1836.] of the Dddupur Collection. 501 



Ind. Rhin. femur and tibia, met. 0.960 humerus and radius,, met. 0.868 

 Fossil Ind. Rhin. do. do. „ 1 .056 ditto do. „ 0.947 



In the first, the humerus and radius are to the femur and tibia in 

 the ratio of 1 : L10 ; in the fossil the ratio is 1 : I'll. 



The analogy which exists between these fossil extremities and those 

 of the Indian rhinoceros being no less striking than that which was 

 observed between the cranium PI. XV. and the skull of the existing 

 species, we have considered such correspondence sufficient to prove, 

 that the fossil anterior and posterior limbs appertained to an animal of 

 the same species, and of about similar size to the one of which the 

 cranium in question is a relic. 



Even in the event of a much closer approximation of symmetrical 

 proportions than that given in this paper being obtained, we are aware 

 that identity of species could not be presumed. It could not be 

 assumed that the skin, the external appearance of the animal, was 

 precisely similar to that of the existing species. The fossil Indian 

 rhinoceros must, however, have presented a figure bearing a strong 

 general resemblance to the uncouth symmetry of its present repre- 

 sentative. 



Remarks on part of the specimens delineated in Plate XVII. 

 When describing the specimens of upper and lower jaws, the pos- 

 sibility of the existence of another species was noted. The fossil 

 femur, of which figs. 3, 4 are representations, would be corroborative 

 of the fact, were it not for a peculiarity which renders it somewhat 

 doubtful whether or not it may be attributed to a species of rhino- 

 ceros. On comparing it with PL XVIII, the dissimilarity of the two 

 bones will be at once apparent. The third trochanter is in fig. 3, 

 placed about the centre of the femur, in which respect it resembles 

 the unicorn of Java, thus described by Cuvier : " Le femur a son 

 troisieme trochanter place au milieu de son cote externe, large, re- 

 courbe en avant, ne remontant pas de sa pointe vers le grand tro- 

 chanter lequel ne donne non plus aucune pointe pour venir a sa 

 rencontre. L'echancrure entre eux n'est done pas close en dehors ; 

 mais du reste elle est aussi grande que dans l'unicorne. La tete inferieure 

 est plus enlargee en arriere." The latter remark, however, does not 

 at all apply to the fossil, which has its inferior extremity much com- 

 pressed instead of developed ; so much so, indeed, that but for the 

 other parts of the bone it could not for a moment be a matter of doubt 

 whether or not it came from a rhinoceros. 



