THREE EXTINCT SPECIES OF ELEPHANT. 283 



comparison. Both bones are so much worn at either end, apparently by water-rolling, 

 that no portion of either epiphysial surface remains ; but the portions removed at either 

 extremity cannot be very great, so that the length of the epiphysial shatt in fig. 38 may be 

 estimated perhaps at about 3" -2 ; on comparing which with its other dimensions it will be 

 seen that the bone is proportionally much more robust than that provisionally referred 

 to E. melifensis. In other respects also it differs so remarkably, not only from that bone, 

 but from all other tibim of any age belonging to the Elephant that have come under my 

 notice, that I think it impossible to refer these bones to that genus at all. Had the 

 means existed, which unfortunately they do not in this country, it would have been 

 interesting to compare these immature tibiae with those of the HippojJOtamus, to which, 

 at a guess, one might be inclined to assign them*. 



§ VI. Dextitiox. (Plate LIII.) 



The only pai't of the Zebbug Collection respecting which the late Dr. Falconer has 

 left any written observations, beyond a few brief and scattered notes, is that which com- 

 prises the teeth. 



It is well known that that distinguished palaeontologist had devoted very great atten- 

 tion to the odontography of the Proboscidia, and that he assigned paramoiint import- 

 ance to the study of the teeth in the discrimination of species. It is with the greatest 

 satisfaction therefore that, with respect to the dentition of the Maltese fossil forms, I 

 find myself in possession of his copious and careful notes, and am thus, on this subject, 

 enabled to rely upon his great and undoubted authority. 



Although in some points I have been led to form an opinion apparently differing from 

 his, yet, as I feel that all palaeontologists must desire to have the actual opinions and 

 verbal descriptions, as he left them, of my lamented friend, I propose to give all that I 

 can find of what he has written concerning the Zebbug fossil teeth in his own words, 

 and to reserve to the end, or to notes, the few remarks I may have to offer mjself. I 

 would also add that the figures in PL LIII. have all been lithographed from Mr. Duikel's 

 drawings, which, as they were made under Dr. Falconer's immediate supervision, may 

 be taken to convey what he deemed the more important characteristics of the various 

 specimens in the Collection. 



" Among the most interesting of the Zebbug fossils is a series of molar teeth and 

 fragments of tusks. The molars comprise specimens ranging from the first milk-molar 

 of very young animals up to what appear to be adult teeth ; and they are at once charac- 

 terized, besides other differential marks, by the singularly small size of the species which 

 yielded them. ^A'arned by the great blunders committed by Nesti, Fischer de Wald- 

 heim, and other palaeontologists, who have been misled by the characters of milk-teeth 

 to identify them as the remains of pigmy species of Elephant, I have been chary in 



* With reference to tliis, it should bo remembered that a diminutive species of Uippopotannis still exists. 

 VOL. VI. PART V. 2 E 



