128 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF [March, 



Tragulus kanchil (Raffles). 



18:i-2. Moschus kanchil Raffles, Trans. Linn. Soc. London, XIH, p. 

 2(52. ^ 



The relationship and synonymy of tliis species are discussed 

 below. There is one skin in the collection from Goenong Soegi, 

 Lampong District, 



Revision of the Genus Tragulus. — The consideration of the 

 proper specific appellation for the above species has led to a study 

 of the nomenclature of the entire genus, the results of which are 

 given below. The synonymy of the Chevrotains has long been in- 

 tricately involved, although Blanford in his Mammals of British 

 India has simplified it to a considerable extent. The main faults 

 with his revision are his failure to recognize two apparently well- 

 marked species and his misapplication of the name javanieus. 



Exclusive of the new forms recently described by Mr. G. P. 

 Miller, Jr., which are accompanied by such detailed diagnoses and 

 exact localities that they can easily be identified, there seem to be 

 six distinct species of Tragulus from the Indo-Malay region. These 

 may be considered in groups as follows : 



(1) The mottled T. viem i7in a Erxl., about which there is no con- 

 fusion. 



(2) T. stanleyanus Gray, M'hich is equally distinct. 



(3) The " Napu," the largest of the group, and the one called 

 by Blanford and other authors " T. napu." 



(4) Three small species which Blanford unites under the name 

 ' ' T. javanicus. ' ' 



One of these three is unquestionably the Moschvs javanicus of 

 Gmelin, which has for its basis the description of Pallas, Spicil. 

 ZooL, XII, p. 18. And as Blanford considered the three as rep- 

 resenting but one species, he did perfectly right in adopting this 

 name, which was apparently the oldest known to him. 



The trouble is that Osbeck, in 1765, independently described a 

 Chevrotain as Cervus javanicus, and by those who begin with the 

 tenth edition of Linnseus this name must be considered. Osbeck's 

 description is far from satisfactory, but applies without question to 

 a species of Tragulus.^ He comments on the lack of horns and 

 describes the dentition of what he considers the male, though the 



' His " nine back teeth " are accounted for by the ridges of the poste- 

 rior molars, each of which he evidently took for a separate tooth ! 



