CEPHALOPllUS SILVICULTOR. 185 



than iu Jentinki ; the nasalia are more sleuder anteriorly in 

 Jentinki and the processus coronoideus less arched, altogether 

 differences better to see in our photo's than to describe. 



One of the skulls — that of the adult male , mentioned 

 above — presents some so very important peculiarities that 

 if it had not been collected like the other ones by Mr. 

 Demery and not labeled by him »Elk", like he labeled 

 the other specimens, many one would separate it as »the 

 type" of a new species. Now as I don't like to base a 

 » species" upon a single skull, I bring it with the other 

 specimens above cited under the head of silvicultor untill 

 later investigations and more material may prove the one 

 or the other opinion to be correct. I prefer to describe 

 the differences as follows, looking upon it as being a 

 highly remarkable variety of silvicultor. The horns and 

 horncores are a good deal shorter than in silvicultor and 

 this notwithstanding the skull is larger in all dimensions 

 and belongs to a fullgrown animal ; the horns are much 

 more curved backward, they are less broad at the base, 

 and the part of the skull where the horncores arise too 

 is much less developed than in other silvicultor-s\\x\\s. 



I registered the number of vertebrae thoracicae and 

 lumbares of our Antilopidae — about fifty skeletons — 

 and can establish the fact, that all skeletons belonging 

 to specimens of large Antelopes like species of the genera 

 Damaliscus, Connochaeies, Kobus, Antilope, Antidorcas^ Ga- 

 zella, Hippotragus, Oryx, Tragelaphus, Limnotragus and 

 Taurotragus have 13 thoracic and 6 lumbar vertebrae, 

 meanwhile those of specimens belonging to small Antelo- 

 pes of the genera Cephalophus and Neotragus present 14 

 thoracic and 5 lumbar vertebrae. The skeletons of Jen- 

 tinki^) and silvicultor make no exception: they show 14 

 thoracic vertebrae with movable ribs and 5 lumbares: the 



1) The number 15 for Terpone longiceps (Notes Leyden Museum, 1888, 

 p. 19) are incorrect and ought to be 14; as I destroyed my manuscript it 

 cannot be made oat whether I made the mistake or the corrector. 



Notes from tlie Leyden iMuseum, Vol. XXII. 



