64 



Fig. 23 (actual size).— Mass of felted 

 hair of rodents, together with a fine 

 wool belonging possibly to the extinct 

 sloth, found scattered through Layer 2, 

 and often near the large bones. On 

 this lies a jaw from the same layer of 

 the bat, Adelonycterisfusca. The back- 

 ground shows the mass of rat manure 

 and clay fragments characteristic of 

 Layer 2. 



Sometimes close to the bones, 

 and generally scattered through 

 ihe whole mass of manure in 

 Layer 2, felted like tufts of carpet 

 dust in an unswept room, lay 

 wads of hair or fur (see Fig. 23, 

 Fig. 5 object 4 and Fig. 17 object 

 14), exceedingly fine, slightly 

 crinkled, with a reddish brown 

 color, pos'^ibly due to contact 

 with the cave earth. To what 

 animal shall we attribute them? 

 Certain fine bits may, according 

 to Mr. Rhoads, be referred to 

 the bat and a few straight hairs 

 to the rat or porcui)ine. But 



as none of the rat fur has this 

 crinkle, and as the under fur of the porcupine, according to 

 Mr. Rhoads, is coarser than these specimens and always straight, 

 this crinkled cave wool is attributable to neither animal. Shall we 

 suppose it to be the under fur of the buffalo, or of any of the ani- 

 mals of the outer forest carried down into the cave in predominant 

 quantity by rats? Is it sloth fur, and if so, why its extreme fine- 

 ness? Where are the large, limp hairs, flattened in appearance and 

 grayish white in color, characteristic of the living sloths ? Shall we 

 fancy the fossil sloth fine-furred as a seal? Yet if this discovered 

 fur, which in all reason is contemporary with the sloth bones, be 

 not sloth fur, what became of the sloth fur if the animal, as we 

 suppose, perished here? 



Leaving the significance of the fur in doubt, we are left to account 

 for the comparatively large excrement of a herbiverous animal, like- 

 wise found in Layer 2, and altogether too large for the porcupine or 

 cave rat (see Fig. 17 object 8 and Fig. 5 object 3). Because 

 no other trace of a herbiverous animal of the size indicated 

 was observed at the spot, and because of the herbiverous character 

 of the sloth itself, it has seemed to Mr. Rhoads and myself possible 

 to refer it, modern as it looks, to the latter mammal rather than to 



ing labels makes it doubtful whether the sunflower seed belongs to Layer 2, or came 

 from a rat -hole. For these reasons, I abandon the hope of positive demonstration 

 involved in the presence of the sunflower (used by Indians for food and oil, and o f 

 maize, his favorite plant) , that sloth and Indian were contemporaries at Big Bone cave. 



