iv Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [Jan., 1915. 
the genus Sivapithecus' was the right ramus, from which alone 
he would have restored the jaw almost exactly as they now 
saw it. He failed to see how this specimen could be described 
as belonging to a very young animal, seeing that the full 
permanent set of teeth was present, of which the last molar had 
been erupted some months previously to death. He was will- 
ing to allow that some change might have taken place in the 
d , 
casual observer might reasonably suggest that the symphisial 
fragment belonged to another genus, but on further considera- 
tion this seemed to him to be untenable. He might first point 
out that the canine in the right ramus was shown by its alveolus 
to have been almost or quite as large asin the other. If an extra 
4 inch were to be modelled below that fragment, as Dr. Hossack 
suggested, not only would the resulting jaw be entirely unlike 
that of the Gorilla or the Orang, but it would possess a slender- 
ness, which was well nigh inconceivable in a jaw of that depth. 
Such a supposition seemed, therefore, rather far-fetched, when a 
ramus was provided ready made to fit it as it stood, belonging 
to an animal that was only slightly smaller. As an argument. 
against a greater depth he mentioned the existence of a foramen 
Orang about half way down the symphysis. If so, then ap- 
proximately half the depth of the entire jaw must lie above it. 
e imagined also that it was the symphysial fragment to 
which Dr. Annandale referred when he suggested an affinity with 
the lower monkeys, since the shape of the teeth in the type 
ramus Offered a sufficient distinction. He admitted that the — 
canine was very similar but the short symphysis, the inward 
position of the canine and the divergence of the rami militated 
against any close alliance. He thought that the peculiar curva- 
1 New Siwalik Primates and their beari i 
: ng on the question of the 
evolution of man and the Anthropidea. Rec. G ndia XLV 
pt. l, pp. 1-71 (1918). p ec. Geol. Surv. I , vol. XLV, 
