224 
THE MAMMALS OE EGYPT. 
in the accompanying table of the skulls (pp. 222-3) show how they run one into another. 
It will be observed that the male Sardinian fox is the only one among the European 
foxes which is an exception to this, as its skull is considerably smaller than that of any 
of the other males, and in its dimensions only slightly exceeds that of the small adult 
female Egyptian fox. It will also be observed that the tarsus of this animal is much 
shorter than that of any of the other European foxes, and that in this respect the fox 
approaches the one found in Barbary. The fourth upper premolar tooth of the latter, 
however, is smaller than the corresponding tooth of the Sardinian animal, and the 
skull, although like it in form, is altogether smaller. The Algerian fox, moreover, 
in the form of its skull is closely allied both to the Egyptian and European foxes, 
so much so, indeed, that there is no character to distinguish it except it be that 
the fourth upper premolar is slightly smaller than in the others; but this is so trivial 
that no importance can be attached to it. 
The colouring, however, of the Algerian fox distinguishes it from the Egyptian fox, as 
the hairs on the upper surface are devoid of the white subterminal bands or tips which 
give to the fur of the common European and Egyptian foxes its speckled appearance k 
It appears from the measurements of the skull of V. ][iersica and foxes that can he 
grouped with it, such as the fox of Palestine, that this series of Asiatic foxes stands 
intermediate in size between 7. vulpes and 7. leucopus, the latter being essentially a 
dwarf fox with much smaller fourth premolars than those foxes referable to V. vulpes, 
of which 7. nilotica and V. persica are undoubtedly geographical races. It would 
appear that the fox found at Maskat, which Dr. Blanford was disposed to regard as 
7. leucopus, unquestionably belongs to the Egyptian type of 7. vulpes, and is a giant 
compared with 7. leucopus, with a much larger fourth premolar, the dimensions of 
w'hich equal the corresponding tooth in the fox from Assuan. 
A female fox from the Wells of Moses has the same size of fourth premolar as 
the adult female fiom Gizeh 2 , but its tarsus is 19 mm. shorter, and 5 mm. shorter 
than the longest tarsus of five specimens of 7. leucopms, and 1 mm. shorter than 
the shortest tarsus of these five animals. Notwithstanding this short tarsus, so 
much shorter than that of the other examples of the Egyptian fox, I am disposed to 
regard it only as an individual A'-ariation, which may possibly be also the explanation 
of the short tarsus of the Sardinian fox registered in the table (p, 222). 
The fox of Palestine is represented in the British Museum by one specimen collected 
1 The above is my experience, but I observe that Cretzschmar’s figure of Cams niloticus is brillianljy 
coloured and shows no speckling of the fur, and in this respect resembles a skin of the Algerian fox in 
the British Aluseum. 
2 This fox, in its general coloration, except its limbs, which are rufous externally, has a strong resemblance 
to a fox from the country X.E. of the Salt Eange, Punjab, referred to V. 2 ^v.silla, Blyth, but undoubtedly 
belonging to F. leucopus, which is distinguished by the w'hite on the inner side of its fore legs and front of its 
bind legs ; but the Gizeh fox has a little w hite in these parts, and patches of greyish black down the front 
of its fere legs. 
