109 
these remains were collected by Sellow, the Prussian traveller, and 
after his death the last-named collection of bones and armour were 
submitted to Prof. D’Alton, by whom they have been described, 
(Berlin Trans., 1833,) and who states, that they are not the remains 
of the Megatherium, but of a large edentate animal more nearly allied 
to Dasypus. 
In 1832, Mr. Clift laid before the Geological Society a memoir 
on the remains of the Megatherium brought to England from Buenos 
Ayres by Sir Woodbine Parish. In the collection of which they 
formed a part, were fragments of bony tessellated armour, one 
of which was figured but not described by Mr. Clift, because the 
fragments were not associated with the remains of the Megatherium ; 
there were also a portion of a jaw and several other bones, which 
were found in connexion with portions of a bony armour in the bed of 
arivulet at Villaneuva, about 95 miles south of Buenos Ayres. On the 
examination of the last-mentioned remains when they first arrived in 
England, it was evident both to Mr. Clift and Mr. Owen, particularly 
from the conformation of the alveoli in the jaw, that the bones did 
not beiong to the Megatherium ; and that the dentition of the extinct 
species differed more widely from that of the existing subgenera of Ar- 
_ madillos than the respective dental characters of the latter differ from 
each other. As the portions of the skeleton were not sufficient to en- 
able Mr. Clift to determine satisfactorily the characters of the animal, 
no account of them was given in his memoir on the Megatherium, but 
they form the subject of Mr. Owen’s paper, of which this is a notice. 
Soon after the arrival of Sir Woodbine Parish’s collection, the Col- 
lege of Surgeons had casts made of the bones, and presented them to 
different museums, including the Jardin du Roi, where they were 
examined by M. Laurillard and Mr. Pentland. ‘These naturalists 
also concluded, especially from the bones of the foot, that the re- 
mains were not portions of the Megatherium, but of a gigantic 
Armadillo. 
More recently, Sir Woodbine Parish received an account of the 
discovery, in the bank of a rivulet near the Rio Matanza, 20 miles 
south of the city of Buenos Ayres, of a perfect skeleton and bony 
covering, and with the description, he also received a fragment of 
a tooth and a drawing of the animal. On examining the tooth, Mr. 
Owen found, that it belonged to an animal referable to the Edentata 
of Cuvier, but indicative of a new sub-genus of the Armadillo family ; 
and for which he proposed the name of Glyptodon, in reference to 
the sculptured character of the tooth. Subsequently, he compared 
the tooth with the alveoli in the fragment of the jaw in Sir Wood- 
bine Parish’s collection; and he found that the peculiar longitudinal 
ridges in the sockets precisely corresponded with the flutings in the 
tooth itself, whereby he was enabled to prove, that the bones dis- 
covered with the tessellated coat of mail at Villaneuva appertained 
to the same species as the more perfect skeleton and cuirass found 
near the Rio Matanza. 
Judging from the drawing transmitted to Sir W. Parish, the Glyp- 
todon differs from the Megatherium not only in the form and struc- 
