110 MR. A. L. ADAMS ON THE OSTEOLOGY OF 
with one another, unless a liberal margin be allowed for individual differences in size, 
which, unfortunately, is the only very distinctive character in many instances. I have 
therefore, in correlating the various teeth, made such allowances in this respect as seem 
to me fairly permissible in comparison with individual differences in size of similar 
molars in well-known species. 
The molars I regard as representing the last milk-teeth of the two Maltese fossil ele- 
phants agree in holding ordinarily eight plates and two talons, and occasionally an 
additional ridge in the lower jaw. They are fairly divisible, on the score of size, into 
three forms, and on the grounds of characters into two apparently distinctive species. 
The two smaller differ a good deal in size, but not apparently in other particulars ; 
whilst the largest is at once recognized, not only from its far greater dimensions, but, 
as in the case of the preceding molar, by the thickness of the plates and the rugose 
character of the collines posteriorly. 
The crown-patterns vary slightly in specimens equally worn, there being, seemingly, 
less faint crimping of the macherides of the disks in the smallest than in the largest. 
As compared with recent species, the more diminutive teeth would point to a very small 
elephant; whilst the second-sized would indicate an intermediate form, between a dwarf 
and a small individual of either of the recent species’. If, however, a fair margin is 
allowed for individual differences, it appears to me that the data prove the existence of 
only two distinct species, or mayhap one very variable species of Maltese elephant. 
The teeth assigned to the first true molar are only divisible into two sizes and two 
very distinctive forms. The smaller, as in the preceding, show a thin-plated molar, 
remarkable for the great height of the ridges in the upper jaw and the arcuated crown 
of the lower, with its rounded, broad anterior aspect”, these characters giving quite 
distinctive features to the teeth, as compared with the first true molars of the largest 
species*. The Zebbug specimen was doubtfully referred by Dr. Falconer to the second 
true molar of E. melitensis*. The largest form of a first true molar is at once dis- 
tinctive, and, as compared with the largest of the preceding teeth, fully maintains all 
their characters’. All the first true molars maintain the same ridge-formula, which 
gives eight to nine plates besides talons. 
The second true molar of the series presents well-marked differences in dimensions 
and characters. All the members seem to have ordinarily held ten plates and two talons. 
They are divisible into large and small molars. The former, again, present certain 
anomalies as to thickness of plates, which might be considered sufficient to separate 
them, although in size they do not differ to any very marked extent®. The smallest 
‘ Compare Pl. I. fig. 11 with fig. 10 and Pl. III. figs. 4 & 5, 
> Pl. IT. figs. 9 & 9a, Pl. VI. figs. 5 & 5a, and Pl. V. fig. 2. ® Pl. III. fig. 3, and Pl. LV. fig. 4. 
* Trans. Zool. Soc. vi. pl. 53. fig. 9, and p, 296. 
* Compare Pl. III. fig. 3, and Pl. IV. fig. 4, with Pl. IIT. figs. 4 & 5. 
® Compare Pl. III. figs. 1 & 2 with Pl. VIII. fig. 4 and Pl. XI. fig. 10. 
