THE ELEPHANT.
This has long been one of the most remarkable, as it is one of the most widely distributed of the fossil mammalia. Many of the skeletons particularly, those of Asia and America, have been popularly called mammoth, a term borrowed from the Russains. It is not supposed that more than one fossil species exists, while it is also certain that it differs from the only two living ones that have yet been ascertained, namely, the Asiatic and the African, and which differ most conspicuously in the structure of their teeth. It is in the structure of the teeth, also, that this species are principally distinguishable.
There are, however, other differences, which have been ascertained by the researches of Cuvier, and which serve to prove, that the appearance of the species in the fossil animal must have differed from those of the living species. In the former, the alveoli of the tusks are much larger, and the zygomatic arch of a different figure; the post orbital apophysis of the frontal bone is longer, more pointed, and more crooked ; and the tubercle of the os lachrymalis is considerably larger and more projecting. Besides this, there is a greater parallelism in the molares. The vacuity between the branches of the jaws at the fore part is wider than in the Asiatic or African species. In these the lower jaw terminates in a kind of pointed apo physis, but in the fossil animal that is rounded off, to pre vent any interference of the alveoli of the tusks.
From this structure, the form of the face and trunk must have differed from those of the common elephant, so as to have given the animal a different appearance, though it is conceived that in this respect it may have resembled the Ceylon elephant. M. Cuvier ends by sug gesting; that the lost species differed more from the com mon elephant than the horse does from the ass.
The structure of the fossil tusks agrees with that of the recent. They do not seem to exceed in size what they would do in the living species of the same stature. In general, however, they are more curved, and often approach to a semicircle. One found at Hackney appear ed to have formed four-fifths of a circle. In other cases, however, they have been found nearly as straight as those of the living species. Mr. Parkinson thinks, that two species are found in the fossil state; one of them an extinct species, and the other agreeing more with the Asiatic species, if not actually the same.
With respect to its geological position, that is men tioned in its proper place ; but we may here extend the list of its localities, a few of which we have been compel led to give in other parts of this article for particular purposes. Either the bones or the teeth have been found
in many parts of our island. They arc not uncommon in the London gravel, as at Woolwich, Highgate, and Brent ford, and in many other places. They have also been found in Kent and elsewhere, as at Sheppey ; and in Suffolk, North amptonshire, Essex, Wiltshire, Dorsetshire, Flintshire, Gloucestershire, and Sommersetshire. More rarely they have occurred in Ireland ; and, not very long ago, on the west coast of Scotland, in Ayrshire. In Norway and Sweden they have also been found ; and a tooth was further said to have been discoverd in Iceland ; circumstances whence we have elsewhere attempted to account for the sculptured elephants of the Runic stones, not uncommon in Scotland. Those who are desirous of seeing examples of these, may find them in the stones of Glands and the neighbourhood, well known to every one ; in the Maiden stone on Bennachie in Aberdeenshire ; and in those of Su therland, well described and figured by Cordiner, who has, however, somewhat mistaken the object. Gordon appears to have very much misapprehended the nature of that de sign, although he has also figured it in his Itinerarium Septentrionale.
These remains are found nearly in all the European continent, as in Russia, Poland, Germany, Hungary, Hol land, France, Switzerland, Spain, and Italy. In Siberia they are most particularly abundant, and frequently in a state of great perfection, as we shall presently mention. According to Pallas, to whom we are indebted for our chief knowledge of this country, there is scarcely a spot, from the Don to Kamtschatka, where they have not been found. The bones are generally separated and dispersed ; but on some occasions, either considerable portions of skeletons, or even entire ones have been discovered; and, more rarely, as has also happened with the rhinoceros, with the flesh partly adhering. In South America, the same kind of teeth and bones have been occasionally found ; and in North America, they have also been observed, although the remains of the great mastodon have sometimes been mistaken for those of the mammoth, as these bones were then called. Very lately, Lieut. Kotzebue discovered both teeth and bones inclosed in an iceberg on the north western angle of this continent, close to Behring's Strait.