| External Characters of Ruminant Artiodactyla. 101 
IX.—On some External Characters of Ruminant Artio- 
dactyla.—Part VII. Domesticated Cattle (Bos taurus an 
Beindicus);*. By R. 1. Pocock, F.R.S. 
I. INTRODUCTION. 
The question of the origin of domesticated cattle has an 
extensive literature. The latest volume on the subject 
known to me was published in 1912 by the late Mr. Lydekker 
and entitled ‘ The Ox and its Kindred.’ In this the views of 
previous writers are collated and analyzed, and accepted or 
rejected as the case may be, the general conclusions arrived 
at being apparently the following :— 
1. Domesticated cattle are descended from two distinct 
species, one of which (B. taurus) is represented in its 
purest form at the present time by Pembroke, Kerry, 
West Highland, and British Park breeds, the other 
(B. indicus) by the breeds of zebus or humped cattle 
of India and elsewhere. 
2. The extinct aurochs (B. primigenius) was the ancestor 
of B, taurus. 
3. The existing banteng (B. banteng) was the ancestor of 
B.indicus,atheory originally propounded by Riitimeyer 
in 1878 and supported by Keller in 1902 +. 
4, The existence in the southern and some other countries 
of Europe of cattle partaking of the characters of 
B. taurus and B. indicus is due to the introduction of 
* The substance of this paper was drafted in 1912 in the form of a 
review when Mr. Lydekker’s volume, ‘The Ox andits Kindred,’ first came 
into my hands; but its publication was delayed for a variety of reasons, 
including my own occupation with other work and my friend’s subse- 
quent illness and death. Resumption of work upon the Ruminantia in- 
duced me to take up the paper again and cast it in its present form. 
Although compelled to criticise some inconsistent arguments and theories 
and dispute a few statements of fact it contains, I must disclaim all 
intention of disparaging this volume as a whole. It is a valuable compi- 
lation, containing in a handy form most of the information about cattle, 
useful to zoologists and laymen, that could be compressed into the 
allotted space. 
+ It is singular that Mr. Lydekker omits all reference to B. indicus in 
his ‘ Catalogue of Ungulate Mammals,’ published in 1913. According to 
his views this form should have found a place under the subgenus Bedos, 
Perhaps the reason for its omission is that it possesses none of the cha- 
racters of that group. It may be noted that if the opinion of the descent 
of indicus from banteng be true, indicus differs not merely specifically, 
but subgenerically, according to Lydekker, from taurus, 
