22 
BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 
true molar, which would be confirmed by the dimensions of the fragments of the third 
milk in front; but I am not convinced that they belong to the same jaw, which is broken 
at the commencement of the diastem, where the fragments of the molars have been glued 
to the shattered surface. The entire molar has an arcuated crown and the disks are 
clearly distinctive of the E. antiquus. 
The lower jaw and molar, 18,967, B. M., is figured in the ‘Fauna Antiqua Sivalen- 
sis,’ PI. xiv a, figs. 8 and 8 a; the latter is stated by Palconer to belong to the first 
true molar j 1 it is the same tooth that is shown in Lyell’s ‘ Antiquity of Man ' as a second 
or penultimate true molar. 3 It holds clearly x 11 x in about 8‘3 inches. Here the formula 
is very small for a second true molar, and, on the other hand, the tooth is long for the 
first true molar, but, taking everything into consideration, the balance of evidence appears 
to lean towards Falconer’s opinion. 
In the Museum of the Geological Society of London there is an entire upper molar 
from the Norfolk coast deposits, showing an unusual broad crown and an approximation 
of ridges, with crimping of the machserides, and but for the latter it might have been 
fairly placed among the first true molars of the Mammoth. It holds x 12 x in the short 
space of 6‘5 inches. The breadth in front is 2'6 inches, at the middle 3 inches, and 
behind 2‘4 inches; there is barely what might be called a tendency to central expansion of 
the disk. This, like the last milk tooth referred to at p. 18, shows the character of the 
broad-crowned variety to be noticed in the sequel. The comparisons between the last 
upper milk molar, No. 21,301, B. M., PL I, fig. 4, and its associated specimens from 
Grays Thurrock, seem to me to receive additional proof of the position assigned to 
them by a well-worn crown of an upper first true molar in the British Museum from the 
same locality. The loss by wear in front is indicated, but the original formula was x 10 x, 
as may be seen by a careful examination of the surface, where eleven and a half ridges 
remain in a space of 6 inches. There is not much expansion of the disks; but, I repeat, 
this is not always a well-defined character in upper teeth. 3 
There are other characteristic specimens of this stage of growth in the British 
Museum ; for example. No. 28,512 (2 specimens), from the Dixon Collection, one of 
which (right upper) holds x 11 x in 7'8 inches. 
A right upper molar in the Norwich Museum, and lately discovered by Mr. Gunn in 
the Porest Bed, shows only x 9 x in 6'6 inches. The tooth is apparently too large for 
a last milk, only seven ridges are invaded; altogether it is very typical of E. antiquus. 
A very characteristic example of a lower molar referable to the first true molar is 
represented by an entire tooth in the same collection and from the Post-glacial Bed at 
Mundesley. It is small for a fourth molar, but the ridges are wide apart, and the 
formula a? 11 a? is contained in 7'5 inches. 
1 ‘ Pal. Mem.,’ vol. i, p. 443. 3 ‘Antiquity of Man,’ p. 133, fig. 19. 
8 There is a very striking resemblance in the above and a crown of the second true molar of Elephas 
Mnaidriensis shown in ‘Trans. Zool. Soc. London,’ vol. ix, pi. iii, fig. 1. 
