SIWALIK CAMELOPARDALIM. 
13—111 
far from those of the existing species \ the neck and limbs having attained their 
characteristic elongation in the pliocene period. The evidence of the teeth and 
bones before us does not appear to me to be sufficient to establish the existence 
of more than one species, though, taking into consideration the difficulty of dis- 
tinguishing many of the fossil teeth from those of the existing species, it would 
be extremely rash to affirm that these remains did not belong to more than one 
species ; such different species, if they existed, being very probably distinguished 
mainly by external characters. The fossil bones and teeth leaving, as we have seen, no 
doubt but that the Siwalik giraffes were constructed on the same plan as the living 
species, the interesting, but unfortunately ever unanswerable, question forces itself 
upon us, as to what was the external colour of the fossil form. Was the organis- 
ation of this type of animal always associated with the dappled chesnut and 
tawny hide of the existing giraffe, which, together with its towering form, we 
are told is a valuable means of concealment to its owner, as it browses in the 
splashes of alternating sunlight and shade among the lofty palms and mimosas 
of the plains of Southern Africa ? 
Distribution . — Remains of the Siwalik giraffe have been obtained throughout 
the Sub-Himalayan Siwaliks, but, in comparison with the remains of other rumi- 
nants, are decidedly of rare occurrence. They have also been obtained from the 
Siwaliks of Perim Island. 
Comparison with other fossil species. — It may be observed, firstly, that, with 
the exception of Camelopardalis biturigum (the name of which was given in the 
same year), the Siwalik species has the priority of name over all the other species, 
and, therefore, its name would stand even if it were proved to be identical with 
either C. attica or C. vetusta. 
Camelopardalis biturigum seems to be known only by a lower jaw, which, 
according to Professor Owen 1 2 3 , differs very markedly from that of the living 
species, and is not therefore likely to be the same as the Siwalik form. 
The upper molars of C. vetusta, figured by M. Duvemoy 3 , are so much worn, 
that it is difficult to compare them with the Indian specimens. 
Camelopardalis attica, according to Professor Gaudry 4 , was of nearly the 
same height as the living species, but its limbs were of much more slender make 5 . 
It therefore seems to be the most specialised of the group. Some upper molars 
from Pikermi are provisionally referred by M. Gaudry to this species, but as they 
are not figured they cannot be compared with the Siwalik teeth. 
Other alleged Siwalik species. — We have seen that the second Siwalik species of 
giraffe mentioned by Palconer and Cautley cannot be mantained ; we have also 
1 It may be mentioned that Messrs. St. Hilaire, F. Cuvier, and Duvemoy considered that the variations in 
the living giraffe were such as to prove the existence of more than one species. 
2 See Gaudry, Loc. cit., p. 249. As stated above, this form may be Helladotherium. 
3 Loc. cit. 
4 Loc. cit. 
4 “ Elle ayait des os beaucoup plus minces.” 
