138 FAUNA ANTIQUA SIVALEXSIS. 



I. Description bt Messrs. Baker and Durand of the Fossil 



Rhinoceros of the Sewalik Hills. 



{Eeprinted from the Journal of the Asiatic Society for August, 1836.') 



Cranium. — We shall commence with the fossil which, being the most 

 perfect, affords the beat means of instituting a comparison with the 

 skulls of described species. 



The fossil cranium is imperfect in the following parts. The extre- 

 mity of the nasal and intermaxillary bones is broken ofF;_ the zygo- 

 matic arches are both fractured; the left occipital condyle is wanting; 

 the following molars hare either dropped out prior to the envelop- 

 ment of the head by the matrix, or have been broken off subsequently 

 to its fossilization, viz. the fifth of the right, the first and seventh of 

 the left, maxilla. In addition to these losses, the cranium has under- 

 gone, when in the stratum, the common fate of Sub-Himalayan relics, 

 and is cracked in several directions ; tlie crush, hoAvever, which pro- 

 duced these cracks has not materially altered the form of the head ; 

 the chief eifect produced has been the forcing the left half of palate at its 

 anterior extremity a little above its proper level ; this the longitudinal 

 crack passing through the left orbit enabled it to accomplish ; the 

 displacement resulting may be best observed in the profile view of the 

 skull, fig. 3. The transverse cracks are accompanied by a small 

 hollow and a consequent neighbom-ing bulge, both so partial and of 

 such small relief, that in the profile their places can only be observed 

 by paying attention to the jagged outline at the depression of the 

 frontals. With the above exceptions the specimen is perfect. 



A "-lance at PI. XV. Avill be sufficient at once to determine the species 

 with which this fossil rhinoceros must be compared. The depression 

 of the frontals causing the deeply curved outline of the upper planes of 

 the head, the slope of the occiput, the septimi, and the nasal arch all 

 separate this cranium from the existing and fossil bicorn species. The 

 existing unicorn species is that, therelbre, to which recourse must be 

 had in order to establish a comparison. 



In the imicorn rhinoceros of Java the height to which the crest of 

 the occiput rises above the palatal plane, and also the thickness and 

 prominence of the nasal arch supporting the horn, are less than in the 

 Indian rhinoceros. A line drawn at a tangent to the crest of the occiput 

 and the highest point of the nasal bones Avill, in the iinicorn species of 

 India, be more raised above the plane of the fi-ontals than is the case in 

 the Javanese rhinoceros. In the foregoing respects the fossil associates 

 itself with the Indian, and differs from the Java, species. The com- 

 parison may, therefore, in general be confined to the former. 



With the view of bringing at once under the eye, the discordance 

 which occurs between the relative values of analogous dimensions, the 

 subjoined table is here inserted. The modulus chosen is the space 

 occupied by the seven molars, because on this measiu-ement the 

 development of the bones of the head inust, to a certain extent, be 

 dependent. The measurements given in Cuvier's ' Oss. Foss.' have 

 afforded the proportions of the existing species; and the table of 

 dimensions which closes this paper has given the proportions of the fossil. 



' The illustrations referred to are those in the ' Journ. Asiatic Society.' — [Ed.] 



