ON THE FOSSIL BONES OF 1 HE ELEPHANT. 289 



and belongs to an old one. The comparison should be made between 

 teeth of an equal number of plates, and with them alone. 



From this first characteristic (i. e. the narrowness of the plates) we 

 may deduce, that the number of these plates, which are at once brought 

 into use for the purposes of trituration, may have been more considera- 

 ble in the fossil than in the Indian elephant. 



Corse tells us in express terms, that the latter has only ten or twelve 

 actively employed at the same time, whereas fossil teeth have fre- 

 quently been found with their twenty-four plates worn ; such, for in- 

 stance, is that found in the forest of Bondy, represented^/. 12, fig. 1. 



A second characteristic, which I look on as equally palpable, is, that 

 the lines of enamel which intercept the divisions of the plates are more 

 delicate and less wreathed in the fossil teeth than in the others. I 

 have remarked this in most of the specimens in the Museum, and I 

 shall presently mention those which form an exception. 



A third characteristic is derived from the length, as well absolute 

 as proportional, of the teeth themselves, being much more considerable 

 in the fussil than in the Indian elephant. This may be assertained by 

 an inspection of the fifth column of my table ; we shall there see that 

 almost all the fossils are 0,08 to 0,09 in breadth, and tha teeth of 

 living animals from 0,06 to 0,07. 



If these differences stood alone, perhaps they might not be thought 

 sufficient grounds for establishing a distinction of species ; but agree- 

 ing as they do with the differences of the jaws and those of the skulls, 

 as we shall very soon see, they assume a decisive importance. 



But then it remains to be considered — Are these characteristics 

 equally constant ? Are all the fossil teeth large, of narrow plates, and 

 but slightly wreathed ? 



In a former passage, I alluded to a specimen of the tooth with large 

 plates. It was exhumed at Porentrury, in the department of the Upper 

 Rhine. Without being very much decomposed, it is sufficiently so to 

 be identified as a genuine fossil. Nine plates still remain entire, and 

 its back has lost an indeterminable quantity. These nine plates are 

 thick, very much undulated, and occupy a space of 0.180 in length. 

 Their breadth is still more considerable than that of the other fossil 

 teeth ; it amounts to 0,092. This tooth must have belonged to a very 

 old elephant. 



My two fossil jaws from Romagnano {pi. 15, fig. 8), and from 

 Monte Verde {pi. 15, fig. 3), also represent plates of more than ordi- 

 nary thickness. 



The jaw of a young elephant, given by M. Nesti*, likewise appears 

 to have had the plates of its molares somewhat thicker than those of 

 the majority of those of fossil elephants. 



In other respects, this jaw, being perfectly similar in shape to those 

 of the other fossil jaws, has nothing which might serve to point it out 

 as belonging to a distinct species, as the worthy professor we have 

 just mentioned was led to imagine. Its anterior jaw tooth presents 

 six plates very much worn, and its posterior exhibits as many outside 



* Annals of the Museum of Florence, vol. i, pi. 2, fig. 1. 



