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 machserides 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 indi^ddual 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 PI. III. figs. 4 & 5. 



' PI. II. figs. 9 & 9a, PI. VI. figs. 5 & 5a, and PL V. fig. 2. = PL III. fig. 3, and PL IV. 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 III. figs. 4 & 5. 



' Compare PL III. figs. 1 & 2 with PL VIII. fig. 4 and PI. XI. fig. 10. 



