78 MaAmMALIA OF INDIA. 
incisors. In Blyth’s additions to Cuvier he states that “in this group 
we are led to identify the canine tooth as simply the first of the false 
molars, which in some has two fangs, and, as in the Lemurs, to perceive 
that the second in the lower jaw is in some more analagous in size and 
character to an ordinary canine than that which follows the incisors. 
The incisor teeth are never more than six in number, which is the 
maximum throughout placental mammalia (as opposed by marsupiat), 
and in several instances one or two pairs are deficient. (It should be 
remarked that a single tooth with two fangs is often represented by two 
separate teeth, each with one fang.) The canines, with the succeeding 
false molars, are extremely variable, but there are ordinarily three 
tuberculated molars posterior to the representative of the carnivorous or 
cutting grinder of the true Carnivora.” All the molar teeth are studded 
with sharp points or cusps; the deciduous teeth are developed and 
disappear before birth. ‘This order is divided into four families, viz., 
Talpide or Moles, Sorecide or Shrews, Lrinaceide or Hedgehogs, and 
the Zupaiade, Banxrings or Tree-shrews. Of all these well-defined types — 
are to be found in India, but America and Africa possess various genera 
which we have not, such as the Condylures (Condy/ura, Illiger), the 
Shrew-moles (.Scalops, Cuvier), belonging to Zalside ; the Solendons, 
Desmans, and Chrysochlores to Sorecide ; the Sokinahs, Tenrecs and 
Gymnures to Lrinaceide; and the Macroscelles or Elephant-mice of 
the Cape Colony form another group more allied to Zwfaza than the 
rest. This last family is the most interesting. Anatomically belonging 
to this order, they externaily resemble the squirrels so closely as to have 
been frequently mistaken for them. ‘The grovelling Mole and creeping 
Shrew are as unlike the sprightly Tupaia, as it springs from branch to 
branch, whisking its long bushy tail, as it is possible to conceive. I intend 
further on to give an illustration of this little animal. The first we 
have on record concerning it is in the papers relating to Captain Cook’s 
third voyage, which are now in the British Museum, where the animal 
is described and figured as Sciurus dissimilis ; it was obtained at Pulo 
Condore, an island roo miles from Saigon, in 1780. 
Sir T. Stamford Raffles was the next to describe it, which he did under 
the generic name Zupaia—/upai being a Malayan word applied to 
various squirrel-like small animals—but he was somewhat forestalled 
in the publication of his papers by MM. Diard and Duvaucel. Dr. 
Anderson relates how Sir T. Raffles engaged the services of these two 
naturalists to assist him in his researches, on the understanding that the 
whole of the observations and collections were to be the property of the 
East India Company; but ultimately on this point there arose a 
disagreement between them, and the paper that was first read before the 
Asiatic Society of Bengal on the roth of March, 1820, was drawn up by 
MM. Diard and Duvaucel, though forwarded by Sir T. Raffles, whose 
ra 
