82 
Hecorch of the Geological Stifveg of India. 
[vOL. XI. 
humerus, and other bones were in close proximity. 1 merely mention these 
facts to shew the number of specimens buried in this one place. 
The cranium, except in the matter of its vastly suj)erior size, seems scarcely 
to differ from that of the living Indian pig; the profile of the fossil is, 
however, rather more concave. The following are the chief dimensions of the 
specimen:— 
Inches. 
Length from supra-ocoipital to incisors ..... 23’00 
Interval between suijra-occipital and angle of mandible . . . 8 00 
Width above orbits . . . . . . . 5’40 
Length of molar series ....... 6'30 
„ of exposed portion of lower canine ..... 2'50 
„ „ „ „ incisors .... 1'40 
Diameter of upper canine ....... 1'25 
Depth of mandible at last molar ...... 3'80 
Width of sjmphj’sis of mandible ...... 2'60 
In addition to the cranium, Mr. Theobald has also sent down the two 
median metacarpals of the left foot of a gigantic Sms, which doubtless belong to the 
same species, and very probably, since they are from the same locality, to the same 
individual; they do not differ, except in size, from the metacarpals of the living 
pig. I give theii- dimensions in order that they may be compared with those of 
the latter; in the second column are given the dimensions of an outer metacarpal 
of the smaller Siwalik 8us hysudricus :— 
S. gigant. 
S. hgsud. 
Length of onter metacarpal 
. 4-50 
310 
Width of distal extremity of outer metacarpal 
. 1-18 
0-67 
„ of proximal ,, „ „ 
. 1-50 
0-85 
Length of inner metacarpal 
. 4-40 
These bones are about the size of the metacarpals of the living Malay Tapir, 
and indicate that the extinct Indian pig, must have about equalled in size the 
foi-mer animal. 
Genus: Hippohyus. 
This genus, which is confined to the Siwaliks, seems to have been hitherto 
known only by the cranium and fragments of the mandible, figured on plates 70 
and 71 of the “ Faima Antiqua Sivalensis.” Mr. Theobald has collected near 
Asnot a considerable numhej' of specimens of the cranium and mandible of this 
genus, and one or two specimens had been obtained from the Punjiib in previous 
seasons; the great number of specinien.s obtained from Asnot illustrates the 
very local distribution of many of the Siwalik mammals. Of the specimens of 
crania and upper molars recently obtained, some are slightly larger and others 
slightly smaller than Falconer’s figured specimen, but I can see no evidence of 
specific distinction, the gradation from one to another being so regular. 
In the mandibles, however, there is such a difference in the size and pro¬ 
portion of the molars that I cannot but think that there is evidence of a 
second species smaller than H. sivalensis. Below I have compared together the 
