« السابقةمتابعة »
province of Kattywar in Guzerat—the Tiger, the Leopard, and the Cheetah. The members of the succeeding family, Mustelidæ are mostly more northern in their range, but the Indian list includes at least one Martin (Martes flavigula), a species of wide distribution, and two Mustela belonging to the Subhimalayan region. The Ratel (Mellivora indica), which, judging from the living specimens now in the Zoological Society's Gardens, seems separable from its African brother (M. capensis), a species of the Eastern-Asiatic genus Helictis, and two of the peculiar Indian form Arctonyx likewise belong to this family of the Carnivora, which seems altogether to number about nine Indian representatives. Of the remaining family of this Order—the Ursidæ-four very distinct species occur in various parts of the same country. The “Wáh” (Ailurus fulgens) is a somewhat abnormal form, confined to the slopes of the Himalayas, and not descending below the level of 7000 feet. The Ursus isabellinus is probably nothing more than a variety of the widely distributed Ursus arctos, and is also confined to the higher ranges of the Himalayas, while the lower forest-districts of the same region are tenanted by the Ursus tibetanus or Black Bear of the Indian sportsmen, and the Sloth Bear (Prochilus labiatus) is generally distributed over the Indian peninsula and Ceylon.
The Insectivora, which follow next the Carnivora in Mr. Blyth's list, are also numerous in India, particularly the Shrews of the genus Sorex and its allied forms, of which nearly twenty species have been recorded as belonging to this Fauna,* although the whole of this difficult group requires a searching revision. Of the Hedgehogs (Erinaceus), at least two species are found in India, and of the Banxrings (Tupaia), one well-marked species inhabits the Eastern gháts of the peninsula,f while a second runs up the Malayan peninsula, as far north as the Khasya hills, and perhaps even to Sikhim. The Talpidæ are only represented in India, as far as we know at present, by two species of the typical genus Talpa.
The Cetaceans of the Indian seas, according to Mr. Blyth's catalogue, consist of seven species of Delphinidæ, the Sperm-whale,
* See an article by Messrs. Blyth and Tomes, Ann. N. H. ser. 2, xvii. p. 11, (1856.)
† Trpaia elliotti, Waterhouse, P. Z. S. 1849, pl. xiii. p. 106.
etters of the Brahmas the foo be common probabl?, Dolphin
and a single species of Whalebone whale of the genus Balænoptera, * which occasionally even enters the Persian gulf. Not the least remarkable of these is the freshwater Dolphin, Platanista gangelica, which is only found in the freshwaters of the Ganges and neighbouring rivers. It is said to be common in the Brahmaputra in the Falley of Assam, and to ascend that stream probably up to the foot of the mountains. In the Indus and its tributaries this Dolphin appears to be replaced by an allied, but distinct species, recently described by Mr. Blyth as Platanista indi,t of which, we believe, no specimens have yet reached this country.
Mr. Blyth now enters upon the most formidable order of Mammals, as regards their classification, both from their varying forms and from the numbers of the species. The Order Rodentia in India as elsewhere in the world (except always those lands of exceptions, Australia and Madagascar) comprises a greater number of specific forms than any other of the great divisions of the Mammalia. The Squirrels, Sciuridæ, of which we have only one species in this country, are very numerous in the extensive forests of India, both in those of high and of low elevation. Many of the former pass into well-marked geographical varieties in different regions, and have been distinguished as species by Mr. Blyth, who has devoted much attention to this group of Mammals. Of the Flying Squirrels (Pteromys and Sciuropterus) our catalogue enumerates some thirteen Indian species, and of true Sciuri about fifteen, besides many others of the adjoining Malayan provinces and great Asiatic Islands. The Myoxidæ or Dormice on the other hand, a group, it is true, not very numerous in species, bave only one representative in India, This is a singular and very little known form, allied to the African Graphiuri, but with sharp flat spines on the back. It is only found on the Malabar coast, and was described by Mr. Blyth a few years ago as Platacanthomys lasiurus. I The Spalacidæ in like manner have but one or perhaps two representatives within the area of India proper, in the shape of the Bamboo-rats of the genus Rhizomys, of which one species occurs in the north-eastern parts of the country. The Muridæ or true Mice are numerous. Mr. Blyth's list gives us the names of nearly twenty species of Mus and its subdivisions, besides a species of Gerbillus, and at least two Voles, which occur at some elevation on the slope of the Himalayas, and are perhaps rather to be regarded as stragglers from the great stronghold of this group in Europe and Central Asia. There is much, however, to be done before this very difficult group of Mammals can be said to be anything like satisfactorily worked out, and future investigation will, no doubt, augment the present list, while at the same time it may get rid of many merely nominal species.
* B. indica, Blyth, J. A. S. B. xxviii, 488. * Ibid. p. 493,
I J. A. S. B, xxviii. p. 288.
Of the Porcupines (Hystricida) there are two well-marked Indian species-Hystrix hirsutirostris, scarcely distinguishable externally from the European H. cristata, and the crestless H. hodgsoni of the Subhimalayas. But a recent writer speaks of a third, specimens of which have not yet reached Europe.* The long catalogue of Rodents closes with the Hares (Leporida), three of which seem to have good claims for admission into the Indian Fauna. These are all true hares (Lepus), as distinguished from the Piping-hares (Lagomys) of the Steppes of Central Asia, which only descend just far enough to look over the edge of the Himalayas, and are quite foreign to the true Mammal-fauna of India.
As, in spite of what Professor Schlegel has advanced, we agree with Dr. Falconert in considering the specific difference of the Indianpeninsular and Ceylonese Elephants as not yet proven, we shall only allow one Proboscidean to count in the Indian list. The Equidæ, which follow next in Mr. Blyth's catalogue, have also but one living representative in the Indian Fauna. This is the Equus onager, or wild Ass of the deserts of Western Asia, extending from Syria through Persia and Beloochistan to the run of Cutch, upon the left bank of the Indus. Judging from specimens now living in the Zoological Society's Gardens, examples from all these countries are indistinguishable, whereas they are strongly contrasted with the true Equus hemionus of Pallas, which is spread over the high plains of Central Asia, and is often encountered by Indian sportsmen in the eastern parts of Ladakh. On the subject of the Indian Rhinoceroses, we confess we do not quite understand Mr. Blyth's views, although he has lately put them
* Hystrix malabarica, Day (Land of the Permauls, p. 446)—the “ Orange Porcupine" of the Western Ghauts.
† See Nat. Hist. Rev. 1862, p. 144, and 1863, p. 43.
forward at considerable length.* They appear, however, to be that the true R. unicornis sive indicus is confined to the Tarai regions at the base of the Eastern Himalayas, inclusive of the valley of the upper Brahmaputra and province of Assam ; and that the R. sondaicus, generally heretofore supposed to be confined to the islands of Java and Borneo, extends right up the Malay peninsula into the Sundarbans of Bengal, and even to the Rajmahal hills north of Calcutta. There seems to be no doubt that the two-horned Rhinoreros of Sumatra (R. sumatranus) likewise ranges along the Malay peninsula into the Tenasserim provinces, but though Mr. Blyth says it is “rare in Assain,” he does not furnish us with any precise evidence as to its occurrence so far north. It is interesting to the student of geographical distribution to notice that the Sumatran Rhinoceros, although two-borned, belongs strictly to the Asiatic section of the genus with lower incisors, and has nothing to do with the African type with deciduous lower incisors, in which two horns are always present.f The Suidæ are represented in India by various “distinguishable” races of wild Sus, which Mr. Blyth groups together under the specific name of our European Sus scropha, and by the little Pigmy Hog of the Tarai forests of Nepal and Gorruckpore, which Mr. Hodgson described as Porcula salvania in 1847,8 but of which no satisfactory account has yet been published, although, we believe, skin and skull are in our National collection.
Of the marine order of Sirenia, the Dugong (Halicore indica) occurs in the Bay of Bengal—the specimens in the Society's Museum being from the Andaman islands, where it seems the natives occasionally use its flesh for food.
The Cervidæ of the Old World are divisible into two sections-the sub-families, Cervinæ and Rusinæ of Mr. Blyth, although we should doubt even the generic distinctness of these two groups. The Cervinæ or typical Cervi can hardly be said to enter strictly into the Fauna Indica—this form being characteristic of the northern regions of the two Hemispheres. But the Cervus wallichii, which is distributed from the shores of the Caspian throughout the mountainranges of Caucasia and Persia, certainly occurs abundantly in the forests of Cashmir, and probably in those of the Nepalese Terai ; while we suspect that the Cervus affinis of Hodgson, although it has been called “the Saul forest Stag,"* is confined to the northern slopes of the Himalayan range. It is certainly quite contrary to the laws of distribution that these two large, nearly-allied species should co-exist in the same area. The Rusine Cervi, on the other hand, are the characteristic group of the Indian region, to which indeed they are peculiar. In India proper we have four distinct species of this form--the Cervus duvaucelii of Upper Bengal, Nepal, and Assam-the C. aristotelis or Sambur, which is generally distributed over the peninsula and Ceylon—the Cervus axis with the same wide distribution, and the Cervus porcinus confined to the eastern parts of India and Ceylon, but according to Mr. Blyth “unknown in the peninsula of India generally.” On the opposite side of the Bay of Bengal the very distinct Cervus eldii occurs, which ranges from Pegu northward to the valley of Munipur. The four first-named species of Indian Deer have already been introduced into this country and bred in the Gardens of the Zoological Society of London, and we hear that the last-named species, so conspicuous for its curiously lengthened brow-antlers may be shortly expected as a new addition to the Society's celebrated Menagerie. The only remaining member of the family Cervidæ is the Muntjac (the Barking Deer or Jungle Sheep of the Indian sportsmen), very incorrectly, as we believe, placed by Mr. Blyth in the family of Moschidæ. It is certainly not a Musk, although its exserted canines give it a superficial resemblance to those animals, and together, with the elongated pedicils on which the horns are mounted, distinguish it from the typical Cervidæ. Mr. Blyth does not separate the Indian Cervulus from the true C. vaginalis of Java and Sumatra, although, judging from the living specimens seen in this country, the latter would appear to be the larger and finer animals, and quite as different as many similarly allied representative forms.
* See Mr. Blyth's article “On the living Asiatic Species of Rhinoceros,” J. A. S. B. xxxi. p. 151, (1862.)
† Cf. De Blainville's Orteographic, Rhinoceros, p. 209. [ J. A. S. B. xvi. 423.
The Tragulida as, in accordance with M. A. Milne-Edwards't viows, we suppose we must call the next group, appear to have only one representative in India—the Tragulus meminna. The T. kanchil occurs in the southern Tenasserim provinces, but the locality of
Gray, ('at. of Ungulata, p. 199.