OHALICOTIIEROIDEA FROM BALUCHISTAN. 359 



forms in tlie greater approximation of the length and breadth, 

 being square rather than transversely elongated. 



The upper figure in Plate 1. represents the foui'th upper 

 premolar in a slightl}' Avorn condition, and illustrates the two 

 ridges described by Pilgi"im ; in the centro-internal cusp and 

 broad internal cingnliim it shows features charactei-istic of all 

 Chalicotheroids. 



The molars are all elongated, and in this respect difler from 

 those of Macroiheriuin, where they are all square, and fi'om A^estori- 

 theriuin and Circotherium, where the molars change from square 

 in the front one to elongate in the third. They agree best with 

 those of Moropus, but cai-ry the elongation to a still greater 

 degree, and represent the greatest modification in this respect. 



The lower figure in Plate I. shows two right upper molars just 

 erupted, only the posterior half of the second being preserved. 

 The condition of this fragment is excellent. In shape and in 

 pattern they resemble Deperet's figures * of the milk teeth of 

 Macrotherhim and also those figured by Pilgrim fo]' this species t- 

 They are, however, in all px'obability the permanent second and 

 third molars, being considerably larger than the measurements of 

 the milk teeth given by Pilgrim — i. e., the third molar is 48 mm. 

 long and 36 mm. wide in the front half as against 40 mm. and 

 31 mm. The only points in which these teeth ditter from 

 Pilgrim's description of his specimen are that here the whole 

 external sui'face of the metacone — i. e., fi'om mesostyle to 

 metastyle — is considerably smaller in the third molar than in the 

 second, and that faint ribs are present on the external surface of 

 the metacone of the second tooth and quite absent on tha.t of the 

 third. A corresponding rib, rather more clearly marked, is 

 pi-esent on the paracone external surface of the third molar, 

 and presumably would he found in the other molars. These ribs 

 are not shown in Deperet's figures I, and in Holland and Peterson's 

 figures of Moropus they are shown only on the protocones of 

 ail three molars, where, however, they appear to be strongly 

 marked. 



Text-fig. 2 shows the outline of one of the fragments of mandible 

 which has the socket for three incisors, or the second and third 

 incisor and a canine— all apparently small-rooted teeth — and the 

 whole premolar-molar series except the last half of the third 

 molar. This is continued by another fragment (the dotted outline 

 in the figure) with the third and the second half of the second 

 molar. As these fragments coincide in size they may be con- 

 sidered as belonging to the same species. 



The mandible thus reconstructed shows certain peculiarities. 

 Compai'ed with the best-known Chalicothere {Moropus elatus), as 

 figured by Holland and Peterson §, it has a much flatter lower 



* Loc. cit- pi. iii. iigs. 4 & 5. 



t Mem. pi. xii. fig. 3. 



X lioc. cit. 



§ IjOC. cit. pi.. Iii, 



