106—8 INDIAN TERTIARY AND POST-TERTIARY YERTEBRATA. 
This table shows that while Ealconer and Cautley’s specimens are slightly 
larger than those of the living species, Mr. Theobald’s specimens are slightly 
smaller, thus indicating a certain amount of variation in the size of the upper 
molars. It further shows that in the two specimens (one recent, and the other 
fossil), in which the whole premolar and molar series is exhibited, the fossil form 
is distinguished by the penultimate being larger than the last premolar, the reverse 
of this arrangement obtaining in the recent form. 
In describing their specimens, Messrs. Ealconer and Cautley notice the presence 
of three small tubercles on the inner surface of two specimens of the penultimate 
upper premolar, which were wanting in the corresponding tooth of the recent skull 
examined by them. The recent skull in the Indian Museum likewise shows the 
absence of these tubercles. In my first description of the specimens figured in this 
memoir these tubercles were likewise stated to be absent, but a more thorough cleans- 
ing of the specimen has shown that one broad and flat tubercle exists on the hinder 
half of the inner aspect, probably corresponding with the two posterior tubercles on 
the original specimen . As far, therefore, as the materials at hand go, the presence of 
tubercles on the inner aspect of the penultimate upper premolar does seem charac* 
teristic of the fossil teeth. None of the figured specimens show any trace of the 
minute tubercle at the entrance of the median valley so generally occurring in the 
upper molars of the living species. Some of Messrs. Ealconer and Cautley’s speci- 
mens and others in the Indian Museum do, however, present this tubercle. Some 
specimens of the last true molar show a rudimentary ‘ cingulum ’ on their anterior 
face. 
Two other specimens of upper molars of Siwalik giraffes, from among Mr. 
Theobald’s Siwalik collection, call for a moment’s notice. One of these specimens 
(No. B. 180) is a portion of the right maxilla, showing the first and second true 
molars, the first being only just touched by wear. These specimens cannot be dis- 
tinguished from the figured teeth, except by the presence of a small process project- 
ing from the posterior ‘ crescent’ into the central pit. A last upper molar (B. 846) 
however, agreeing precisely in all other respects with the corresponding tooth re- 
presented in figure 2 (m. 3), presents a similar process, so that it would seem that 
the presence or absence of this process, like the tubercle in the median valley, can 
only be reckoned as an individual character. 
The other specimen also consists of a fragment of the right maxilla (No. B.177), 
and shows the penultimate and last premolars, and the first true molar. The latter 
tooth agrees precisely with the first true molar in No. B. 180 even down to the pre- 
sence of the process in the posterior pit, but is distinguished by the presence of a 
tubercle in the median valley. The dimensions of the three teeth above mentioned 
are given below : — 
Length of first true molar 
Width 
Length of second „ 
Width „ „ 
No. B. 180. 
1-15 
1-14 
1-3 
No. B. 170. 
1-12 
1-11 
1*3 
