OK THE BONES OF THE MASTODON. 351 



Academy of Bavaria, on the teeth found by Kennedy, tells us, that 

 there is a jaw bone of this animal in the Museum of the University of 

 Erlang. The usual story was, of course, in circulation, that it had been 

 exhumed in 1 645, near Krembs, not far from the Danube, and that it 

 must have belonged to a giant twelve feet in height. Hence it is evi- 

 dent that this must be a part of the supposed giant found near Krembs 

 in 1645, mentioned by divers authors. 



The late Abbe Amoretti, in a letter to M. de la Torre, archbishop of 

 Turin, inserted in the Memoirs of the Italian Institute, on the tooth of 

 Rochetta di Tanaro, announces his having seen a tooth at Vienna, in 

 the house of the Baron Joseph de Bruderh. It was found on the estate 

 of that gentleman in Hungary. In the Imperial Museum he noticed 

 half of a lower jaw which had come from Moravia. 



Andre Stutz speaks of teeth of the same species as this jaw being 

 found in Lower Austria, to the south of Vienna, near Brtinn, at Ent- 

 zersdorf and at Modling *. 



In the 24th volume of the Memoirs of the Academy of Turin, page 

 167, and plates 1 and 2, the Abbe Borsonhas described and represented 

 two portions of a jaw, containing one tooth each, which were found 

 near Asti more than sixty years since, as also two germs found at 

 Castelunova-Calcea, ia the same province. 



In addition to this, I have had the drawings and originals of several 

 others, the origin of which I could not discover ; but which, taken in 

 conjunction with those already mentioned, furnish decisive proofs that 

 the animals to which they belonged must have left a very great quan- 

 tity of spoils. 



Like those of the great mastodon, these teeth are all furnished with 

 conical denticuli more or less numerous, which are worn down by mas- 

 tication ; and, as we shall see hereafter that the shapes of some of the 

 bones found with these teeth also resemble those of the great mastodon, 

 and that there is reason to believe that they were accompanied by tusks, 

 we may thence conclude, with a very great show of probability, that the 

 animals of which they formed part were also of the species of the mas- 

 todon. 



But again, these teeth may be distinguished from all those of the great 

 mastpdon of Ohio, by some specific characters. The principal and most 

 general is, that the sides of their crowns are furrowed more or less 

 deeply, and sometimes they terminate in many denticuli ; sometimes 

 they are accompanied by other and smaller cones upon their sides, or in 

 their intervening spaces ; the result of which is, that mastication pro- 

 duces at first upon this crown many small circles, and then a trefoil 

 shaped figure, but never lozenges. 



These trefoil figures have frequently caused these teeth to be taken 

 for the teeth of the hippopotamus. We have already seen that Dau- 

 benton found some resemblance between them ; and on the subject of 

 this hippopotamus we shall have occasion to mention similar opinions 

 entertained by Peter Camper and M. Faujas ; but it is easy to guard 

 against the recurrence of this error. Independently of the sizes, the 

 teeth of the hippopotamus never have more than four trefoil figures, 



* Oryctography of Lower Austria. Vienna, 1807, page 74. 



