Shared Publication

pieces by tbe tidal wave or been buried in deep sand, and that, beyond what bad been already recovered, there was little probability of saving more. However, Major Duff bad instructed one of bis assistants, Mr. Duke, to proceed at once to the spot where the Whale was stranded, to obtain as much information as he could on the subject of its size, &c., and to bring away whatever bones or other parts of the animal he could secure. In a letter from Major Duff, dated 3rd August, I was informed that Mr. Duke had found the animal still almost intact and had been "able to bring away some of the bones of the head, portions of the skin, and some “ curious homy scales with fringed e n d s t h a t he had measured the creature and ascertained its length to have been 24i cubits (37 feet), and its girth as near as could be estimated 12 cubits or 18 feet. As the animal had been drifted about by the tide, and was unfortunately lying on its hack, Mr. Duke was unable to determine whether or not it had a blowhole, a point regarding which, as also as to the set of the animal’s tail, Major Duff had asked him to take particular notice, in order to satisfy himself as to its being really a Whale, because the natives in the neighbourhood had given most contradictory statements, ‘ some saying that it spouted and others that it did not. The animal was in a high state of decomposition, and it was with the utmost difficulty that Mr. Duke got people to assist him to recover the bones; moreover, the weather was extremely bad, and the wide inlet was by no means safe - for boats. Notwithstanding the great difficulties of such an undertaking as this in a tropical climate, Mr. Duke was successful in preserving the skull of this Whale almost entire and of securing nearly'all the vertebras, a portion of one limb and some other bones now to be enumerated in detail, as also a few flakes of balene and a portion of theskm. The skull (PI. NT,TV), the vertebrae, the bones of the extremity which have been preserved, the short balene with its fringed edge, all furnish evidence that this Whale was a Balcmoptera ; but unfortunately there is nothing on record regarding the presence 6r absence of a dorsal fin. The l<witog characteristics of the skull, PI. XLIV, as compared with the skulls of known Balcenoptera, are the great length of the maxillary portion and the little downward shelving of the upper surface of the maxillae. In these points it is somewhat resembled by Balcenoptera rostrata, but the beak of this eastern Whale is relatively longer and more pointed than in the Whale of the North Sea, and the downward shelving of its maxillaries is much less. I t is also distinguished from B . rostrata by the great length of its temporal fossa, in which feature it is approached by B . musmlus, a Whale which, on the other hand, has a very muoh shorter and deeper beak, and in these respects resembles somewhat the skull of the Javan Whale B . schlegeli. There can be no doubt about this Whale being closely allied to B. sehlegek, but I cannot reconcile the form of the skull with the figure of the skull of the type given by Professors Van Beneden and Gervais. I have reproduced three drawings taken from a photograph of the skull (PI. SU V , figs. 1, 2, 3), and it will be observed that although it bears a strong resemblance to the skull of B. schlegeli, it differs from it materially in the character of its beak, which is long and slender, and much more forwardly directed than the beak of B. schlegeli, and also in the absence of the curvature of the external margin of the maxilla which distinguishes B. schlegeli. The beak of the latter is also much more downwardly shelving at its base than is the maxillary of this form from the Bay of Bengal, and the skull has greater depth, as is shown by the circumstance that the orbital process of the maxilla in B. schlegeli is below the level of the base of the skull, whereas in this skull it is above it. The opening of the posterior qares also is much narrower than in B, schlegeli. The length of this skull compared with the type of B. schlegelh, is only about three inches longer, hut notwithstanding the additional length it has less breadth and less occipital length associated with a shorter maxilla, less maxillary breadth, and a narrower beak. Its lower jaw also differs considerably in its length from that of B. schlegeU, being nearly 4 inches shorter, although its skull is longer than the skull of that type, which, according to Professor Elower’s1 measurement, has the lower jaw longer than its skull, whereas in Van Beneden’s and Gervais2 figure the lower jaw is represented as shorter than the skull. The lower jaw of B. schlegeli is much deeper and heavier than the jaw of this Whale, as is seen by the accompanying table of measurements, and the curve also differs materially, the latter being much more outwardly curved than the former. Skull measurements of B. schlegetti and of B. e Length of sknll, in straight l i n e ............................................................. Breadth of condyles . . • • , ......................................................... „ ' of exoccipitals . . . • • • - ■ „ of squamosals (greatest breadth of shall) ........................................ Length of supra-occipital ................................................ • - „ of articular process of squamosal - • • • Orbital process, frontal length......................................................................................... m g m m m breadth at b a s e .............................................................................. outer end . . • • Length of beak from middle of curved border of maxillary to tip o f premaxillary „ of m a x i l l a r y .................................................................................................. Greatest width of nasal aperture . . . . • • • Breadth of maxillaries at posterior end . • • . • . • of ,, across orbital processes, following curve „ of beak at base, following c u r v e ............................................................ „ of ,, at m i d d l e ........................................................................................ „ of maxillary, at m i d d l e ............................................................................... M of premaxillary, at middle. •’ • • • • • • • Length of lower jaw, in a straight line ....................................... Height of „ „ at coronoid p r o c e s s ............................................................ „ .,, „ » at middle Amount of curve of lower j a w ............................................................................... Inches. Inches. Inohes. 11600 118-75 124 50* 1050 8-76 10-50 41-00 34-25 39 00 57-00 5300 58-25 29*50 26-50 27-50 2200 23-50 26-00 2200 2900 23-50 24-50 2200 2 300 1 50 0 1800 1900 8200 77-50 81-00 9000 84-P 88-P KKX) 11-00 63-00 64-50 62-00 42-00 33‘00 3600 22-25 21-25 2375 6 0 0 6-75 8-00 400 3-00 11700 113-25 11900 14-00 1400 15-30 9-50 7-00 7-50 8-50 13-60 14-50 * Adding on 6'60 inches for premaxillaries. The lower jaw of this Whale has ail the characters of the jaw of the WTiale described by Blyth as Balcenoptera mdica, the rami having, as pointed out by him, 1 Proc. Zool. Soo., 1864, p. 410. * I reproduce in this table the measurements given by Professor Flower of B. tchlegeli and alongside of them those of B . edeni by myself.