364 



FALCONER ON THE PERIM ISLAND FOSSILS. 



Length of the three premolars 



Length of the 1st premolar - - - 



Width of the 1st — 



Length of the 2d — 



Width of the 2d — - 



Length of the 3d — - 



Width of the 3d — - 



Length of the 1st or antepenultimate true molar 



Perim 



Fossil. 

 No. 1. 



Sivathe- 



rium 



giganteura. 



Male 

 Giraffe. 



inc. 



inc. 



inc. 



4 



4-5 



2-9 



1-5 



1-75 



•9 



1-3 



1-63 



11 



1-4 



1-5 



1- 



1-5 



1-75 



1-1 



1-25 



1-75 



1- 



- 



1-9 



1-2 



1-6 



1-6 



1-33 



The second specimen (fig. 4. and 4a.), (for an examination of 

 which I am indebted to the kindness of Major Jervis, of the 

 Bombay Engineers,) is also from Perim Island, and shows the 

 hindmost premolar, together with the three back or true molars 

 nearly perfect. Like the premolar of the other specimen, these 

 teeth, besides being smaller, differ from their equivalents in 

 Sivatherium giganteum, by the absence of the flexuous direction 

 of the enamel, and of the basal ridge at the inside. In these par- 

 ticulars, and also in the presence of a minute or rudimentary 

 cone of enamel on the inner side at the base, between the barrel 

 divisions of the teeth, but attached only to the posterior lobe, 

 they correspond with the other molars of the giraffe. But the 

 anterior pillar of enamel, on the outer surface of the front half of 

 these teeth, is considerably thicker in proportion in the fossil than 

 in the giraffe ; while the outer surface of the posterior half is more 

 expanded in length, and is more hollow than in the latter genus. 

 A still more important difference is, that in the fossil there is 

 no tendency to a basal mammilla or enamel lobe at the outside 

 between the barrel divisions of the two backmost molars as in 

 the larger fossil giraffe of India (Geol. Proceed, ante cit. pi. ii. 

 figs. 3., 3a., and 4.) ; while the middle of each of these divisions 

 at the inner side is so compressed vertically, as almost to present 

 an obsolete or indistinct form of keel. The following are the com- 

 parative dimensions as in the case of the previous specimen. 



Length of the series of three back molars 



Length of the 1 st — 



Width of the 1st — 



Length of the 2d — 



Width of the 2d — 



Length of the 3d — 



Width of the 3d — - 



Perim 



Fossil. 

 No. 2. 



Sivather. 

 Gigant. 



Male 

 Giraffe. 



inc. 



inc. 



inc. 



4-63 



5 



3-9 



1-6 



1-63 



1-33 



1-75 

 1-75 



2- 

 2- 



1-97 

 1-37 



1-9 



2- 



1-37 



1-6 



2- 

 1-75 



1-37 

 1-37 



It is not necessary to follow up the comparison of the fossil 

 teeth with those of the Bovidce, Cervidcs, and other familes of the 



