As to the causes which led to the extinction of this animal, whether

it was suddenly destroyed by the deluge, or by some other great

catastrophe of nature, or whether it was ultimately exterminated

by the continued and successful persecution of its pursuers, as

has nearly been the case with the red deer within the recollection

of many of the present generation, I profess myself unable to form

any decided opinion, owing to the limited number of facts as yet

collected on the subject. On some future occasion I may, perhaps,

be induced to revert to so interesting a topic, should I have

opportunities of discovering any thing worthy of communication.

The following Table exhibits a comparative view of the measurements

of different parts of the skeletons of the Cervus Megaceros in

the Museum of the Royal Dublin Society, and in the Royal Museum

of the University of Edinburgh, with some parts of the Moose. The

measurements of the Edinburgh specimen are taken from Professor

Jameson’s memoir on _organic remains_, in the Supplement to the

Encyclopedia Britannica.

|R. D. Soc. |U. of Edin.| Moose

HEAD. | Ft. In. | Ft. In. | Ft. In.

| | |

Length of the head, | 1 8½ | 1 8¼ |

Breadth of the skull between | | |

the orbits. | 0 10½ | 0 9 |

Do. of skull at the occiput, | 0 8 | |

Diameter of the orbit, | 0 2⅜ | 0 2½ |

Distance between infra orbitar | | |

holes across the skull, | 0 7 | |

Length of alveolar processes | | |

of the upper jaw, | 0 6 | 0 6 |

Length of lower jaw, | 1 5½ | 0 3½ |

Diam. of foramen magnum, | 0 2 | |

| | |

HORNS. | | |

| | |

Distance between the extreme | | |

tips, measured by the skull, | 11 10 | |

Ditto, in a straight line | | |

across, | 9 2 | 6 8 | 3 7

Length of each horn, | 5 9 | 5 1 |

Greatest breadth of the palm, | 2 10 | |

Length of the beam, | 1 9 | | 0 6½

Ditto of brow antler, | 0 8¾ | |

Ditto of sur-antler, | 1 4 | |

Circumference of the beam | | |

at root of brow antler, | 1 0¾ | | 0 7½

| | |

BODY. | | |

| | |

Length of spine, | 10 10 | 9 8 |

Ditto of sternum, | 2 4 | |

Height to the upper extremity | | |

of the dorsal spines, | 6 6 | |

Ditto to the highest point | | |

of the tip of the horn, | 10 4 | |

| | |

EXTREMITIES. | | |

| | |

Greatest length of the scapula,| 1 6½ | |

Ditto breadth at the base, | 0 10¾ | |

Ditto depth of its spine, | 0 2¾ | |

Length of the humerus, | 1 4 | 1 3½ |

Ditto of ulna and radius, | 1 8 | 1 6 |

Ditto of carpus, | 0 2¾ | 0 2 |

Circumference of do., | 0 9½ | |

Length of metacarpus, | 1 0½ | 1 0½ |

Length of phalanges, | 0 7 | 0 6½ |

From anterior superior spine | | |

of one ileum to that of | | |

the other, | 1 4½ | 1 6½ |

From anterior superior spine | | |

to the tuber ischii, | 1 8 | 1 9½ |

Greatest diameter of | | |

foramen ovale, | 0 4 | 0 3 |

Least do. of do., | 0 2¾ | 0 2¼ |

Length of the femur, | 1 6½ | 1 5½ |

Ditto of tibia, | 1 6 | 1 6 |

Length of the tarsus, | | |

including the os calcis, | 0 8 | |

Ditto of the metatarsus, | 1 1¾ | 1 1¾ |

2. _Account of the Two Living Species of Elephant, and of the Extinct

Species of Elephant, or Mammoth._

1. ELEPHAS AFRICANUS.--_The Elephant with rounded skull, large ears,

grinders, having rhomboidal-shaped marks on their crown, which we

call the African Elephant_ (_Elephas Africanus_), is a quadruped

which has hitherto been found only inhabiting Africa. There can

be no doubt that it is this species which lives at the Cape, at

Senegal, and in Guinea; there is reason to believe that it also

occurs at Mosambique; but it is not certain that individuals of the

following species do not occur in this part of Africa. A sufficient

number of individuals have not been figured or compared, to know if

this species presents remarkable varieties. It is it that produces

the largest tusks. Both sexes are equally furnished with tusks, at

least at Senegal. _The natural number of the hoofs is four before,

and three behind._ The ear is very large, and covers the shoulder.

The skin is of a deep and uniform brown. This species has not been

domesticated in modern times. It appears, however, to have been tamed

by the ancients, who attributed to it less power and courage in

that state than to the following species; but their observations do

not appear to have been confirmed, at least in so far as refers to

magnitude. Its natural manners are not perfectly known; yet judging

of them by the notices of travellers, they appear to resemble in

every thing essential those of the following species.

2. ELEPHAS INDICUS.--_The Elephant with elongated skull, concave

forehead, small ears, grinders marked with undulating bands_, which

we call the _Indian Elephant_ (_Elephas Indicus_), is a quadruped

which has only been observed with certainty beyond the Indus. It

extends from both sides of the Ganges to the Eastern Sea and the

south of China. They are also found in the Islands of the Indian Sea,

in Ceylon, Java, Borneo, Sumatra, &c. There is still no authentic

proof that it exists in any part of Africa, although neither is the

contrary absolutely proved. The inhabitants of India having from

time immemorial been in the habit of taking this species and taming

it, it has been much better observed than the other. Varieties have

been remarked as to size, lightness of form, the length and direction

of the tusks, and the colours of the skin. The females and some of

the males have tusks which are always small and straight. The tusks

of the other males never attain so great a length as in the African

species[430]. _The natural number of the hoofs is five before and

four behind._ The ear is small, frequently angular. The skin is

commonly grey, spotted with brown. There are individuals entirely

white. The height varies from fifteen to sixteen feet. Its manners,

the mode of taking it, and of treating it, have been carefully

described by many travellers and naturalists, from Aristotle down to

Mr Corse Scott.

3. ELEPHAS PRIMIGENIUS, Blum, or MAMMOTH.--_The Elephant with

elongated skull, concave forehead, very long alveolæ for the tusks,

the lower jaw obtuse, the grinders broader, parallel, marked with

closer bands_, which we name the _Fossil Elephant_ (_Elephas

primigenius_, Blum.), is the _Mammoth_ of the Russians. Its bones

are only found in the fossil state. No person has seen in a fresh

state bones resembling those by which this species is peculiarly

distinguished, nor have the bones of the two preceding species been

seen in the fossil state.[431] Its bones are found in great number

in many countries, but in better preservation in the north than

elsewhere. It resembles the Indian more than the African species. It

differs, however, from the former in the grinders, in the form of

the lower jaw, and many other bones, but especially in the length

of the alveolæ and tusks. This last character must have singularly

modified the figure and organisation of its proboscis, and given it a

physiognomy much more different from that of the Indian species, than

might have been expected from the similarity of the rest of their

bones. It appears that its tusks were generally large, frequently

more or less spirally arcuate, and directed outwards. There is no

proof that they differ much according to differences of sex or

race. The size was not much greater than that to which the Indian

species may attain; it appears to have been still clumsier in its

proportions. It is already manifest from its osseous remains, that

it was a species differing more from the Indian, than the ass from

the horse, and the jackal and isatis from the wolf and fox. It is not

known what had been the size of its ears, or the colour of its skin;

but it is certain that, at least, some individuals bore two sorts

of hair, namely, a red, coarse, tufted wool, and stiff black hairs,

which, upon the neck and along the dorsal spine, became long enough

to form a sort of mane. Thus, not only is there nothing impossible

in its having been able to support a climate which would destroy the

Indian species, but it is even probable that it was so constituted

as to prefer cold climates. Its bones are generally found in the

alluvial and superficial strata of the earth, and most commonly in

the deposits which fill up the bottom of valleys, or which border

the beds of rivers. They scarcely ever occur by themselves, but are

confusedly mingled with bones of other quadrupeds of known genera,

such as rhinoceroses, oxen, antelopes, horses, and frequently with

remains of marine animals, particularly conchiferous species, some of

which have even been found adhering to them. The positive testimony

of Pallas, Fortis, and many others, does not allow us to doubt that

this latter circumstance has frequently taken place, although it is

not always observed. We ourselves have at this moment under our eyes

a portion of a jaw covered with millepores and small oysters.

The strata which cover the bones of elephants are not of very great

thickness, and they are scarcely ever of a rocky nature. They are

seldom petrified, and there are only one or two cases recorded in

which they were found imbedded in a shelly or other rock. Frequently

they are simply accompanied with our common fresh water shells. The

resemblance, in this latter respect, as well as with regard to the

nature of the soil, between the three places, of which we have the

most detailed accounts, viz. _Tonna_, _Cantstadt_, and the _Forest

of Bondi_, is very remarkable. Every thing, therefore, seems to

announce that the cause which has buried them, is one of the most

recent of those that have contributed to change the surface of the

globe. It is nevertheless a physical and general cause; the bones of

_fossil elephants_ are so numerous, and have been found in places so

desert and even uninhabitable, that we cannot suppose that they had

been conducted there by man. The strata which contain them and those

which are above them, shew, that this cause was aqueous, or that it

was water that covered them; and in many places these waters were

nearly the same as those of our present sea, since they supported

animals nearly the same. But, it was not by these waters that they

were transported to the places where they now are. Bones of this

description have been found in almost every country that has been

examined by naturalists. An irruption of the sea that might have

brought them from places which the _Indian elephant_ now inhabits,

could not have scattered them so far, nor dispersed them so equably.

Besides, the inundation which buried them has not risen above the

great chains of mountains, since the strata which it has deposited,

and which cover the bones, are only found in plains of little

elevation. It is not, therefore, seen how the carcases of elephants

could have been transported into the north, across the mountains of

_Thibet_, and the _Altaic_ and _Uralian_ chains.

Further, these bones are not rolled; they retain their ridges and

apophyses; they have not been worn by friction. Very frequently the

epiphyses of those which had not yet attained their full growth, are

still attached to them, although the slightest effort would suffice

to detach them. The only alterations that are remarked, arise from

the decomposition which they have undergone during their abode in

the earth. Nor can it with more reason be represented that the

entire carcases had been violently transported. In this case, the

bones would indeed have remained entire; but they would also have

remained together, and would not have been scattered. The shells,

millepores, and other marine productions which are attached to some

of these bones, prove besides that they had remained at least some

time stripped and separated at the bottom of the fluid which covered

them. The elephants’ bones had therefore already been in the places

in which they are found, when the fluid covered them. They were

scattered about in the same manner as in our own country the bones

of horses and other animals that inhabit it may be, and as the dead

bodies are spread in the fields.

Every circumstance, therefore, renders it extremely probable, that

the elephants which have furnished the fossil bones, dwelt and

lived in the countries where their bones are at present found. They

could only, therefore, have disappeared by a revolution, which had

destroyed all the individuals then living, or by a change of climate,

which prevented them from propagating. But whatever this cause may

have been, it must have been sudden. The bones and ivory which are

found in so perfect a state of preservation in the plains of Siberia,

are only so preserved by the cold which congeals them there, or

which, in general, arrests the action of the elements upon them. If

this cold had come on by degrees and slowly, these bones, and still

more the soft parts with which they are still sometimes invested,

would have had time to decompose, like those which occur in warm and

temperate countries. It would especially have been impossible that an

entire carcase, like that discovered by Mr Adams, could have retained

its flesh and skin without corruption, if it had not been immediately

enveloped by the ice which preserved it. Thus, all the hypotheses of

a gradual cooling of the earth, or of a slow variation, whether in

the inclination or in the position of the axis of the globe, fall to

be rejected.

If the present _elephants_ of _India_ were the descendants of these

ancient elephants, which have been preserved in that climate to

the present day, from their being there placed beyond the reach

of the catastrophe which destroyed them in the others, it would

be impossible to explain why their species has been destroyed in

America, where remains are still found, which prove that they had

formerly existed there. The vast empire of Mexico presented to them

heights enough to escape from an inundation so little elevated as

that which we must suppose to have taken place, and the climate there

is warmer than is requisite for their temperament.

The various _mastodons_, the _hippopotamus_ and the _fossil

rhinoceros_ lived in the same countries, and in the same districts,

as the _elephants_, since their bones are found in the same strata

and in the same state. Yet these animals very assuredly no longer

exist. Every thing therefore, Cuvier maintains, concurs to induce a

belief that the _fossil elephant_ is, like them, an extinct species,

although it resembles more than they one of the species at present

existing, and that its extinction has been produced by a sudden

cause, by the same great catastrophe which destroyed the species of

the same epoch.

3. _On the Great Mastodon, or Animal of the Ohio._

It appears that the _Great Mastodon_ or _Animal of the Ohio_,

was very like the elephant in its tusks and whole skeleton, the

grinders excepted; that it very probably had a proboscis; that

its height did not exceed that of the elephant, but that it was a

little more elongated, and had limbs somewhat thicker, with a more

slender belly. Notwithstanding all these points of resemblance, the

peculiar structure of its grinders is sufficient to constitute it

of a different genus from the elephant. It further appears, that it

fed much in the same manner as the hippopotamus and boar, choosing

by preference the roots and other fleshy parts of vegetables; that

this sort of food must have drawn it towards the soft and marshy

places; that, nevertheless, it was not formed for swimming, and

living often in the water like the hippopotamus, but that it was a

true land animal. Its bones are much more common in North America

than any where else. They are even perhaps exclusively confined to

that country. They are better preserved, and fresher, than any other

fossil bones known; and, nevertheless, there is not the slightest

proof, the smallest authentic testimony, calculated to impress a

belief that either in America, or any where else, there is still any

living individual, for the various accounts which we have from time

to time read in the journals respecting living mastodons, which had

been observed in the forests or plains of that vast continent, have

never been confirmed, and can only pass for fables.

NOTE

ON THE CAVES IN WHICH BONES OF CARNIVOROUS ANIMALS OCCUR IN GREAT

QUANTITIES.

The extraordinary accumulations of fossil bones in caves and caverns

in different districts, especially in those composed of limestone,

have for many years engaged the attention of inquirers; and, of

late, have afforded many interesting facts to the geologist and

zoologist. In England, as will appear from the following details,

many different fossil animals have been discovered in limestone

caves; but hitherto the caves in Scotland, which will probably be

found to contain interesting documents of an ancient population, have

not been examined. As the subject is a curious and interesting one,

we shall, in the following pages, principally from Cuvier’s great

work, lay before our readers a pretty full account of the different

caves, especially those that afford bones of carnivorous animals.

* * * * *

Numerous caves, brilliantly decorated with stalactites of every form,

succeeding each other to a great depth in the interior of mountains,

communicating together by openings so narrow as scarcely to allow a

man to enter them crawling, and which are yet found strewed with an

enormous quantity of bones of large and small animals, are without

dispute among the most remarkable phenomena which the history of

fossil remains could present to the contemplation of the geologist,

especially when we reflect that this phenomenon recurs in a great

number of places, and over a very extended space of country. These

caves have been the object of research of several naturalists,

some of whom have well described and figured the bones which they

contain; and even before they were explored by the naturalist, they

were celebrated among the common people, who, according to their

custom, added many imaginary prodigies to the natural wonders which

are really observed in them. The bones which they contain were long,

under the name of _fossil unicorn_, an important article of commerce

and materia medica, on account of the powerful virtues which were

attributed to them; and it is probable that the desire of finding

these bones contributed much to the more accurate knowledge of these

caves, and even to the discovery of several of them.

The most anciently celebrated is the cave of _Bauman_, situated in

the country of _Blankenburg_, which belongs to the Duke of Brunswick,

to the south of the city of that name, to the east of _Elbingerode_,

and to the north of the village of _Rubeland_, the nearest inhabited

place, in a hill which forms one of the last declivities of the

_Hartz_ toward the east. It has been described by many authors, among

whom we shall particularly mention the great _Leibnitz_, in his

_Protogæa_, pl. i. p. 97, where he gives a map of it, borrowed from

the _Acta Eruditorum_ 1702, p. 305.

Its general direction is east and west, but the entrance faces the

north. It is very narrow, although it is under a pretty large natural

vault. The first cave is the largest. From this to the second, one

must descend by another narrow passage, at first by creeping, and

afterwards by a ladder. The difference of level is 30 feet. The

second cave is the richest in stalactite of all forms. The passage

to the third cave is at first the most difficult of all, and we have

to climb with hands and feet; but it afterwards enlarges, and the

stalactites of its walls are those in which the imagination of the

curious has pretended to see the best characterized figures. It has

two lateral dilatations, of which the map of the _Acta Eruditorum_

makes the third and fourth caves. At its extremity, we have still to

ascend, in order to arrive at the real third cave, which forms a sort

of portal. _Behrens_ says, in his _Hercynia curiosa_, that it cannot

be reached, because it would be necessary to descend more than 60

feet; but the above mentioned map, and the description of _Von der

Hardt_, which accompanies it, describe this third cave under the name

of the Fifth, and place beyond it a narrow passage, terminated by two

small grottoes. Lastly, _Silberschlag_, in his _Geogony_, adds, that

one of these grottoes leads to a narrow passage, which, descending

much, leads under the other caves, and terminates in a place filled

with water. There are still many bones in these remote and little

frequented parts. Most of those bones which are in collections from

this cave, or which have been described, are of the bear genus.

A second cave, nearly as celebrated as the former, and very near,

is that which is named, after the _unicorn, Enihornshæle_, at the

foot of the chateau of _Scharzfels_, in a part of the Electorate

of Hanover which is named the Dutchy of _Grubenhagen_, and nearly

upon the last southern declivity of the _Hartz_. It has also been

described by _Leibnitz_, as well as by _M. Deluc_, in his Letters

to the Queen of England. The entrance is 10 feet high, and 7 broad.

We descend vertically 15 feet into a sort of vestibule, the roof of

which lowers to such a degree, that, at the end of 60 feet, we are

obliged to creep. After a long passage, we come to two other caves,

according to Leibnitz; but Behrens adds three or four, and says,

that, according to the country people, we might penetrate nearly two

leagues.

_Bruckmann_, who gives a map of this cavern (_Epistol. Itin._ p.

34.), represents only five caves, arranged nearly in a straight line,

and connected by extremely narrow passages. The second is the richest

in bones; the third, which is the most irregular, has two small

lateral caves; the fifth is the smallest, and contains a fountain. Of

the bones which have been taken from it, some are in the possession

of M. Blumenbach and other naturalists; and others have been figured

by _Leibnitz_ and _Mylius_. They belong to the bear, hyena, and tiger

or lion genera.

The chain of the Hartz also presents some other caves of less

celebrity, although of the same nature mentioned by Behrens in his

Hercynia curiosa, namely,

The cave of _Hartzburg_, under the castle of the same name, above

_Goslar_ to the south. We do not know why Büsching disputes its

existence. It is true that Behrens cites J. D. Horstius erroneously,

for having seen bones of various animals taken from it; for Horstius

speaks only (_Obs. Anat. dec._ p. 10.) of the cave of _Scharzfels_.

The cave of _Ufftrungen_, in the county of _Stollberg_, to the south

of the castle of that name. It is named in the country _Heim-knohle_,

or _Hiding-hole_. Behrens thinks that fossil bones might be found in

it.

Another cave of the same neighbourhood, is named _Diebsloch, Thieves’

Hole_. Skulls have been found in it, which were supposed to be human.

We shall not speak here of those caves of the Hartz in which bones

have not been discovered. And even those in which they have been

found, are, at the present day, almost exhausted, it being only by

breaking the stalactite that any can be obtained, so much of them had

been taken away for selling as medicines.

The caves of _Hungary_ come after those of the Hartz, with reference

to the remoteness of the time at which they have been known. The

first notice of them is due to _Paterson Hayn_, (Ephem. Nat.

Cur. 1672, Obs. cxxxix. and cxciv.) _Bruckmann_, a physician of

_Wolfenbüttel_, afterwards described them at length. (_Epistola

Itineraria_, 77, and _Breslauer Sammlung_, 1725, First Trim. p.

628.) They are situated in the county of _Liptow_, on the southern

declivities of the _Carpathian mountains_. They are known in the

country by the name of _Dragons’ Caves_, because the people of the

neighbourhood attribute to those animals the bones which occur in

them, and with which they have been acquainted from time immemorial;

but all those which have been figured by authors belong to the Bear

family, and to the species which is named the _Great Cave Bear_

(_Grand Ours des cavernes_).

Essay on the Theory of the Earth · 第 28 / 34 段