1862.] A Memoir on the living Asiatic Species of Rhinoceros. 159 
—“ I have, myself, shot three Ehinoceroses ; one single-liorned, on the 
borders of Asam [indicus, of course] ; and the other two, not far 
from Bassein in the Yo'matoung range separating Pegu from Arakan. 
1 saw the skin of the one whose skull you have got [that of Bn. 
sondaicus (of the narrow type), shot by my friend Dr. Hook of 
Tavoy near Tavoy Point, where there is a small isolated colony of 
the species], and it was exactly, in every respect, like the one 1 shot 
in Asam. The two-horned fellows I shot had smooth skins, as stated 
by Mason; they were, however, very thick, and there were slight 
rumples or folds about the neck and shoulders, I remember, but 
nothing to be compared in size to the mailed armour of the single¬ 
horned species.” In Burma, people distinguish only a one-horned 
« kind and a two-horned kind ; and though the skull from Tavoy 
Point, referred to, is very nearly adult and of fair size, Col. Fytche 
thought it to be that of a small and immature animal, as compared 
with the huge indicus that he killed in Asam. I must frankly con¬ 
fess that I have only quite recently discriminated the two one-horned 
species ; fancying, as a matter of course, that the numerous skulls 
of single-horned Ehinoceroses in the Society’s museum, from the 
Bengal Sundarbans, &c., especially of the broad-faced type, were 
necessarily of the hitherto reputed sole Indian species. F. Cuvier’s 
figure of Ri. sondaicus is that of a very young animal; and, with 
those of Horsfield and S. Muller, conveys the appearance of a more 
eventy tessellated hide than I remember to have seen in any living 
continental example. I have, however, been comparing our stuffed 
Sundarban example (less than half-grown) with the figure of adult 
Rh. indicus in the Menagerie du Museum d'Hist. Hat., and with 
the figures of Eh. sondaicus by S. Muller and others ; and perceive 
that it must be referred to the latter and not to the former. The 
tubercles of the hide are much smaller than in indicus ; and a 
marked difference between the two species, as represented, consists 
in the great skin-fold at the setting on of the head of in Die us, 
which is at most but indicated in sondaicus. In skulls of adults, 
however those of both species may vary in width, and especially in 
breadth anterior to the orbits, the following distinctions are tren¬ 
chant. Length of skull, from middle of occiput to tip of united nasals 
(measured by callipers),—in indicus 2 ft. (f in. more or less),—in 
sondaicus, If ft. at most. Height of condyle of lower jaw,—in 
x 
