Br. C. I. Forsytli Major — On Fossil Dormice, 499 



Pomel's description of the molars of ' Myoxiis muriniis' is quite 

 correct : " Les molaires ont une forme de couronne plus compliquee 

 que celle du lerot, auxqiielles elles ressemblent le plus." ^ We have 

 here, again, the pattern of the Eliomys molar, approaching close to 

 E. Hamadryas. There are four complete crests, alternating with 

 three rudimentary ones ; besides, three tubercles on the outer 

 margin. In addition to the usual indentation in the middle of the 

 raised inner margin, there is a slight indentation on its anterior half 

 as well ; and this is about the only difference from ^. Hamadryas in 

 the pattern of the tooth. 



The alveoli of the true molars, however, differ considerably, and 

 show that the lower molars of Eliomys Pomeli, Trouess. (= E. murinus, 

 Pom.), had each only two roots. The premolar was one-rooted. 



In size, m. 1 q{ E. Pomeli is slightly inferior to the corresponding 

 tooth of ^. Hamadryas, although the length of the whole lower 

 dental series is about the same as in the smaller specimen of the 

 latter species (3^ mm.). 



T conclude the present note by a few remarks on the Pleistocene 

 Leithia and on the affinities of Dormice generally. 



Mr. Lydekker^ has proposed a new genus, Zeithia, for the Pleisto- 

 cene. ' Giant Dormouse ' of Malta. He is quite positive in asserting 

 that this fossil does not belong to the Myoxidae, nor to the 

 ' Myomorpha,' and he inclines to constitute for this genus a separate 

 family (Leithiidae) of ' specialized Sciuromorpha.' His reasons are 

 twofold : — 



(1) The infraorbital foramina are said to be of very minute pro- 

 portions, thus resembling what obtains in squirrels. This I venture 

 to deny, for it is quite evident that the slit-like appearance of the 

 infraorbital foramen in some of the skulls is due to their crushed 

 condition ; in one which is a more normal cranium, the foramen is 

 of considerable size. 



(2) The upper cheek-teeth are said to resemble those of 

 Sciuridee, and are said to be nearest to Xeriis and Pteromys ; 

 therefore " it seems not impossible that both types of teeth might 

 be derived from a common stock." With this last proposition I 

 quite agree. It is, however, well known that the same may be said, 

 and with greater truth, of the Myoxine Eliomys, the four upper 

 cheek-teeth of which "agree in the main with the corresponding 

 teeth of Sciurus vtdgaris " ^ — indeed, more so than the teeth of Zeithia 

 agree with those either of Xerus or Pteromys. 



If no other choice was left save to class Zeithia and the Myoxidse 

 with either the 'Myomoi'pha' or the 'Sciuromorpha,' then, taking 

 the Muridee to be the type family of the former and the Sciuridte the 

 type of the latter, they would have to be ranged with the latter, 



^ Porael : Catal. Meth. et Descr. des Vert, foss., etc., 1853, p. 24. 

 ^ R. Lydekker, "On the Affinities of the so-called Extinct Giant Dormouse of 

 Malta" : Proc. Zool. See. London, 1895, p. 860, 



^ H. Winge, " Um grseske Pattedyr" : loc. cit., p. 51. 



