574 MR. R. I. POCOCK ON A 



The following analytical key to the species above discussed 

 represents my views as to their probable affinities : — 



a. Chin and lower lip white, muzzle pale fawn, markedly lighter 

 than the rest of the face; ears bluntly pointed and with 

 straight upper rim ; no white on croup above root of tail . . . hanglu Wagn. 

 a' . Chin fawn or brown, muzzle brownish fawn with at most 

 a little white on the lip in front ; ears long and pointed 

 with sinuous upper edge (? in affinis). 

 b. White on back of thighs not spreading on to croup 

 above root of tail ; tail dark down centre ; a large 

 blackish-brown croup-patch reaching nearly or quite to 

 the summit of the croup. 



c. Prevailing colour grej% rather darker on the back and 



still darker on the head ; practically the whole of the 



upper side of the tail black macneilU Lydd. 



c'. Prevailing colour (March) brown; upper side of tail 



with an irregular median dark stripe kansuensis, nor. 



h'. White on back of thighs spreading upwards above the root 

 of the tail and encroaching more or less on the cronp ; 

 dark patch on croup smaller or absent. 



d. White area above the tail comparatively small with a 



more or less distinct median dark longitudinal stripe; 

 prevailing colour (Februarj') earthy brown, paler 



laterally affinis Hodgs. 



d'. White area above tail very large, reaching summit of 

 croup and undivided by dark line ; prevailing colour 

 (March) pale fawn-brown wallichii Cuv. 



In selecting the colour of the chin and muzzle as the character 

 for eliminating C. hanglu from the rest of the species, I am not 

 unmindful of the fact that Ouvier wrote of C. tvallichii " comme 

 I'ordinaire, le tour de I'oeil, celui de la bouche, sont plus pales, et 

 il y a du blanc sous la machoire et une tache noire sous Tangle 

 des l^vres." These words may suggest that the muzzle and 

 chin were coloui-ed as in C. lucnghc ; but the coloured plate of 

 C ivallichii, from which the description was taken, does not bear 

 out this supposition nor does it qviite justify Cuvier's phraseology, 

 for the lips and chin are washed with the same yellowish tint as 

 that of the rest of the body. 



If the caudal disk were taken as the primary basis for the 

 classification of the species, they would be grouped as follows : — 

 C. macneilli-\-C. kansuensis; G. hanglui-\-G. affinis; C. ivallichii. 

 I pi'efer on the whole to regard these forms as species rather than 

 subspecies because we have at present no proof that they inter- 

 grade, and the diflferences between them aie perhaps greater than 

 those between the various races of Wapiti (Cervus canadensis) 

 and Red Deer {Cervus elaphios). As a group they resemble the 

 Wapiti and differ fiom the Red Deer in the shortness of their 

 tails. 



The only other Stag which should perhaps come into the same 

 category, judging from the shortness of the tail, the size of the 

 caudal disk, and the shape of the ears, is the Tibetan species 

 commonly known as 0. albirostris which Blanfoid described as 

 C. thoroldi (P. Z. S. 1893, p. 444). Judging from the mounted 

 specimen of this stag in the British Museum the coloured figures 

 of this species pubHshed by Blanford and by Mr. Lydekker 



