52—18 INDIAN TERTIARY AND POST-TERTIARY VERTEBRATA. 
9. Sus PEiscus, M. de Serd Pleistocene, France. 
A species about the size of S. scrofa, with which it agrees in dentition ; its skull is, 
however, more like that of A. afrkanus. 
10. Sus PROViNCiALis, Gei’v.^ Low. pliocene, Montpellier. 
Larger than A. scrofa, with 3 like that of A. afrkanus, with which it was identified 
by De Blainville : it has small canines, and four lower premolars. 
11. Sus STEiNHEiMENSis (Fi’aas^). Mid. miocene, Germany. 
Chmvpotamus steinheimensis, Fraas. 
A species considerably smaller than S. scrofa, referred to the present genus on the 
authority of Prof. Gaudry^ : the molars are apparently not unlike those of living 
swine. 
12. Sus STRozzi,® Menegli. Up. pliocene, Italy. 
A species stated by Prof. Forsyth-Major to present affinities to A. verrucosus. 
13. Sus VALENTiNi, Filliol.® Miocene, France. 
Characterized by the extremely short talon of m. 3 ; the whole length of this tooth 
being less than that of m. 2 . The species is apparently somewhat smaller than S. 
andai?ianensis. 
Sus (?) 7nastodontoides, Blain., is probably a Sirenian, while S. (?) lemuroides, 
Blain., may belong to the Pachysimia. Most of the other forms which have been 
referred to Sus belong to Ilyotherkmij or allied genera. 
Distribution. — The genus, both in the recent and fossil condition, is entirely 
confined to the Old World, over which it appears to be pretty generally distributed. 
In time, according to Prof. Gaudry,^ it made its first appearance in the middle 
miocene (stage of Montabuzard). 
Species 1 : Sus giganteus, Falc. and Caut. 
Histoy'y of fossil hidian species. — The earliest notice of the occurrence of fossil 
swine in the Siwaliks seems to be one published in 1835 by the late General (then 
t 
Lieut.) Sir W. E. BakeF ; in which the lower jaw of a species considerably larger 
than the existing Indian wild-boar was described and figured. In the following year 
a fuller notice was published by Messrs. Baker and Durand,® in which a nearly 
complete skull of a female and several upper and lower jaws were described and 
figured. It was therein stated that the authors had evidence of the existence of two 
species of Siwalik swine ; one considerably larger, and the other smaller than 
1 “Reclierches dans les Cavernes de L\mel-Viel,” p. 134, pi. XI. (Montpellier, 1839). 
2 Op. eit., p. 177, pis. III., XXII. Rutimeyer, ‘ Verhand. nat. Ges. Basel,’ vol. I., p 517, ef. seq. (1857). 
3 “ Die Fauna von Steinheim,’ p. 22, pi. V. (Stuttgart, 1870). 4 “ Animaux Foss, du Mt. Leberon,” pp. 45-6. 
5 Forsyth- Major, ‘ Proc. Verb. Soc. Tosc. Sci. Nat.,’ vol, II., 1881, p. 22: the writer has not seen a full 
description of this species. 
6 ‘ Bull. Soc. Philom.,’ vol. VI., 1882, p. 123. 
7 “ Les Enchainements— Mam. Tert.,” p. 5. It is possible that the subsequently described S. valentini may belong to a 
lower stage. 
' 8 ‘ Journ. As. Soc. Beng.,’ vol. IV., p. 668, pi. XLVTI., fig. 20. 
9 lUd, vol. V., p. 661., pis. XXXV. and XLFV. 
