ME. ST. GEOBG-E MIYAET ON THE SKELETON OF THE PEIMATES. 
ai7 
second semilunare *, exists in all the genera of the Order below Troglodytes, with the 
exception of those forming the subfamily Indrisinse f . 
It has a flattened proximal surface, which joins the ulnar part of the concave distal 
articular surface of the scaphoides. 
Its distal surface is generally deeply concave antero-posteriorly, and embraces the 
radial side of the head of the magnum, and sometimes (as in the Nycticebinse and 
Cheiromys) the unciforme also, which last, however, is excluded from it in the Anthro- 
poidea, and apparently also in Tarsius J. 
At the ulnar side of the bone is a narrow surface, which articulates with the radial 
side of the semilunare. 
At the radial side of its distal surface is a concavo-convex surface, which joins the 
trapezoides, and on its palmar side is a narrow surface, which joins the radial side of the 
distal surface of the scaphoides. 
This bone appears to answer to part of the scaphoid of Man, as De Blainville §, 
Professor G. M. Humphry ||, Professor Huxley ^[, and others have regarded it, and not 
to be a dismemberment of the os magnum, as Cuvier ** seems to have been inclined to 
consider it. Indeed, if that part of the scaphoides of Man which is on the distal side 
of the dorsal groove were cut away, it would answer tolerably well to the intermedium. 
Nevertheless, the united scaphoides and intermedium of any ape together form a mass 
which is much more disto-proximally extended than is the ulnar part of the human 
scaphoides. 
In one manus of a Chimpanzee f f, however (Plate XIV. fig. 1), I have found the sca- 
phoides develope a large process, embracing the magnum dorsally, while at the same 
time the part passing beneath the trapezium is much developed, so that in this case it, 
I think, evidently and completely responds to both the scaphoides and the intermedium 
of the Orang (Plate XIV. fig. 2). 
Again, in Indris, in which the intermedium is wanting, the outer part of the sca- 
phoides is enlarged, and has a more or less marked projection over the dorsum of the 
os magnum JJ. It would be a fact of much interest if it should turn out that in the 
* Its form in Cynoceplialus is very well described by Dr. Johann Georg Ilg, ‘ Honographie der Sehnen- 
rollen.’ Zweiter Abschnitt. Erste Abtheilung, 1824, p. 4. 
t I make no doubt but Propithecus resembles in this Indris and Microrhynchus. 
t Burmeister’s ‘ Tarsius,’ Table 2, fig. 5, b ; and Blanchard’s ‘ Regne Animal,’ Mammiferes, Primates, 
pi. 22, fig. 9, b. In Cheiromys it joins the unciforme, and extends between it and the lunare. — Owen, Trans. 
Zool. Soc. vol. v. pi. 21, figs. 17 & 18, i. 
§ Loc. cut. Pithecus, p. 16. 
|| In his very interesting and valuable memoir on the limbs of Vertebrates. 1860, p. 4. 
Hunterian Lectures. See 4 Medical Times,’ 1864, vol. i. p. 565. 
*'* Le£ons d’Anat. Comp. 2nd edit. 1835, vol. i. p. 425. 
ft The skeleton No. 5083a in the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons. M. Gratiolet has, I find, 
noticed the same thing in his recent treatise, 4 Troglodytes Aubreyi,’ in the Nouvelles Archives du Museum, 
vol. ii. 1866. i i De Blainville, loc. cit., Lemur, pi. 10. 
2x2 
