Horsfield, in his Zoological researches in Java, described the small-clawed Otter
of that island as Zutra leptonyx, erroneously regarding it as the Simtmg of Raffles—
an error which he afterwards rectified in his Catalogue of Mammalia.
In 1823, P. Cuvier described Z. n tm r a species whioh I shall have occasion to
r e f e r to m o r e particularly hereafter, and, at the same time, drew attention to and
named a young Otter Z. bm-mg, received from Java from M. Diard, who was P.
Cuvier’s authority for the Javanese native name of the speoies.
I have cammed this latter type, which does not prove to he an Aonyx, as has
been generally supposed, hut a. true Lntra with a naked nose and well-developed
Claws, as in Z. navr, the common Otter of India. The fur, as in young Otters, is
long and loose, and P. Cuvier, who seems to have examined the skull, states that the
specimen was immature, and that the great size of its cranium led him to believe
that the adult animal attained to the size of the Simmy, and that it was probably the
young of that animal and not the young of Z. nair. The type of Z. bm-mg m its
peripheral characters resembles the young of Z. rum.. I was unable to fin
the skull of this specimen in the Paris Museum, although in my search I was kmdly
assisted by M. Paul Gervais, unless a skull which now stands in the Catalogue
under the name of Z. perspicillata, Is. Geoff. St.-Hil., is ito-a supposition which semis
probable from the circumstance that on the skull is written Z. barmg, under which
name M. Paul Gervais included it in his manuscript Catalogue. This skull, considering
its youth, is of such dimensions that the adult animal must attain to a considerable
size, and might he, as Prederick Cuvier has suggested, the young of the Swmmg.^ But,
as I have already observed, the skull of the type of Z. simtmg has been lost if it g g
ever deposited in the India Museum. The type of Z. barmg, however, conclusively
proves that it is neither an Aonyx nor an Otter resembling the haary-nosed_ species
of which Cantor considered to he Z. bm-mg, Cuvier, and which Gray
elevated to generic rank under the name of. Baxangta.
Horsfield! in his Catalogue of Mammalia, does not indicate to which of the species
therein described the Z. bm-mg of P. Cuvier is referable, but, as already menttoned,
he.corrects his original error regarding his Simtmg of Baffle! as the equivalent
of his Imtra (.Aonyx) leptonyx, hut erred in considering the Z. barmg °fj ^ r
as a synonym, of that species, as I have ascertained by a personal injection of
Cantor’s specimens. Pischer,8 in his synopsis, perpetuated Horsfield s first error in
assigning the Simtmg of Raffles as a synonym to Z. (A.) leptmyx with whichu
has no affinity, while he was apparently correct in considmng L. persp^llata
Is Geoff St.-Hilaire, as identical with Z. leptmyx, under which species Horsfield
makes no reference to Z. perspicilUta, although it appears to he identical with the
short-clawed Otter of Java. I . ,, .
Z. perspicillata was described by Is. Geoff. St.-Hilaire in 1826 under the impression
that he was dealing with the Simtmg. Having examined the type of this
¡opposed species, I am in a position to state that it is in all probability the young of
il __ , , .. 1QOQ „ SB1 * gyn. Mamm. 1829, p. 227.
; m r- w . * toi- p-6i9;
JO. (Aonyx) leptonyx. The claws, however, appear to be rather longer than in the
generality of young specimens of this species, but it must be remembered that at an
early age the claws are more pointed than in the adult. The specimen, moreover, has
the characteristic markings of the species in the white on the cheeks and on the sides
of the neck and throat, and in the brown moustachial band. The tentative opinion
which I have formed regarding the nature of JO. perspicillata coincides with Ur.
Gray’s view of the question, but as there is no properly authenticated skull of the
specimen which is quite young, it is extremely difficult and almost impossible to
determine its affinities with accuracy.
Schinz in his synopsis1 regarded the Barang as a small-clawed Otter, and as the
equivalent of the JO. barang of Baffles and of the JO. leptonyx as described by Wagner;2
but, as I have indicated, the JO. barang of Prederick Cuvier from Java is a species
with long claws and apparently the young of the Simung, which Schinz correctly
states is distinguished by strong claws.
Before I refer to the Otters that have been described from India proper, the Otter
from the Malayan peninsula which Cantor8 has indicated must be mentioned. He
described it under the name of JO. barang, Baffles, but apparently erred in so doing,
as Baffles’ description of the feet of the Barang would seem to point in the
direction of the small Otter figured by Marsden and described by Horsfield and
Is. Geoff. St.-Hilaire respectively, as L. leptonyx and JO. perspicillata. The Barmg
of Cantor is a strongly clawed Otter distinguished from all other known Asiatic Otters
by its hairy hose, resembling in this particular A. delalandii, Lesson, and JPteronura
sandbachn, Gray. I t is quite distinct from the JO. barang, P. Cuvier, which, as
already stated, has a bald nose and agrees with the Smrnng. Cantor states that in
old individuals the hairs become rubbed off, but in an adult specimen presented by
him to the India Museum, the hairy character of the nose is well marked, although
at the same time it is not so thickly clothed as in the young. In the type of
JO. simtmg in the same Museum, the bare nose shows no indication whatever that
it was ever clad, and the rough character of the skin resembles that of the bald-nosed
species. As already mentioned, one of the Otters figured by Marsden and referred
by him to JMJustela lutra appears to be represented in the plate as having a
haired nose, and the drawing seems to me to be a good representation of this, the
supposed Barang of Cantor, while Marsden’s other figure is a characteristic representative
of JO. (A.) leptonyx, which I consider, along with Müller and Horsfield, to
be the Barang of Baffles. Some of Cantor’s specimens of this Otter found their
way to the British Museum, and Dr. Gray, apparently without enquiring whether
they had been correctly identified by Cantor, adopted the name under which they
had been sent, and elevated the species to generic rank under the erroneous name
of Baramgia, and specific term svmatrana, although the specimens he was dealing
with came from Malacca.
1 Syn. Mamm. vol. ii. 1844, p. 35. 3 Schreb. Saugeth. Suppl. vol. iii 1841, p. 265,
3 Joum. As. Soc. Beng. 1846, vol. xv. p. 195.'