76 
ReconU of the Geological Survey of India. 
[VOT,. XI. 
Stegodon insignis, Falconer. 
Loxodon planifrons, Falconer. 
Tduelephas hijmdricm, Falconer. 
Stegodon ganesa may also not improbably occur in the Western Pnnjdb, but 
the teeth are undistinguishable from these of S. insignis, and no cranium has been 
found. 
The distribution of the Indian fossil Proboscidia, as far as I can at present 
determine it, seems to be as follows:— 
Disteibution of Indian Fossil Peoboscidia. 
[The abbreviations of localities used in the table are as follows: B., Burmah, D., Siwaliks of 
Debra Dun District. De., Deccan. C., China. J., Jamna Valley. K. Each. N. Nerbudda 
Valley. P., Western Punjab. P. I., Perim Island. S., Sind. The following refer to books; 
A. S. B., Falconer’s '“Catalogue of Fossil Vertebrata in Asiatic Society of Bengal.” F. A. S., 
‘‘Fauna Antiqua Sivalensis.” P. M., “Palseontological Memoirs.” R. G. S. I., “Records of 
Geological Survey of India.”] 
Dinotkerium indicum, P. I.‘ 
Dinotherinm pentapotamicB, K.; P. ; S. 
Mastodon (Trilophodon') faleoneri, P.; S. 
Mastodon (Trilopliodon) pandionis, De.® 
Mastodon (Tetralophodbn') latidens, B.’; D.; P. ; P. I.^; S.- 
Mastodon (Tetralophodon') perimensis, P. ; P. I.; S. (?). 
Mastodon (JPentalopliodon) sivalensis, D.; P. I. 
Stegodon cliftii, B.; P. 
Stegodon bonibifrons, D. ; P. 
Stegodon sinensis C.; D. (?); P. 
Stegodon insignis, D.; P. ; N.® 
Stegodon ganesa, D.; N.’ 
Loxodon planifrons, D.; P. 
Enelephas liysudricus, D.; P. 
Etielephas namadiciis,^ N.; J. 
In the table of Proboscidia given on page 14 of the “ Palieontological Memoirs” 
certain species, such as If. latidens and S. oliftii, are mentioned as occurring in 
“ Southern India,” and not in the Siwaliks; this question has already been 
sufBciently discussed above. 
> F. A. S., pi. 3. " A. S. B.. p. 206. « A. S. B , p. 316. 
Pal. Mem., Vol. II, p. 15. = A. S. B.,p. 256. ’ R. G. S. I., X. p. 31. 
’A. S. B., p. H. 
® I am informed that during the past year Professor Leith-Adame, in the publications of the 
“ Palasontographical Society,” has endeavoured to prove the identity of the Nerbudda Elephant 
with E. antiquus of the pliocene of Europe. 1 have not at present seen the Memoir in question, 
and therefore cannot discuss the question fully. I may, however, observe that Dr, Falconer, who 
named the two species, considered them as distinct, but closely allied (Pal. Mcui., Vol. II., p. 108); 
of the Indian species Dr. Falconer remarks (sup. cit., p. 642) : “It {Elephas namadicus) belongs 
to the same group, Etielephas, as the existing Indian Elephant, but it is broadly distinguished from 
that species and from all other known species by a very marked peculiarity in the form of the 
cranium, in addition to dental and other characters.” 
