ON THE FOSSIL BONES OF THE MASTODON. 323 



the Count of Vergennes in 1770, and said to have been found in Little 

 Tartary, while the inhabitants were opening- a trench. It is one of the 

 largest that has ever been found ; it weighs eleven pounds four ounces ; 

 ti second, which was preserved in the Museum of the Abbe Chappe, and 

 which was supposed to have been found in Siberia, was represented 

 in his third plate : they are both in our Museum. 



Pallas made a similar announcement in I 777, with regard to the 

 teeth with six denticuli. He published an engraving of one found in 

 the Ouralian mountains *. 



From a consideration of these three pieces, 1 have long entertained 

 the opinion that our large mastodon must have been an inhabitant of 

 theold Continent also; but I am free to confess, that being unable to 

 find during the course of my long researches, anyi other specimen which 

 did not come from America, I re-examined the question, and felt very 

 great doubts on the subject. The Abbe Chappe had spent some time in 

 California, and might have preserved in his collection, some specimens 

 which he had not found himself ; and I cannot find in any direction, 

 any positive proof of his having brought from Siberia the tooth re- 

 -ceived from him by the Museum. That which has been engraved by 

 Pallas, after a careful comparison, is found to resemble the mastodon 

 Tyith narrow teeth, as much as the great mastodon. In fine, what se- 

 curity have we that Vergennes was not deceived with regard to the 

 large jaw, which he gave to BufFon } I repeat again, I do not wish al- 

 together to invalidate these three proofs ; but I begin to think they are 

 not sufficient. 



At the same epoch, and in the same volume of the Academy of 

 Petersburg for 1777, p. 219, Camper again showed that the American 

 animal with lai'ge tuberous teeth bore a stronger resemblance to the 

 elephant than to the hippopotamus ; and that it was very probable that 

 it had a trunk, and that in no case could it have been considered to 

 have been carnivorous. This was an important step made towards the 

 knowledge of our mastodon ; but the great anatomist to whom we are 

 indebted for it, soon made one of a retrograde description. 



A considerable portion of a skull, with some other bones, were found 

 by Dr. Brown, in 1785, and exposed to the public curiosity in the gal- 

 lery of paintings of Mr. Charles Wilson Peale at Philadelphia, to whom 

 they suggested the idea of the splendid Museum of Natural History 

 which he has since called into existence. 



M. Michaelis, professor at Marbourg, having procured dravvings as 

 large as life of these bones, showed them to Camper, who taking that 

 part of the palate where the teeth approach each other, for the anterior 

 part, considered the pterygoid apophyses as intermaxillary bones ; and 

 consequently he could find no place for the tusks. 



Hence in 1788, he made a declaration (Nov. Act. Petrop., vol. ii, p. 



259) that he had been deceived ; that the animal of Ohio had a pointed 



snout and no tusk; that it did not bear any resemblance to the elephant; 



and that for his part, he v/as at a loss to comprehend its real nature. 



It would appear that M. Michaelis had also advanced this opinion in 



* Acta. Pcti-op. 1777, part ii> p. 213, tab. ix. 



