44 INDIAN TERTIARY AND POST-TERTIARY YERTEBRATA. 
invariable point of distinction, as we have seen that a ‘ third fossette ’ is occasionally- 
developed in some of the molars of the latter species, and it does not always appear 
to be present in those of the former. 
The next specimen requiring notice is a detached upper molar, drawn of half 
the natural size in figure 4 of plate LXXY of the “ Eauna Antiqua Sivalensis,” 
and copied in figure 3 of plate IY of the first volume of this work. This tooth has 
a length of 2’5, and a breadth of 32 inches; it has hitherto been considered, 
following Ealconer and Cautley, as a premolar, but its large size and proportionate 
length rather seem to indicate that it is a true molar, and it appears to agree pre- 
cisely, both in form and size, with the right upper penultimate true molar of the 
skull drawn in plate LXXIY, figure 2 a of the “ Eauna Antiqua Sivalensis.” 
The last specimen of the upper molar dentition of this species figured in 
Ealconer and Cautley’s great work is contained in a detached specimen of the left 
maxilla showing the three true molars (pi. LXXY, fig. 1). In this specimen the 
teeth have the general characters of those of the other specimens, but, as far as can 
be judged from the figures, the external surface of the penultimate molar appears to 
be slightly more curved ; this, however, does not appear to be a character of specific 
importance. The length of the penultimate tooth in that specimen is 2*4, and the 
width 3’2 inches. 
Punjab specimen. — In plate YI, figure 1 of this volume are represented three 
associated upper molars of a fossil . rhinoceros, which it seems probable should 
be referred to a small form of the present species. The figured teeth are contained 
in a portion of the left maxilla, collected by Mr. Theobald in the Siwaliks of the 
Punjab. That maxilla shows the broken base of a tooth to the right of the figured 
specimens, which is the remnant of the last true molar ; the figured specimens will 
therefore be (counting from left to right) the last premolar and the first and 
second true molars. The whole of the three teeth are somewhat battered, but the 
premolar and the first true molar are fairly perfect ; the second true molar has, 
however, lost its outer wall. 
Erom the absence of any distinct ‘ buttress ’ at the antero-external angle of the 
first true molar, it is perfectly evident that these teeth can belong neither to Acero- 
therium perimense nor to Rhinoceros sivalensis. The want of a c combing-plate ’ 
is equally convincing that they cannot belong to R. platyrliinus. Hence, unless 
they belong to a new species, they must be referred to E. palceindicus. 
On comparing the two true molars of the specimen under consideration with 
the figures of the corresponding teeth of the specimen drawn in figure 1 of plate 
LXXV of the “ Eauna Antiqua Sivalensis,” the two appear to correspond very 
closely, except in the matter of size : it seems probable that in our specimen an 
‘ accessory fossette’ would be cut off from the ‘ median valley ’ in a more advanced 
state of wear. The premolar in our specimen has a wide ledge at the entrance of 
the ‘median valley’ forming a rudimentary ‘cingulum.’ 
