SEMNOPITHECUS. 35 



Saugeth. Suppl. vol. v. 1855, p. 21 ; Dahlbom, Stud. Zool. Fam. Eeg. An. 1856, pp. 88, 90 ; 

 Gray, Cat. Monkeys and Lemurs, B. M. 1870, p. 16 ; Blyth, Journ. As. Soc. vol. xliv. 1875, 

 ex. no. p. 10. 



Semnopiihecusflavimanus,'L&BBon,Qeni. Zool. 1830,Augt.p.l09,pl. xl.; Is. Geoff. St.-Hil. Zool. du Voy. 



de Belanger, 1834, p. 39; Waterhouse, Cat. Mus. Zool. Soc. Lond. 2nd ed. 1838, p. 4; Martin, 



Charlesworth's Mag. Nat. Hist, (new ser.) vol. ii. 1838, p. 438; Lesson, Sp. des Mammif. 



1840, p. 60; Martin, Nat. Hist. Quad. 1841, p. 470, fig. 284; Is. Geoff. St.-Hil. Comptes 



Eendus, vol. xv. 1842, p. 719; Arcli. du Miis. vol. ii. 1843, p. 543; Muller und Schlegel, 



Verhandl. 1839-44, pp. 61, 67; Schinz, Syn. Mamm. vol. i. 1844, p. 37; Horsfield, Cat. 



Mamm. E. Ind. Co. Mus. 1851, pp. 11-14; Is. Geoff. St.-Hil. Cat. Method, des Mammif. 



1851, p. 16; Gervais, Hist. Nat. des Mammif. 1854, p. 63; Dahlbom, Stud. Zool. Fam. Eeg. 



An. 1856, pp. 88-90. 

 Setmiojnthecus sumatranus, var. aurata, Miiller und Schlegel, Verhandl. 1839-44, pi. x. bis, fig. 2, 



head of ? . 

 Fresbytes melanophus, Gray, Hand-list Mamm. B. M. 1843, p. 2. 

 Freshytes flavimana, Gray, Hand-list Mamm. B. M. 1843, p. 2. 

 Freshytes nohilis, Gray, Hand-list Mamm. B. M. 1843, p. 3 ; Is. Geoff. St.-Hil. Arch, du Mus. vol. ii, 



1843, p. 545; Blyth, Journ. As. Soc. vol. xiii. 1844, p. 476 ; Ibid, 1875, vol. xliv. ex. no, p. 11. 

 Semnopithecus nobilis, Gray, Cat. Monkeys and Lemurs, B. M. 1870, p. 17 ; Gervais, Hist. Nat. des 



Mammif. 1854, p. 63. 



A careful consideration of tlie typical specimens of the monkeys wliich have 

 heen described under the names S. melalopJms, E-aflELes, S.flavimanus, S. sumatranus 9 

 var. aurata, Muller and Schlegel, and S. nobilis, Gray, has led me to form the 

 opinion that they are all referable to one species which is found in Sumatra and in 

 the Malayan peninsula. The key which opens out this view of their relations is 

 the form which has been described by Muller and Schlegel as the female of 

 S. sumatranus under the name of variety aurata. But apart altogether from that 

 specimen, a comparison of the types of S. melalopJius and S. flavimanus which I 

 made in Paris, has convinced me that the latter is only a variety of the former, as it 

 has a similarly formed crest which in its dusky tipping conforms to the character 

 which has been selected by EafEes as distinctive of the species ; and in another 

 specimen referred in the Paris Museum to S. flavimanus, the forehead is pale 

 yellowish, and, as in S. melalophus, the crest and a narrow line over the ear to the 

 external orbital angle are dark brown. The upper surface and shoulder of the type 

 specimen are reddish washed with pale brown, the rest of the fore-limbs and the 

 whole of the hinder extremities and the tail are pale orange-red or a paler tint of 

 the same colour as S. melalophus. All of these specimens have the same proportions, 

 and their crests are alike. An examination of the type of S. nohilis in the British 

 Museum does not reveal any differences between it and S. melalophus. 



S. sumatranus var. aurata is generally yellowish throughout, with the exception 

 of a few brownish hairs which tend sometimes to group themselves irregularly — a 

 circumstance which Muller and Schlegel thought indicated that this yellow garb 

 was transitional. But I am inclined to think that this will be found not to be the 

 case, as numerous adult male and female monkeys exhibiting these characters with 

 but little variation have been under my observation dead and alive, and all of them 

 appeared to be specifically identical with S. melalophus. 



