THE MALTESE FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 47 



scribed by Busk', give rather smaller dimensions, but nothing in any way remarkable. 

 I have, moreover, bodies of detached vertebrae, mostly from Benghisa Gap, somewhat 

 lai-ger than the Zebbug specimens, whilst that of PI. X. fig. 5 is considerably smaller 

 than any of the above. 



Ribs. — The heads of the ribs (PI. IX. figs. 6, 6a, & 7) ofi'er several very cogent proofs of 

 the small dimensions of one form of the Maltese elephants. The articular epiphyses in 

 fig. 6 are completely consolidated. The same parts, with the tubercle, of fig. 7 have 

 been injured ; but a fragment of the former remains, and shows sufficiently, in common 

 with the second rib, that both belonged to adult, if not aged, elephants. The comparison 

 between fig. 6 and the same rib of Elephas melitensis of Busk^ furnishes the following 

 data : — 



(1) Largest diameter of head (fig. 6) 0'8 inch : Zebbug (fig. 8), 1 inch. 



(2) Short diameter of head (fig. 6) 0'7 inch: Zebbug, 0-85 inch. 



(3) Distance between ianer border of head and outer surface of the tubercle (fig. 6) 

 1'7 inch: Zebbug, 2 inches. 



The two agree in outline, with the exception that the neck of the Zebbug specimen is 

 longer. As shown in fig. 6 a, there is a deep pit, which is also present in the Zebbug 

 and the Asiatic, and mayhap in the African, but not so pronounced. As regards a rib 

 of a very aged individual of the Asiatic in the Royal College of Surgeons, this fossa is 

 relatively smaller. With reference to other characters, in comparison with the second 

 rib in recent species the same narrow anterior margin is common to them ; but I think, 

 as far as fig. 6 is concerned, that the outer surface of the tubercle is broader than in 

 the Asiatic Elephant. With reference to fig. 7, its nearly horizontal neck is cha- 

 racteristic of the third rib, to which I have little doubt it belonged. Moreover there 

 is every evidence of its claims to be considered not only the bone of an adult, but, 

 as far as the description and figure go, I am much inclined to associate it with the 

 equally imperfect specimen ascribed by Busk to his E. falconeri^. Both display pre- 

 cisely the same characters; and the absence of the pit and rotundity between the 

 head and tubercle is only what obtains in other species. The particular characters 

 assigned to the Zebbug specimen are precisely what obtain in the above, and,' in con- 

 junction with the decided horizontal neck, seem to me to place both together. I would 

 therefore consider them either the third or fourth ribs ; and as far as the dimensions of 

 fig. 7 are concerned, all might have belonged to the same individual. Mr. Busk does 

 not give the dimensions of the Zebbug specimen ; but, judging from the figure, I should 

 imagine that it is slightly smaller than fig. 7*. 



' Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. vi. pi. 46. figs. 9 & 10. = Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. vi. pi. 45. fig. 8. 



' Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. vi. pi. 51. fig. 37. 



' The second and third ribs of 2723 b, Eoyal College of Surgeons (refeixed to with the atlas) have no epiphyses, 

 but, as far as dimensions go, are about the same as figs. 6 & 7 ; and its dorsal vertebrae are of about the same 

 dimensions as those of fig. 9, PI. XI., only all the epiphyses are easily detached. 



