AMERICAN MONKEYS. 147 



observed in the dried skulls. It will be remembered that in our description of the 

 characters of the man-like apes, it was stated (p. 21) that in these and all the 

 uionkeys of the Old World, the total number of teeth was thirty-two. Of these, 

 on each side of both upper and lower jaws, two were incisors, one was a canine, two 

 were premolars, and three molars ; the series being expressed by the formula 

 i|, c\, p\, rii\ ; total, 82. 



If we now examine the skull of any American monkey (always excluding the 

 marmosets) and count the teeth, we shall find that their total number is thirty-six, 

 or four more than in the Old World monkeys. A closer examination will show 

 that the additional tooth on each side belongs to the premolar series — the so-called 

 bicuspids of human dentistry. Thus whereas all Old World monkeys have but two 

 bicuspids on each side of both the upper and lower jaw, the American monkeys 

 have three of these teeth ; and the number of teeth in the latter may accordingly 

 be expressed by the formula i'\, c\, 'p\, tti^ ; total, 3G. 



If we care to carry our examination a little further, we shall not fail to notice 

 that the upper molar teeth of the American monkeys differ very decidedly in the 

 form of their crowns from those of the monkeys of the Old World, so that a single 

 detached specimen of one of these teeth is amply sufficient to decide to which of 

 the two groups its owner belonged. Thus whereas in the Old World monkeys 

 (exclusive of the man-like apes) the crowns of tliese teeth are tall and nan-ow, with 

 the four tubercles arranged in pairs nearly at right angles to the long axis, and 

 each tubercle nearly conical, in the monkeys of the New World the crowns of 

 these teeth are much shorter and broader, with their pairs of tubercles ai'ranged 

 obliquely to the long axis; the outer tubercles being much flattened, and the iinier 

 crescent-.shaped. Those acquainted with the details of anatomy will also find 

 characters by which the skulls themselves of the Old and New World monkeys 

 can be mutually distinguished. 



Having now shown the leading characteristics by which the 

 Amex-ican monkeys, as a whole, are distinguished from those of the 

 Old World, we may refer to a few other mattei-s before proceeding to the description 

 of the various species. 



In the first place, none of the American monkeys make any approach in jjoint 

 of size to the large man-like apes, or even the baboons, of the Old World. Then, 

 again, the whole of them are essentially adapted for a purely forest-life. Indeed, 

 in the great primeval forests of the Amazon, where the ground is either swampy 

 or entirely under water, the monkeys, together with several other animals, pass 

 the whole of their lives in the tree-tops, ti-avelling from tree to tree, and rarely, 

 if ever, descending to the trround. 



In this purely arboreal life it will lie easily seen that the prehensile tail of 

 those species which possess such an organ must be a great assistance to tlieii' 

 owners in travelling from bough to bough, and thus from tree to tree. Considering, 

 however, that the species, like the titis, in which the tail is not prehensile, are 

 equally as arboreal in habits as those with prehensile tails, it is quite clear that the 

 latter type of organ can only be regar<lod as a kind of luxuiy. Indeed, the whole 

 question as to the reason why s(;me monkeys have long tails, others short tails, and 

 others, again, no tails at all, is involved in great obscurity. 



