1905. | OF THE GENUS RHINOLOPHUS. 99 
(6) Light phase: one ad.; Darjeeling; teeth slightly worn ; 
skin :—Above inclining to “clay”; a strongly marked, deep brown 
horse-shoe patch; base of hairs and fur of under side almost 
“ cream-buff.” 
(2) Specimens from Ceylon and India.—{a) Dark phase: 
three adult individuals; Ceylon; teeth rather slightly worn; 
skins :—Upper side a shade of brown, darker and duller than 
“mars-brown ”; horse-shoe patch more or less effaced; base of 
hairs “drab,” with a tinge of ‘ ecru-drab”; under side ‘‘ wood- 
brown” or light “ drab.”—This is Kelaart’s 2h. cinerascens. 
A skin (ad., January, teeth unworn) from Sirzi, Kanara, comes 
extremely near to the last-mentioned specimen, being only a little 
darker. A. spirit-specimen from Nilghiri seems to be of very 
much the same colour. 
(b) Intermediate stage: 3g ad.; January; Sirzi, Kanara; teeth 
unworn. Upper side between “russet” and ‘ mars-brown ” ; base 
of hairs ‘‘ ecru-drab” ; under side almost “ clay.” —This is Kelaart’s 
th. rammanika. 
(c) Red phase: one ad.; Ceylon; teeth worn; skin :—Above 
light “hazel” with a tinge of ‘orange-rufous”; horse-shoe patch 
almost obliterated ; base of hairs and under side of body light 
“ orange-rufous.”—This is Kelaart’s Rh. rubidus. 
A skin (¢ ad., February, teeth unworn) from Jellapur, Kanara, 
represents the extreme of light colour: upper side next to “ tawny- 
ochraceous”; base of hairs and fur of under side almost ‘“ orange- 
ochraceous.” 
Conclusions :—-The dark phase in specimens from the Himalayas 
(Nepal, Dar ‘jeeling) 1 is of a richer brown, more tinged with russet, 
than in specimens from Ceylon and 8. ‘India (Kanara, Nilghiri). 
The light phase, in specimens from the Himalayas, seems to be 
more inclining to “clay”; in specimens from Ceylon and§. India 
more “hazel” or * tawny-ochraceous.” I do not think the series 
examined affords evidence conclusive enough to justify the sepa- 
ration of a Himalayan “race” and a soit hern (Ceylonese and 
S. Indian) “race.” In all the other characters (external, cranial, 
dental; variation in general size) there is no appreciable dif- 
ference. If they were *t0 be separated subspecifically, the southern 
form would have to stand as “ 2h. rowai rubidus Kelaart,” the 
Himalayan as ‘“ 2th. rouxt typicus.” 
Measurements. On p. 100. 
Distribution. Himalayas (Darjeeling, Nepal, Masuri). 8. India 
(Nilghiri, Kanara) and Ceylon. 
Remar hs. Of the two forms here recognised, 2h. rowan sitirvicus 
and Rh. rowxi typicus, the former, as coming nearest to Lh. 
borneensis, is no doubt the more primitive. The rouai-type, 
therefore, has spread from an eastern point of the continent 
westwards, through the Himalayas, down the Indian Peninsula, 
to Ceylon. 
Q/ 
