106 
BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 
They were found in Siiandon Cave, along with other remains of the Mammoth, including 
two upper penultimate molars, possibly of the same individual, but the last-named teeth 
have been ground down to their common base in front, consequently cannot be placed in 
their position in the dental series with the same certainty, although I doubt not they 
were the opposing teeth of the two in question. Judging from the small size of the tusks 
which accompanied them, the probability is that they belonged to a female. The enamel 
is thick, and the cement is in excess, whilst the crowns of the upper molars are unusually 
convex, and those of the lower preternaturally concave. 
A superb specimen of a lower second true molar, Plate XII, fig. 1, from Crayford, 
Thames Valley, holds x 15 or else 16 x in SlrX3| inches. The anterior portion 
of the crown is worn to the common base, so that the number of ridges is not quite 
clearly defined,• however, the tooth is perfect with that exception, and the loss cannot 
exceed a ridge at the most. It was obtained from the “ lower brick-earth,” and is in 
the Museum of Practical Geology, Jermyn Street. Like other molars from the above 
locality, it presents a thin enamel as compared with the thick of the Ilford specimens. 
Two molars (Nos. 54 and 55) in the Woodwardian Museum, from gravel at Barn¬ 
well, near Cambridge, hold ^16 in 7 X 2-| and eight ridges in 3j. Neither is quite 
entire, but No. 54 does not seem to have lost more than its posterior talon. I have referred 
before 1 to this tooth as one of a series from the above locality. The specimens indicate rather 
small individuals, which contrast with the stupendous femur in the Museum of Zoology, 
Cambridge, from the same locality, the length of this thigh bone being 50 inches. 
Two somewhat arcuated molars, each showing a?16« in 8jx2 - 8 inches, and con¬ 
taining eight ridges in 3J inches, are present in a mandible lately discovered during the 
Oxford main drainage works. The specimen is in the University Museum. The 
mandible, like the teeth, presents all the characters of the Mammoth. The height of the 
jaw in front of the molars is 6h inches, and breadth of the spout in front between the erect 
diastemes is 2| inches. The posterior portion of the jaw is wanting. 
There are several fragments, and nearly entire true molars, from Heddingiiasi, Essex, 
in the British Museum. Among them is a nearly entire penultimate lower molar, holding 
a? 15 in 8 -|x 25 and eight in 4| inches. The remarkable peculiarities of these teeth 
are that this penultimate and another fragment show unusual thickness of enamel and 
cement, whilst another displays the very reverse. In consequence of these discrepancies 
in teeth from the same locality and evidently similar deposits, it seems to me that all 
attempts to correlate thick and thin plated varieties of the crowns of molars in connection 
with localities receives a marked exception in this instance and in other cases, as will be 
shown in the sequel. 
A ridge formula of x 17 x in 7|x2'7 inches, and containing eight in 33 inches, is 
well shown in another mandible in the Oxford University Museum, from deposits 
underlying Oxford. 
1 Page 100. 
