68 



FAUN^ ANTIQUA SIVALENSIS. 



' These two dental characters, which are of greater im- 

 portance than many accepted by modern zoologists as suffi- 

 cient demarcations of existing groups of mammalia, have 

 been recognised in the species called Mastodon giganteus, 

 most common in North America, and in the Mastodon angus- 

 tidens, which is the prevailing species of Em-ope.' 



But the value of these alleged characters, as furnishing 

 certain distinguishing marks between mastodon and elephant, 

 is far from being absolute. It will be seen in the sequel that 

 premolars, instead of being invariably wanting in the ele- 

 phants, are developed in greater number in one typical fossil 

 species than they are known to be in any ascertained species 

 of mastodon {Ele2}has planifrons) ; while, on the other hand, 

 they do not appear to be constant in every species of the 

 latter group ; and, although the inferior tusks have been 

 observed in three species of mastodon, there are other forms 

 in which they have not yet been detected, even in sjiecimens 

 of the young animal {Mastodon Sivalensis and M. Elephan- 

 to'ides of Clift) . 



With respect to the European species, Professor Owen 

 considers, like M. de Blainville, that M. am-gustidens and M. 

 longirostris belong to a single form ; and he refers the whole 

 of the elephantine remains which occur so plentifully in 

 England, whether in the fluvio-marine crag, or in the super- 

 ficial drift and gravel, also to a single species, E. primigenius. 

 He describes the dentition of the Indian species, discovered 

 by Clift, under the designation of ' Transitional Mastodons.' 



We shall now proceed to the special consideration of the 

 teeth, as the organs which have the greatest share of influ- 

 ence in determining the modifications in the constru.ction of 

 the cranium, and in the development of the general form 

 presented by the different species in the Proboscidea. 



a note (p. 1218), Dr. Bronn states that: 

 ' Tetracaulodon, according to Kaup, has 

 " premolars " in the upper jaw, which are 

 very similar to the back molars of hip- 

 popotamus, and are very caducous.' Fur- 

 ther, in his remarks upoa TdracauJodon 

 of Godman, after stating that the species 

 enumerated by Hays were, according to 

 W. Cooper, Peale, and Harlan, only 

 ' individual varieties in young males of 

 Mastodon giganteus of different ages,' he 

 adds, in regard to these inferior tusks : 

 ' Mastodo7i gigantncs, M. avgustidens, 

 and M. longirostris, do unquestionably 

 possess such inferior tusks ; the other 

 species of mastodon occur more rarely, 



and we can, therefore, only by analogy 

 infer their having possessed them also ' 

 (p. 1233). Bronn appears to have 

 founded his diagnosis mainly ujMn the 

 observations of his countrymen, Kaup 

 and Von Meyer, regarding M. longiros- 

 tris, Kaup {M. Arvernensis, Von M.). 

 Nations, as well as individuals, are 

 jealous on points of discovery. We are 

 confident that Bronn's remarks must 

 have escaped the notice of our distin- 

 guished couutrjTnan when he wrote the 

 passage in the ' British Fossil Mam- 

 malia ; ' and that he will concede priority 

 of observation, on both points, to the 

 German Palaeontologists. — [Ed.] 



i 



