132 INSECTIVORA. 



iDches. 

 68 



Breadth at lachrymal notch , . . . . 



Lachrymal notch to tip of premaxillaries '86 



Breadth at canines '33 



„ „ 2nd incisors "33 



„ „ 1st „ -12 



„ „ temporal angle of parietals ........... "66 



Least breadth between orbits '56 



Posterior palatine margin to tip of premaxillaries ........ 1'12 



Greatest breadth between alveolar (external margins) between 2ud and Srd molars . . '65 



Breadth (external) half-way between posterior incisor and canine ...... '25 



Length of alveolar border ............. 1'14 



Breadth behind origin of zygomatic arch (inferior aspect of skull) '72 



Distance between tympanic bullee (anterior extremity) ........ ? 



„ „ „ „ (posterior „)'....... ? 



Depth of premaxillary surface of skull to anterior extremity of nasals '20 



„ „ „ „ posterior „ ...... '30 



„ through posterior margin of palate .......... '50 



„ „ highest point of parietal .......... ? 



Anterior extremity of symphysis to extremity of angular process of lower jaw - . . 1'42 



„ „ „ condyle 1'40 



„ „ „ coronoid process ........ 1'36 



Length of alveolar surface ............. '85 



Depth through coronoid process ............ '50 



„ from base of corono-condyloid notch .......... -28 



This species appears to be distributed over the Malayan peninsula and the 

 islands in its neighbourhood, such as Sumatra, Borneo, and Java. 



Diard and Duvaucel's figure in the Asiatic B^esearches appears to have been 

 copied in a slightly reduced form into the Calcutta Journal of Natiu-al History, 

 where it is regarded as a Herpestes ! 



TuPAiA SPLENDIDULA, Gray, PL VII, figs. 10 and 11, skull. 



Tupaia splendidula, Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1865, p. 322, pi. xii. 



Tupaia ruficaudata, Gray, MS. Mivart, Journ. Anat. & Phys. vol. i. 1867, p. 393 (foot-note). 



There are two specimens of this species in the British Museum, and Gray states 

 that they had at first been regarded as varieties of T. tana, to which in coloration 

 they have a .strong resemblance. Their skulls, however, are perfectly distinct from 

 that species, and in their general characters approach more to T. ferruginea than to 

 T. tana, from which it is at once distinguished by its short muzzle, which is even 

 shorter than in the former species. As the skull could never be mistaken for that 

 of T. tana, I shall merely point out wherein it differs from T. ferruginea. It is rather 

 smaller than the skull of that species, and the facial portion, besides being smaller 

 has the premaxillaries bent downwards to a greater degree. The frontal region also 

 is more flattened, and the breadth across the zygomatic arch is in excess of T. ferru- 

 ginea, as is also the depth of the brain-case through the highest point of the parie- 

 tals. The rami of the lower jaw are more divergent opposite to the end of the 

 alveolar border than in T. ferruginea, which is in keeping with the greater breadth 

 across the zygomatic arch. The teeth also present certain differences, and one of 



