PROBOSCIDIA FROM BALUCHISTAN. 613 



Of upper premolars there are two specimens, both unworn. 

 One, apparently a third premolar of the left side, consists of four 

 cusps arranged in pairs, but not joined into ridges, and a small 

 talon. This is a small tooth (PI. IV. fig. 3) about 30 mm. long and 

 20 mm. in width. The other, a fourth premolar (PI. IV. fig. 2) 

 45 mm. long and 36 mm. Avide, is formed of two separate cusps in 

 front, while the hinder cusps are subdivided each into about four 

 smaller ones, and make a neai-er approach to a ridge; the talon is 

 fairly well-marked. 



It may be stated at this point that no part of the material in 

 the present collection gives any evidence in support of the genus 

 Hemmiastodon *, which was originally described from specimens 

 from the same beds in Baluchistan. 8chlesinger t has criticised 

 the validity of this genus somewhat adversely, and has pointed 

 out that, with the exception of the type specimen (a third upper 

 molar), all the other specimens fall within the limits of known 

 variation of B. angustidens. The type tooth has only three 

 ridges instead of four, and is of a more pi'onounced triangidar 

 shape than the third molars just described. Schlesinger has 

 made the tentative suggestion that it may be a four-ridged tooth 

 with the front ridge broken away t, which has been misintei'preted 

 as a complete three-ridged one. This, of course, is possible, and 

 fractured specimens of proboscidian teeth with extraordinarily 

 little evidence of the fractured sui-face are not rare. On the 

 other hand, the broken edges of these teeth all show a convex 

 anterior border, whereas the presumed line of fracture in the 

 tooth under discussion is decidedly concave. The normal front 

 border of these teeth seems to be convex in unworn specimens, 

 which in fully-developed teeth may become flat or concave bv 

 pressure of the tooth in front. If Pilgrim's specimen be an 

 entire one, there remain alternative exj^lanations. Either it is 

 an abnoi'mal specimen, or Pilgrim was correct in making a generic 

 distinction for it and keeping it apart from the genus Buno- 

 lophodon. In neither case is there any proof for or against 

 his view, except the negative evidence of two seasons' collecting- 

 over the same ground, which has produced nothing to confirm 

 the genus TIemimastodon, while the more ordinary variations of 

 Buonolophodon angustidens occuri'ed in fair quantity. 



The right and left fragments of the lower jaw are in precisely 

 the same stage of wear as the older of the two palates, and are in 

 all probability parts of the same animal. The fourth premolar 

 and first molar are well worn, the second has the first two ridges 

 in wear, and a complete third mola.r lies in the alveolus. 



Compared with a specimen in the British Museum, the 

 mandible (text-fig. 2) is not only smaller, but gives the impression 

 of having been considerably shallower than is usual ; it compares 



* Pilsviin, loc. cit. f Loc. cit. p. 48. 



X A third lower molar minus the first ridge would give a shape very doso to 

 that figured bj- Pilgrim, 



42* 



