1901.] RHINOCEROS LASIOTIS. 155 



giving it the special name of Ceratorhinus niger (nee Rhinoceros 

 niger, Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 335, 1845). 



In the latter paper Gray, perceiving (as I think rightly) that 

 the skulls figured in Blyth's valuable paper of 1863, quoted below, 

 belonged to different forms, gave the name of Ceratorhinus blythii 

 to some of them, but so worded his remarks that it is not easy to 

 make oat to which he applied the name. This point is, however, 

 of but little importance, as the term blythii is antedated by names 

 covering all the forms figured. 



Other references bearing on the subject are as follows : — 



Sclater, Ann. Mag. N. H. (4) x. p. 298 (1872). 



Blyth, t. c. p. 399 ; also J. A. S. B. xxxi. p. 151 (1863), and xliv. 

 Burmese Appx. p. 51 (1875). 



Flower, P. Z. S. 1876, p. 443, and 1878, p. 634. 



As might have been expected, after so many years in confinement, 

 the animal had become very much diseased, and after its death it 

 was found that the skull and the head-skin were alone worth 

 preservation, and it is on these that my observations have been 

 taken. 



For comparison I have had before me 13 skulls belonging to the 

 group of M. sumatrensis, four of them having been kindly lent me by 

 Prof. Stewart from the College of Surgeons collection (Xos. 2142, 

 2143, 2145, and 2146 of the 1884 Catalogue), and the others being 

 those belonging to the British Museum. 



In the first place, with regard to the external characters of 

 colour and hair development, a comparison of the head-skin of 

 11. lasiotis with the two specimens in the Museum of " Ceratorhinus 

 niger " leads me to the conclusion that the differences described 

 were mainly due to age. For it will be remembered that the 

 " C. niger " (that is to say the specimen determined by Sclater as 

 sumatrensis and used by him for his comparison with lasiotis) was 

 very old, whde the type of lasiotis was then quite young. In its old 

 age the latter has become practically quite like the former, for the 

 tufts on the ears do not exceed l|-2 inches in length, and are in 

 no way noticeably different from those of the Malaccan specimen. 

 In fact Dr. Anderson's supposition (P. Z. S. 1872, p. 130) that the 

 tufts on the ears might wear off with age, seems to me entirely 

 confirmed by the evidence, so far as can be judged from a mena- 

 gerie specimen. 



Nor is there in colour any difference worthy of note, that 

 described by Sclater having apparently disappeared with advancing 



a s e - 



Turning to the skull, we find that in size the type of R. lasiotis 

 surpasses all the other thirteen skulls examined, but differs in 

 no other tangible character, so that the question of the validity of 

 li. lasiotis as a special form seems to depend purely on the matter 

 of size. Tin- following are it s measurements, given in inches for 

 comparison with those published by Sir \\ . Flower in 1878 : — 



Length from occipital creel to end of nasals, in straight line 238, 

 with tape over curve of nasals 24-5; greatest zygomatic breadth 



