42 SJOSTEDTS KILIMANDJARO-MERTT EXPEDITION. 2. 



so this origin of the specimen is very acceptable, but then at the same time it does 

 not seem probable that SUNDEVALL should have given away anything but what he 

 regarded as duplicates. In consequence of this it must be expected that the Natural 

 History Museum in Stockholm possesses one or more specimen of the same kind 

 and this is really the case. Here is a specimen, a buck, collected by the famous tra- 

 veller and naturalist J. WAHLBEEG 1845 in Caffraria interior (ad tropic. ) according 

 to the catalogue. This specimen agrees with JENTINK'S in having long nasals pro- 

 vided with a pointed attenuated tip, aud measuring 51 mm. This is no doubt to be 

 regarded as the male to JENTINK'S P. rufescens. The skull is othenvise more similar 

 to that of R. n. stigmatus than that of R. campestris, because it has a high and nearly 

 vertical maxillary and a wide orbit. There are, however, differences wjth regard to 

 the skulls of WAHLBERG'S specimen and P. n. stigmatus as well, the latter being shorter 

 and broader. This is demonstrated by the following measurements. 



WAHLBEROS'S specimen SJOSTEDT'S specimen 



Basicranial length 127 mm. 125 mm. 



Least distance between orbit anteriorly 43, r> 46, n 



Distance between the middle of upper margins of orbits 56 61 



Greatest distance between posterior brims of orbits 68, r> 73 



Distance between outer sides of horn-cores basally 51 5(>, > 



But especially, P. n. stigmatus has much broader and flatter nasals their greatest 

 combined breadth being 20 mm. and the least at the anterior end of the naso-pre- 

 maxillary suture 12 mm. while the corresponding measurements in WAHLBERG'S spe- 

 cimen are resp. 15 and 10 mm. With regard to the colour of the fur the male 

 of JENTINK'S rufescens* in this museum is somewhat less rufous than R. n. stigmatus, 

 but otherwise they agree with regard to the minute light tips to the hairs which 

 produce an appearance as if the animal was dusty. The dark horseshoe-shaped 

 marking is well developed in the male rufescens. The white marking above the 

 eye is similar in both. They are thus no doubt more related inter se than with R. 

 campestris. 



Another question is whether really HAMILTON SMITH'S name >rufescens can be 

 placed on the Rhaphicerus from Natal, as has been done by JENTINK, or not. The 

 colour of the members of the genus Rhaphicerus is somewhat variable and specimens 

 which fully agree with regard to the colour with the by JENTINK quoted description, 

 may be found although not all of them are similar in cranial characters and thus 

 belong to other species. This is for instance the case with a young female in this 

 museum which has short nasals, low and very convex maxillaries like R. campestris 

 THUNBERG, and as it has been collected in the Cape Colony at Saldanha Bay by 

 WAHLBERG it is no doubt to be regarded as a variety of the last mentioned species. 

 The hoofs of this young female are also of the longish type exhibited by R. cam- 

 pestris, as they measure above 3,2 cm. 



The late Dr. SUNDEVALL observed the bright colour of this specimen and made 

 therefore the following remark about it when he entered it in the catalogue of the 

 museum: Est varietas riifescens rec. With this remark he expressed his opinion 



