. 
Family 3. Cheibomyidas. 
Arctocehus calabarensis. Prof. Huxley gives a most exhaustive 
account of the zoological characters of this species, of its denti- 
tion compared with that of other Lemurine Apes, and of its 
visceral anatomy, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1864, p. 314. The paper is 
illustrated by numerous woodcuts. 
As regards the zoological characters, the specimen examined by Prof. 
Huxley agreed with that described by Dr. J. Alexander Smith, whose 
account, read before the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, is quoted at full 
length, and the author had to add only a more detailed description of the ear, 
hand, and foot, which are figured j but he found an unexplained discrepancy 
between his specimen and that of Dr. Smith ; the latter had described the 
inner upper incisors as smaller than the outer ones, whilst all are equal in 
size in the specimen under description. In the course of the paper, the 
dentition of Arctocehus is compared with that of the other Lemuridcey and 
the author directs particular attention to the gradual transitions of form 
from premolar to molar, in the upper and lower jaws, the antero -internal 
cusp of the molar being connected with the postero-external by an oblique 
