70 MR. A. L. ADAMS ON THE OSTEOLOGY OF 
the Royal College of Surgeons it covers the entire lower margin. It is probable there- 
fore that the three belonged to one species, the largest being that of an adult, the two 
smaller being immature bones; and this is borne out to some extent by the smoothness 
of the exterior of the latter as compared with the rugosities and irregularities of fig. 2*. 
In all apparent differences between the cuneiform of the Asiatic and African Ele- 
phants, such as the greater breadth of the ulnar and cuneiform surfaces of the African 
as compared with the narrow aspects of the Asiatic, there is a remarkable contrast 
between those just described and the following, which display the characters of the 
African. Moreover, by the much narrower internal border at a, figs. 7, 8, & 9, the 
lunare face is diminished in height, so that when placed side by side with figs. 2 & 5 
there is no difficulty whatever in distinguishing the former from the latter. Whether 
it isa regular point of distinction or not, on examining various cuneiforms of all ages 
of the Asiatic Elephant, I find that the fifth metacarpal facet near the extremity is not 
observed, excepting in bones of aged individuals. Unfortunately none of the largest 
specimens are sufficiently preserved at the apex to show this surface; however, it is 
preserved in fig. 8, and even in the very diminutive cuneiform, fig. 7. 
B Series —1. The largest specimen (fig. 9) shows the ulnar surface of a right cunei- 
form. The apex has sustained a recent injury, and the lunare facets are abraded ; other- 
wise the specimen is entire, and affords the following :—extreme length (about) 3 inches, 
breadth 2°5 inches, ulnar surface (antero-posterior) 2:2 by 2 inches. The pisiform 
facet is in the form of a right-angled triangle, with the base uppermost; height 1 inch, 
breadth 1 inch, unciform surface (antero-posterior) 2:2 by 2 inches; thickness at the 
middle of the pisiform facet 1°4 inch, and at middle of the lunare side 1 inch. 
2. An imperfect bone of the same side, showing only a portion of the ulnar surface, 
is of the same or slightly larger dimensions. ‘The smaller right cuneiform (fig. 8) has 
its pisiform facet and point considerably abraded, preserving, however, the body entire, 
with, as just stated, the fifth metacarpal facet on the border of the apex. This speci- 
men, although probably of the same type as the two preceding, has relatively a rather 
deeper concavity at a, on the internal ulnar surface; indeed so contracted is the height 
of the bone in this situation that there is no room for the lunare facets ; and the margins 
are sharp instead of even; but with these exceptions it agrees with fig. 9. The 
following are its admeasurements :—entire length 2°5 inches, breadth 2; ulnar sur- 
faces—antero-posterior diameter 1:6, transverse 1-9 ; unciform aspect—antero-posterior 
diameter 1-9, transverse 1:8; thickness at middle of pisiform facet 1:1, thickness at 
middle of lunare side 0-4. 
3. Like the preceding, fig. 7 was also found in Benghisa Gap, so prolific of remains 
of the smallest form. Here the pisiform facet is abraded; but the fifth metacarpal 
impression is very distinct, and the extremity is completely ossified—a feature of im- 
* These cuneiform bones agree in characters with specimens in the Paleontological Collection, British 
Museum, referable to the Mammoth and Elephas antiquus. 
