276 PKOCEEDINGS OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETT. 



bears a record of having been discovered by Count Gazzola, in a 

 calcareous deposit upon Monte Serbaro, in the valley of Pantena^ 

 about eight miles from Verona, along with the remains of other 

 herbivorous quadrupeds. In its mineral condition and appearance, 

 it presents undoiibted evidence of being a true fossil. 



This completes what 1 have to adduce in proof of E. {Loxodon) 

 priscus being a distinct species ; and it must be freely admitted that, 

 considering the area explored and the number of museums examined, 

 both in Dritain and abroad, the evidence, although strong in kind, 

 is, in the form of authentic materials, quantitatively very limited. 

 It may be asked, If this is a well-founded species, how does it happen 

 that determinable remains of it are everywhere so rare ? To which 

 it is replied that the pliocene Mastodon (Triloph.) Borsoni, respect- 

 ing which there is now no question among those mammalian palae- 

 ontologists who have studied the remains attributable to it, is in the 

 same predicament, and almost equally rare. A single molar of that 

 species was discovered by Abbe Borson in 1820 in the Pliocene de- 

 posits of the Astesan, since which date, up to 1856, not a single 

 additional specimen had been acquired for the collections of Florence, 

 Pisa, Turin, Milan, or Pavia, although the ossiferous Pliocene strata 

 of the Astesan had subsequently been largely laid open by railway- 

 cuttings. The detailed proofs have been obtained from deposits in 

 Auvergne and elsewhere in Prance. In 1845, I was unable to re- 

 concile the characters yielded by the Gray's Thurrock specimen with 

 those of any recognized species of fossil Elej)hant, except E. priscus; 

 and after an interval of twelve years, with a large addition of expe- 

 rience in the investigation of the subject, and with more materials, 

 my conviction of its being distinct is as strong as that in favour of 

 any other species in the genus. In mammalian palaeontology, when 

 the evidence furnished by the teeth can be crucially tested by means 

 of the varied characters of the cranium and of the bones of the 

 extremities, a safe and satisfactory conclusion as to the distinctness 

 or otherwise of the species can generally be attained. But when 

 a few teeth only are available, the area of the evidence becomes very 

 limited, and there is a constant unperceived tendency in the observer 

 either to magnify the value of the differential remarks, or to under- 

 rate them, as the case maybe, according to his inclination, from some 

 extraneous influence, to make the species distinct or merely a variety 

 of some other form. In this case I have tried to guard myself against 

 a bias either way, and the evidence has appeared to me to be con- 

 clusive of the distinctness of the species. Although so httle is known 

 of the details of the different teeth, the ridge-formula is inferred to 

 be 7:7 + 8-}- 11 in the last milk molars and three true molars, 

 as in the African Elephant. The known limits to the dimensions of 

 the molars in the Elephants, coupled with the average great antero- 

 posterior extent of the ridges in this form, namely, one inch to each, 

 necessarily involves a limited number of the latter. The distinction 

 from the African species is founded upon the characters that the 

 lozenges are regularly rhomboidal in the one, and somewhat cres- 

 centic, with the angular expansions more apart, in the other. Both 



