CRANIA OR RUMINANTS RROM THE INDIAN TERTIARIES. 51—138 
It will be observed from the above that the narrowness of the temporal fossa 
is characteristic of Dr. Ealconer’s specimen as of our figured specimen ; the outward 
direction of the horn-cores does not, however, appear to be of much value, as the 
female of the Assam variety of the existing species possesses nearly horizontally 
directed horns, as in the fossil species. 
A specimen (No. N. 20), which Dr. Ealconer regarded as probably belonging 
to a female individual of this species, has the following dimensions : — 
Inches. 
Length . . . . . , . . . . . 17 50 
Height from sphenoid to frontal ........ 8‘00 
Width at constriction between orbit and horn-core ...... 8'25 
„ between middle of orbits . . . . . . . . 7'50 
Length from vertex to upper margin of orbit ....... 7‘50 
„ of line of molars ......... 6’50 
Greatest width of left b orn-core ........ 5'00 
Thickness of ...... ... 3’00 
A large detached horn-core of a male individual (No. N 32) has 
dimensions : — 
Length of fragment ......... 
Girth near base . . . . 
Long diameter ......... 
Short „ ......... 
the following 
Inches. 
11-0 
197 
7-0 
4-5 
Erom the above comparisons and measurements we find that the cranium 
of the fossil Indian buffalo differs in the following points from the cranium 
of the existing wild buffalo, mz., in its larger size, in the form of the infra- 
cristal portion of the occipital surface, and in the narrowness of the temporal 
fossae ; in the form of the orbits, nasals, and nasal cavity, and in that of the ultimate 
molar ; in the degree of the inclination of the basi-cranial axis to the plane of the 
palate, and in the backward prolongation of the palatines; the most important of 
these differences appear to me to be those relating to the nasals, the temporal 
fossae, and the basi-cranial axis and palate. The whole of the differences are but 
slight, and yet they are quite sufficient to distinguish the skull of the fossil from 
that of the recent form, and I therefore think it best to continue to consider the 
two forms as distinct species in the modified acceptation of the term, although 
there can be no doubt but that the one species is the direct ancestor of the other. 
In opposition to this view, however, I see that Mr. Eoyd-Dawkins ‘ considers the 
fossil form (misnamed in his notice Bubalus namadicus) as specifically identical with 
the Living Bubalus arni ; this determination was apparently made on the evidence 
of Dr. Ealconer’s comparison of the two crania. 
The fossil species ranged throughout a great portion of the central Nerbudda 
vaUey, and its remains have been noticed by Dr. Ealconer from the older alluvium 
of the Jamna valley ; bones of this species have also been obtained by Mr. Eedden 
* Cave Hunting, p. 428. 
