94 
BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS 
Upper molars .—A suggestive example is furnished by the incisive alveolus with the two 
tusks in situ (woodcut, fig. 1, p. 130), and a detached upper and two lower molars of the 
same individual from the brick-earths of Ilford in the Museum of Practical Geology. 
Unfortunately the remainder of the skull is wanting, but the gradual divergence of the 
incisors from the roots to the points of exit is well shown. The intermediate distance 
between them at the former is inches, and at the latter 9 inches ; the maximum breadth 
of the alveolus at its free border being 12 inches. 
The tusks diverge and protrude a distance of 16 inches beyond the incisive sheaths, 
and are blunt-pointed, and curve outwards, with a maximum girth of inches. These 
defensors far exceed the dimensions of the tusks of either of the recent species at a 
corresponding age. 
The upper molar in the above is just commencing wear, the last two or three 
ridges not having been invaded. It shows, as well as the lower teeth, the thick enamel 
of the Ilford molar as compared with teeth from Crayford on the opposite side of the 
Thames. The ridge formula in the upper tooth is a? 11 a? in 4|x2 inches, whilst the 
lower hold each x 12 x in 5^X2 inches. 
A palate specimen, No. 19, Brady Collection, B. M., and also from Ilford, contains 
two molars in situ, showing the same characters and dimensions of the upper tooth just 
referred to; it is a good illustration of the palatal region of this stage of growth or that 
of adolescence. 
A very characteristic specimen of a well-worn upper molar is shown by No. 5489 
(PI. XII, fig. 2), from “ the Sloping Chamber, Kent’s Cavern,” where it was found in 
“ the fourth-foot level of cave-earth, 24th June, 1871, along with a tooth of Hyaena.’ 
This tooth is a further illustration of the ^to-plated or typical crowns of the Mammoth 
as distinguishable from the thicker enamel of such as the molars found at Ilford. The 
fore part of the crown in fig. 2 has been ground away, leaving ten disks in wear, and 
traces of an original ridge formula of x 10—11 x. It is entire as to length and breadth, 
and has a fragment of the alveolus attached. The two other crowns, from Kent s 
Cavern, of upper molars, Nos. - 343 -g and 2902, fully support the characters of the 
above. 
I have been thus desirous to refer at some length to the deciduous molars from 
Kent’s Cavern, not only on account of the typical character of the worn crown, but as 
exponents of the exhaustive method pursued by Mr. Pengelly in chronicling the records 
of the famous Cavern of Torquay—a mode of procedure deserving of imitation in the 
working of future bone caves. 
Another palate specimen in the British Museum is from Hutton Cave, in the 
Mendip Hills. The right tooth is in place, but instead of x 12 a? shows a ridge formula 
of x 11 X in 4J X 1 i inches. 
The enamel and dentine are thick, so that eight ridges are contained in 3} inches. 
The molars of the Elephant found in 1715 at Belturbet, in Cavan, and figured by 
