41 



the latitude of 36^° north. From the accounts y)ub- 

 listied in Europe, I suppose it to he decided, that these 

 are of the same kind with those found in Siheria. In- 

 stances are mentioned of like animal remains found in 

 the more southern climates of both hemisj)heres ; but 

 they are either so loosely mentioned as to leave a doubt 

 of the fact, so inaccurately described as not to author- 

 ize the classing them with the great northern bones, or 

 so rare as to found a suspicion that they have been car- 

 ried thither as curiosities from more northern regions. 

 So that on the whole there seem to be no certain ves- 

 tiges of the existence of this animal further south than 

 the salines last mentioned. It is remarkable that the 

 tusks and skeletons have been ascribed bv the natural- 

 ists of Europe to the elephant, while the grinders have 

 been given to the hif)]iopotamus, or river horse. Yet 

 it is acknowledged, that the tusks and skeletons are 

 much larger than those of the elephant, and the grind- 

 ers many times greater than those of the hippopota- 

 mus, and essentially different in form. Wherever these 

 grinders are found, there also we find the tusks and 

 skeleton ; but no skeleton of the hippopotamus nor 

 grinders of the elephant. It will not be said that the 

 hippopotamus and elephant came always to the same 

 spot, the former to deposit his grinders, and the latter 

 his tusks and skeleton. For what became of the parts 

 not dei)Osited there .^ We must agree then that these 

 remains belong to each other, that they are of one and 

 the same animal, that this was not a hippopotamus, 

 because the hippopotamus had no tusks nor such a 

 frame, and because the grinders differ in their size as 

 vv^ell as in the number and form of their points. That 

 it was not an elephant, I think ascertained by proofs 

 equally decisive. I will not avail myself of the au- 

 thority of the celebrated* anatomist, who, from an ex- 

 amination of the form and structure of the tusks, has 

 declared they were essentially different from those of 

 the elephant ; because anotherf anatomist, equally cele- 



* Hunter. t D'Aubenton. 



4* 



