138 INSECTIVOEA. 



HYLOMID^. 



Chauacters. — Head elongate ; ears round; feet arboreal^ naked below j tail semi-nude ; pelage not 

 spiny ; orbit imperfect ; rudimentary post-orbital process present ; no zygomatic imperfections 

 of ossification ; pelvis posteriorly depressed ; symphysis pubis very short ; tibia and fibula 

 united ; dentition 1 ^^l c l^^pn |^4 « ItI -= 44. 



Genus Hylomys, Mllller. 

 * Hylomys peguensis, Blytli, Plate VI. 



Hylomijs pegiienm, Blyth, Journ. As. Soc. Beng. vol. xxxviii. 1859^ p. 394; Jhid, p. 286; Anderson^ 

 Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond. vol. viii. 1874^ p. 453, plate Ixiv. 



The general configuration and details of the structure of this Insectivore are 

 so anomalous that it cannot, with propriety, be classed either with the Tupaiidce 

 or ErinaceidcB, as it has characters in common with both of these groups. Its 

 skull has the general form of the skull of Ttopaia, but in its imperfect orbit, 

 in the rudiment of a post-orbital process, and in the absence of any impei-fections 

 of the zygomatic arch, and in the position of its lachrymal foramen, it resembles 

 the skull of Erinaceus, to which it has a general resemblance, although at the same 

 time it is a much lighter skuU, in keeping with the arboreal habit of the animal. 

 As I have elsewhere shown, it also differs from Tupcda in the skuU having an 

 imperfect tympanic bulla, an excavated basi-sphenoid, and paroccipital and 

 mastoid processes. In these details of its skull structure it is more nearly related 

 to the ErmaceidcB than to the TupaiidcB, but it does not approach either of 

 these groups to that degree of affinity that would entitle it to be ranked under 

 either of them. 



Its teeth also show proclivities with the Erinaceidce, whilst at the same time 

 they exliibit imdoubted relations to the teeth of Tupaia. The form of its scapula 

 is ijitermediate between that of Tupaia, and even Erinaceus itself. Its united 

 tilaa and fibula affine it to the Erinaceidce, and the form of its pelvis, moreover, is 

 markedly distinct from the pelvis of Tupaia, whereas it is closely resembled by 

 the pelves of Gymniira and Erinaceus. In its short rudimentary tail it also 

 exhibits a character the very opposite of any Twpaia. 



Considering all these facts, this animal appears to present an assemblage of 

 characters which excludes it from any known family of vertebrates, and to place 

 it intemiediate between Tupaia and Erinaceus. I have therefore named the family 

 Hylomidw for its reception. 



This animal was obtained at Ponsee, in the Kakhyen hills, at an elevation 

 of about 3,000 feet. 



