SIWALIK AND NARBADA BUNODONT SUINA. 
41—75 
the last premolar of the female jaw already described from that of S. titan, leave no 
doubt of the specific distinctness of the specimens under consideration from that 
species. 
Compared with the jaw provisionally referred to S. giganteus (plate XI., fig. 1 ), still 
more striking differences obtain, since the crowns of the molars of that specimen 
are even lower than in S. titan, and the crowns of m. 1 and m. 2 are of remarkable 
shortness ; while the latter tooth exhibits no trace of the complex pattern formed on the 
worn surface of the present specimens. These differences, together with the simple 
preniolars of the female lower jaw of the present form, leave no doubt of the 
specific distinctness of the latter from the lower jaw figured in plate XI.: and since it 
has been shown even if that specimen do not belong to S. giganteus that the lower molars 
of that species must have been of very similar structure, there is no doubt of the 
specific distinctness of the present form from that species. 
Compared with B. cristatus, the molars of the present specimens present a much 
greater resemblance than they do with those of 8 . titan or 8. giganteus. In m. 3 
of the living species the whole crown, and more especially the talon, is relatively 
lower ; and the hindmost portion of the talon [d) comprises only a single column : 
the inner lateral surfaces of the main columns are less flattened and elongated, the 
accessory columns less fully developed, and the pattern on the worn masticating 
surfaces of all the molars less complex. With the simple molars of 8. harbatus the 
present specimens have no resemblance. 
Other mandibles. — In figs. 7, 7a of plate LXX. of the “ F.A.S.” there is 
represented, under the name of 8. giganteus, the mandible of an immature Siwalik 
jDig, now in the collection of the British Museum (No. 16,599), which, judging from 
the elongated form of m. 2 and the complex pattern of the worn surface of the same, 
as well as from the general contour of the jaw, should apparently be referred to the 
present species. The last molar is not fully protruded ; and the small size of the 
canines indicates that the specimen probably belonged to a female. The side view 
shows the depression of the extremity of the symphysis below the alveoli of the 
cheek-teeth characteristic of this species. Another specimen in the same collection, 
represented in plate LXX., fig. 6, of the F.A.S.,” in which the molars are very 
much worn down and battered, j)robably belongs to the same species. The 
dimensions of these two s]3ecimens, 
taken in 
the same order, are as follows, viz .\ — 
Height of ramus at m. 3 
2-0 
2-1 
Width of m. 1 
0-55 
Thickness ,, ,, . 
i’4 
1-4 
Length „ 2 
1-21 
Length of symphysis 
2-8 
2-8 
Width jyjjjj 
0-7 
Interval between canine and pm. 1 
0-5 
Width ,, ,, 3 
0-78 
Length of m. 1 . 
0-72 
A fragment of the right 
ramus 
of a mandible in the same collection (No. 
16,609) 
probably belongs to a young individual of the same species. This specimen shows 
very clearly the elongated form of the little worn m. 1. 
Distinctness and affinities. — The foregoing comparisons leave no doubt of the 
specific distinctness of the specimens under consideration from 8. giganteus and 
