﻿16 



BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 



There is no available example of the second milk molar of E. Namadicus to compare 

 with the teeth of E. antiquus. 



In E. Jfricanus the second milk molar appears seldom to exceed a ridge formula of 

 x 6 x, but no doubt exceptional instances do occur. The open disk and absence of 

 pronounced crimping will ordinarily distinguish its teeth. 



In E. Asiaticus the ridge formula is very much the same as in the Mammoth ; and, 

 excepting in the absence of the central expansion and angulation, which, however, are 

 not always present in E. antiquus, there is little to distinguish individual second milk 

 molars in the two forms. I suspect, however, that it is rare to find a tooth of this 

 member of the series in the Asiatic Elephant with a smaller ridge formula than x 7 x. 



The Maltese fossil Elephants represent in their second milk teeth all the characters 

 of E. antiquus in much smaller Elephants. At the same time, as I have shown, 

 individuals of the largest form (E. Mnaidriensis) possessed molars occasionally holding 

 x 8 x in 2*4 inches. 1 



The diagnosis of the second milk molar in E. antiquus, although ordinarily well defined 

 when the dental materials are well exposed, is not always easily determined. The tooth 

 is subject to considerable variety with reference to the number of ridges ; indeed, 

 it seems futile to attempt to formulate an average. Dr. Ealconer inferred that it 

 ordinarily held five plates and two talons. 2 Erom the materials here furnished it would 

 seem that x 6 x for the upper and x 7 x for the lower molar would be nearer the truth. 



An analysis of the foregoing and of specimens mentioned by Falconer 3 and from other 

 sources, I find that the ridge formulae in upper molars vary from x 5 x to x 7 x in 

 a space of from T9 inch to 31 inches, whilst in lower molars I find x6 x to x 8 x in 

 from 2*5 inches to 3 inches. 



Third or Last Mill Molar. 



The well-known similarity between the last milk and first true molar must always 

 make it difficult to determine detached specimens of these teeth. In the Elephas antiquus 

 and other members of the sub-genus Euelephas the true molars, in particular man- 

 dibular molars, are usually more arcuated than in milk teeth, and the crowns are 

 broader. 



The last milk molar of Elephas antiquus varies considerably in size and number of 

 ridges, so that the maximum dimensions may attain to those of the succeeding tooth, and 

 seeing that the ridge formula is about the same, there must of necessity be much 

 uncertainty in the diagnosis. 



A very characteristic example of the upper molar of this stage of growth is seen, 



1 'Trans. Zool. Soc. London,' vol. ix, pi. i, fig. 14, and p. 16 ; see also figs. 7 to 16. 



2 ' Pal. Mem.,' vol. ii, p. 176. 3 Idem., vol. ii, pp. 177 and 179. 



