EHINOCEEOS DECCANENSIS. 
15 
Eh. Sivalensis. 
Eh. Perimensis. 
Eh. Paloeindicus. 
It has already been shown that Mh. Deccanensis agrees with the fossil Indian 
Ehinoceroses hitherto described in being hypsodont. It differs, however, in many 
points which will now be enumerated. 
Bh. Sivalensis, Falconer, does not show the guard on the inner side of 
the upper premolars, which is so marked a feature in 
Deccanensis^ and both the anterior and posterior valleys 
are relatively much shallower. The frontal bones of Sivalensis are deeply incurved: 
in Bh. Deccanensis they are flat, or but very triflingly incurved. The zygoma of Bh. 
Sivalensis is not so wide in proportion to its length as that of the Deccan species. 
In Bh. Berimensis, Falconer, the guard is also absent from the upper pre- 
molars. The anterior and median colles are much 
more oblique and much narrower, and the anterior 
valleys are much shallower and pointed at their anterior extremities, while the 
posterior form deep notches on the posterior wall — all points of marked difference 
from Bh. Deccanensis. The ascent of the rami of the mandible begins well behind 
molar 3 in Bh. Berknensis, and not at the median groove on the outer wall of that 
tooth as in Deccanensis. Bh. Berimensis was a larger animal than Deccanensis. 
The most striking difference between Bh. Balceindicus, Falconer, and Bh. 
Deccanensis lies in the form of the auditory fossa, which 
in the latter forms a broad, shallow, roughly rhom- 
boidal area, with the meatus opening into the lower half. The meatus itself is some- 
what triangular in form. In Balceindicus the fossa is triangular and very small, 
with a circular meatus opening centrically and filling nearly the whole space between 
the post-glenoid and post-tympanic processes. Bh. Balceindicus had also good-sized 
lower incisors, and the prolonged symphysis, although slightly constricted in front 
of the premolars, expands further forward and becomes spatulate. The upper 
premolars did not possess a guard, and the valleys of the whole molar series are 
much shallower than in Bh. Deccanensis. The zygoma is more slender than in 
Bh. Deccanensis. 
Bh. platyrhinm, Falconer, differs from Bh. Deccanensis in possessing large 
incisors and a broad spatulate symphysis. The auditory 
Eh. plaha’hinus. i i i j i . 
lossa IS also much narrower, and the zygoma much 
narrower and more slender. Bh. platyrhinus does not show any ant-orbital wart-like 
rugosities as does Bh. Deccanensis. The anterior and median colies in the molar 
series in Bh. platyrhinus are more oblique, and the walls of the valleys much 
more complicated by foldings of the enamel. 
Bh. Sinensis, Owen, is very distinct from Bh. Deccanensis. It is much smaller 
and distinctly brachydont ; the upper premolars do not 
possess a guard ; the valleys are very shallow, and the 
crochet a mere wave in the enamel wall of the median collis. Molar 3 is quadrate, 
rather than trihedral, in plan, and the enamel walls of all the teeth are relatively 
very much thicker than in Deccanensis. 
Eh. Sinensis. 
