16 MR. A. H. GARROD ON THE [Jan. 2, 
enlarged (fig. 25.5). In the Elaphine Deer this is carried further, 
the continuation of the beam C being divided terminally into many 
points (fig. 25. 6) in C. elaphus, C. canadensis, C. maral, and C. cash- 
meerianus. According to Mr. Blyth, C. sika ‘belongs strictly to the 
Elaphine, and not to the Awine, group’’’ of Deer; and the con- 
pee 
1 2 
Fig. 25. Diagram of types of antlers. 
c 
a 

formation of its horns is decidedly in favour of this view. Never- 
theless it must be noted that in its ally, C. mantchuricus, and in 
C. kopschi (Swinhoe)—I cannot find a skull of C. sika in any 
museum for comparison—the auditory bulla is considerably inflated, 
as in C. porcinus and C. avis. This feature is not, however, of 
particular importance, as C. virginianus in this respect differs from 
most of the American Cervidee, 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 con- 
cerned, lost in the plurality of mundane organized forms. In the 
science of chemistry—an older one, it is true—the case is very 
1 J. A.S.B. xxix. p. 90. 
