2C8 
TEirriAllY Vp:RTEnRATA OF THE EATtTM. 
prominence. 'J'lie portion of the basioccipital beneath the occipital condyle is 
comparatively sliort and much more nearly resembles the basioccipital of Gharialis 
than the vertically elongated bone of Tomistoma schlegeli, but at the same time the 
basal tuberosities for muscle-attachment are only slightly developed. The foramen 
magnum is wider than high, as in Tomistoma. The skull-roof differs widely from that 
of the recent Tomistoma, particularly in its much greater breadth, which depends 
mainly on the large size of the supratemporal openings. One result of this increased 
width of the skull-roof is that the lateral temporal fossae look more directly outwards 
and less upwards than in Tomistoma, thus more nearly approaching the condition 
found in the Gavial. The orbits, unlike those of Tomistoma schlegeli, are rounded 
more as in Gharialis, hut at the same time have not the prominent borders found in 
that genus. In the width of the interorbital bar this skull is exactly intermediate 
between the two genera. 
In front of the orbits the snout narrows less gradually than in Tomistoma, but at 
tlic same time not nearly so suddenly as in Gharialis-, in the degree of its dorsi- 
ventral compression also it is intermediate between the two. The long slender nasals 
extend forwards to a point about opposite the first maxillary tooth, thrusting 
themselves between the slender facial processes of the premaxillae, which extend 
back to the level of the space between the fourth and fifth maxillary teeth, so that 
the overlap of the two bones is considerable. It is mainly on account of this character 
that this species is referred to Tomistoma, since in Gharialis the nasals are separated 
from the premaxillae by a long interval in which the maxillae meet in a median suture. 
On the palate the palatines extend forwards in a wedge between the posterior ends 
of the palatine plates of the maxillae, reaching the level of the twelfth maxillary tooth. 
The form of the maxillo-palatine suture is the same as in Gharialis, while in Tomistoma 
schlegeli it is only slightly convex forwards. The premaxillary expansion is much less 
than in Gharialis, but at the same time rather more marked than in Tomistoma schlegeli ; 
on the palate the premaxilhe extend backwards between the maxilhe to just behind 
the level of the third maxillary tooth. The nasal opening is comparatively large. 
In the specimen described all the teeth have fallen from their sockets, but from 
these it can be seen that there were 22 or 23 on each side, or rather more than 
in Tomistoma (20-21), hut considerably fewer than in Gharialis (27-29). In each 
premaxilla there are five teeth arranged as in the* Gavial. In the recent Tomistoma 
only four are ])rcsent, though in some of the fossil forms referred by Lydekker to that 
genus five are present [T. champsoides, T. eggenhurgense) ; the third and fourth are the 
largest, and behind the fif th is a broad notch for the rece])tion of the mandibular tooth. 
In the maxilla' the alveoli are almost equal in size througlumt, and they o])en outwards 
and forwards, both Gavial-like characters. There are no ])its for the reception of the 
lo\^er teeth, except perhaps between the alveoli 12-13 and 13-14. 
In some respects the present species approaches the Lower Miocene form described 
