404 ON THE ANATOMY OF THE RUMINANTS. 
tion of its horns is decidedly in favour of this view. Nevertheless it 
must be noted that in its ally, C. mantchuricus, and in O. kopschi 
YY 
JAN 
Fig. 25. Diagram of types of antlers. 
(Swinhoe)—I cannot find a skull of C. sika in any museum for com- 
parison—the auditory bulla is considerably inflated, as in C. porcinus 
and C. awis. This feature is not, however, of particular importance, 
as O. virginianus in this respect differs from most of the American 
Cervidze, possessing a very inflated bulla. 
With reference to the brow-antler (A), it is evident that its dupli- 
cation in the true Elaphine Deer and in Rangifer is more associated 
with the actual size of the antlers than with any other peculiarity. 
The antlers of Elaphurus davidianus are at present quite beyond my 
comprehension. 
General Remarks. 
Whilst working at any special group of animals, there is nothing 
which must strike most students so much as the inefficient scientific 
capacities of the Linnean binomial nomenclature as it is at present 
employed. For the simple identification of species among themselves 
and of genera it is excellent, no doubt; but immediately the generic 
position is assigned to any collection of related species, the animals or 
plants which constitute them are, so far as nomenclature is concerned, 
lost in the plurality of mundane organized forms. In the science of 
Page 17. chemistry—an older one, it is true—the case is very different. There, 
the knowledge of the composition of any non-elementary substance is 
sufficient for the determination of the name by which it should be 
designated; and, vice versd, from the name its composition may be 
inferred. Why should we not be able to do the same in biology ? 
