44 MR. A. L. ADAMS ON THE OSTEOLOGY OF 
The fragment No. 74 of the collection, of a lower jaw, contains portion of a last milk- 
tooth in use, and the germ of the succeeding one in place: both are imperfect ; but from 
the height of the collines of the latter, I should be inclined to regard this specimen as 
representing the above stage of growth. The fragment furnishes no useful measure- 
ments as far as the jaw is concerned. 
10. The portion of a cranium No. 86 (PI. IV. fig. 1) holds what appear to be the 
two last true molars of the smallest form. As far as comparisons go, it is slightly larger 
than No. 87, another but less perfect portion of a skull found close to it in Benghisa 
Gap. The former has been considerably injured and rolled; and, excepting the relative 
distances between the molars, and a fragment of the left jaw showing the malar attach- 
ment of the zygomoid process and a portion of the floor of the orbital and temporal 
fosse, there is nothing of importance to record excepting the dental characters, which 
have been fully discussed. 
The molars are placed obliquely, approximating in front and diverging behind. The 
intervening space in front is 1-4 inch, at the middle 1°3 inch, and posteriorly 2:5 
inches, the extreme breadth of the jaw at the middle of the crowns being 4:7 inches. 
From the roof of the palate to the crown surface of the teeth is 2 inches. The length 
of the palate is 7-5 inches. The height of the jaw from the alveolar border to 
the floor of the orbit in front is 2 inches. The roof of the latter is not clearly 
indicated. 
11. No. 87 furnishes no important data beyond its teeth, the fragment of the 
skull having been much injured. The breadth of the jaw across the crowns at the 
middle is 4 inches. From the posterior nares to the front of the right tooth is 4°3 
inches. 
The dimensions of these two jaws, as compared with recent species, are precisely in 
accord with the lower, No. 95 (Pl. VI. fig. 1); so that the upper jaw of 2667, Royal 
College of Surgeons, holding a fragment of the penultimate, with six ridges of the last 
milk-molar, in wear, not only gives almost identical measurements as regards the breadth 
of the jaw, but shows the same surface in wear. They differ, however, to a marked extent 
in regard to the “distance between the floor of the orbit and the alveolar border,” which 
is 3°3 inches in the recent specimen. Now, seeing that there is a very pronounced 
difference in the two recent species in this respect, just as they differ in the contour 
of the calvarium; it might therefore be assumed that the pygmy Maltese Elephant 
partook of the shorter admeasurements of the African, and, like it, presented a more 
prominent upper maxilla, as evinced by the relatively shorter measurement in the above 
situation. 
12. A fragment of the jaw of a large elephant from Mnaidra Gap (No. 107, collec- 
tion) is unfortunately of very little value for comparative purposes, unless to show that 
the owner was a fair-sized elephant, the proportions roughly estimated being about 
