31 



boscis which it probably had. There is no po- 

 sitive proof that it had a proboscis, but from the 

 shortness of the neck and magnitude of the 

 tusks, it is reasonable to suppose that it was fL\r- 

 nished with some such contrivance ; that part in 

 which it must have originated is deficient in 

 both skeletons ; and although I have met with 

 several accounts of the distance between the 

 orbits of the eyes in fragments of heads, they 

 were never accompanied with any mention of 

 3uch place of insertion for a proboscis. 



The general form of the under jaw of this 

 animal is made up of three distinct angles ; one 

 horizontal, on which the jaw rests (when placed 

 on a table), from the front to the back, where a 

 small corner appears cut off, whence it rises per- 

 pendicularly to the condyle. The same view 

 of the elephant's jaw exhibits very nearly a regu- 

 lar portion of a circle without any angles. The 

 arms of this animal's jaw (composed of the con- 

 dyloid and coronoid processes and their bases), 

 are short as well as flat, adapted to the peculiar 

 form of the upper jaw, which I shall proceed to 

 describe ; whereas those of the elephant are com- 

 paratively thick, and generally as long as, and 

 frequently longer than, the body of the jaw it- 

 self: This length is adapted to the great eleva- 



E 2 



