PART 1.] 
Lydefcker: Notices of SiwaliJc Mammals. 
87 
posterior valley, which does not exist in Falconer’s specimen; in the living Giraffe 
the first molar has a tubercle. 
The next tooth which requires notice is a detached last lower premolar of the 
right side; it agrees precisely in form with the corresponding tooth of the speci¬ 
men a (which is drawn in fig. 14, ])lato 7, of the above-quoted volume of the 
“ Paleeontologia Indica ”), hut exceeds that tooth in length by 0’37 inch, and is 
therefore too largo to have belonged to G. skalensis, and seems to indicate a 
third and larger species of Siwalik Giraffe. 
The detached first lower molar mentioned in the list of specimens, is of nearly 
the same size as the corresponding tooth of G. giraffa, and doubtless belonged to 
C. sivalensis ; it carries a large accessory tubercle in the outer valley. 
The penultimate left lower premolar which, I think, may possibly have 
belonged to a small individual of G. sivalensis differs somewhat from the corre¬ 
sponding tooth of 0. giraffa, and approaches the form of the corresponding tooth 
of SivatJiernmh, and of the same tooth in the jaws which I refer to Hydaspithe- 
rium. The hinder barrel of the tooth is very like the same part in G. giraffa, 
with the exception that both the inner and outer columns are somewhat more 
elongated; the outer column of the anterior barrel is also very similar; the 
inner side of this barrel is, however, very different. In the living Giraffe, 
the inner column of the anterior barrel is a simple flattened cone, placed 
immediately on the inner side of the outer column, there being consequently a 
central enamel pit in this column; the anterior extremity of the outer barrel 
curves round to form a simple wall bounding the anterior side of the tooth. In 
the fos.sil specimen, on the other hand, there is no separate inner column; the fore- 
and-aft extremities of the outer column bending round to the inner side, and 
leaving an open valley between them leading into the central enamel fold; the 
posterior one of the inner columns of the anterior barrel is simple, while the 
anterior one forms a large cone, with a central enamel island. The crown of the 
tooth is low (brachydont), and shews that the tooth belonged to the true Giraffes 
and not to the Sivatherioids, in which the crowns are tall (hypsodont). The 
general aiTangement of the anterior barrel is very similar to that which occurs 
in Sivatherkim, and in the jaw which I have referred below to Hydaspitherium; in 
the two latter genera, however, the antero-internal column of the tooth has its 
enamel fold forming a cleft on the inner side, and not a median pit. 
The dimensions of this tooth are compared below vrith the corresponding tooth 
of G. giraffa, and I have also added the measurements of the penultimate lower 
molars of G. sivalensis and G. giraffa, for relative comparisons;— 
Length of penultimate premolar 
Width of „ „ 
Height of crown of penultimate premolar 
Length of penultimate molar . 
Width of „ „ . 
C, siv. 
C. giraf 
Inches. 
Inches. 
110 
0-95 
O 
6 
0-86 
0-62 
085 
1-10 
115 
090 
0-99 
It will be observed from the above measurements that the present premolar is 
relatively longer than in the living Giraffe; in the latter the penultimate lower 
premolar is considerably shorter than the penultimate true molar; while in C. 
