FALCONER ON THE AMERICAN FOSSIL ELEPHANT. 81 
but he need not be surprised, if, in the progress of erection, the 
superstructure is altered by his successors, like the Duomo of Milan, 
from the Homan to a different style of architecture. 
§ 9. Unity or Plurality of Species in the existing Asiatic 
Elephants. 
This question has an important bearing on that of the fossil spe¬ 
cies which we have just discussed. It is averred, that from the 
time of Cuvier up to the present day, zoologists have been commonly 
in error in regarding the Elephants of Eastern Asia as all belonging 
to one species, E. Indicus; that there are two well marked forms 
confounded under this name, the one limited to Continental India, 
the other insular, called E. Sumatranus, inhabiting Sumatra and 
Ceylon, and probably extending also to the Trans-Grangetic portion 
of the Continent. Let us see upon what evidence these assertions 
are founded. 
The opinion, so far as I am aware, was first broached, but in a 
very general and conjectural way, by Mr. B. H. Hodgson, the emi¬ 
nent ethnologist and explorer of the zoology of Nepal, who, in a 
communication to the Zoological Society, in 1831, suggested that 
there are two varieties, or ‘ perhaps rather species,’ of the Indian 
Elephant, the Ceylonese and that of the Sal forests : the Ceylonese 
having a smaller and lighter head, which is carried more elevated, 
and having also higher fore-quarters; while the Elephant of the Sal 
forests has sometimes five nails on its hinder feet.* 
In 1847, Temminck brought out a work embodying a general 
survey of the resources and productions of the Dutch East India 
possessions, in which there appeared a brief notice of a supposed new 
species of Elephant, named E. Sumatranus :f As Temminck’s strength 
as a naturalist lay in ornithology, the announcement did not carry 
with it the weight of authority, when opposed to the opinion of 
Cuvier, and other eminent zoologists. But it now appears that the 
inference originated with the distinguished Dutch zoologist, Profes¬ 
sor Schlegel, and that Temminck’s work was simply the vehicle in 
which the results arrived at by the latter, first appeared. 
In 1847 I visited Leyden, for the express object of examining the 
materials preserved in the Museum there, upon which E. Sumatranus 
was founded; by the aid of Prof. Van der Hoeven, I was enabled to 
see them, although only in a cursory manner, owing to the shortness 
of the time at my disposal; and the inspection failed to satisfy me 
that E. Sumatranus was distinct from the continental Indian Ele¬ 
phant, with which I had been familiar in its native haunts, during 
many years. 
* Zoological Proceedings, 1834, p. 96. 
f ‘Coup d’ceil general sur les Possessions Neederlandaises,’ &c., 8vo. 1847, 
tom. ii. p. 91. 
N. H. R.—1863. 
G 
