138 MEMOIRS OF THE CARNEGIE MUSEUM 
figs. 34, 35, 37) is quite similar to that of Dinohyus, but the distal articulation is 
interrupted on the fibular angle and it is plainly seen from the figure that Mt. II, 
did not come in contact with the cuboid as in Dinohyus. 
Cuboid. —The cuboid is relatively large and reveals some interesting and 
important differences from that of the earlier types. The articular facets for the 
caleaneum and astragalus occupy the proximal end in nearly equal proportions, 
the former facet being slightly wider,® which is directly the opposite of what 
is the case in Archezotheriwm ingens, where the astragalar facet is the larger of the 
two. The cuboid of the type of Boochwrus humerosws more nearly approaches 
that of Dinohyus so far as the two specimens can be compared. The astragalar 
facet of the present genus is plane transversely, deeply concave antero-posteriorly, 
and the articular surface is confined to the anterior and posterior parts, with an 
interrupted median area twelve millimeters long. A deep pit is located on the 
fibular side of this interrupted sinus, which separates the calcaneal and astraga- 
lar facets at this point. The calcaneal facet is less interrupted than that in 
Archxotherium, as described by Scott, and continues obliquely from in front upward 
and backward, terminating near the summit on the postero-tibial angle of the 
ascending palmar hook. ‘he tibial border of the dorsal face is heavy and very 
rugose ; the fibular angle is also prominent and abruptly convex antero-posteriorly. 
The tibial face is rugose and in addition the dorsal facet for the navicular has 
developed a projecting ledge” so that together with the palmar facet, which also 
occupies a similar though much larger ledge, the cuboid and navicular bones are 
very strongly interlocked. Below the navicular facet near the dorsal angle is a 
small facet with square outlines, which articulates with the ectocuneiform. The 
latter bone was undoubtedly connected posteriorly by cartilage only, as the corre- 
sponding surfaces on the two bones are very rugose with no distinct facets, suchas 
are found in Archxotheriwm ingens. Immediately below the facet for the ectocunei- 
form there is a third facet on the tibial angle.*® This facet articulates in a. promi- 
nent and quite important manner with a process of Mt. III which extends above 
the head of Mt. IV similar to, though less prominent than, thatin the manus (figs. 
70, 78). These articulations are not present in the peccary, Sus, Hippopotamus, or 
Entelodon magnum, but on Mt. III in Archeotheriwm there is a very slight indication 
56 On page 448 (38) Kowalevsky says that the cuboid of Entelodon magnum has a narrower facet for the astragalus 
than for the caleaneum, which is also well shown in his illustrations (Pl. XXVIII). 
57 In Bodcherus humerosus this projecting ledge is more developed than in the Princeton specimen from the Oligo- 
cene, but is not so prominent as in Dinohyus. 
58In the type of Bodcherus humerosus this facet is not present on the cuboid, but in a smaller individual from the 
green sandstone (middle beds) of the John Day formation (Yale Museum No. 12765 ; Collector, L. S. Davis, 1875) this 
facet is fairly well developed on the cuboid. 
