52 FAUNA ANTIQUA SIVALENSIS. 



tliroiigli the discovery by Peter Camper of the specific dif- 

 ference between the teeth of the Asiatic and African 

 elephants,' when Blumenbach and Cuvier almost simul- 

 taneously entered upon the investigation and arrived at the 

 same result, viz. that the mammoth was an extinct form, dif- 

 fering from both of the existing species. Sti'uck with the 

 lengfth of the cranium and of the incisive sheaths in the 

 mammoth, as represented in the figiires of Messerschmidt's 

 specimen attached to Breyne's excellent remarks in the 

 ' Philosophical Transactions,'^ and connecting these pecu- 

 liarities with the great width of the crown, and the naiTOw- 

 ness and number of the plates in the fossil grinders, Cuvier 

 was conducted to his first happy conclusion. The probability 

 of a similar difference characterizing the species in other 

 fossil genera flashed across his mind, and opened to him new 

 views respecting the theory of the earth. Great and impoi-tant 

 were the results ; and after they had been acliieved, the illus- 

 trious anatomist reverted, in terms of the liveliest acknow- 

 ledgment, to the long neglected figui'es of Messerschmidt 

 which had helped him to the first idea.^ 



After determining the specific independence of the mam- 

 moth, the next point to ascertain was, whether the remains 

 occurruag in very different deposits, and in localities widely 

 contrasted in climate and in geographical position, belonged 

 to the same or to different species. Notwithstanding that the 

 fossil teeth from the southern parts of Europe commonly 

 presented wider and fewer plates, with thicker enamel, than 

 those of the typical form of mammoth found in Siberia, 

 Cuvier attached minor importance to these differences, as the 

 teeth agreed in certain other respects ; and he ranged the 

 whole under the single species of Eleplms primigenius. This 

 opinion has been very generally adopted by subsequent 

 authors — among others, by M. de Blainville and by Professor 

 Owen, who has entered at considerable length upon the ques- 

 tion in his ' British Fossil Mammalia,' and decided in favour 

 of the specific unity of the Eirropean forms. But notvdth- 

 standing this array of authority, we cannot help thinking 

 that Cuvier was premature in his conclusion, and that the 

 identity of the forms has rather been assumed against the 

 evidence than proved by it. Had the differences in the teeth 

 been less considerable than they are known to be, it would 

 have been requisite to show that the crania at least agreed, 

 before this identity could be considered to have been satisfac- 

 torily established. But there were not sufiicient materials 



' P. Camper, Descript. Anatom. d'un I ^ Phil. Trans, vol. xl. 1738, p. 124. 

 dl^phant male, p. 16. | ^ Cuvier, Oss. Fossil, torn. i. p. 178. 



