MOLAR TEETH AND OTHER REMAINS OE MAMMALIA. 
65 
lateral surfaces of the bone are nearly flat. Below, the dimensions of the bone are 
compared with those of the corresponding phalange of the 
{Pangolin) indica, viz . : — 
living 
Indian Manis 
Living. 
Fossil. 
Length, of anterior surface 
0-62 
1-10 
Transverse diameter of dist. extremity 
0-30 
0-69 
Antero-posterior do. do. do. . . . 
0-42 
0-95 
Transverse diameter of superior surface 
0-34 
0-70 
Antero-posterior do. do. do. 
0-50 
1'05 
Erom the above it will be seen that the fossil bone is very slightly wider in 
proportion to its length than in the living species : the only other distinction 
between the two specimens is that in the bone of the living species the depression 
for muscular attachment above the trochlea on the posterior surface is somewhat 
larger and deeper than in the fossil specimen. The dimensions of the fossil bone 
are about double the size of those of the recent hone, and consequently indicate 
that the fossil animal was about double the size of the living species. The length 
of the second phalange in the living species is equal to one-seventh of the length 
of the cranium, and the length of the cranium is about equal to one-tenth of the 
total length of the body ; taking these proportions, the head of the fossil species 
would be about 7*7 inches in length (that of the recent Indian species being 4*2), 
and the length of the whole body would be about seventy-seven inches, whereas 
that of the living Indian species never exceeds forty-three inches, Ilanis {Pan- 
golin) gigantea* of Western Africa attains a length of seventy inches, or rather less 
than the Siwalik species. The present specimen is distinguished from the corre- 
sponding bone of the Armadillos and Orycteropus by being much shorter in propor- 
tion to its length ; from that of Ilyrmeeophaga by not being enclosed in the 
terminal claw. It has nearly the same form as that of MegaloQiyx, but is shorter 
in proportion to its length. With the phalanges of other Edentata it has few 
points in common. 
In referring this bone to the genus 3Ianis, I assume that the animal to which 
it belonged must have had the same general organization as the living species ; 
the fossil species was clearly fossorial, and being so, the presumption is that it did 
not differ far from the living animal, though subsequent discoveries may prove that 
there were differences in the form of some part of the osteology of the fossil 
species which will require that it should eventually be placed under a new genus ; 
other remains of this interesting fossil form will, I hope, be subsequently obtained : 
the locality from which this fossil was obtained has already yielded several little 
known forms to Mr. Eedden’s search, and it is from these Sind and Panjab districts 
alone that the majority of new Siwalik fossils in the Indian Museum have been obtained. 
* The name Mania gigantea appears to have been applied to two ditferent animals ; it was first applied by Illiger in 1811 
to the living African species, and the name is used for this species in Gray’s catalogue of the Edentata in the British Museum 
(1873). Subsequently the same name was applied by Holl in 1830 to Cuvier’s 'Pangolin gigantesqiie, (the latter name dating 
from 1812) ; the name therefore belongs to the African species ; the fossil species was subsequently named by Lartet 
Macroiherium giganteum. I have not had an opportunity of comparing our specimen with the corresponding bone of the 
African M, gigantea ; it is much smaller than that of Macrotlierium, 
( 83 ) 
