EIIINOCEROS DECCANENSIS. 
9 
guard on the anterior wall of the tooth; this is the only part of the building up of the 
teeth that I feel a shade of doubt about, because such a pit does not seem to be known 
in other species; the fragmentary parts, however, fitted most perfectly together. The 
corresponding portion of the right jaw premolar, is unfortunately unknown. This tooth 
is a good deal more worn than premolar 3 and 4, and the pass p, leading from the inner 
wall of the tooth to the anterior valley, is almost obliterated by wear. The edge of 
posterior wall of the tooth has also been so much worn that the posterior collis 
is separated from the posterior valley by a belt-like surface of dentine. In premolar 3, 
on the contrary, much less wear has taken place, and the three colles stand up dis- 
tinctly. The guard commences on the anterior wall, at about one-third of the length 
of the wall from the anterior angle of the outer waU, and runs all round the inner 
wall till it merges in the posterior collis. The pass p dividing the anterior and 
median colles is deep and sharply defined. The external side of the anterior valley 
(^. e., the side next the exterior wall of the tooth) is rather broken round the top. 
A spur of enamel projects from the median collis very nearly across the anterior 
valley, and shows that a very strongly marked crochet characterized this tooth. 
The posterior valley is rather oval in shape, imperfectly so however, as the curve 
on the posterior side of the major axis is much greater than that on the an- 
terior side of the axis, which is parallel with the axis of the median colKs. The 
posterior waU of the tooth descends but little from the posterior collis, and thus 
shows signs of wear, and also gives the posterior valley a decidedly pit-Mke appear- 
ance quite different from the bay-like appearance it presents in many other spe- 
cies, owing to the posterior waU of the tooth being deeply notched by the posterior 
vaUey. This character belongs also to the posterior valleys of premolar 2 and 4. The 
outer wall of premolar 3 is characterized by the anterior angle or costa ki, forming an 
acute angle ; k 2 the second costa is well developed, but the whole wall of the tooth 
is remarkable for its flatness. 
Premolar 4 is, on the whole, very little different from premolar 3, though of 
considerably larger size. The chief difference lies in the larger proportional size of the 
anterior colUs, which is taller and more bulging a little below the present surface of 
mastication. Premolar 4 is perhaps a little less worn down. The anterior angle of 
premolar 4 is also rather more acute. The appearance of greater height in the anterior 
collis of premolar 4 as compared with premolar 3 is in measure due to the lower posi- 
tion occupied by the guard on the anterior half of the inner wall of the tooth. The 
central part of the masticatory surface is rather broken, but there is a well marked 
fold of enamel projecting from the median coUis, showing that a large crochet 
would be present were the tooth unbroken. The outer wall of the tooth is, like that 
of premolar 3, remarkable for its flatness, which greatly exceeds that of aU other 
species I have been able to compare it with. This character will be apparent from a 
comparison of flg. 1 in Plates I and II. 
The true molars, as already stated, are unfortunately less well preserved, but 
enough remains to recognize many of their chief characteristics. The true molars 
c 
