TETEACONODON OR CH(ER0THER1UM. 135 



pair are distinct, and of a qnadrilobal figure wlien they have 

 run together. This character is very marked in the large 

 species, and the structure on which it depends is more or less 

 present in all, although in the small species described by 

 Cuvier, it is so marked by the obliquity of the plane of de- 

 trition as to be little apparent. In all the species the 

 undivided portion of the shaft is low, and the processes are so 

 much in relief from it, that the vertical height of the latter 

 is several multiples of the height of the shaft. The curvature 

 of the processes is directed inwards, so that the apices of each 

 pair are brought considerably within the margin of the shaft. 

 The spur is a simple hillock ; there is but one transverse crest 

 or ridge, the anterior one. 



In the fossil the height of the tooth, compared with its 

 other dimensions, is much less than in the Hippopotamus. 

 The shaft is not so low, and the prominence of the processes 

 in relief from it is less than the height of the shaft. Their 

 form is, consequently, shortly conical. The longitudinal cleft 

 is not a vertical fissure : it is an open hoUow, and the sides of 

 the hillocks slope outwards at a considerable angle with it. 

 The curvature of the hUlocks is but slight, and their points 

 are not brought much inwards, so that they are, as it were, 

 seated marginally. They are not furrowed vertically so as to 

 give anything approachmg a trefoil in detrition, and their 

 grinding plane is very oblique, compared with the large species 

 of Hippopotamus, fossil and recent, although not so much in 

 contrast with the smaller. They have a transverse crest in 

 the hollow between the outer hillocks, and another between 

 the outer posterior hillock and the spur, neither of which is 

 present in the Hippopotamus. The spur is strongly bifid, 

 so as to resemble two hillocks in apposition, like that of the 

 large Mastodon, and not simple, as in the Hippopotamus. 



These points of distinction are so marked as to establish 

 the generic difference of the fossil from the Hippopotamus. 



It appears, therefore, that there existed formerly in the 

 North of India, associated with the Mastodon, the fossil 

 Elephant, the Rhinoceros, and the Hippopotamus, a pachy- 

 dermatous animal of large size, distinct from all known fossil 

 or recent species, and adding another genus to this numerous 

 fossil family. Our knowledge of its structure is at present 

 confined to the posterior molars, which connect it with the 

 Hippopotamus, the Hog, and the Anthracotherium. But till 

 the entire composition of its dentary system is known we 

 must remain in the dark regarding its strict analogies and 

 position among the Pachydermata. From the active and 

 extensive search, however, which is at present made near 

 the valley of the Murlcunda by fossil collectors emploj^ed by 



