358 Dr. J. E. Gray on the Dentitioji of Rhinoceroses. 



The skull is very different from those of the Sumatran Rhi- 

 noceros [R. sumatramiSj Haffles), collected by Sir Stamford 

 Eaffles and now in the British Museum and in that of the 

 Eoyal College of Surgeons, and from the skull which we pur- 

 chased of Mr. Theobald, and proves most distinctly that I 

 was right in stating the animal, when alive, to be very 

 distinct from the Sumatran Rhinoceros described and figured 

 by Bell in the ' Philosophical Transactions' for 1793, to which 

 Sir Stamford Raffles gave the name of R. sumatranus, under 

 which name the Malaccan Rhinoceros was exhibited at the 

 Zoological Gardens and mentioned in the list of accessions in 

 the ' Proceedings of the Zoological Society ; ' and I see by the 

 report that a paper on the details of its visceral anatomy has 

 been read to the Society by Mr. Garrod. 



There has for many years existed in the British Museum a 

 stuffed skin of a young specimen of this species, which was 

 pm-chased of Mr. Franks of Amsterdam as the young Sumatran 

 Rhinoceros ; but there is reason to believe that this specimen 

 was from Singapore, the port of Malacca. 



The skull of the Malaccan Rhinoceros is very like that of 

 the Sumatran one ; but it is shorter and broader than that of 

 R. sumatranus. The hole in the cheek for the passage of the 

 large vessels is oblong, much larger, and nearer the margin 

 of the nasal aperture ; while in the two skulls of R. sumatranus 

 it is smaller, circular, and some distance from the margin of 

 the apertm^e. The front edge of the intermaxillary bones is 

 broader, rounded, and not compressed or nearly so much pro- 

 duced as the front edge of the intermaxillary bone of the adult 

 skull of R. sumatranus^ nor so much as in the skull of the 

 young animal of the same species, which is shorter and broader 

 than in the adult. The grinders of the upper jaw are six in 

 number, and appear broader than those of the adult R. suma- 

 tranus^ but they occupy the same length. 



The skull of the Malaccan Rhinoceros is not so high behind 

 as that of the adult Sumatran Rhinoceros ; and the space in. the 

 crown between the temporal muscles is flat, and much wider 

 than that of the adult but not so aged Sumatran Rhinoceros 

 in the British Museum. The back end of the upper part of 

 the occiput is not nearly so broad as that of the Sumatran 

 Rhinoceros. 



The most striking difference is in the lower jaw. The con- 

 dyles are further apart ; indeed the whole jaw is wider ; but 

 the outer edge of the hinder angle is much more expanded. 

 This latter peculiarity, as well as the form of the crown of the 

 grinders in the upper jaw, may arise from the greater age of 

 the specimen. The greatest peculiarity is that the front of the 



