CERCOPITHECID®. 3 
precisely in size and form’ with those of Semnopithecus 
entellus, but the depth of the ramus is considerably less. 
The resemblance is so close that there is every probability 
that the fossil belongs to the same genus; and as it can- 
not be identified with any living form, it has received the 
name of S. palewdicus. 
Cautley Collection. Presented, 1842. 
15711. Fragment of the right ramus of the mandible, containing the 
(fig.) last true molar, in an unworn condition ; from the Plio- 
cene of the Siwalik Hills. This specimen is described by 
Falconer and Cautley in the memoir cited above, and is 
represented in figs. 7, 8 of the above-mentioned plate of 
‘Falconer’s Paleontological Memoirs.’ It is regarded by 
its describers as belonging to the same species as the last 
specimen, with which it agrees in size. There is a slight 
difference in the form of the talon of the last molar, but 
it is quite probable that this may be merely an individual 
variety. Cautley Collection. Presented, 1842. 
M. 1539. Cast of the right astragalus. The original was obtained 
from the Pliocene of the Siwalik Hills, and is preserved 
in the Museum of the Geological Society. It is described 
and figured by Falconer and Cautley in the Trans. Geol. 
Soc. ser. 2, vol. v. p. 499; and differs very slightly from 
the corresponding bone of Semnopithecus eniellus, whence 
itis highly probable that it may belong to the same species 
as the two mandibles noticed above. Made by permission 
of the Council of the Geological Society. 
Semnopithecus monspessulanus, P. Gervais’. 
Hab. France. 
M. 1893. Five casts of detached teeth. The originals are from the 
Lower Pliocene of Montpellier (Hérault), France ; and are 
described and figured: by P. Gervais in the Zool. et Pal. 
Frangaises, 2nd ed. p. 19, pl. 1. figs. 7-11. 
Presented by Sir R. Owen, K.C.B., 1884. 
1 Falconer and Cautley stated that there is a difference in the form of the 
last molar; but many specimens of S. endel/ws exhibit the same character. In 
consequence of this supposed difference they were disposed to refer the spe- 
cimen to Macacus (Pithecus). It may be observed that a species of that genus 
allied to M. rhesus has been described from the Siwaliks by the present writer 
(Ree. Geol. Surv. Ind. vol. xi. p. 66, xii. p. 41) under the name of M. sivalensis. 
2 Zool. et Pal. Frangaises, lst ed. vol. i. p. 6 (1848-52). 
B2 
