NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 105 



der, and about six feet long. These are the dimensions of the largest elephants, and 

 exceed those of the ordinary size by nearly one third. 



The mammoth of New York, although bearing some general resemblance to the ele- 

 phant, differs from it in the general figure ; in the tusks, formation of the head, promi- 

 nence and pointedness of the back over the shoulders, its great descent thence to the 

 hips, together with the comparative smallness of the hody : there are proofs of greater 

 activity also in the structure of the thigh bones, and the formation of the ribs, which 

 are peculiar, and indicative of greater strength. It also differs in the magnitude of the 

 spines of the back ; the proportionate length of the processes from the spine of the sca- 

 pula; the thickuess and strength of all the bones, particularly of the limbs; the teeth, 

 which are of the carnivorous kind ; its under jaw, which is distinctly angular, instead of 

 being semicircular, as in the elephant, beside several other striking distinctions. There 

 can be little doubt but that it is, therefore, at least, specifically distinct from the elephant. 

 Philosophical Magazine, Peak's Account, vol. 14. 



The examination of the Asiatic mammoth has also settled the question as to its identity 

 with the American. They are considered as specifically, if not generically, different. 



Blumenbach has termed the Asiatic mammoth elephas primasvus, or primogenus, and 

 the American mammoth the elephas Americanus. Cuvier calls it the mastodontus, 

 which name has been adopted by Dr. Barton. In the Memoirs of the National Insti- 

 tute, Cuvier describes the former elephas mammonteus, maxilla obtusiore, lamellis inola- 

 rium tenuibus rectis; and the latter he characterizes as follows: elephas Americanus, 

 molaribus multi-cuspidibus, lamellis post detritionem quadrilobatis. In his opinion neither 

 of them are the same as the existing elephant, and he considers them as extinct. Sciences 

 Phys. et Mat. II. 



Mr. Tilesius sent to Dr. Barton of Philadelphia some fine large drawings of the mam- 

 moth, described by Adams as found near the mouth of the Lena, whereby he had an 

 excellent opportunity of comparing it with Peale's ; and he is of opinion, that although 

 very different from the Ohio animal, yet that there are great and striking affinities. In 

 opposition to Cuvier he believes that the Ohio bones bespeak an animal not generically 

 different from the elephant ; that, although in the general form of the molares and the 

 disposition of the vitreous body or enamel upon and through them, the Ohio mammoth 

 differs materially from the extinct as well as the existing elephants of the old world, and 

 there is, in this respect, a much greater affinity between the Asiatic mammoth, and the 

 existing Asiatic elephant, than between either of them and the Ohio, or American, mam- 

 moth, yet there are several other characters in which the resemblance is much closer 



16 



