Phd Thesis from the Shadows out of Time

Home , Bergiaria, Bergiaria westermanni, Francisco Moreno, Hoplophorus, Japetus Steenstrup, La Plata Museum

UNIVERSITY OF COPENH AGEN FACULTY OF SCIENCE

PhD Thesis Kasper Lykke Hansen

From the Shadows out of Time A comparison and assessment of the fossil collections of P.W. Lund and V. Lausen based on historical archives and bone analysis. Additionally, thoughts and guidelines about future avenues for their usage are proposed. Supervisors: Tom Gilbert & Morten Meldgaard

This thesis was submitted to the PhD School of Science, University of Copenhagen, 31 January 2019

Name of department: The Natural History Museum of Denmark

Author(s): Kasper Lykke Hansen

Title and subtitle: From the Shadows out of Time

Topic description: A comparison and assessment of the fossil collections of P.W. Lund and V. Lausen based on historical archives and bone analysis. Additionally, thoughts and guidelines about future avenues for their usage are proposed.

Supervisors: Tom Gilbert & Morten Meldgaard

Submitted on: 31 January 2019

Word count: 32,400

Cover: V. Lausen and P.W. Lund (Photo: KLH, SNM)

Abstract

English Two large South American subfossil vertebrate collections are housed in the Natural History Museum of Denmark, the P.W. Lund Collection and the V. Lausen Collection. Both were collected in the 19th century. Today they are kept in a storage facility and are very rarely accessed or studied. Many other European natural history museums keep similar collections. By examining the personal histories behind the collectors as well as reviewing and comparing the two collections, suggestions for their future use are proposed. Data has been collected from museum archives, letters, interviews and newspapers. Fossil material has been identified through morphological analysis. Both collections show a potential for deeper scientific investigations. The V. Lausen Collection with three virtually undescribed type specimens and the possibility of sampling petrosal bones from large extinct mammals for ancientDNA studies. The P.W. Lund Collection with many subfossil bones and breccias remaining unidentified. This thesis also reveals that the biography of V. Lausen gives new insight into how a philanthropically inclined man of the 19th century purchases and donates fossils. Furthermore, when exhibited together, these two historical collections have complemented each other in such a way, that they apparently enhance the sum experience of the viewer. Revisiting old museum collections and reconstructing the stories that surround them may be a valuable endeavour. The P.W. Lund Collection and the V. Lausen Collection should not be forgotten in a storage facility as they hold great promises within several different fields of scientific research and for new museum exhibitions. This work may find use as a guide or tool for future curators and students of these and similar collections around the world.

Dansk Statens Naturhistoriske Museum huser to store samlinger af subfossile knogler fra Sydamerika; P.W. Lunds Samling og V. Lausens Samling. Begge blev indsamlet i det 19. århundrede og opbevares i dag i museets magasiner. Mange andre europæiske museer opbevarer lignende samlinger. Ved at undersøge de to protagonisters personlige historier og ved at udføre en nøje gennemgang og sammenligning af de to samlinger, præsenteres der forslag til deres fremtidige udnyttelse. Der er blevet indsamlet data fra museets arkiver, breve, interviews og andre nyhedskilder. Fossilerne er blevet identificeret baseret på deres morfologi. Begge samlinger har et potentiale for yderligere videnskabelige undersøgelser. V. Lausens Samling med tre næsten ubeskrevne typeeksemplarer, samt muligheder for at udføre fossil DNA analyser på petrosa knoglerne hos flere arter af store uddøde pattedyr. I P.W. Lunds Samling er der mange uidentificerede småknogler og breccier. Denne afhandling afslører også gennem V. Lausens biografi, hvordan filantroper fra det 19. århundrede indkøbte og donerede naturhistoriske samlinger. Yderligere syntes der at være relativt store fordele ved at udstille komplementære samlinger som disse to sammen, idet dette tilsyneladende øger den samlede oplevelse hos den museumsbesøgende. At genbesøge ældre museale samlinger og rekonstruere historierne der omgiver disse kan være meget værdifuldt. P.W. Lunds Samling og V. Lausens samling bør således ikke blive glemt i museets magasiner, da de kan bruges konstruktivt i flere forskellige fremtidige forskningsprojekter og indgå i nye udstillinger. Denne afhandling kan bruges som ledetråd af fremtidens kuratorer samt studerende af disse samlinger.

Table of contents

INTRODUCTION ...... 5

MATERIALS & METHODS ...... 7

P.W. LUND BIOGRAPHY ...... 9

OVERALL DESCRIPTION OF THE P.W. LUND COLLECTION ...... 17

VALDEMAR LAUSEN BIOGRAPHY ...... 27

OVERALL DESCRIPTION OF THE V. LAUSEN COLLECTION ...... 45

THE RECENT HISTORY AND STATUS OF THE COLLECTIONS ...... 59

COMPARISON/DISCUSSION ...... 77

MOVING FORWARD...... 85

CONCLUSIONS ...... 91

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 95

REFERENCES ...... 97

APPENDIX ...... 103

Introduction

The Natural History Museum of Denmark houses two relatively large subfossil vertebrate collections from South America of historical and scientific importance. The more famous of the two is the P.W. Lund Collection from Lagoa Santa, Brazil. The natural historian Peter Wilhelm Lund (1801-1880), excavated limestone caves, and, over the course of a 10-year period, collected and studied vast quantities of Late Pleistocene vertebrates which he eventually donated to King Christian VIII of Denmark. Lund’s personal history, as well as most of his scientific collection, has previously been studied in great detail. The collection itself includes almost 300 species of vertebrates and around 45 type specimens. The less well-known collection is Dr. Lausen’s. Valdemar Lausen (1834-1889) was a Danish medical doctor who worked and lived for most of his adult life in Buenos Aires, Argentina. He had a general interest in palaeontology and fossils, and acquired a substantial number of specimens from various “fossil collectors” during his time in Argentina. Some very impressive almost complete skeletons of ground sloths and glyptodonts, skulls of sabre-toothed cats and remains of rare Miocene mammals are among the highlights of this collection. Dr. Lausen also donated his entire collection, not to the King, but to Copenhagen University. Today, these two historical collections are kept in a storage facility at the Natural History Museum of Denmark, under Copenhagen University, in Denmark, except for a very small number of specimens currently on exhibition at the same museum and some on a loan to a museum in Brazil. As the collections are somewhat large, they take up a relatively large amount of storage space. The Lund Collection has around half a dozen scientific visitors on average each year, while the Lausen Collection has only one at most. In reality, less than 1% of the subfossil material from these collections has been studied or used in any other way in any given year since 1965. One could argue that keeping the collections safely tucked away in dimly-lit storage is a good way of preserving the, in some cases, very fragile fossils for the curiosity of future generations of mankind. But at the same time, it does seem somewhat unsatisfactory to keep so much hidden away, without even knowing precisely what is contained in the collections, both in regard to scientific and historical information. The aim of this research project was to compare these two collections that are of similar age and geographical origin, and the two people who have given name to them, as well as to attempt to assess the collections’ inherent values – not necessarily in monetary terms, but rather in the broader sense. This research should not only yield an overview and assess the status of the 5 collections, but also lay out future prospects for their possible uses (both scientific- and exhibition-wise), and, by extrapolation, potentially do so for similar collections in other museums. In order to draw an adequate comparison, it was first essential to accumulate as much information as possible on as many different aspects of both the collections and their donors. With regards to P.W. Lund’s personal life, this has previously been documented at great length and detail in his biography (Holten & Sterrl 2010), so only a brief résumé has been provided here. Lund’s Collection as a whole has also been previously dealt with, especially in E Museo Lundii (Winge 1888-1915), but also by many others. However, new quantitative and volumetric information on the collection as a whole will be provided here. The circumstances surrounding Dr. Lausen’s life were virtually entirely unknown at the outset of this project, and thus considerable effort has been made to piece together a new biography and a chronology pertaining to his many travels. This task could be compared to attempting to assemble a 100- piece jigsaw puzzle, though with only one or two pieces to begin with, and having to find the remaining pieces during the assembly – often in the most unlikely of places. Gathering together all the disparate strands has not been possible, but a reasonable understanding of many important events and his general whereabouts has emerged. Concerning the Lausen Collection, very little has previously been published, though the limited works include an article on sabre-toothed cats (Christiansen 2012). Zoologist Herluf Winge identified more than half of the material on its arrival back in the late 1800s, but now the majority of the remaining unidentified material has been identified, and a preliminary list of species for the entire collection has been provided here. Ultimately, after having lined up the two sides against each other, a comparison was possible. Everything, from comparing the when, where and how the material was excavated, studied and shipped to Denmark to details about type specimens, volume in the storage facility and former use in outreach projects has been explored. The two main protagonists’ lives and legacies have also been compared. Based on these comparisons various ideas about possible future avenues for the use of the collections are proposed and discussed.

Materials & Methods

Valdemar Lausen’s biography was based on various sources. This included 11 letters from Dr. Lausen to professors Steenstrup and Reinhardt that are today kept at the Royal Library (Copenhagen), accrual journals (Fig. 1) from the collections of the Natural History Museum of Denmark, personal correspondence with living relatives from the Lausen and the Sarauw families, old newspaper articles, obituaries, genealogical records, The Royal House of Denmark (Ordenskapitlet), Copenhagen Zoo and a number of articles and books (see references). The studied materials were written in different languages: Danish, English, Spanish, German, French and Latin.

Figure 1: Sample page from accrual journal (U.Z.M.I. Tilvæxt – Journal, 2. Række, Nr.3) (SNM)

The Lausen Collection was reviewed in its entirety. Previously unidentified subfossil material was examined morphologically and classified to species level whenever possible. Previously identified materials were re-examined when their classification seemed doubtful or incomplete. The collection was re-packed and placed in new cardboard boxes and given new museum numbers. A digital file was created for each lot number for future reference. 7

P.W. Lund biography

The life history of P.W. Lund (Fig. 2) has been described and studied by others at great length. Therefore, only a brief résumé will be provided here.

Figure 2: P.W. Lund, the Natural History Museum of Denmark (SNM) Peter Wilhelm Lund was born in Copenhagen, Denmark on June 14th, 1801. His father, Henrik Lund, originally came from Jutland, Denmark, but, as a younger son, did not stand to inherit the family farm. Instead, he travelled to Copenhagen and started a career as a merchant, eventually establishing a relatively prosperous family. Peter’s mother, Marina Magdalena Lobeck, had five children, all boys, with Henrik. Peter was the second youngest. Not much is known of P.W. Lund’s childhood, but it is certain that he showed an early interest in all matters concerning nature. In 1818 he started his studies in medicine at Copenhagen University. At that time the only other opportunity for study was theology. It soon became clear to Lund that he was too fragile, both in terms of actual physical health and perhaps also mentally too soft, for lack of a better term, to go on to have a career as a medical

9 doctor. Instead he pursued his interests in natural history. Moving forward, his greatest inspiration was Professor of Zoology J.C.H. Reinhardt. This enormously inspiring teacher also had Japetus Steenstrup as a student. At around the same time Alexander von Humboldt’s books on South America seemed to have also made an impression on the young student Peter. Before finishing his degree, Peter wrote two major dissertations, (P.W. Lund, 1824: Fremstilling af den Nytte, som den menneskelige Fysiologi have høstet af de I de sidste Decennier i Mængde foretagne Vivisectioner, P.W. Lund, 1824: En ved Kniv og ved Injektion gjennemført Undersøgelse af danske tiføddede Krebsdyr for derved at oplyse de Tvivl, der herske angaaende Blodomløbet hos disse Dyr.) Both of these works received a gold medal award for their exceptional quality. No one had previously turned in two gold-medal-winning dissertations in the same year.

1825-1832 P.W. Lund had now finished his studies and was prepared for new adventures. The combination of his previous experience with the works of Humboldt and his somewhat weak health propelled him towards South America, and, more precisely, to Brazil. He spent the years 1825-1829 there studying and collecting fish, invertebrates, mammals and birds. He sent a large number of specimens to Prof. Reinhardt, including 185 species of birds. There is no doubt that Lund became enamoured with the tropics of Brazil when he first visited the country. After returning home to Denmark and staying with his family during the summer, Lund immediately set off on his next journey. This time he would travel around Europe and visit colleagues and museums of note. His itinerary here was: Kiel, Berlin, Vienna, Rome, Napoli, Palermo, Geneva and Paris, all in a period of just two years. In Paris, where he stayed for a relatively long period, he attended scientific lectures by the famous anatomist Georges Cuvier and also met Alexander von Humboldt. As inspired as Lund was by the high level of scientific “notables” in Paris, he continuously planned for his future career path. After once again returning to Denmark, Lund would set out on his final adventure a year later.

1833-1834 After a long journey at sea and with many delays, Lund finally returned to Brazil in January 1833. In Rio de Janeiro he met the Russian botanist Luiz Riedel, who suggested that the two of them join forces in an expedition northward into the state of Minas Gerais. In the small town of Sao Antonio de Curvello Lund encountered a fellow Dane, Peter Claussen, apparently by 10 coincidence. Claussen introduced Lund to one of the many limestone caves in the vicinity and also showed him some fossils he had found in them (Fig. 3). Lund immediately understood the importance of these caves and their potential for yielding major scientific discoveries. Almost immediately he decided to make the exploration and excavation of caves his niche and main area of focus for the next long period of time in his life.

Figure 3: Small breccia given to Lund by Peter Claussen, dated September 5th, 1834 (Photo: KLH)

1835-1845 Over the following 10 years P.W. Lund visited approximately 800 limestone caves in the area surrounding the town of Lagoa Santa where he had established his home. Out of the 800 caves, Lund found significant numbers of fossils in 65 of them. He excavated these and essentially collected everything of a fossil and recent nature. He assembled an astounding collection consisting of more than 100,000 subfossil bones and bone fragments, 1,300 breccias and several million small bones from owl regurgitation. He also collected recent specimens of a huge varietyof vertebrates and plants. During his work and studies of this material Lund put together the first description of Brazil’s prehistoric fauna. In a series of publications (Blik paa Brasiliens Dyreverden för sidste 11

Jordomvæltning 1-5, written in Lagoa Santa 1836-1847) he described a number of new species as well as many previously known ones. In these publications, Lund included many illustrations by the Norwegian artist Peter Brandt (Fig. 4). Brandt had previously (in 1835) met with some of Peter Claussen’s brothers in Rio de Janeiro and had decided to accompany them to Minas Gerais, where Lund hired him and took him on as artist and assistant.

Figure 4: Sample page from Lund’s Blik paa Brasiliens Dyreverden för sidste Jordomvæltning, with illustrations by Peter Brandt (Photo: KLH)

Scientific accomplishments In retrospect, one can argue that Lund attained fame for three major scientific discoveries during his first years in Lagoa Santa. His first was the discovery of fossilised humans in several of the caves, though especially the ones found in Lapa do Sumidouro. Not only did Lund excavate about 30 more or less intact skeletons with very early native Indian descent, but he also found 12 some of the bones in conjunction with bones from extinct mammal species, such as ground sloths. As a consequence, Lund took it upon himself to seriously question Cuvier’s theory of Catastrophism. This theory was the current paradigm describing how a divine god created life in the shape of wild animals and then later, in an effort to create something even more sublime, destroyed the former in a diluvial flood. Cuvier had argued that ground sloths and other extinct creatures of the same age had all been destroyed at the same time. But how could human remains then have been found amongst the bones of these animals? This was illogical to Lund, and his conclusion was that some species had somehow survived the floods. Lund could identify at least five species that were found in the caves in layers containing extinct species and that were all still in existence – alive and well in Lund’s time. These were among the initial steps in an important paradigm shift, and Charles Darwin would later refer to Lund’s thoughts in his revolutionary work ‘On the Origin of Species’ (Darwin 1859). On a side note about early human activity in the Lagoa Santa region, Lund was also one of the first to discover ancient wall paintings made by these early men (Fig. 5).

Figure 5: Early cave painting from Lapa da Cerca Grande, Brazil (Photo: KLH) The second of Lund’s most important contributions to science was his overall description of the subfossil vertebrate wildlife found in the caves. This had never been done before, and Lund 13 described many new species in the process, of which at least 25 still stand today. This was, and still is, a huge amount for one person to describe – without access to any reference material, little literature and no one else with whom to discuss his findings. The most famous of the new species was perhaps the sabre-toothed cat Smilodon populator (Lund 1842) (Fig. 6) but he also described primates, rodents, ground sloths and even a new species of bird.

Figure 6: Smilodon populator Lund, 1842, (Z.M.K. 1/1845:2554) canine tooth from upper jaw, one of several type specimens (Photo: KLH) Lund’s last major contribution was his attempt to calculate the minimum age of the caves. In an ingenious manner, Lund used simple observations and arithmetic to estimate the age of one cave in particular. He had observed that a species of owl nested in the caves – only one pair per cave. He believed that each owl consumed two rodents every night and regurgitated bones, teeth and hair in the cave under the nest. In one cave (Lapa da Escrivania Nr. 5) Lund uncovered a vast pile of regurgitated bones (Fig. 7). Employing 10 workers and building a crane, they managed to excavate the entire hoard of bones (in about 8,000 small wooden barrels) in three months. During the operation Lund took out samples and through a series of calculations estimated the contents to include approximately 7.5 million rodents and other small vertebrates. Taking the aforementioned two rodents per owl and only two owls per cave into account, Lund estimated 14 the minimum age of the cave to be 5137 years old. Today with modern technology we know that the caves are actually hundreds of thousands of years old, but Lund’s attempted estimation shows a simple and elegant experimental design, by using whatever means he had at hand.

Figure 7: Owl regurgitation sample (Photo: KLH)

1845-1880 Having reconsidered returning to Denmark on a number of occasions Lund decided to remain in Brazil. Precisely why remains somewhat unclear, and it is difficult to establish if it was because he was so content with his life in Lagoa Santa, or because of his anxiety of returning to a more civilized, and perhaps for Lund, a more constrained lifestyle in Europe. Whatever the reasons, he chose to stay in Brazil and never returned to Denmark. With regards to Lund’s impressive collections, he decided to donate everything to King Christian VIII of Denmark, on the one condition that a trust fund for a caretaker of the collections was made available by the King. The proposal was accepted and from 1845 Lund began the task of packing the collections into large wooden crates and sending them on the long journey to Copenhagen. The crates were shipped on different vessels, but all would arrive in decent condition within the following years.

Now relieved of his collections, in his later years Lund focused on hosting various visiting scientists, primarily from Denmark. Of special note were the botanist Eugen Warming (1841- 1924), who acted as Lund’s personal secretary from 1863-66, and Johannes Theodor Reinhardt (1816-82), who would eventually become the caretaker of the collections back in Copenhagen. Reinhart stayed with Lund on three different occasions, two of thesefor a couple of years. Lund also concerned himself with the wellbeing of the local population in Lagoa Santa and helped its people with various ailments. This more philanthropic side of Lund gained him great respect and admiration which he has retained even to this day, especially in Brazil. During his last years Lund’s health began to rapidly deteriorate. Arthritis, toothaches and fatigue plagued him often, all exacerbated by his tendency to hypochondria. At the age of 79, now also nearly blind and deaf, he fell ill and died on May 25th, 1880. Lund was buried in the town of Lagoa Santa and his grave can still be visited today. But more importantly, his legacy also remains. P.W. Lund will always be remembered as the founder of Brazilian palaeontology and the first to describe Brazil’s prehistoric wildlife. His thoughts about species surviving Cuvier’s theory of Catastrophism were instrumental for paving the way for Darwin’s paradigm-shifting theory of natural selection. Today, P.W. Lund stands as a fundamental scientific and historical beacon from which the very good diplomatic relations between the two nations he loved the most, Denmark and Brazil, continue to benefit.

Overall description of the P.W. Lund Collection

The subfossil collection consists of more than 100,000 subfossil bones distributed in 14,000 lots, as well as more than 2,000,000 small bones from owl regurgitation and around 1,300 breccias. Lund also sent many other samples to Denmark, including the skins of birds, various small animals in alcohol in glass containers, invertebrates, plants and even some ethnographical items. However, when the Lund Collection is referred to today, it is normal practice to only include the subfossil material, which is kept together as one large unit in the storage facility. The more recent specimens are dispersed amongst other corresponding species and thus mixed into the museum’s general collections. The subfossil specimens were collected by Lund himself (with some help from his assistants) in limestone caves near the town of Lagoa Santa in Minas Gerais, Brazil (Fig. 8). The material was collected during the years 1834-1845. It should also be mentioned that, for historical reasons, the species retain the nomenclature of Herluf Winge (E Museo Lundii, 1888-1915)

Figure 8: Map of South America showing Lagoa Santa (Shutterstock)

The material dates to the late Pleistocene and early Holocene age, and is similar to what has been found in large areas of Brazil (Eisenberg & Redford 1999). C-14 dates taken from various

17 mammal species yield dates of between 20,610 and 7580 YBP (calibrated age) (W. Neves, personal communication). The rate of success in gaining C-14 dates is around 10% due to the poor condition of the material. The limestone caves that Lund studied are integral parts of the karst terrain that covers large areas of Minas Gerais (Fig. 9). Most of this karst terrain has its origins in the Cambrian Period, around 500 million years ago (Auler & Farrant 1996). Isolated linear limestone cliffs, often hundreds of meters long, spread across undulating dry grasslands with single standing trees and small lakes characterise the landscape. Rainfall is minimal and occurs in the late summer season. The caves have been established by the flow of slightly acidic water from nearby lakes and small rivers. Most of the caves that Lund explored were quite small compared to others in Brazil. For example, the Maquiné cave that Lund studied and considered one of the larger cave complexes is 650 meters long with an 18-meter drop in altitude, whereas the largest in Brazil, the Toca da Boa Vista is 65.5 km long! Aside from the limestone itself, the karst terrain near Lagoa Santa consists of sandstone and a reddish-coloured clay/soil. The caves were rich in minerals, everything from diamonds to gold to nitre has been mined, and this field of work has been so intensive that it has given name to the region of Minas Gerais. It was in these caves that Lund uncovered his many fossils, most of which were embedded into a matrix of sandstone and the reddish soil. Speaking from personal experience, the work of extracting the bones from the matrix must have been immensely difficult for Lund and his assistants, as this combination of the sandstone and reddish clay is rock hard. What Lund discovered and later described, was a subfossil fauna primarily consisting of vertebrates, but also including a few invertebrates. The vertebrates had ended up in the caves in different ways. Some had been dragged in by carnivores, some had fallen through a crack in the roof of the cave and others, probably the majority (Eisenberg & Redford 1999), had drifted in with the current of a stream or the rise of local water level during the rainy season. There is also evidence of Homo sapiens being buried in the caves (Piló et.al. 2005). The invertebrates had probably entered the caves via waterways. Due to these special circumstances, the material in the Lund Collection is generally in a relatively poor condition. The majority of the bones are broken or fragmented and few, if any, skeletons are complete.

Figure 9: The limestone cave Lapa da Cerca Grande, Brazil (Photo: KLH)

With a grand total of 293 vertebrate species in this subfossil collection, one must consider it to be among the largest in the Natural History Museum of Denmark in this respect. Currently, the list (especially the rodents and marsupials) is in dire need of reclassification, as nearly all species are kept under Herluf and Oluf Winge’s nomenclature from E Museo Lundii (1888-1915). This is not to say that Winge’s classifications were poor, Herluf was an exceptionally competent and precise zoologist for his time and Oluf an excellent ornithologist, but several examples (Mayer et. al. 2016) of rodents and marsupials changing nomenclature have recently emerged. One would assume that a reclassification would slightly alter the number of species in the collection. The list of vertebrates includes eight species of fish (Osteichtyes), one species of amphibian (Amphibia), 12 species of reptiles (Reptilia), 125 species of birds (Aves), and 147 species of

19 mammals (Mammalia). Only a limited number of invertebrates (Invertebrata) are represented, probably less than 10 species (many have not yet been identified). As mentioned above, reclassification may alter the number of species represented in the collection. However, there also exists a potential for discovering entirely new species in the collection from two different sources. To date, nobody has analysed the 28 boxes of owl- regurgitated small bones and fragments in detail. Such an analysis would most likely expand the list of species within the rodent and marsupial groups, since these are by far the most commonly represented specimens based on a superficial examination of the boxes. The list can be further expected to grow as a more or less complete overview of small mammal fauna from Brazil is still a work in progress. New species are described regularly, both recent and extinct. A second source for discovering new species could be the more than 1,300 breccias Lund sent back to Denmark together with a small catalogue. In this catalogue, many of the major bones and bone fragments in the breccias are ascribed to various species by Lund. This catalogue however, cannot be a completely satisfactory description, since many more bones are hidden inside the very hard clay and limestone matrix that holds the breccia together. The P.W. Lund Collection currently holds 47 type species (Figs. 10a, 10b) of which at least 25 have retained Lund’s authorship. All of these are mammals except for one species of bird (Chenalopex pugil Winge, 1887). More than half of the type species are from Rodentia. This order’s South American members are currently under a massive process of revision, which has already impacted on the status and total number of Lund’s type specimens and this trend is likely to continue in the years to come. It is important to note that Lund did not use terms like ‘types’ as we do today in the scientific community (Hansen 2012). His approach was quite different, though normal for his time. Initially he would study several specimens that appeared to be very similar to each other, and would then erect a new species and name it based on the similarities. Subsequently, he would have individual bones, or perhaps a skull or a jaw of one of the specimens, depicted in one of his publications. This method has since given rise to major confusion. On several occasions experts have opened small boxes containing a number of rodent skulls that should be the ‘types’ for a particular species described by Lund, only to find out, upon further close examination, that the box held two or three different species and not just one.

Figure 10a: Speothos venaticus Lund, 1839 (Z.M.K. 1/1845:2033). Example of type specimen (Photo: KLH)

Figure 10b: Calomys tener (Winge, 1887) (Z.M.K. 1/1845:13272). Example of type specimen

(Photo: KLH)

This is not to say that Lund was a poor anatomist, but his overall system for describing a new species must today be interpreted as inadequate. This is especially true when looking at the rodents. Lund erected more than 20 such species and less than half this number remain as species described by Lund. In hindsight, one may propose that Lund demonstrated more skill when describing megafauna, as many of these species are still recognised today.

When Lund eventually decided to send his collection to Denmark it was accompanied by a number of catalogues handwritten by Peter Brandt (Fig. 11). One of the catalogues (Katalog over Dr. P.W. Lund’s palæontologiske Samling I) contained a list of 12,622 individual subfossil bones, bone fragments, teeth and skulls, along with information on the cave from which they were excavated. An almost exact copy of this catalogue is also in existence, the only difference being a single extra entry for a total of 12,623 items. This minor discrepancy remains a mystery. However, it is important to understand that none of these catalogues should be considered complete insofar as encompassing the entire subfossil collection. They should rather be considered as the highlights. This because many of the most impressive and unique specimens are included in the catalogues, whereas literally thousands of more mundane bones such as from the deer (Mazama) have been omitted. Many of these not so spectacular pieces have been allotted to a so-called ‘batch number’ in the database. Therefore, one can find boxes with perhaps 500 specimens of the same bone from the same species under one single museum number. As mentioned earlier, the subfossil collection of P.W. Lund contains at least 100,000 individual subfossil bones, bone fragments, teeth and skulls (personal information gathered during digitalisation). It is unfortunately a very common mistake made when describing Lund’s works to only include the 12,623 items listed in the old catalogue. For the sake of completion, it should be mentioned that a smaller catalogue including 1,337 breccias also exists (Katalog over Dr. P.W. Lunds palæontologiske Samling II Breccier.). Another smaller curiosity observed from reviewing the Lund Collection is the fact that very few rib bones are present – it appears as if Lund purposely neglected to collect these. Out of the many figures depicted in Lund’s work Blik på Brasiliens Dyreverden før sidste Jordomvæltning (1836-1847), only one rib is displayed. The lack of illustrations can, of course, be a coincidence, but the extremely low representation in the collection is so blatantly obvious, that this must be on purpose.

Figure 11: Example of a page from Lund’s catalogue, specifying lot number, type of material, species and location. More than 12,000 lots were catalogued (SNM)

The physical volume of this collection is quite extensive. The majority of the material is kept in app. 300 brown cardboard boxes (16 cm x 37 cm x 60 cm) and 25 wooden boxes (20 cm x 38 cm x 38 cm). However, an additional special cupboard includes 30 cardboard boxes with skulls from Homo sapiens. The majority of the material is wrapped with protective cotton wool. Aside from all the boxes, a number of items are on loan to a museum (Lapinha) in Brazil and some are on display at the Natural History Museum of Denmark. All in all, the collection would take up between 12-13 m3 in storage if compressed (Fig. 12).

Figure 12: Storage facility at the Natural History Museum of Denmark showing parts of the P.W. Lund Collection (Photo: KLH)

Today, the entire subfossil P.W. Lund Collection is kept together as one unit in storage at the Natural History Museum of Denmark. Here it can be accessed physically by guest scientists as well as digitally in the museum database. It is planned that this database will be available via the Internet sometime in the near future. The Lund Collection is one of the most frequently visited sub-collections at the museum. In particular, scientists from Brazil, Argentina, the USA, France and Spain have studied the collections, paying a particular attention to Homo sapiens and Xenartha, Carnivora and Rodentia. In recent years parts of the collection have also been filmed for television productions about P.W. Lund (DRTV, TVBrasil).

Valdemar Lausen biography

Origins Valdemar Lausen was born in a house in Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, on October 11th, 1834 to parents Johan Daniel Lausen and Wilhelmine Sophie Frederikke Ovenbech. Valdemar had two older siblings, his brother Einar and his sister Frederikke Wilhelmine and also a younger brother Frode (Familien Lausens slægtshistorie). Their father, Johan Daniel, had worked as an administrative officer at a postal office in the town of Odense on the island of Fyn, prior to coming to the capital. In Copenhagen he administrated an institute for young boys before being appointed financial assistant in the Ministry of Finance, placing the family comfortably in the upper-middle-class income bracket. He also managed to publish a book about Danish history in 1833 (J.D. Lausen, Udtog af Fædrelandets Historie. Kbh. 1833). These varied and industrious personal qualities were quite common in the Lausen family, and would re-emerge later in Valdemar as he became an adult. Not much is known about Valdemar’s mother apart from her having raised her four children. The Lausen family lineage did not originate in Denmark; in fact, its roots can be traced back to Kindelbrück in Thüringen, Germany. First to arrive in Denmark however, were the two brothers Martin Christopher and Johan Daniel in around 1760. According to family records they were both saddle makers and settled on Fyn. On this island the Lausen family would soon split into two distinct lineages. In two different towns the brothers lived out almost parallel life stories, both ending their careers as Postmasters, but with Martin Christopher as a somewhat more successful businessman. As if intentionally wishing to cause confusion for future historians, the two brothers also named their eldest sons after each other and initiated a tradition for this in the family that would last for some time. So Johan Daniel’s son was named Martin Christopher and his son was named Johan Daniel (the father of Valdemar) and so forth. Even though the family tree branched into two different directions the Lausens stayed in touch and helped each other out on several occasions in times of trouble for a number of years. Knowledge of Valdemar Lausen’s early life is somewhat limited. He graduated at high school level through one or more private teachers hired by the family in 1854. He then began 8 years of studies at the University of Copenhagen to become a medical doctor. During his studies Valdemar proved himself to be an excellent student. His favourite teacher was Japetus Steenstrup, a professor of zoology, with whom he would correspond for most of his life. Steenstrup possessed a very wide knowledge and expertise within the fields of zoology, 27 archaeology and geology and was also famed for being a very enthusiastic teacher who also mentored many young students of medicine. At a point in Valdemar’s studies, Steenstrup recommended Valdemar for one of a few select rooms at the prestigious Valkendorffs Kollegium. From this dormitory Valdemar eventually finished his medical studies in 1862. After attaining his medical degree Dr. Lausen started work at Frederik’s Hospital, situated centrally in Copenhagen in Bredgade. Its buildings still stand today and function as the Danish Museum for Art & Design. After a brief two-year stay at the hospital, war came to Denmark. In 1864 the Second Schleswig War erupted and drew Lausen into it. He was given the rank of “Underdoctor” (underlæge) and participated in an unspecified location (Obituary 1889). The war only lasted for about 6 months and Lausen soon returned to Frederik’s Hospital where he completed and defended a doctoral dissertation on treating lesions in the major arteries of the hand the following year, on the 20th October 1865 (V. Lausen 1865, Behandlingen af de traumatiske haemorrhagier fra haandens större arterier). He was now well on his way to a career as a doctor. But Lausen was not destined to stay in Denmark. According to Lausen’s descendants, Dr. Lausen had decided to apply for two positions abroad, one in Greenland and one in Argentina. The reasons behind his desire to leave Denmark are somewhat unclear; again, as told by relatives to Dr. Lausen, it was either due to an unhappy romance or some disagreements in his family. In the end he decided upon Buenos Aires, Argentina, where a new hospital was being built for the large German community there. He boarded a ship and left Denmark in late 1865.

1865-1873 Lausen arrived in Buenos Aires in late 1865 or early 1866. He quickly decided to stay in the Argentine capital and began preparing for an exam for commencing work as a doctor at the German Hospital (Hospital Aléman). Having laid out a plan for his future professional career, Lausen went on to meet with Professor Burmeister from the Bernardino Rivadavia Natural Sciences Museum, initially just to present the professor with a gift of some books from Professor Steenstrup (letter from Lausen to Steenstrup). This first meeting took place as early as the spring of 1866 and, over the coming years, a friendship between the two would develop. This friendship was most likely built on the two scholars’ mutual interest for the natural sciences and their similar backgrounds and upbringing in Europe as well of their knowledge of the formidable German natural historian Alexander von Humboldt and his travels throughout South America and P.W. Lund’s exploits in Brazil. Interestingly, Burmeister had met Lausen’s compatriot P.W. 28

Lund on an expedition to Brazil 15 years earlier and this expedition had been sponsored by none other than von Humboldt himself. In the end, the meetings with Burmeister had an important effect on Lausen; it spurred him onto a personal quest to amass a collection of fossils destined for the University of Copenhagen.

Figure 13: Portrait of Valdemar Lausen, signed C. Rasmussen 1874 (Photo: KLH).

As well as keeping his job at the German Hospital, which officially opened on August 26th, 1867, Lausen began his intense search for fossils immediately. He was extremely talented at making acquaintances with influential people, and through the hospital may have established contacts with various other layers of society. He had friends who were known freemasons; his own affiliation to this somewhat clandestine organisation remains unverified, but highly probable. In reality, Lausen relatively quickly built a social network that would eventually lead him on his way to fame and financial glory. Already by 1866 he had sent a small number of fossils to Denmark via a courier, a certain hat-maker (and fellow Dane) named Mr. Sommer, who would travel to Denmark carrying pieces of an extinct armadillo to Professor Steenstrup

(letter from Lausen to Steenstrup). The provenance of these fossils remains unknown, as the material never reached Copenhagen. But this was only the beginning; yet greater things were on the horizon. The exact comings and goings of Lausen during his first 6-7 years in Buenos Aires are still somewhat unclear. But he was most likely heavily involved in treating patients from two major outbreaks of cholera in 1867 and 1868 as well as from a massive yellow fever epidemic in 1871. From a letter written by J.B. Leahy, the caretaker of The Irish Hospital in Buenos Aires (Murray 1919) to subscribers of the hospital, a heartfelt account of the ongoing maladies in 1872 exists. Beginning with the words: “A sickening horror creeps over me as I remember the scenes of multiplied want I had to witness during the yellow fever.” Leahy struggles to find any happy memories apart from “the assistance by the heroic Irish Sisters of Mercy” during this time. Following his description of the gruelling period the hospital went through that past year, Leahy presents the official monetary account for the institution. The third entry on the list is: “Paid to Dr. Lausen 6,000”. This corresponds well to a full-time salary of 500,- per month (currency in Peso moneda corriente). It seems as though Dr. Lausen for a time worked at this hospital and not at the German Hospital, at least until it ran out of funds in 1873. A very likely and fortunate outcome from working at the Irish Hospital occurred later that same year, when Lausen’s name appeared in a large real estate deal. Pontevedra, a village on the south-western outskirts of Buenos Aires, with adjacent lands covering close to 2,750 ha was sold by Thomas Gahan, an Irish ex-pat and possibly an acquaintance of Dr. Lausen’s from the Irish Hospital, to a group of investors (ref.: Billinghurst). The group consisted of some very distinguished gentlemen; Enrique and Manuel Quintana, Miguel Navarro Viola, Julio Harry Wulf and Valdemar Lausen. Manuel Quintana was especially prominent; he was a lawyer, a senator and eventually became President of Argentina (1904-1906). After buying the land, the investors laid out a ground plan for a larger settlement and sold off lots of land of different sizes, some for housing and others for farming. Streets were specifically named to draw in newly arriving immigrants; De Cuba, De los Italianos, de Berlin, de Gibraltar and so forth. Some of the investors were also involved in a similar project in the suburb of Billinghurst, but Lausen’s participation in this venture is not entirely clear. Nevertheless, the income from selling off the lots of land at Pontevedra was an extremely lucrative business and it made Lausen a very wealthy man.

1874-1879 From one of Lausen’s letters to Prof. Steenstrup, it was learned that Lausen travelled to Denmark in 1874. Here he met with Steenstrup, but not much else is known about this particular visit, except that he had a portrait of himself painted by C. Rasmussen (Fig 13). Rasmussen had been the apprentice of professor and architect Hans J. Holm, who designed many iconic buildings in Copenhagen: The Royal Library (1898-1906) Diakonissestiftelsen, Vestre Kirkegård store begravelseskapel, Tietgensgade Skole. He also designed numerous other schools and churches around the country. Interestingly, he also designed Copenhagen’s Mineralogical Museum in 1888-1893 (today’s Geological Museum and part of the Natural History Museum of Denmark) and the headstone of the plot where Lausen is buried at Frederiksberg Cemetery (Fig. 19). There seems to have been some sort of connection between Lausen, Holm, Rasmussen and possibly Steenstrup or someone else at Copenhagen University. The exact details, however, remain veiled. Subsequently, Lausen returned to Buenos Aires. Back in Argentina Lausen made two very import acquaintances around 1875-1876. Firstly, he met Alice Sarauw (Fig. 14), who would become his first wife (Sarauw family genealogy 2009). Secondly, Lausen established a friendship with a certain Santiago Roth, a Swiss freelance “fossil finder”. Roth would emerge as the primary source of fossils for Lausen to acquire for the next 10 years or so. Alice Sarauw was born on the island of St. Croix in the Caribbean in 1853. This island was part of the Danish colony of the West Indies. She was the born out of wedlock to parents Ernst Sarauw, who was a lawyer and police constable on St. Croix and possibly a woman named Christiana or Christine Abednego/Bodniga. This woman lived a very short distance from Ernst and also had a son named Waldemar Adolph Sarauw (born in 1847). Alice’s story is quite unique and worth further discussion. Her family, the Sarauws, had a tradition of taking care of their own. This meant that all their illegitimate children were sent to the town of Sorø on the island of Zealand in Denmark. In a home run by some of the unmarried Sarauw sisters, “aunts” to the children, the boys would attend the very fine school Sorø Akademi, and the girls would train as governesses, learning etiquette, sewing and singing among other things.

Figure 14: Alice Sarauw (original photograph kept by the Sarauw family) Alice was described as somewhat exotic, olive-skinned girl with a pleasant singing voice. One aunt, Maria Elisabeth Hagedorn (born Sarauw and sister to Ernst) took a particular interest in the upbringing of Alice. After coming of age, Alice began working at a manor house as a governess. Unfortunately for Alice, her health was poor, she suffered from pleuritis, a serious lung condition, and her doctor eventually recommended her to find a more tolerable climate to live in, perhaps starting out with a long cruise to warmer latitudes. Some discrepancies exist with regards to her departure from Denmark. Some sources claim that she had already heard of Dr. Lausen before she left. It has been surmised that Dr. Lausen had advertised in a Danish newspaper for a position as a nursing assistant at a newly opened Institution for Health, a rehabilitation facility for former hospital patients in Buenos Aires (Sarauw family, personal communication). However, this facility was not led by Dr. Lausen himself, but rather a lady named Mimi Drachmann (1849-1940), the younger sister of famed Danish poet Holger Drachmann. This information was gleaned from a number of letters between 32 her father and her brother Holger (Borup 1968). As an example, dated April 1876, Mimi’s father concerns himself with the future of her new project as well as her own youthful wellbeing and encourages Holger to write to his sister, interestingly giving him the address of a Senor, Dr. Lausen: “Fra Mimi have vi jevnlig Efterretning; med Begyndelsen af denne Maaned er hendes Virksomhed i B. A. egentlig begyndt, og det vil nu snart vise sig, om den vil lykkes eller om hun med uforrettet Sag, men med en ikke ganske ringe Livserfaring, maa vende tilbage til Reden. Du vilde kunne glæde hende meget med et Par Linier, som Du kan adressere: Senor, Dr: Lausen, Vittoria 117 — Buenos Ayres (via Bordeaux) og frankere (Portoen vil ikke overstige 1 Krone).” (Borup, 1968). It now seems highly probable that Alice travelled with Mimi to Buenos Aires, having already been hired as a staff member before their departure. Others claim that her encounter with the doctor occurred by coincidence at the German Hospital in Buenos Aires, where Alice had sought medical help (Sarauw family, personal communication). This latter scenario does seem somewhat far-fetched. Would a young woman have travelled this far on her own and without a clear destination or purpose? It also remains undocumented whether Dr. Lausen had in fact returned to the German Hospital to work after his stint at the Irish Hospital. This scenario now seems highly unlikely. But we know for certain that they met and were subsequently married in Buenos Aires on the 8th July 1876. Dr. Lausen and Alice never had any children of their own, but in February of 1879 something unexpected happened to the couple. A 4-year-old indigenous girl from the Tehuelche people was handed over to Dr. Lausen by military officers (Fig. 15). The girl’s name was Lalla and she was lovingly adopted by the Lausens (Esmann 1964). The Tehuelche People is a collective term used for the native tribes of Patagonia. Today, around 6,000 of them still live in southern parts of Chile and Argentina. During 1878-80 the Argentine government conducted a violent military campaign led by General Julio Roca (1843-1915) against the Tehuelche people. The aim was to conquer and claim the region of Patagonia. The natives were almost annihilated and many women and children were taken prisoner. Sadly, Alice’s health had deteriorated drastically over the years and, in the spring of 1879, her aunt Maria from Sorø (at the ripe age of 70) came all the way to Buenos Aires to take care of her. Alice’s life ended in August 1879 at the age of only 26. Aunt Marie returned to Denmark, bringing little Lalla with her.

Figure 15: Lalla, at age 4 (Foto, Esmann 1964) After Lalla’s stepmother’s early death, she accompanied Aunt Maria back to Europe. It must have been quite an adventure for the little girl. The route went from Buenos Aires to Rio di Janeiro via Montevideo and then across the Atlantic Ocean to Bremmerhafen in Germany and then finally to Denmark. After being welcomed with open arms by the Sarauw family, Lalla began a new life in Sorø. She must have stood out as an individual, looking quite different from any of the other children in town with her jet-black hair and dark complexion. In the parish archives in Sorø, one can follow a series of letters regarding the baptism of Lalla. There seems to have been some great confusion about whether it was likely that she had already been baptised in Buenos Aires. Under no circumstances could one be baptised twice, but on the other hand it was problematic not to be baptised at all. In the end, none other than the Bishop of Roskilde Cathedral became involved. In a letter, the Bishop wrote that he could see no impediments to a baptism and granted a resolution to proceed. The baptism took place soon thereafter. In Dr. Lausen’s many letters to Steenstrup during these years, Alice was only mentioned once; on a discreet wedding invitation card. Someone who did get mentioned frequently however was Santiago Roth. He was born in the town of Herisau in Switzerland in 1850 under the name Kasper Jacob Roth (Saffer 2009). The Roths immigrated to the Swiss colony in Baradero near Buenos Aires about the same time that Dr. Lausen initially arrived in Argentina. As a very young man, Roth began exploring his new surroundings near the Parana River, primarily searching for fossils of extinct animals. By 1870 Roth had assembled a considerable number of fossils and 34 began selling individual pieces to museums in Europe. As he became more knowledgeable on the subject of palaeontology, he also began putting together assemblages, which he called “collections”, of fossils for sale (Giacchino & Gurovich 2001). In the beginning, these collections were presented to potential buyers simply as a handwritten inventory on a piece of paper. Later ones were, however, printed as high-quality catalogues, often with very fine drawings of the most important pieces and including both individual prices and a sum total for the whole collection. Roth also began collaborating with the paleontological museums in Argentina, where he worked with both Professor Burmeister and later on with Director Moreno from the Plata Museum. Later in Roth’s career he coined the term Notoungulata, meaning “southern hoofed” for an extinct order of mammals endemic to South America (Simpson, 1980). He also stayed in touch with museum staff in Switzerland, not least Professor Carl Vogt. His first major collection was sold to Dr. Lausen in 1877 or 1878, for an unknown price. Lausen wrote about acquiring this collection as well as his plans for donating it to the University of Copenhagen to Prof. Steenstrup the same year. In his letter Lausen also mentions troubles with obtaining an export permit. Only after Professor Burmeister intervened did the shipment clear customs. In what would become a recurring element in many of his later letters to Steenstrup, Lausen went into quite some detail regarding how the fossils would be shipped to Copenhagen, such as the number of crates, the labels on the crates, the itinerary and in this case even a description of the vessel transporting the goods; the German steamboat “Rio”. As an acknowledgement of his donation to Copenhagen University, the Danish Government bestowed a knighthood (Knight of the Order of the Dannebrog) to Dr. Lausen on December 20th, 1878 (Fig. 16).

1880-1889 During the first couple of years after Alice’s death, Dr. Lausen remained in Buenos Aires and continued his ongoing quest to purchase more fossils. With regards to this, Santiago Roth made a rather famous discovery around 1880 near Pontimelo; an ancient human skeleton found in conjunction with the carapace of a glyptodon (very large extinct relative of the armadillo) (Vogt 1881), (Podgorny 2015). Soon after this extraordinary find was excavated, rumours began circulating in some scientific circles that evidence for the coexistence between humans and extinct megafauna had finally emerged. Roth certainly believed the human remains were very old and that they could not have been buried at a later date, since the skeleton was found under the shell of the glyptodon. 35

Figure 16: Knights Cross Order (Ridder af Dannebrog), December 20th 1878 (Ordenskapitlet)

In the meantime Dr. Lausen returned to Denmark where he married Ernestine (Erni) Marie Martha von Düring (Fig. 17) in the town of Haderslev in Jutland on the 4th December, 1883. It is not known how they met, but Lausen had most likely been in the region during the war of 1864 and his first wife’s father also lived in the region (Løgumkloster) after returning from the West Indies. Lausen also found time to visit little Lalla in Sorø in 1883. Lausen would return to Haderslev later in his life and soon found himself back in Argentina with his young new wife (Erni was more than 20 years his junior). Together with an impressive sabre-toothed cat skull, an almost complete skeleton of a ground sloth, remains from a toxodon and several glyptodons, the Pontimelo human skeleton was the star attraction of Roth’s auction catalogue Nr. 2. Lausen bought everything in the catalogue in 1884, for somewhere in the region of 31,600,- Francs (Box Nr.1).

Figure 17: Dr. Lausen’s second wife Ernestine (Erni) Marie Martha von Düring (Det Kongelige Bibliotek) Box Nr. 1. So how much does 31,600,- Francs equal to in today’s money? The Latin Monetary Union existed between 1865 and 1927 and included France, Belgium, Switzerland and Italy. In a treaty, the member nations agreed to mint their coins in the same denominations so that their currencies would remain interchangeable. The system was based on the values of gold and silver, so that 1 gold franc (0,29 g of fine gold) was worth 15.5 silver francs (4.5 g sliver). The term fine gold equals 900/1000 parts per thousand of pure metal or 21.6 karats. By this calculation 31,600,- Francs would equal 9.2 kg gold, which today would have a value of somewhere around 300,000 Euro. But this calculation doesn’t take history into account. The same 9.2 kg gold would have valued 5,603,- USD in 1882 and this amount would have taken an average white-collar worker a relatively long time to earn if compared to today. In truth, it is not unrealistic to estimate the value of the 31,600,- Francs to about 500,000-600,000 Euro in today’s money.

The year 1885 was a happy one for Lausen. He fathered a son named Valdemar Düring Lausen on the 8th July and later that same year he acquired another collection of fossils from Santiago Roth. This assemblage was presented in catalogue Nr. 3, and had a price tag of 43,000,- Francs. Again Lausen bought the entire inventory of the catalogue. Having decided to continue to donate his fossils to Copenhagen University, Lausen began shipping it to Denmark. This process would take more than two years and seven separate shipments to complete. But Lausen did not just donate fossil bones, he also presented some live animals to the Copenhagen Zoo as a gift. After a thorough search in the Zoo’s archives (Zoo, Copenhagen, personal communication with staff), it was discovered that Lausen had indeed donated a few local Argentinean animals as early as 1878 and again in 1887. These included one otter (species unknown), two nandus (the South American equivalent to an ostrich) and one Azara's fox. Having the exact date of the arrival of the Azara's fox at the Zoo and knowing that many animals were brought from the Zoo to the Zoological Museum after their death, it was possible to cross- reference these data with museum records and find the remains of this particular animal in the museum’s storage facility. As luck would have it, someone had stuffed and mounted the skin, so that today we can get a good impression of this fine example of a 13-year-old adult female Azara’s fox – the exact specimen donated by Lausen (Fig. 18).

Figure 18: The Azara’s fox donated by Dr. Lausen to the Copenhagen Zoo (Photo: KLH)

In 1887 Lausen and his family returned to Denmark where a daughter, Frederikke Sofie Wilhelmine Düring Lausen, was born on June 19th in Haderslev. That same summer Lausen visited Lalla in Sorø again. Lalla had begun attending school and the doctor seemed very interested in her progress in general. It was agreed that Lalla should stay on with the now elderly Aunt Maria and finish her education in Sorø. Afterwards she could join Dr. Lausen and his new wife in Argentina. In late 1887, back in Buenos Aires, Lausen wrote to Steenstrup. In this letter Lausen asked about the possibilities for donating a new huge collection and whether this collection could be combined with his previous donations as a whole, under his name and to never be split up in any fashion. This would be along the same lines as the well-established and quite famous P.W. Lund Collection from Brazil. Lausen mentioned that he had not yet acquired any new collection (letter from Lausen to Steenstrup). It is not known if this request had any bearing on the bestowment of the honorary title of Councillor of State (Etatsråd) to Lausen, but it is very likely that Steenstrup had instigated this or at least been involved in the process. However, with regards to establishing a Lausen Collection, Steenstrup had now retired from the university and no longer had any major influence there. Whether the question was put to the new professor of zoology at the museum, Christian Frederik Lütken, remains unknown. The collection Lausen was referring to was most likely the Botet Collection that today resides in Valencia, Spain. This enormous collection had apparently been promised to “a Museum in Copenhagen”, but José Rodrigo Botet (a Spanish engineer) had probably outbid or outmanoeuvred any Danish bidder. The fossils were originally collected by Enrique de Carles from the Museum of Natural Science of Buenos Aires; in much the same manner as Santiago Roth operated (K. V. Chichkoyan, personal communication). Lausen had missed out on the de Carles collection, but he quickly bounced back by buying another collection, this time from fossil collector José Larroque. Larroque had worked in the region of Mercedes near Buenos Aires for many years and was furthermore well connected with museum staff in the capital. He had also previously sold fossils to other museums in Europe and USA. The Larroque Collection that Lausen bought was somewhat smaller than de Carles’s, but still an impressive collection including skulls from ground sloths, sabre-toothed cats and toxodon. As before, Lausen sent the entire collection to Copenhagen in early 1889, where it was received in June and July. At the end of the 19th century outbreaks of typhoid fever were relatively common in Argentina. This bacterial infection had a potentially deadly outcome at the time, since antibiotics had not yet been discovered. From the archives of the Norwegian Seamen’s Church in Buenos Aires (ref.: 39

Sjomannskirken), a comprehensive register documents the people who have been buried there and their cause of death. From the year 1889, 10 deaths are recorded. Out of these 10, six are confirmed to have died from typhoid fever and five of these six died at the German Hospital during the months of March and April. Also on the list, but without a cause of death, is a young child; Frederikke Sofie Wilhelmine Düring Lausen, died on April 23rd, buried the following day. The exact details are veiled in the shadows of history, but Dr. Lausen travelled to Switzerland sometime soon after his daughter’s death, most likely with the rest of his family. Some sources describe the trip as Lausen’s attempt at convalescence. Was he ill? Typhoid fever can have a protracted nature and complications such as encephalitis, pneumonia and serious intestinal problems are not uncommon in untreated cases (ref.: Netdoktor). Lausen died on July 29th, 1889 in Rheinfeld, Switzerland, aged 54. Whether it was typhoid fever or something else that took him remains unknown. He was buried at Frederiksberg churchyard in Copenhagen under a beautiful headstone (Fig. 19) made by architect Hans J. Holm, who very appropriately had also designed Copenhagen University’s Mineralogical (today Geological) Museum.

Figure 19: Grave marking the final resting place of Dr. Valdemar Lausen and his wife Ernestine “Erni” Düring Lausen. Frederiksberg Kirkegård (Photo: Christina Jürs)

Aftermath Lausen’s wife Erni relocated to a large villa, Marienlund (Fig. 20), in Aarhus in Jutland (Denmark). She may have found the city of Aarhus appropriate since her sister Marie Sophie Henriette von Düring also lived here (W. Lausen, personal communication). Marie was married to a nephew of Dr. Lausen, a man named Martin Frederik Lausen, managing director of Aarhus Oliefabrik and a great philanthropist. Erni’s son Valdemar Düring Lausen also came to live here and began attending school. Valdemar eventually completed an engineering degree and moved to Copenhagen, possibly after getting a new job. Erni followed her and lived in Østerbro, Copenhagen, until her death on December 1st, 1939, aged 81.

Figure 20: Marienlund in Århus, Denmark (Trøjborg Historiegruppe) Lalla stayed in Sorø until the death of Aunt Maria in 1896 and then joined Mrs. Lausen in Jutland. A very sweet family anecdote exists describing how Lalla and young Valdemar rode to school on horseback together and by horse-drawn sleigh during wintertime. Lalla eventually met and married Waldemar Esmann, a manager of a bank. They had three children and a number of grandchildren. Lalla died in 1953, almost 80 years of age. In October 1948, Valdemar Düring Lausen died. To avoid expropriation of the Lausen estates in Argentina (Fig. 21), his son moved back to Argentina. Here he stayed with his wife until 1966, where the lands were sold to business partners, two brothers from the Linck family, lawyers from

41 the firm Estudio Linck. After the sale the Lausens moved back to Denmark (W. Lausen, personal communication).

Figure 21: Map showing the two pieces of land previously owned by the Lausen family near Tandil, Argentina. Marked with circles, the upper or northern area was known as “Campo Vela” (2,749 hectares) and the lower or southern area was named “La Concordia” covering 2,382 hectares (Photo: KLH)

In the end, Lausen’s many donations were accumulated into what became known as Lausen’s Collection. The combined value paid by Lausen is estimated at no less than 100,000 Francs, equalling 1,600,000 – 1,700,000 Euro in today’s money. The Lausen Collection’s true value, is, however, likely to be much higher. Many of the most impressive skeletons and skulls were exhibited in the main hall of the then newly erected (1870) Zoological Museum in Krystalgade alongside the P.W. Lund Collection (Fig. 22). These exotic South American fossils were in many ways the highlight of the museum and would remain as such until a new museum building was opened in 1970. Hereafter, most of the Lausen Collection would be placed in storage facilities, except for a select few mounted skeletons still on display today.

Figure 22: The Edentates donated to the Zoological Museum in Krystalgade (SNM)

Overall description of the V. Lausen Collection

The collection comprises more than 3,000 subfossil skulls, teeth, bones and bone fragments divided into approximately 450 lot numbers. The subfossil material was originally excavated in Argentina during the years 1875-1888, primarily and independently from each other by Santiago Roth and José Larroque. A few pieces were collected by other unnamed people. As far as is known, everything in the collection was bought by Dr. Valdemar Lausen and donated to Copenhagen University. As Lausen bought more and more fossils, he began dispatching them to Denmark. The larger fossil specimens were wrapped in newspaper and packed in wooden crates and transported by many different ships, beginning in 1877 and ending in 1889. Smaller and more fragile items were sometimes placed in small wooden boxes for extra protection (Fig. 23).

Figure 23: Examples of small boxes used for the smallest and most fragile items in the V. Lausen Collection (Photo: KLH) The provenance of the bones is generally not very well documented. Santiago Roth did not supply any information on his earliest pieces. Most are labelled “Plata-landene” (in Danish), which roughly translates into something along the lines of: areas of land in the vicinity of the La Plata River. This should probably be interpreted in its widest form. The La Plata River is actually more of a gulf than a river and none of the items in the collection have been found there. Upon

45 closer examination from the museum’s historical registration journals (Z.M. accrual journals) one can learn that Roth had excavated both within the city limits of Buenos Aires as well as hundreds of kilometres up the Parana River (which flows into the La Plata) all the way up to Santa Fe, 300 km to the northwest of Buenos Aires (Fig 24). This information pertains to Roth’s later activities, but according to Roth’s biography (Saffer 2009) there is no reason to believe that his earlier finds came from outside of this general area. The fossils were mainly excavated from the banks of riverbeds and aside from supplying a vague geographical location for some these finds, Roth sometimes placed a subtext of “Pampas Superior”, Pampas Intermedia” or “Pampas Inferior” to the location (Table 1.).

Table 1. Santiago Roth’s system of Pampaen stratigraphic layers, here simplified from Damian Voglino (Voglino) Santiago Roth Period Epoch Estimated age in millions of years Pampas layer BP Superior Quaternary Pleistocene 0.085 – 0.12 Intermedium Quaternary Pleistocene 0.12 – 0.5 Inferior Quaternary Pleistocene 0.5 – 2.0

The material excavated by José Larroque also has almost no information, except that it is from the area of Mercedes, located around 50 km due west of Buenos Aires (Fig. 24). The specific details of how and where the material was recovered by Larroque are unknown. The age of the material in the Lausen Collection ranges from Late Miocene to Late Pleistocene age, with a few Holocene specimens as well. At least six species are from the Miocene. A few attempts at radiocarbon-dating pieces from the Lausen Collection have been made, but only a single one has been successful (T.W. Stafford, personal communication). This was human phalange dated to approximately 1950 years BP (14C Age: 1985 +/-15), corresponding to a pre- Columbian age, but not particularly interesting with regards to the colonisation of the New World by humans, as was originally hoped.

Figure 24: Map of South America. Area A is the general area for most finds from both S. Roth and J. Larroque in the Lausen Collection (Shutterstock)

With regards to the present condition of the material in the V. Lausen Collection, the majority of the bones are intact or almost intact. Approximately 10-15% have fallen apart into smaller fragments or almost completely turned into a coarse-grained powder. Several individual skeletons are nearly complete and intact. The V. Lausen Collection holds at least 55 mammalian species which are spread over 13 mammalian orders. The represented species are relatively diverse, ranging from aquatic dolphins and seals to sabre-toothed cats and enormous ground sloths. There are also a number of species that have not been adequately identified. This is due to either the bones being too fragmented to properly identify or in a few instances a lack of a higher level of expertise required for a final determination. Some disagreement also exists between experts about the precise taxonomy of some mammal groups, for example the South American proboscideans (Mothé 2016) and within the group of Mylodontidae (Corona et.al. 2013). A datasheet for each of app. 450 lot numbers 47 containing about 3,000 subfossil pieces in total has been produced for future incorporation into the Natural History Museum of Denmark’s species database (see Appendix). There is also a single unidentified species of turtle (Testudines) and a number of unidentified fish and shark species in the collection (Fig. 38). The V. Lausen Collection includes three type specimens: a piece of the right mandible of the rodent-like notoungulate Protypotherium antiquum Ameghino, 1882 (Fig. 25a-25c) and the left maxilla of the litoptern Scalabrinitherium rothii Ameghino, 1882 (Fig. 26a-26c), both of Miocene age (9.0 – 6.8 million years BP). Neoprocavia mesopotamica Ameghino, 1889 (Fig. 27a-27c), related to the capybara and of Miocene-Pliocene age, is currently under revision (Moreira et.al. 2012). This species is represented by a piece of the left mandible.

Figure 25a: Protypotherium antiquum Ameghino, 1882, Z.M.K. 21/1887, lingual view (Photo: KLH)

Figure 25b: Protypotherium antiquum Ameghino, 1882, Z.M.K. 21/1887, buccal view (Photo: KLH)

Figure 25c: Protypotherium antiquum Ameghino, 1882, Z.M.K. 21/1887, occlusal view (Photo: KLH)

Figure 26a: Scalabrinitherium rothii Ameghino, 1882, Z.M.K. 116/1887, buccal view (Photo: KLH)

Figure 26b: Scalabrinitherium rothii Ameghino, 1882, Z.M.K. 116/1887, lingual view (Photo: KLH) 50

Figure 26c: Scalabrinitherium rothii Ameghino, 1882, Z.M.K. 116/1887, occlusal view (Photo: KLH)

Figure 27a: Neoprocavia mesopotamica Ameghino, 1889, Z.M.K. 111/1887, buccal view (Photo: KLH)

Figure 27b: Neoprocavia mesopotamica Ameghino, 1889, Z.M.K. 111/1887, lingual view (Photo: KLH)

Figure 27c: Neoprocavia mesopotamica Ameghino, 1889, Z.M.K. 111/1887, occlusal view (Photo: KLH)

During his time in Argentina Dr. Lausen also found time to send various other specimens of a more recent age back to Copenhagen. These reptiles and amphibians were probably caught by himself in and around the vicinity of Buenos Aires (Figs 28, 29). Around 10 species were received in alcohol through different couriers.

Figure 28: Liophis poecilogyrus (Erythrolamprus poecilogyrus (Wied-Neuwied, 1825)) a small and common colubrid snake (Photo: KLH)

Figure 29: Acrantus viridis (Teius oculatus (D’Orbigny & Bibron, 1837)). A species of lizard (Photo: KLH) As mentioned earlier both Roth and Larroque sold their fossils to museums around the world, but on occasion they sold to private investors as well. As a way of presenting their finds to potential buyers they produced catalogues. These ranged from hand-written lists of fossils to beautifully illustrated printed booklets in several different language versions (Fig. 30). Usually the fossils were individually priced, but on occasion one could buy the entire assemblage for a bundle price. Santiago Roth made the most elaborate catalogues and even numbered his later printed ones chronologically. Lausen bought everything in catalogues Nr. 2 and Nr. 3. Catalogue numbers 4-6 were sold to Swiss Museums, Nr. 5 for example, is in Zürich.

Table 2: Date of arrival of V. Lausen Collection with Z.M.K. reference numbers and corresponding S. Roth catalogue number. (Z.M.K. = Zoological Museum Copenhagen) Date of arrival to Z.M.K. Journal reference S. Roth catalogue nr. 9.7.1877 2. Række Nr. 3 side 57 7.12.1877 2. Række Nr. 3 side 63 24.5.1878 2. Række Nr. 3 side 71 30.12.1880 2. Række Nr. 3 side 119 1.7.1885 2. Række Nr. 3 side 230 Roth Nr. 2 1.8.1885 2. Række Nr. 3 side 236 Roth Nr. 2 25.11.1887 2. Række Nr. 4 side 79 Roth Nr. 3 12.3.1888 2. Række Nr. 4 side 94 Roth Nr. 3 24.4.1888 2. Række Nr. 4 side 99 Roth Nr. 3 30.5.1888 2. Række Nr. 4 side 107 Roth Nr. 3 11.9.1888 2. Række Nr. 4 side 114 Roth Nr. 3 26.12.1889 2. Række Nr. 4 side 160 26.7.1899 2. Række Nr. 5 side 138

The physical volume of the V. Lausen Collection is somewhat difficult to calculate, especially given the fact that four relatively large skeletons of ground sloths and glyptodonts are mounted. This increases their volume in storage significantly as compared to if their individual bones were packed tightly together in appropriately sized boxes. The rest of the collection is generally stored into around 360 white cardboard boxes (14.5 cm x 32 cm x 49 cm) and a number of smaller white boxes of varying sizes. In each container the individual bones are protected with cotton wool (Fig. 31). A number of quite large skulls and bones are on display at the Natural History Museum of Denmark and have not been placed in boxes. The total size of this collection would be around 15 m3 plus the mounted skeletons.

Figure 30: Example from S. Roth’s catalogue Nr. 2. The complete catalogue can be found in the Appendix. (SNM)

Today, the subfossil V. Lausen Collection is kept in storage at the Natural History Museum of Denmark. The collection will probably not be kept as a single unit in the future and it will be integrated into the general collections of foreign origin. Depending on future storage dispositions, the collection will be physically accessible by guest scientists as well as digitally in the museum database. The Lausen Collection has not received many visiting scientists over the last 50 years (since its relocation to storage). The interest has circled around Smilodon populator, Homo sapiens and to a lesser extent the search for signs of human activity on bones. A complete list of the app. 450 lot numbers and the types of material included in each is provided in the Appendix.

Figure 31: Storage facility at the Natural History Museum of Denmark showing parts of the V. Lausen Collection (Photo: KLH)

The recent history and status of the collections

After the collections had dominated the museum in Krystalgade, they were moved into storage at the new museum in Universitetsparken in 1970. Here they have remained for the most part with only a few exceptions, when a small number of items have been on temporary exhibition. The Lund Collection has, on average, been visited twice a year by foreign researchers and has around 5-6 inquiries via e-mail per year. In terms of scientific publications, approximately one article has been published per year since 1965; however, there has been a significant increase in articles in the last decade compared to previous years. With regards to outreach, the Lund Collection has been extensively utilised. Documentary television programmes have incorporated the collection on numerous occasions. Both Danish and Brazilian programmes have been produced, such as the Lund biographical documentary in Danish: “Store danske videnskabsfolk: Peter W. Lund” (DR, 2016) and the Portuguese language “Pré-história brasileira: um tempo a ser descoberto” (TV Brasil, 2016). In addition, major parts of the collection have been on exhibit. In 1980 (the centenary of Lund’s death) the Zoological Museum in Copenhagen presented an exhibition in Lund’s honour (Brasliens Knoglehuler og deres udforskning I forrige århundrede – en mindeudstilling om zoologen P.W. Lund). That same year Lund was also celebrated in Brazil, both in Minas Gerais (Fig. 32) and in Rio de Janeiro. In 2012, their royal highnesses Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary of Denmark opened a Lund exhibition in Museo Peter Lund near Lagoa Santa in Minas Gerais, Brazil. These are just a few examples; there have at least been five exhibitions in Denmark and Brazil over the last 50 years, including items from the Lund Collection. Numerous popular books and articles pertaining to P.W. Lund and his collection have been published through the years, and a novel/biography “Vejen til Lagoa Santa” (based on real events) by acclaimed Danish author Henrik Stangerup (1937-98) also enjoyed literary success (Stangerup 1981). Even a Brazilian cartoon for children based on Lund’s discoveries has been published, this being a joint venture between the renowned artist Lor and Professor Cástor Cartelle, a P.W. Lund expert from PUC Minas University (Fig. 33).

Figure 32: Exhibition catalogue from the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, celebrating P.W. Lund and the centenary of his death in 1980 (SNM)

Figure 33: “A historia de Aur e Nia”, educational children’s cartoon explaining facts on palaeontology, Lund and human migration (Cartelle & Lor, 2012) 60

The Lausen Collection has not been visited and studied to anywhere near the same extent, and hardly any enquiries have been made over the years. Visiting scientists have only studied parts of this collection less than 10 times in the previous five decades. The number of scientific publications touching on the Lausen Collection is estimated to be somewhere in the region of 5- 10. With regards to outreach, only a few specimens have been exhibited at the Natural History Museum of Denmark (in the permanent “Evolution” exhibit, see Fig. 34).

Figure 34: Edentates from the V. Lausen Collection on exhibit at the Natural History Museum of Denmark, The Evolution Exhibit (Photo: KLH)

Newer research subjects have been the numerous reclassifications of rodent species, primarily by Brazilian and Argentine researchers and DNA sampling of Homo sapiens by the Natural History Museum of Denmark’s Centre for GeoGenetic’s Eske Willerslev Group (Moreno-Mayar et.al. 2018).

Rediscovered fish, reptiles, amphibians and other curiosities As an example of more recent research into the Lund Collection it is worth briefly mentioning the rediscovery of fish, amphibian and reptiles remains in the storage facility in 2010-2011. Herluf Winge (1857-1923) provided a remarkably thorough description and analysis of the mammals (Mammalia) in the P.W. Lund Collection in E Museo Lundii (Winge, 1888-1915). His brother Oluf Winge (1855-1889) described the birds (Aves) and Søren Hansen (1857-1946) supplied a chapter on Homo sapiens in that same work. For reasons unknown, a volume on reptiles (Reptilia) (Fig. 35), amphibians (Amphibia) (Fig. 36) and bony fish (Osteichtyes) was never published. Back in 2010-2011, boxes predominantly filled with subfossil bones from these three groups were rediscovered during a major review of the entire P.W. Lund Collection.

Figure 35: Caiman Caiman latirostris (Daudin, 1801). Dental fragment excavated by Lund in the cave Lapa da Escrivania Nr. 5, Minas Gerais (Photo: KLH)

Moreover, small paper notes found with their corresponding bones were identified as having been written by Professor Dr. Hector Frederik Estrup Jungersen (1854-1916). Jungersen edited the last volume (Vol. 3, parts 1 and 2) of the three volumes of E Museo Lundii and was a gifted

62 ichthyologist. Furthermore, comprehensive notebooks describing many of these newly uncovered specimens were found in the Zoological Museum’s Library (Copenhagen University, Denmark) under Jungersen’s name. The layout of these notebooks was, in many aspects, similar to the format seen in E Museo Lundii, suggesting that Jungersen was planning to publish his writings in the series of which he himself was editor. However, Jungeresen was elected Head of Copenhagen University from 1912-1913 and this could have drawn his attention away from publishing further volumes in E Museo Lundii. With the emergence of the boxes containing the rediscovered bone material and Jungersen´s notebooks, it seemed highly relevant to produce an addendum to E Museo Lundii. Using Jungersen’s notes as a framework, the reptilian, amphibian, and fish material were re- investigated and analysed. The resulting addendum was divided into three main chapters: Reptilia, Amphibia and Osteichtyes, following the general layout of the original volumes of E Museo Lundii. The creation of this addendum to E Museo Lundii was essential for the completion of the descriptions of the major bones and bone fragments in the P.W. Lund Collection (Hansen 2012).

Figure 36: Horned frog, Ceratophrys aurita (Raddi, 1823). Lapa da Escrivania Nr. 5, Minas Gerais (Photo: KLH)

Further items have since been rediscovered during the registration of the South American collections at SNM. For example, while unpacking some fragile bones found in an old wooden box holding various paraphernalia from the Lund Collection, it was discovered that some of the sheets of wrapping paper used had small pencil drawings on them. On one of the sheets one can clearly see the depiction of two bats drawn by P.W. Lund himself (personal communication, Jon Fjeldså) (Fig. 37).

Figure 37: Small bat, drawing by P. W. Lund on packing paper discovered wrapped around small bone fragments (SNM)

Moreover, during a recent review of the Natural History Museum of Denmark’s Fossil Vertebrate storage facility, teeth, fin rays and vertebrae from fossil fish and sharks originating from Dr. Lausen were uncovered (Fig 38). These finds have now been integrated into the registration of Lausen’s Collection.

Figure 38: Shark teeth (Elasmobranchii sp.), excavated by Roth and purchased by Dr. Lausen. Museum numbers NHMD -157436 & NHMD -157438 (Photo: KLH).

Biological significance When approaching relatively large natural historical collections such as the Lund and Lausen collections, one can pose reasonable questions pertaining to their overall biological and/or ecological relevance. Is it indeed possible to infer some sort of distribution pattern or even a segment of the evolution of one or more species in our prehistoric natural world based on massed accumulated datasets? The yielding of potentially significant results in this area would require three critical factors to be present for each datapoint: an identified species, its provenance and its age. Aside from this a certain threshold in total numbers must be met for each species studied and some relative minimum distance drawn between locations (D. Nogues Bravo, personal communication). Unfortunately, both collections are currently ill-suited for this kind of analysis. The Lund Collection lacks C-14 dates (or other dating methods), but aside from this it could be a suitable candidate with thousands of specimens representing mammalian species as well as, for the most part, well-defined locations. The Lausen Collection suffers from a number of different issues. Even though about one third of the collection has a relative age based on the stratigraphic layer associated with the find, the number of samples per species and the sometimes very vague

65 provenance, renders any real data analysis futile. One must also consider the nature of how Lausen’s Collection was accumulated by fossil hunters’ cherry-picking the most spectacular fossils rather than scientifically excavating and assessing a dig site for a more complete fossil record. There does, however, seem to be more to be found when combining data from both collections into one simple analysis. Here one must initially consider that there only exists a very small number of overlapping species between the two. In fact, only eight species (all mammalian) overlap: Glossotherium robustum, Paleolama sp., Hippidion principale, Toxodon platensis, Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris, Cuniculus paca, Arctotherium bonariensis and Smilodon populator. The probable explanations for this particular overlap in species are threefold. First, the geography and vegetation of the two regions of origin was vastly different; mostly flat grassy plains in northern Argentina compared to a softly undulating elevated plateau, partially covered by forest, in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Thus one would find quite extensive natural variations in habitats, resulting in different conglomerations of species. Second, there was a considerable age gap between the two collections; Lund’s is of late Pleistocene and early Holocene age and Lausen’s is from late Miocene to late Pleistocene age (with only a relatively few Holocene specimens). Third, climate change was a factor. The overlapping species seem to have originated from cooling southern reaches and radiated northward towards a warmer climate (Eisenberg & Redford 1999). This theory of radiation does correlate well with the overlapping species typically being quite large herbivores, with a following of the carnivorous sabre-tooth cats and opportunist omnivorous bears. Again, the cherry-picking aspect of Lausen’s collection detracts from these findings, but still, only the largest of the smaller mammals in the Lausen Collection overlap with similar-sized species in Lund’s Collection. For future macroecological studies into this area, Lund’s Collection seems to hold the most promise. Many species and numerous samples could be combined with C-14 dates for the potential computer modelling of datasets. The only issue here would be the relatively small distance in kilometres between locations. Ideally, one should combine data from Lund’s Collection to similar collections currently kept in Brazil (Croft et.al. 2008).

Complementary collections As previously mentioned, the P.W. Lund and V. Lausen collections attained their highest point of public popularity when they were on joint exhibition in the old Zoological Museum in Krystalgade during the late 19th century and up until around 1960. They would probably not have 66 enjoyed the same success if they had been exhibited by themselves. Being highly heterogeneous and primarily consisting of small-sized and often fragmented bones, the Lund Collection is actually relatively difficult to put on meaningful display. Having a high degree of scientific value is not always sufficient to attract visitors. The Lausen Collection on the other hand is somewhat easier to exhibit. With large almost complete skeletons of extinct and, for us Europeans, unusual mammals, the visual appeal is clear. However, lacking detailed excavation information, the depth of experiencing the Lausen Collection may to some extent appear superficial to the viewer. As luck and coincidence would have it the two collections shine when displayed together. This is because they complement each other perfectly. One definition of complementary is: “…combining in such a way as to enhance or emphasize the qualities of each other or another” (Oxford Dictionary Online). And this is exactly what these two South American collections do! The fragmented individual bones in the Lund Collection can be correlated to the almost complete mounted skeletons in Lausen’s. The understanding of Lund’s comprehensive fieldwork and further ordeals of transporting the material first across land and then by boat back to Denmark is similar to the combined efforts of Santiago Roth and Dr. Lausen, but considerably better recorded in his letters and publications. Complementary collections such as Lund’s and Lausen’s will likely give the viewer a far greater experience and level of appreciation of the natural wonders of the world, than they would find on their own. This experience can be difficult to describe, but authenticity, the fact that these are real specimens, not casts, as well as the interesting personal life histories of the protagonists are some of the more important key factors. The sheer size of several of the complete mounted skeletons as well as the overall volume of material collected by Lund himself is also awe- inspiring. One can safely assume that the end result for the visitor is far greater than the sum of its parts. Future exhibitors of the Lund and Lausen collections should bear this in mind.

Repatriation Repatriation of museum collections in their entirety or in parts is a notoriously delicate and complicated matter. Even which exact words to use about the act are debated (Gabriel 2002). Is repatriation, transfer, restitution or return the most appropriate term? For the sake of simplicity, repatriation will be used here. Classic examples that have been covered in international media are the requested repatriations of Egyptian mummies to Egypt and the remains of Native American Indians to their tribal communities (Opoku 2010). These are just a few of many similar cases that have arisen during the last 20 years. Most common are cases involving the 67 return of pieces of art, cultural heritage or human remains. The repatriation of objects of natural historical origin is very rare. Here, a brief history of the subject in relation to the P.W. Lund Collection and the V. Lausen Collection is presented. This is followed by a discussion of the matter and thoughts on whether the Natural History Museum of Denmark should have a transparent statement available regarding repatriation. According to museum archives (Note 1, Note 2) there have been a few initial requests involving the repatriation of the P.W. Lund Collection by various local government officials, museum- and university personnel beginning in 1975. All these initial requests have been denied on different occasions by the Natural History Museum of Denmark, the Ministry of Culture or the Ministry of Higher Education and Science, with some or all of the same or similar arguments: - According to the Danish Parliament the P.W. Lund Collection belongs to the state of Denmark, and is in the care of the Zoological Museum (the Natural History Museum of Denmark). - The collection is both parts of Brazilian and Danish history as well as of pre- history. - Lund’s overseas studies were important for the formation of the modern identity of Danes. - Separating select items from the collection would decrease the scientific importance and value of the collection. - The collection is being kept in a very secure environment and is accessible to visitors (scientists and laymen alike). No formal inquiries have been proposed by the Argentines with regards to the Lausen Collection; only a single very indirect preliminary request has been registered, which in the end came to nothing (personal communication). It is worth delving a little further into this issue, not least because the question of repatriation may surface again in the future. Legal ownership, historical affinity, cultural connections, monetary value, scientific value, security and access to a given collection are probably the most important factors regarding the repatriation of the Lund and Lausen collections in their entirety. One should perhaps also consider another factor: “the responsibility of the current curators to future generations”. All these factors are, of course, only relevant insofar as the nations involved have established a diplomatic relationship or some other means of communication between them and are willing to discuss the issue.

With regards to legal ownership it is important to understand that neither the Lund nor the Lausen collections were acquired as a result of war, theft or colonial annexation. There were no laws in Brazil in the mid-19th century prohibiting the export of fossils and Dr. Lausen had acquired permits for his shipments out of Argentina. According to Danish Museum law (Museumsloven, LBK nr 358 af 08/04/2014) these collections today belong to the State of Denmark. However, it is worth mentioning that legal ownership of items pertaining to the natural world is debatable (Gabriel 2002). One could also theoretically argue that these items belong to mankind or science in general. When looking at the historical and cultural connections, both sides have persuasive arguments such as: the collections are an integral part of their nation’s cultural and natural history as well as being an important factor in the forming of the nation’s populations’ identity. In continuation, when considering that the collections are currently kept at a museum, the focus from staff is often placed on curating the collections in an optimal manner. This contrasts with the desire of the nations of the collections’ origin, where curation is not necessarily the driving force. Determining a monetary value for the collections is always a somewhat abstract process and is generally used for insurance purposes as opposed to actually selling the collection or parts thereof. When considering the repatriation of the Lund and Lausen collections, monetary value here seems of little concern to all parties involved. The overall scientific value of both collections is undisputedly high, especially the Lund Collection. In matters concerning repatriation, this should be taken into account, as parts of these collections cannot be replaced again, they are unique. Finally, it is of utmost importance that the collections are safeguarded and at the same time accessible for relevant scientific analysis. These should be some of the easiest factors to agree upon during repatriation consultations. However, this is not always to be taken for granted, as there are often concerns for the wellbeing of collections being moved to a new location as material may be lost or even stolen during the process (Fig. 39). And defining what exactly the term access covers may be problematic. Who should decide on who can apply for access? Political stability is also a factor here. Unstable democracies with high levels of corruption can in times of trouble alter their priorities and valuable collections can disappear or be mishandled with catastrophic consequences. This is not to say that more stable democracies cannot arrive at the same conclusions as funding can run out and collections end up in dire straits by way of neglect. It is worth noting that the museum in Rio and the museum in Belo Horizonte have both had devastating fires in recent times, Rio in 2018 (Fig. 40) and Belo Horizonte in 2013. 69

Moreover, the Instituto Butantan has lost a large part of their collections in a fire back in 2010 (Kemech 2010). A final argument can be presented as kind of debt owed to future generations on our planet. The philanthropy of the donors of natural history collections foreshadowed the future of both access to scientists and exhibitions to the public. Had it not been for people such as P.W. Lund and Dr. Lausen, we would not have had these collections in the first place. This should also be taken into account when deciding the fate of these two collections.

Figure 39: Safety of collections. The P.W. Lund Collection was temporarily moved to a bomb shelter during WW2 (SNM)

Figure 40: The devastation of the fire in the Natural History Museum in Rio di Janeiro, Brazil (The Guardian) An exception exists to the general concepts mentioned above; the issue of human (Homo sapiens) remains present in both collections. Such remains can arguably be considered as integral parts of the collections or as separate entities depending on the onlooker’s point of view. Rather than functioning as a legally binding international rule of law, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples article 12 (Box Nr. 2) sets a standard for the treatment of indigenous people around the world. To date, 147 nations have signed the declaration, including Argentina, Brazil and Denmark. Box Nr. 2. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples article 12 1. Indigenous peoples have the right to manifest, practice, develop and teach their spiritual and religious traditions, customs and ceremonies; the right to maintain, protect, and have access in privacy to their religious and cultural sites; the right to the use and control of their ceremonial objects; and the right to the repatriation of their human remains. 2. States shall seek to enable the access and/or repatriation of ceremonial objects and human remains in their possession through fair, transparent and effective mechanisms developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples concerned.

The obvious question here is whether the human remains in the relevant collections are in fact from native Indians and if there are any descendants alive today from the same original culture that could potentially claim the rights to the material (Simpson 2009). According to internal museum reports the human remains from the P.W. Lund Collection are dated to between 7500- 9500 years BP and are of native Indian origin (Fig. 41). After future and further DNA analysis there seems to be some potential here for invoking article 12. The human remains in the V. Lausen Collection have only been C-14 dated (app. 2000 years BP), indicating a pre-Columbian native Indian origin (Fig. 42). No DNA has been sampled, so the exact heritage of these bones is still unclear. However, one cannot rule out the possibility for article 12 being invoked here as well relatively many years down the line.

Figure 41: Human male skull from the P.W. Lund Collection (Z.M.K. 1/1845:15113) (SNM)

Figure 42: The Pontimelo skull (Homo sapiens). V. Lausen Collection (Z.M.K. 11/1885) (Photo KLH) Should the question of repatriation emerge at some point in the future, it would be highly recommendable that negotiations be conducted at government-to-government (ministerial) level to prevent complications at lower levels that could result in inconvenient precedencies having a cascade effect (Gabriel 2007) (Harris 2015). One could imagine such problems arising when local museums could feel overlooked when a rival museum managed to gain some repatriated material from direct negotiations conducted at museum to museum level. As complicated and emotionally provoking matters of repatriation can be, one must never forget that many artifacts, pieces of art and exceptional wonders of the natural world may never have seen the light of day had it not been for human nature. Scientific curiosity, the search for treasure, fame and glory has been and still is a powerful driving force moving our species forward in time. However, sometimes we find ourselves at a crossroads and must conclude that we have gone too far and a treasure must be repatriated to its point of origin. At this moment in time and based on the discussion above, when considering the Lund and Lausen collections in their entirety, it is difficult to conceive an arrival at these crossroads, with the exception of the human remains that must remain in some doubt.

Bearing any possible future negotiations in mind, it is somewhat disturbing to find the following text on one the biggest tourism homepages in Minas Gerais, Brazil (www.guiabh.com.br.): “Inaugurado em setembro de 2012, o Museu Peter Lund é localizado em Lagoa Santa, na região metropolitana de Belo Horizonte. Trata-se de um museu de território inspirado na trajetória do naturalista dinamarquês Peter Wilhelm Lund (1801-1880) pela região de Lagoa Santa. O espaço compreende todo o território do Parque do Sumidouro, onde foi construída uma sede, ao lado da Gruta da Lapinha, que reunirá cerca de 80 fósseis humanos e animais descobertos por Lund na região cárstica da cidade - os itens foram cedidos ao museu pelo Governo da Dinamarca”. (http://www.guiabh.com.br/museu-peter-lund). The final sentence regarding bones on display at the museum, on loan from the Natural History Museum of Denmark, translates into roughly: “the items were donated to the museum by the Government of Denmark.” There were similar articles in the Brazilian press in 2009 when news broke about an upcoming P.W. Lund exhibit that would open with repatriated bones from the Lund Collection. These kinds of inaccuracies should be avoided as they may cause serious confusion for anyone reading them. However, today there seems to be little overall interest in the repatriation of either the Lund or the Lausen collections. At the highest level of government good relations thrive between Brazil and Denmark. The Danish Royal Family has visited Brazil on several official occasions (Queen Margrethe II in 1999 and Crown Prince Frederik in 2012). The relationship between Argentina and Denmark is also strong, not least due to the Danish ex-pat community in Tandil, Tres Arroyos and other locations that have integrated very well into Argentine society and now number about 50.000 people (ref.: dkargentina). Looking forward and in conjunction with the construction of a new Natural History Museum of Denmark, it seems important to think about the importance a making an official public statement available on how the museum would handle possible future requests pertaining to the repatriation of the P.W. Lund and Dr. Lausen collections as well as other similar inquiries. This statement should include the details of the procedures on how an application is dealt with by the museum itself (and other involved authorities). The Natural History Museum and the British Museum in the UK have both had such statements available in the past (Harris, 2015). Transparency is of key importance here, but having thought about these matters in advance would also prepare museum staff, so that an initial state of panic upon receiving a request for repatriation, which is often inherent in these cases, can at least be somewhat reduced. A new state-of-the-art natural history museum should be optimally geared for this situation as, even if a 74 request never presents itself, it sends a strong signal to the world that the museum cares, has thought about the concept of repatriation and is prepared to enter into a dialogue about it.

Comparison/Discussion

Many natural history museums across the globe house vast collections of plants, animals, minerals and other wonders of the natural world. Only very little of this is ever on display for a wider audience, as most of it is kept locked away in storage facilities. But why do we keep all these collections of specimens? Should we keep them at all? Or why not just keep some of it, do we really need more than one of each? Does anyone ever look at or study these specimens? And what about historical collections, what are their relevance today? Here follows a comparison and discussion about two historical collections housed in the Natural History Museum of Denmark; the P.W. Lund Collection and the Valdemar Lausen Collection. It seems natural to begin the comparison by looking at the facts in chronological order and beginning with the most obvious historical similarities. Both collections were excavated in the 19th century by Danes who lived most of their adult lives in South America. P.W. Lund and Dr. Lausen were both products of their time, men with a natural scientific educational background, embarking on the ultimate quest of their life during a global age of discoveries. Having assembled relatively large subfossil collections, they both donated these as a way of giving thanks. In Lund’s case, he wanted to demonstrate his gratitude for the financial support he had received from King Christian VIII as well as giving his scientific colleagues a chance to further study the collection and for the Danish people to see it on display. Lausen certainly wished to thank Copenhagen University for his medical degree. But maybe he also had other reasons? In a letter to Prof. Steenstrup, he had asked about the possibility of donating a larger collection and in such a case requested that a collection be established in his name. The implication being, that if Dr. Lausen should invest a larger amount of money into buying fossils in Argentina, he would still like to donate them, but preferably if they would be kept together as a self-contained unit, a “Lausen Collection”. This would certainly be a more prestigious endeavour and something that, at least for a time, would establish the good doctor’s legacy. Today, donations of natural history collections are quite rare and seem a thing of the past, but back in the late 19th century it was considered as almost a standard operating procedure. Having decided on the future of their collections, the many bones, teeth and skulls were packed in large wooden crates and shipped off to Denmark. In combination, the two collections were dispersed across at least 10 different vessels and, almost miraculously, all arrived safely at their destination, incurring only minor damage to a small number of the specimens during the transport. 77

After initial delays and time spent on mounting some of the more or less complete skeletons, both collections were put on display. In the newly erected (1870) Zoological Museum in Krystalgade the two collections would have their finest hour (Fig. 43). The reasons for this success were twofold. Firstly, the timing of the exhibitions was perfect. This was at a particular time in history where people yearned for greater knowledge of the extinct wildlife from the New World. Inspired by Charles Darwin’s travels and descriptions of Megatherium as well as Humboldt’s work about the South American continent and the writings of P.W. Lund himself, visitors flocked to the scene. Secondly, the two collections complemented each other very well. Where Lund’s fossils were often fragmented and the individual specimens highly incomplete, a guest at the museum could see similar species in their full articulation in the Lausen Collection. Having this complementation was essential for the success of the exhibits as it underlined the scientific research that Lund had meticulously performed over many years and at the same time put his work into perspective when visitors were presented with the “bigger picture” by observing the mounted skeletons in the Lausen Collection. One could say that the arguably of higher scientific value Lund Collection would probably not have been an ongoing success without the Lausen Collection to complement it and that the Lausen Collection would not have been quite as interesting without the scientific background supplied by the Lund Collection. In hindsight the complementation was largely a coincidence, but it does give rise to afterthoughts regarding possible future exhibits with a similar setup. As much as the two collections had enjoyed enormous success while being exhibited in the Krystalgade museum, they were in many ways also typical of their time. A new museum was being built and a more modern ecological approach for the exhibits was planned to replace the more old-fashioned ones from Krystalgade. The old museum closed in 1967 and the new museum opened in Universitetsparken in 1970. After almost 100 years on display (slightly less for Lausen’s Collection) both collections (in their entirety) were placed in storage in the new museum. Afterwards there was a brief, but intense, altercation between descendants of P.W. Lund and Dr. Lausen on one side and the Zoological Museum on the other. The family members who contacted the museum were quite upset and claimed that placing the P.W. Lund Collection in storage was in violation with what was stated in the original agreements with the donators (personal communication). In the end, nothing came of the complaint and both collections ended up in storage.

Figure 43: Engraving depicting the Zoological Museum in Krystalgade, Copenhagen around 1870-1875 (SNM) 79

Continuing from the historical perspective, there are also some important differences worthy of mention. Obviously our two main characters went about putting their collections together in very distinct ways. This may seem odd at a glance as both of them came to South America with advanced scientific university degrees, but where P.W. Lund was a natural historian, with a combination of zoological, botanical, geological and medical training, Dr. Lausen worked purely as a medical doctor. With regards to the collecting of fossils Lund worked intensively for 10 years within his profession and Lausen never visited an active dig site during his time in Argentina. These ways of going about their business certainly had a significant effect on the final composition of the collections and their relative scientific value. The methods used by P.W. Lund were fairly conventional for his time in terms of labelling most specimens according to their location, in Lund’s case usually the name of the cave where the fossils were excavated. Sometimes he would also make some general descriptions of the geological sediment layers in particular caves. These notes would all be recorded in his catalogues, where more than 12,000 specimens are listed. Lund would remove as much fossil material from a cave as possible and then examine it further after transporting them to his home in Lagoa Santa. This method of approach ensured a very wide range of species collected, but also entailed a certain drawback, in that major parts of the collection consist of hundreds or even thousands of specimens of the same type of bone from the same, at times, mundane species, for example deer from the genus Mazama. When a collection reaches these amounts of ‘duplicates’, one could argue that the overall relative scientific value is somewhat decreased, when compared to its size. Of course, Dr. Lausen’s approach was very different and less scientific in many ways. His main source of supply of fossils was Santiago Roth. From early on in Roth’s career he worked almost as an “Indiana Jones-like” fossil hunter. Initially he was inspired by his passion for finding fossils from unknown and perhaps undiscovered species. Later on in his career he would assume a more scientific point of view and eventually, in 1905, he became professor of palaeontology at the National University of La Plata. This metamorphosis can be traced in the evolution of Roth’s catalogues. Whereas some of his earlier catalogues were rather primitive handwritten lists of fossils with almost no description, his later ones were much more thorough and detailed, both with regards to their overall layout but also in relation to anatomical terminology. Unfortunately, most of what Dr. Lausen acquired from Roth was from early on in Roth’s career. This was, generally speaking, at a time where Roth apparently did not give any great priority to recording exact information on his dig sites. This resulted in very vague locations such as “the delta area of 80

Entre Rios” written on his labels. Even though some more precise information has been reconstructed (Voglino), it seems odd that Roth, who was very interested in geology and topography, did not take down more precise notes on this subject. It should, however, be mentioned that Roth became much better at describing his excavations during the second half of his career and from these descriptions one can reconstruct the locations of some of his initial dig sites. Another problematic issue for Santiago Roth was the moral dilemma he must have found himself in when deciding which fossils to excavate and to whom to offer them. The rarest and the most complete fossils would attain the highest price when selling to collectors, but what about the local museums? As Roth’s career began to develop he established close ties with the museums in Buenos Aires, not least with Francisco Moreno, the Director of the La Plata Museum and Florentino Ameghino, who is considered by many as one of the most important founding fathers of South American palaeontology. When studying Roth’s career in detail, there seems to be a clear pattern, where he slowly over time moves away from selling fossils to European museums and instead begins working with local Argentinian museums (Saffer 2009). As an example of Roth’s ingenuity as a salesman in the relatively early part of his career, one may consider a case in Roth’s catalogue Nr. 3 from 1885 (see Appendix). Here he presents an almost complete skull of what appears to be a juvenile Typotherium cristatum (Mesotherium c.). In the catalogue, after referring to having spoken with Professor Burmeister about it, Roth ascertains that the specimen is in fact not Typotherium cristatum, but rather a new species, now proposed by Roth as Typotherium lauseni. Naming the new species in honour of Dr. Lausen must have attracted Lausen’s attention and made the purchase of this collection almost impossible for him to resist. For how could he possibly let someone else acquire the type specimen of a species bearing his own name? With a price tag of 4500,- Francs, this individual skull was valued at more than 10% of the full catalogue (42,972,- Francs). The skull (Fig. 44) has since been identified as a young specimen of Mesotherium cristatum (formerly known as Typotherium c.). Whether Roth’s clever idea was purposely designed to lure in Dr. Lausen remains unknown, but in the end Lausen bought everything in catalogue.

Figure 44: Skull from Mesotherium cristatum Serres, 1867. This is the specimen (Z.M.K. 113/1887) tentatively named Typotherium lauseni by S. Roth (Photo: KLH)

Having compared the historical background, the different approaches for collecting and recording information from excavations as well as integrating the latest scientific publications and curatorial information, the end result is, in reality, two very different collections (Table 3).

Table 3. Comparison between the P.W. Collection and the V. Lausen Collection. This is a tool for obtaining a quick overview of the collections’ various parameters when presented side by side. Parameter P.W. Lund Collection V. Lausen Collection Country of origin Brazil Argentina General provenance Limestone Caves Dried-up river banks, significant number of lots with unknown provenance. Excavated by P.W. Lund S. Roth, J. Larroque Age Late Pleistocene (some Late Miocene to Late Holocene) Pleistocene (some Holocene) Type of registration Digital database (internal Digital archive (not available SNM) uploaded to database) Vertebrate classes Mammals, Fish, Reptiles, Mammals, Fish, Shark, represented Birds, Amphibians Reptiles Other groups represented Invertebrates, Plants Number of specimens App. 100,000 App. 3,000 (+ 2,000,000 small bones in owl regurgitation) Breccias More than 3,000 Other material Ethnographic, written letters Number of type specimens 47 3 Special storage RH 50% (+/-5%) RH 50% (+/-5%) requirements Temp. 12-15 °Celsius Temp. 12-15 °Celsius In darkness, no UV light In darkness, no UV light Physical size App. 13 m3 15 m3 (+ 6 large mounted skeletons) Relative scientific value High Low-Medium Relative historical value High Medium Relative monetary value High Medium Relative outreach value High High

Relative hands-on Medium High educational value Repatriation issues Potential Unlikely Number of relevant Medium-High Low scientific publications about Number and character of High numbers, radio other publications, broadcasts, TV documentaries, radio, documentaries, novels, podcasts etc. biographies, (many in foreign languages) C14 (Stafford et.al. 1991) App. 20 C14 dates. 1 C14 date DNA sampling App. 5 (Homo sapiens)

Moving Forward

Towards the end of the 19th century the P.W. Lund Collection and the V. Lausen Collection were extremely popular. One could say that Lund and Lausen were an integral part of a Golden Age of Danish scientific discoveries and natural historians. Placing the collections on near permanent exhibition for decades was a demonstration of how relevant they were at that time. When the new museum in Universitetsparken was built in the late 1960s, the two collections were deemed less relevant and the traditional method of exhibiting skulls and skeletons was considered old- fashioned. Thus, the vast majority of the collections were placed in a storage facility, where they remain to this day. In this chapter, thoughts pertaining to the future of the collections are considered. Special focus will be given to how to make the two collections (and other collections of a similar nature) relevant in the 21st century. In other words, how does one set these magnificent objects free from their shadowy storage? Three different angles of approach will be taken initially: scientific research, exhibits and media. The future for the collections within the context of the natural sciences seems bright and full of potential. Cutting-edge ancient DNA technology will most likely spread to other species than Homo sapiens. Questions such as how the various species of ground sloths are related to each other, which species are hidden in the many boxes of owl regurgitation in P.W Lund’s Collection and how sabre-toothed cats from South America are related to those of North America can be studied with this emerging technology. The only real caveat for the Natural History Museum of Denmark in this matter is to maintain a standard for the procedures of sampling. There are certain limits to how many samples can be taken before the permanent damage to the integrity of a collection is incurred. Another newer field of study uses X-rays in computed tomography (CT) scans. This technology has already been used (work in progress) to study structures in the inner ear of Xenarthrans as well as the evolution of the brain in large Felids. These research projects are already underway and it seems a natural field to develop further. It should be mentioned that there have been some small concerns regarding whether the X-rays used may impact DNA fragments. Until this issue is completely resolved, one should remain cautious when selecting samples for CT scans. Continuing in the three-dimensional universe, 3D printing is a rapidly evolving technique that within the last decade has improved in quality and can now be purchased for reasonable sums of money. By initially scanning an object via a 3D scanner or a camera with the relevant software, a computer-aided design (CAD) can be produced. This CAD can then be saved into another format 85

(for example STL) which the 3D printer uses to print the final version. Depending on the quality of the scanner, the printer and the plastic polymers used, the quality of the end result varies. This technique can be used in different scenarios. One can easily imagine the Natural History Museum of Denmark sending digital STL files of a particular specimen to another institution that could then print their own copy of the specimen for either research or exhibition purposes. It is worth mentioning here that sometimes a three-dimensional scan can be used on its own by scientists for taking measurements without actually making a 3D print. And the potential for 3D scanning also includes software akin to facial recognition software that may, far into the future, be able to identify bones and maybe even bone fragments. Rounding off the subject of natural sciences, both the Lund and the Lausen Collections have a potential for being used in teaching situations. Subjects such as evolution, zoology, geology, skeletal anatomy, taphonomy, extinctions, history and philanthropy can easily be taught using the two collections. As this range of subjects is somewhat broad, there is almost no limit to the age or background of the students that can enjoy learning from them. Even the youngest of audiences find the enormous ground sloths and sabre-toothed cats to be “cool”.

Figure 45: Cane Toads (Rhinella marinus (Linnaeus, 1758)), collected by Dr. Lausen and sent to Denmark (Photo: KLH) 86

When talking about placing the collections on exhibit, it is important to note that only parts of the collections can realistically be exhibited at one and the same time. In addition, it is not unheard of that a small number of objects are integrated into a larger exhibit. For example, the Evolution exhibit currently (2018) on display at the Natural History Museum of Denmark contains a couple of mounted skeletons from the V. Lausen Collection. This way of using materials from the two collections is quite normal and one can easily imagine the same happening in similar contexts such as in a historically focused exhibition or in an exhibit dealing with extinctions. Whether there will be individual P.W. Lund or V. Lausen exhibitions created or indeed a combined Lund & Lausen exhibition in the future at the Natural History Museum of Denmark remains to be seen. The prospect seems to hinge on a trigger effect to catalyse an initiative to make it happen. This trigger effect could be in the shape of a new scientific discovery, a relevant live action film, a television series or even shifts in the socio-political climate in Denmark. A completely different approach would be the creation of a “travelling exhibit”, the concept being an exhibit that could be moved and set up in different locations. There seems to be a relatively large and continuing interest in P.W. Lund in Brazil and this would certainly be the biggest market for such an idea. General security issues in Brazil would be the most concerning issues regarding such an endeavour at this point in time. Moreover, 3D-printed replicas of museum specimens can be used for exhibits. They are particularly good at giving visitors an opportunity for discovering how tactile an item may be, as they can be permitted to touch 3D-printed items in lieu of the more rare and fragile originals. One can imagine how it feels holding the 25-cm-long canine from a sabre-toothed cat in one’s own hand for the first time! Taking this subject further, there seems to be some potential for 3D- printing certain iconic specimens for commercial sale, perhaps even giving them a simple coat of paint, some shades and highlights, to further enhance their sales value?

Today, modern media comes in many different forms: print, television, software, video games, music, the Internet, etc. The ones that have applied to the Lund and Lausen collections are books (biographies and a historical novel), newspaper articles, articles in scientific journals, television documentaries, television news and science programmes, television entertainment programmes, radio programmes, information on many and varied Internet sites, lectures, and so forth. These have appeared at a more or less steady rate within the last four decades and will most likely 87 continue to do so, simply because there are so many great stories to tell about the collectors and their collections. There have been informal discussions on a few occasions where filmmakers have approached staff at the Natural History Museum of Denmark with questions about the production of a live action movie about P.W. Lund’s life (personal communication). According to the filmmakers, the main reason for this not coming to fruition is the lack of historically accurate knowledge of the innermost feelings and thoughts of P.W. Lund. In other words, it would require a relatively large amount of invention to portray a version P.W. Lund’s personality that, ultimately, would largely be guesswork at best and would certainly detract from an accurate account of his life.

A few other issues are worth briefly touching upon with regard to the future of the Lund and Lausen collections. There has historically been a tradition for donating both money and collections to natural history museums, especially in the USA, but also in Europe. As our world changes today, certain philanthropically minded and very wealthy individuals have chosen to donate large sums of money to particular causes (Fiennes 2017). Some have argued that this would, in some cases, be contrary to a government’s system of funding of museums through taxpayers’ money (Birn 2017). Perhaps it would be better for a broad range of museums in a region to gain government funding instead of having one or two museums singled out by millionaires? However, as government funding to museums in general seems to be on the decline in many countries, it is important for modern museums to keep potential philanthropically inclined people interested and inspired. Perhaps even a strategy for getting their attention should be considered. One way of gathering people’s attention has been the advent of crowdfunding. On Internet sites such as www.Kickstarter.com and www.Indiegogo.com anyone with a good idea or invention may try to get funding to realise their dream project. The scope here seems to be almost without limits and ranges from people seeking funding for recording music, producing films, writing novels, to making foldable electrical bicycles, board games or air purifiers. Backers of a project are often given a say in some of the details of the design of a crowdfunded project as well as receiving a reward depending on the amount pledged. So why not consider crowdfunding when planning new exhibits for a museum? The Natural History Museum of Denmark could gain funding, publicity and establish an Internet-based “interest group” of dedicated backers. The backers would feel empowered by supporting a good cause (promoting the natural sciences) as well as possibly being involved in making some selections/decisions regarding an upcoming 88 exhibit and receiving a reward. The crowdfunding concept seems to hold some potential for the future of museums and it could be interesting to conduct a pilot project to examine the pros and cons of this method of funding. Finally, a new Natural History Museum of Denmark will open in 2022 (Fig. 46). This new museum will replace the one in Universitetsparken and thus the collections will have to be moved away from their current location. Exactly how the P.W. Lund and V. Lausen collections will be stored in the future remains unclear. The most likely scenario will be in an external storage facility within one hour’s driving distance from the new museum in the Botanical Gardens in central Copenhagen. Hopefully this storage facility will be state-of-the-art and can keep the collections safe for many years to come. One issue that may cause some concern is access to the collections. It will require some detailed logistical planning, when, for instance, foreign scientists are visiting the museum. Without daily access, there also seems to be some potential for the collections to be forgotten. Even worse would be future plans for redistributing items in storage so that items of “lesser importance” were placed in storage even further away from the museum.

Figure 46: Model of the new Natural History Museum of Denmark. Planned to open in 2022 and designed by architects Claus Pryds og Lundgaard & Tranberg (Illustration: Bygningsstyrelsen og Lundgaard & Tranberg Arkitekter)

Conclusions

Having compared the P.W. Lund Collection and the V. Lausen Collection it is clear that they are very different entities in a number of ways but also share some commonalties. The Lund Collection is by far the more famous and has the highest intrinsic scientific value due to the large number of type specimens and the very broad range of vertebrates represented; the very well described personal history of P.W. Lund also enhances the possibilities for outreach and storytelling significantly. As late as December 2018 an extensive essay about P.W. Lund and the author Henrik Stangerup appeared in the Danish newspaper Weekendavisen (M.B. Hansen 2018). Combined with latest article in Science (Moreno-Mayar, J.V. et al. 2018) these are just the most recent examples of the ongoing perceived interest in P.W. Lund and his collection as a whole today. The Natural History Museum of Denmark also enjoys a continued and steady influx of both visiting scientists and various people from the media to the Lund Collection. The V. Lausen Collection certainly also holds potential, albeit on a somewhat lesser scale then Lund’s. It is virtually unknown in both scientific and public circles. When compared to Lund’s Collection, the overall scientific value of Lausen’s Collection is smaller, or perhaps narrower is a more precise term. Fewer species and a lower level of information pertaining to provenance characterise the majority of the collection. Superficially this makes the collection as a whole less interesting for scientists, but it does not mean that it is without scientific value. There remain at least three type specimens to be studied in greater detail as well as a number of suitable specimens (petrosal bones) for ancient DNA sampling from various species including sabre- toothed cats and ground sloths, to mention just a few examples. The personal history of Dr. Lausen is also not without its own merits. Working as a medical doctor under difficult conditions such as war and during outbreaks of cholera are only small fragments of his life story. He also enjoyed establishing a family, amassing a huge collection of vertebrate fossils and travelled over long distances several times between Buenos Aires and Copenhagen. His story is at the same time a brilliant example of how a man of the 19th century demonstrated his philanthropic inclinations by donating his entire fossil collection back to the university from which he graduated. This was at least in part meant as a token of gratitude, but also, and probably to a lesser extent, a way of ensuring his legacy.

The shared features revolve around several very different aspects. Most obvious perhaps is the collections themselves; they are relatively large, both in physical size and in number of 91 specimens. They also overlap in age, they are from the same continent and the individual bones are in relatively fragile and/or deteriorated condition overall. The collections should also ideally be kept under similar storage conditions. The two protagonists behind the collections also share a few important traits; their willingness to travel abroad and live a large part of their lives outside of Denmark, a curiosity for understanding and investigating our world’s natural history and a desire to share their discoveries with the general public through donations. With regards to complementarity, this is certainly present as the two collections complement each other when considering exhibits and teaching situations. This concept of having two or more collections that complement each other should not be underestimated. Just as two complementary colours optically enhance the viewer’s experience of both colours when next to each other, natural historical collections such as Lund’s and Lausen’s create a better understanding of both to the observer. And finally, even though future requests for the repatriation of items from either collection seem somewhat unlikely at this point in time, it would be recommendable for institutions holding collections of natural historical objects from other countries of origin to have a concise and transparent protocol in place for such an event, however unlikely it may seem.

Figure 47: Examples of teeth from Megatherium americanum from the V. Lausen Collection (Photo: KLH) 92

When working through the comparison of the two collections, it has become evident that there lies buried a significant but forgotten potential here. Not only has new information pertaining to V. Lausen and his collection come to light, and this in itself is of importance when planning new exhibits, outreach in general, and scientific research at the Natural History Museum of Denmark, but the rediscovery of the concept of exhibiting the Lund and Lausen collections as complementary to each other also seems to hold valuable promise for the future. However, some important challenges and risks exist that must be considered while moving forward in time. There has clearly been a reduction of scientifically trained curatorial staff working closely with collections in general at the Natural History Museum of Denmark, as well as in other similar institutions across Europe and the Americas over the last 20 or so years. Whatever the reasoning behind these cuts or reallocations of funding, a loss of information pertaining to the collections is inevitable. Another secondary effect also occurs that correlates to the first. This is the loss of the possibility of multidisciplinary scientific research. Combining the minds and thought processes of scientists from different disciplines can at times result in ground- breaking research. With the loss of the aforementioned curatorial museum staff, less or no input from museum personnel into these kinds of endeavours will likely result in fewer scientific discoveries in the future. As an extension of reorganisations and budget reductions, problems relating to the future storage of the collections must also be addressed. First and foremost is the security of the collections. The status quo is relatively acceptable, even though precise climate control and sprinkler systems are currently lacking. As for moving the collections to a new storage facility outside central Copenhagen, the details have not yet been finalised. Moving the collections further away from a reduced number of museum staff members seems counterintuitive and only time will show what the consequences will be.

Some important perspectives surrounding the concepts of complementary collections, archival studies and philanthropism are worthy of consideration. At the Natural History Museum of Denmark there are several other examples of collections that could complement each other for exhibition purposes. Such collections do not necessarily both have to be of a historical nature. Thus, it is simple to imagine Peter Forskål’s “Fish Herbarium” from the 18th century being exhibited alongside specimens from the museum’s general collection of fish, or living plants

93 from the Botanical Garden being displayed next to Flora Danica, the magnificent botanical atlas produced in 1761-1883. With regards to other ideas for archival research, it is worth mentioning the former curator of herpetology at the museum: Jens Bødtker Rasmussen (1947-2005) as one example of many. During his more than 25-year-long tenure, he collected vast amounts of biogeographical data on African snakes. His work remains unfinished and could potentially yield a very fine distribution atlas if taken up today. And just as P.W. Lund’s lists of recent mammalian species in the area around Lagoa Santa can be used as a baseline for current research into the distribution of species, J.B. Rasmussen’s studies of snakes could potentially be used in a similar way. In 2013, the Natural History Museum of Denmark bought the fossil of a dinosaur nicknamed “Misty”, a Diplodocus longus, at auction for about 4.3 million Danish kroner (DKK). It was later revealed that this purchase was in fact made possible through a donation from Den Obelske Familiefond for the full amount. This is often how museums benefit from philanthropy today and it seems as a very good solution as a museum may now seize the initiative and propose a desire for special items that the museum is lacking, instead of receiving more or less random specimens.

Many interesting facts and fascinating personal stories can be discovered in the archives and storage facilities of old museums. It is the hope that this work may be found useful to anyone wishing to delve further into the collections and personal lives of P.W. Lund and V. Lausen. Perhaps it may even be considered as a tool for future curators of these collections at the Natural History Museum of Denmark for many years to come. May a bright light forever shine on the legacies of P.W. Lund and V. Lausen.

Acknowledgements

This project would not have been possible without the ongoing support from my supervisors Tom Gilbert and Morten Meldgaard. It has been a pleasure and a privilege to work with the both of you during the last more than 6 years. I owe my deepest gratitude to the Natural History Museum of Denmark and all my wonderful colleagues there. I especially appreciate the assistance and/or advice from Kristian Murphy Gregersen, Kurt H. Kjær, Daniel Klingberg Johansson, Marcus Anders Krag and Eske Willerslev. I would like to thank Waldemar D. Lausen whose extraordinary help has been invaluable in mapping out the biography of Dr. Lausen. I would also like to thank Henrik Kristian Sarauw, Sonja Sarauw, Niels Sten Jensen and Trøjborg Historiegruppe for providing essential information in this regard. I appreciate the assistance from Ulysses Pardiñas, Damián Voglino and Karina V. Chichkoyan. I am also indebted to HPL and REH for their timeless inspiration. Finally, I would like to show my special gratitude to my family and friends, without whose support this project would not have been possible.

References

Auler, A. & Farrant, A.R. A brief Introduction to Karst and Caves in Brazil. Proc. Univ. Bristol Spelacol.Soc. 20 (3), 187-200 (1996).

Benton, Michael J. (2005). Vertebrate Paleontology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Birn, A. The politics of giving. Nature. 544, 31-32 (2017)

Borup, Morten (1968). Holger Drachmann og hans fader breve fra A.G. Drachmann til sønnen 1875-90. Fund og Forskning, Bind 15. Det Kongelige Bibliotek.

Cartelle, Cástor & Lor (2012). A história de Aur e Nia. Belo Horizonte: Ed. PUC Minas.

Caude, C.: El mamifero misterioso. Das Riesenfaultier und seine Verwandten, Zoologisches Museum de Universität Zürich, Zürich 2000, ISBN 3-9521043-4-5

Christiansen, P. Phylogeny of the sabertoothed felids (Carnivora: Felidae: Machairodontinae). Cladistics. 29, Issue 5 (2012)

Corona, A., Perea, D. & Mcdonald, H.G. Catonyx cuvieri (Xenarthra, Mylodontidae, Scelidotherinae) from the Late Pleistocene of Uruguay, with comments regarding the systematics of the Subfamily. Journal of Vertebrate Paleotology 33(5): 1214-1225 (2013)

Couto, Carlos de Paula (1953). Paleontologia Brasileira, Mamiferos. Rio de Janeiro: Departomento de Imprensa Nacional.

Couto, Carlos de Paula (1979). Tratado de Paleomastozoologia. Rio de Janeiro: Academia Brasileira de Ciências.

Croft, D.A., Flynn, J.J. & Wyss, A.R. The Tinguiririca fauna of Chile and the early stages of “Modernization” of South American mammal faunas. Arquivos do Museo Nacional, Rio de Janeiro v.66, nr.1, 191-211 (2008)

Darwin, Charles (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. London: John Murray.

Eisenberg, John F. (1989). Mammals of the Neotropics. The Northern Neotropics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Eisenberg, John F. & Redford, Kent H. (1999). Mammals of the Neotropics. The Central Neotropics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Esmann, G. Fra Patagoniens stepper til Priorgade i Sorø, En lille indianerpiges eventyr. Jul i Sorø. 1964. Fariña, Richard A.; Vizcaino, Sergio F. & Iuliis, Gerry De (2013). Megafauna Giant Beasts of Pleistocene South America. Indiana: Indiana University Press.

Fiennes, C. We need a science of philanthropy. Nature. 546, 187 (2017)

Gabriel, M. Repatriering – en udfordring for fremtidens museum. Arkæologisk Forum. 7, November (2002)

Gabriel, M. Skal kulturarven fra inuit tilbageføres? Nordisk Museolgi 2007-1, 100-102, (2007)

Giacchino, A. & Gurovich, Y. Homenaje al Doctor Santiago Roth a 150 años de su natalcio. Àgora Philosóphica, Revista Marplatense de Filosofia (2001)

Hansen, Kasper L. (2012). E Museo Lundii – Addendum. København: Statens Naturhistoriske Museum.

Hansen, M. B. I morgen er endnu et eventyr Weekendavisen 52, (2018)

Harris, F. 2015. Understanding human remains repatriation: practice procedures at the British Museum and the Natural History Museum. Museum Management and Curatorship. (online) https://doi.org/10.1080/09647775.2015.1022904

Hillson, Simon (2005). Mammal Bones and Teeth, an Introductory Guide to Methods of Identification. Great Britain: Henry Ling Ltd.

Holten, Birgitte; Sterrl, Michael & Fjeldså, Jon (2004). Den Forsvunde Maler. København: Museum Tusculanums Forlag.

Holten, Birgitte & Sterrl, Michael (2010). P.W. Lund og Knokkelhulerne i Lagoa Santa. København: Statens Naturhistoriske Museum.

Kemech, J. A blow to the fight against snakebite. Lancet 375, 2061 (2010).

Lausen, Johan Daniel (1833). Udtog af Fædrelandets Historie. København.

Lausen, Valdemar (1865). Behandlingen af de traumatiske haemorrhagier fra haandens större arterier. København: Lund.

Lund, P.W. (1824). Fremstilling af den Nytte, som den menneskelige Fysiologi have høstet af de I de sidste Decennier i Mængde foretagne Vivisectioner. Københavns Universitet.

Lund, P.W. (1824). En ved Kniv og ved Injektion gjennemført Undersøgelse af danske tiføddede Krebsdyr for derved at oplyse de Tvivl, der herske angaaende Blodomløbet hos disse Dyr. Københavns Universitet.

Lund, Peter Wilhelm (1837-46). Blik på Brasiliens Dyreverden før sidste Jordomvæltning. København.

Mayer, E.L., Hubbe, A., Kerber, L., Haddad-Martim, P.M. and Neves, W. Taxonomic, biogeographic, and taphonomic reassessment of large extinct species of paca from the Quaternary of Brazil. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 61 (2016).

Moreira, José R., Ferraz, Katia Maria P.M.B., Herrara, Emilio A., Macdonald, David W. editors (2012). Capybara: Biology, Use and Conservation of an Exceptional Neotropical Species. New York: Springer

Moreno-Mayar, J.V. et al. Early human dispersals within the Americas, Science 10.1126/science.aav2621 (2018).

Mothé, D et al., Sixty years after “The mastodonts of Brazil”: Thestate of the art of South American proboscideans (Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae), Quaternary International. (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.2016/j.quaint.2016.08.028

Murray, Thomas (1919). The Story of the Irish in Argentina. New York: P.J. Kenedy &Sons.

Opoku, K. 2010. Is the Declaration on the Value and Importance of the ’Universal Museums’ Now Worthless? (online) https://www.modernghana.com/news/265620/1/is-the-declaration-on-the-value- and-importance-of-.html Piló, L.B., Auler, A.S., Neves, W.A., Xianfeng Wang, Hai Cheng and Edwards, R.L. Geochronology, Sediment Provenance, and Fossil Emplacement a Sumidouro Cave, a Classic Late Pleistocene/Early Holocene Paleoanthropological Site in Eastern Brazil. Geochronology: An International Journal, Vol. 20, No. 8, 751-764 (2005)

Podgorny, I., Human Origins in the New World? Florentino Ameghino and the Emergence of Prehistoric Archaeology in the Americas (1875-1912). PaleoAmerica Vol. 1. No. 1. 68-80 (2015)

Redford, Kent H. & Eisenberg, John F. (1992). Mammals of the Neotropics. The Southern Cone. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Roth, S.: Beobachtungen über Entstehung und Alter der Pampasformation in Argentinien, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, Berlin 1888, S. 375-464

Roth, Santiago: Los Ungulados Sudamericanos. Anales del Museo de La Plata (Sección Paleontológica) 1903/5, pp. 1–36, OCLC 14012855

Roth, S. (1892). Fossilien aus der Pampasformation. Catalog Nr. 6. Zürich.

Roth, S. (1885). Fossilien aus der argentinischer Republik. Catalog Nr. 3. San Nicolas.

Roth, S. (1884). Fossiles de la Pampa. – Catalog Nr. 2. San Nicolas. Republic Argentine.

Roth, S. (1879). Pretiosorum Fossilium in regionibus Reipublicae Argentinensis. CaroliF. Hofer & Soc. Genuae.

Saffer, M. S., Santiago Roth. Desarrollo Cientifico y Sistemático. Paleo, Boletin Paleontológico. 7. (36) 9-11. (2009)

Schmid, Elisabeth (1972). Atlas of Animal Bones. Amsterdam, London, New York: Elsevier Publishing Company.

Schultess, B.: Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Xenarthra auf Grund der Santiago Roth’schen Sammlung des Zoologischen Museums der Universität Zürich. Albert Kundig, Genf 1920 (Thesis at the University of Zurich)

Simpson, George G. (1980). Splendid Isolation. The curious history of South American mammals. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

Simpson, M., Museums and restorative justice: heritage, repatriation and cultural education. Museum International Vol. 61. No. 1-2. (2009)

Stafford, T.W. et. al. Accelorator Radiocarbon Datingat the Molecular Level. Journal of Archaeological Science 18, 35-72 (1991)

Stangerup, Henrik (1981). Vejen til Lagoa Santa. Gyldendal.

Turner, Alan (1997). The Big Cats and their Fossil Relatives. New York: Columbia University Press.

Voglino, Damián . Sitios geológicos y paleontológicos estudiados por Santiago Roth en el centro-este de la Argentina. Museo de Ciencias Naturales – P.Antonio Scasso. www.museocasso.com.ar

100

Vogt, C., Squelette Humain associé aux Glyptodontes. Extrait des Bulletins de la Société D’Anthropologie. Séance du 20 octobre 1881. (1881)

Weigelt, Gertrud: Santiago Roth 1850-1924. Ein Berner als wissenschaftlicher Pionier in Südamerika, Berner Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Heimatkunde, Paul Haupt Bern, 1951/1, pp. 19–39

Winge, Herluf (1888-1915). E Museo Lundii. København: H. Hagerups Boghandel.

Other references

Museumsloven, Kulturministeriet, Slots- og Kulturstyrelsen, LBK nr 358 af 08/04/2014

Letters from Dr. Lausen to Japetus Steenstrup (NKS 3460, Royal Danish Library) Letters from Dr. Lausen to Johannes Theodor Reinhardt (NKS 3460, Royal Danish Library)

Sarauw family genealogy: Virgin Islands Families (2009) Contributor: Svend E. Holsø.

Lausen family genealogy: Familien Lausens Slægtshistorie, privat eje, udateret.

Obituary of Dr. Valdemar Lausen 1834-1889. www.gravsted.dk

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Published by the United Nations. (2008) https://www.dkargentina.com.ar https://www.sjomannskirken.no/historien-til/buenos-aires/ http://www.billinghurst.org.ar/ https://netdoktor.dk/rejsemedicin/sygdomme/tyfus.htm

101

The Natural History Museum of Denmark, accrual journals: U.Z.M.I. Tilvæxt Journal 2. Række Nr.3, Pattedyr, Fugle, Krybdyr, Fisk 1875-1885 U.Z.M.I. Tilvæxt Journal 2. Række Nr.4, Pattedyr, Fugle, Krybdyr, Fisk 1886-1891

Katalog over Dr. P.W. Lunds palæontologiske Samling I Katalog over Dr. P.W. Lunds palæontologiske Samling II, Breccier

Television documentaries: “Store danske videnskabsfolk: Peter W. Lund” (DR, 2016) “Pré-história brasileira: um tempo a ser descoberto” (TV Brasil, 2016).

Repatriation:

Note1

Kongelig Dansk Ambassade Brasilia J.nr.: 41.Bras.2. (15. september 1975)

Note 2

Zoologisk Museum. Svar på ministeriet for kulturelle anliggenders skrivelse J.nr. 600-4-75. (31. oktober 1975)

102

Appendix

- List of species in the P.W. Lund Collection - List of species in the V. Lausen Collection - List of specimens in the V. Lausen Collection - Examples of catalogues (Santiago Roth, José Larroque)

103

List of species in the P.W. Lund Collection (Herluf Winge nomenclature)

Amphisbaenia Osteichtyes Amphisbaena alba Pimelodidae Lacertilia Pseudoplatystoma corruscans Polychrus acutirostris Pimelodus maculatus Tropidurus torquatus Bergiaria westermanni Ameiva ameiva Pseudopimelodus charus Tupinambis teguixin Heptapteridae Serpentes Rhamdia quelen Boa constrictor Erythrinidae Mastigodryas bifossatus Hoplias malabaricus Crotalus durissus Prochilodontidae Lachesis muta Prochilodus costatus Aves Characidae Cryptoridae Astyanax lacustris Tinamus major Crypturus noctivagus Amphibia Crypturus obsoletus Ceratophryidae Crypturus tataupa Ceratophrys aurita Crypturus parvirostris Nothura maculosa Nothura minor Reptilia Nothura nana Testudines Rhynchotus rufescens Phrynops hilarii Rheidae Platemys platycephala Rhea Americana Crocodylia Anatidae Caiman latirostris Dendrocycna sp. 104

Chenalopex pugil Species indet. Cairina moschata Ibidae Anas brasiliensis Ibis sp. Erismatura dominica Ardeidae Mergus sp. Ardetta erythromelas Cracidae Steganopodes Penelope sp. Phalacrocorax brasilianus Crax sp. Dicholophidae Phasianidae Dicholophus cristatus Odontophorus dentatus Cathartidae Podicipedidae Catharistes atratus Podilymbus sp. Catharthes aura Tachybates dominicu Gyparchus papa Rallidae Species indet. Aramides sp. Falconidae Rallus nigricans Micrastur ruficollis Species indet. Micrastur sp. Porzana albicollis Milvago chimachima Porzana melanophaea Milvago chimango Prozana sp. Polyborus tharus Species indet. Falco sparverius Porphyrio martinicus Falco femoralis Gallinula gaeata Cymindis uncinatus Limicolae Thrasaetus sp. Vanellus cayennenesis Buteo melanoleucus Totanus solitaries Buteo natteri Tringa maculate Accipter sp. Ereunetes pusillus Strigidae Gallinago frenata Strix flammea Parra jacana Scops brasilianus Laridae Nyctalops stygius

105

Syrnium sp. minoribus Cypselidae Syrnium sp. majoribus Chaetura zonaris Athene cunicularia Trochilidae Glaucidium ferox Species indet. Colombae Trogonidae Columba rufina Trogon aurantius Columba plumbea Trogon sp. Zenaida maculate Alcedinidae Peristera geoffroyi Ceryle amazona Peristera cinerea Momotidae Chamæpelia sp. 3 Momotus ruficapillus Engyptilia ochroptera Cuculidae Geotrygon montana Diplopterus naevius Psittaci Pyrrhococcyx cayanus Chrysotis sp. magnitudine Crotophaga ami Chrysotis sp. minoribus Bucconidae Brotogerys xanthoptera Malacoptila torquata Pyrrhura vittata Bucco chacuru Conurus aureus Rhamphastidae Conorus pavua Rhamphastus discolor Ara maracana Rhamphastus toco Ara sp. minoribus Picidae Ara sp. majoribus Chrysoptilus chlorozostus Ara chloroptera Colaptes campester Caprimulgidae Species indet. Eleothreptus anomalus Melanerpes flavifrons Nyctidromus albicollis Pictus maculifrons Species indet. 2 Tyrannidae Hydropsalis torquata Species multae indet. Nyctibiidae Formicariidae Nyctibius sp. Chamaezosa brevicauda

106

Dendrocoalptidae Grymaeomys velutinus Picolaptes bivittatus Philander laniger Xiphocolaptes albicollis Didelphys opossum Corvidae Didelphys crassicaudata Cyanocorax cyanoleucus Didelphys marsupialis Hirundinidae Didelphys cancrivora Hirundo domestica Hemiurus domesticus Hirundo sp. 2 Hemiurus tristriatus Vireonidae Proboscidea Cyclorhis sp. Mastodon andium Species indet. Cingulata Troglodytidae Euphractus sexcinctus Troglodytes furvus Xenurus duodecimcinctus Species indet. Xenurus squamicaudus Mimidae Dasypus hybridus Mimus saturninus Dasypus novemcinctus Turdidae Dasypus punctatus Turdus sp. Dasypus sulcatus Tanagridae, Coerebidae, Emberizidae, Icteridae Chlamydotherium majus Procnias tersa Hoplophorus euphractus Saltator similis Glyptodon clavipes Aphobus chopi Pilosa Pseudoleistes viridis Coelodon maquinensis Cassicus critatus Megatherium americanum Mylodon robustus Mammalia Catonyx giganteus Scelidotherium magnum Marsupialia Tamandua tetradactyla Grymaeomys griseus Myrmecophaga jubata Grymaeomys cinereus Chiroptera Grymaeomys microtarsus Schizostoma megalotis Grymaeomyspusillus 107

Lophostoma bidens Dicotyles torquatus Vampyrus auritus Dicotyles stenocephalus Phyllostoma hastatum Dicotyles labiatus Tylostoma longifolium Perrisodactyla Carollia brevicauda Equus curvidens Glossophgag sorcina Hippidium neogaeum Lonchoglossa caudifera Hippidium principale Lonchoglossa ecaudata Tapirus cristatellus Vampyrops lineatus Tapirus americanus Sturnira lilium Litopterna Chiroderma villosum Macharauchenia patagonica Artobius perspicillatus Notoungulata Desmodus rufus Toxodon platensis Saccopteryx canina Carnivora Natalis stramineus Felis tigrina Vespertilio nigricans Felis macrura Vesperugo serotinus Felis eira Vesperugo hilarii Felis pardalis Vesperugo velatus Felis concolor Atalapha ega Felis onca Molussus bonariensis Machaerodus neogaeus Molussus abrasus Canis azarae Molussus perotis Canis vetulus Molussus nasutus Canis cancrivorus Molussus hirtepes Canis jubatus Artioodactyla Canis troglodytes Auchenia major Icticyon pacivorus Subulo campestris Icticyon venaticus Subulo paludosus Ursus brasiliensis Subulo simplicicornis Ursus bonariensis Subulo rufus Nasus sasica

108

Procyon ursinus Calomys anoblepas Galictis barbara Calomys longicaudus Galictis intermedia Calomys plebejus Galictis vittata Calomys rex Thiosmus suffocans Calomys coronatus Lutra platensis Calomys laticeps Primates Rhipidomys mastacalis Callithrix personata Nectomys squamipes Mycetes seniculus Sphingurus insidiosus Hapale penicillata Sphingurus magnus Cebus fatuellus Sphingurus prehensilis Eriodes protopithecus Myopotamus castoroides Homo Sapiens Dasyprocta aguti Rodentia Coelogenys paca Hesperomys simplex Cavia boliviensis Hesperomys molitor Cavia flavidens Hesperomys tener Cavia vates Hesperomys expulsus Cavia porcellus Sigmodon vulpinus Hydrochoerus capivara Habrothrix cursor Dactylomys amblyonyx Habrothrix clivigenis Lasiuromys villosus Habrothrix orycter Loncheres armatus Habrothrix augustidens Echinomys cajennensis Habrothrix lasiurus Nelomys antricola Oxymycterus breviceps Mesomys spinosus Oxymycterus talpinus Mesomys mordax Oxymycterus rufus Carterodon sulcidens Oxymycterus cosmodus Dicolpomys fossor Scapteromys labiosus Sciurus aestuans Scapteromys principalis Lagomorpha Scapteromys fronto Lepus brasiliensis

109

List of species in the V. Lausen Collection

ZMK or NHMD # Roth # Year in Order/Class Family Genus Species Author 84/1888 10 1888 ? Ge. sp. NHMD-157441 183 1887 Actinopterygii Ge. sp. NHMD-157430 184 1887 Actinopterygii Ge. sp. NHMD-157433 185 1887 Actinopterygii Ge. sp. 19/1885 Jc 1885 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 47/1878 1878 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 73/1888 9 1888 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 79/1887 90a 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 80/1887 90b 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 81/1887 91 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 82/1887 92 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 83/1887 93 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 84/1887 95 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 85/1887 90c 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 86/1887 90, 95, 96 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 87/1887 95 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 88/1887 94 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 117/1887 88 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 133/1887 90 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 134/1887 89 1887 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 74/1889 1889 Artiodactyla Cervidae Cervus sp. 80/1885 173 1885 Artiodactyla Ge. sp. 101/1885 1885 Artiodactyla Ge. sp. 21/1885 Ja 1885 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 22/1885 Ja 1885 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 23/1885 Ja 1885 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 24/1885 Ja 1885 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 48/1878 1878 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 110

74/1888 9 1888 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 75/1888 9 1888 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 89/1887 78 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 90/1887 80 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 91/1887 86 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 92/1887 82 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 93/1887 19 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 94/1887 87a 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 95/1887 87b 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 96/1887 77 + 95 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 97/1887 81 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 98/1887 83 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 99/1887 84 1887 Artiodactyla Camelidae Paleolama sp. Gervais 1869 20/1899 1899 Artiodactyla Iniidae Saurocetes argentinus Burmeister 1871 49/1887 1 1887 Artiodactyla Tayassuidae Tayassu pecari Link 1795 50/1887 76 1887 Artiodactyla Tayassuidae Tayassu pecari Link 1795 87/1888 1888 Carnivora Ursidae Arctotherium bonariensis Gervais 1852 100/1887 7 1887 Carnivora Ursidae Arctotherium bonariensis Gervais 1852 119/1887 6 1887 Carnivora Ursidae Arctotherium bonariensis Gervais 1852 46/1878 1878 Carnivora Canidae Canis sp. 75/1887 5 1887 Carnivora Canidae Canis sp. 74/1887 13 1887 Carnivora Mustelidae Galictis sp. 76/1887 169 1887 Carnivora Phocid Ge. sp. 77/1887 1887 Carnivora Ge. sp. 10/1887 11 1887 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 11/1877 1877 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 11/1887 2 1887 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 12/1878 1878 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 12/1885 Ba 1885 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 12/1887 65 1887 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 12/1888 3 1888 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 13/1878 1878 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 13/1885 Bb 1-5 1885 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 111

14/1878 1878 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 14/1885 Bc 1-2 1885 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 15/1885 Be 1885 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 16/1885 1885 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 18/1878 1878 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 44/1889 1889 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 45/1889 1889 Carnivora Felidae Smilodon populator Lund 1842 101/1887 1887 Cetacea Ge. sp. 80/1885 1885 Cetacea Ge. sp. 125/1887 140 1887 Cingulata Dasypodidae Dasypus sp. Linnaeus 1758 128/1887 135 1887 Cingulata Dasypodidae Dasypus sp. Linnaeus 1758 13/1888 155 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Doedicurus clavicaudatus Owen 1847 14/1888 156 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Doedicurus clavicaudatus Owen 1847 15/1888 9 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Doedicurus clavicaudatus Owen 1847 25/1888 157 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Doedicurus clavicaudatus Owen 1847 53/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Doedicurus clavicaudatus Owen 1847 68/1885 Ha 1-2 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Doedicurus clavicaudatus Owen 1847 72/1889 1889 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Doedicurus clavicaudatus Owen 1847 123/1887 137 1887 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Euphractus sp. Wagler 1830 124/1887 138 1887 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Euphractus sp. Wagler 1830 67/1889 1889 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Euphractus sp. Wagler 1830 19/1878 1878 Cingulata Dasypodidae Eutatus seguini Gervais 1867 25/1887 141 1887 Cingulata Dasypodidae Eutatus seguini Gervais 1867 26/1887 142 1887 Cingulata Dasypodidae Eutatus seguini Gervais 1867 27/1887 143 1887 Cingulata Dasypodidae Eutatus seguini Gervais 1867 28/1887 144 1887 Cingulata Dasypodidae Eutatus seguini Gervais 1867 29/1887 140 1887 Cingulata Dasypodidae Eutatus seguini Gervais 1867 59/1885 Hn 1885 Cingulata Dasypodidae Eutatus seguini Gervais 1867 60/1885 1885 Cingulata Dasypodidae Eutatus seguini Gervais 1867 17/1877 1877 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 18/1877 1877 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 20/1888 151 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 21/1888 9 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 112

22/1888 9 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 23/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 23/1888 9 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 24/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 24/1888 9 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 25/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 31/1888 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 32/1888 152 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 34/1888 146 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 70/1885 Hi 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 72/1885 Hh 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 14/1877 1877 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon clavipes Owen 1839 16/1888 149 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 17/1888 146 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 18/1888 150 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 19/1888 147 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 20/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 21/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 22/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 27/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 33/1888 167 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 40/1889 1889 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 41/1889 1889 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 49/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 50/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 54/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 56/1889 1889 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 69/1885 Hd 1-4 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 71/1885 Hg 1-3 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 73/1885 He 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 74/1885 Hf 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 75/1885 A 17 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 76/1885 Hj 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 113

86/1888 145 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 59/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 53/1877 1877 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 54/1877 1877 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 115/1888 148 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Glyptodon reticulatus Owen 1845 52/1878 1878 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 63/1885 Hk 1-2 1885 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 64/1885 Hk 3 1885 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 65/1885 Hb 1885 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 72/1888 9 1888 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 77/1888 161 1888 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 81/1888 165 1888 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 88/1888 164 1888 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 81/1885 1885 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 110/1888 162 1888 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 111/1888 166 1888 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 112/1888 168 1888 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 113/1888 9 1888 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 36/1889 1889 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 37/1889 1889 Cingulata Glyptodontidae Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Owen 1845 58/1885 Hn 1885 Cingulata Pampatheridae Pampatherium humboldtii Lund 1839 103/1887 129 1887 Cingulata Pampatheridae Pampatherium humboldtii Lund 1839 104/1887 130 1887 Cingulata Pampatheridae Pampatherium humboldtii Lund 1839 106/1887 133 1887 Cingulata Pampatheridae Pampatherium humboldtii Lund 1839 107/1887 134 1887 Cingulata Pampatheridae Pampatherium humboldtii Lund 1839 108/1887 1887 Cingulata Pampatheridae Pampatherium humboldtii Lund 1839 109/1887 1887 Cingulata Pampatheridae Pampatherium humboldtii Lund 1839 78/1888 9 1888 Cingulata Pampatheridae Pampatherium humboldtii Lund 1839 105/1887 132 1887 Cingulata Pampatheridae Pampatherium humboldtii Lund 1839 19/1877 1877 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 20/1877 1877 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 28/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 35/1888 159 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 114

36/1888 9 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 37/1888 158 1888 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 38/1889 1889 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 66/1885 Hb 1-4 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 67/1885 Hb 1-4 1885 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 63/1878 1878 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Panochthus tuberculatus Owen 1845 118/1887 139 1887 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Tolypeutes tricinctus Linnaeus 1758 122/1887 140 1887 Cingulata Chlamyphoridae Tolypeutes tricinctus Linnaeus 1758 115/1887 148 1887 Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Monodelphis sp. Burnett 1830 NHMD-157450 Elasmobranchii Ge. sp. NHMD-157436 182 1887 Elasmobranchii Ge. sp. NHMD-157438 186 1887 Elasmobranchii Ge. sp. 38/1887 75 1887 Litopterna Proterotheriidae Brachytherium cuspidatum Ameghino 1883 39/1887 62 1887 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia intermedia Moreno 1888 27/1885 Ja 1885 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 32/1877 1877 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 33/1877 1877 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 33/1878 1878 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 34/1877 1877 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 34/1887 63 1887 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 35/1887 59 1887 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 41/1878 1878 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 44/1888 9 1888 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 45/1888 9 1888 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 61/1889 1889 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 195/0000 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Macrauchenia patagonica Owen 1838 33/1887 64 1887 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Scalabrinia paranensis Bravard 1858 36/1887 60 1887 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Scalabrinia paranensis Bravard 1858 37/1887 62 1887 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Scalabrinia paranensis Bravard 1858 45/1888 9 1888 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Scalabrinitherium rothii Ameghino 1885 116/1887 61 1887 Litopterna Macraucheniidae Scalabrinitherium rothii Ameghino 1885 22/1887 34 1887 Notoungulata Mesotheridae Ge. sp. 23/1887 441 1887 Notoungulata Mesotheridae Ge. sp. 115

13/1877 1877 Notoungulata Mesotheridae Mesotherium cristatum Serres 1867 24/1887 34 1887 Notoungulata Mesotheridae Mesotherium cristatum Serres 1867 51/1889 1889 Notoungulata Mesotheridae Mesotherium cristatum Serres 1867 113/1887 35 1887 Notoungulata Mesotheridae Mesotherium cristatum Serres 1867 21/1887 37 1887 Notoungulata Interatheriidae Protypotherium antiquum Ameghino 1882 11/1888 9 1888 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 12/1877 1877 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 13/1887 44 -45 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 14/1887 48 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 15/1878 1878 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 15/1887 46 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 16/1878 1878 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 16/1887 47 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 17/1878 1878 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 17/1887 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 18/1887 42 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 19/1887 52 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 20/1887 52 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 21/1877 1877 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 22/1877 1877 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 23/1877 1877 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 28/1885 La 1885 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 29/1885 Lb 1885 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 30/1885 Ld 1885 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 30/1887 39 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 31/1878 1878 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 31/1887 40 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 32/1878 1878 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 32/1885 Lf 1885 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 32/1887 Ks. nr. 15 1887 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 33/1885 1885 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 35/1885 Bd 1-2 1885 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 36/1885 1885 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 116

41/1888 9 1888 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 42/1888 43 1888 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 43/1888 9 1888 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 49/1889 1889 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 50/1889 1889 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 57/1878 1878 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 34/1885 Lc 1885 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 114/1888 9 1888 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 71/1889 1889 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 70/1889 1889 Notoungulata Toxodontidae Toxodon platensis Owen 1840 126/1887 1887 Notoungulata Haplodontheriidae Toxodontherium compressum Ameghino 1883 127/1887 1887 Notoungulata Haplodontheriidae Toxodontherium compressum Ameghino 1883 NHMD-157453 188 1887 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. NHMD-157460 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. NHMD-157456 1887 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. NHMD-157463 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. NHMD-157464 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. NHMD-157465 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. NHMD-157451 1887 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. NHMD-157445 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. NHMD-157447 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. NHMD-157466 Osteichthyes Ge. sp. 25/1885 Kc 1885 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 36/1877 1877 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 41/1887 54 1887 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 42/1878 1878 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 42/1887 55 1887 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 53/1889 1889 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 64/1888 9 1888 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 129/1887 53 1887 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 73/1889 1889 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 65/1888 9 1888 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. Linnaeus 1758 196/0000 Perissodactyla Equidae Equus sp. 117

120/1887 58 1887 Perissodactyla Equidae Hippidion sp. Roth 1899 26/1885 Kb 1885 Perissodactyla Equidae Hippidion sp. Roth 1899 35/1877 1877 Perissodactyla Equidae Hippidion sp. Roth 1899 40/1887 57 1887 Perissodactyla Equidae Hippidion sp. Roth 1899 43/1887 56 1887 Perissodactyla Equidae Hippidium principale Lund 1846 63/1888 9 1888 Perissodactyla Tapiridae Tapirus terrestris Linnaeus 1758 40/1877 1877 Pilosa Ge. sp. 55/1878 1878 Pilosa Ge. sp. 64/1889 1889 Pilosa Ge. sp. 102/1887 9 1887 Pilosa Megatheridae Ge. sp. Cuvier 1796 107/1888 128 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Ge. sp. Cuvier 1796 22/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 23/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 24/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 25/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 26/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 26/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 27/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 28/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 29/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 30/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 34/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 35/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 39/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 46/1888 120 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 47/1888 122 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 48/1888 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 49/1888 121 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 50/1885 Ee2 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 51/1885 Ee1 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 56/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 60/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 66/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 118

89/1888 45 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 47/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 42/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 46/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 49/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 24/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 91/1888 123 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 92/1888 115 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 48/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 60/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 93/1888 118 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 50/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 55/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 116/1888 9 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 117/1888 124 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Glossotherium robustum Owen 1842 25/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 27/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 28/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 50/1888 116 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 51/1888 113 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 52/1885 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 52/1888 114 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 53/1888 118 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 31/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 49/1885 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 41/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 43/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 44/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 51/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Lestodon armatus Gervais 1855 20/1889 1889 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 21/1889 1889 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 37/1877 1877 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 39/1877 1877 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 119

40/1878 1878 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 43/1878 1878 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 44/1878 1878 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 51/1878 1878 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 53/1885 1885 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 54/1885 1885 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 54/1888 101 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 55/1885 1885 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 56/1885 Da 1-3 1885 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 57/1885 1885 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 65/1889 1889 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 79/1888 9 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 83/1888 105 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 94/1888 102 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 62/1878 1878 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 101/1888 97 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 102/1888 98 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 103/1888 99 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 104/1888 100 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 105/1888 104 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 106/1888 103 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 108/1888 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 109/1888 9 1888 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 68/1888 1889 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 69/1889 1889 Pilosa Megatheridae Megatherium americanum Cuvier 1796 95/1888 124 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Promylodon paranensis Ameghino 1883 15/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 16/1877 1877 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 26/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 26/1888 8 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 27/1888 110 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 28/1888 107 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 29/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 120

29/1888 127 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 30/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 30/1888 9 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 30/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 31/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 32/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 33/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 34/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 36/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 38/1888 106 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 39/1888 112 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 40/1888 126 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 42/1885 Ea 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 43/1885 Ed 1-6 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 44/1885 Ee 1 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 45/1885 Ee 2 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 46/1885 Eb 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 47/1885 Ec 1-7 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 48/1885 Ke Equus 1885 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 55/1888 111 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 56/1888 109 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 57/1888 108 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 57/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 58/1878 1878 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 58/1888 9 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 58/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 59/1888 9 1888 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 59/1889 1889 Pilosa Mylodontidae Scelidotherium leptocephalum Owen 1839 55/1889 1889 Primates Homidae Homo sapiens Linnaeus 1758 78/1887 1887 Primates Homidae Homo sapiens Linnaeus 1758 11/1885 1885 Primates Homidae Homo sapiens Linnaeus 1758 37/1878 1878 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 37/1885 Ma 1-2 1885 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 121

38/1877 1877 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 38/1878 1878 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 39/1885 Mc 1885 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 40/1885 Md 1-2 1885 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 46/1889 1889 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 61/1888 67 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 62/1888 68 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 76/1888 68 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 82/1888 74 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 85/1888 7 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 110/1887 79 1887 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 47/1889 1889 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 52/1877 1877 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 61/1878 1878 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 38/1885 Mb 1885 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 41/1885 Me 1885 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 96/1888 9 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 97/1888 69 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 98/1888 70 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 99/1888 72 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 100/1888 73 1888 Proboscidea Gomphotheriidae Notiomastodon platensis Mothé et al. 48/1887 26 1887 Rodentia Hydrochoeridae Cardiatherium paranese Ameghino 1883 58/1887 27 1887 Rodentia Hydrochoeridae Cardiatherium sp. Ameghino 1883 59/1887 28 1887 Rodentia Hydrochoeridae Cardiatherium sp. Ameghino 1883 60/1887 38 1887 Rodentia Hydrochoeridae Cardiatherium sp. Ameghino 1883 61/1887 29 1887 Rodentia Hydrochoeridae Cardiatherium sp. Ameghino 1883 68/1888 10 1888 Rodentia Hydrochoeridae Cardiatherium sp. Ameghino 1883 52/1887 1887 Rodentia Caviidae Ge. sp. 53/1887 15 1887 Rodentia Caviidae Ge. sp. 54/1887 33 1887 Rodentia Caviidae Ge. sp. 55/1887 31 1887 Rodentia Caviidae Dolichotis sp. 56/1887 32 1887 Rodentia Caviidae Dolichotis sp. 70/1888 9 1888 Rodentia Ctenomyidae Ctenomys sp. Blainville 1826 122

71/1887 17 1887 Rodentia Ctenomyidae Ctenomys sp. Blainville 1826 71/1888 9 1888 Rodentia Ctenomyidae Ctenomys sp. Blainville 1826 72/1887 1887 Rodentia Ctenomyidae Ctenomys sp. Blainville 1826 66/1888 9 1888 Rodentia Cuniculidae Cuniculus paca Linnaeus 1766 67/1888 9 1888 Rodentia Caviidae Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris Linnaeus 1766 17/1885 Ca 1885 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 18/1885 A 18 1885 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 45/1878 1878 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 62/1889 1889 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 63/1889 1889 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 64/1887 22 1887 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 65/1887 23 1887 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 66/1887 1887 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 67/1887 24 1887 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 68/1887 25 1887 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 69/1887 1887 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 69/1888 9 1888 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 70/1887 1887 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 77/1885 1885 Rodentia Chinchillidae Lagostomus trichodactylus Brookes 1828 112/1887 20 1887 Rodentia Dinomyidae Megamys holmbergi Ameghino 1885 57/1887 37 1887 Rodentia Dinomyidae Megamys patagoniensis D'Orbigny 1842 62/1887 20 1887 Rodentia Dinomyidae Megamys patagoniensis D'Orbigny 1842 63/1887 21 1887 Rodentia Dinomyidae Megamys patagoniensis D'Orbigny 1842 47/1887 16 1887 Rodentia Myocastoridae Myocastor coypus Molina 1782 51/1887 16 1887 Rodentia Myocastoridae Myocastor coypus Molina 1782 111/1887 30 1887 Rodentia Caviidae Neoprocavia mesopotamica Ameghino 1889 44/1887 14 1887 Rodentia Ge. sp. 45/1887 4 1887 Rodentia Ge. sp. 46/1887 14 1887 Rodentia Ge. sp. 73/1887 1887 Rodentia Ge. sp. 114/1887 117 1887 Sirenia Ge. sp. 32/1887 Ks. nr. 15 1887 Sirenia Ge. sp. 19/1899 178 1899 Testudines Ge. sp. 123

List of specimens in the V. Lausen Collection

ZMK or NHMD # Genus Species Bones 84/1888 Ge. sp. Bone fragments NHMD-157441 Ge. sp. NHMD-157430 Ge. sp. NHMD-157433 Ge. sp. 19/1885 Cervus sp. Antler in pieces, quite large 47/1878 Cervus sp. Piece of mandible with mIII and mII 73/1888 Cervus sp. Piece of left side of mandible with mIII 79/1887 Cervus sp. Piece of frontal bone 80/1887 Cervus sp. Pieces of frontal and parietal bone 81/1887 Cervus sp. Left side of mandible with molars 82/1887 Cervus sp. Right side of mandible with molars 83/1887 Cervus sp. Left side of mandible with all pre-molars and molars 84/1887 Cervus sp. Piece of mandible with 2 tooth fragments 85/1887 Cervus sp. Piece of antler 86/1887 Cervus sp. 2 canines, 4 upper and 1 lower molar, 3 pices of antler 87/1887 Cervus sp. Left side of mandible with 2 molars 88/1887 Cervus sp. Both forelimbs almost complete, pieces of vertebraes and ribs 117/1887 Cervus sp. Almost complete skull without mandible 133/1887 Cervus sp. Piece of antler 134/1887 Cervus sp. Posterior part of skull, antlers more or less intact 74/1889 Cervus sp. Antler 80/1885 Ge. sp. Bone fragments 101/1885 Ge. sp. Bone fragments 21/1885 Paleolama sp. Piece of left mandible with pre-molar and molar. Piece of left mandible with molar, piece of mandible with tooth fragments 22/1885 Paleolama sp. Piece of left mandible with pre-molar and molar 23/1885 Paleolama sp. Piece of right mandible with 2 pre-molars and molar 24/1885 Paleolama sp. Upper molar 124

48/1878 Paleolama sp. Mandible 74/1888 Paleolama sp. Cervical vertebra and 2 thoracic vertebrae 75/1888 Paleolama sp. Fragment of radius, atragalus d. 89/1887 Paleolama sp. Piece of left side of mandible 90/1887 Paleolama sp. Piece of rigth side of mandible with 2 pre-molars and 2 molars 91/1887 Paleolama sp. Radius and ulna 92/1887 Paleolama sp. Right side of mandible 93/1887 Paleolama sp. Tibia s. 94/1887 Paleolama sp. Radius s. and ulna s. 95/1887 Paleolama sp. Metacarpal s. 96/1887 Paleolama sp. Fragments of mandible and several teeth (species ?) 97/1887 Paleolama sp. Mixed collection of teeth, vertebrae, limb bones. From different individual specimens, some juvenile some mature 98/1887 Paleolama sp. Sacral vertebrae, 4 distal sacral vertebrae, pelvis 99/1887 Paleolama sp. 2 cervical vertebrae, many bone fragments 20/1899 Saurocetes argentinus Maxilla 49/1887 Tayassu pecari Piece of maxilla with 2 pre-molars 50/1887 Tayassu pecari Piece of mandible with 2 molars 87/1888 Arctotherium bonariensis Mandible (incomplete),ulna s., tibia s., tarsus and metatarsus of both feet, all vertebrae, pelvis, pieces of 14 ribs, both femures 100/1887 Arctotherium bonariensis More or less complete specimen, with skull, many fragments, very old, worn teeth 119/1887 Arctotherium bonariensis Right side of mandible 46/1878 Canis sp. Braincase - about the size of Canis cancrivora 75/1887 Canis sp. Skull without mandible - about the size of Canis cancrivora 74/1887 Galictis sp. Proximal end of right side of mandible 76/1887 Ge. sp. Incisor 77/1887 Ge. sp. 3 canines 10/1887 Smilodon populator Pieces of coprolite 11/1877 Smilodon populator Proximal end of ulna d.

125

11/1887 Smilodon populator Skull (almost complete). Atlas, 5 vertebrae in fragments, 5 ribs, pieces of sternum. Left sid of pelvis, fibula s. Of the left foot: astragalus, calcaneus, naviculare, cuneiforme II and III, cuboideum, metatars II, III, and IV, 7 phalanges. Some bone fragments 12/1878 Smilodon populator Cervical vertebra, 2 thoracicvertebrae, humerus s. Piece of radius s., piece of ulna s., piece of femur d. 12/1885 Smilodon populator Radius d. Most of right hand 12/1887 Smilodon populator Humerus d. 12/1888 Smilodon populator Skull 13/1878 Smilodon populator Maxilla with pre-molars III, IV. Metacarpal IV d. 13/1885 Smilodon populator Skull. Pieces of mandible and maxilla. Upper canines and other tooth fragments. Axis, cervical vertebra, ulna s. without distal end, ulna d. fragments. Pieces of 2 humeri, fragments of ribs. 14/1878 Smilodon populator Piece of pre-molar IV, lower incisor 14/1885 Smilodon populator Upper canine, 3 ribs 15/1885 Smilodon populator Humerus d. 16/1885 Smilodon populator Pieces of mandible with pre-molar IV and molar I, 2 loose incisors 18/1878 Smilodon populator Skull with mandible 44/1889 Smilodon populator Skull without mandible or canines 45/1889 Smilodon populator Ulna d. (proximal end) 101/1887 Ge. sp. Bone fragments 80/1885 Ge. sp. Bone fragments 125/1887 Dasypus sp. Piece of carapace 128/1887 Dasypus sp. Femur s. proximal end, small piece of carapace 13/1888 Doedicurus clavicaudatus Both upper rows of teeth 14/1888 Doedicurus clavicaudatus Pieces of carapace 15/1888 Doedicurus clavicaudatus Piece of carapace 25/1888 Doedicurus clavicaudatus Fragments of vertebrae, most of the left side of pelvis, almost complete set of tail rings 53/1878 Doedicurus clavicaudatus Pieces of carapace 68/1885 Doedicurus clavicaudatus Tibia, fibula, pieces of carapace 72/1889 Doedicurus clavicaudatus Pieces of carapace and tail rings

126

123/1887 Euphractus sp. Piece of calcaneus, carapace fragments 124/1887 Euphractus sp. Left side of mandible 67/1889 Euphractus sp. Pieces of pelvis, pieces of vertebrae 19/1878 Eutatus seguini 5 caudal vertebrae, 8 large pieces of carapace, many smaller pieces of carapace, scapula s distal end, 1 patella, right foot almost complete 25/1887 Eutatus seguini Lumbar vertebrae, sacrum, section of tail vertebrae, sections of tail ring 26/1887 Eutatus seguini Ulna s., humerus s., radius s., scaphoideum s., cuneiforme d., pisiforme, metarcarp II s. Fragments of pelvis. Femur d., tibia s., fibula d.. Carapace fragments. Atlas, thoracic vertebrae (incomplete), 15 caudal vertebrae, clavicula d. s. Almost complete mandible. 27/1887 Eutatus seguini Thoracic vertebra, 2 caudal vertebrae. Many bone fragments from hand and foot. Many carapace fragments 28/1887 Eutatus seguini Humerus s., ulna s., femur d., tibia s. 2 Caudal vertebrae, part of right side of mandible. Several pieces of carapace, many bone fragments 29/1887 Eutatus seguini 6 pieces of carapace (not from same specimen) 59/1885 Eutatus seguini Midsection of femur s, lunatum d s, atragalus d, cuneiforme II d, metatarsals I, IV and V. Fragments of phalanges. Many carapace fragments 60/1885 Eutatus seguini 2 pieces of carapace 17/1877 Glyptodon clavipes 4 pieces of ribs 18/1877 Glyptodon clavipes Small pice of right side of maxilla without teeth 20/1888 Glyptodon clavipes Piece of right side of mandible without teeth 21/1888 Glyptodon clavipes Cervical vertebrae 22/1888 Glyptodon clavipes Patella 23/1878 Glyptodon clavipes Patella 23/1888 Glyptodon clavipes Small pice of tail ring 24/1878 Glyptodon clavipes Small piece of mandible with remains of 2 teeth 24/1888 Glyptodon clavipes Tooth 25/1878 Glyptodon clavipes Pieces of 2 teeth 127

31/1888 Glyptodon clavipes Almost complete set of tail rings. Pieces of carapace 32/1888 Glyptodon clavipes Distal end of series of tail rings 34/1888 Glyptodon clavipes 1 ooth and small pieces of carapace 70/1885 Glyptodon clavipes Piece of posterios part of skull. Piece of maxilla, right side of mandible, a few teeth. Piece of cervical vertebra, piece of thoracic vertebra. Scapula d. Many bone fragments 72/1885 Glyptodon clavipes Tibia s., fibula s., 1 patella. Left foot almost complete (mounted). Bone fragments and pieces of carapace 14/1877 Glyptodon clavipes Patella 16/1888 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace 17/1888 Glyptodon reticulatus Crushed skull in pieces, pieces of carapace. Fragments of ribs. Complete right hand, femur d. and s. Tibia s. and d., fibula s. and d. Both feet almost complete. 18/1888 Glyptodon reticulatus Right side of mandible (incomplete) 19/1888 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace 20/1878 Glyptodon reticulatus Right side of mandible 21/1878 Glyptodon reticulatus Piece of the right side of mandible 22/1878 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace 27/1878 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace and tail rings 33/1888 Glyptodon reticulatus Incomplete skull with maxilla including most teeth. Mandible 40/1889 Glyptodon reticulatus Atlas, cervical vertebra, left side of mandible, pieces of carapace 41/1889 Glyptodon reticulatus Atlas, cervical vertebra, right side of mandible, partial pelvis, almost complete series of tail rings. Several ribs, incomplete scapula. Pieces of carapace 49/1878 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace 50/1878 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace 54/1878 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace 56/1889 Glyptodon reticulatus Calcaneus d. and s., naviculare, piece of cuneiforme 69/1885 Glyptodon reticulatus Skull, 2 pieces of atlas, 1 piece of axis, 9 caudal vertebrae. Almost complete series of tail rings, humerus s., humerus d. pieces of carapace

128

71/1885 Glyptodon reticulatus Occipital bone, many fragment of vertebrae, ribs. 15 caudal vertebrae. Almost complete pelvis (in pieces), patella, femur d., tibia d. Right foot almost complete (mounted). Almost complete carapace, many bone fragments 73/1885 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace 74/1885 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace 75/1885 Glyptodon reticulatus Pieces of carapace 76/1885 Glyptodon reticulatus Set of tail rings 86/1888 Glyptodon reticulatus Juvenile. 5 molars, fragments of mandible, pieces of carapace 59/1878 Glyptodon reticulatus Femur d. (fragments) 53/1877 Glyptodon reticulatus Pelvis and tail (mounted) 54/1877 Glyptodon reticulatus Carapace (mounted) 115/1888 Glyptodon reticulatus Bone fragments 52/1878 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Pieces of carapace and tail rings 63/1885 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Skull. Pieces of carapace and tail rings 64/1885 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Pieces of carapace and tail rings 65/1885 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Pieces of carapace 72/1888 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Astragalus d. 77/1888 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Skull, tail rings, vertebra, many pieces of carapace 81/1888 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Fragments of skull. Pieces of carapace 88/1888 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Distal tail rings 81/1885 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Section of cephalic carapace 110/1888 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Humerus d., radius d., ulna s., metatarsal II s. Section of cephalic carapace 111/1888 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Pieces of carapace 112/1888 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Piece of right side of mandible 113/1888 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus 2 pieces of carapace 36/1889 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Piece of mandible 37/1889 Neosclerocalyptus ornatus Almost complete set of tail rings (carapace) 58/1885 Pampatherium humboldtii 4 small pieces of carapace 103/1887 Pampatherium humboldtii 3 small pieces of carapace 104/1887 Pampatherium humboldtii 2 small pieces of carapace 106/1887 Pampatherium humboldtii 4 small pieces of carapace 129

107/1887 Pampatherium humboldtii 2 small pieces of carapace 108/1887 Pampatherium humboldtii 2 small pieces of carapace 109/1887 Pampatherium humboldtii 1 small piece of carapace 78/1888 Pampatherium humboldtii Tibia d. (incomplete) 105/1887 Pampatherium humboldtii 3 pieces of carapace 19/1877 Panochthus tuberculatus Left foot mounted, almost complete. 6 caudal vertebrae, pieces of carapace and tail rings 20/1877 Panochthus tuberculatus Tibia s., fibula s. Pieces of carapace 28/1878 Panochthus tuberculatus Smaller pieces of carapace 35/1888 Panochthus tuberculatus Pieces of carapace 36/1888 Panochthus tuberculatus Piece of carapace 37/1888 Panochthus tuberculatus Pieces of sacral vertebrae, femur s., large portion of carapace in pieces 38/1889 Panochthus tuberculatus Atlas, cervical vertebra, caudal vertebrae, tail rings, carapace (almost complete) 66/1885 Panochthus tuberculatus Skull. Atlas, almost complete column of vertebrae, scapula d. s.,humerus d. s., radius s., ulna s., scaphoideum. Large section of pelvis. Pieces from fingers and toes. Pieces of carapace and most of the tail rings 67/1885 Panochthus tuberculatus Pieces of carapace 63/1878 Panochthus tuberculatus Large piece of carapace 118/1887 Tolypeutes tricinctus Carapace and cephalic shield (both incomplete) 122/1887 Tolypeutes tricinctus 4 loose pieces of carapace 115/1887 Monodelphis sp. Right side of mandible almost complete (a little larger than H. brachyurus) NHMD-157450 Ge. sp. NHMD-157436 Ge. sp. NHMD-157438 Ge. sp. 38/1887 Brachytherium cuspidatum Small fragment of mandible with molar and pieces of at least 2 other teeth 39/1887 Macrauchenia intermedia 2 upper and 1 lower molar 27/1885 Macrauchenia patagonica 1 upper and 1 lower molar 32/1877 Macrauchenia patagonica Piece of parietal bone 130

33/1877 Macrauchenia patagonica Pieces of 3 upper and 1 lower molars 33/1878 Macrauchenia patagonica 7 thoracic vertebrae 34/1877 Macrauchenia patagonica Fragments of a mandible 34/1887 Macrauchenia patagonica Upper molar 35/1887 Macrauchenia patagonica 2 small pieces of mandible with teeth fragments 41/1878 Macrauchenia patagonica 6 teeth, some in fragments 44/1888 Macrauchenia patagonica Astragalus d. 45/1888 Macrauchenia patagonica Calcaneus d. 61/1889 Macrauchenia patagonica Astragalus 195/0000 Macrauchenia patagonica Piece of scapula, species ? 33/1887 Scalabrinia paranensis Raius d. (species ?) 36/1887 Scalabrinia paranensis Upper molar 37/1887 Scalabrinia paranensis 2 lower molars 45/1888 Scalabrinitherium rothii Calcaneus d. 116/1887 Scalabrinitherium rothii Piece of left maxilla with 4 teeth 22/1887 Ge. sp. Juvenile. Mandible with emerging teeth (species ?) 23/1887 Ge. sp. Piece of left side of mandible with 2 molars (species?) 13/1877 Mesotherium cristatum Pieces of 2 mandibles with a few teeth, several upper and lower loose teeth 24/1887 Mesotherium cristatum Palet and maxilla with 5 teeth on left side and 2 on right side 51/1889 Mesotherium cristatum Palet and maxilla with 2 rows of teeth (incomplete) 113/1887 Mesotherium cristatum Juvenile. Skull, almost complete.Almost complete skeleton, many fragments 21/1887 Protypotherium antiquum Piece of right side of mandible with 1 pre-mola and 1 molar 11/1888 Toxodon platensis Incisor, 4 molars 12/1877 Toxodon platensis 5 fragments of teeth 13/1887 Toxodon platensis Teeth (25+) from many different specimens (young and old) 14/1887 Toxodon platensis 3 lower incisors, 2 lower molars 15/1878 Toxodon platensis 9 tooth fragments 15/1887 Toxodon platensis Upper incisor 16/1878 Toxodon platensis Piece of right side of mandible with 3 molars 16/1887 Toxodon platensis Piece of mandible with 3 molars 17/1878 Toxodon platensis Fragments of carpals 131

17/1887 Toxodon platensis Piece of mandible with molar 18/1887 Toxodon platensis 6 small pieces of teeth (species ?) 19/1887 Toxodon platensis Fragments of 3 molars 20/1887 Toxodon platensis Molar (species ?) 21/1877 Toxodon platensis Occipital condylus d. 22/1877 Toxodon platensis Tibia d., astragalus d. 23/1877 Toxodon platensis Juvenile, maxilla with palate 28/1885 Toxodon platensis Skull with mandible, axis 29/1885 Toxodon platensis Juvenile, mandible 30/1885 Toxodon platensis Piece of right side of mandible with 2 molars 30/1887 Toxodon platensis Fragments of skull, without mandible 31/1878 Toxodon platensis Thoracic vertebra 31/1887 Toxodon platensis Pieces of skull, pieces of teeth 32/1878 Toxodon platensis Tibia s. 32/1885 Toxodon platensis Ulna s. 32/1887 Toxodon platensis Piece of femur 33/1885 Toxodon platensis Axis 35/1885 Toxodon platensis Femur s.Tibia s.Calcaneus s. 36/1885 Toxodon platensis Tibia s. 41/1888 Toxodon platensis Piece of proximal end of ulna 42/1888 Toxodon platensis Lumbar vertebra (species ?) 43/1888 Toxodon platensis Piece of atlas 49/1889 Toxodon platensis 8 thoracic vertebra, 5 ribs 50/1889 Toxodon platensis Several vertebrae including 3 axis, teeth, humerus d., ulna d., 2 femurs 57/1878 Toxodon platensis Juvenile, mandible 34/1885 Toxodon platensis Humerus d. 114/1888 Toxodon platensis Scapula d. 71/1889 Toxodon platensis Almost complete mandible 70/1889 Toxodon platensis Incomplete skull, without mandible 126/1887 Toxodontherium compressum Tooth fragments 127/1887 Toxodontherium compressum Tooth fragments NHMD-157453 Ge. sp. 132

NHMD-157460 Ge. sp. NHMD-157456 Ge. sp. NHMD-157463 Ge. sp. NHMD-157464 Ge. sp. NHMD-157465 Ge. sp. NHMD-157451 Ge. sp. NHMD-157445 Ge. sp. NHMD-157447 Ge. sp. NHMD-157466 Ge. sp. 25/1885 Equus sp. Small fragments of teeth 36/1877 Equus sp. Phalange 41/1887 Equus sp. 4 upper molars, 2 lower pre-molars, 4 lower molars, 2 incisors 42/1878 Equus sp. Toothe fragment 42/1887 Equus sp. Phalange 53/1889 Equus sp. 10 vertebrae, bone fragments 64/1888 Equus sp. Tibia distal end 65/1888 Equus sp. Tibia s distal end 129/1887 Equus sp. Left side of mandible 73/1889 Equus sp. Fragment of mandible 196/0000 Equus sp. Astragalus d 120/1887 Hippidion sp. Skull (incomplete) without mandible 26/1885 Hippidion sp. Piece of the right side of skull. Piece of right side of mandible with molars I-III. A few bone fragments 35/1877 Hippidion sp. Pelvis, astragalus, cuneiforme, metatarsus III d. 40/1887 Hippidion sp. Piece of right side of mandible. 1 incisor, 1 molar 43/1887 Hippidium principale Fragments of skull without mandible 63/1888 Tapirus terrestris Distal end of humerus d. 40/1877 Ge. sp. Bone fragments, ribs 55/1878 Ge. sp. Bone fragments 64/1889 Ge. sp. Bone fragments, vertebrae 102/1887 Ge. sp. Humerus fragmentet 107/1888 Ge. sp. Tooth 22/1889 Glossotherium robustum Almost complete skeleton (mounted). Many small bone fragments 133

23/1889 Glossotherium robustum Skull 24/1877 Glossotherium robustum Astragalus d. 25/1889 Glossotherium robustum Several individual specimens. Scapula, humerus s. d., tibias, atlas, vertebra. 26/1877 Glossotherium robustum Zygomatic bone d. 26/1889 Glossotherium robustum Juvenile. 4 cervical vertebrae, 13 thoracic vertebrae, 5 sacral vertebrae, 14 d. and 16s. Ribs. 2 scapula, 2 humerus. Ulna s., pelvis, femur s., tibia, fibula. 27/1877 Glossotherium robustum Metatars. 5 s. 28/1877 Glossotherium robustum Calcaneus d. 29/1877 Glossotherium robustum Ulna d. 30/1877 Glossotherium robustum Piece of mandible 34/1878 Glossotherium robustum Piece of right side of mandible without teeth 35/1878 Glossotherium robustum Tibia d. 39/1878 Glossotherium robustum Scapula d. s., humerus d. ,atlas, axis, 10 vertebrae, at least 19 caudal vertebrae, many fragments of ribs. Skull. Ulna s. d., femur d., tibia d., fibula d., fibula s., astragauls s. d., cuboideum s.d. Pieces of both sides of pelvis. Almost complete hands. Many bone fragments, fossil skin 46/1888 Glossotherium robustum Humerus s., tibia s., pieces of radius and ulna. Almost complete hand s. A few teeth. 47/1888 Glossotherium robustum Partial skull, fragments of at least 5 teeth, atlas, axis. Humenrus s., radius s. and ulna s. Femur d. and s. The most of both feet, parts of hand s. 48/1888 Glossotherium robustum Parts of left side of mandible without teeth 49/1888 Glossotherium robustum Skull with mandible. Several caudal vertebrae. Of the right foot: piece of astragalus, calcaneus, naviculare, cuneiforme III, cuboidium, toe IV and V complete. Many bone fragments 50/1885 Glossotherium robustum Humerus d. 51/1885 Glossotherium robustum Tibia s. 56/1878 Glossotherium robustum Right part of maxilla 60/1889 Glossotherium robustum Skull fragmenst 66/1889 Glossotherium robustum Fragments of pelvis, scapula 134

89/1888 Glossotherium robustum Fragment of molar 47/1877 Glossotherium robustum Piece of mandible 42/1877 Glossotherium robustum Capitatum 46/1877 Glossotherium robustum Fragments of 4 teeth 49/1877 Glossotherium robustum Fragments of a tooth 24/1889 Glossotherium robustum Pieces of the left foot: naviculare, cuneiforme II, III, cubeideum, metatarsals III, IV, V. Of the right foot: naviculare, cuneiforme II, III 91/1888 Glossotherium robustum Distal ends of tibia s. and fibula s. Distal end of tibia d. 92/1888 Glossotherium robustum Pre-molar and fragments of other teeth 48/1877 Glossotherium robustum Piece of maxilla 60/1878 Glossotherium robustum Small piece of what appears to be skin with small bony elements within it 93/1888 Glossotherium robustum Small pieces of rigth side of mandible and pieces of teeth 50/1877 Glossotherium robustum Femur d 55/1877 Glossotherium robustum Scapula 116/1888 Glossotherium robustum Scapula d. 117/1888 Glossotherium robustum Upper tooth (fragment) 25/1877 Lestodon armatus Scapula fragments 27/1889 Lestodon armatus 2 mandible fragments, 7 cervical vertebrae, 4 thoracic vertebrae, 9 ribs, 5 caudal vertebrae, clavicula, scapula 28/1889 Lestodon armatus Astragalus 50/1888 Lestodon armatus Piece of the right side of mandible, 2 molars and parts of 2 pre- molars 51/1888 Lestodon armatus Piece of the left side of mandible with partial teeth 52/1885 Lestodon armatus Skull, piece of the left side of mandible, tooth fragments 52/1888 Lestodon armatus Bone fragments, especially of vertebrae 53/1888 Lestodon armatus Fragment of mandible, species ? 31/1877 Lestodon armatus 2 thoracic vertebrae 49/1885 Lestodon armatus Bone fragments 41/1877 Lestodon armatus Fragments of 3 teeth 43/1877 Lestodon armatus Phalange 44/1877 Lestodon armatus Phalange 135

51/1877 Lestodon armatus Astragalus d. 20/1889 Megatherium americanum Mounted skeleton. Some vertebrae are missing, especially caudal vertebrae. Mandible and atlas are from another individual. The left foot is from another individual and left femur is artificial 21/1889 Megatherium americanum Proximal end of ulna, column of vertebrae, most of right foot 37/1877 Megatherium americanum 2 thoracic vertebrae, 1 cervical vertebra 39/1877 Megatherium americanum Bone fragments of ribs and other bones 40/1878 Megatherium americanum Tibia s. (incomplete) 43/1878 Megatherium americanum Ulna, a few teeth 44/1878 Megatherium americanum Bone fragments of vertebrae and metacarpals 51/1878 Megatherium americanum Many bone fragments of ribs and other bones, from different animals 53/1885 Megatherium americanum Axis 54/1885 Megatherium americanum Lunatum 54/1888 Megatherium americanum left sid of mandible with 2 pre-maolas and 1 molar 55/1885 Megatherium americanum Atlas 56/1885 Megatherium americanum 3 thoracic vertebrae, fragment of sternum, teeth 57/1885 Megatherium americanum Metacarpal IV and V, tooth fragments 65/1889 Megatherium americanum Ribs 79/1888 Megatherium americanum Pieces of pelvis, species ? 83/1888 Megatherium americanum Tibia in fragments 94/1888 Megatherium americanum Piece of right side of mandible 62/1878 Megatherium americanum Middle phalange of 2nd finger s. 101/1888 Megatherium americanum 8 teeth 102/1888 Megatherium americanum Tooth 103/1888 Megatherium americanum Tooth 104/1888 Megatherium americanum Tooth 105/1888 Megatherium americanum Pieces of pelvis 106/1888 Megatherium americanum Tooth 108/1888 Megatherium americanum Piece of zygomatic bonee 109/1888 Megatherium americanum Radius (incomplete) 68/1888 Megatherium americanum 9 mnolars, 3 pre-molars 69/1889 Megatherium americanum 4 ribs, fragments of mandible, astragalus 136

95/1888 Promylodon paranensis Fragment of tooth 15/1877 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Molar 16/1877 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Piece of left side of mandible 26/1878 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Pieces of right side of maxilla and right side of mandible 26/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Fragments of 4 teeth 27/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Fragment of middle section of left side of mandible 28/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Both forelimbs (almost complete). Ulna s., fragments of humerus s. 29/1878 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Skull 29/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Mandible fragments and parts of 3 teeth 30/1878 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Fibula d., femur d. without proximal end 30/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Carpal (species ?) 30/1889 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Skull 31/1889 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Skull 32/1889 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Part of mandible 33/1889 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Parts of different metacarpals, molars 34/1889 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Juvenile, very young. Remains of at least 10 vertebrae, 3 ribs, humerus d., scapula d., pelvis (species ?) 36/1878 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Mandible 38/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Humerus s., radius d., ulna s. Most of femur s., tibia d., fibula d., 6 caudal vertebrae. Most of both hands. Many bone fragments 39/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum 2 cervical vertebrae, pieces of 5 teeth, lunatum d. and s., pisiforme, capitatum s., hamatum s., metacarp 2 d. and s., astragalus d., some bone fragments 40/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Parietal bone and os petrosum 42/1885 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Almost complete skeleton with skull. Some elements are of plaster 43/1885 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Fragments of 2 ribs, scapula d., proximal end of radius s., tibia s. and fibula s. Mounted foot. 44/1885 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Fibula d. and s. 45/1885 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Tibia s. 46/1885 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Mandible (almost complete). Fragments of vertebrae, pieces from 7 ribs, scapula, humerus, ulna, pelvis 47/1885 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Tibia d., fibula d., 1 patella, 9 caudal vertebrae, upper molar, large pieces of pelvis, many bone fragments 137

48/1885 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Several fragments of teeth (species ?) 55/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Fragment of left side of mandible 56/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Mid-scetion of skull 57/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Humerus d. 57/1889 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Skull (incomplete), mandible, 7 cervical vertebrae, 7 thoracic vertebrae, about 20 ribs, Humerus s., most of right hand, radius d. and s., ulna d. and s. 58/1878 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Skull with mandible 58/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum 2 metatarsals 58/1889 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Both feet (almost complete) 59/1888 Scelidotherium leptocephalum Astragalus s. 59/1889 Scelidotherium leptocephalum 2 thoracic vertebrae 55/1889 Homo sapiens 14 almost complete vertebrae, pieces of scapula d. and s., pieces of ribs. Tibia, fibula, almost complete right foot 78/1887 Homo sapiens A few fragments of skull and limb bones 11/1885 Homo sapiens Skull, almost complete 37/1878 Notiomastodon platensis Tusk. Atlas, axis. Of the right foot: calcaneus, cuneiforme I, metatarsal V. Of the left foot: naviculare, cuneiforme III, metatarsal III, IV 37/1885 Notiomastodon platensis Incisor, molar, bone fragments 38/1877 Notiomastodon platensis Pieces of incisors and ribs 38/1878 Notiomastodon platensis Almost complete molar 39/1885 Notiomastodon platensis Molar 40/1885 Notiomastodon platensis Incisor in fragments, pieces of molars. Several bone fragments 46/1889 Notiomastodon platensis Pieces of mandible, pieces of maxilla. Incisor 61/1888 Notiomastodon platensis Tusk, molar 62/1888 Notiomastodon platensis Molar, incisor in fragments 76/1888 Notiomastodon platensis 6 upper and 6 lower molars. Of the right hand: cuneiforme, capitatum, hamatum. Of the left hand: cuneiforme, capitatum. Of left foot: astragalus, naviculare. Proximal end of radius, many bone fragments 82/1888 Notiomastodon platensis Proximal end of ulna 85/1888 Notiomastodon platensis Fragments of skull 138

110/1887 Notiomastodon platensis 2 molars 47/1889 Notiomastodon platensis 2 pieces of humerus, molar 52/1877 Notiomastodon platensis Pieces of ribs, piece of incisor 61/1878 Notiomastodon platensis Scapula s. (incomplete) 38/1885 Notiomastodon platensis Incisor 41/1885 Notiomastodon platensis Tooth- and mandible fragments 96/1888 Notiomastodon platensis Piece of molar 97/1888 Notiomastodon platensis Incisor 98/1888 Notiomastodon platensis Molar and right side of mandible 99/1888 Notiomastodon platensis 3 molars and 1 pre-molar 100/1888 Notiomastodon platensis 2 teeth 48/1887 Cardiatherium paranese Right upper molar III 58/1887 Cardiatherium sp. 1 upper molar and 1 incisor 59/1887 Cardiatherium sp. 3 molars 60/1887 Cardiatherium sp. Humerus d. 61/1887 Cardiatherium sp. Lower molar 68/1888 Cardiatherium sp. Distal end of tibia 52/1887 Ge. sp. 2 pre-molars 53/1887 Ge. sp. Skull with mandble 54/1887 Ge. sp. Right side of mandible 55/1887 Dolichotis sp. Both upper rows of teeth 56/1887 Dolichotis sp. Fragment of right side of maxilla 70/1888 Ctenomys sp. Piece maxilla 71/1887 Ctenomys sp. More than 10 fragments of mandible and maxilla, a few teeth 71/1888 Ctenomys sp. Piece of left side of mandible 72/1887 Ctenomys sp. 5 incisors 66/1888 Cuniculus paca Astragalus, calcaneus 67/1888 Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris Distal end of humerus d. 17/1885 Lagostomus trichodactylus Maxilla and mandible 18/1885 Lagostomus trichodactylus Humerus s., ulna s., Metacarpals II-IV s. 45/1878 Lagostomus trichodactylus Fragments of maxilla and frontal bone 62/1889 Lagostomus trichodactylus Pieces of skull. Pieces of scapula d. and s. Humerus d., radius d. and ulna d. 139

63/1889 Lagostomus trichodactylus Femur s., humerus d., tibia d. Piece of left side of pelvis 64/1887 Lagostomus trichodactylus Pieces of skull with mandible. Femur d. and s. 2 tibia s. (from two different individuals) 65/1887 Lagostomus trichodactylus Piece of right side of mandible 66/1887 Lagostomus trichodactylus Piece of left side of mandible 67/1887 Lagostomus trichodactylus Mandible 68/1887 Lagostomus trichodactylus Pieces from several different specimens. Fragments of mandible, maxilla, teeth. Distal end of humerus s., proximal ends of radius s. and ulna s. Metatarsals 69/1887 Lagostomus trichodactylus 1 incisor and 1 molar 69/1888 Lagostomus trichodactylus Piece of right side of mandible. Fragment of ilium d., fragment of tibia d. 70/1887 Lagostomus trichodactylus Tibia s. distal end 77/1885 Lagostomus trichodactylus Humerus mid-section 112/1887 Megamys holmbergi Molar 57/1887 Megamys patagoniensis Incisor and molar 62/1887 Megamys patagoniensis Molar 63/1887 Megamys patagoniensis Fragments of 3 molars 47/1887 Myocastor coypus Piece of right side of mandible with 3 molars 51/1887 Myocastor coypus Upper molar 111/1887 Neoprocavia mesopotamica Piece of left side of mandible with 2 pre-molars and 1 molar 44/1887 Ge. sp. Mandible 45/1887 Ge. sp. Sacral vertebra 46/1887 Ge. sp. Maxilla d. 73/1887 Ge. sp. Piece of right side of mandible with 6 loose incisors 114/1887 Ge. sp. Framents of 2 teeth 32/1887 Ge. sp. Femur in fragments 19/1899 Ge. sp. Bone fragments of unidentified tortoise

140

Examples of catalogues

Title Page nr. Author

Fossiles de la Pampa. – Catalog Nr. 2. San Nicolas. Republic Argentine 142-155 S. Roth

Fossilien aus der Pampasformation. Catalog Nr. 6. Zürich 156 S. Roth

Pretiosorum Fossilium in regionibus Reipublicae Argentinensis. Caroli F. Hofer & Soc. Genuae 157 S. Roth

Fossilien aus der argentinischer Republik. Catalog Nr. 3. San Nicolas 158 S. Roth

Unnamed list of fossils. 1877. 159 ?

Extracts from S. Roth’s Catalog Nr.3. regarding Typotherium lausenii 160 S. Roth

Catalago de la Collection Paleontologica de José Larroque. Partido de Mercedes, Republica Argentina 161-163 J. Larroque

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163