SIWALIK AND NARBADA BUNODONT SUINA. 
11—45 
ever published by Falconer. The only one among all those specimens exhibiting 
the incisors is the symphysis of the mandible represented in plate LVII., figs. 5, 5a 
of the “ F.A.S.”; which must consequently be taken as the type specimen. The 
only important note^ of Falconer’s in reference to the species is to the effect that it 
differed from II. amj^hibius, in the proportions of the lower incisors. A note was 
published in 1882 by the present writer^ showing that JI. palceindicus was at all 
events in some instances hexaprotodont. 
Mandible . — The type mandible® consists only of the symjDhysis, showing the 
complete alveoli of a central pair of incisors, and the lower halves of the alveoli of 
an outer pair, together with the section of the left canine. The alveoli of the outer 
incisors are larger than those of the inner ; and in the figure the specimen has been 
restored as simply tetraprotodont, but it will be shown below that this restoration is 
most probably incorrect. A similar mandible from the Narbadas, now in the Indian 
Museum, was referred to this sjDecies by FalconeF ; it comprises only a portion of 
the symphysis, exhibiting the lower halves of the alv.eoli of two pairs of incisors 
and of the canines. 
In figure 2 of plate VI. of the present volume there is represented the symphysis 
of the mandible of a hippopotamus collected by Mr. C. Hackett in the Narbadas.® 
In this specimen there remain the sections of two pairs of large and closely 
approximated incisors ; and in the upper triangular spaces between the first and 
second pair there are wedged another pair of very minute teeth, evidently 
corresponding to the second pair of incisors (i72) in H. namadicus. The whole form 
of the jaw, and the relative size of the two pairs of large incisors leaves no doubt 
that the specimen belongs to II. palceindicus. In the British Museum there are two 
specimens of similar mandibles (Nos. 40,893 and 41,663) from the Narbadas,® 
acquired since Falconer’s death, exhibiting a precisely similar arrangement of the 
incisors. The former specimen shows the symphysis, and the complete left ramus : 
the descending process is smaller than in E. sivalensis, and more like the same part 
in H. ampkibiiis ; the horizontal ramus is, however, much shorter than in either, the 
total length from the descending process to the extremity being only 11^ inches, in 
place of 15 in an equal-sized specimen of AT. amphibiusd In the second specimen iT2 
is smaller on the left than on the right side. In the following table the dimensions 
of the four specimens mentioned above are compared with those of II. namadicus and 
H. sivalensis ; viz . : — 
1 “ Pal. Mem.,” vol. I., p. 147. 2 < Records,’ vol. XV., p. 102. 
3 “ F.A.S.,” pi. LVII., fig. 5. The place where this specimen is preserved is unknown. 
1 “ Pal. Mem.,” vol. I., p, 147. 
5 The specimen mentioned in the passage of the ‘ Records,’ ah-eady cited. 
6 The second specimen (41,663), which was bought at Toulmin-Smith’s sale, is labelled Siwaliks : its general condition, 
and especially its imperfect state of mineralization, leaves, however, not the slightest doubt of its Narbada origin. 
7 A specimen from Auvergne in the British Museum. 
D 
