ser. I, vol. VI, pp. 269–286, plates XII to XIV; 1835, Med. Phys. Res.,
pp. 319–331, plates XII to XV), Richard Harlan described a number of
bones of _Megalonyx jeffersonii_ which had been purchased for the
Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and which he reported had
been found in “White Cave,” Kentucky. This was supposed to be situated
near Mammoth Cave. It was ascertained later that the bones had been
found in Bigbone Cave, Van Buren County, Tennessee.
The bones mentioned by Harlan had belonged to a young animal and
consisted of 5 vertebræ, a few fore-limb bones, a few hinder-limb bones,
a scapula, a rib, and a part of a molar tooth. Some of the articulating
surfaces still retained their cartilage. In the same cave were found
bones of “_Bos_” (_Bison_), “_Cervus_” (_Odocoileus?_), _Ursus_, and a
human metacarpal. These were said to have been found on the surface,
while the megalonyx bones were buried at a depth of 2 or 3 feet. The
mandible of the bear (Harlan, op. cit., p. 283) was described as
displaying appearances of antiquity equal to that of the megalonyx
bones. The sloth bones were made the basis of the name _Megalonyx
laqueatus_. In 1855 (Smithson. Contrib. Knowl., vol. VII, art. 5, p. 4),
Leidy determined that these bones belonged to _M. jeffersonii_. He wrote
that the collection consisted of one molar tooth, four dorsal vertebræ,
one lumbar, a left humerus lacking the upper epiphysis, the proximal
two-thirds of the right ulna, the right radius, the left scapula, the
distal epiphysis of the right femur, the left tibia, and the distal
epiphysis of the right tibia, a right calcaneum, two claws of a hinder
foot, and some fragments of ribs. Leidy appears to have concluded that
these bones had been those of a young animal, but that other bones in
the collection had belonged to adult individuals. He stated that they
had come from Bigbone Cave, White County. This adjoins Van Buren on the
north and possibly at that time included the latter; or Leidy may have
been mistaken. Besides the bones above mentioned, Harlan described from
this cave an ilium of _Megalonyx_ (Med. and Phys. Res., p. 334).
In 1892 (Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer., vol. III, pp. 121–123), Professor J. M.
Safford reported the discovery of some bones of a megalonyx in Bigbone
Cave. They had been met with in the bat manure at a depth of about 3
feet. The parts received by Professor Safford, and which are all
probably in Vanderbilt University, were the skull, 17 vertebræ
(including 5 sacrals), a fragment of a rib, a right scapula, a right
humerus, the two ilia, a part of the right pubis, a part of the right
ischium, and a left tibia. Safford concluded that these bones formed a
part of the same young animal that Harlan had described.
In 1897 (Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., vol. XXXVI, pp. 36–70), Dr. H. C.
Mercer gave a detailed account of his explorations in this cave. It is
situated about a mile from the left bank of Caney Fork River, a mile
above the mouth of a confluent called Dry Branch, and at an elevation of
about 1,000 feet above sea-level. It is excavated in Carboniferous
limestone and opens into what is known as “Beech Cove.” Thomas L. Bailey
(“Resources of Tennessee,” vol. VIII, pp. 131–132) described it as being
situated 3.5 miles south of Quebeck, near the head of a hollow or cove
extending south from McElroy’s store. The latter is probably the
locality put down on the topographic sheet of the quadrangle as Elroy.
It is further said to be one branch of an extensive cave whose other
branch is known as Arch Cave. Bigbone Cave is known to extend a distance
of 3 miles. It appears that the cave had been exploited for saltpeter in
the wars of 1776, 1812, and 1863 and immense amounts of the nitrous
earth had been removed. Mercer found no bones until he had reached a
small passage at a distance of 900 feet from the entrance. Here he found
an epiphysis of a left humerus, 6 vertebræ, an astragalus, and a
calcaneum of a sloth, evidently a young animal; and he concluded that
they were probably parts of the same animal that Harlan had described
many years before; also a part of a skeleton that had been found there
in 1884, which is the one described by Safford. A remarkable feature of
the bones of the young animal found in this cave, as noted by Harlan,
Leidy, and Mercer, is the presence of some of the cartilage, some shreds
of ligaments, and a part of the horny sheath of one claw.
2. _Lookout Mountain, Hamilton County._—In 1894 (Amer. Naturalist, vol.
XXVIII, pp. 355–357), Dr. H. C. Mercer reported his work, done in 1893,
in a cave situated on Lookout Mountain, near Chattanooga, Tennessee. In
a brief report made June 4, 1896 (Dept. Amer. and Prehist. Archæol.
Univ. Penn.), Mercer stated that this cave is on the left bank of
Tennessee River, 0.25 mile below Chattanooga Creek. According to the
report last quoted, the cave earth, “with its culture layer,” was
removed by him to a distance of 58 feet from the entrance. According to
the report of 1894, this was effected by digging 4 trenches, 6 feet 10
inches wide and with a depth of 3 feet, in two cases to rock bottom.
Near the bottom of the deposit were found a jaw of _Tapirus haysii_ with
teeth, and a jaw of a small _Mylodon_, identified as such by Professor
E. D. Cope. A bone of the extinct peccary appears to have been found
higher up in the layer of refuse. In a letter received by the writer in
1919, Doctor Mercer stated that later Cope expressed some doubt
regarding the identity of the bone supposed to belong to _Mylodon_.
A further reference to this cave and its contents will be found on page
396.
3. _Memphis, Shelby County._—In 1850 (Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., vol.
III, p. 280; Amer. Jour. Sci., ser. 2, vol. X, p. 58), Jeffries Wyman
reported that a tooth and a claw of _Megalonyx jeffersonii_ had been
found in the “diluvium” of Mississippi River at Memphis. The tooth is a
first upper molar of large size; the claw is that of the median digit.
With these were found remains of mastodon, beaver, and _Castoroides
ohioensis_.
4. _Nashville, Davidson County._—From Mr. William Edward Myer,
Nashville, Tennessee, the writer has received for examination a fragment
of a tooth of a mylodon which was found near Nashville, in sand or
gravel, along Cumberland River, beneath 30 feet of gravel. This tooth
appears to be the left lower penultimate molar of _Mylodon harlani_, but
it is in some ways different. The antero-inner face has a broad, shallow
groove, while the outer face makes a smaller angle with the inner hinder
face than in the tooth figured by Leidy.
The transverse section resembles that of the lower penultimate molar of
_M. sulcidens_ Cope (Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., vol. XXXIV, plate X, fig.
4_a_), and somewhat the tooth regarded by Cope as the upper fourth molar
of _M. sulcidens_ (op. cit., plate XI, fig. 7). It is probable that _M.
sulcidens_ and _M. renidens_ of Cope are synonyms of _M. harlani_, as
Stock (Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer., vol. VIII, p. 331) is inclined to
believe.
The greatest length of a cross-section of the tooth found at Nashville
is 27 mm.; the greatest width 14 mm. The tooth is the property of Mr. H.
L. Ridge, of Nashville.
At the same locality have been found remains of _Equus leidyi_, _E.
complicatus_, _Mammut americanum_, a camel (_Camelops?_), a species of
deer, and some turtle bones. The deposit seems to belong to a stage not
far removed from the Aftonian.
KENTUCKY.
(Map 3.)
1. _Bigbone Lick, Boone County._—In 1831, Dr. Richard Harlan (Monthly
Amer. Jour. Geol., vol. I, p. 77, plate III, figs. 1 to 3) described a
left ramus of the lower jaw of a ground-sloth which had been brought to
New York. This jaw he referred to his _Megalonyx laqueatus_ (_M.
jeffersonii_); but it was later shown by Owen (Zool. Beagle, 1840, p.
68) to belong to _Mylodon_, and he named it _M. harlani_ in honor of Dr.
Harlan. From Cooper (Monthly Amer. Jour. Geol., vol. I, p. 172) it is
learned that this bone had formed part of the Finnell collection at
Cincinnati. So far as the present writer sees, there was nothing in
Harlan’s article to show where the jaw was discovered. In 1855
(Smithson. Contrib. Knowl., vol. VII, p. 47, plate XIV, figs. 1, 2),
Leidy further described and illustrated the specimen and stated that it
was found at Bigbone Lick. In 1903, Barnum Brown (Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat.
Hist., vol. XIX, p. 511) stated that Harlan’s specimen ought to be in
Columbia University, but it could not be found. It is more probable that
it was destroyed in a fire in the old American Museum of Natural
History.
In his report on Bigbone Lick (op. cit., p. 171), Cooper stated that he
had seen in the “Western Museum,” Cincinnati, a large humerus of a
megalonyx. Cooper further wrote that he and a companion had found at the
lick a metacarpal bone which he supposed belonged to the same animal.
The humerus was described and figured by Harlan (Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci.,
Phila., ser. 1, vol. VI, p. 277, plate XIII, fig. 10). Cooper (op. cit.,
p. 172) mentions other bones of _Megalonyx_ found at Bigbone Lick, but
some may have belonged to _Mylodon_. This is the case with the fragment
of lower jaw with 4 teeth which became the type of _Mylodon harlani_, as
above mentioned. In Princeton University there is an ungual phalanx 167
mm. long, 66 mm. high, and 43 mm. thick at the middle of the height.
This is labeled as having been found at Bigbone Lick. A list of the
species discovered at this place will be found on page 403.
2. _Bluelick Springs, Nicholas County._—In the collection made by Mr.
Thomas W. Hunter, in the sulphur spring at the place mentioned, the
writer has seen two ungual phalanges which were identified as those of
_Megalonyx jeffersonii_.
3. _Henderson, Henderson County._—A considerable part of a skeleton of
_Megalonyx jeffersonii_ was found at different times extending through
some years, about 5 or 6 miles below Henderson, in the bank of Ohio
River. This skeleton is now in the University of Indiana and was
described by Leidy in 1855 (Smithson. Contrib. Knowl., vol. VII, art.
3). This collection furnished a fine skull and lower jaw. In the same
deposits were found many horns and bones of deer. The geology of the
locality and the age of the bones will be discussed on page 405.
FINDS OF PLEISTOCENE MASTODONS IN EASTERN NORTH AMERICA.
ONTARIO.
(Map 5.)
1. _Essex County._—In 1898 (Science, n. s., vol. VII, p. 80), Dr. H. M.
Ami reported that he had exhumed some mastodon remains in this county.
The exact locality was not given. It was north of the west end of Lake
Erie. The section dug up was from 6 to 8 feet deep. At the bottom were
clay and boulders; above this were found gravel and the bones, and above
these sand, shell marl, peat, and other sands of various colors. The
remains were fragmentary.
2. _Morpeth and Highgate, Elgin County._—In 1858 (Canad. Jour. Indust.
Sci. Art, ser. 2, vol. III, p. 356), E. J. Chapman announced the
discovery of a tooth of mastodon at or near this place. He had seen a
drawing of the tooth. It appears that another man also had sent to the
journal an account of the discovery, accompanied by drawings. These
showed 5 distinct crown-ridges.
In 1891 (Geol. Mag. London, ser. 3, vol. VIII, p. 504; Brit. Assoc. Adv.
Sci., 64th meeting, 1892, p. 654), Professor J. Hoyes Panton gave an
account of the discovery of mammoth and mastodon bones at Highgate, only
a few miles north of Morpeth. These were found in a bed of marl. Some
measurements of the mastodon were given.
3. _St. Thomas, Elgin County._—In a private museum at Niagara Falls,
owned at the time by Davis Brothers, the writer saw a quite complete
lower jaw and a tusk, labeled as having been found at this place in
1856, on the farm of Isaac Barnard. The jaw had the last 3 teeth on the
right side and the last 2 on the left side. In front was a tusk about 6
inches long which appeared to be in the middle of the jaw. The upper
tusk is curved in a semicircle. Dr. J. W. Dawson (Geol. Mag. London,
ser. 1, vol. VI, 1869, p. 39) mentions this find. He stated that there
were 2 lower tusks. If this was the case the species _M. progenium_ is
indicated.
4. _London, Middlesex County._—In the article quoted above from the
Geological Magazine of London, Dr. J. W. Dawson stated that there were
in the Provincial Museum 3 mastodon molars which had been found at
London.
5. _Marburg, Norfolk County._—In 1898 (Science, n. s., vol. VII, p. 80),
Dr. H. M. Ami reported the exhumation of remains of a mastodon at some
place in this county. The skull, 25 ribs, 40 foot-bones, 2 tusks, and
many vertebræ were recovered. The remains were buried at a depth of from
only 3 to 4.5 feet. At the bottom was clay; above this, shell marl, and
sands of different colors; and above all was peat.
The writer has seen this skull in Victoria Museum, Ottawa. It is to a
considerable extent restored. It appears to have been found at or near
Marburg. A small label, somewhat injured, has the record: “West half lot
15, R V, Tp. of [?]dhouse, Norfolk Co., Ont. Ami, 1897.” The penultimate
and ultimate molars are in place. The former is 113 mm. long; the latter
is 174 mm. long, and has 4 crests and a talon. The tusks are present and
the right one is 2,230 mm. long. The skull is a large one. The width
across the rear is 760 mm.
6. _Dunnville, Haldimand County._—In 1869 (Geol. Mag. London, dec. 1,
vol. VI, pp. 38, 39), Dr. J. W. Dawson gave an account of the finding of
a mastodon, in 1868, at the place named, situated at the east end of
Lake Erie. When he reached the place a large part of the animal had
disappeared, especially the tusks. He found 7 teeth, a few vertebræ, a
few fragments of ribs, and part of the right ramus of the lower jaw.
These remains were buried in a swamp, partly embedded in a layer of fine
sand. This contained fresh-water shells of species yet living in that
region. The sand was 2.5 feet thick and rested on boulder clay. Over the
sand was 1.5 feet of black vegetable mold. He regarded it as clear that
the animal lived long after the close of the Glacial period.
7. _St. Catharines and Welland Port, Lincoln County._—At Rochester
University, New York, the writer has seen a cast of a lower jaw, labeled
as having come from the place named above. On the left side the second
and third molars are present, the former slightly worn, the hindermost
not at all. On the right side the hindermost molar is not to be seen.
The second molar is tilted up behind and lowered in front. The little
wear of the tooth is on the hinder end. It is possible that the
hindermost molar was yet in the bone and somewhat under the second one.
The ramus has a length of 400 mm.
8. _Toronto, York County._—It does not appear to be wholly certain that
the mastodon has been found at Toronto; but its occurrence there is
probable. In some of his papers Coleman has reported that its presence
was believed to be determined.
9. _Junction of Missinaibi and Moose Rivers, Algoma County._—In 1898
(Science, n. s., vol. VII, p. 80), Robert Bell reported a mastodon tooth
from the locality mentioned. It had been chopped out of a skull by an
Indian. Later Bell attempted to obtain the skull, but could not, because
of high water. A further account was given of this tooth by Bell in 1898
(Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer., vol. IX, p. 383).
CAPE BRETON ISLAND.
1. _Middle River, Victoria County._—In 1912 (Proc. Trans. Nova Scotia
Inst. Sci., vol. XIII, pp. 163–174), Mr. Harry Piers, curator of the
Provincial Museum, Halifax, presented a paper in which he detailed the
history of mastodon remains found on Cape Breton Island. At the place
above named, in a meadow, at a depth of only 5 inches, was found a right
femur. According to Piers’s account, this was discovered about the year
1834, possibly a few years earlier. It came into the possession of the
Mechanics’ Institute, at Halifax, and later of the Provincial Museum of
Halifax, where it is now preserved. It was noticed and figured by J. W.
Dawson in the four editions of his “Acadian Geology.”
2. _Baddeck, Victoria County._—According to Piers’s account, a molar
tooth of a mastodon, now in the Provincial Museum, was found in 1859, at
the place named. This tooth is figured by Dawson, with the femur. Piers
states that Dawson was in error in crediting Honeyman with the
discovery. Details regarding this are wanting. The molar has 3 crests.
In the same museum is a part of a proboscidean tusk, but it is not
certain where it was found. It is quite certain that all of these
remains are of animals which lived there after the Wisconsin ice had
retired.
These localities are not indicated on the map.
MASSACHUSETTS.
(Maps 5, 6.)
1. _Coleraine, Franklin County._—In 1872 (Amer. Jour. Sci., vol. III, p.
146), Dr. Edward Hitchcock, in a letter to one of the editors, reported
the discovery of a tooth of a mastodon at or near this place. It had
been shoveled out of a muck-bed, on the farm of Elias Bardwell. Nothing
more is known about the matter. This tooth was mentioned by B. K.
Emerson in 1917 (Bull. U. S. Geol. Surv. 597, p. 149).
2. _Shrewsbury, Worcester County._—In 1885 (Trans. N. Y. Acad. Sci.,
vol. V, pp. 14, 15), N. L. Britton read before the Academy an extract
from the New York Times, copied from the Worcester Spy of October 14,
1885, relating to the finding of a human skull near Shrewsbury, close to
the spot where mastodon remains had been found the year before. In
Science (vol. VI, 1885), Professor F. W. Putnam gave an account of the
investigations of the case made by himself and others. The conditions
under which the mastodon was buried were incidentally described. In the
same year Franklin P. Rice, a member of the Worcester Natural History
Society, published a pamphlet of 8 pages, in which the discovery and
exhumation of the remains were set forth; one molar, an upper
penultimate, was well figured. A trench was being made in a meadow of a
farmer, W. U. Maynard, about 2 miles from the center of Shrewsbury, on
the road to Northborough. The teeth and some bones of the mastodon were
met at a depth of 8 feet. Putnam stated that these remains, as well as
the human skull, were resting on blue clay beneath a bed of peat. Rice
reported that the mastodon bones and teeth were resting on bed-rock.
Putnam believed that both skulls had been transported thither by water
before the peat was laid down. From Mrs. Ella Horr, custodian of the
Natural History Museum of Worcester, the writer has learned that the
mastodon remains are preserved there. Mention was made of these remains
by B. K. Emerson in 1917 (Bull. U. S. Geol. Surv. 597, p. 149).
There is no reason to suppose that the mastodon in question lived before
the Wisconsin stage, but at its close. The ice must already have retired
beyond the State, and the land, which, according to Dr. Fairchild, was
depressed at the latitude of Shrewsbury about 350 feet, must have been
elevated enough to reduce considerably the area covered by water before
conditions would have favored the presence of mastodon. It is possible,
however, that the depression was not so great.
CONNECTICUT.
(Maps 5, 6.)
1. _Cheshire, New Haven County._—In 1828 (Amer. Jour. Sci., vol. XIV, p.
187), a note appeared which stated that in the summer of the preceding
year 3 or 4 large molar teeth of a “mammoth” had been found near
Cheshire. From the description it is evident that they were teeth of a
mastodon. They were in fine condition but were immediately destroyed in
a frolic of the workmen. The teeth had been found in gravel only a few
feet under ground. Warren (“Monogr. on _Mastodon giganteus_,” p. 3)
stated that the mastodon teeth had been found in making a canal at
Cheshire. He undoubtedly referred to the teeth mentioned above.
Schuchert (Amer. Jour. Sci., ser. 4, vol. XIV, p. 321) states that one
tooth was preserved and is now in the Yale University collection.
2. _New Britain, Hartford County._—In 1835 (Amer. Jour. Sci., vol.
XXVII, p. 165), a report was published about the finding of a vertebra
of a mastodon in digging a canal for a factory in Berlin, not far from
New Britain. It appears to have been met with in a deposit of marl.
Schuchert (op. cit., p. 322) mentions this find and says that the
locality was not in Berlin, but in New Britain. The depth is given as 3
feet and the material as mud or clay.
Schuchert, as cited, gave an account of the discovery, in 1852, of
another mastodon in New Britain. Two or three teeth and some bones were
found in a soft swampy soil.
3. _Farmington, Hartford County._—In 1914 (Amer. Jour. Sci., vol.
XXXVII, pp. 321–330), Schuchert and Lull described the exhumation of a
mastodon near the town named. All of the principal bones of the skeleton
were secured. One tusk and most of the foot-bones were missing. The
account ought to be taken by collectors as a model for their reports.
The exact position of the skeleton is given. A topographic map of the
surrounding region is furnished, as well as the details concerning the
materials occurring above and below the bones. These lay on boulder clay
of Wisconsin age and were covered by materials washed in from the
surrounding higher grounds. No mollusks were found in the excavation,
and little vegetation. The bones, as shown by Lull’s map, were
remarkably little disturbed, not more than one might expect from the
activities of wolves. One of the tusks was, however, removed from the
skull a distance of 23 feet and left on ground 2 feet higher. Schuchert
regarded this as being hard to explain. The other tusk was not found at
all.
4. _Bristol, Hartford County._—In 1885 (Trans. N. Y. Acad. Sci., vol. V,
p. 14), O. P. Hubbard stated that the remains of a mastodon had been
found at Bristol, but no further information was furnished.
5. _Sharon, Litchfield County._—In 1828 (Amer. Jour. Sci., vol. XIV, p.
187), in a footnote, it was reported that, a good many years before that
time, some remains of mastodon had been found near Sharon. In 1835
(ibid., vol. XXVII, p. 166) it was stated that a mastodon bone, found
probably at Sharon, had been presented to the museum of Yale College.
There seems to be no certainty that the bone was correctly identified.
NEW YORK.
(Maps 5, 6, 34.)
1. _New Dorp, Richmond County._—In 1901 (Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci., vol.
XIV, p. 67), Dr. Arthur Hollick reported the discovery of some fragments
of a molar of a mastodon in a swamp deposit in the Moravian cemetery
immediately north of New Dorp, Staten Island. The molar was found at a
depth of 23 feet. The swamp, now drained, was located immediately on the
moraine of the Wisconsin ice-sheet (Folio 157, U. S. Geol. Sur.). It had
evidently at first been a pond about 25 feet deep; later it had become
filled up with sandy silt, muck, and vegetable débris. At a depth of
about 8 feet Hollick found a stratum approximately 2 feet thick, in
which were cones of white spruce (_Picea canadensis_), a tree now found
not farther south than northern New England and the Adirondacks.
Evidently the mastodon had lived there not long after the retirement of
the ice, for the tooth appears to have been only about 2 feet above the
bottom of the old pond. The spot is probably at an altitude above the
submergence described by Fairchild (Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer., vol. XXVIII,
p. 279).
2. _Ridgewood, Kings County._—In 1885 (Trans. N. Y. Acad. Sci., vol. V,
p. 15), Mr. D. S. Martin stated that some 15 or 20 years before that
time a mastodon skeleton had been exhumed in excavating for the
Ridgewood, Long Island, reservoirs. No details were furnished.
3. _Jamaica, Queens County._—In 1859 (Proc. Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci., 12th
meeting, 1858, p. 232), J. C. Brevoort reported the finding of 5 molar
teeth and fragments of bones in removing pond-muck in the valley of a
small stream which flowed into Baisley’s pond, near Jamaica. In the pond
itself was a deposit of mud, in some places 6 feet deep, which rested on
gravel. This deposit of mud, mixed with vegetable matter, is continued
up the valley mentioned. The bones and teeth were found about 20 yards
from the channel of the stream, resting on the gravel and covered by
about 4 feet of the muck.
According to Folio 83, of the U. S. Geological Survey, Jamaica and
vicinity is situated on stratified drift which was laid down while the
foot of the glacial ice was immediately north of the town. The mastodon
must have lived there after the retreat of the ice from the island; it
may have been a long time afterward. According to Fairchild, as above
cited, this locality was submerged by the sea while the stratified
materials were being laid down.