FOSSIL ANTHROPOIDS FROM INDIA 19 
This M8 differs from the type of Dryopithecus darwini Abel in the fol- 
lowing characters: (1) cusps higher, buccal and lingual cusps more con- 
vergent; this may be due in part to difference in wear; (2) cusp “7” (meta- 
stylid) less well defined; (3) outer cingulum even fainter than in darwini; 
(4) lingual stem of Y distinctly double. 
The comparative measurements are as follows: 
Dryopithecus darwini, type (pl. 3, fig. 5) M3, Jammu 
CAlben hye see nase ap. 13.5 tr. 11.8 br.ind. 87.4 ap. 138 tr. 12 br.ind. 92.3 
CASTE Etats haem 13.5 12.4 92.6 
This M3 is both too large and much too wide to fit in the empty alveolus 
of the M8 type of Sugrivayithecus salmontanus. 
If we arrange our third lower molars in series according to relative width, 
we have the breadth indices as follows: 
Sugrivaptthecus cf gregoryt (No. 607) ...........cccccccvcsscvsees 79.0 
DDPVODUENECUSIICAULELEY tes LYE Ae Ae cbs ete eaiclocceie Giclee Ge sue tieberoineiela aie 90.0 
DEY ODULNE CUSIN TAC OLY; DOs ete tee ere ae eto e alas wiser ele le ois ie etelerereralavst ecslers 92.0 
SOUER OTT ERE NPS Crieb ea iS Ce CRC T DIEM CREA CEO ERI CRN IS PAPA PSEC Ee 92.3 
DPN ODULLECUS MAGTADLILED te teieiere cl etelee eee wie kore ook ose eke Be eas 87 .4—92.6 
STONE DUCNECUSIILNOTD Clap OYDCu crs cheleleicrs Gree e ieleieka ers o cysiersievs sie ofertieiiereiare 95.0 
In the talonid index Jammu M3 is not far from Bramapithecus thorpei, 
but its trigonid index is lower and it is totally different in morphology. 
In brief, this tooth is broadly oval, recalling that of Bramapithecus 
thorpet, but larger and not so short; in fact, it is intermediate in propor- 
tions and contour between cautleyz and thorpei. 
Sivapithecus ? 
Another specimen which may be tentatively referred to Sivaygthecus 
is a second right upper molar (K 23/209) from the Kamlial formation 
pl. 7G; pl. 1, figs. 14a, 14b). This is of interest as being the oldest Siwalik 
anthropoid so far recorded. Unfortunately the surface of the crown has 
been weathered by grass roots, which have destroyed the finer details; 
the crown was also considerably worn. Its measurements, ap. 11.4, tr. 
12.6, ind. 110, are somewhat larger than those of “Dryoyithecus pun- 
jabicus” as recorded by Pilgrim, and somewhat smaller than those of Siva- 
pithecus sivalensis (No. 617). In general appearance and details it seems 
nearer to the former (as figured by Pilgrim) than to the latter, from which 
it differs in its apparently lower crown. In another direction it compares 
well with the second upper molar of Dryomithecus germanicus, save for 
its larger size. 
Bramapithecus cf. punjabicus (Pilgrim) 
(Plate 3, figures 9, B) 
To this species is tentatively referred a single right M3 (609, Y.P.M. 
13833, pl. 3, figs. 9, B) in the 1985 collection from the upper Chinji (ap. 
13.7, tr. 11.9, br. ind. 86.1), in the third stage of wear (fig. 9). The talonid 
is relatively much narrower than in the type of Dryopithecus punjabicus 
and the whole tooth is larger; nevertheless the general appearance is strik- 
ingly similar: the steep flat lingual wall, the low relief of the occlusal sur- 
