It is suggested that two specimens assigned to Ramapithecus (G.S.I. D. 199 and B.M.N.H. 15423) should be transferred back to two Dryopithecus species (respectively D. sivalensis and D. laietanus). In most respects, these specimens display dryopithecine-like features. The fallacy of comparing individuals of unequal age has improperly influenced previous taxonomic assessments of these two specimens. It is also shown that some of the features used to argue hominid status for Ramapithecus are, in fact, commonly shared (alone or together) by extant and Miocene pongids. The lack of taxonomic significance for these features is discussed.