﻿ELEPHAS ANTIQUUS — RADIUS. ULNA. 



59 



One of the largest humeri of recent species I have seen is represented by two 

 specimens, right and left, No. 2744 E, of the Indian Elephant in the Royal College of 

 Surgeons. Here the length is 36 5 inches ; girth of the proximal extremity 33*5 inches ; of 

 the shaft (minimum) 16 - 5 inches; the distal extremity being 27 inches in circumference. 



5. RADIUS. 



There are two radii, Nos. ~ and ^, B. M., in the Brady Collection, from Ilford, 1 the 

 former has been referred to E. antiquus by Mr. Davies ; and it appears to me that this 

 decision is well sustained by a comparison with radii of the Mammoth. Although neither 

 of the foregoing belonged to aged individuals, and one was that of a young animal, both 

 preserve stouter proportions than I have seen in radii of E. primigenius. There is a flat- 

 tening of the upper and outer side of the shaft, rather more pronounced in the former than 

 in several specimens of the Mammoth, whilst the inner side of the shaft and its border 

 are quite flat and rounded. These bones seem to carry the radius of the African with 

 them, whilst that of the Asiatic has the slender outline of the Mammoth. The various 

 ridges appear to differ according to age and in individuals, as observed in numerous 

 specimens of this bone belonging to the Mammoth and the Asiatic Elephant. 



The larger of the two radii in question is 26 inches in length, and belonged to an 

 adolescent individual, the distal epiphyses being lost. The other, that of a much younger 

 elephant, is 19 inches in length. 



I think, as far as the Maltese specimens of the equivalent bone in E. Mnaidriensis 

 are concerned, that there is a close resemblance between the latter, E. antiquus, and 

 E. Africanus, more especially in the general breadth of the shaft at the middle and lower 

 third, whilst the afore-mentioned conditions referable to the upper third of the bone in 

 E. antiquus are present in the Maltese, which I have shown elsewhere 2 have the decided 

 aspect of the African as compared with the other living species. 



6. ULNA. 



Comparing the ulnae in the Ilford collection, B. M., Nos. d 11 and 12, with similar 

 bones from the same deposits and with Mammoth remains from the Arctic Regions, and 

 likewise with the two recent species, I find the following distinctions : 



1. The radial sulcus, round and shallow in the African, is less so in the Asiatic, and 

 much less than either in the above. 



2. The pit in front of the inner condyle seen in Asiatic and Mammoth is scarcely 

 noticeable in the African and in the above. 



1 'Cat.' cit, pp. 21 and 29. 



2 ' Zool. Trans.,' vol. ix, p. 54. 



