1905.] OF THE GENUS RHINOLOPHUS. 95 



in the original description as given by Temminck are the 

 following : — 



(1) In ■'taille, forme du corps, des oreilles et des follicules 

 accessoires du nez " very much like Java specimens of Uh. afflnis 

 Horsf . It may be said so ; the difference in the shape of the 

 sella is not easily ascertained in dried skins. 



(2) " Des proportions moins grandes," as compared with affinis. 

 As measurements Temminck gives : — Of rouxi : foreai'm " 1 pouce 

 10 lignes " (49*5 mm.), expanse of wings " 10 pouces." Oiaflnis: 

 foi'earm "1 pouce 10 lignes," expanse "11 a 12 pouces." 

 49 '5 mm. is one of the commonest measurements of the forearm 

 in the series before me. It looks a little contradictory that 

 Temminck, having stated that rouxi is smaller than affinis (which 

 is quite correct), gives precisely the same measurement of their 

 forearms, though, at the same time, a considerablj' larger 

 " expanse " of the latter species. But just that is the salient 

 point. As a matter of fact, the two species ca7i have the foreai-m 

 of exactly the same length (veiy large rouxi, and small affinis) ; 

 but also in that case, the expanse of Rh. affinis is always markedly 

 larger than that of Rh. rouxi, for the obvious reason that in the 

 former species the second phalanx of the third (longest) finger is 

 always absolutely longer than in the latter. 



(3) A red, a dark, and an intermediate phase of roioxi were 

 laiown to Temminck. I have the same phases before me. That 

 similar phases occur in Bh. horneensis has no bearing on the 

 present technical question ; horneensis lives far away from 

 " Calcutta." The "phases " of Rh. affinis are different. 



(4) " Les molaires de la machoire superieure sont en meme 

 nombre que dans V affinis, celles de I'inferieure en compte cinq, ou 

 une de moins, par le manque total de la petite dent dont Vaffinis 

 est pourvu, et qui forme la sixieme molaire." Since Temminck 

 emphasises the "manque total" of p^, I suppose that he has not 

 overlooked this small tooth, but has examined a (probably aged) 

 individual in which it was wanting (cf. the specimen mentioned 

 above). The word " sixieme " is, of course, a la23sus for " cinquieme " 

 (Temminck counted the " molars " from behind forwards). 



To sum up : — There can be no doubt that Temminck's Bh. rouxi 

 is the Bat here under consideration, being a species (1) bearing- 

 much resemblance to Bh. affinis ; (2) of almost the same size, but 

 with a markedly smaller expanse of wings ; (3) with a red, a dark, 

 and an intermediate phase ; and (4) inhabiting the Continent of 

 India. 



" Rh. petersi." — The original description of Rh. jjetersi is meagre 

 and vague ; the figures of the head and nose-leaves published four 

 years later are badly drawn ; the tyjDe specimen (in the Calcutta 

 Museum) has no indication of locality. This may sufficiently 

 account for the fact that no technical name in the genus has been 

 the source of more confusion. I therefoi-e think it of some use to 

 give a brief sketch of its rather complicated history in literature : — 



(«) As to the identification of '"Rh. 2^<'tersi," in the original 



