574 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE TERRITORIES. 



The anterior limb was stouter than the posterior, jndg'ing from the 

 proportions in EobasUcus presskomis^ and was no doubt more elevated 

 if of the Proboscicban character. This woukl give us the hypothetical 

 elevation at the withers: 



Measurements. 



Inches. 

 Leg 61-00 



Scapnia, (actual) 21.00 



Neural spines, (extremities) *. "0 



Or 7 fcct Siuclies H?. 00 



These measurements are made from the plantar and palmar surfaces, 

 allowance being made for tlie pads. 



The neck, estimating from the dorsal vertebroe and from the cervicals 

 of other species preserved, could not have very much exceeded 1 foot in 

 length. This, added to th(^ length of the cranium, gives a total of near four 

 and a half feet. The obH(ini(y of the antero-posterior axis of the cervical 

 vertebrae indicates that the head was posteriorly elevated above the 

 axis of the dorsal vertebr;T». Thus it is entirely clear that tiie muzzle 

 of this animal could not have reached the ground by several feet, and 

 that, as occurs in the siujihir cases of the tapirs and elephants, there 

 was a proboscis to supply that necessity. The indications derived from 

 the bones of the muzzle contlrm this conclusion, as has been already^ 

 poitited out. 



Further than this, the symphysis madibuli is very short and narrow, 

 and its teeth could have had no adaptation for cutting oft vegetation. 

 The mental foramen is small, and the small nutrient artery thus indi- 

 cated is entirely adverse to belief in a powerful or prehensile under lip 

 to make up for' the uselessness of the teeth. The long decurved canine 

 teeth would, moreover, partially in^event the lips from touching the ground. 

 The posterior i)osition of the molar teeth indicates use for a proboscis as 

 well as for a long, slender t ongue. The fact that t\w. foramen infraorhitale 

 of the Loxolophodon is less than in the elephants, in no wise militates 

 against the possession of a proboscis, for it is still smaller in the ta[)ir, 

 which has one, and larger in many rodents which are without it. There 

 could have been no interference from horns near the ends of the 

 nasal bones, for the bases of these project beyond the origin of a pro- 

 boscis, and were directed outwards, while the latter hung downwards. 



This species was probably quite as large as the Indian elephant, for 

 the individual described is not adult, as indicated by the freedom of the 

 epi))hyses of the luuibar veitebra^, and fragments of others in my posses- 

 sion indicate very con.^iderably larger size. 



Habits. — The very weak dentition indicates soft food, no doubt of a 

 vegetable character, of what particular kind it is not easy to divine. 

 The long canines were no doubt for defense chiefly, and may have been 

 useful in pulling and cutting vines and branches of the forest. The 

 horns furnished formidable v/eapons of defense. That the anterior 

 nasal pair were not used for rooting in the earth is evident from the ele- 

 vation of the head, which would render this impossible. 



This huge animal must have been of defective vision, for the orbits 

 have rio distinctive outline, and the eyes were so overhung by the horns 

 and cranial walls as to have been able to see but little upwards. The 

 muzzle and cranial crests have obstructed the view both forward and 

 backward, so that this beast i>robably resembled the rhinoceros in the 

 ease with which it might have been avoided when in ])ursuit. 



i^unoinimy. — According to Marsli, he described this species Sei^tem- 



