296 PROCEEDINGS OP THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 



ostrich's egg, serving in all appearance for the insertion of the mus- 

 cles of the neck." These occipital bosses are distinctly represented 

 by two convex lines in Brejne's profile-figure, one of which is omitted 

 in the copy reproduced by Cuvier*. Their development varies in the 

 Elephants, according to the age, sex, and size of the tusks in the 

 individual. In some of the species, such as E. Namadkus and E. 

 Hysudricus, the fossa terminates upwards in a deep concave notch of 

 the vertex. In E. meridionalis, and also in E. prkmgenius in a 

 less degree, it is overarched by a produced lamina of the vertex, 

 I am unable to give any details as to the extent of the sphenoid alse 

 in the Italian form. 



y. Based aspect. — One of the distinctive characters of theMammoth, 

 upon which Cuvier laid much stress, is the parallelisoi of the molars 

 in the upper jaw. In E. meridionalis, young and old, they invariably 

 converge, more or less, in front. In young specimens this conver- 

 gence is very pronounced ; in the worn-out molars of very old crania 

 it is less obvious. It is distinctively shown in the palate-specimen, 

 fig. 1 of pi. 6 of Cortesi's cranium, from Monte Pulguasco. 



The materials for comparative description of the crania of the 

 Elephants have been largely increased since the time of Cuvier, and 

 chiefly with the skulls of Indian fossil species. The points here 

 indicated clearly show that the cranium of E. meridionalis differs 

 more from that of the Mammoth than does the latter from the exist- 

 ing Indian Elephant. The Italian form, in this respect, resembles 

 most the cranium of E. Hysudricus from the Sewahk Hills, and is 

 intermediate between it and that of the African Elej)hant, although 

 widely dififerent from both. 



i. Lower Jaw. — Much importance was attached by Cuvier to the form 

 of the mandible as distinctive of the Mammoth ; and of E. meri- 

 dionalis by jSTesti. I have already adverted to the error committed 

 by the latter (Part I. p. 341) in taking the lower jaw of M. 

 Arvernensis as the type of his E. meridionalis. He adhered to this 

 opinion to the last, notwithstanding the correction by Cuvier. The 

 demonstration is so manifest that it would be unnecessary to discuss 

 the point again, but that De Blainville has reproduced Nesti's figure 

 in the ' Osteographie', with the designation of E. meridionalis, thus 

 sanctioning it in some measure with his aiithority. 



In Mastodon Arveriieyisis the horizontal ramus anteriorly bulges 

 out with great convexity, and the symphysial beak is projected for- 

 wards with very little inclination of the diastemal ridges, and not 

 as a continuation of the lower margin of the ramus, which is rounded 

 oif and curved upwards to join the beak. The latter is raised con- 

 siderably above the level of the lower margin, which is convex in the 

 antero-posterior direction. The beak forms a short, blunt, dilated 

 spout, with raised diastemal margins. On the contrary, in all the 

 known Elephants of the groups Loxodon and Euelephas, the beak of 

 the symphysis is a prolongation of the inferior mai'gin, into which 

 the diastemal ridges descend with great obliquity; and it is atte- 

 nuated towards the apex to terminate in an obtuse point {vide 

 * Oss. Foss. torn. i. UlepJians, pi. 2, fig. 1. 



