more frequently seen in Calcutta than the previous one, and, as already stated, it
seems to me to be identical "with N. cmereus, A. M. Edwards.
Vosmaer1 has described what he has denominated the Bengaalische iAiijnard,
and which be characterises thus: “Lepoils est assez long,flm et laineux, mais rade
au toucher. Sa couleur est, en générale, le gris ou cendré jaunâtre clair, m peu plus
roux sur les flancs et aux jambes. Autour des yeux et des oreilles, la couleur est
amsi un peu plus foncée, et depuis la tête tout le long dm dos règne rai brune."8 A
description in every way applicable to the example from Bhamô and to the Assam
specimens of this race which have come under my observation, and therefore also
embracing the Cochin-China form N. cmereus, A. M. Edwards.
GeofEroyV description.of N. bengalensis is founded on “ le paresseux penta-
dactyle du Bengale” of Vosmaer, of whioh he gives Bengal as the natural abode,
and mentions that the animal has four upper incisors, whereas Vosmaer had stated
it had only two premaxillary teeth. Audebert,* however, in his work on Monkeys
and Lemurs, remarks that Vosmaer had overlooked the two small outer incisors, the
existence of which Geoff. St-Hilaire had determined by a personal inspection of
Vosmaer’s specimen which is now in the Paris Museum, where it is ranked in the
Catalogue under N. javanicus, and Bennett6 also repeats this statement. Vosmaer s
figure, if a correct representation of his specimen, certainly conforms more to the
Assam than to the Javan form, the latter being markedly distinguished by the
presence of two ocular and two aural brown bands, and generally by there being
only two upper incisors, whereas the head of Vosmaer’s figure is a very good representation
of the Assam Nycticebus with four upper incisors.
I am therefore disposed to consider that the Assam, Bhamô, and Siam Nycticebi,
which appear to be one species, belong to the form described by Vosmaer, but the
correctness of this suggestion can only be ascertained by the actual comparison of
specimens from the foregoing localities with the type.
The figure whioh M. Audebert“ has given of N. tardigradms is a life-sized
representation of Blyth’s variety B. I t is uniformly rusty-brown with no bands
from the eyes, which have the brown area around them but very little darker than
the body colour. The ears are dark, and no brown bands proceed from them to the
vertex, and the white which in other species exists between the eyes surrounding
their brown margin is here replaced by a rufous tint. This is the Burmo-
Malayan form, and is smaller than the Assam Nycticebus. Audebert states that the
specimen was in the Paris Museum under the Malayan name “ Poucan,” which is
apparently the same as the " Kulemg,” figured and described by Baffles7 under the
names N. tardigradms and N. bengalensis, an animal without head-bands, of the
1 Natuurkundige Beach. &c. in Oost. en Weat-indische, 1766—1804, p. 19, pi. xx.
* Buffon, Hist. Nat. (1789), Suppl. vol. vii. pi. xxxvi. p. 2125.
* Ann. du Mus. 1812, vol. xix. pp. 163-164.
* Singes et Makis, p. 21.
s Gardens and Menagerie Zool. Soo. Lond. 1831, vol. i. pp. 139,144.
* L. o. pi. i.
7 Trans. Linn. Soc. Lond. (1822), vol. xiii. p. 247.
same type as Audebert’s specimen. Audebert appears to baye been in doubt regarding
its natural habitat, because he says: “ Celle (figure) que nous donnons, nous a été
envoyé du Bengale par M. Alfred Duvaucel sous le nom de Lori JPoucan, nom que
cet animal reçoit des Malais.” The probability, therefore, is that this specimen was
of Malayan origin, and that M. Duvaucel had previously obtained it or had
purchased it when in Calcutta and there appended the Malayan name to it ; and,
moreover, as strengthening this supposition, is the circumstance that no Eastern
Bengal example of this animal is registered in the Catalogue of the Paris Museum
published in 1851. Both Audebert’s and Cuvier’s specimens belong to the type
without head-bands figured by Van der Hoeven,2 and which is in strong contrast with
the Assam form, although it has the same number of upper incisors. This is the
form to which Temminck3 also applied the term N. tardigradus, Linn., and it is
likewise classed in the Paris Catalogue under N. tardigradus, 4 and is recorded from
Borneo.
Geoffroy characterised N. bengalensis5 as having a large muzzle with four
upper incisors, and distinguished his N. javanicus, the KuTcong of Temminck, by
its short muzzle with two upper premaxillary teeth, but he makes no mention of the
four permanent brown bands on the front of the head, and which are so well shown
in the head figured by Yan der Hoeven, which corresponds to the variety Q of
Blyth. The muzzle of N. javanicus more resembles in breadth and shortness that
of N. cmereus than that of the Burmo-Malayan Nycticebus.
Geoffroy’s specimens were obtained in Java6 by M. Leschenault. Guerin7 in his
“ Iconographie” figures this form and its skull and incisor teeth as N. tardigradus.
The chief characters by which these various Nycticebi have been separated
from each other are the differences of coloration and the number of incisors in
the upper jaw, which may be either two or four, but this latter character is
the subject of variation as has been shown by A. M.-Edwards, who lias met
with skulls of N. javanicus with only one upper incisor on one side of the jaw and
two on the opposite side. This being the case, he is inclined to regard N. javanicus
as only a synonym of N. tardigradms. However, the coloration of the former is
markedly distinct from that of the latter ; and the two upper incisors are rarely
supplemented by one, and I am not aware that an instance has been met with in
which four have been present. Yan der Hoeven8 states that he has never observed
an example of N. tardigradus with only two incisors, but he agrees with
A. M.-Edwards that N.javcmicus and N. tardigradus do not materially differ in
their dentition. And an observation of Huxley’s9 on the dentition of Nycticebus
ja/oa/nicus verifies the more recent observations of these zoologists, and proves
satisfactorily that the teeth in that form are liable to considerable variation.
1 Gat. Méthod. des Mamm. 1851, p. 78.
8 Arch. Neerland, vol. iii. 1868, pi. vi. fig. 8.
3 Les Possess. Neerland, 1 .1, p. 323,1846.
* L .c .
• Ann. Mus. 1812, pi. xix. p. 164.
8 L . e.
7 Iconographie Mamm. vol. i, pi. 6.
8 L . c., p. 95.
8 Proc. Zool. Soo. Lond. 1864, p. 323.
0