94 BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS 



Upper molars. — A suggestive example is furnished by the incisive alveolus with the two 

 tusks in situ (woodcut, fig. 1, p. 130), and a detached upper and two lower molars of the 

 same individual from the brick -earths of Ilford in the Museum of Practical Geology. 

 Unfortunately the remainder of the skull is wanting, but the gradual divergence of the 

 incisors from the roots to the points of exit is well shown. The intermediate distance 

 between them at the former is 5^ inches, and at the latter 9 inches ; the maximum breadth 

 of the alveolus at its free border being 12 inches. 



The tusks diverge and protrude a distance of 16 inches beyond the incisive sheaths, 

 and are blunt-pointed, and curve outwards, with a maximum girth of 1\ inches. These 

 defensors far exceed the dimensions of the tusks of either of the recent species at a 

 corresponding age. 



The upper molar in the above is just commencing wear, the last two or three 

 ridges not having been invaded. It shows, as well as the lower teeth, the tidch enamel 

 of the Ilford molar as compared with teeth from Crayford on the opposite side of the 

 Thames. The ridge formula in the upper tooth is a? 11 a? in 4|x2 inches, whilst the 

 lower hold each <r 12 x in 5^X 2 inches. 



A palate specimen. No. 19, Brady Collection, B. M., and also from Ilford, contains 

 two molars in silu, showing the same characters and dimensions of the upper tooth just 

 referred to ; it is a good illustration of the palatal region of this stage of growth or that 

 of adolescence. 



A very characteristic specimen of a well-worn upper molar is shown by No. 5489 

 (PI. XII, fig. 2), from " the Sloping Chamber, Kent's Cavern," where it was found in 

 *' the fourth-foot level of cave-earth, 24th June, 1871, along with a tooth of Hyaena." 

 This tooth is a further illustration of the //^«^-plated or typical crowns of the Mammoth 

 as distinguishable from tlie thicker enamel of such as the molars found at Ilford. The 

 fore part of the crown in fig. 2 has been ground away, leaving ten disks in wear, and 

 traces of an original ridge formula of w 10 — 11 x. It is entire as to length and breadth, 

 and has a fragment of the alveolus attached. The two other crowns, from Kent's 

 Cavern, of upper molars, Nos. -sif-g aud 2902, fully support the characters of the 

 above. 



I have been thus desirous to refer at some length to the deciduous molars from 

 Kent's Cavern, not only on account of the typical character of the worn crown, but as 

 exponents of the exhaustive method pursued by Mr. Pengelly in chronicling the records 

 of the famous Cavern of Torquay — a mode of procedure deserving of imitation in the 

 working of future bone caves. 



Another palate specimen in the British Museum is from Hutton Cave, in the 

 Mendip Hills. The right tooth is in place, but instead of x 12 <r shows a ridge formula 

 of cr 11 <?? in 4^ X Ij inches. 



The enamel and dentine are thick, so that eight ridges are contained in 3;}- inclics. 

 The molars of the Elephant found in 1715 at Belturbet, in Cavan, and figured by 



