1G4 



It will be observed that these specimens illustrate the accuracy 

 of Inspecting Veterinary Surgeon Oliphant's notes on Dentition 

 (page 27), except that there seems a degi^ee of uncertainty as to 

 the time of eruption of the tushes. Mr. Oliphant, rightly in our 

 opinion, though contrary to the usage of ruminant anatomists and 

 zoologists, considers and describes as the tush the corner lower 

 incisor. 



Appendix VI. — A few notes on the History and Literature of the 

 Camel mainly from Lombardini's work. 

 As regards the fossil cameline forms, information is given on 

 those of the Sewalik Hills by Falconer and Cautley in the Asiatic 

 Researches, vol. XIX, p. 115, (1836), and there is a further paper 

 in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal for September 

 1840. Leidy has worked up the American forms and gives 

 the following scheme : — 



Fossil Camels of America — ■ 



Auchenia hesterna — A Californiensis. 



Palauchenia magna — 



Procamelus rohustus. 



Occidentalis — 4 premolars, 3 molars. 



Gracilis. 



Virginiensis — premolars as in Camelus, 

 Aristotle, Diodorus Sicalus, and the younger Pliny noticed the 

 camel, and Leo Africanus writes of three species the Huguin, 

 Becheti, and Raguahil (Hygeen, Bactrian, and running Camel). 

 Strabo, Conrad Gesner (1551), Aelian (1658J, Linnseus (1788), 

 Niebuhr (1772., Blumenbach (1803), and Buffon (1785), all men- 

 tion the camel and give elementary information of a popular 

 nature concerning it. In 1811, George Santi of Pisa published 

 in the Annals of the Paris Museum an article '' on the Camels 

 of Pisa." In 1885 Porse's monograph on the Tuscan camel was 

 published at Pisa ; Cuvier contributed to our knowledge about 

 this time (1817) and was followed by Milne Edwards (1827). In. 

 1828, Paolo Savi of Pisa wrote " on the nature of the Palu " 

 in his scientific memoirs, Pisa, 1828, pp. 147-160; and two un- 

 published Reports to Government, dated 1858 and 1860, by the 



