hardly then to be met with within the Colony! It is, however, as we
are informed by Mr. W. L. Sclater, still to be found even up to the
present day, though rarely, on some places on the east coast (Bathurst
and Komgha), and in considerable numbers in the adjoining countries.
Writing in 1881, Mr. Selous tells us that a few were then still to be
found in the Transvaal, and that in Matabeleland and Mashonaland, on
both slopes of the watershed, it was very common along the banks of the
rivers. On the Manica plateau north of the Zambesi, Mr. Selous found
Reedbucks particularly abundant, and had seen as many as eight at one
time feeding in close proximity one to another. He remarks, however,
that they are animals that go in pairs, and in this particular differ
altogether from the various Waterbucks, which consort together in herds
of not more than one male to ten females.
Messrs. Nicolls and Eglington, in their ‘Sportsman in South Africa,’
the most recent authority on this subject, give us the following
account of the present distribution of the Reedbuck and of its
habits:--“It is now extremely rare to meet with this species in the
Transvaal, except along some of the rivers in the north-eastern
districts, and in Bechuanaland it is virtually extinct, although five
years ago it was fairly common in the reeds of the Molopo, close to
the site of the present town of Mafeking. In portions of the British
Protectorate bordering the Crocodile River, and along its north-western
tributaries, the Reedbuck may still occasionally be met with, but
nowhere there in plenty. In the low country on the east coast about
the Pungwe and Sabi Rivers it is extremely numerous. On those rivers
of Mashonaland and Matabeleland which are margined with reeds, and
where it has not been driven out by the natives and the prospectors,
it may be in places plentifully found. But along the Chobe, Mababe,
Tamulakani, and Botletle Rivers (where the banks are not precipitous)
it is still quite common. In the dry reed-patches bordering Lake Ngami,
the Taouhe, and Okavango, as far up as Indalis, from which the water
recedes during several months of the year, the Reedbuck is particularly
numerous; so much so as to lead to the erroneous impression that this
antelope is gregarious, so many often being observed together at one
time. It is usual to find the rams and ewes consorting in pairs,
accompanied by a couple of their immature progeny, usually frequenting
dry patches of reeds; but when these become flooded they often resort
to the bush in the immediate vicinity of water. Although always found
in proximity to the latter element, the Reedbuck when pursued will
never take refuge in it; but in endeavouring to escape will direct its
course right away from the river-beds towards the shelter of the thick
bush, and, where such is not at hand, even into the open country. When
suddenly alarmed, the males sometimes give vent to a whistle resembling
that of the Red Rhébok (_Cervicapra fulvorufula_). This species
is rather easily approached, and the gallop being slow and regular,
it is perhaps the easiest of the South-African antelopes to shoot;
but, at the same time, it must be remarked that this, like all the
other water-resorting varieties, possesses an extraordinary amount of
vitality. The flesh is scarcely palatable, but the liver is considered
a tit-bit.”
There is still much left to be ascertained about the range of the
Reedbuck towards the north. On the west coast it certainly extends into
Angola, where specimens have been recorded by Prof. Bocage, while Dr.
Jentink includes it amongst the Mammals of Mossamedes, and registers
examples in the Leyden Museum from Damaraland and Benguela. Far up the
east coast it seems to be abundant in Nyasaland. Mr. Crawshay, in his
“Field-Notes” on the Antelopes of this Protectorate (P. Z. S. 1890),
considers it quite as widely distributed there as the Waterbuck, though
in fewer numbers. He found it, perhaps, in greatest abundance on the
vast swampy plains at the foot of the Wa-Kinga mountains, north-west
of the lake. In their habits, he says, they are decidedly local, and
day after day the same animals can be found in the same spot: they are
specially partial to bare sandy patches and open plains, well away from
cover:--“When alarmed they give vent to shrill screams, and bound off,
kicking up their hind legs and tossing up their tails like rabbits.
Their tails are thick and bushy, and, being white on the underside,
present a striking appearance when their owners are making off.”
Although they have a strong scent, Mr. Crawshay considers their flesh
“better than that of any other antelope except that of the Impala and
Eland.”
[Illustration: Fig. 37.
Horns of _Cervicapra arundinum_ from Nyasaland (Major Trollope).]
Amongst other hunters’ trophies from Nyasaland which Major F. C.
Trollope has kindly allowed us to examine is a fine pair of horns of
this Antelope, of which we give a figure. They measure 17 inches from
the base to the tip along the curve and the distance between the points
is 19½ inches.
In German East Africa, Dr. Matschie records the Reedbuck as having
been obtained by Böhm, and observed by Neumann in several localities,
although the latter traveller did not bring home specimens. Dr.
Matschie seems a little doubtful as to its exact identity with the
Reedbuck of the Cape, and it is probably somewhere here that _C.
bohor_ from the north inosculates with _C. arundinum_.
Reedbucks, even in the same district, appear to vary much in size,
in colour, and in other external characters, and some authorities
have attempted to divide them into several species. Sundevall, in
his ‘Expositio Pecorum,’ has described four varieties of the present
animal, remarking that all the specimens he has examined varied a
little amongst themselves. Besides the differences in the direction of
the hairs on the head, to which he alludes, there is much variation in
the amount and in the depth of the dark markings on the feet, which are
quite black in some examples and brown in others. Our figure (Plate
XLIII.), which has been put upon the stone by Mr. Smit from an original
drawing by Wolf (kindly lent to us by Sir Douglas Brooke), shows this
particular feature in its less decided form. It was probably taken from
a mounted specimen in the British Museum, but we regret to say there is
no absolute certainty upon this point.
Living specimens of the Reedbuck are occasionally brought to Europe,
but are rarely seen in our menageries, and do not bear captivity
easily. The Zoological Society of London received examples of this
species in 1864, 1865, and 1879, but none of them lived long in the
Gardens.
_February, 1897._
71. THE BOHOR.
CERVICAPRA BOHOR (RÜPP.).
_Antilope redunca_, =Rüpp.= N. Wirb. Abyss, p. 20, pl. vii. fig.
1 (1835) (Woggers, Abyssinia) (_nec_ Pall.).
_Eleotragus reduncus_, =Heugl.= Ant. u. Büff. N.O.-Afr. (N. Act.
Leop. xxx. pt. 2), p. 11 (1863); =Sclat.= P. Z. S. 1864, p. 101
(Usagara, _Speke_); =Jent.= Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. P.-B.
xi.) p. 150 (1892).
_Redunca bohor_, =Rüpp.= Verz. Senck. Mus. p. 38, Osteol. p. 50
(1842); Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 169 (1869).
_Antilope_ (_Redunca_) _bohor_, =Wagn.= Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv.
p. 425 (1844), v. p. 432 (1855).
_Cervicapra bohor_, =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1844,
p. 195 (1846); =id.= Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr.
ii. p. 146; Reprint, p. 70 (1848); =Scl.= List An. Zool. Soc.
(8) p. 144 (1883), (9) p. 153 (1896); =Günth.= P. Z. S. 1890,
p. 604; =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm. p. 340 (1891); =Ward=, Horn Meas.
(1) p. 93 (1892), (2) p. 136 (1896); =Lyd.= Horns and Hoofs, p.
229 (1893); =Jackson=, Badm. Big Game Shooting, i. pp. 285 & 297
(1894); =Matschie=, Thierw. Ost-Afr., Säug. p. 128 (1895).
_Eleotragus bohor_, =Temm.= Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 191 (1853).
_Eleotragus arundinaceus_, =Heugl.= Ant. u. Büff. N.O.-Afr. (N.
Act. Leop. xxx. pt. ii. p. 11 (1863) (Sobat); =Pagenst.= JB.
Hamb. ii. p. 36 (1884) (Maurui, Masailand); =True=, Pr. U. S.
Nat. Mus. xv. p. 472 (1892) (Kilimanjaro).
_Antilope arundinacea_, =Schweinf.= Herz von Afrika, ii. pp. 465
& 534 (1874).
_Cervicapra arundineum_, =Lugard=, E. Afr. i. p. 538 (1893)
(Ruwenzori).
_Kobus_, sp. inc., =Scl.= P. Z. S. 1864, p. 103 (Uganda).
_Reedbuck_, =Hunter=, in Willoughby’s E. Africa, p. 289 (1889).
VERNACULAR NAMES:--_Xondieh_ in Arabic; _Behor_ or _Bohor_ in
Amharic (_Rüppell & Heuglin_); _Oboor_ of the Madi (_Baku_, fide
_Günther_); _Käo_ in Dinka; _Pohr_ in Djur; _Jalo_ in Bongo;
_Joro_ in Niam-Niam; _Ngallah_ in Golo; _Djiang_ in Ssebre
(_Schweinfurth_); _Njasa_ in Uganda (_Lugard_); _Porhi_ in
Swahili (_Hunter_), also _Toi_ or _Tohi_ (_Jackson_).
Nearly similar to _C. arundinum_, but decidedly smaller, and
with the horn more hooked at their tip. As the hooked tip, however,
gradually wears off, and the horns grow up straight from their bases,
even this difference tends to disappear in quite adult specimens. The
horns attain a length of from 10 to 13 inches. The tail is rather
shorter and less bushy than in _C. arundinum_, and the black
markings of the limbs are less defined than in well-marked examples
of that species. In the general colour there is also less difference
between the head and the body than in _C. arundinum_, both being
fawn-coloured.
Skull dimensions of an old male:--Basal length 9 inches, greatest
breadth 4·3, muzzle to orbit 5·35.
_Female._ Like the male, but hornless.
_Hab._ Abyssinia and East Africa, southward to Kilimanjaro.
The great explorer of Abyssinia, Rüppell, was the first to obtain
specimens of the Reedbuck in that country, although its existence
there had, perhaps, been vaguely alluded to by Bruce in his ‘Travels.’
Rüppell was at first inclined to refer the Abyssinian animal, which
he met with in the plains of Woggara, to _C. redunca_, but at a
later period, when he had had an opportunity of comparing its skull
with that of the West-African species, came to the conclusion that
it was distinct, and changed its specific name to “_bohor_.”
“_Cervicapra bohor_” has therefore been generally adopted as the
appellation of the East-African Reedbuck, although, as yet, we are
far from being well acquainted with this animal and the points of its
distinctions from its congeners.
Heuglin, in his memoir on the Antelopes of North-east Africa,
enumerates this species still under the name _redunca_ of Pallas, but
quotes the plate of _Antilope bohor_ in Rüppell’s ‘Atlas,’ and gives
its native Amharic name as “Behor.” Heuglin met with it in small troops
in the bushy plains and hills of the provinces of Woggara, Dembea,
Begemeger, and Foggara in Abyssinia, at a height of from six to eight
hundred feet above the sea-level. Heuglin was not certain as to having
encountered this Antelope in the districts west of the Nile, but
believed that a female specimen which he obtained in November 1853, in
Southern Kordofan, must have belonged to it. According to Dr. Günther
(P. Z. S. 1890, p. 607), Sir Samuel Baker met with the Bohor among
the Madi tribes on the White Nile between 4° and 2° 30´ N. lat., and
supplied him with a sketch of the skull which enabled him to identify
the species.
We have as yet no records of any Reedbuck having been obtained in
Somaliland, but when we go further south to British East Africa we have
good evidence from several trustworthy observers of its existence in
that country. It is a difficult question, however, and one which is by
no means yet decided, whether the East-African Reedbuck is the same as
the Abyssinian “Bohor.”
Dr. Günther was the first to interest himself in this subject, and
contributed a paper on it to the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’ in
1890. Taking the skull of an adult male Reedbuck, obtained by Mr. H.
C. V. Hunter in British East Africa, he pointed out the differences
between it and the South-African Reedbuck called _C. redunca_ by
Gray, which is in fact _C. fulvorufula_ of the present work. By the
kind permission of the Zoological Society of London we are enabled
to reproduce the woodcuts of the portions of the skull of these two
Antelopes upon which Dr. Günther based his conclusions, and we add
thereto Dr. Günther’s descriptions of these differences.
“_Cervicapra fulvorufula_[12] (fig. 38, p. 168) is distinguished
by its very large orbit; in a skull 230 millim. long the vertical
dimension of the orbit is 45 millim.; the eyeball is supported below
by a largely expanded concavity of the jugal bone, the lower edge of
the orbit being particularly sharp and thin, merging into the suture
between the jugal and lacrymal bones. The cheek part of the skull is
flat, rather concave, so that the facial portion of the cranium between
the orbit and the antorbital foramen appears rather compressed when
viewed from above. The ascending ramus of the intermaxillary reaches
to, or nearly to, the nasal bone. The horns are but slightly divergent
and very little bent forwards.
“In _Cervicapra bohor_ (fig. 39, p. 169) the orbit is comparatively
smaller; in a skull 245 millim. long the vertical diameter of the
orbit is only 40 millim.; the jugal bone is much less expanded to form
the bottom of the orbital cavity; the lower rim of the orbit has two
edges, the lower of which does not merge into the jugo-lacrymal suture,
but runs parallel to it at a distance of about 8 millim. The cheek
part of the skull is swollen and convex, so that the facial portion
of the cranium above the molar teeth cannot be termed compressed.
The ascending ramus of the intermaxillary is short, terminating at a
considerable distance from the nasal bone.”
[Illustration: Fig. 38.
Skull of _Cervicapra fulvorufula_.--_j_, jugal; _l_,
lacrymal.
(P. Z. S. 1890, p. 604.)]
Dr. Günther adds that the horns of _C. bohor_ are much stronger
and larger than in _Cervicapra fulvorufula_; their basal portion
is somewhat flattened from the front backwards, but similarly
corrugated; they diverge very slightly and have their points strongly
curved forwards. He also says that the skull of a female Antelope
brought home by Capt. Speke and given to the Museum in 1863 evidently
belongs to _C. bohor_[13]; it has the basal portion of the nasal
bones raised into a slight convexity, whilst this part is flat in the
male. A similar sexual difference exists in the skulls of _Cervicapra
arundinum_.
[Illustration: Fig. 39.
Skull of _Cervicapra bohor_.--_jl_, jugo-lacrymal suture;
_o_, lower edge of infra-orbital rim.
(P. Z. S. 1890, p. 605.)]
Assuming Dr. Günther’s view to be correct, and that the Reedbuck of
British East Africa is truly referable to _Cervicapra bohor_, we
will proceed to recount what has been said about it by the leading
authorities on the antelopes of this country. Mr. Hunter, from whom,
it will be recollected, Dr. Günther obtained the specimen upon which
he made his observations, tells us that the Reedbuck met with in the
district of Kilimanjaro is usually found in the early morning and
evening feeding near the edges of the reedy swamps, and when disturbed
immediately runs into the rushes. Mr. Hunter and his companions found
it very common in a large swamp near Mikundune, to the south-west of
the mountain. Mr. Jackson, who calls the same antelope the “Lesser
Reedbuck,” and gives its Swahili name as “Toi” or “Tohi,” tells us that
this species is very local in British East Africa, and, as a rule,
frequents only the vicinity of rivers and swamps that are never dry.
He found it on the shores of Lake Jipi, and on the river Ziwa, to the
east of Kilimanjaro, and in a few other places. He also saw on the
hills to the north-west of Machako’s several small herds of it, which
had evidently been driven up there by the grass-fires in the plains.
Mr. Jackson remarks that these Reedbucks give a shrill whistle when
disturbed, and are very shy and difficult to stalk, but that in long
grass they lie close and sometimes allow the sportsman to approach to
within twenty or thirty yards of them.
In the large series of mammals obtained by Dr. Abbott in the district
of Kilimanjaro, which has been described by Mr. True, there were two
young male specimens of a Reedbuck which were referred by Mr. True to
_C. arundinum_, but which belonged no doubt to the present species
(if distinct).
This species is so like _C. arundinum_ in its general external
characters that we have not thought it worth while to give a special
figure of it. Besides the skull in the National Collection presented
by Mr. H. C. V. Hunter, and used for description by Dr. Günther, as
mentioned above, and the female head from Uganda obtained by Speke,
also already spoken of, there are in the British Museum two good
specimens, adult and young, presented by Major Kenrick. The more adult
of these, as Major Kenrick kindly informs us, was shot in July 1892,
about six miles east of Kiumengelia, at the north-east corner of the
Kilimanjaro range, and the younger one in August of the same year on
the banks of the Pangani River, both these places being now within the
limits of German East Africa.
Reedbucks, as we have already stated, do not, as a rule, do well in
captivity. The Zoological Society of London have on two occasions
(in 1877 and 1883) received female Reedbucks from East Africa which
have been referred with some doubt to the present species. In neither
instance, however, did they live long in the Society’s Gardens.
_February, 1897._
[Illustration:
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. XLIV.
_Wolf del., J. Smit lith._ _Hanhart imp._
The Nagor.
CERVICAPRA REDUNCA.
_Published by R. H. Porter._]
72. THE NAGOR.
CERVICAPRA REDUNCA (PALL.).
[PLATE XLIV.]
_Le Nagor_, =Buff.= Hist. Nat. xii. p. 326, pl. xlvi. (1764)
(Goree Isl., Senegambia).
_Antilope reversa_, =Pall.= Misc. Zool. p. 5 (1766) (nec _Capra
reversa_, L.).
_Antilope redunca_, =Pall.= Spic. Zool. i. p. 8 (1767), xii. p.
13 (1777); =Müll.= Natursyst. Suppl. p. 53 (1776); =Erxl.= Syst.
R. A. p. 281 (1777); =Zimm.= Spec. Zool. Geog. p. 541 (1777);
=id.= Geogr. Gesch. ii. p. 114 (1780); iii. expl. to chart, p.
9 (1783); =Gatt.= Brev. Zool. i. p. 81 (1780); =Herm.= Tab.
Affin. Anim. p. 108 (1783); =Schreb.= Säug. pl. cclxv. (1785);
=Bodd.= Elench. Anim. p. 141 (1785); =Gmel.= Linn. S. N. i.
p. 184 (1788); =Kerr=, Linn. An. K. p. 308 (1792); =Donnd.=
Zool. Beytr. i. p. 624 (1792); =Link=, Beytr. Nat. ii. p. 98
(1795); =Bechst.= Syst. Uebers. vierf. Th. ii. p. 643 (1800);
=Shaw=, Gen. Zool. ii. pt. 2, p. 360 (1801); =Turt.= Linn. S.
N. i. p. 112 (1802); =Desm.= N. Dict. d’H. N. (1) xv. p. 330
(1803), xxiv. Tabl. p. 32 (1804); =G. Cuv.= Dict. Sci. Nat.
ii. p. 243 (1804); =Tiedem.= Zool. i. p. 409 (1808); =Licht.=
Mag. nat. Fr. vi. p. 170 (1814); =G. Fisch.= Zoogn. iii. p.
410 (1814); =Afzel.= N. Act. Ups. vii. p. 220 (1815); =Desm.=
N. Dict. d’H. N. (2) ii. p. 188 (1816); =Goldf.= Schr. Säug.
v. p. 1200 (1818); =Schinz=, Cuv. Thierr. i. p. 395 (1821);
=Desm.= Mamm. ii. p. 458 (1822); =H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. iv. p.
238, v. p. 338 (1827); =Less.= Man. Mamm. p. 375 (1827); =J. B.
Fisch.= Syn. Mamm. p. 464 (1829); =Less.= Compl. Buff. x. p.
290 (1836); =Oken=, Allg. Nat. vii. p. 1385 (1838); =Laurill.=
Dict. Univ. d’H. N. i. p. 621 (1839); =Gerv.= Dict. Sci. Nat.
i. p. 261 (1840); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 177 (1842);
=Wagn.= Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 426 (1844), v. p. 431 (1855);
=Schinz=, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 425 (1845); =Rüpp.= Mus. Senckenb.
iii. p. 182 (1845); =Gieb.= Säug. p. 314 (1853–5); =Huet=, Bull.
Soc. Acclim. 1887, p. 267.
_Cerophorus_ (_Cervicapra_) _redunca_, =Blainv.= Bull. Soc.
Philom. 1816, p. 75.
_Eleotragus reduncus_, =Gray=, Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p.
232 (1846); =id.= Knowsl. Men. p. 13, pl. xiii. (1850); =id.=
P. Z. S. 1850, p. 127; =id.= Ann. & Mag. N. H. (2) viii. p. 145
(1851); =id.= Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 94 (1852); =Temm.= Esq. Zool.
Guin. p. 191 (1853); =Gray=, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 18 (1872); =id.=
Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 88 (1873); =Jent.= Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus.
(Mus. Pays-Bas, ix.), p. 130 (1887); =Huet=, Bull. Soc. Acclim.
1887, p. 84.
_Cervicapra redunca_, =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1844,
p. 195 (1846); =id.= Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr.
ii. p. 146; Reprint, p. 70 (1848); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm. p. 340
(1891); =Lyd.= Horns and Hoofs, p. 228 (1893); =Scl.= P. Z. S.
1890, p. 698; =id.= List of An. Zool. Soc. (9) p. 153 (1896).
_Redunca redunca_, =Fitz.= SB. Wien, lix. 1, p. 169 (1869).
_Antilope rufa_, =Afzel.= N. Act. Ups. vii. p. 250 (1815).
_Ourebi du Sénégal_[14], =F. Cuv.= Hist. Nat. (fol.) iii. livr.
lx., imm. ♀ (1829), whence
_Antilope fulva_, =Schinz=, Mon. Antil. p. 17 (1848).
_Redunca nagor_, =Rüpp.= Verz. Senck. Mus. p. 38, Ost. p. 51
(1842).
VERNACULAR NAME:--_Wonto_ of natives on the Gambia (_Gray_, fide
_Whitfield_).
Size decidedly smaller than in the previous species, the height at
the withers only about 27 or 28 inches. Colour uniform bright fawn
generally, without darker markings on the limbs; head and body quite
alike. Tail comparatively short and little bushy, fawn above, white
below.
Horns very thick in proportion to the size of the animal, 5 inches in
circumference at the base but only about 8 to 10 inches long. Their
terminal portion is strongly turned forwards, a character most marked
in rather young specimens before the long straight basal part has grown.
Dimensions of a male skull:--Basal length 8·1 inches, greatest breadth
3·8, muzzle to orbit 5.
_Female_ similar, but hornless.
_Hab._ West Africa north of the forest region (Senegal and
Gambia).
The Reedbuck of West Africa was somewhat vaguely described by Buffon,
in his ‘Histoire Naturelle,’ from a stuffed specimen in the cabinet
of Adanson, which had been obtained from the island of Goree on the
coast of Senegal. Fortunately Buffon added a tolerably recognizable
figure of the “Nagor,” as he proposed to call it (from its fancied
resemblance to the “Nanguer,” i. e. _Gazella dama_!), and taking
this figure into consideration along with the locality, we can have
little doubt as to its identity. In the first essay on the Antelopes,
published in his ‘Miscellanea Zoologica,’ in 1766, Pallas suggested
the name “_Antilope reversa_” for Buffon’s “Nagor”; but in his
second essay on the same subject, issued in the ‘Spicilegia Zoologica’
in 1767, Pallas changed this name, which had been already used by
Linnæus for another animal, to _Antilope redunca_. There can be no
doubt, therefore, that _redunca_ is the proper specific name of
the present species of _Cervicapra_, although this term has been
applied by various authors, as will be seen by reference to our lists
of synonyms, to three other species of the genus.
Beyond quoting Buffon’s account of the “Nagor” and references to the
authors who had adopted his description, little, if anything more,
appears to have been added by subsequent writers to our knowledge
of _Cervicapra redunca_ until 1850, when the ‘Gleanings’ from
the Knowsley Menagerie were published. In the letterpress to this
work Gray appears to have confounded the present animal with _C.
bohor_, and perhaps with _C. fulvorufula_, but the plate of
_Eleotragus reduncus_ (tab. xiii.) seems to represent a male
and young one of the present species. In the letterpress we are told
that a “young male” was then living at Knowsley, and, so far as we
can understand the remarks, had been obtained from the Gambia, where
Whitfield had given its native name as “Wonto.” Again, from 1850 to the
present period there has been an almost complete blank in the history
of the West-African Reedbuck. No examples of it appear to have been
received either by the British Museum or at Leyden, and the species
seems to have remained (even up to the present time) unrepresented
in most of the great National Collections, except in Paris, where
there are two mounted males from Senegal, besides other specimens
formerly living in the Menagerie, and in the Senckenbergian Museum at
Frankfort-on-the-Main, where, according to Rüppell’s list (Mus. Senck.
iii. p. 182), there is also a specimen of it, which enabled him to
realize the differences between this species and _C. bohor_.