166 
The last attempt to arrange this extensive family in subordinate 
groups is that of Mr. Gray, published in the eighteenth volume of the 
‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History.’ His preliminary remarks, 
though brief, appear to me quite sufficient to dispose ot the arrange¬ 
ments previously set forth, therefore I 'will content myself with the con¬ 
sideration of his own. The two primary divisions, which are founded 
only upon the horns, certainly do not indicate any very natural affi¬ 
nities, since, taking the whole structure into consideration, the Anti- 
lopece of Mr. Gray are not more closely allied to the Bovecz than they 
are to the members of the second primary division, nor do the Strep- 
sicerece ally themselves particularly to the Sheep and Goats. A ith 
regard to the subdivision of the Antilopece, he is certainly right in 
separating the “ Antelopes of the Desert” as a group, although there 
is no doubt that some of the divisions of the “ Antelopes ot the 
Fields” are equally as distinct from each other as they are from the 
former. The division of the latter group into “ True Antelopes,” 
“ Caprine Antelopes,” and “Cervine Antelopes,” also possesses some 
merit; but the genera Capricornis and Nemorhcedus are very distinct 
from the other Caprine Antelopes, and the genus Eleotragus (Re- 
dunca of Major Smith) is very distinct from the other true Antelopes, 
and ought, as I am quite convinced, to include the genus Kohis of 
Dr. Andrew Smith, placed by Mr. Gray among his Cervine Ante¬ 
lopes, and consisting of species not known at the time Major Smith 
was engaged in these researches. 
It will be universally admitted, that for the generic division of the 
Ruminants, zoology is most indebted to Major Smith, and in the 
course of my observations I have found reason to reject but few ot 
the divisions proposed by him as subgenera, and few, it any, in my 
opinion, need be added. As I thus propose to curtail the list ot 
genera adopted by Mr. Gray, and to separate certain ot them from 
those with w r hich he has associated them, several will stand alone; 
and of those which do ally themselves together, no group seems to 
manifest that particular relationship with other groups which should 
warrant us in separating the family, as Mr. Gray has done, into 
divisions of a primary, secondary, tertiary, and in some cases even a 
fourth and fifth degree of rank. 
I will, therefore, while enumerating the characters which I have 
observed in the genera I propose* to adopt, point out which of them 
appear to constitute groups, and mention those species which, from 
the inspection of entire specimens, skulls, or at least horns, I feel 
warranted in referring to the genera under which I place them. As 
I have seen nothing to guide me to a particular linear arrangement, 
any naturalist w T ho may be pleased to adopt my divisions is at liberty 
to place the groups, and the genera contained in each, in whatever 
order he may think most convenient. 
I will first proceed to the “ true Antelopes” of Mr. Gray, excluding 
the genus Eleotragus. They all have the horns round, the middle 
incisors expanded at their summits, the others being bent outwards to 
make room for them, and the molars without supplemental lobes. 
The infraorbital depression when existing upon the skull is gene- 
