130 
BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 
supports are a good deal in the way of seeing it in the Ilford specimen, the same 
appears to me to be slightly indicated in the latter also (PL VI). 1 In neither, however, 
does it appear so pronounced as to produce a decided inflection of the premaxillaries. 
Nothing, however, of the kind seems present in numerous skulls of the two recent 
species examined by me. In E. meridionalis, Falconer states that the alveoli “ are pro¬ 
duced in the same plane, or with a little obliquity and E. Namadicus maintains to 
all appearances the same character. 
The parallelism of the massive alveoli in the Mammoth is dwelt upon by Falconer as 
characteristic, in comparison with E. meridionalis , where, instead of being parallel, “ they 
diverge from the sub-orbitary foramina on to their extremity, where the divergence 
becomes sudden and as marked as in the African Elephant.” 3 Now, although the 
divergence of the alveoli is not so pronounced as in either of the two living species, nor 
apparently as in E. meridionalis, it is clear that the alveoli are also not parallel 
in the Mammoth, but tend in opposite directions gradually from their commencement 
towards the extremities of the premaxillaries, where they diverge rapidly. This disposi¬ 
tion to divergence in the alveoli of the Mammoth is further seen in the accompanying 
Woodcut, fig. 1 (xoth natural size), from Ilford. It represents the third milk stage of 
dentition, as proven by its three molars preserved with the specimen in the Museum of 
Practical Geology, to which I have referred at page 94. 
Fig. 1. 
From Ilford : Museum of Practical Geology. 
The same is seen in Plates VI and VII of the skull from the same locality. Here the 
right alveolus has been considerably injured, but has been restored carefully by the artist 
from the left side, which is entire. The cast of the skull from Brussels, in the Museum 
1 Compare also the Siberian cranium of the Mammoth, ‘ Ossemens Fossiles,’ pi. xiv, fig. 2/, with that 
of JE. meridionalis, pi. xv, fig. 1. 
3 Op. cit., vol. ii, ) 25. 
