275 



smaller, whilst its size is nearly that of the larger Gavial. From the 

 figure given by M. Faujas, of the head at Darmstadt, it appears to differ 

 from that of either of the Gavials; since the symphisis of the lower jaw 

 does not extend so much backwards, and there are seven or eight teeth 

 in the separated parts of each branch of the jaw ; whilst, in this part of 

 the jaw, in the Gavials, there are only two or three teeth. 



Some have imagined these fossils to have been the remains of a dol- 

 phin j but that this is not the fact is evinced by the nostrils, which, 

 instead of passing in vertically, at the root of the muzzle, are disposed at 

 its end, and open into a double nasal canal, reaching even beneath the 

 skull. It is evident, that there can exist no reason for supposing that 

 these remains can be referred to any kind of fish ; and that they have 

 belonged to some animal of the crocodile kind is certainly the most 

 reasonable conjecture. 



Part of the head of a crocodile has also been found in a mountain near 

 to Rozzo, on the borders of Vicentin and of Tyrol, the lower jaw of 

 which is twenty-five inches and a half long, and eight inches wide. Its 

 matrix is a limestone of a yellowish red colour. Voyage en Tyrol, par M. 

 le Comte de Stemberg. This fossil has also been referred to the Gavial 

 by M. Faujas ; but, as is observed by M. Cuvier, it differs from it in the 

 posterior part of the jaw not being in a straight line with the anterior 

 pint, where it is united by the symphisis, but forming an angle, by 

 which the branch of one side becomes separated from that of the other 

 side : a character which sufficiently shows, that this cannot have been 

 the remains of an actual Gavial. M. Cuvier is of opinion, that these 

 fossils, as well as those of Altorf, are the remains of an unknown spe- 

 cies of the crocodile, and similar to those which will form the subject of 

 our next letter. 



