bo 
22, PROBOSCIDIA. 
This lower jaw shows also that the outer contour of 
one ramus meets that of the other at a more open angle 
than in the African or Asiatic Elephant, and that the 
symphysis itself (s), though acute at this period of life, is less 
prolonged ; in illustration of which the figure of the lower 
jaw of the Asiatic Elephant at a corresponding age with the 
fossil, is added. In the older Mammoths the symphysis 
becomes obtuse; were it otherwise, the prolonged alveoli 
of the fully developed tusks would have interfered with 
the motion of the lower jaw. 
The difference between the extinct and existing species of 
Elephant, in regard to the structure of the teeth, has been 
more or less manifested by every specimen of fossil elephant’s 
tooth that I have hitherto seen from British strata, and those 
now amount to upwards of three thousand. Very few of 
them could be mistaken by a comparative anatomist for 
the tooth of an Asiatic Elephant, and they are all obviously 
distinct from the peculiar molars of the African Elephant. 
Cuvier, who had recognised a certain range of variety 
in the structure of the numerous teeth of the Mammoth 
from continental localities, found nevertheless, that the 
molars of the fossil Elephant were broader in proportion 
to their length or antero-posterior diameter than in the 
existing species; that the transverse plates were thinner 
and more numerous in the fossil molars than in those of the 
Indian Elephant; that a greater number of plates en- 
tered into the formation of the grinding surface of the 
tooth, and that the lines of enamel were less festooned ; 
but to this character there are exceptions, especially in the 
large molars of aged individuals. 
The development, progressive complication, and suc- 
cession of the molar teeth, obeyed the same laws in the 
ancient Mammoth, as in the existing Elephant; it may, 
