56 
Records of the Geological Survey of India. 
[vOL. XII. 
the condyles, 'which does not occur in the latter. In Gastornis the tendon of the 
tibialis anticiis muscle passes through a distinct bony arch, which I think does 
not exist in the Indian fossil. Again, the Indian tibia has the fibula anchylosed 
to it for half its length, which is not the case in Gastornis. I am not aware of 
any other living or fossil bird (except the Ratidai), which has a tibia approaching 
in size to that of our fossil. 
These tw^o bones indicate the former existence of a carinate bird, probably 
allied to the adjutant, but which in stoutness and length of limb was interme¬ 
diate in size between the ostrich and the emeu. I proiiose to call this bird 
Megaloscelornis sivalensis^ ; the remains I hope to describe more fully on a subse¬ 
quent occasion. 
Argala falconeri, M.-Edwards. 
The remains of Argala, falconeri in the British Museum, according to M. 
Milne-Edwards (Joe. cit.), consist of the proximal and distal exti’emities of a 
tarso-metatarsus, and two specimens of the distal extremity of the tibio-tarsus. 
Two of the bones indicate a bird larger than Argala indica (Lejjtoptilus argala), 
while the other two are of somewhat smaller size. In the Indian Museum we 
have three bones belonging to Argala falconeri, all of which were collected by Mr. 
Theobald in the Punjab: these bones comprise a very late cervical vertebra,** the 
dist.al extremity of a tibio-tarsus, and the first phalange of the outermost digit. 
The first two of these bones are of exactly the same size as the corresponding 
bones of A. indica, while the third is slightly smaller; as regards form all appear 
to me to be indistinguishable from the corresponding bones of the living species. 
Since some of M. Milne-Edwards’ specimens are of somew'hat larger size than the 
living adjutant, it is evident that the Siwalik adjutant attained aso:newhat greater 
size than the living species ; but as the bones of the two are indistingiushable in 
form, it appears to me to be very doubtfrd whether we have as yet any good evi¬ 
dence as to the specific distinctness of the living and fossil forms. 
Conclusion. 
Besides the above-described bones, there are in the Indian Museum a cervi¬ 
cal vertebra and a tibio-tarsus of birds about the size of the common fowl, but 
whose affinities I have not yet determined. 
There is also the distal extremity of the femur of a large unkno^vn bird figured 
in the “ Fauna Antiqua Sivalensis,” as ■well as several fragments of bones of 
smaller birds. In the collection of the British Museum there is the distal 
extremity of the humerus of a large bird, which was recently discovered among 
some Siwalik specimens by Mr. Davis, 'W’ho .showed it to me; but I had then no 
opportunity of determining to what bird it belonged. It 'will be noticed that 
among these Siwalik bird-remains, those of Argala falconeri are the most common, 
and that the great majority of the known bones belonged to birds of large size. 
^ niyaQ-aXoQ, fTKiXoi, upris. 
’ Kec. Geol. Surv. India, Vol. IX, p. 104. 
