176 
BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 
The tooth of the left side repeats these characters and dimensions, and has the lateral 
and accessory digitations more pronounced. 
Lower molars. —The right lower molar (figs 1 and 1 a) is considerably arcuated and 
tapers towards the heel. It has been recently broken across at the fourteenth plate. 
The crown holds x 20 x in 16 X 4 inches, 1 * 3 and as regards length is the largest molar of any 
Elephant I have seen from British strata. The same great breadth is likewise exhibited. 
There are thirteen discs in wear. 
The height of the thirteenth colline is also 7 inches, and there are five ridges in 4 inches, 
with the same number of accessory digitations (8) on the inner side, as seen in the two 
upper and the other left lower molar. 
The left molar appears to have an additional ridge and shows a formula of x 21 x . 
Like the other, the anterior fang, which is broken off, was single and curved. 
The states of wear are unfortunately not sufficiently advanced to develop the discs to 
their fullest extent, but they are sufficiently detrited to serve the purposes of comparison 
with the crowns of the typical JE. meridionalis as described by Falconer. In the above 
there is no inordinate excess of cement, so that the plates are closer together, the enamel 
is fully crimped, and there is a decided disposition to central expansion and angulation 
of the discs, which doubtless would appear pronounced in a low T er transverse section of 
the teeth. 
But the ridge formula of itself shows a difference of fully six ridges over the largest 
tooth that can be unhesitatingly ascribed to JE. meridionalis. Falconer has placed the 
limit of the ridge formula in last molars in that species at x 15 x which he establishes 
from an Italian specimen, 1 and, on what appears to me questionable grounds, considers 
that the unusual number of ridges of this specimen may be owing to an abnormal 
condition of the crown. But I cannot see that there is any reason to establish a limit 
to a ridge formula, because the ordinary number of ridges seldom exceeds x 13 x . This 
view, so pertinaciously carried out by him, has been shown in the two previous parts of 
this Monograph to admit of so many exceptions that I see no reason whatever to doubt 
that the same may have obtained in 27. meridionalis. The above addition to the dentition 
of JE. antiquus necessarily alters the ridge formula of JE. antiquus given at page 47 as 
follows: 
f *->, ,- A - N 
1. II. HI. IY. V. YI. 
x 2 * —x 3 * x 5 x—x 7 x *8®— x 10 x x 9x—x 12® xl2x — xl3x xl5x — x20x 
x3x — *6*—*8* x9x—xllx xllx—x 12 x xl2x —*13® *16*—*21* 
1 In connection with a neighbouring locality, Mundesley, there is a description of a beach specimen 
by Mr.,Henry Baker in the ‘ Philosophical Transactions ’ of 1745. The molar referred to was 2 feet 11 
inches in longitudinal circumference, linear length 15 inches, height 7 inches, and breadth 3 inches. It 
contained sixteen ridges with enormous discs “furrowed like a millstone.” Prom its height and ridge 
formula this may have belonged to the broad-crowned variety of E. antiquus. A thigh-bone measured 
6 feet in length. 
3 Op. cit., vol. ii, p. 117. 
