64 



The Canadian Field-Naturalist 



[Vol. XXXIII 



also, may antedate the Iroquoian occupation by 

 hundreds of years, but these do not yield many 

 animal remains. 



By identifying the animal bones collected by 

 the archaeologist the zoologist can determine the 

 former presence of (1) animals now extinct, of 

 which we have no historical record; (2) animals 

 which are known to have become extinct or to have 

 been exterminated since the arrival of Europeans 

 on this continent; (3) animals not now living in the 

 vicinity of the prehistoric site, but found in other 

 and more distant parts of the country; and (4) 

 animals still living in the area covered by the 

 archaeological explorations. It is also possible lor 

 him to greatly extend the range of some species 

 thus filling in gaps in distribution. 



As practically all the bones owe their presence 

 in archaeological sites to the fact tnat they are 

 those of food animals it would probably be possible 

 to get an approximate idea of the relative abundance 

 of any of these animals in a certain region. The 

 bones of those most relished for food would natur- 

 ally preponderate and there would be a preponder- 

 ance of the herbivores as compared with carnivores. 

 Given a sufficient number of specimens it is 

 possible for the zoologist to learn whether there is 

 any difference in the size of the bones or shells of 

 recent and prehistoric animals of the same species. 

 For example, there is a difference in size between 

 recent oyster shells and those from shell-heaps. 

 Oyster shells found by Mr. Harlan I Smith in a 

 shell-heap on Merigomish harbor. Nova Scotia, are 

 much larger than those of oysters now living in the 

 vicinity. Those from the heaps of Damariscotta, 

 Maine, likewise are much larger than recent shells, 

 being from eight to ten and some even fourteen 

 inches long. Then, too. Dr. Edward S. Morse has 

 found that shells of Mpa from prehistoric shell- 

 heaps of the coast of Maine and Massachusetts 

 were higher in comparison with their length than 

 recent specimens collected in the immediate vicin- 

 ity of the same heaps. He also observed a change 

 in the shell of the common beach cockle (Lunatia). 

 The ancient shell-heap form from Marblehead, 

 Mass., "has a much more elevated spire than the 

 recent form living on the shore today, and this 

 variation curiously enough was in accordance with 

 what he had observed in a species of Nalica in the 

 Japanese shell-heaps."' 



There is a possibility, too, that the zoologist might 

 discover among archaeological finds some bones ex- 

 hibiting unknown pathological conditions of interest 



to the student of animal pathology. It is of in- 

 terest to note here that the shells cf Unio com- 

 planatus Solander, one of our common fresh-water 

 clams, found in the refuse of the Roebuck village 

 site, seemed to be affected by the same species of 

 parasitic fresh-water sponge (probably Vioa), caus- 

 ing exfoliation of the sides and umbonic region, as 

 are those of the present day. 



ZOOLOGICAL INTEREST OF SOME ARCHAEOLOGICAL 

 DISCOVERIES. 

 The mention of a few examples will suffice to 

 show that some other discoveries made by arch- 

 aeologists are of considerable zoological interest. 

 One of the most recent was made by the late Dr. 

 H. Haeberlin, of Columbia University, New York, 

 in a cave in Porto Rico.- The bones were those 

 of a large extinct species of rodent belonging to a 

 new genus and species, allied to Plagiodontia. 

 To this rodent Dr. J. A. Allen has given the name 

 holobodon portoricensis.' 



In shell-heaps in Maine were discovered many 

 bones of an extinct species of large and heavily 

 built mink (Lutreola macrodon Prentiss), which 

 "may have lived to historic times." Fifty-three 

 finds of this mink were made in one shell-heap 

 alone, one-fifth of all the animal bones found."* 



Dr. Henry C. Mercer in his explorations of the 

 Durham cave in Bucks county, Pennsylvania, 

 found two vertebrae and a fragment of the lower 

 jaw of an extinct species of peccary (Mylohyus 

 pcnmylvanicus). The modern peccaries are not 

 known to have ranged any farther north than the 

 Red river. ' 



As examples of discoveries which have extended 

 the range of certain species, I might mention the 

 following: In a mound in Lee county, Virginia, 

 were found the bones of the caribou, which, on 

 the authority of Dr. J. A. Allen, "is farther south 

 than bones of the caribou have hitherto been 

 found."'' In a shell-heap in Maine, Dr. Wyman 

 found the bones of the elk or wapiti. This animal 



iClianges in Mya and Lunatia since tlie De- 

 position of tlie New England Sliell-lieaps, Proc 

 Am. Assoc. Adv. Science, 30tli meeting, Cincinnati 

 (Salem, 1882), p. 345. 



JSome Archaeological Work in Porto Rico, Am- 

 erican Anthropologist, N.S., 1917, Vol. 19, pp. 225-226. 



3An Kxtinct Octodont from the Island of Porto 

 Rico, West Indies, Annals of the New York 

 Academy of Sciences, Vol. XXVII, pp. 17-22. 



4L,oomis, F. B., and Young. D. B., On the Shell- 

 heaps of Maine, The American .lournal of Science 

 (New Haven, Conn.), 1912, Vol. XXXIV. pp. 27-28. 

 See also F. B. Loomis, New Mink from the Shell- 

 heaps of Maine, ibid., 1911, Vol. XXXI, pp. 227-229: 

 I). W. Prentiss, Description of an Extinct Mink 

 from the Shell-heaps of the Maine Coast, Proceed- 

 ings of the U. S. National Museum (Washington. 

 1903), Vol. XXVI, pp. 887-888. and an article by 

 M. Hardv on The Extinct Mink from the Shell- 

 heaps, Forest and Stream, 1903, Vol. LXI, p. 12.S, 

 Hardy thinks the animal became extinct about 1860. 



'An exploration of Durham cave in 1893, Pub- 

 lications of the University of Pennsylvania, Vol. 

 VI, p. 175. 



tiCarr, Lucien, Report of the Exploration of a 

 Mound in Lee county, Virginia, etc., Report of the 

 Peabody Museum, Vol. II. 1876-78, p. 80. 



