THREE EXTINCT SPECIES OF ELEPHANT. 265 



has been sawn across, I believe by Dr. Falconer ; and this part is probably, to judge from 

 analogy, not very far above the point of least circumference of the shaft. No indication 

 of the nutrient foramen is to be perceived in the fragment ; and its situation, therefore, 

 was in all probability lower down the shaft than is usually the case in the Indian 

 femur. The various dimensions afforded by the specimen are: — tr. d. at upper end 

 2"-4., ap. d. about 0"-95 ; tr. d. at lower end r'-25, ap. d. U"-85 ; circumference 3"-4 ; 

 whilst the outline of the transverse section at that point, which, as before said, cannot 

 be very much, if at all, above the point of least circumference of the shaft, is shown 

 in the accompanying figures, contrasted with that of the femur of E. melitensis, taken, 

 as nearly as can be judged, at the same part of the shaft. The anterior surface of the 



J' 



E. falconer!. E. melitensis. 



bone presents a slight elevation in the middle, with a very shallow depression internally, 

 and a much deeper and larger one (a pretrochanteric fossa, as it may be termed) 

 externally, the outer boundary of which is formed by a well-pronounced, rough, elon- 

 gated tuberosity. On the posterior aspect, at the upper end and outer angle, is seen 

 the strongly projecting base of the trochanter major, within which is the lower part 

 of a deep digital or posttrochanteric fossa. The inner and outer surfaces are of very 

 nearly the same width from before backwards ; and they both have the rectangular form, 

 peculiar more especially to the African femur. 



This fragment, compared with the corresponding part of the femur of E. melitensis, 

 exhibits such marked differences, in almost all respects, as to aiford, perhaps as strongly 

 as any other of the remains, as striking a proof as can be desired of the, at any rate, 

 specific difference between the two dwarf Elephants. In the first place the transverse 

 section of the shaft, shown in the two figures given above, is widely different at corre- 

 sponding points. On the anterior aspect the surface is totally different in the two 

 cases. In E.-melitensis it slopes obliquely backwards and outwards, from the anterior 

 and internal angle, with an even, slightly convex curve ; whilst in E.falconeri (owing to 

 the anterior and posterior surfaces in the upper part, and till very near the lower end 

 of the fragment, being parallel to each other, and the outer and inner faces conse- 

 quently of equal width) the anterior surface is not oblique. But a still greater pecu- 

 liarity in this respect, consists in the presence of the remarkable pre- or, more properly. 



