ANOPLOTHERIUM AND GIKAFFE. 195 



A. Sivalense .... 

 A. commune .... 

 Ch. Goldfussi 



On the whole the Sewalik species appears to be most closely 

 allied to the Ghalicotherium Goldfussi. The existence of a 

 vacant diasteme in front of the anterior tooth would constitute 

 a difference from the Anoplotherian type of some importance. 

 The characters generally show a return from the ruminant 

 tendencies of the Cuvierian species back to a more pachyder- 

 matous type, and a closer affinity with the rhinoceros, 

 between which and A. commune it may ultimately j)rove to 

 be an intermediate form. Until the evidence for separation 

 is conclusive the authors suggest leaving it with the genus 

 Anoplotherium. The A. comm,une was determined by Cuvier 

 to be of the size of a small ass ; the A. Sivalense would rank 

 in dimensions between a horse and the small Sumatran 

 rhinoceros. 



Remarks on Ghalicotherium. — Kaup appears to have founded 

 this genus, as distinct from Anoplotherium, on real or sup- 

 posed differences, 1st, in the rear molars ; 2nd, in the in- 

 cisors ; 3rd, in the canines. The difference in the rear 

 molars consists in the size of the lobule of the enamel, into 

 which the vertical bulges near the apex are notched ; this 

 character indicates, as he conceives, an affinity with the 

 Tapir and Lophiodon. But this lobule, even if constant, does 

 not appear to the authors of sufficient importance to consti- 

 tute the basis of a generic distinction. The general form of 

 the rear molars of both the upper and lower jaws is only an 

 enlarged and less rectangular representation of those of Ano- 

 plotherium. Moreover, in the direction of the ridges of the 

 crown, and in the insulation of the conical cusp, the accordance 

 between Ghalicotherium and Anoplotherium is complete. 

 As to the second distinction, drawn from the supposed form 

 of the incisors, the detached tooth which he figures and de- 

 scribes as a lower incisor (Oss. Foss. Uv. ii. p. 30, PI. VII.), 

 judging from the figures and from a cast which the authors 

 have examined, very closely resembles, both in form and in 

 the development of the crown, the penultimate premolar of 

 the A. Sivalense. The channeled sides and the bifid extremity 

 of the fang, indicating two confluent fang roots, and the com- 

 plicated form of the crown with three mammillse on the inside, 

 appear to the authors strongly to militate against regarding the 

 tooth as an incisor. They therefore consider this tooth as an 

 upper premolar (and probably as the penultimate) one of the 

 right side. 



As to the third distinction, drawn from the canine teeth, 

 judging from a cast of the detached fragment which Kaup 



o 2 



