200 
BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 
Add to these the proportions, i. e. the length to the breadth and height as compared with 
them, and the following characters of the mandible, all of which conspire, with the similar 
fragment to be described, in establishing what may be fairly considered to be characters 
distinct from E. antiquus and E. primigenius} 
It is unnecessary to detail the measurements of the jaw so accurately laid down by 
Falconer. 2 I have, however, to offer observations, on, what he observes, are “ peculiarities 
distinctive of this specimen from the lower jaw of the Mammoth,” 8 to which I might add 
E. antiquus. Moreover, these observations are also applicable to fragments to be referred 
to in the sequel. 
1. The lower elevation of the jaw at the anterior extremity as compared with E. 
primigenius and E. antiquus , but not E.planifrons, with which it agrees. 4 
2. The long and gradual slope of the diasteme into the beak is also a characteristic 
feature in the above and 215 a, and in E. planifrons . 5 
3. The consequent long symphysis resultant of the prolonged diasteme is a good 
character, but in both these specimens that part is wanting ; the outlines, however, tend 
to support the diagnosis. 
4. The greater length of the horizontal ramus, and the height in proportion to the 
width of the ascending ramus. This is pronounced and well shown in the above, and 
is conspicuous in E. planifrons. 6 
5. The less sudden curve posteriorly at the angle and margin of the ascending ramus. 
This character is also distinctive, more especially as compared with the same parts in the 
Mammoth, 7 and is present also in the jaw of E. planifrons , 8 
I observe, further, a flattening on the external border of the ascending ramus, the sharp 
posterior border of which is similar to that of the African Elephant and E. planifrons. 
The dental canal is also like that of the African, as it opens upwards and backwards, 
and not directly upwards, as in the Mammoth. 
The usual irregularity in size and position of the mental foramina is shown in this 
specimen, in which there are two nearly in line with each other. One is 1J inches, and 
the other 3 inches from the margin of the diasteme. 9 The internal opening in the gutter 
is about two inches from the beak. 10 
1 Pages 52 and 134. 2 Op. cit., vol. ii, p. 140. 3 Op. cit., vol. ii, p. 127. 
* See ' Faun. Ant. Sival.,’ pis. xi and xliv. 6 ‘ F. A. S.,’ pis. xxi and xliv. 
6 ‘ F. A. S.,’ pi. xi, figs. 2 and 3. 
7 ‘ Ossem. Fossil.,’ pi. xv, figs. 5 and 6, taken from Nesti’s figs. 1 and 2. 8 1 F. A. S.,’ pi. xi, fig. 3. 
9 Cuvier, in alluding to a mandible from Tuscany (op. cit., vol. ii, p. 213), conceives that the mental 
foramina being two in line and not above or below one another is distinctive of the Italian fossil; but, as 
will be seen in the woodcuts of E. primigenius, figs. 4—12, p. 135, there is no rule as to numbers and 
position of these openings. He refers also to the contour of the beak, which will be seen to be also 
exceedingly variable. 
i° The “important specimen ” referred to by Falconer (‘Pal. Mem.,’vol. ii, p. 132), showing “a 
longitudinal section ” of a molar, is, I am informed by Mr. Gunn, not now in the Norwich Museum. 
