1897.] DEEB, AUilED TO CEETtTS SICA. 41 



So far as the forms to M'hich the names quoted above refer are 

 concerned, this prophetic opinion is in accord with the conck;sions 

 at which I have arrived from my examination of the AVobiirn herd. 

 It is true that 1 have not found it possible to measure a series of 

 specimens graduating from the 2 ft. 8 in. of the typical sica to 

 the 3 ft. 5 in. of 0. manclmncus and C. dyhowshii, but intermediate 

 forms undoubtedly exist ; and I find little distinction except size 

 between the largest and the smallest. In his description of 

 C. mancJnu-icus Mr. 8clater gives the height at 3 ft. S in. ; but I 

 think this must be a misprint for 3 ft. 3 or 5 in., which is the 

 height of the " co-type " of C. dyhotuslcii. Apparently, the typical 

 C. mancJmricus is unrepresented at Woburn, unless an immature 

 buck with faint spots in the winter coat, and a similarly marked 

 doe, belong to it. 



The type of C. mancJiuricus is figured by Mr. Sclater in pis. 

 xxxi., xxxii. of vol. vii. of the Society's ' Transactions.' The 

 summer coat is well spotted, whereas the winter dress is a rich 

 uniform dark brown on the upper-parts, with light chestnut 

 patches on the shoulders ; the under-parts being dark. The tail 

 apparently has but little trace of a black line ; and in a specimen 

 of the typical sica in winter dress in the British Museum it is 

 almost completely white. In summer the dark median line seems 

 to be more marked, and there may be some black at the tip. As 

 regards C. kojjschi, from China, of which the type is in the British 

 Museum, I agree with Sir V. Brooke that it is inseparable from 

 manchuricus. 



I now come to C. dyhoivsJcii, originally described on the evidence 

 of specimens obtained from the Upper Ussuri district of Man- 

 churia, one of which was presented by the founder of the name, 

 Prof. Taczanowski, to the British Museum, where it has for many 

 years been exhibited in the Mammal Gallery under the name of 

 manchwicits. Indeed, it was only the other day that I became 

 acquainted with the fact that it was one of the " co-types " of 

 dybowshii. In writing of this Deer, Sir V. Brooke observed, "it is 

 highly probable that, when we know more of this, it will be found 

 inseparable from C. manchuricus." It is much to be regretted 

 that Sir Victor did not more carefully study the original description. 

 Had he done so, he would have found that dyhoivslii is absolutely 

 the same as manchuricus, and much subsequent misunderstanding 

 would have thereby been saved. "When Prof. Taczanowski's 

 original description is carefully studied, it will be found that 

 there is no mention at all of C. manchuricus, with which the 

 author appears to have been unacquainted. Such comparisons as 

 are made are with C axis and C. dama ; consequently no points 

 of difference between this deer and C. manchuricus are indicated, 

 and it is pretty evident that the two are identical. It is true that 

 Taczanowski states that the type of his species is of the colour of 

 a Roebuck in the winter coat, with faint tracings of dapplings on 

 the hind-quarters ; but he alludes to a lighter race from the same 

 district, and his specimen in the Museum is brown (doubtless 



