36 
SECOND YARKAND MISSION. 
caudatus. The locality whence Severtzoff’s only specimen, since l° s 
south of the Aulje-ata, in the mountain chains between Tall aS ^ 
far too small for A 
was procured, was 
Chirchik.” This is north of Khokand and about 350 miles north-west of the Kaskasu f 
which again is at least 200 miles north of any place known to be inhabited by A . 
ccui' 
cU<t ’ lS ' 
J- 
Arctomys dichrous? from the mountains of Cabul, is a very different species 
aureus, being much less yellow, without any black on the back, and having the npp er f‘ ^ 
pale dull tawny and the lower parts rufous brown. It appears also to be a smaller an 1 ’ 0 ' 
{in ' 1 
It appears also to be a smaller 
In the Indian Museum there is a skull of a marmot, 2 brought by Sir A. Burnes from C a 
and much resembling that of A. aureus. It is however distinguished by being 
across the zygomatic arches, by having much broader and differently shaped nasal bones> . 
by a few other differences. This skull may perhaps have belonged to an adult of A. die' 11 
the typical specimens of which are immature, but it is impossible to determine this ^ ^ 
nasal bones arc similar, but the skull of A. dichrous appears longer in proportion 
breadth, besides being very much smaller, although all the molars are through the jaW- 
27. Abctomys himalayantts. Pis. XII, Xlla. 
Hodgson, J. A. S. B., 1841, x, p. 777. — W. Blanford, J. A. S. B., 1875, xliv, p. 121. 
A. himalayanns, potius tibetensis, Hodgs., J. A. S. B., 1843, xii, p. 409. 
“A. bobac, Sclireb./’ partim, Cray, List Spec. Mam. Coll. B. M., 1843, p. 148. — Horsfiel 
Mam. I. H. Mus., p. 164 (1851). — Blyth, Cat. Mam. Mns. As. Soc., p. 108 (1863) 
Mam. Ind., p. 181 (1867). — Anderson, P. Z. S., 1871, p. 560. — nec Sckreber. 
A. tataricus, Jameson/ L’Instit. 1847, xv., p. 384. 
-Jen 
■A. tibetanus, Hodgson,” Fitzinger, Sitzb. k. k. Akad. Wiss. Wien., 1867, lv, i,p. 49L- 
A 
P. Z. S., 1858, p. 521. 
robustus, A. Milne Edwards, Nouv. Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat., vii, Bulletin, p. 02, ^ 
Recbercbes Mamm., i, p. 309, PI. XL VII, XLIX, fig. 2. 
“ ? A. baibacinus, Brandt/'’ Severtzoff, Turk. Jev., p. 61, nec Brandt, teste Severtzoff, J. Y 
1875, xliv, Pt. 2, p. 126; Ann. Mag. N. H., July, 1876, Ser. 4, xviii, p. 50, note. 
g?0)' 
s. 
Of this marmot no specimens were procured by Dr. Stoliczka during his last eX¥ ea ^ 0 l 
but I have examined the three brought from the San] u pass in the Kuenlun range, so 11 ^ 
Yarkand, by Dr. Henderson, and described by Dr. Anderson in the Proceedings 0 / 
Zoological Society, l. c. So far as I am able to judge, I quite concur with Dr. Andei' b ^ 
assigning them to the species originally described by Hodgson from Tibet, and wl :v 
referred by Gray, Blyth, Anderson, aud other writers, to A. bobac. It is, however, a 
larger species than the Bobac. ,.M 
I have already entered into the confused synonymy of this Himalayan and , ^ 
marmot in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (/. c.), and need not recap 1 ^ 
further than to point out that the species is probably the A. tartaricus of Jam eS °^j-jlP 1 ’ 
description of which I have been unable to consult, and the A. robustus of M 1 
Edwards from Eastern Tibet. The latter species, as figured in the “ Reclierches, a c 
1 l) 1 ' 
1 Anderson, Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., October, 1875, Ser. 4, xvi, p. 283. ^ 
- One of the specimens referred by Mr. Blyth to Arctomys bobac in his Catalogue of the Mammalia in the Museum 
Society, No. 348 E, p. 109. 
3 This reference is quoted from Wiegman’s “ Archiv," no copy of the work named being available. 
