54 MR. A. L. ADAMS ON THE OSTEOLOGY OF 
VII. Rapivs anp ULNA. 
The radius is represented in the collection by three proximal extremities and four 
distal epiphyses. 
1. A head is shown half natural size, Pl. X. fig. 7, and its upper aspect natural size, 
fig. Ta. This bone had evidently belonged to an aged individual, seeing that the neck 
is enlarged by rugosities and the bony exostosis often noticed in the largest specimens 
of other species. Although the ulnar margin is not quite entire, it was evidently pretty 
even; and the general outline of the humeral aspect, whilst neither exactly like any of 
the recent or fossil species with which I have compared the specimens, is decidedly 
more like the African and £. antiquus than the Indian and Mammoth. The external 
portion of the articular surface (a) is more concave than apparently in other species. 
The characters of the shafts of the two recent Elephants, if always regular, would seem 
to differ considerably. Unfortunately I have no entire specimen of the Maltese 
forms. The above, however, shows the pronounced anterior ridge or shin (fig. 74) so 
conspicuous in the African, where the same part is rounded in the Asiatic. Again a 
prominent ridge in the African and fig.7 rises at ¢ close to the inner side of the head, and 
runs obliquely to near the external malleolus, when it becomes confluent with the former ; 
whereas in the Asiatic the surface is flat below the condyloid face, where a rounded 
ridge runs down the middle having tectiform slopes on either side, but not nearly so 
abrupt as in the African and fig. 7. There are seemingly other important differences 
between specimens of the Asiatic and African radius; however I have not Maltese 
materials wherewith to compare them. ‘The above specimen, in relation to dimensions, 
nearly equals that of the Sumatran Elephant in the British Museum, and therefore would 
represent a rather small-sized Asiatic Elephant. 
2. Another head and fragment of about 5 inches of the shaft is considerably injured ; 
it shows however the even (not undulating) outline of the ulnar facet. In size it is 
somewhat smaller than fig. 7, and has a humeral facet 2°4 inches by 1°6 in the antero- 
posterior direction. 
3. A much smaller proximal end and about three and a half inches of shaft, with the 
epiphysial junction nearly consolidated, gives a facet of 2 inches by 1°3 in the antero- 
posterior direction. Here the shaft is rounded near the head in front like the Asiatic; 
but this may be the character of an immature bone. With reference to the solidification 
of the proximal epiphysis, it appears that the latter may be completed when the distal 
end is quite easily detached; and, judging from skeletons of the Asiatic, the former 
obtains before the animal has cast its milk-teeth. 
The central portions of the shaft are all too imperfect for comparison; but there are 
four detached distal epiphyses evidently belonging to fairly matured animals, if we are 
to judge from the determined outlines of the facets—the honeycombed and pitted 
upper surfaces clearly indicating that their owners were not aged, although they might 
have been full-grown elephants. 
