Li2 Mr. R. I. Pocock on some 
in question and that of the Vaynol bull on pl. v. bears out 
this contention. The dewlap of the Transylvanian bull is a 
little deeper, it is true, but it is not appreciably deeper than 
in the Swiss and Simmenthal bulls, without claim to zebu 
blood, depicted on pl. xiii. The only striking difference 
between the Vaynol and the Transylvanian bulls lies in the 
horns, which in the latter are much longer and extend at 
first horizontally outwards and then upwards; but they are 
not like the horns of any Indian zebu I have seen, and differ 
no more, perhaps less, from the upturned horns of the 
Chillingham breed than the latter differ from the downturned 
horns of the Chartley breed shown on pl. iv. Hence it 
appears to me that the evidence of zebu blood in the Tran- 
sylvanian bull is quite untrustworthy ; and if the head of this 
animal be compared with the skull of the Spanish draught ox 
(pl. xiv.), another breed of assumed zebu descent, it will be 
evident that, so far as the head and horns are concerned, the 
two breeds are very much alike. ‘The assumption that the 
Spanish draught cattle are wholly or partly zebus, in which 
the hump has been eliminated by selective breeding or 
crossing, seems to me inadequately supported by the facts. 
The same theory has been put forward to explain the zebu 
descent of some of the humpless cattle of ancient Egypt, and 
to illustrate the characters of these cattle Lydekker reproduces 
two figures from Egyptian monuments—one (p. 135) showing 
four cows, the other a bull (pl. xvi.),—which in general style 
resemble the Transylvanian bull aforesaid, and are believed 
by Diirst and Lydekker to belong to the same stock and to 
have been introduced into Spain. That the Egyptian cattle 
belong to the same stock as the Spanish may be admitted, on 
the evidence, as probable, and that they were introduced into 
Spain as possible ; but since they have the long bodies, 
humpless withers, high croup, and shallow dewlap of typical 
examples of Bos taurus, the claim that they are zebus with 
the hump artificially suppressed is surely unwarranted. At 
all events, the identification of these cattle must be admitted 
to bea matter of doubt. If they are not zebus, as I maintain, 
what becomes of the theory that their supposed introduction 
into Spain by the Moors or other invaders supplies the 
explanation of the alleged zebu blood in Spanish draught 
cattle? 
I find similar difficulties in agreeing with Lydekker’s 
determination of the Nineveh bull, depicted on p. 64, which 
le says appears to be an aurochs despite the absence of the 
mane and the excessive length of the tail. The animal, 
