ELEPHAS PRIMIGENIUS.—MANUS. 
161 
inner border, and a more horizontal upper surface, whilst its length and breadth are nearly 
equal. The outer border is somewhat convex. 
The inner border of the East-Coast specimen (fig. 10) is inclined below, suddenly 
becoming erect, and gradually declines towards the summit; the outer border is very 
uneven. It is broader than it is long. 
2. The scaphoidal and trapezoidal facets of fig. 8 a , as regards outlines and surfaces, 
are widely different from figs. 9 a and 10. 
3. The metacarpal aspects are also perfectly distinct in figs. 8 b, 9 b, and 10 h. 
How far a series of specimens would show these to be only individual and variable 
characters I cannot say, at all events the above appears to me worthy of illustration. 
Trapezoid. —The two bones just described from Grays and Maidstone, referable to 
E. antiquus and to E. primigenius, present, in their trapezoids, discrepancies equally 
noteworthy. Possibly the two elements of the foot belonged to the same individual, 
seeing that the trapezoids are from the same localities. 
The trapezoid of the Mammoth (PI. XXI, fig. 3), 23,119, B. M., from Maidstone, is 
of the left side, and fits fig. 8, PL XIX. It is 4’5 inches by 2 - 5 inches, with a girth of 
8 - 5 inches. It is remarkably narrow as compared with the Grays specimen of E. 
antiquus (PI. XXI, fig. 4), which represents a left trapezoid. No. 36,609, B. M.; it is 
3‘5 by 2'8 inches, the girth is 8'4 inches. 
The general contours of these two bones, and of their carpal and metacarpal facets, 
supposing fig. 3 is that of E.primigenius and fig. 4 belongs to E. antiquus, are certainly very 
remarkable. These are, however, the only instances known to me of this bone, excepting 
a much larger example of E. meridionalis from the Norfolk coast. The latter partakes 
more of the characters of E. antiquus than of the Mammoth. Here, again, it is desirable 
to examine several specimens before a definite conclusion can be come to. 
In the Asiatic Elephant the bone, as regards relative dimensions and contour, is 
certainly more closely allied to fig. 4 than fig. 3. 
Magnum. —The characters of this bone are much alike in the recent and fossil 
Elephants. The lunare aspect is generally more concave in the Mammoth and Asiatic 
than in the African, and this is more or less apparent also in the specimen I have 
referred to E. antiquus} Large magna from the Eorest Bed will be referred to in 
the sequel. Very often the trapezoidal facet is divided in the Asiatic and Mammoth, but 
it is not so in 708 h, African. This bone seldom exceeds 5 inches in its greatest length 
in the Mammoth, the generality of specimens being little over 4^ inches, whereas indi¬ 
viduals of E. antiquus and E. meridionalis show a maximum length of 7 inches. 
Unciforme. —The facet for the third metacarpal, said to be absent in the Asiatic, 3 is 
certainly not an invariable condition; indeed, from what 1 have seen, it is usually present. 
It was present in the magna of E. antiquus and E. meridionalis, as recorded at p. 60. 
1 Page 60. 
2 De Blainville, vol. iii, p. 42. 
