(9) p. 163 (1896); =Flow. & Gars.= Cat. Ost. p. 260 (1884); =Blanf.=
Faun. Brit. Ind., Mamm. p. 517 (1891); =Sclater= f. Cat. Mamm. Calc.
Mus. p. 154 (1891); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm. p. 345 (1891); =Ward=, Horn
Meas. (1) p. 151 (1892), (2) p. 192 (1896); =Lyd.= Horns and Hoofs, p.
145 (1893); =id.= Royal Nat. Hist. ii. p. 278 (1894); =Trouessart=,
Cat. Mamm. pt. iv. p. 956 (1898).
_Portax tragelaphus_, =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. lxv. p. 198
(18–16) (corrected to _tragocamelus_, p. 323, 1847); =id.= Hornsch.
Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 149 (_tragocamelus_, p. 315)
(1848); Reprint, p. 73.
_Portax tragocamelus_, =Gray=, P. Z. S. 1850, p. 146; id. Knowsl. Men.
p. 28, pl. xxix. (1850); =id.= Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 141 (1852); =Adams=,
P. Z. S. 1858, p. 523; =Wood=, Ill. Nat. Hist. i. p. 667, fig. (1862);
=Gerr.= Cat. Bones Mamm. B. M. p. 247 (1862); =Blyth=, Cat. Mamm. Mus.
As. Soc. p. 165 (1863); =Gray=, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 51 (1872); =id.=
Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 121 (1873).
_Antilope picta_, =Pallas=, Spic. Zool. xii. p. 14 (1777); =Schieb.=
Säug. pls. cclxiii. & cclxiii. B, ♂, ♀ (1784); =Bodd.= Elench. Anim.
p. 141 (1785); =Gm.= Linn. S. N. i. p. 184 (1788); =Pennant=, Quadr.
ed. i. p. 74, pl. vii. (1781), ed. 3, p. 83, pl. xiii. (1793); Linn.
An. K. p. 309 (1792); =Donnd.= Zool. Beitr. i. p. 625 (1792); =Lath. &
Dav.= Faun. Ind. p. 4 (1795); =Link=, Beytr. Nat. p. 99 (1795); =Cuv.=
Tabl. Elém. p. 163 (1798); =Bechst.= Syst. Uebers. vierf. Th. ii. p.
78, pl. 9 (1799); =Shaw=, Gen. Zool. pt. ii. p. 327, fig. 189 (1801);
=Turt.= Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 112 (1802); =G. Cuv.= Dict. Sci. Nat.
ii. p. 248 (1804); =Afz.= N. Act. Upsal. vii. p. 220 (1815); =G. Cuv.=
R. A. i. p. 264 (1817); =Goldf.= Schreb. Säug. v. p. 1159 (1818);
=Desmoul.= Dict. Class. d’H. N. i. p. 447 (1822); =G. Cuv.= H. N.
Mamm. iii. pl. xlvi. (1824); =J. B. Fisch.= Syn. Mamm. p. 476 (1829);
=Bennett=, Gard. & Menag. Z. S. i. p. 125 (1830); =Sykes=, P. Z. S.
1831, p. 105; =Masson=, Cuv. R. A. i. p. 318 (1836); =Waterh.= Cat.
Mus. Z. S. (2) p. 42 (1838); =Schinz=, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 449 (1845);
=id.= Nat. Abb. d. Säug. p. 355, t. 161 (1824).
_Antilope (Damalis) picta_, =Schinz=, Mon. Antil. p. 44, t. 49 (1848).
_Antilope (Bubalus) picta_, =Laurill.= Dict. Univ. d’H. N. i. p. 625
(1861).
_Antilope (Cephalolophus) picta_, =Gieb.= Säug. p. 323 (1853).
_Cemas picta_, =Oken=, Lehrb. Nat. iii., Zool. p. 729 (1816).
_Damalis picta_, =J. Brooke=, Cat. Mamm. p. 64. (1828).
_Boselaphus pictus_, =Blainv.= Bull. Soc. Philom. p. 75 (1816); =Desm.=
Mamm. ii. p. 471 (1822); =Lesson=, Man. Mamm. p. 384 (1827); =Gerv.=
Dict Sci. Nat., Suppl. i. p. 266 (1840); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm.
p. 181 (1842).
_Portax picta_, =Less.= Compl. Buffon, x. p. 304 (1836); =Gray=, List
Mamm. B. M. p. 154 (1843); =Jardine=, Nat. Libr. xxii. p. 182, pl.
xvi. (1845); =Wagner=, Schreb. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 467 (1844); =id.=
op. cit. v. p. 450 (1855); =Reichenb.= Säug. iii. p. 148 (1845);
=Hutton=, Journ. As. Soc. Bengal, xv. p. 150 (1846); =Gray=, Cat. Ost.
B. M. p. 59 (1847); =Horsf.= Cat. Mamm. E.-I. Comp. p. 170 (1851);
=Jerdon=, Mamm. India, p. 272 (1867); =Fitz.= SB. Ak. Wien, lix. pt.
1, p. 181 (1869); =McMaster=, Notes on Jerdon’s Mamm. p. 122 (1870);
=Kinloch=, Large Game Shooting, i. p. 55 (1876); =Brehm=, Thierl. iii.
p. 251, fig. (1880); =Sterndale=, Mamm. Ind. p. 476 (1884); =Kinloch=,
Large Game Shooting, p. 93 (1885); =Jent.= Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus.
Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 141 (1887); =id.= Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-
Bas, xi.) p. 173 (1892); =Percy=, Badminton Big Game Shooting, ii. p.
353 (1894).
_Antilope albipes_, =Erxl.= Syst. R. A. p. 280 (1777); =Gatterer=, Brev.
Zool. pt. i. p. 81 (1780); Zoogn. iii. p. 411 (1814).
_Boselaphus albipes_, =Desm.= Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. N. (2) ii. p. 199, pl.
xxxiii. fig. 2 (1816).
_Antilope leucopus_, =Zimm.= Spec. Zool. Geogr. p. 541 (1777); =Forst.=
Zool. Ind. p. 39 (1795); =id.= Descr. Anim. p. 377 (1844).
_Damalis risia_, =H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. iv. p. 363 (1827); =Elliot=,
Madras Journ. x. p. 226 (1839).
_Damalis (Portax) risia_, =H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. v. p. 366 (1827).
_Tragelaphus hippelaphus_, =Ogilby=, P. Z. S. 1836, p. 138; =Rüpp.=
Verz. Senck. Mus. iii. pt. 2, p. 181 (1839).
_Nyl-ghau_, =Wm. Hunter=, Phil. Trans. lxi. p. 170 (1771).
_White-footed Antelope_, =Penn.= Syn. p. 29, pl. vi. (1771); =id.=
Quadr. i. p. 74, pl. vii. (1781); =id.= op. cit. ed. 3, p. 83, pl.
xiii. (1793).
Vernacular Names:—_Nil, Nilgao_ (♂), _Nilgai_ (♀); _Roz Rojh, Rojra_ in
Hindustani; _Rú-i_ in Dakhani, Mahratti, and Guzrati; _Guraya_, Gond;
_Murim_ (♂), _Susam_ (♀), in Ho Kal; _Mánú-potú_ in Tamil; _Mairu
Maravi, Kard-Kadrai_, Canarese (_Blanford_).
_Male._ About four feet six inches in height at the withers.
General colour of the head iron-grey, due to the hairs being black at
the base and white at the extremities; nose, neck, and cheeks tinted
with black; whitish grey above the eye; two small white cheek-spots
generally traceable. Lips and chin white; a large white patch at the
upper extremity of the throat; inter-ramal area also white. Ears
greyish white, blacker behind towards the extremities, and furnished
with two black spots on the outer edge in front. Upper parts of the
body iron-grey, like the head; lower portion, chest, and belly black,
except a median ventral white streak; groin, inner side of thighs
above, and subcaudal area of rump pure white, the latter emphasized
on each side by a black vertical streak on the buttocks. Tail white
below and at the sides, grey above; tuft white at the base, black at
the tip. Fore and hind limbs black inside and outside, except for
two large white spots on the front and outer sides of the pasterns
and on the outer and inner sides of the fetlocks; fetlock-spot of
hind leg sometimes extending right round the front to form a complete
half-ring; the corresponding spots on the fore legs much smaller, the
outer obsolete. A long tuft of black hair on the throat below the white
patch; a short hog-mane on the nape formed of stiff hairs, whitish at
the base, blackish at the ends; parting of hair on the withers; behind
this point a spinal mane of longish black hairs extends to nearly the
middle of the back and is represented as far as the root of the tail by
a narrow stripe of short black hairs.
_Female._ Without horns. Smaller and slighter than the male and
of a fawn or tawny hue throughout, but with the same white patches
and markings as in the male, the fetlock and pastern spots being very
conspicuous and set off with black. A short hog-mane on the nape, but
no tuft on the throat.
_Young male._ Like the female in colour.
Measurements of an adult male skull:—Basal length 16·3 inches,
greatest breadth 5·75, muzzle to orbit 10, horn 8·5.
Horns usually from 8 to 9 inches long, with a basal girth of about 8
inches, and rarely reaching a length of 11·75 inches, with a basal
girth of 9·5.
_Hab._ The Peninsula of India from the base of the Himalayas to
the south of Mysore; North-west Provinces, Eastern Punjab,
Guzerat, and the Konkan; but not extending to the Indus on the
west, nor into Eastern Bengal, nor into Malabar. Entirely absent
from the countries to the east of the Bay of Bengal.
The Asiatic division of the Tragelaphine group, which, in the existing
stage of the Earth’s fauna, is represented only by the present species,
is nearly as different in its structure as it is in its geographical
range from its African brethren, being at once distinguishable by its
short hind limbs, untwisted horns, bovine nose, and hypsodont molars,
not to mention its very different style of colour. The Asiatic form
might, in fact, be more naturally arranged as constituting a Subfamily
of itself, but we are content to follow recent authorities who have
associated this animal with the more typical Tragelaphs of Africa.
The “Nilgai” (said by some authorities to be more correctly written
“Nilgau,” from _nil_ or _lil_, blue, and _gau_, cow) was
first introduced into scientific literature by Pallas in his memoir
on the genus _Antilope_ published in 1766. Pallas’s “_Antilope
tragocamelus_,” as he called this species, was based partly upon
Ray, who quoted from Gesner, and partly on the description of Dr. James
Parsons, F.R.S., who, in the forty-third volume of the ‘Philosophical
Transactions,’ published in 1745, gave a very fair description of this
animal from a living male specimen “brought,” as he tells us, “from
Bengal, and shown in London.” There can be no doubt as to the identity
of Parsons’s “Quadruped,” whatever we may say regarding the less
accurate descriptions of Ray and Gesner, and it follows, consequently,
that “_tragocamelus_” must be used as the earliest and most
correct specific name of the Nilgai.
In the supplement to his memoir on the genus _Antilope_ published
in 1777, besides _A. tragocamelus_, Pallas introduced into his
list an _Antilope picta_, founded upon Pennant’s “White-footed
Antelope.” On referring to Pennant’s description and figure of
this animal in his ‘Synopsis of Quadrupeds,’ there can be no doubt
whatever that they likewise refer to the Nilgai. They were taken, as
the author informs us, from a pair of animals living at Clermont in
1770. Following Pallas’s second name, a large number of authorities,
as will be seen by our list of synonyms, have used _pictus_ and
_picta_ as the specific name of the Nilgai; but, as we have
already pointed out, _tragocamelus_ is prior in point of date, and
being also unquestionably applicable, should have the preference.
Erxleben’s name “_albipes_” and Zimmermann’s “_leucopus_,”
both founded on Pennant’s “White-footed Antelope,” have likewise been
proposed for the present species, but are also both later in date.
Again, in 1827, Hamilton Smith adopted “_risia_” as the specific
name of the Nilgai on account of some fancied objection to the term
_picta_. But in this change few have been found to follow him.
Finally, in 1836, Ogilby proposed to alter the name of the Nilgai to
_hippelaphus_, because he thought it was the true Hippelaphus of
Aristotle. This is possibly the case, but it does not necessitate the
suggested change of the specific term.
As regards the generic name of the Nilgai, we have fortunately only
two to choose from—_Boselaphus_ of De Blainville, published in
1816, and _Portax_ of Hamilton Smith, proposed in 1827. Of these
two, according to the rules of Zoological Nomenclature, we employ the
oldest; and the scientific name of the Nilgai consequently becomes
_Boselaphus tragocamelus_, as was first adopted by Sclater in 1883.
Before proceeding further we must call attention to the excellent
account of the Nilgai read before the Royal Society in 1774 by the
great physiologist and physician William Hunter and published, along
with an excellent figure of the animal by Stubbs, in the 61st volume
of the ‘Philosophical Transactions,’ from which we make the following
extracts:—
“Among the riches which of late years have been imported from
India may be reckoned a fine animal, the Nyl-ghau; which, it is to
be hoped, will now be propagated in this country, so as to become
one of the most useful, or at least one of the most ornamental
beasts of the field. It is larger than any ruminant of this
country, except the ox; its flesh probably will be found to be
delicious; and, if it should prove docile enough to be easily
trained to labour, its great swiftness, with considerable
strength, might be applied, one would think, to valuable purposes.
“Good paintings of animals give much clearer ideas than
descriptions. Whoever looks at the picture, which was done under
my eye by Mr. Stubbs, that excellent painter of animals, can never
be at a loss to know the Nyl-ghau, wherever he may happen to meet
with it. However, I shall attempt a description of the animal; and
then give as much of its history as I have been hitherto able to
learn. The account will be imperfect: yet it will give naturalists
some pleasure in the meantime to know even a little of a large and
elegant animal, which has not hitherto been described or painted.”
After a capital description of both sexes of this animal from the
living specimens, Hunter proceeds as follows:—
“Of late years several of this species, both male and female, have
been brought to England. The first were sent from Bombay by Gov.
Cromelen, as a present to Lord Clive: they arrived in August 1767.
They were male and female, and continued to breed every year.
Afterwards two were brought over, and presented to the Queen by
Mr. Sullivan. From Her Majesty’s desire to encourage every useful
or curious enquiry in natural knowledge, I was permitted to keep
these two for some time, which enabled me to describe them, and to
get a correct picture made, and, with my brother’s assistance, to
dissect the dead animal, and preserve the skin and skeleton. Lord
Clive has been so kind to give me every help that he could furnish
me with in making out their history; so has General Carnac, and
some other gentlemen.
“At all the places in India, where we have settlements, they are
rarities, brought from the distant interior parts of the country,
as presents to Nabobs and great men. Lord Clive, General Carnac,
Mr. Walsh, Mr. Watts, and many other gentlemen, who have seen much
of India, tell me they never saw them wild. So far as I have yet
found, Bernier is the only author who has ever mentioned them.
“In the fourth vol. of his Mémoires, he gives an account of a
journey which he undertook, ann. 1664, from Delhi, to the province
of Cachemire, with the Mogul Aurengzeb, who went to that
terrestrial paradise, as it is esteemed by the Indians, to avoid
the heat of the summer. In giving an account of the hunting, which
was the Emperor’s amusement in this journey, he describes, among
others, that of _le Nyl-ghau_, but without saying more of the
animal than that the Emperor sometimes kills them in such numbers
as to distribute quarters of them to all his Omrachs; which shows
that they were there wild, and in plenty, and esteemed good or
delicious food.
“This agrees with the rarity of these animals at Bengal, Madras,
and Bombay; for Cachemire is the most northern province of the
Empire, and it was on the march from Delhi to that place that
Bernier saw the Emperor hunt them.”
Although, as we have already seen, living specimens of the Nilgai were
long ago brought to Europe, little addition was made to our knowledge
of this animal in its native state until the days of Elliot, Jerdon,
and Hodgson. In 1839 Sir Walter Elliot included the Nilgai in his
catalogue of the Mammals of the Southern Mahratta country, where he
states “it is found in the thick low jungles.” Jerdon, in his volume on
the Mammals of India, tells us that the Nilgai “frequents thin forests
and low jungles, but is also often found in tolerably open plains with
only a few scattered bushes. It associates in small herds, varying from
7 or 8 to 20 and upwards.”
Mr. Robert A. Sterndale, whose popular manual on the Mammals of India
and Ceylon was published in 1884, does not speak favourably of his
experience of the flesh of the Nilgai as an article of diet:—“The
Nilgao,” he says, “feeds on Beyr (_Zizyphus jujuba_) and other
trees, and at times devours such quantities of the intensely acrid
berries of the Aoula (_Phyllanthus emblica_) that its flesh
becomes saturated with the bitter elements of the fruit. This is most
noticeable in soup, less so in a steak, which is at times not bad.
The tongue and marrow-bones, however, are generally as much as the
sportsman claims, and in the Central Provinces at least the natives are
grateful for all the rest.”
Col. Kinloch, who writes of the Nilgai mainly from a sporting point of
view, gives us the following account of this animal:—
“The Nilgai does not hold a very high place among the Game-animals
of India, and is seldom shot by any but young sportsmen, unless
meat is required for camp-followers. It is, however, one of the
largest and most conspicuous of the ruminants to be found in the
plains, and no records of Indian sport would be complete without
some notice of it.
“The bull is a large and powerful beast, attaining a height of at
least 14 hands at the withers, which are high and narrow like
those of a horse. The neck is long and compressed, and the head
slender and deer-like, the eyes being remarkably full and
lustrous. The hind-quarters fall away considerably, giving the
animal rather an awkward appearance. The legs are slender and
wiry, and the hoofs rather upright. The tail is tufted, something
like that of the domestic cow, but it is not so long in
proportion, reaching only to the hocks. The color is a dark bluish
grey, deepening to nearly black in very old individuals, while the
legs are jet-black, curiously marked with white patches about the
fetlocks. The throat is white, and from the lower part of it
depends a long tuft of blackish hair, while the hair on the
withers is developed into a thin upright mane.
“The cow is of a light brown colour, and is destitute of horns.
The young males are like the females, but become gradually darker
with age.
“Nilgai inhabit extensive grass-and tree-jungles, but appear to
prefer those that are not very thick, and interspersed with
occasional bare open spaces. Their favorite cover seems to be that
composed of the ‘_dhák_’ or ‘_palás_’ tree (_Butea frondosa_).
They are also fond of resorting to the sugar-cane fields, and they
frequently commit considerable damage among cultivation. They are
generally to be found in herds, varying in number from four or
five to twenty, and composed of both sexes; but occasionally small
parties of old Blue Bulls, and even solitary bulls, are to be met
with. In places where they are not disturbed, especially in some
of the Native States, Nilgai are absurdly tame, but in districts
where they are much molested they become extremely shy and wary.
It must not therefore be supposed that they can always be easily
shot, but they afford such a poor trophy that, as already
mentioned, they are not much sought after. When they can be found
sufficiently far from thick cover, they may be speared, and they
then show capital sport; as they will probably lead a well-mounted
horseman a chase of several miles. On hard ground I doubt if a
_cow_ Nilgai could be speared by a solitary hunter; the bull,
being much heavier, is more easily ridden down.
[Illustration:
Fig. 98.
Skull and horns of an adult male Nilgai.
(Brit. Mus.)
]
“The flesh of a cow Nilgai is occasionally excellent, and the
tongue and marrow-bones are supposed to be delicacies. They are,
however, hardly worth shooting, except when one is in want of meat
for Mahomedan servants: Hindoos, of course, will not touch the
flesh.”
[Illustration:
Fig. 99.
Frontlet of an adult male Nilgai.
(Brit. Mus.).
]
The Nilgai does well in captivity, and, as we have already mentioned,
several of the original descriptions of this animal by the older
writers were based on specimens brought alive to Europe. In 1824 both
sexes of the Nilgai were well figured by Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and F.
Cuvier in their
‘Histoire Naturelle des Mammifères,’ from specimens living in the
Jardin des Plantes. In 1845, as we learn from Gray, the Nilgai bred in
the Knowsley Menagerie, and there was at that time a herd of a male
and four females kept in one of the paddocks along with the Elands.
In 1847 the half-grown male and young were drawn from some of these
specimens by Waterhouse Hawkins, and the figures were published in
the twenty-ninth plate of the ‘Gleanings.’ The Nilgai has been an
inhabitant of the Zoological Society’s Menagerie from its commencement.
In 1830 it was described and figured in the first of the two volumes
on the ‘Gardens and Menagerie of the Zoological Society’ by Vigors and
Bennett, and in February 1831, as recorded in the ‘Proceedings,’ a
specimen of a young one, born at the Society’s farm at Kingston, was
exhibited and described at one of the Scientific Meetings. This appears
to have been the first instance of its breeding in the Society’s
Gardens, but since that date many other examples have been received,
and the species has frequently bred in the Menagerie. On referring to
the Society’s registers we find that this has taken place in 1856,
1864, 1866, 1868, and 1869. As a general rule, two young ones are
produced at the same birth; but the young animals, although they
thrive well, are excessively shy and timid, as is also the case with
many others of the Deer and Antelopes, so that, if frightened, they
frequently injure themselves by rushing against the fences of their
paddocks.
Our coloured illustration of the Nilgai (Plate LXXXVII.) has been
prepared from specimens of both sexes of this animal now living in the
Zoological Society’s Gardens, where they were received in exchange on
October 14th, 1896.
There is a good mounted example of the male Nilgai in the British
Museum, obtained from the Zoological Society’s Gardens in 1896,
besides two other older mounted specimens kept in store. There are
also specimens of heads of this animal from the Khalcote jungle south
of Mhow, presented by Col. J. Evans, and from Jullunder near Sangor,
presented by Mr. G. A. Carmichael, and some skulls and horns from Oude
and the North-west Provinces, presented by Mr. A. O. Hume, C.B. From
the last of these the drawings of the skull and horns and frontlet of
an adult male (figs. 98 and 99) have been prepared.
_November,_ 1899.
Genus II. TRAGELAPHUS.
Type.
_Tragelaphus_, =De Blainv.= Bull. Soc. Philom. 1816, p. 75 T. sylvaticus.
_Euryceros_, =Gray=, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 47 (1872) T. eurycerus.
Large or medium-sized Antelopes, with the facial, neck, body, and leg
markings characteristic of the subfamily usually well expressed.
Hind-quarters as high as or higher than the withers; fore limbs not
longer than hind limbs. Hoofs of normal form, their length along the
anterior border about equal to the basal width from back to front;
posterior surface of the pasterns covered with hair. Ears large and
expanded.
Horns present only in the male; of medium length or long, always longer
than the face; flat at the base behind; with a strong external basal
ridge arising just behind the orbit and forming an obtuse angle with
the plane of the nasals; spirally twisted, the twist affecting the
whole horn with the exception of its extreme tip, but shallow and not
taking the form of an open corkscrew spiral; the anterior ridge, which
starts in front of the middle of the base of the horn, only reappearing
once close to the tip.
Skull much less flat than in _Boselaphus_, the parietal region
more depressed. Molar teeth with short crowns; those of the upper jaw
with only a small accessory column.
_Range of the Genus._ Africa, south of the Sahara, from
Senegambia, Abyssinia, and Somaliland, over the whole continent.
The species of this genus here recognized may be tabulated as follows:—
_a._ Height at withers of adult male about 30 inches; horns
from about 10 to 15 inches, normally with black tips; a white
patch present upon the upper end of the throat.
_a1._ A large white patch at the base of the fore leg on
the inner side; inner side of fore leg from knee to fetlock and
of hind leg from hock to fetlock white; body striped or spotted
with white.
_a2._ Adult male a rich dark red colour above, and very
distinctly marked with many white spots and stripes 121. _T. scriptus._
_b2._ Adult male much duller or darker in colour, spots
and stripes less numerous, the latter often absent.
_a3._ Colour yellowish brown; an upper longitudinal white
stripe. 120. _T. decula._
_b3._ Colour darker and richer in adult; no upper white stripe.
_a4._ White stripes visible in immature and sometimes
retained by adult 123. _T. roualeyni._
_b4._ White stripes usually absent in young and always in
adult. 122. _T. sylvaticus._
_b1._ Fore leg from base to fetlock on inner side a
uniform yellowish brown; hind leg similarly coloured,
except for a white patch on front of hock; no stripes
or spots on body 124. _T. delamerei._
_b._ Height at withers of adult male over 40 inches; horns
24 inches or more in length, with amber-yellow tips; no white
patch at upper end of throat in either sex.