The entire taxonomy of Lepus capensis throughout its range is unclear. Taxonomic review of the species is urgently needed; otherwise, it is possible that some forms may go extinct before they are formally identified. Hoffmann and Smith (2005) restricted L. capensis to the South African distribution, citing no evidence of gene flow between the southern and northern ranges. A list of synonyms is provided based on four geographic locations (South Africa, East Africa, Arabia and Near East, and northwest Africa), which are informal subdivisions of L. capensis sensu lato. The authors suggested that these four groups might represent distinct species. In the Near East and Arabia L. c. arabicus; in South Africa L. c. capensis; L. c. aquilo, L. c. carpi, L. c. granti; East Africa L. c. aegyptius, L. c. hawkeri, L. c. isabellinus, L. c. sinaiticus; and L. c. atlanticus, L. c. schulmbergeri, L. c. whitakeri in northwest Africa (Hoffmann and Smith 2005, Schai-Braun and Hackländer 2018). According to Harrison and Bates (1991) there are eight subspecies in Arabia: L. c. syriacus (Syria, Lebanon, northern Israel); L. c. sinaiticus (southern Israel, Sinai); L. c. connori (east of the Euphrates in Iraq); L. c. arabicus (western Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Yemen); L. c. cheesmani (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Yemen, Oman); L. c. omanensis (UAE, Oman); L. c. atallahi (Bahrain, Qatar?); L. c. jefferyi (Masirah Island, Oman). The taxonomic status of L. c. jefferyi needs clarification, as it may represent a good species. Hares present in Qatar also require taxonomic investigation. The taxonomic position of the Sardinian Hare is unresolved. Hoffmann and Smith (2005) include the Sardinian Hare as one of the unassigned synonyms of L. mediterraneus Wagner, 1841 or typicus Hilzheimer, 1906, in L. granatensis. Analysis of the mtCR-1 sequence indicated that Sardinian Hares form a monophyletic clade with North African Hares (Scandura et al. 2007). A genetic and morphometric analysis supports the hypothesis that the Sardinian Hare was introduced from North Africa (Canu et al. 2012). A phylogenetic analysis of mtCR-1 sequences from Tunisian and Egyptian Hares characterized them as monophyletic and separate from L. capensis (Ben Slimen et al. 2006). However, a study of the nuclear gene pool of L. capensis, L. europaeus and the North African Hare indicated that the North African Hare as well as L. europaeus belong to L. capensis (Ben Slimen et al. 2005), supporting Petter's (1959, 1961) hypothesis of the inclusion of L. europaeus in capensis. Ben Slimen et al. (2008a) suggest that in a case such as the genus Lepus, where evolution is ""rapid and to some extent reticulate"", species designation based solely on mtDNA is misleading without examination of the nuclear gene pool. Ben Slimen et al. (2008a) has shown that genetic differentiation between L. capensis and L. europaeus could be attributed to geographic distance rather than divergence. They speculate that gene flow may be occurring in the Near East where distributions meet resulting in the potential for intergraded populations. However, Ben Slimen et al. (2008b) propose that ""a combined phylogenetic, phylogeographic, and population genetic approach, based on various nuclear and mitochondrial markers and including other biological characters, such as phenotypic and morphometric data,"" is needed for conclusive evidence of a single species complex. A recent study looking at a partial transferrin nuclear gene and phylogenetic relationship of hares in Tunisia showed shared ancestral polymorphism between North African and Chinese hares (Awadi et al. 2016). It also concluded that the Tunisian Hare is well differentiated from hares considered belonging to brown hares L. europaeus from central Europe (Awadi et al. 2016). In light of this continuing uncertainty regarding the taxonomic status of the Sardinian and North African Hares, both will remain included in capensis and L. europaeus retains its taxonomic status as a distinct species. Many treatments indicate that the range of L. capensis extends into China, Mongolia and Russia; however, recognition of L. tibetanus and L. tolai as distinct species removes consideration of L. capensis as occurring in this region (Hoffmann and Smith 2005).