1905. ] OF THE GENUS RHINOLOPHUS. 131 
Blyth’s kh. swbbadius (1844) from Nepal, erroneously believed 
by himself to be the same as Hodgson’s V. subbadia, is a genuine 
Rhinolophus. The following analysis of the original description 
will make it evident that it is the species here under consideration : 
(1) The connecting process is stated to be “ conspicuously deve- 
loped, and pointed”; one of the chief characters of subbadius. 
(2) The lancet is but “slightly emarginated towards the point” ; 
also one of its principal characters; for the salient point in the 
sentence is the word “ slightly,” as proved by a comparison with the 
immediately subsequent description of lepidus, in which the lancet is 
called ‘‘ considerably emarginated towards the tip.” (3) Forearm 
“12 inches” (34°8 mm.); third finger “ 14 inches” (47°6 mm.); 
these measurements, as being smaller than in any other species, 
and like those of the individual before me (forearm 34:2, third 
finger 46-4 mm.), settle the identification beyond all doubt. 
Rh. garoénsis.—Dobson’s Rh. garoénsis (1872) is evidently the 
same species as Blyth’s Ah. subbadius* (to which there is no 
reference in Dobson’s ‘Monograph’ or ‘Catalogue’). The two 
authors emphasise the same points :—(1) The connecting process 
is described by Dobson as “ forming an acutely pointed elevation.” 
(2) The lancet is a “ broad, triangular, pointed process,” or, as he 
says in his ‘ Monograph,’ “almost an equilateral triangle” ; both of 
these features are the same as already pointed out by Blyth. (3) The 
Bat is said to be ‘probably the smallest known species of the 
genus,” the forearm measuring only 1°3 in. (33mm.). (4) Width 
of horse-shoe 0:2 in. (5'1 mm.); a very narrow horse-shoe is also 
characteristic of the species (5°5 mm., as measured by myself). 
In the type of garoénsis p, is, according to Dobson, in the tooth- 
row; this is of no importance for the identification ; the position 
of this tooth is ‘“‘ vacillating ” in the whole lepidus section. 
22. RHINOLOPHUS MONOCEROS, sp. Nn. 
Diagnosis. Subbadius-type. Larger: forearm, in a not full- 
grown example, 38°2 mm. 
Details. Connecting process (text-fig. 22 ¢, on p. 121) and lancet 
as in subbadius. Horse-shoe markedly broader. General size 
considerably larger. Tail proportionately longer. 
The type, and only specimen known to me, is not full-grown 
(supraorbital crests still separated posteriorly ; no saggital crest ; 
metacarpals far from having acquired their full length). In the 
table p. 132 I give only those measurements which may be of 
some use for comparison with Rh. subbadius. 
Dentition. p, external. p, and p, in contact, p* in row; cusp 
very minute. 
Type. © jyav. (in alcohol). Baksa, Formosa; June 5th, 1893. 
Collected by Mr. P. A. Holst. Presented by Henry Seebohm, 
Esq. Brit. Mus. no, 94.2.4.1. 
* This view was held by the late Dr. Blanford, who, however, put the names 
down as synonyms of Rh. minor (J. A. S. B. lvii. pt. ii. no. 3 (1888) p. 262; Fauna 
Brit. Ind., Mamm. pt. ii. (1891)'p. 277). . 
9 
