118 
BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 
The formula of a? 24 a? in lower last molars is well seen in a superb specimen in the 
Museum of Zoology, Cambridge University, in which the above is contained in a space 
of 12x3 inches, and eight ridges are held in a space of 41 inches. The crown is 
considerably arcuated, and the specimen shows every indication of having been dredged. 
Broken molars. —The largest molar of the Mammoth I have seen from British soil is 
a fragment of an upper tooth, No. 33,328, B.M., in the Layton Collection, which was 
made on the Norfolk Coast. This molar when entire must have been of gigantic 
proportions. There are sixteen plates in 9f X 4J inches, the half of which are contained 
in a space of 5 inches. The enamel is not particularly thick for the size of the tooth, 
but the ridges are very high for a molar of the Mammoth, the eighth ridge being 8 
inches in height. The disk presents all the features of the crown of the species in 
question as distinguishable from E. meridionalis or E. antiquus. Although no history 
is attached to the specimen it was evidently either dredged up or found on the shore. 
Another broken tooth, but evidently of enormous size, is represented by a fragment 
in the British Museum, from Fenny Stratford, Essex. It holds x 12 in 7x4|. 
Here the enamel is thin and the cement scant, but the dentine is in excess, causing 
unusual width of the plate. There is likewise a large tusk in the Museum, from the 
same locality, to which I have already referred to at p. 82. 
In Mantell’s Collection, British Museum, there are several true molars, none of which 
are entire, from a raised beach at Brighton, Sussex. All are deeply impregnated with 
chalk. They evidently belonged to tldck-plated teeth of very large dimensions. But a 
fragment of a true molar from “ gravel (?) Brighton,” in the Museum of Practical 
Geology, has thin enamel with rather an excess of cement, and holds eight in 
inches. 
A very large molar is instanced by the fragment of an upper molar from Oundle, 
Northamptonshire, in the British Museum. It has none of its collines invaded, and 
holds x 19 in 11 X4J inches. The plates are very thick with excess of cement. 
Another broken tooth in the same Museum, from Northampton, has x 19 in 
10 X 2 inches, and holds eight in 4 inches. Like the preceding it is characterised by its 
thick plates and abundance of cement. The crown is arcuated a good deal, and the tooth 
may have belonged to the mandible of the foregoing. 
I examined very carefully the imperfect ultimate upper molar in the Woodwardian 
Museum, stated by Falconer to belong to “ the pre-glacial variety of Elephasprimigenm 
from the Norwich Coast.” 1 Assuredly, the matrix with which it is intimately encrusted 
is indistinguishable from that on the crowns and palate of a superb specimen of the 
ultimate molars of E. meridionalis and other teeth of the latter “ from the Forest Bed, 
in the Wooclwardian Collection. 3 Whether or not certain post-glacial beds, as I believe 
1 ‘ Pal. Mem.,’ vol. ii, p. 170. Falconer further substantiates his belief in the Mammoth having been 
Pre-glacial by statements elsewhere (see ‘ Pal. Mem.,’ vol. ii, p. 240). 
2 Professor Boyd Dawkins points out instances similar to the above from the Forest Bed at Bacton, 
