246 [Nov. 15, 



and is more or less conspicuous on those of the hippopotamus. It 

 is not observed in the camel, the moose deer, or the larger bovine 

 ruminants ; or if ever present, it is but faintly developed. This tex- 

 ture is vi'ell marked on the enamel of the teeth of this second species 

 of giraiFe. A magnified representation of it is given in PI. XL fig. 3 c. 



The series of teeth last described, excepting the fifth and sixth spe- 

 cimens, are all but undistinguishable from those of the Nubian giraffe; 

 and the authors have sought in vain for any distinctive character by 

 which to discriminate them. There is no good evidence to show 

 that this fossil species and the living are even different ; but in 

 putting the case thus, the authors are far from advancing that the 

 species are identical. The materials are far too scanty to warrant a 

 conjecture to that extent. 



Since the neck of the C. Sivalensis was one-third too short and 

 slender to sustain the head that would have suited the teeth last 

 described, the authors consider it a necessary consequence that these 

 teeth belonged to a distinct species. Had the difference been less 

 considerable, they might have hesitated regarding this conclusion ; 

 but the difference between 8 inches and 12 inches in the length of 

 the same cervical vertebra of two adult animals of the same genus, 

 admits, in their opinion, of no other construction than distinctness 

 of species. For the present, until sufficient materials shall be ob- 

 tained to determine the relationship between the African giraffe and 

 the second Sewalik species, in reference to their supposed resem- 

 blance, the authors propose to mark the latter by the provisional 

 name of Camelopardalis affinis. 



General Remarks. — In a former communication to the Society, 

 (Geol. Trans. 2nd ser. vol. v. p. 503) the authors noticed the re- 

 markable mixture of extinct and recent forms which constituted the 

 ancient fauna of Northern India. An extinct testudinate form, 

 Colossochelys Atlas, as enormous in reference to other known Chelo- 

 nians as the Saurians of the lias and the oolite are to their existing 

 analogues, is there associated with one or more of the same species 

 of crocodile that now inhabit the rivers of India. The evidence 

 respecting one of these species of crocodile, resting as it does on nu- 

 merous remains of individuals of all ages, is considered by the 

 authors as nearly conclusive of the identity of the fossil with its 

 recent analogue. These reptUes occur together with extinct species 

 of such very modern types as the monkey, the camel, the antelope, 

 and (as has now been shown) the giraffe : and these are met by 

 species of the extinct genera Sivatherium and Anoplotherium. As 

 regards the geographical distribution of the true Anoplotheria, those 

 hitherto discovered have been confined, as the authors believe, to 

 Europe ; and as regards their geological distribution, to the older 

 and middle tertiaries. In India this genus continued down to the 

 period when existing Indian crocodiles and probably some other 

 recent forms had become inhabitants of that region. 



It might be expected that in a deposit containing Anoplotherium, 

 Paleeotherian remains also would sooner or later be discovered. 

 However, among the very large collection of fossil bones from the 



