280 Bibliographical Notices. 
molar tooth which has some characters approximating it to Hyo- 
potamus. Hyopotamus is widely distributed in America, India, and 
Europe. Both the Indian species Hyopotamus giganteus and H. 
paleindicus are of older Pliocene age; they are both known from 
molar teeth and fragments of the mandible, so that beyond present- 
ing very characteristic shapes they do not throw much light upon 
this generic type. The tetracuspidate Merycopotamus dissimilis was 
a four- or five-toed pig about the size of a wild boar. The anterior 
premolars are pointed, like those of Anthracotherium and Hippo- 
potamus, and the cranium greatly resembles that of the latter genus, 
and in 60 far as it diverges from Hippopotamus it approximates to 
Anthracotherium ; yet the author is disposed, from the character of 
the molars, to think it most closely related to the Anthracotheride 
and Oreodontide. Cheromeryx silistrensis 1s only known from a 
fragment of a jaw with three molars. Hemimeryx Blanfordi is a 
new type founded upon isolated molar teeth; it is most closely 
related to Cheromeryx and Merycopotamus, and has some relation 
to the Anoplotheres. Stvamery« sindiensis is another type founded 
on isolated teeth ; it is larger than Chawromeryx, and also resembles 
Merycopotamus. The Oreodonts are represented by a species of the 
American genus Agriochwrus ; and the ruminant section is indicated 
by a single molar named Pro-palwomerya sivalensis, and is considered 
to be most nearly related to a European species of Palwomerya, and 
to form a link between the giraffe and the true deer. The memoir 
concludes with the usual bibliography, and is illustrated with three 
plates of teeth. 
It is difficult to speak of Mr. Lydekker’s merits as an anatomist, 
for he is unfortunate in having published work that was immature, 
so that now the corrections are unpleasantly numerous ; but then 
the scientific fidelity of which these corrections are evidence is no 
small merit. We cannot so unreservedly commend the author's 
method ; his critical acumen is excellent, but he does not always 
seem at his ease in dealing with the writings of others. Frequently 
voluminous discussions occur when the same result might have been 
attained in a few sentences. And the memoirs seem written on the 
supposition that the reader has the resources of the Indian Museum 
before him, and that the illustrations leave nothing to be desired. 
In other words, there is not that laborious description of materials 
other than teeth which we think necessary ; and the result is that 
we are often unable to judge critically of much of the author’s 
labours or to use them fully. Ifit should be urged that they make 
no pretence to be more than contributions to paleontology made for 
the Geological Survey of India, we would say that the acumen dis- 
played by the author leads us to believe him capable of work of a 
yet higher order, and that science docs not gain by restricting the 
paleontologist to the task of being a lantern-earrier for his geolo- 
gical comrade. The memoirs, however, are valuable contributions 
to paleontology ; and the author is to be congratulated on the pro- 
eress made with a difficult subject. 
