ADDENDA AND CORRIGENDA . 1 
Page 5-7. The range in time of the rhinoceroses of the later European tertiaries, according to Prof. 
Boyd Dawkins, 2 should be as follows, viz . : — 
R. etruscus. Up. pliocene to lower pleistocene. 
R. leptorhinus, Ow. Mid. and upper pleistocene. 
R. megarhinus, Christ. Low. pliocene to mid. pleistocene. 
R. iichorhinus. Mid. and upper pleistocene. 
,, 21, line 17 from top for occididenlale read occidental . 
,, 60, ,, 9 ,, ,, ,, Geraund ,, Gerand. 
,, 76. In the table of measurements the premolars numbered 1st, 2nd, 3rd, should be 2nd, 3rd, 4th. 
„ 100, line 18 from top for Qrasius read Orasius. 
,,126, ,, 16 ,, bottom ,, proximals ,, proximal. 
,, 134, ,, 13 ,, ,, ,, bar ,, base. 
,, 140, ,, 2 ,, top ,, Mesace/ops ,, Megacerops. 
,, 146. According to Prof. Gaudry, it is Palceochcerus , rather than Hyotherium, which is nearest to 
Dicolyles : it is, however, probable that the two fossil genera, together with Choeromorus, 
should be united. Amphichcerus is a synonym of Hyotherium. 
,, 149, top line after Up. eocene add and low. miocene. 
„ 164, line 12 from top for Gandri read Gandoi. 
„ 171, ,, 15 ,, bottom ,, Laki ,, Laki. 
„ 189, „ „ „ „ „ II. „ A. 
,, 211, ,, 11 ,, top „ caudivolus „ caudivolvulus . 
VOLUME I. 
„ 283-284 (and elsewhere) the range in time of the three following species of probosci dians should 
according to Prof. Boyd Dawkins, 3 be as follows, viz . : — 
. Mastodon arvernensis. Pliocene. I 
Elephas meridionalis . Up. pliocene and low. pleistocene. 
,, antiquus. Pleistocene. 4 
,, 286, line 18 from top for India read Asia. 
In description of plate XLVI., fig. 4, for true molar read milk-molar. 
1 A few self -apparent misprints (especially in pt. IV., of which the writer did not see the final revise) have been left 
uncorrected. ' 
2 1 Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. XXXVI., p. 370, et. srq. This memoir had not reached the writer when pt. I. was 
sent to press. It should he observed that the lower pliocene of Prof. Dawkins does not include the Pikermi beds ; which, if 
classed in that period, may he termed ‘ Lowest pliocene ’ ( ride infra “Introductory Remarks”). 
3 Op. cit. It may be observed in self -justification that the geological ages of the two species of elephant given in the 
first volume were taken from Falconer’s table (“ Pal. M em vol. II., pp. 14-15) : the present writer not being then aware 
of the incorrectness of many of the statements contained therein. 
4 The pleistocene age of this species invalidates the connection between the geological age and the ridge-formula of the 
species of Elephas noticed in vol. I., p. 288 : and also the inference as to E. antiquus being older than E. namadicus mentioned 
in note 2, p. 281. 
