Lacepède, and genera formed by him, have been used in our la te s t works, some even in Cuvier’s la s t edition of the
‘ Animal Kingdom ; ’ and many of these species still encumber our Catalogues.
Cuvier, dissatisfied with this state o f th ings, in his ‘ Ossemens Fossiles,’ examined the various documents an d consulted
the authorities which h ad been used by Lac epède ; b u t, unfortunately, instead o f examiuing with diligence the
various descriptions, an d comparing th e various figures and th e ir proportions, &c., he appears to have undertaken the
work with a predisposition to reduce the number o f species which his predecessor h ad described, to the smallest
number. Tims, he concludes th a t there ai-e only eleven species of Dolphins, one Narwhal, one Hyperoodon, one
Cachalot or Sperm Whale ; and he appears to think there are only two Whalebone Whales, the R ig h t Whale and
the Dinner. To make th is reduction, he believes th a t the Hump-backed Whale o f Dudley is only a Wha le th a t has
lost its fin, n o t recognizing th a t th e Cape Rorqual, which he afterwards described from the fine skeleton now shown in
the in n e r court oi) the P a ris Museum, is one o f this kind, an d th a t th e Black-fish and the Sperm Whale are th e same
species ; an error which must have arisen from his n o t having observed th a t Sibbald h ad figured tb e former, for he accuses
Sibbald o f twice describing th e Sperm Whale, and when h e came to Schreiber’s copy o f Sibbald’s figure, he
thinks the figure represents a Dolphin which h ad lo st its u p p e r teeth, overlooking the peculiar form and posterior position
of th e dorsal fin, an d the shape o f th e head, which is unlike th a t o f any known Dolphin. T h is mistake is important,
as it vitiates th e greater p a rt o f Cuvier’s criticism on the writings of Sibbald, Artedi, and others, on these animals.
And unfortunately his views have been very generally adopted without re-examination, especially in the ‘ Catalogue of
the Osteological Specimens in th e Museum o f th e College of Surgeons,’ p. 169. I t is b u t rig h t to observe that in
making these remarks I do n o t in th e lea st desire to unden-ate the great obligation we owe to Cuvier for the papers
above referred to. I t is to him th a t we are indebted for having plac ed the examination o f the Whales on^ its right
footing, and for directing our enquiries into th e safe course on these animals, which only fall in our way a t distant p e riods,
and generally u nder very disadvantageous circumstances for accura te examination and study.
M. F . Cuvier’s ‘ C e ta c e a ’ (Paris, 1836) is little more th an an expansion of his brother’s essays, with a compiled
account o f the species ; b u t h e has consulted with greater attention th e works of S ibbald and Dudley, h a s some doubts
about the finned Cachalots being tb e same as the Sperm Wh a le (p. 475), b u t a t length gives up the subject. H e has
found out th a t the Hump-ba cked Wha le is evidently a Rorqual (p. 305), b u t does n o t record it as a species, nor recognize
it as th e Cape Rorqual nor as Dr. Johnston’s Wh a le ; the latter he incorrectly considers th e same as B . Physalus.
H e combines together as one species Quoy’s short-finned Rorqual of the Falkland Islan d s with Lalande’s long-finned
Whale of the Cape, (p. 352). He is quite a t sea about the hump of th e Cachalots, (p. 279) ; his remarks on th a t su b je
c t, and on th e Cachalots of Sibbald, show how dangerous it is for a natura list to speculate beyond his knowledge.^
Sir William Ja rd in e ’s W h a l e s in th e ‘ Na turalists’ Library ’ is an abridgement of M. Lesson’s miserable compilation,
with some extra cts from English writers on the subject.
No r are the B ritish species be tte r known; for in Fleming’s work they are left nearly in the same state th ey were in
when Linnams published his twelfth edition o f the ‘ Systema Naturie and Mr. Bell’s account and fipwes arc entirely
derived from preceding authors, without any addition being made to our knowledge : while this revision, though not
undertaken with any view to this subject has taken three or four species from our list, and determined the specific
identity of one hitherto neglected, and added two or three species for the first time to our Fauna.
I am by no means convinced th a t all the species in the following Synopsis are distinct. It is ra the r to be regarded
as a collection o f th e accounts o f th e Whales of different localities, derived from the materials a t present a t our command
; and I have endeavoured to select from these sources what appe ared to afford the best characters for defining
them, so as to furnish to those naturalists who might enjoy th e opportunity o f observing the animals, a short abstract
of what h a s been said with regard to them, and o f referring them to where they could find a more detailed account of
each kind. I have been induced to adopt this course, as wherever I have had the opportunity of examining anc
comparing the proportions of the allied species o f distant seas, and o f comparing their bones, they have invariably
proved distinct, which leads me to believe th a t many of the other species of different countries, which have been regarded
as the same, will be found to be distinct, though representatives of those found in other seas.
The C e t a c e a may be divided into the Whales (Cete),
which are carnivorous, and the Manates or Mermaids,
which are herbivorous.
I. C e t e . Skin smooth, without hair. Limbs clawless,
fore fin-like, hinder caudal, horizontal, forked. Tea ts 2,
inguinal. Nostrils enlarged and close together, called
blowers. Carnivorous. The group contains three families,
the Balxnidce, Phijseteridx, and the Delphinidce.
Fam. 1 . B a l /ENId .'E. W h a l e b o n e W h a l e s .
Head very large, one-third the size of the body. Jaws
toothless. P a late with crowded, transverse, triangular,
pendant, horny p lates (whalebone or baleen), with a fibrous
inner edge, forming “ a screening apparatus.” He ad shelving
in front. Blowers far back, longitudinal, separate, each
covered with a valve. Spout double. Gullet small. Eyes
small, near angle of the mouth.
1. B a l .®n a , Ray, Linn, R ig h t W h a l e s .
Head ra the r b lunt, swollen. Th ro a t and belly smooth,
not plaited. Dorsal fin none.
These Wha les yield the tra in oil o f com m erce; but
tra in appears to be applied by th e whalers as we use
d r a in : they refer to th e tra in of th e blubber, when
speaking of th e oil o f dolphins, &c., and appear to
call all blubber-oil tra in , in contradiction to head-matter,
or spermaceti, which Sibbald says is called
by the English ; it is so called by th e Dutch whalers.
* Body smooth above.
Th e R ig h t W h a l e . Balfcna mysticetus.
B a l^ iia mysticetiis, Líh íí. 5 . A'', i. 105. O .F a h .3 2 . Cuv.
R. A. i. 296. Oss. Foss. v. 361, t. 2 5 , / 9, 11, i. 2 6 ,/ . 25.
The R ig h t, or Whalebone Whale, Dudley , P h il. Trans.
xxxiii. 256. Scoresby, A rctic Regions, i. 448, t. 1 2 , / 1.
B. Grcenlandica, L in n .
B. vulgaris, Brisson.
He ad depressed, temporal bone narrow, oblique. There
are two series o f tubercles on each side of the lower l i p ;
and according to Scoresby’s figure, the head is -f, the fins
are the vent ■§•, and th e sexual organs j. from the head.
Females larger th an th e males.
Inhab. North Sea.
The Nord Caper, Anderson, B. Islándica, Brisson, B.
glacialis, Kle in, Nord Caper, Bo n u a t. Us Lacep. t. 2, 3, does
not appear to differ from the former. I t is said to be th in ner,
and infested with B a rn a c le s; this u’ould lead one to
think that it was established on a specimen out o f health.
Lacepedc’s figures above cited, from a drawing by Back-
strom, communicated by Sir Joseph Banks, are th e best
figures of the R ig h t Wha le after Scovesby’s.
Cuvier gives a figure of the skull o f lliis species from the
specimen in the British Museum. T h e nose of the skull
is regularly and gradually arched above, rather wide b e hind,
near the blow-hole, the nose and the intermaxillary
bones regularly taper in front. The hinder end of the jaw bones
is obliquely produced behind, and the frontal bones
are narrow, nearly linear, and oblique.— Cuv. Oss. Foss. v.
t. 2 5 , / 9—11.
Mr. Pearsall informs me the fcetus of the Whalebone
Wha le in the Museum of the H u ll Philosophical Society
has no rudiment o f whalebone on the palate, and th e lips
are very large, and longly depending over the sides o f the
under jaw. Camper (t. 1, f. 1, 2) figures th e foetus o f this
species, an d the skull o f a young specimen, t. 4—6 .
A variety, or probably different species, is thus noticed
by M. Guerin, a surgeon o f a whaler.
The R o c k - n o s e d W h a l e is said “ never to leave the
coast, and even to make the circuit o f the bays. The most
important point (of difference) is th e comparative size of
the head and body. T h e head is always considerably
more th an 4» while in th e true B . mysticetus it is, as slated
by Scoresby, less than J , or as 16 to 51. The whalebone
is longer in comparison to th e length o f the animal, but
tbe laminæ are thinner for their length, the body is broader
and terminates more abru]itly ; the skin is dark velvet-
brown, an d has fewer spots and yields less oil. The whalers
in general seem to think th a t it is merely a difference
of age th a t causes this difference in th eir external characters,
b u t cubs or sucklers are as often found amongst the
Rock-noses as amongst th e Middle Ic e Whales ; the former
must have attained the age of inaliirily.”— Guérin, in
Jameson's N . E d in . Ph il. Jour. 1845, 267.
The C a p e W h a l e . Balæna australis.
Balæna australis, De smoulinf Diet. Class. H . A', t. 140,
/ 3, foetus.
B. dll Cap, Cuv. Oss. Foss. v. 368, t. 24, /. 25, / . 1—8,
i. 2Q,f. 7, 11, 13, 23, t. 27, f . 10, 15,24.
Skull convex, temporal bone broad, erect.
Inbab. South Sea, Delalande. Cape of G ood Hope.
Skeleton and foetus. Mus. Paris.
Cuvier gives the details o f the skeleton of this species,
and figures them. T h e nose of the skull is high, straight,
and rather suddenly b en t down in front ; the nose and the
intermaxillary bones contra ct in the middle, and then continue
o f the same width in front. T h e hinder p a rt of the
jaw-bones is nearly perpendicular, and the temporal bones
are broad and erect.—Cuv. Oss. Foss. v. i. 2 5 , / 5—7.
Cuvier also figures the skull of a newly born specimen
o f the same species, only two feet long, which only differs
in being shorter, lower, and in the hinder p a rt of the jaw bone
being more slanting.— Cuv. Oss. Foss. v. t. 2 5 , / 1—3.
In False Bay they carry on th e fishery from the shore,
and during the time Mr. Warwick was there, only one bull
o ut of sixty specimens was killed, th e females coming in to
the bay to bring forth their young. He skinned one,
which was supposed to be not more Uiau eight or ten
days old, and it was 20 feet long.
T h e J a pa n W h a l e . Balæna Japónica.
Balæna australis, T emm. Fatina Japon, t. 28, 29.
Temminck’s figure is black ; the middle o f the belly to
the vent, and a spot on the chin and over the eye, white ;
the nose has a rounded prominence in front ; the head is ^
the entire length ; the pectoral fin large, poiiHed.
Inhab. Japan.