ELEPHAS ANTIQUUS—EEMUR. PATELLA. TIBIA. 
63 
The important distinctions between the proximal extremities in the thigh-bones of 
the recent species naturally suggest inquiries with reference to the same characters in the 
extinct forms. In the shorter neck and more shallow digital pit I find an accordance in the 
femora of E. Afncanus , E. Mnaidriensis, and E. Namadicus, whilst the longer neck and 
deep pit are observable in E. Asiaticus and E. primigenius. There are no materials, 
however, available by which these characters can be ascertained in the E. antiquus and 
E. meridionalis. 
10. PATELLA. 
There is a large patella from Grays, Essex, in the British Museum assigned by 
Falconer to the E. antiquus} and, judging from its massive proportions, it is unlike the 
bone of the Mammoth; whilst the abundance of teeth of Eleplias antiquus from that 
situation render it highly probable that the above belongs to this species. 
11. TIBIA. 
A huge left tibia, 48,134, B. M., from Camberwell, Surrey, is 26 inches in length. 
Compared with a left leg bone of Mammoth, 24,581, B. M., from Eschscholtz Bay, it is 
relatively stouter, but seemingly does not present any other distinctive character. The 
concavities posteriorly for the muscles of the ham are pronounced with sharp outer and 
inner ridges in the Mammoth, whilst in the above specimens it is shallow, and these 
ridges are not so angular and do not run down the bones with the distinctness seen in 
several tibiae of the Mammoth, but perhaps a series would show this character to be 
variable. The more slender proportions of the Mammoth’s tibia seem to me the only points 
by which the tw T o species can at present be safely differentiated. As to other species, 
the tibia of E. Mnaidriensis is inferred to have been stout in proportion, 2 and, again, it 
shows an affinity with the above. These characters I found substantiated in tibiae of 
Elephants from the Norfolk Porest Bed in the Norwich Museum. As to E. meridionalis, 
there are fragments of huge tibiae in the Norwich Museum, and which might be referred 
to that species, and no doubt comparisons might be instituted between the recorded 
tibiae 3 of E. Namadicus in the British Museum. The latter, however, are not at present 
available for study. 
1 ‘ Pal. Mem.,’ vol. i, p. 494 ; and ‘ F. A. S.,’ pi. It, fig. 4. 
2 ‘ Trans. Zool. Soc. London,’ vol. is, p. 62. 
3 ‘ Pal. Mem.,’ vol. i, p. 496 ; and 1 F. A. S.,’ pi. lvi, fig. 2. 
