102 MR. G. BUSK ON THE ANCIENT OR 
tion to the same species. The correspondence holds in the contour of the articular 
head and large trochanter, and in the amount of uncination and expansion of the blade 
of the third trochanter, which yield distinctive characters of the femur in different species 
of Rhinoceros. The complete synostosis of the articular head, and strong tendinous 
ridges on the surface of the bone, prove that the Gibraltar femur is of an adult and even 
old animal. We have seen,” he says, “no adult femur of 2. megarhinus that would 
correspond with it in size.” 
The following Table shows the comparative dimensions of the Gibraltar bone and of 
R. etruscus, as taken by Dr. Falconer and myself, together with those of R. hemitechus 
and &. bicornis &c. :— 





E s 1 
okie [3 |@ |8 
ap =i 19 ~ 
ales a les 2 ole = 
Dimensions of Femur in various species of g g Baler |e) z ‘qa 1g 
Rhinoceros, Sim ectersul (cet a | REG eat ica Md fete re 
6 |SE\SH|/oplos)°8 
ra rg (rcs | eo ree |i 
a bot ee |Salealss 
ala |ja |E |v |E 
Gibraltarifemun.,cerecyselceretios eae 3:3 | 7-4 | 8-2 | 4:3 | 2-5 | 2-7 
PEUACLTUSCUSy DeMatteis telets e-ntelotrnetne ts 35 | 7-9 | 31 |48 | 1-7 | 3:0 
Re biconnis| (Et, Wevtlod), ssi. as le vss sen 3:3 | 7-4 | 3-2 | 3:5 | 1-7 | 2°8 
ra py) altron \Waldent cic wo eae s oe 4-0 | 7-9 
R. hemitechus (Brady) ................ 3°6 







At the time when this study of the Gibraltar femur was made by Dr. Falconer and 
myself we were unable to find a fossil specimen that came so near to it in size and 
general characters as the femur of 2. etruscus above referred to; but since then the 
specimens of the smaller Thames-valley femur in Sir A. Brady’s collection afford suffi- 
cient ground for considering it not at all improbable that it may belong to the same 
species, or one closely allied to it. It may also be remarked that, if the propor- 
tions between the femur and humerus were the same in the extinct form as they are 
in the existing BR. bicornis, the diameter of the articular head in the Gibraltar bone 
quite accords with that of the head of the adult humerus already described. They 
may therefore be safely regarded as belonging to the same species, and, as I should 
suppose from their both being crushed in the same way, in all probability to the 
same animal, which all the other evidence seems to show was undistinguishable from 
R. hemitechus. 
A third specimen is a nearly entire tibia, represented in Plate XIV. fig. 4. 
This bone was found broken into numerous fragments, several of which were met 
with many feet apart; but I have been able to put them together in such a manner as 
to give a very fair representation of the bone in its entirety. It belongs to an immature 
animal, as both the proximal and distal epiphyses are naturally detached. It has 
therefore probably not reached its full size. Dr. Falconer and I compared it with 
