NOTES ON THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE SKELETON 23 
Humerus 
Upnor Specimen, 
ft. ins. metres. 
4 1 1-24 
E. maximus. 
ft. ins. metres. 
3 1 0-04 
Radius-ulna 
3 
2 
o-955 
2 7 
o-79 
Foot 
1 
9 
o-534 
1 2 
0-356 
Total height of fore-leg 
9 
0 
2-75 
6 10 
2-09 
Femur 
5 
0 
1-52 
3 9 
1-14 
Tibia 
3 
0 
0-915 
2 2 
o-66 
Foot 
1 
6 
0-455 
0 10 
0-254 
Total height of hind-leg 
9 
6 
2-89 
6 9 
2-05 
Height from the top of the scapula to ground 
12 
1-2- 
37 
9 6 
2-89 
Height across the top of the pelvis to ground 
11 
9 
3-58 
9 0 
2-75 
Length of the vertebral column as mounted from the 
atlas to back of the pelvis 
11 
3-3 
Height to ground from the top of the spine of the nth 
dorsal vertebra (the highest point of the body) 
12 
7 
3-84 
„ 
Height from top of scapula 
12 
12 
37 
Teeth. 
Of the teeth only a portion of one of the tusks and 
three molars were preserved. 
The tusk is broken off at each end ; the remaining part is evenly curved, 2,240 
millimeters in length and 205 in diameter at the thickest part. It is probable that 
not much has been lost in front. 
Of the molar teeth there are two upper ones and one lower. It is not always 
easy to distinguish with certainty between the second and third molars, but in 
this case it is probable that all the teeth are the ultimate ones, a right and left upper 
and left lower third molar. Dr. Andrews so considered them and left a rough 
note to that effect. He also spoke of them to me as third molars. In favour of 
this view are the circumstances of the collection of the remains. A rough diagram 
has been preserved showing the disposition of the bones in situ ; in this it can be 
seen that the skull, which was present, though too comminuted and destroyed by 
plant roots to be capable of preservation, and the tusk, which has been preserved, 
all lay well to the side of the original trench. The molar teeth all lay close to the 
skull, and had they been second molars it is quite clear from the state of wear that 
the third molars would have been largely formed. In that case there would have 
been a large number of separate lamellae, some of which might reasonably be 
expected to occur. As the whole site was most carefully examined and none was 
found it adds to the evidence that these teeth are true third molars. If this is the 
case it makes the specimen a very remarkable one, in that the teeth are of such 
small size, hardly larger than the little form of E. antiquus, from Barrington, near 
Cambridge, while in the rest of the body it is one of the largest of known elephants. 
It would have been reasonable to expect a molar tooth more of the size of the large 
examples found on the continent (such as the Taubach form) as well as in England. 
There is, for instance, a lower third molar from Whittlesea mere in the Museum of 
Zoology at Cambridge, which though lacking some of the anterior plates measures 
(for 12^ plates) 336 mm. in length (Forster Cooper, 1924, pi. x, fig. 3). 
