The Beginnings of Vertebrate Paleontology in North America Author(S): George Gaylord Simpson Source: Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol

Home , George Gaylord Simpson, History of paleontology, Richard Harlan

The Beginnings of Vertebrate Paleontology in North America Author(s): George Gaylord Simpson Source: Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 86, No. 1, Symposium on the Early History of Science and Learning in America (Sep. 25, 1942), pp. 130-188 Published by: American Philosophical Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/985085 . Accessed: 29/09/2013 21:55

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

American Philosophical Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY IN NORTH AMERICA GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON Associate Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History (Read February14, 1942, in Symposiumon theEarly Historyof Science and Learning in America)

CONTENTS siderablevariety of vertebratefossils had been foundin before1846, the accepteddate of that dis- 132 the far West First Glimpses...... covery. Amongthem were findsby Lewis and Clark in Longueuil,1739, to Croghan,1766 ...... 135 1804-1806,a good mosasaurskeleton from South Dakota, Identifyingthe Vast Mahmot...... 142 about 1830,mastodons from western Missouri found in Wistar and Jefferson...... 151 1806 or earlier,a Pleistocenefauna foundin Oregon in Museumsand the Peale Family...... 157 1839, and anotherfound in Alaska in 1816. Scientific RichardHarlan ...... 161 publicationin Americabegan in the Transactionsof the Harlan's Contemporaries...... 164 AmericanPhilosophical Society, which started printing in Discoveryof WesternFossils ...... 168 1769,and before1842 numerous scientific periodicals were ScientificPeriodicals ...... 173 establishedand were publishingnotices of fossil verte- The State of Knowledgein 1842...... 175 brates, notably the A4mericanJournal of Science, estab- Appendix: lishedin 1818. 1842 is takenmore or less arbitrarilyas A. Records of Early VertebratePaleontological theend of thepioneer period and theextent of knowledge Activitiesof theAmerican Philosophical Society 177 of Americanfossil vertebrates at thatdate is summarized. B. The Collectionof VertebrateFossils of the An appendixgives recordsof early vertebratepaleon- AmericanPhilosophical Society ...... 181 tologicalactivities and collectionsof the AmericanPhilo- sophicalSociety. ABSTRACT I NTRODUCTiON The firstvertebrate fossils to be seen by Europeansin the WesternHemisphere were mastodonbones collected Reverend Dr. Nicholas in ON April 3, 1789, the by the Indiansin Tlascala, and shownto Cortez'sarmy Society 1519. A few casual findswere made in the next two Collin read to the AmericanPhilosophical centuriesbut these also had no sequel and cannot be a long essay "on those inquiriesin Natural Phi- called scientificdiscoveries. The findthat may be con- losophy,which at presentare most beneficialto sideredthe true discoveryin this historicalsense was the UNITED STATES OF NORTH AMERICA."1 "The Le Moyne, made by a partyunder the CanadianCharles vast Mahmot [mammothor mastodon],"he said, secondBaron de Longueuil,on the Ohio River in 1739. Mastodonbones were takento France by Longueuiland "is perhapsyet stalkingthrough the westernwil- studied by Guettard,Daubenton, Buffon, and others. derness; but if he is no more, let us carefully Anotherimportant collection was made by Croghanin gatherhis remains,and even tryto finda whole 1766and sentto London. It was not untilabout the end skeletonof this giant,to whom the elephantwas it was firmlyestablished of the eighteenthcentury that in was not even thatmost of theselarge bonesrepresented a distinct,ex- but a calf." An interest fossils tinct, herbivorousspecies allied to the elephant-the thennew to theSociety, or to suchillustrious mem- species now called Mammut arnericanum. Recognition bers as Franklin,Jefferson, and Wistar, but the of these facts involvedthe most fundamentalprinciples admonitionsignalized devotion to a subject of in- with of vertebratepaleontology. The first American quirythat has been continuallybefore the Society trulyprofessional competence in researchin thisfield was Caspar Wistar. Early encouragementof the scienceand for more than 150 years-indeed, for a longer of collectingwas givenby Jefferson.The intimatecon- betweenvertebrate paleontology and publicmu- 1 Dr. Collin was Rector of the Swedish Churchesin nection a memberof the Society seumsbegan withthe Peales, who in 1801 collectedand Pennsylvania.He was elected mountedthe firstassembled fossil skeletonin America on Jan.16, 1789,and, with what might now be considered the secondin the world. RichardHarlan, in 1823- brashness,he began his long and active participationby and thought 1843,gave Linnaeannames to fossilvertebrates, made a tellingthe other members in greatdetail what he of studiesrelatively modern in tone,and was the theyshould do. The rangeof Collin's interestswas al- series of Franklin's firstAmerican who can be said to have pursuedan im- mostas broad,though not as deep,as that botanical portantand consecutivepaleontological career. Less ex- and it included,among many other subjects, or less importantwork by his contemporariesis gardens,lead-glazing, colonial history, the theory of prob- tensive a morebriefly reviewed. The main centerfor theseearly abilities,philology, climatology, and the inventionof researcheswas the AmericanPhilosophical Society, with speedyelevator for savingpersons and propertyfrom the which Wistar,Jefferson, the Peales, Harlan, and most upper storiesof a house on fire. Collin died in 1831. othersthen active in thisscience were connected.A con- For textof his inauguralessay see Collin,1793.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, VOL. 86, NO. 1, SEPTEMBER, 1942 130

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 131

timethan the scienceof vertebratepaleontology is 6. Modern Period.-Since about 1895. This commonlysupposed to have existed. has been a period of democratizationin which The immediateproposal for gathering the whole great figureslike Scott, Matthew, and Osborn skeletonof a "mahmot"was soon carriedout by were surroundedby increasingnumbers of pro- the Peales, who assembledand fora timeexhibited fessionalresearch students and the classic centers in the Society's hall a mastodonskeleton. More of studywere supplementedby the rise of many generally,the whole historyof American verte- others. Discoveryis unabated,but betterknowl- brate paleontologyis intimatelyconnected with edge of previouslyknown faunas, improvement the historyof the AmericanPhilosophical Society. and diversificationof meansand.subjects of study, Following Scott (1927) and Osborn (1931), and unificationand synthesisare characteristic. with considerablemodification, the historyof this It is possiblethat future historians will findthat sciencein Americamay be dividledinto six periods: a sixth period began about 1930 or during the 1. Pre-scientificPeriod.-Flrom the earliest following decade, for vertebrate paleontology times to about 1762. The firstfossil discoveries seems to be undergoinganother radical transfor- were made. Toward the end of the period bones mation, but the outcome cannot now be deter- mined and this is, in any case, werecollected and sentto Europe. No trulyscien- beyondthe scope of the present tificstudy of themhad been made. enquiry. On the occasion of the 200th anniversaryof 2. Proto-scientificPeriod.-From about 1762 to the formationof the Junto,forerunner of the about 1799. In 1762 Daubentonread a paper on American PhilosophicalSociety, Professor Scott Americanfossils treating them for the firsttime discussedthis history, with special emphasis on the in what deserves to be called a scientific way. fourthand fifthperiods (Scott, 1927). Recently Vert&bratepaleontology was not yet a true sci- Romer (1941) has summarizedthe modern pe- ence, but basic methodswere being inventedand riod. It would be repetitiousand it would invite sporadically applied. Collections were slowly unfavorablecomparison to attemptanother ac- accumulating. count of these parts of the history. There is, 3. Pioneer ScientificPeriod.-About 1799 to however,no adequate historicalstudy of the ear- about 1842. In 1799 the firstable technicalstudy liest stages of Americanvertebrate paleontology, by an American (Wistar) was published. In its firstthree periods as I have listed them,and Europe this was the epoch of Cuvier,who organ- the presentpaper is thereforeconfined to these. ized the subject as a true and definedscience. The activitiesof the AmericanPhilosophical So- Harlan and othersin America applied Cuvierian ciety will automaticallyassume a major part in methodsand theoriesto increasinglylarge collec- this study,but theirimportance is bettercompre- tionsof fossils. The date 1842 is arbitrary,chosen hended and the interestsof students are best partlybecause of the even centurysince elapsed, served, if the whole subject is summarizedand but it markedthe approximateend of Harlan's the Society's paleontological contributionsare career and shortly preceded the beginning of placed in thiscontext. Leidy's. Many individualsand institutionshave assisted 4. First Classic Period.-About 1842 to about in the preparationof this paper. It is, of course, 1865. In America the subject was dominatedby based in greatestpart on the publicationsof the Leidy, in Europe by Owen. The descriptivesci- periodin questionand on laterpublished historical ence was well establishedon a comparativeana- studies. In this connectionthe Osborn Library tomicaland taxonomicbasis, but still lacked the of VertebratePaleontology and the generallibrary guiding principleof phylogeny. The flood of of the AmericanMuseum of Natural History,the westerndiscovery began. New York Public Library,and the Libraryof the 5. Second CliassicPeriod.-About 1865 to about American Philosophical Society have been used 1895. Paleontologybecame evolutionaryand de- and theirlibrarians have been uniformlyhelpful. veloped the theories of phylogeny. Cope and Among them,these librarieshave copies of prac- Marsh were the dominantfigures in America,al- ticallyevery pertinent printed document. Impor- thoughLeidy continuedto work until 1890 and tant manuscriptmaterials have been found par- numerousother studentsentered the field. This ticularlyin the Archivesof the AmericanPhilo- was a golden age of discoverywhen most of the sophicalSociety, the Academyof Natural Sciences major fossil fieldsof the continentwere found. of Philadelphia,and the Public Archivesof Can-

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 132 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON ada. For informationon Longueuil and the first stone), theirauthenticity and antiquityare more half of the eighteenthcentury, I am particularly than dubious,and when theirauthenticity is rea- indebtedto Mr. Regis Roy, Ottawa, who spent sonably established(like the petroglyphsin the much time searchingfor published and unpub- Southwestclaimed to representdinosaurs, or the lished information,to Mr. Lawrence J. Burpee, CentralAmerican "elephant" carvings), theirzo- Ottawa, who gave similarassistance and who put ological identificationis highly questionable or me in touchwith Mr. Roy, to Mr. A. J. H. Rich- surelyfalse. ardson, Public Archives,Ottawa, who made and Finds of fossil shark teeth in pre-Columbian sent me a copy of an importantletter (Wright to sitesof the southeasternstates and of fossilinver- Bartram), and to G. Lanctot, Deputy Minister, tebratesover a widerarea (Ball, 1941) provethat Public Archives,Ottawa, who provideda photo- even relativelysavage tribes did know and pick graph of the historicMandeville-de Lery manu- up fossils. The contextof these findsand analo- scriptmap. My originalenquiry in Canada was gous incidentsin historictimes suggest that the forwardedby Dr. L. S. Russell, Toronto. Dr. fossils were "medicine," like many curiously W. R. Jillson,Frankfort, Kentucky, provided data shaped or colored stones,and that there was no on Big Bone Lick, of whichhe is the leadinghis- particularregard for, probablyno knowledgeof, torian. Mrs. GertrudeHess, AssistantLibrarian theirorganic origin. Kindle (1935) has devoted of the American PhilosophicalSociety, not only a special studyto Indian discoveriesof vertebrate facilitateduse of materialsin her care but also fossils,but only three instances are circumstantially found,organized, and suppliedvarious important givenand all are relativelylate and of littlesignifi- data. Dr. Edwin H. Colbert and Mr. Robert cance. In 1858 an Ojibway told Hind of some Chaffeefacilitated examination of specimensand bones in westernCanada, powderedas medicine records in the Academy of Natural Sciences, by the Indian informant. The bones were not Philadelphia. Mr. E. T. Hall, Jr.,Columbia Uni- seen, their nature is unknown,and the incident versity,brought to lighta remarkablyinteresting has no real bearingon paleontologicaldiscovery. prehistoricfossil discovery. My wife,Dr. Anne Some timeprior to 1853, Indians foundmastodon Roe, did much of the bibliographicresearch and bones on a branch of the Assiniboineand de- assistedin otherways. Several othershave given stroyedor hid mostof thembut took some to Fort less definiteor less extensiveaid by makingsug- Pelly. These were describedby Richardson in gestionsand comments. 1854, but the mastodon was completelyknown fromnon-Indian sources long before this. Kin- FIRST GLIMPSES dle's thirdexample is erroneous.2 Afterthis paper was in manuscript,a discovery a fewdays sincewith a present "I was surprised, was made by Mr. E. T. me fromAlbany by two honest Dutchmeti, of exceptionalinterest laid before Columbia inhabitantsof thatcity; whichwas a certaintooth, Hall, Jr.,Department of Anthropology, accompaniedwith some other pieces of bone; which University,to whom I am muchindebted for this beingbut fragments, without any points whereby they recordand for presentingthe specimensin ques- mightbe determinedto whatanimals they did belong, tionto the AmericanMuseum of Natural History. I couldmake nothing of them."-GovernorDudley, These specimensare undoubtedlythe firstknown 1706. fossilvertebrates to be collectedby humanbeings They were found Pre-ColumbianIndians certainlyfound and oc- in the Western Hemisphere. of Gobernador,northwest- casionally collected fossil bones, but in general one-halfmile southeast on the floorof a pit house. The these discoveriesare no real part of paleontologi- ern New Mexico, conditionsof excavation,on the cal history. Various reportedIndian legends of associationsand Mr. are such as to leave no fabulousbeasts representedby fossil bones have authorityof Hall, fossilswere collectedand brought little ethnologicaland no paleontologicalvalue; doubt that the house its prehistoricoccupants. The the data are sparse, often untrustworthy,and into the by carrylittle conviction of genuineand spontaneous 2 He creditsthe Indians with discoveryof Big Bone (trulyaboriginal) reference to real findsof fossils. Lick becausethey are said to have guidedCroghan there Nor is it necessaryto examine here the repeated in 1765. In fact the lick and its bones had thenbeen knownto whitesfor more than twenty-fiveyears. As claims that American Indians have left portraits will later be shown,Indians were probablyinvolved in of animals now extinct: when the portraitsare the real discoveryof this locality,but even in that in- unmistakable(like the proboscideanon the Lenape stancethey cannot fairly be called the discoverers.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 133 date of such occupationis placed somewherebe- thatit probablybelongs to one of the largercarni- tween700 and 900 A.D., so thatthese fossilswere vores of the early Eocene. One end has clearly collectedat least 1000 yearsago. been grounddown by the Indian owner,as can be seen in the photograph(Fig. 1), and thereseems also to have been some grinding,but less deeply, on the side. There are remnantsof a concre- tionaryhematite coating, which would make the powderpink or red,and it couldhave been used as paint. (There is no hematiteon the Phenacodus specimenand it couldhave servedno directlyutili- tarianpurpose.) Another,much later Indian discoverythat is at the same time the firstnotice by Europeans of fossilbones in the WesternHemisphere has been generallyoverlooked by paleontologicalhistorians. Writingin 1568 about eventsthat happened in the latterpart of 1519, Bernal Diaz del Castillo, a captainin the armyof Cortez,tells of greatbones in Tlascala.3 "[The Tlascalans] said that their ancestorshad told them,that in formertimes the countrywas inhabitedby menand womenof great stature,and wickedmanners, whom their ancestors had at lengthextirpated; and in order that we mightjudge of the bulk of these people, they broughtus a bone whichhad belongedto one of them,so large,that when placed uprightit was as highas a middlingsized man; it was the bone be-

FIG. 1. The first vertebrate fossils collected in the tweenthe knee and the hip; I stood by it, and it WesternHemisphere. These specimenswere collected by was of myheight, though I am as tall as thegener- Indians in Lower Eocene beds of northwesternNew alityof men.4 They broughtalso pieces of other Mexico over 1000 years ago (700-900 A.D.) and taken by bones of great size, but muchconsumed by time; themto a pit house from the ruinsof whichthey were but the one I have mentionedwas entire;we were excavatedin 1941 by E. T. Hall, Jr. The upperspeci- men,Amer. Mus. No. 32661,is a fragmentof lowerjaw astonishedat theseremains, and thoughtthat they of an unidentifiedcarnivore. It was groundsmooth on certainlydemonstrated the formerexistence of one end (right in the photograph) by its prehistoric giants. This bone was sent to Castille for his owners. The lower specimen,Amer. Mus. No. 32660,is Majesty's inspection,by the firstpersons who of an of Phenacodus part upperjaw primaevuts. wenton our affairsfrom hence." The reactionof the King, who had asked for The two are fossil mam- specimens(Fig. 1) gold and was senta bone,is not on record,and I mals. One is a of withthree fragment upperjaw have not learned anythingfurther of this first fromPhenacodus teeth,indistinguishable primae- fossil sent fromthe New World. There can be vus. The came fromthe specimenunquestionably littledoubt that it was a fossil,probably some kind Lower so-called Eocene, Wasatch,properly Largo of mastodon.5 The Indian interpretationof the and Almagre,beds that outcropwidely near the localityof the pit house. These formationsand 3I am indebtedto Dr. E. H. Colbertfor callingmy theirimportant mammalian fossils were discovered attentionto thisincident, which I, too,had overlookedon (in a scientificsense) by E. D. Cope in 1874,some firstwriting this paper. 4A fossil femurfound in this regioncannot have ex- ten centuriesafter their Indian discovery. The ceededfive feet in length. The conquistadoreswere small Phenacodusjaw shows no evidenceof humanac- men by our standards,but not this small. The account tion,other than its t'ransportationto the pit house, was writtenfifty years after the event,and even at the and was apparentlyretained as found,as a curi- time some degree of exaggerationwould be excusable with (G. G. S., note). osity probably imputedmagical properties. 5 Dr. G. L. Jepsen(pers. com.) pointsout that mastodon The second specimenis a fragmentof lower jaw remainsare stillabundant in the vicinityof Tlascala and withouttooth crowns and unidentifiableexcept thatlocal collectionsof thetwentieth century parallel that

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 134 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

bones as those of humangiants was at that time In 1743 Catesbyreported finds that may surely (and forlong after) the orthodoxbelief regarding be recognizedas of extinctanimals. This publi- such discoveriesmade in Europe. cation was subsequentto the definitivediscovery The Jesuit missionaryd'Acosta made similar by Longueuil,soon to be discussed,but it probably observationsin South America later in the 16th refersto findsmade at considerablyearlier dates centuryand interpretedthem .in the same wav, but and is in any case amongthe firstpublications that in NorthAmerica the observationsof the doughty give a definiteindication of what animalsare con- Bernal Diaz were followedby a long hiatus. The cerned. Catesby'sremarks are as follows (1743, silence olnthis subject of the earlierEnglish and Vol. II, appendix,p. vii): Frenchexplorers, despite their interest in the ani- All parts of Virginia,at the Distance of Sixty mals and otherproductions of the New World, is Miles,or more,["from the sea," evidentlyomitted] indirectevidence that the abundantoccurrence of aboundin Fossil Shells of variousKinds, which in fossil bones in North America was not widely Stratumslie imbeddeda greatDepth in theEarth, in known among the Indians and not a common the Banksof Riversand otherPlaces, among which subjectof remarkby them. are frequentlyfound the Vertibras,and otherBones In 1636 Samuel Maverick reportedat Boston of Sea Animals. At a placein Carolinacalled Stono, thatburied shells and bones,including whale bones, was dug out of the Earththree or fourTeeth of a had been foundabout sixtymiles above the mouth large Animal,which, by the concurringOpinion of of the James River in Virginia (Neill's Virginia all theNegroes, native Africans, that saw them,were theGrinders of an Elephant,and in p. 131, reportedin Goode, 1901, p. myOpinion they Carolorumn, could be no other; I havingseen some of the like 430). Althoughfossils in the elementarysense thatare broughtfrom Africa. of having been buried,there is no evidencethat these bones belongedto an extinctanimal. Fifty Whateverthe "Vertibras"may have been, the years after Maverick,in 1686, John Banister is elephantgrinders were evidentlyfrom one of the said to have had in his possessionand to have ex- southernmammoths, which were, in fact, ele- hibited to an English travelerlarge bones and phantsand which somewhatmore closely resem- teethfrom the interiorof Virginia.6 Corrobora- bled the living African species than did the Si- tive detail is lackingand again the findled to no berianmammoths. If, as is probable,this incident scientificresult, but it is possiblethat this indicates preceded1739, and because identificationsof still the firstdiscovery of true remainsof extinctani- earlier date speak of human giants or of bones mals in what is now the United States. Banister, questionablyfossil, it appears that these negro a clergymanof the Churchof England,emigrated slaves made the firsttechnical identification of an to Virginia prior to 1668 and was one of the Americanfossil vertebrate-a lowlybeginning for mostactive 17thcentury colonial students of natu- a pursuitthat was to be graced by some of the ral history,especially botany. He may be called most eminentmen in Americanand in scientific our firstscientific martyr, having died in 1692 as history. a resultof a fall sufferedwhile botanizingon the Whateverthe truestatus of the discoveriescon- Roanoke. nectedwith Maverick and withBanister, and what- ever the dates of thosementioned by Catesby,fos- of the Indians in the sixteenth. Rhyntchotheriumtlascalae sil mammalswere certainlyknown in the English Osborn (type of this important genus) is based on a coloniesearly in the 18thcentury. Under the date pre- lower jaw from this region, a cast of which was "Roxbury, 10 July, 1706," GovernorJ. Dudley served in Geneva at least as early as 1856. It is unlikely that such strikingobjects escaped the at- of Massachusettswrote to the eminentdivine Dr. tention of the early natural historians of the Spanish CottonMather and told him of findsof enormous possessions, who did give notices of fossil bones in South teeth and bones made along the Hudson River America, at least. A search of that literature may pro- duringand about 1705 (Dudley's letterin Warren, but duce interestingdata also on Mexican discoveries, 1855, pp. 196-197). "I am perfectlyof the opin- limitations of space and time have prevented me from undertakingso considerable a task regarding a topic that ion," wrote the governor, "that the tooth will is only incidentalto my main theme. agree only to the human body, for whom the 6 The incidentis often mentioned,but without reference floodonly could preparea funeral. . . There is to a contemporarysource. I cite it from Goode (1901, p. nothingleft but to . . . allow Dr. Burnettand for the remarks 385), who seems also to be the authority Dr. Whistonto himat the if he of Osborn (1931) and of others who mentionthe incident bury Deluge; and, in historical notes. were what he shows,he will be seen again at or

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 135 after the conflagration,further to be examined." LONGUEUIL, 1739, TO CROGHAN,1766 Fortifiedwith this information(the source of "Theyare which he did not state), Mather wrote on Nov. extremelycurious on manyaccounts; no living elephantshaving been seen in 17, 1712,to Dr. JohnWoodward of London. He any part of Americaby any of the Europeanssettled there, or told of a large manuscript,two volumesin folio, rememberedin anytradition of theIndians."-Benja- designedto illustrateand to commenton the Bible minFranklin, 1767. by observationson the naturalhistory of America. The authorof this Biblia Ainericana,as he called If Columbus discovered America in 1492, it, was not named but was perhaps Mather him- Charles Le Moyne, second Baron de Longueuil, self. He writesto recommendit "to the Patron- discoveredAmerican fossil vertebratesin 1739. age of some generousMecaenas, to promotethe Both had predecessors,and those of Longueuil publicationof." As a specimenof the manuscript, have been discussed,but in neithercase did the a note is givenon the passage in Genesis,Chapter predecessorsinitiate permanent record or continu- 6, Verse 4, relatingto giants. The note cites the ous development.Not forgettingthe pioneers who occurrenceof giganticteeth and bones judged to saw, marveled,and passed on withoutsequel, the be human,particularly a tooth,four pounds and scientifichistorian may neverthelessdefine true threequarters in weightand a thigh-bone,seven- discovery,for his purposes,as that leading by a teen feetlong, brought from Albany to New York traceableroute, however devious, to eventualeluci- in 1705. Another tooth and some bones were dationof the problemsconcerned. found at "Cluverack,"thirty miles fromAlbany. In the course of the present investigationso "He thengives the Descriptionof one, which he much confusionregarding Longueuil's discovery resemblesto the Eye-Tooth of a Man; he says it was found and such a large amountof evidence has four Prongs, or Roots, flat,and something concerningit was broughttogether that a separate worn on the top; it was six inches high,lacking paper has been devoted to this and ancillaryas- one eighth,as it stood uprighton its Root, and pectsof paleontologicalhistory in America (Simp- almost thirteen inches in circumference; it son, 1942). Previous contradictionsand doubtful weigh'd two pounds four ounlcesTroy weight." pointshave therebeen fullyexposed, the circum- Anothertooth was found far beneaththe surface stances surroundingthe events have been sum- of theearth in thebank of theHudson Riverabout marized,and the available data have been listed fiftyleagues fromthe sea. and consideredin detail. In the presentpaper, We may still ardentlyagree with the secretary therefore,only a briefaccount of the conclusions who caused this communicationto be insertedin reachedwill be given,referring the reader to the thePhilosophical Transactions (see Mather,1714) more special paper for most of the corroboration, that"it were to be wish'dthe Writerhad givenan qualification,and citation. exact Figure of these Teeth and Bones." There In 1739 Longueuil was placed in commandof is, however,no seriousdoubt that they were mas- Frenchand Indian troupsdespatched from Canada todon remains. The abstractof Mather's letter to aid Le Moyne de Bienville,founder and gov- was perhapsthe firstprinted notice of the occur- ernorof New Orleans,in an attackon the Chicka- rence of such fossilsin North America. Mather saw Indians. Longueuil (born 1687, died 1755), and his informantDudley were still medievalin son of a distinguishedCanadian family,was then theirinterpretation of the bones. The next finds, a major in the French colonial army and was that of Longueuil in 1739 (see below) and that destinedto occupythe importantpost of Governor publishedby Catesby in 1743, were immediately of Montreal, 1749-1755. The expedition left recognizedas belongingto animalsof the elephant Montrealin June,1739, and proceededto theOhio kind,and the firstturning point in paleontological River by way of Oswego, Lake Chautauqua,and historyhad been reached.7 theAllegheny River. In late summerof thatyear theydescended the Ohio and at some distancebe- 7 One other early glimpse may be mentionedalthough my data on it are insufficient.Smallwood and Smallwood and the manuscriptis not now available to me. The in- (1941, p. 88) mention a manuscript letter from Joseph cident is neverthelessworthy of notice because it is unique Lord to James Petiver, Sept. 1, 1707, in the Sloane Col- for its date, and for a long time after, in involving a lection of the British Museum. In this letter Lord told small fossil vertebrate. Most of the eighteenthcentury of the tail of a small fish found in a flat and broad piece naturalists overlooked bones of animals smaller than the of stone. The Smallwoods do not quote the data as to mastodon, although they were quite familiar with small locality that were presumablygiven in the original letter, fossil shells.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 136 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

FIG. 2. Map of the Ohio River,drawn in 1740by Mandevillefrom an approximatetraverse by de Lery in 1739. The site of the discoveryof fossilbones by Longueuilin 1739 is shown (see Fig. 3). The manuscriptmap has been photographedin two overlappingsections. Originalin the "Depot des Cartes et Plans de la Marine,Service Hydrographique,"Paris. Photographiccopy fromthe PublicArchives of Canada.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 137

CARTE PARTICUL'QE diunepartie de Ia belleRiviere L a c flrie &de laou+te qele Detachemt du Canadaatenu depuis le Saut O\ de Nigara.jusqutu FfeuveSt R Louis,pourserendre auFortae l'assomption.RelevieA lest irne oparle srdeleryfils & dess;ni Cavernes k'- siviere Oyo ? e s'de Mandevilleen 1740

C eIZO dey 9-ot z --de 14/4~~~~~~~~~~~~O

,Ha 0 aX ,

FIG. 3. Drawingof part of the map shownin Fig. 1, to reproducesome of its details more clearly. A is the fossil locality. The threenames in bracketsare illegibleon the copyof the map availableto me and are supplied fromother early French sources. The spellingof some of the othernames is uncertainbut is aboutas shown. fore reaching the falls, where Louisville now Nicolas Bellin on his map of Louisiana and neigh- stands,they found a marshon the edge of which boringregions published in Paris in 1744 (Fig. 4). were largebones and teeth,representing what they Such studentsas havebeen aware of Longueuil's took to be the remainsof threeelephants. Lon- discoveryhave assumed that it was made at the gueuil had some of these remains gatheredup, localitylater famous as Big Bone Lick, in what includinga tusk,a femur,and at leastthree molars, is now Boone County,Kentucky, southwest of and thesewere carried with the army to its rendez- Covington. Examination of the Mandeville-de vous with Bienville,on the Mississippinear the Lery map casts some doubt on this conclusion. presentsite of Memphis. On this, the only contemporarysource that sur- Afterthe successful conclusion of theChickasaw vives, Longueuil's' localityseems to be distinctly war in the springof 1740, Longueuil went on to fartherdown the Ohio, nearerLouisville, than is New Orleans, taking the fossils with him, and hencetransported them to France at about the end of 1740. The fossils were placed in the King's collectionof curiosities,Cabinet du Roi, whence theywere transferredto the naturalhistory museum in the Jardindes Plantes,where Cuvier re- portedtheir continued preservation some seventy- fiveyears later and wherethey may stillbe. This collectionof fossil bones, the firstfrom America ever to receivedefinitely scientific attention, was studiedby Guettard,Daubenton, Buffon, and others, as will be relatedin the next sectionof this paper. Longueuil'sfossil locality was notedby Chausse- gros de Lery, fils,a young (18-year-old)engineer who accompaniedthe expedition,and it was re- cordedon a manuscriptmap (Figs. 2-3) drawnup fromde Lery's data in 1740 by Philippe Mande- FIG. 4. Part of the map of Louisiana,etc., published ville,sieur de Larigny,a lieutenantwith the Loui- by Bellin in 1744. The course of the Ohio River is based and the fossil indicationof on the manuscriptmap of Fig. 2, Longuieuil siana contingent.From thismap the site is designated in a more general way and with the the fossil localitywas copied, with less precision erroneous date "1729" for "1739." ( Photostat of the and with a serious error, 1729 for 1739, by New York Public Library copy.)

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions op~ ~ ~ o

A~~~~~~~~~~ Ol jil *~h .; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . x~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r~~...... i** * ~ ~ -~~* , ~~tirn~~~i1.

7777777777V

FIG. 5.IapofBi BneLik,mot amusofealyAmrianfosiNlcaitesIa i ws bot 82.ra I. Cozn flr. p

FIG. 5. Map of Big Bone Lick, most famous of early American fossil localities, as it was about 1828. Drawn by I. Cozzens from data of William Cooper. From Cooper, 1831.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 139

Big Bone Lick, even with due allowance for the thatyear, while in thisvicinity, he was given two inaccuracyof this hurriedand roughsurvey. At teeth of a large beast (doubtless a mastodon) presentit cannotbe affirmedthat Longueuil'slo- foundat or near thatlocality. One RobertSmith, cality is known or that it was, or was not, Big residingin the region,was then familiarwith the Bone Lick. It was, however,on the south (now occurrenceof big bones and teeththereabouts and the Kentucky)side of the Ohio betweenthe pres- toldGist thatthey had been discoveredsome seven ent citiesof Covingtonand Louisville.8 years earlier,i.e. about 1744. Whetherthis was In 1751 ChristopherGist passed near and may an inaccuratememory of Longueuil'sdiscovery or have visited Big Bone Lick.9 On March 13 of refersto a later,independent discovery by English colonialpioneers is not clear. The importanceof the incidentis that it shows that English settlers or traderswere thenin thisvicinity and thatthey knew of the fossil deposits. Most of these pioneers were driven out by the French in 1752- 1754, but they were spreadingdown the Ohio Valley again in the 1760's and definitivelyoccu- pied it in the 1770's. Gist gave one of his fossil teethto the Ohio Companyand it may have been one of those that laterturned up in London withoutdefinite record, but its fate is not known. It is probablethat numerouswhites, British or French, visited Big Bone Lick during the later 1750's,as suggestedby a fewrecords such as those FIG. 6. Big Bone Lick today. View lookingdown the of JohnFindley in 1752 and of Mary Inglis,with valley,toward the Ohio. Most of the boneswere found French and Indian captors,in 1756 (see Jillson, in the alluvial floorof the valleytoward the centerand 1936). These visitshave no bearingon paleonto- to the rightin the photograph.Photographed by the logicalhistory except to suggestincreasing famili- authorin 1941. aritywith the localityamong the usuallyinarticu- late frequentersof the disputedwilderness. 8 Present-dayreaders of the eighteenthand earlynine- Word of the bones reached teenthcentury literature are often confusedby refer- great early John encesto "Canadian"discoveries, to the "Ohio" animalor Bartram,probably the most famousof American animalfrom Ohio, to fossilsfrom western Virginia, etc. These usuallyrelate to remainsfound in what is now Kentucky.Longueuil planted the French flag at his fossillocality and claimedit for Canada. His specimens and othersfrom the same regionwere Canadian to the Frenchstudents and to othersderiving their information from French sources,even as late as the end of the eighteenthcentury, long after France and Canada had relinquishedall claimto this area. To the English,this regionwas in Virginiaeven before force of arms had rebuffedthe French claim. As faras theEnglish colonies were concerned,what is now Kentuckywas in Augusta County,Va., in 1738-1769,in BotetourtCounty in 1769- 1772, and in Fincastle Countyin 1772-1776. In 1776 Kentucky,under that name and with more or less its presentboundaries, became a countyof Virginia,and in 1792Kentucky joined the unionas a separatestate. Big Bone Lick and otherKentucky localities have neverbeen in Ohio,but the name of theriver used in designatingthe regionhas occasionallybeen mistakenfor that of the FIG. 7. One of the salt springsof Big Bone Lick. state. This spring,kept open by an old, large,iron pipe, is still 9 Jillson(1936), who has giventhe mostdetailed and flowing.It is directlybelow the presentsmall settlement in generalmuch the best accountof early visits to the of Big Bone. Photographedby the authorin 1941. Kentuckyfossil fields,maintains that Gist did visit this famous lick. In this he contradictsthe conclusionof tivelyminor difference of opinionelsewhere (Simpson, Gist's editor, Darlington.I have discussedthis rela- 1942).

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 140 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

Colonial naturalists,who was ever eager for any the Surface, and some Partly burned [buried?], but intelligenceregarding the natural productionsof all much more decay'd by time, then those they had the coloniesand theirfrontier. He soughtinf or- been describing, and not Any Entire Sceleton; I mationfrom his correspondentJames Wright and Askd if they had Ever heard from their old men, receivedit abundantlyin the followingletter :10 when these 5 were firstobserved, or if they,or their fathers, had Ever seen any such large Creatures Respectedfriend living, as these bones were supposd to have been a Pursuantto thyrequest, I have madeas particular part of, they Answered they had never heard them an Enquiryrelating to thosebones thou mentions, as spoken of, other then as in the Condition they are I possiblyCould, from two Sencible Shawanese at present,nor ever heard of any such creaturehav- [Shawnee] Indians,Assisted by an Interpreter,And ing been seen by the oldest Man, or his father-that the Substanceof whatthey Say is as follows-the they had indeed a tradition,such mightyCreatures, placewhere they lye is about3 milesfrom the Ohio, once frequentedthose Savannahs, that there were then salt & moist,as well as I could judge by theirde- men of a size proportionableto them,who used of it seemsto contain30 or 40 Acres,in the to kill them,and tye them in Their Noppusses And scription throw Midstof a large Savannah,4 days JourneyBelow them upon their Backs As an Indian now dos a Deer, the lowerShawanese town, on the East Side of the that they had seen Marks in rocks, which appearto be theremains of 5 Entire traditionsaid, were made by these Great & Strong river,that there Men, when with their heads All Pointingtowards theysate down with their Burthens,such Sceletons, as a Man on Each other,And near together,supposd to have makes by sittingdown the Snow, that when there fallenat the same time; whenthey were desiredto were no more of these strong Men left describetheir several parts, they began with their alive, God Kiled these Mighty Creatures, that they should not heads,of whichtwo were larger than the rest, one of hurt the Present race of Indians, And added, God had Kill'd these last 5 they these,they said a Man Couldbut Just Grasp in Both had been his Arms,with a long Nose, And the Mouthon the questioned about, which the Interpretersaid was to next mentiondthe shoulderblade, be understood,they supposed them to have been Killd underside, they by whichwhen set on End, reachedto theirShoulders, lightning-these the Shawanese said were their And theywere both tall men,What theyCall'd the traditions,and as to what they knew, they had told of this bone,was equal in size to it-the Man who Interpreted,was well Acquainted Cup (or socket) with a large bowl,the thighbone whenbroke assunder, their language, and as I have known him from a boy, I am Confidenthe wouldadmit of a littleboy's Creepinginto it-they would do it faithfully,I shal be pleas'd if what smal were askd i f theyhad seen those long bones they Information I have Answeredthey had, And by the gain'd wil be agreable to thee, And shal be glad to Call'd horns,they oblige at distancefrom where they stood to the door,Showd thee any time to the Utmost of my Power, themto be 10 or 12 feetlong, And added thatby I am thyAssured friend the Bones, they judged the Creaturewhen Alive James Wright a Small house,pointing musthave been the Size of August 22nd 1762 to a Stable in Sight;-I askd fromthe Window Bartram themif the Place wherethey lay was Surounded John withMountains, So as to admita probabilityof its Ever havingbeen a lake,they Answered, the place There is, as usual in the earlier records, some was saltand Wettish,And by havingbeen much trod doubt as to the locality here described but it may & Licked, was somthinglower then the adjacent have been Big Bone Lick. This is indeed in a land,which however, was so level,to a prodigious valley surrounded by wooded hills and not in "a Extent,that the lick,as theyCalld it, Could never large Savannah," but reference is probably to the have been coverdwith water; And thatthere were more distantly surrounding level uplands. This manyroads thro this Extent of land,larger & more lick could well be described as a salt and moist beatenby Buffalasand other Creatures,that had tract of 30 or 40 acres, something lower than the madethem to go to it, thanany Roads theysaw in adjacent land, about 3 miles from the Ohio River, on if thisPart of theCountry beingQuestiond they and about 4 days' journey below the lower Shaw- had seen such bones in Any otherplace, they said theyhad seen manysuch, Scattred here & therein nee town, which was near the junction of the thatlarge tract of land mentiondbefore, some upon Scioto and the Ohio (A. J. H. Richardson, pers. com.). The report that bones were widely scat- 10 The original is British Museum, Additional Mss. tered over a large tract in this region is important 21648, ff. 333-4. It is copied in Public Archives of in view of the tendency to ascribe all early finds Canada, Bouquet Papers, Vol. 10-2, pp. 279-82, from which Mr. A. J. H. Richardson kindly provided a tran- along the Ohio to the single locality of Big Bone script for my use. Lick, itself.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 141

JohnBartram (1699-1777) was an "Old Mem- some repetitionof Kindle may be riskedby treat- ber under the Original Plan" of the American ing the incidentat sufficientlength.'2 PhilosophicalSociety and it is highlyprobable that Born in Dublin, Ireland, of Protestantparents the informationthus obtainedwas communicated at an unknowndate early in the eighteenthcen- to the Society,although the incidentantedates any tury,Croghan migrated to Pennsylvaniain 1741. survivingproceedings. The paleontologicalin- He soon became familiarwith the Delaware and terestsof membersof the Society may certainly, Iroquois Indians,whose languageshe learned,and and those of the Societyitself may with sufficienthe establishedtrading posts in the upper Ohio probability,be dated from1762, at latest." Valley. His men were drivenout of the region The most famous collectionof fossils made in by the Frenchin 1752-54 and he becamean active the Ohio Valley duringthe eighteenthcentury was partisan of and participantin the British ad- Croghan's,but otherswere made and sent to Eu- vances that ultimatelystifled French pretensions rope betweenLongueuil's and Croghan'sby collec- here. In 1756 he was made deputysuperintendent tors whom the accidentsof time have left anony- of Indian affairs,with onerous duties that he per- mous, as far as publishedrecord appears. Thus formedwith remarkableskill, and in 1758 he as- we learn from Collinson (1768a) that a Captain sistedin the captureof Fort Duquesne. He then Owry of Hammersmith,who had servedin Amer- moved to that site (Pittsburgh),built "Croghan ica, had, sometimeprevious to 1767, acquiredthere Hall," acquireda greatestate, and engagedin ex- a "calf elephanttusk" and "a greatpronged tooth" tensiveland speculations,often in competitionwith (both obviously of the mastodon). Earl Bute GeorgeWashington. At the outbreakof the revo- also thenhad in his possessionat least one molar lutionhe was unjustlyconsidered a Tory, lost all (Collinson, 1768b). Moreover,in the springof his property,and died in povertyon Aug. 31, 1782. 1767 beforeCroghan's collection reached England, His biographer,Volwiler, considers that, "Next to Hunter (1769) foundin the Tower, in chargeof Sir William Johnson, Croghan was the most Mr. Bodington,"a considerablequantity of ele- prominentIndian agent of his time. . . . He was phants [mastodon]teeth [that] had been brought one of the firstEnglishmen [sic!] to foreseethe . . .from America." UnfortunatelyHunter neg- future greatness of the wildernessbeyond the lectedto recordthe "verbalaccount of theirhaving Appalachians." been broughtfrom the banks of the Ohio" as it In 1765 Croghanwas sentto explorethe region was given to him by Mr. Bodington. of the Ohio, to treatwith the Indians who retained Croghan's activities have been recounted by French sympathies,and to attemptto open the Kindle (1931) in an admirablepaper that has as Illinois region to British penetration. He left its only defectsthe claim thatCroghan discovered Fort Pitt on May 15, 1765, and on the 30th of Big Bone Lick and that he was the firstcollector that monthhe came to Big Bone Lick which he of Kentuckyfossils. It has already been made describedas followsin his diary (diary in full in sufficientlyclear thatCroghan has no titleto either Featherstonhaugh,1831; pertinentpassages copied of thesehonors, but it may stillbe maintainedthat in Kindle, 1931; Jillson,1936): he was the mostimportant 18th century American collectorwhose name and achievementsare known We passed the great Miame River,about thirty to us. For thisreason and because of the connec- milesfrom the littleriver of thatname, and in the tion with Benjamin Franklin,whose interestsare eveningarrived at the place wherethe elephants' so dear to the American Philosophical Society, bonesare found,where we encamped.. . . This day we came aboutseventy miles [henceabout fortybe- '1 The James Wright in question, clearly a Quaker yondthe Miami]. (as was Bartram), is doubtless the James Wright of 31st. Early in the morningwe wentto the great Delaware County (Pennsylvania) who was elected a Lick, wherethose bones are only found,about four member of the Society in 1768. milesfrom the river, on the south-eastside. In our In 1804 Benjamin Smith Barton published a close paraphrase of this letter,from a manuscript (clearly not way we passedthrough a finetimbered clear wood; the letter itself) in his possession. The letter writer was we came into a large road [game trail] whichthe referred to as "James" in this manuscript and Barton buffaloeshave beaten,spacious enough for two wag- erroneously identifiedhim as James Logan. The only additional informationgiven by Barton is that Bartram's 12 The data, however,are fromKindle's sources,and interest arose from his being informed by Colonel others,and not paraphrasedfrom Kindle. On Croghan's Bouquette that Shawnee Indians had brought to Pitts- life, aside fromhis fossil collecting,see Volwiler,1930, burgh a large tooth and part of a tusk. and his references.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 142 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON ons to go abreast,and leadingstraight into the Lick. To George Croghan It appears that thereare vast quantitiesof these London, Aug. 5, 1767 boneslying five or six feetunder ground, which we Sir, discoveredin thebank, at theedge of theLick. We I returnyou manythanks for the box of elephants' foundhere two tusks above six feetlong; we carried tusks and grinders. They are extremelycurious on one, with some otherbones, to our boats,and set many accounts; no living elephantshaving been seen off.... in any part of America by any of the Europeans settledthere, or rememberedin any traditionof the On June 7th, while encampeda shortdistance Indians. It is also puzzling to conceive what should below the mouthof the Wabash, Croghan'sparty have brought so many of them to die on the same was attackedby hostile Indians, who killed five spot; and that Ino such remains should be found in menand tookthe others captive. "I got the stroke any other part of the continent,except in that very of a Hatchet on the Head," Croghanlater wrote distantcounty,'Peru, from whence some grindersof to his friendCaptain Murray (Volwiler, 1930), the same*kind, formerlybrought, are now in the museumof the Royal Society. The tusks agree with "but myskull being pretty thick, the hatchet would those of the African and Asiatic elephant in being not enter,so you maysee a thickskull is of service nearly-of the same form and texture,and some of on some occasions." It need hardlybe added that them,notwithstanding the length of time they must the fossilswere abandoned. have lain, being still good ivory. But the grinders Croghan eventuallyobtained his freedomand differ,being full of knobs,like the grindersof a car- afterweary peregrinations found his way back to nivorious animal; when those of the elephant,who Fort Pitt. Nothingdaunted, he set out for Illi- eats only vegetables, are almost smooth. But then nois again on June 18, 1766, in companywith we know of no other animal with tusks like an elephant,to whom such grindersmight belong. CaptainHarry Gordonand an escort. On July17 It is- remarkable,that elephants now inhabit nat- theyvisited Big Bone Lick, of whichGordon wrote urally only hot countrieswhere there is no winter, (Public Archivesof Canada, ShelborneMss., Vol. and yet these remainsare foundin a wintercountry; 48, pp. 159-178, pertinentpassages publishedby and it is no uncommonthing to findelephants' tusks Kindle, 1931, froma copyby J. Coussens): "The in Siberia, in great quantities,when theirrivers over- extentof the Muddy part of the Lick is 34 of an flow, and wash away the earth, though Siberia is Acre; this Mud beingof a salt qualityis greedily still more a wintrycountry than that on the Ohio; lick'dby Buffalo,Elk & Deer, who came fromdis- which looks as if the earth had ancientlybeen in another position,and the climates differentlyplaced tant parts, in great Numbers for this Purpose; fromwhat theyare at present. we picked up several of the Bones, some out of With great regard,I am, Sir, ye Mud, others off the firmGround... Croghanwent on to Illinois,where malaria cut Your most obedienthumble servant, shorthis stay,and thento New Orleans and New B. Franklin York. Early in 1767 he dispatchedthe Big Bone A subsequent letter to the Abbe Chappe (see Lick fossils to London, part to Lord Shelburne, next section of this paper) shows that Franklin then in charge of American colonies and later soon changed his mind as to the habits of the ani- Prime Minister,and part to Benjamin Franklin. mal from the Ohio. As listed by Collinson (1768a) the Croghan By 1767 fossil collectors in the New World collectionsent to Lord Shelburneincluded two had provided the savants of the Old World with tusks,several molar teeth,and a lower jaw with ample materials for astonishment and reflection. two teeth. Most of these were depositedin the The interpretationof these remains was the first BritishMuseum. Franklin'sshare includedfour task of American paleontology. tusks,another broken tusk and stillanother much decayed,a vertebra,and threemolars. Franklin IDENTIFYING THE VAST MAHMOT acknowledgedthe receiptof theseimportant relics in the followingletter :13 "We are forced to submit to concurringfacts as the voice of God-the bones exist-the animals do not!"-Rembrandt Peale, 1803. 13 The originalhas not been located,but the letteris printedin mosteditions of Franklin'sworks. It is here It took almost the whole eighteenth century to quoted fromthe Smythedition. The JaredSparks edi- tionof 1838includes a helpfulnote with a quotationfrom answer a few questions regarding remains like Collinson. those reported by Mather at the beginning of that

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 143 century. Matherhad repliedcorrectly only to the mainsand his earlysuccessors answering correctly most fundamentaland simpleof such queries: he forall. Were theythe same as the Siberianmam- acceptedthe obvious fact thatthese fossilsare of moth? Answerwas long confusedby lack of ap- organicorigin. preciationthat more than one kind of animalwas From what sort of creaturesdid the bones and concerned,leading to the nextquestion: Were two teethcome? Mathersaid fromhumans. His first or moredistinct American animals confused under successorscorrectly said fromlower animals. En- the namemammoth? No one clearlysaw the pos- larging knowledgethen broke the question into sibilityuntil late in the 1790's, afterwhich a cor- several. What generalsort of animals? This was rect conclusionwas soon reached. already solved by Catesby's slaves and by Lon- Were these animals extinct? Hunter replied gueuil'scompanions: elephant-like animals. Were correctlyin 1768,but theargument continued until theydistinct from living elephants? We will find the end of the century. Collinsonreplying affirmatively for some of there- What were theirhabits? Collinsonhad the an- Arnt.do i:*. ~&JC. qSop. . oJVtg

o 0 j o " 3,w z 27I5 3-A 33,N 3

CARTE MINE'RALOOIQtE, -de Bafl\ 0,r~J~ a~l Nature cdeusTerreins t. C ay d' afi et de la L o rU'su4w lz Drwr, pa- Philippe Buacxe de Ur. dvetint~ I - 1 - S Jur lrO redc-dord_vtpmtr un Af-,4u " 'P licaon 0 ddemGuettadae iamnmeAead! An actere.1 1-35. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CA.yOit.

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~~~~~~~~-14&

I FJad4w . . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r o,rif\''II .0 :vv - Xt"rar rS,w- x

L r r,s ouLa 0 F Lab,r 0t oiXrowb. aI 6' .. A' wo. Oor

1756. Inon"tfmbt t- do .blg,ifs'

FIG 8 Mnealgialma ofNothAmria y hiipp Bace ro te at of, Getr,fomGuttrd

0 1.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 Pt- Miixx e4' 4~~~~~~~~2&M andFIG the 8.Minralgicl vicinityof the Bigmp Bone f LickNrthAmeicaby (south of the "R. hilpp d'Ouabache") Bucefrmtedt is shown but not fGutadmarked. o utad

175. I ths, robblythefirt golgicl mp o th cotinnt,sevralinertbrae fossl lcaltie ar make

FIG. 8.eMviineralogicale map Bofe North Americaby PhilippeBuaache" fro thewdata nof Guretad.rmGutad

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 144 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON swer in 1767,but again it tookthe restof the cen- mankindbut also the developmentof fundamen- turyfor agreementto be reached. tallynew waysof thinkingand of an apparatusfor How could such tropicalanimals as elephants scientificinterpretation. It was the greatachieve- live in the cold climateof Ohio and still farther mentof the eighteenthcentury that it made this north? Franklingave an intelligentbut wrong an- revolutionaryadvance, even more basic than that swer in 1767, and Jeffersongave an essentially wroughtby the doctrineof evolutionin the nine- correctanswer in 1781 or 1782, but new discov- teenthcentury, and so made a scienceof paleon- eries seemed for a time to contradicthim and it tologypossible. The concreteresults are meager was years beforethe solutionwas clearlyunder- compared,say, with those so quicklyobtained by stood and generallyaccepted. Cuvier after 1800, but the expansionof the edi- These questionsall seem verysimple now. We ficeto includeso muchgreater a rangeof materials might think that the firststudent to bring to- was possibleonly after the less showyfoundation gethersome of the Americanfossils, some from had been firmlyconstructed. Siberia,and recentelephant bones (as Daubenton Guettard (1756, read in 1752) publishedthe had already done in 1762) could have answered firstillustration of an Americanvertebrate fossil all of themso conclusivelyas to end the discus- in a curiousmemoir intended to demonstratethat sion. But the questionsare simplenow only be- the geologicalconstitution and productsof Swit- cause they have been answered. Every answer zerland and of North America are essentially was contraryto the accumulatedlore of all the parallel. He includedin this memoirwhat de- millenniumsbefore 1700. They requirednot only serves, despite its crudity,to be called the first the rejectionof some of the fondestbeliefs of geologicalmap of the New World (Fig. 8). He gave two artisticallygood and relativelyaccurate s n4itt A .. views of a thirdmolar of Mammutamxericanum (Fig. 9), certainlyfrom the Longueuil collection althoughno statementof its originwas givenbe- yond saying that it was "d'un endroit qui est marque'dans les cartes du Canada, sous le nom de cantonoiu l'on a trouve'des os d'6le6phant."The place is not so markedon Guettard'sown map of Canada (Fig. 8), but the referenceis clearlyto Bellin's map (Fig. 4) or otherscopied from it, on which Longueuil'sdiscovery is indicated. As foridentification, Guettard asked, "De quel animal est-elle?& ressemble-t-elleaux dents fossilesde cette grosseur,qu'on a trouvees dans differens endroitsde l'Europe?" His onlyanswer was, "Ce sont-ladeux points qu'il ne m'a pas ete possible d'eclaircir." A decade laterDaubenton (1764, read in 1762) .1B...... feltthat he could clear up thesequestions. Deal- Ft D ~ ~ ~ ~ ing primarilywith the femurtaken to France by Longueuil, Daubenton attemptedto elucidateits relationshipsby a figurein whichthis femur,one froma Siberianmammoth, and one froma recent elephant,are compared(Fig. 10). This is an excellent example of the comparativemethod for identifyingfossils, a procedurethat seems quite FIG. 9. The firstfigure of an Americanvertebrate obviousnow, but thatwas long in being adopted. fossil, from Guettard,1756 (drawnby J. Ingram). Not No longerwas it possibleto call mastodonbones identifiedby Guettard,the toothis now identifiableas a those of humangiants: with simplegenius Dau- thirdmolar of the Americanmastodon. (The smaller bentonobserved that the bones of differentanimals figureshows a piece of rock from near Quebec with Paleozoic brachiopods,D, identifiedby Guettardas fossil have characteristicforms, more or less constant moths.) for any one kind of animal,and thatone can de-

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 145 terminewhether two homologousbones are from and usuallydo representextinct species, that they the same species by settingthem alongside each occurin definite,temporal sequence, and thatthey otherand looking. record evolutionaryphylogenies. Some of the This is one of the four most basic discoveries argumentsregarding extinction will be considered or principlesin the rise of vertebratepaleontology on laterpages. The conceptof sequencewas de- velopedby stratigraphersand invertebratepaleon- 4~~~~#/ .;-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... tologistsand gradually taken over by vertebrate paleontologistsaround the beginningof the nineteenthcentury. The evolutionaryconcept was not an accepted or leading principle in vertebrate _ ...... ,.,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... paleontologyuntil well afterthe periodcovered by thepresent paper. The occurrenceof extinctspecies was not en- *S itEiCt;0t...... WD00-.|iE.ESlTySiiEEd:0ti-.E;it-X5i0-...... 2ST0i.0;-.D visionedby Daubentonor acceptedby his authori- tative contemporaries.From his point of view, therefore,the problemwas to findthe livingani- t;t:d00000f::000;ii.0,;;0-.:.f...... ; , ...... :-,...... At;,.....:-:.:-'.f mal whose bones mightinclude some like those .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..::0:;0900i;00--dS.:; i.; ... .. fromthe Ohio as variants. In this he was com- .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*||DES__'X''.--0-'"'.".... . pletelysuccessful, because he demonstratedthat the Ohio River (or Canadian,as he consideredit) 'femur,the Siberian mammothfemur, and the recent elephantfemur. are all variationsof the sametype. To criticizethe error of supposingthat all representa single species would'be to insist that Daubenton should have used premisesthat were not developed,were scarcelyeven imagined, when he wrote. The tusks confirmedDaubenton's conclusion, but the molarteeth (which were whatwe now call mastodon,and not mammoth,teeth) plungedhim into a dilemma. They certainlycould not be simple variants of the elephantpatteern but must FIG. 10. Comparisonof femora of the American representa distinctspecies. He concludedthat mastodon(Fig. 1, middle), Siberianmammoth (Fig. 2, the molars were those of a large hippopotamus. below), and -a recent elephant (Fig. 3, above), from Even this grosslyerroneous conclusion cannot be Daubenton1764 (drawn by Ingram). Although used by Daubentonto supportthe incorrectthesis that all three calledabsurd. Mastodonmolars are, indeed,more femorarepresent the same species,the plate is a unique like those of a hippopotamusthan of an elephant, early exampleof correctprocedure in identifyingfossil but herethe comparativemethod necessarily failed bones. as long as the premiseof non-extinctionwas accepted. To bolsterhis conclusionthat the molars, and it may fairly be dated from Daubenton, al- on one hand, and the tusk and femur,on the thougheven he had less importantpredecessors other,befonged to differentanimals, Daubenton (such as Catesby'sslaves) and althoughit is usu- insistedat some lengththat the bones were found ally credited to Cuvier a generation later.1 The or others of these basic points are that fossils may by savages, incapableof judging guaranteeing theirassociation. He was rightin rejectingthe 14He mayjustly be honoredas the fatherof vertebrate necessityof associationas the materialsreached paleontology,but it is improbablethat Cuvieroriginated but entirelywrong in rejectingthe possibility. of that science. him, any of the trulyfundamental principles or of He developedcertain of theseprinciples, exemplified them, Here the limitsof his scientificimagination, systematizedthem, and for the firsttime broughtto- that of any of his learned contemporaries,had gethera considerablemass of materialdata. These great been reached. Buffon,the pope of eighteenthcen- assurehis in achievementswarrant and pre-eminentplace tury zoologists,adopted and publicizedDauben- scientifichistory without claiming for him priorityon particularpoints that 'were definitely anticipated. ton's conclusions,both right and wrong.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 146 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

These views did not, however,long hold the Abbe Chappe field undisputed. In 1767, as has been related, London Jan. 31. 1768 collectionsof mastodonbones and teeth became Sir available in London and the English naturalists I sent you sometimesince, directedto the Care of then began to study them. Franklin'sviews of M. Molini, a Booksellernear the Quay des Augustins thatyear are seen in his letterto Croghan,copied a Tooth that I mention'dto you when I had the on a previous page. They exhibitedhis usual Pleasure of meeting with you at the Marquis de sound commonsense and reasoningpowers. He Courtanvaux's. It was found near the River Ohio in America, about 200 Leagues below Fort du neverdoubted that all the remainswere fromone Quesne, at what is called the Great Licking Place, kind of animaland thatthis animalwas a sort of where the Earth has a Saltish Taste that is agreeable elephant,but a sort with differentgrinders and to the Buffaloes & Deer, who come there at certain probablycarnivorous in habit. Elephantsare now Seasons in great Numbers to lick the same. At this tropical. The occurrencein a wintryregion of [Pla]ce have been found the Skeletons of near 30 remains of similar animals must indicate either [larg]e Animals suppos'd to be Elephants, several that the climatehas changedradically or that the Tusks like those of Elephants being foundwith these remainsbelong to an allied,extinct species of dif- Grinder Teeth. Four of these Grinders were sent ferentclimatic habit. The second alternativewas me by the Gentleman'6who broughtthem from the closed for Franklinbecause, like Daubenton,Buf- Ohio to New York, togetherwith 4 Tusks, one of which 6 Feet long & in the thickestPart near 6 reason to is fon, and manyothers, he had no good Inches Diameter,and also one of the Vertebrae. My doubt the accepted doctrinethat animals do not Lord Shelbourn receiv'd at the same time 3 or four become extinct. He thereforeconcluded that the [of] them with a Jaw Bone & one or two Grinders earth had ancientlybeen in anotherposition and remainingin it[.] Some of Our Naturalists17here, its climatesdifferently placed. This was daring however,contend, that these are not the Grindersof but trulyscientific imagination, such as Daubenton Elephants but of some carnivorousAnimal unknown, lacked. In this conjectureFranklin also remark- because such Knobs or Prominances on the Face of ably anticipateda moderngeological theory. the Tooth are not to be foundon those of Elephants, Early in the followingyear Franklinhad clari- and only, as they say, on those of carnivorousAni- me that Animals capable fied and modifiedhis views on the affinitiesand mals. But it appears to must them- letterto of carrying such large heavy Tusks, habitsof these animals,as the following selves be large Creatures,too bulkyto have the Ac- Abbe Chappe shows15 (Copied from Franklin's tivity inecessaryfor pursuing and taking Prey, and draft,Fig. 11, in the Library of the American therefore I am inclin'd to think those Knobs are PhilososophicalSociety, Franklin Papers, Vol. 45, only a small Variety.18 Animals of the same kind No. 33b; it has frequentlybeen printedin Frank- and Name often differingmore materially,and that lin's works). those Knobs might be as useful to grind the small Branches of Trees, as to chaw Flesh. However I 15Abbe Chappe d'Auteroche (1722-?1769) was a noted should be glad to have your Opinion, and to know French astronomer who went to Tobolsk to observe the fromyou whetherany of the kind have been found letter transitof Venus in 1761. At the time of Franklin's in Siberia. he was being lionized as an authorityon the little-known wastes of Siberia and his book on that region appeared With great Esteem & Respect, I am- same year, 1768. later in the Sir, Franklin's letter incidentallyclears up a mysterythat plagued Cuvier and that has, as far as I know, been Your most obedthum' ignoredand not explained by later authors. Buffon (1778, Servant P1. III) had figured a tooth of what we now call B. F. Mammut aniericanum with the statement that it was from Siberia. Cuvier (1834, p. 257) knew that this In his correct reversal of opinion regarding the species was quite distinct from the Siberian mammoth diet of the animal (considered carnivorous in the and he believed that it was confinedto North America, earlier letter to Croghan), Franklin was perhaps but he was baffledby this record of a Siberian specimen. influenced by Collinson, with whom, instead of collection,and was there- The tooth was from the Chappe It is not fore assui;zed to be from Siberia, where Chappe had Hunter, he now agreed (see below). traveled and had collected mammoth teeth. Cuvier sug- surprising that Franklin's relative unfamiliarity gested that Chappe might have obtained the specimen in California, which he had also visited. It seems to me 16 [Croghan.] beyond serious doubt that this was the very tooth,that 17 [Referringprobably to Hunter.] Franklin had sent to Chappe and that it was therefore 18 [That is, a minorvariation on the elephantmolar collected by Croghan at Big Bone Lick. pattern.]

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions N.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~K

FIG. 11. Draft of letterfrom Dr. BenjaminFranklin to Abbe Chapped'Auteroche, Jan. 31, 1768,discussing the mastodonremains sent to Franklinby Croghan. From the original,Library of the AmericanPhilosophical Society.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 148 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON with the species conceptof the day led him to a known;or elsethat they are theremains of somevast grossoverestimate of theextent of variationallow- animalthat hath the longteeth, or tusks,of theele- able withina singlespecies, according to contemf-phant, with large grinderspeculiar to that species, poraryas well as modernstandards. beingdifferent in size and shape fromany animal yetknown.... The elephantis whollysupported by vegetables; and theanimal to whichthese grinding teeth belong, bytheir make and form,seemed designed for the bit- ing and breakingoff the branchesand treesfor its sustenance.. This greatcreature, to whichthese teethbelong, wherever it exists,is probablysup- portedby browsingon treesand shrubs,and other vegetablefoods. Collinson avoided the shockingidea that the animalmight be extinct,but he seemsto have been on the verge of this great innovation. He ex- plicitlymade threeimportant and brilliantcontri- butions:the tusks and thegrinders belonged to the FIG. 12. Collinson'sfigure of an Americanmastodon same animal; thisanimal was of a speciesperhaps molar,probably one of thosecollected by Croghanin elephantinebut distinctand knownonly fromfos- 1766at Big BoneLick. FromCollinson, 1768. sils; by analogyof affinityand structurethis animal was herbivorous. It was manyyears before The firstEnglish technical memoir on thesedis- these correctand well-reasonedconclusions were coverieswas read to the Royal Societyby Collin- generallyaccepted. son on Nov. 26, 1767,and publishedin the follow- At the same timeas Franklinand Collinson,the ing year (Collinson, 1768a). He describedthe. equally giftedWilliam Hunter was studying.the occurrenceat Big Bone Lick in substantialagree- Croghancollection and also anotherlarge collec- mentwith the data in Croghan'sjournal and let- tion in the Tower. He presentedhis conclusions ters. The tusks,said Collinson,are those of ele- to the Royal Society on Feb. 25, 1768 (Hunter, phants,but- 1769). He made elaboratecomparisons of the It is very remarkable,and worthyobservation, tusks and called in skilledivory workers, who pro- noneof themolares, or grindingteeth of elephants, nouncedthem "perfectly similar" to the tusks of are discoveredwith these tusks; but greatnumbers recentelephants. "Yet theiropinion, and what I of verylarge pronged teeth of somevast animals are saw withmy own eyes,convinced me of this fact 'onlyfound with them, which have no resemblanceto only,viz. thattrue or genuineivory is the produc- the molares,or grindingteeth, of any greatanimal tion of two differentanimals, and not of the ele- yetknown. phantalone." The Ohio climateis too severe for elephants. Hunter comparedthe lower jaw collectedby In Siberia, said Collinson,the elephantremains Croghan19with one froman elephant,using Dau- may have been swept northwardby wind and benton'smethod with more perceptionand preci- wave at the timeof the Deluge, but how anything sion (Fig. 13), and he proved with complete can accountfor the remainsthat occur in America finalitythat the species are different.The mas- was submittedto the learned Society as an un- todon (as we say now) was called a "pseud- solvedproblem. elephant,""animal incognitum,"and "American Having titillatedhis colleaguesby posing these incognitum."He imaginedthat the Siberian (i.e. questions,Collinson gave answersto themat the northernmammoth) bones would prove to be of next meeting,Dec. 10, 1767 (Collinson, 1768b). the same kindand gave some reasonsfor thinking He had comparedthe tuskswith those of African so, but admittedthat he did not reallyhave the and Asiatic elephantsand found that the fossils materialsnecessary for properdiscussion of this agreed in all respectswith some of these- question. If he had had the materials,Hunter's methodsand abilitywould have avoidedthis error But as thebiting or grindingteeth, found with the others,have no affinitywith the molaresof the ele- 19 Whichhad lostone of its two molarsbetween the phant,I mustconclude, that they, with the long teeth timeof its receiptby Lord Shelburneand its studyby [tusks],belong to anotherspecies of elephant,not yet Hunter.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 149

- ..,..". ... -.11,-.1.1"'I.I...'....., -1-:1X.-.:...... I I:1, , 11$ ::;::X:::!::::;,,w;..".., -.--:;::- :!,cI, -,,::.. :: 1,14-11,I:.. - ,, -I----, -....:,I,. :: !.,..:,:. -::;:X;, ...... 1;1;]:.--:.1,1-1. -: -,.1-1-.-I11. I -...- I'll-.I 1-,::: , -,,:;::-....,I.""..-- .I I-o,NiIi!i. :.I1,', I 1-1 11 zi--.I-11", III,." 111,II ,-, I 11-...-,I...... 11 - .,111I1:1I.- 11.11-1--,-I-,t:::: i ,II-,-,-,I 1111-11-1:: 1,,I I'1, 1-1- 7 ; v,i. A1-::--I 11 1-::I,: .1 !: :.,::::-,I,.-----I ; ..11 - 1: - I 1-111 ".::::::::....,....,..."''.,... ,. I.,I::; 'I I...'',.... -.- .. i , j, .M:: :;:;::x]:!::: ...... I ., :::::;;::::X,:- -.--! 11 I--, ::!:: I. N: 171,..I Inn::-: - --4 I :.-:ii::i: 1: 1: -,-,!:q,Z.-.1.1..:: 11 --.: :::::::: ''.. ,, ::: -.1::;:!:;x.x:, i:.' -',i -::', ; 1!7 - 111 ::,:::: 11 -.1-1- "...1--1,11 ; ;]: - :::J,::;-;.-- ...... "'.., . ... -= 1 :1 ;:.:::::- ::::;::;: I -:::, -1-111-1-1.111.1-111 ", .,::;-..-x1:::;ix]!;: 1-: I : :. 11 I : 1:: I 1.I, I-- I ;:-: 1. , ::: :::, ..:- -- I-::I., :! :I; :::;- -i, ;:!:;::;:!!;;:;;:; : ,::;;7: ,. II , =: ::::: ; . ]:x:,;R -- ,,:,:;:- -1.1.11-1-1..::::,'-v;::... - .., :] -:;:::.'- ...... 1-1-111- -]:],'.::.': - . -, I---:;:' ::::;;, 1.1-11--,- ::,::: I K;:,,'-:: 11 11-11-1-11- I'll, ...... --.1-1 -- ...... :; ];;;,=,, -,,-.- -1, I'll, , 1"...... 11, ., -]::, :] %.- '11-1.,-, .11, : ;;%I:::: I:,-- :, I 1:11'11 - :, -,:; ...... -- I11 I111-1-111 ,,ll::]::":::::.:I 11-:.: .1 ------:, --1-1, 1:411- I-,I1-11-1-1.. 1-11111-: ''I,.,:,:,:,,:;::;:, -1111 --- 11 "I'll, ,::::,-_ ,, I -1-,-.,,,, 1--, ,; ---- 11- :,:,xZ I::;:i - I -,::, , ]:: , :,:- , -1-1 1111, ---,:::', n1111:11 .- ::--. 11.11 1,"-1-- ... I -- ,---.1,1,111.1 :::::::,- '' ---,Z:...: ;;::-I'.."...- I". -, ,11 ,:::, ,; ...--.1II"I'll.::!,--;,"- : '', 1 ]:-:]; ::,]:..,.",''.1-11111-, 7:,:,I: . - . I. , :-,- :;::::X:::::,.::::- .:.;.. 15 ,: -] rl 11 11 ;-.. I,, -:_: ,::, -:: ;-I 11.1 -I11.1"'.11" ...I--,.:,:.. 1. -- - - I..., .11 -1-1..11I---:- 1.1- 1 I'll, 11 111. -,-., 11 7:;;I... -:,; :,, .-1.I-,- I.:],Z:]::: .. 1: :l I I::::::v-.- ." :q : ;]:: 1-1.1- ,, . 111,II;.: ::-;:, I I:: 1-1-111-- 7t; .. ::::: .. 1,I 1141 .-. ,:: 1. -. --,"1:; I.-I" 1-1.11.1-1.11:..''I4 . .11 -1. 1. I .:Z. 11I:::: :::;; X:!,%:;:.:!. 11 E; ! ...... :,.,771-1- :,O. I..'', .,-::-v:.,:,I 11-.1.7. '...'.....'..l."I'll . : I 11 ::..: I.- -. :] : :::;::,,- :7::, 1::: II.: :,: I.-; , 1..,., 1''.. ` :.,:]:I -vi 1,I ;: I ....1-11.1'...'.. -1,11. -: - , -- -:. "I''. II,i; -I 1.11, ...I:;: 1. I 1". 11,1". ::::.:- ::- I:. :.:; ..,::,::: I1-1111 ''I'll - .,-::-, -::..- . 11-11'..", 111-. - , , - : ;:; I .."'.."'I'll.".1,"'I"..I... :1. -,".....-, I ;. :...... 1111111.1.11-,, ,,_ - - 1. --. ` : I'll,::, , 1-1- I ".. ;'. I.-:-.f :V-:: I .1- II II ,II ,I xx:,,:, , - I 1, 1, -l-, -.,- 41A : :--:; IX, --111-11. -, 1, -1111-l", 1- 11 11 II1-1111-11-,-:v:::-,:- -.1-1-1 - 1111-11111, , I --- -1 I -,x:x:: II .--l-,11 ,.!, I I 1-1, '''' 11-11 I - - 1-1-1- , I -: II III - --1-,,,, - ,".--1:-71-11 .;,, -11- -:'-II -,II , -111,11 11-1-11-11,- I1. ,1_111- I ,,--,; .",'""," 11 - -f,1I 11-111- -.;- - 11---I - .--- -...II 11:.:,::::::, __'__,:,',,::- 11 11 --; : -1 .1 .11.1 --, I -11-1- I ... 1-1- - : :: ,,-- - -I.,1.111.11,,.,,"''..,.""..1,.,I ---- 11 11 - :1 - 1. X .-: :,:::::,:,,::',,,,: 1-1-1-1I; , - :::::,,:::,.:,, .-;,:x,,I-1- - _:- -,::,,:'-:: --- I . ,I 11 I1-1. I 11 -- - , ,,-, -17----- ; ,- :,:;, - : ':,,-,.1 .-,-,-:,,,-- 111111-1, ... : 1-111 .- ""I'' I-- -- 1. 1. v7:.,._:,;- I ,-1 W ii I, '-., :-,--: - I 1- -1-- : I 11 -I . : X: ; 1,; I,:..,'',,,,''.I."..,,'.11 11-1- -II-:...1:.I I'll, 111,... .,,,,-' : ;:: - !:]:::, - - .-- --!:',:: -, :. - 1-1.. .11".1-1-1V-1-1- -11.1--.11. - ; '..---'.,-1'1-,..: , 11-11- .1 ":.: ::!:,:, :;:xrlr ..1. ; I - . ::j o :::.i..I-1. 11 . 111--_--_ 111.1--."'11.1. ::;:;,:.:,:, -:%;;:;;,::; II-I. : : ]II11 -? ]I,-1. 7; I], . : , ;!:] I.1-1.::: : - ,,:i:;:.;, .11 1-111-1-1-1 ...... 1.1.::-,-, -,I...... 1...I .1- .11.1 :: 1, -:7:r -. ,''. -, I.--l'', :- : ;. 1.11;I. I.. - : ::: ,,.,.,...... '',:.".::::,:::'I 11 ;; II1. :! III-i1: III: : 11-. - 11 ,."I I----I.,-11 ,::; . 7,:; ... i. ;--: 11.I.- -I. ;] .:..:...,,,.,::::];I.....II 1..11-:;: .7::;;::::, 11 :I :],::] . . I II'll 7: , ... ; ; ". : :,: -.1-1-11, 11.1'1' i!!! 1;I..., ;-,-,.,..1-.-,.1 I: : 1,11,"."',-. - lr-,::-_:,:,I1. : ...... 1, 1 ::. :;: - : 11.1 I'",1:11,]:,,]::,' I..'',",.11,11,-- -11 "I.. :: :- '--- ,I - - -.1111.11 - I-.1...... I ::!:'r ,- , ... ;:-:: 1-1-11111 1:1:111111 --:,:] I'll :]: i;:l - 1. . :: - I --:! ,I: ''I", -- - 1; I 711-1-----,:,,:::, i, _.1,11 z::, -,1.11,1-111'- 1. 11 ,,,:1111-I", :::-, I, i4 -1."; --- I I----,,.":,,': . :::'!i:!:, -I "- -1- ---.'e...-lli- i ;, i:. 11-1.1.1 .11 - I - - I 11- 11.- I.1-:--,,,4-.: 71N I. :,. 1.11, ,-,- ! ;;:--:-,,: ---- - , ,''t ... -.-,:- :vi: :.:::,::,::,, ,] - , .. - .:: ,, ". : 1:1.-;: -.4 :, ,-,. : ' .I, . , - ., , :71 1:,, , .-4-11- ,-11.1 II ,. ,... 1,.1 : I1; I. .:.I".",I I:,:..---., - ", -1,---, I-::::F.,-.1.,: ,-:: ;,I1. : . , , I. ... II I.I 11 I I-II .-..I,,.. ., 1:,:.:...:r.: --.; :.::: , I II.''.1 -I-. ::: v : : .. : ---.- I I;...:: 11,,;,4X,., ---.---::!! %. , 11 - ,.11. I 111.''IN : 111.- ; ..-WFlel:;:I-.11- 1-1- I.1. ;.F,-,....I:;;;7::::e::x:! : :, :: 1. II '.111-1-11111", 1. `;-: :,:: I I-- -- 7:!::::.. - I ! i; i,I ;i- 11I11I - 1 I.- 11 A."--,A -- .11:-I, , , At ,--,,`- -. I--', -',:II-II-1:1-1 1 " ' I - 11I11.II--- 1 -11-1-1 -1111 11 -,". P!1!11'5, 11- ::i:I - - - -l::::,i,,i;l:.;.:.:i , -- .11-- 6 K: - 111-1.1- ::v::::: ., --: : ,!,_ ,,,,,_ ...... __, -:,,:: , 7',- :': -1,1',1--. 11 -1, .vI.I'll 11- !,:, I e -1-1. .: . ---,::;;X:: ,7] ,,;:::::1 I ---.", !o;!,;-i;11- I .. - .. - : ..11 -,'-- --1I -,I '.`,-'!ii;:'-.,: - I.,: :-.::zt::,; ... .. :;: .II,X::::::;:::,',- ...... -:; --- R:::;::.; 1.1- Ni:O .: w;::%;;;::-;: :1 .I:: I- . -... :, ''...., -111111 : ; ,, , . . 111. I..::;::]:., 1 :::;; --- .1 I --:: :: -;;;-:;::::X .11,111, 11: -1-1 .11.11 -M -7 ,"'... , ;, - 1-1 --- 11111. ... --- :.., .: rl;::;:::,; "I'll,F,--,_::.;-:: :,;]: -, i ., ", _, 1.:::::i:,:;:,:.::::.":;,:, .I -A:l :: Ii: ;; e:::;:::: .1 -11- I' ;:: :], -,,: I - ---, ::-1 : .:! ii!!!o 1. .1111 'I'l-,11-1. ". , ,,- ;. 11-1- 1-111-,I ::-11- ::: ::7I .; : ::: ]:!;:. - -1111 11---l'"', 11- -.1 I ,..1 -1., -, 1 Ii, .,'--;,:,,i:l:,,,-::I '', "I'll, 11, 11 1 1-1-1 ',,,,:-- 'll"".'ll""I'll,'ll,1.11,1.11.11,11111.111,,,.'l'I ::- -1 - 11-1-1,-, ----,i,i!i:- - I- 11-1- ,-- ::::i:] 1-11 ]::::Z 11 - 1 II I'll -- I ---l-1-1--l-1- - - -X1, , ,..... :i I'll ..11 ....I-;: 1-11- I- 1, -,,-1'-,W-- - 111-' ;:: -, ..... :.:!,; ... ,%, :%::, -:-:i7,,' -- I- ,-,-' : . 1, ''.. "'' , '', 1-1-11 I :,,,.,----11-',,,', :17:::: ...... 1.-- -1: , -- ,,4k',I:,.,:':,. "I '. - I,,e ::]::: :Z,,,,;,:-,1111- 1 I .-... .11I!;i!!:!!!:: 11 111 - : .I I ,:!, , : ::- ,-.-,0-5-,3..,,- 1 .,", 1: ::::-,:, ...... - -,,-::I , ,- , ","1I:,I. .,, ., , ,-- ..I11 1. - - 1111 1''.. -1. X.,In:.. -1. -11,1.- ::;::::::::::I:X; : q:- .: ; "- -,.],,]]:]::::-: ': :1 :: ; ,-, -11;--, -.,.,.,,,-. ::: !:I:;: -,"""', X .1 ... &::::: -: - .1I... ; :J :v: :_,:! J - 11I... : : , - - 1. ;::::: II,- .., ...... II.. . .. 1. I :; ----...., ..''....:- ;i::]: : ]: II ]:::o:z:: ij ::;:!:: -,-,, "'MM .11.1.11. r: :1.1- , ]:::i:: ., :..:,, :;;:v::::: : I, --- -'_ ..... I'll. %T:: ....::.::1. 11 11 11 --::::::I:.:: -.... ::,:. :. I : 1-1- ,.....1.1-- :....!i,.,.,.,.,..1....,-. - -..xx.- . :: ; ::I... .", ;::::l.,lI I ...... ,-...... '',, ,1:.... ],.-, :. :] 11....Ib, ..-11. - ] : : .''.."..... -.-:,,::,:::::.1111 -.,." -: --,I;:.I'': ,: - 11 : .:. ; ;: iii. X; , :: ... I I.11, .... I'll.... 11::.I'', ]:: ]:]:: 117 ..... ::: : ;,. :, ...... ]]::i::s ..... : _,7 .-,,:7: .... 1.11,11,e::: ::,,: ::i:::'X .1 ,- ; : .:X : .: .: ;!!: ;, 1-I- " :- ----... I .. .,:::::1-1111. 11.11, 11. - 11-111-111-....-... I ::::]:::::l,.I I...... 1. :;; : :: 11 I--. ,... :::17-- -":.1.-.,.,.'1,..-....'1'1 .....",'' ---...... 11.1,11, ',-.-.1....-.... , i: , ., 'I''.: . : -:: .,.,..,.-.-1 : :0: ....-.... 1.11i ,.- 1.1". ., II :. --.-- -1 -1. 1--.",.-I -1-:,"..,. ...1.:: :: II- ', ".,:,::]]:]:;":,: " ": -111-.., .II,:::-:-;:....,;,-!: -11 , ,. I : .,, , ,I.-.I. ::: :,!!;:,:.-::. -.1 :;-;::,:--,;-X-....I ,::; ''I'll, !-1,: _ ::V::, . ::]i:: - - '1111----",""'.1-.",,.-... I11 ; ,,::jl]:.::"::,,,] 11 11,;:,.,. ,,,,,!:i::l,.,::: ..... , --:; - 11 ''I'll, II-. "I'll -1.1-1.1"',- 11--- -,-- , - :--- I'll'--.- I'll---, -.1- -V,,---,, ,,:1"1111,; I I.- I- I,,-,"--, 1. 11 ,- -11-1---,,:7 1-I11 ,- .... II .:,', -- % 11-111 , -'1'1-,- I,, ,- ,,-,-, -:: - :,,:]:]:".:;::,,,,,,- I::::::::::v - -l", ... 1- . I------...... -,-..-- 1-1-1-11 I I - 11 11" - ,I : -1111-1-:,:v-:e!:-1-1- .": ., -; ::- I-- -I .1 - 1-1, ] .',--,-,,',,''""'.-I. ,., 11-111- --,-,,1.,- - -- ...... -....---I -.1 11: 11. 1,%I I - ,:- ,., ", :,:, -!: -.Z.;---, . . ,...... - I-111-11-1.,-1 :- I... 1.I.- -:-- 1- I..-.1 . ,-----,...',:-- ,.- 1.111, .1 .:,L--.-1.1I.- 1- I%- -...... 1-1 - 1.1- I-- 111-1.111111. -- :::-,,;-::1, , W. I-- -!::: .:: ...... - -1-11-.1-1 -,:-, . ....-:-,11-1-1--,1 -1.x -1- -.- ,::: - : -1,111--II ...... ::::----, :,:X: .1 ... ,-... : ...... , ,11-1-11 1--, ------.-...: -,:-1-1-1. I ::::::::::::! -::: 11I"...,"..,...... ,",-,.-,--,- -.1.-,." I'll- 11., .;::-.v: ..--.11-11... , I.... -1;1-1. -X-I....I1-1 I 1 V, ,.. I:::::Il: .1111, ... :11 I... : -qlq :-!`;-1. i: :; .1:....11 -',i;i!! ,:.:::::::.::,::::;:::]:..,.,.,,::,.,!:::::., -.''..''.., ....-...... -..''.. 11... 1 I-- : i::::.: :. . 1, .11 I.. I.11 ...... -r I11-1.. ,I,... ;;;%:::e,,; ::,::::;; : : 1: :; : :;;;, ...... :. ;:!:r: :!'! 1, : : M::::: :: ,..-,::::: v: ::X ; :::: : ...... I.. .1 !:T:::;:!::..::7:--..,...,. I!: : 1: ..:;:::::: :-.:::il; .-:; iI-- :': ._:'.,.,,': :, : 'D!i- :!:::: --- :::. I,Z: '': ...1...1..-,.,. .F- 1 ,:,-- 111. ,. I...... -:;!:, , .:, ;: I. -: :_,! : : :: :i::::: ::::T:;:7::::::;:::;::;: I 7:7: .. ." I.1.1,"..'V-1.1..- X ::- : ::': I',]:,I . I ''Ill-'.. 111. . ..:::::,-:, ,.....1.1...1..,.,.'1 7 i. ..." -.:: v:: : ; :::]]:. I 1-11 i":,:: 1... I : : ::T::,:-1:1:1 : :;;:!;; 7;::; T.. _-7 :i:%i:;:: :::: :::::: - ..;.:..,::: "I'll ...--I,--- .: :,:,I-,.,.rr-, . .-.... . :!::,:: , , ,:, 7:: ::,::;::-::;:;: -: : ': , %: -.J:1: ,:. :..:.;;::11..... I11.11 II-- .... -----'. ....I::!::, . : ! : ::': ...... 1.11. 1, ''.. I.. --! ... 11.... .---, ....I... I-- .111,11"-.,.,,...1.- .....-... -:..1:. :.. -....-...... ::::-1...... -.... 11.1.11 ... --:-:::%, , -, -:7:7-.;,- I''.., ...... -.... ''I"... .. -I,X; ..-.---....-::::::::: 1. 11 I -11''I.-.1-.,,:]: X.I;.:I., 1, , .:.:-x::::::::-:::;; %...II--. 11 1,11"1, I:-'':.:I...-.11 I;]],"::!:!,. ,1.11 1- '-11'...'. F... 1::. I....-::;:;I-,- :, I "-..--:- I'll.. I'll ,I-- -,.. --l'."'.: :11 11 . -- -1- 1 ,- 111-'', I-- -11 11.11111-1-1-.1------. 11.1,1'11- ,: -.11-1 : ,: -, ", ,::-:,., ,-... %, - ., - '11,11'1,1'1,,, ,.,.'-.-,.,.''I".''. ----I- --.- 11,- ':I-- 11I---.1-1-1-1--- :1::;"-::: 11-- I -- 111.1 - 111-1 -1-1 11 11, -.1--:! -1- . ::;!,,:,:- -- .....-...- 1-1-1 ::: , -I I...1. - . :,:-- ::,i;- -,,:,,:,> - 1-1.... I:1 -1111...1.11,1: I I 1- -. ,I.:- v-- .- -- -.- ::::::,: - ,-,, .::i:'::::::: 1: 1!.::; I - ,--I 1:!:::"111- -::::e .. -, .': e: ,, ..: .,: I.. ::- : ,: ::., -I;:!::r::!;-;;;,;;!:X, 1.7 :1:..''..,:I1". I I I' I I... . :: :;,. :- :7--1-1-11.1 ...., "I""..., ... I I -,.I . 1I,1. -:::i; ... T., .. .1111-- :::::::..:;:::::...I...... :-... I. : :;ZI::;. .11, :1. I I11, -1-111, ..I . ..: . ::: ...... 1I I I , I II III,:., I... ::::: .1.:: I 11.1....'',::: I: .XX,'', :. :, I.. 1. 1: X:::;- . -- -..", ..11.,; ::::.. : .11 ... mi;;,:::;:': 11...... -]:.",.".,",]:],'.1]:!i;i. Z:,I ,..!;:;:;i:; :: :::!:;::;:: .. -I .. -i:; . .1 : ,:, !: : :: :%:;:. .1. , .: - -; 1, :::!-: I..,-I -...... I....::;: ::::Xv ....-.: ::!;T .1 ..:; ''. !- ,;:,:;::, -1-I'll,: I.. :.!?! I_-:, 7-:::-;;;r ...... ::i..;::..:]]:]iI:I-:: i::!i:%:7:--.1-1..-%:-:.-.,, .-.1, , , IP:I : ::i , -,,::1 ;i;;:-,: , ;!;! ....-.1 ...... 1111 1:` m -.1I--1..,--,..1..FF1 I 1.:- -V: :. -- ,I'll-- :11 .... - :: -.111.1.1.11 ::7I . :!;-.,, - .-..., .:: !; -::-:--::. :: V.. -.77.. . ,,- :!:::.,-:-, - -e... -1-1 ;: 1-, --:1 ---' 11.1..', ,,- I11 . ; :1i: ', ,:'.,X7 :-,e::,, -,I !!; --l'... .I-- .1,#11- 1". ,.1'',I --.1-1.-. - 1-11:... I.- --...I- -111-:; 1-- I-I::-:: II 1- ,;.-,--.11--I ---l'.11I-:: I. - !:: ---::-,-. ---11 :------, - I.-11- - --- 1-1 , ", .1- ,,..- -I.. '--,,;;-- .e: 1. 11-I.," ::: ! .!, :;` :.; ..-.I...... I-,"',"'.- ---,I ;:I , -,:: ; --- ". .-....II ...... I-> ;, ...... I- :; '':. I.... 11 -,- -::.-:.---.,- 1. . -11. -e .11 ,e... 1. 1!1:-..... r :;: : 7::: 7--:7:;!;:;;; ,:-,, ,...,....., .I,,.11 '-: ...--,,...... -;-,;: :-.-- V.- I.I.I.,., ...... , ::s; :..:. 1.,-1. 1 I I I I ..:.: :. ::,:i-,4i: : : :: I I ". ::: I. ;::: I :: I X, : ]:. i, .:!:: I.-... I :i I .-I]!!.! :''. ::::I:e:,... .-.....I ;:7 i . :: ;.11,11, ,,]:,--:, :!; .:I."...,...,., :!: !x. :: , 7::;::,]::;!:

and cleared up this remainingambiguity. As to if this animalwas indeedcarnivorous, which I be- thehabits of theanimal, Hunter went astray where lieve cannotbe doubted,though we mayas philoso- Collinson had succeeded and Franklin had been phersregret it, as menwe cannotbut thank Heaven persuaded: he unfortunately.gavethe weightof thatits wholegeneration is probablyextinct. his auithorityto the carnivoroustheory. Thus quietly, almost inadvertently,Hunter closedhis discussionwith a conclusionthat was to As theincognitum of Americahas beenproved to startlethe world have been an animal differentfrom the Elephant, when Cuvier again reached it and probablythe same as theMammouth of Siberia; thirtyyears later: fossil bones representanimals and as grinderteeth like those of Americahave been probablyextinct. The noveltyand impactof this dug up in variousother parts of theworld, it would idea, so hard to comprehendnow that it has be- seemto follow,that the incognitum in formertimes come a commonplace,are emphasizedby Jeffer- has beena verygeneral inhabitant of theglobe. And son's eloquent expressionof the orthodoxview

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 150 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON more than a decade later (1781-82, quoted from A next step in unravelingthis mystery,and al- Jefferson,1825, p. 73): most the firsttaken by an Americanon his own It maybe asked,why I insertthe mammoth [mas- ground21 was by George Turner in a paper read todon] [in a list of animalscommon to Europeand to the American PhilosophicalSociety July 21, America],as if it still existed? I ask in return, 1797, and publishedby it in 1799. whyI shouldomit it, as if it did not exist? Such He correctlyrecognized the existence of two is theeconomy of nature,that no instancecan be pro- kinds of "incognita"-a strikingadvance over duced,of her havingpermitted any one race of her currentopinion. He concluded that the name animalsto becomeextinct; of herhaving formed any mammothproperly applied to the animal that we linkin hergreat work so weakas to be broken. To now call a mastodon,that it was "carnivorousor add to this,the traditionary testimony of theIndians, mixed" thatthis animal still exists in thenorthern and west- in diet,and thatit had claws. "With the ernparts of America,would be addingthe light of a agilityand ferocityof the tiger; with a body of taperto thatof themeridian sun. unequalledmagnitude and strength,it is possible thatthe Mammothmay have been at once the ter- The rest of Jefferson'sdiscussion at that time ror of the forestand of man!-And may not the also did littleto promotethe subjectbeyond indi- catingthat mastodon remains were becoming fairly and in the technical form Mastodon. The prior generic commonand the localitiesmultiplying. A locality name is, however, Mammut Blumenbach, 1799. Cuvier's on the NorthHolston, a branchof the Tennessee, "mastodonte" was not proposed until 1806 and Mastodon was explicitlymentioned and othersmore vaguely. was not used as part of a Linnaean binomial until 1814 Big Bone Lick dominatedAmerican vertebrate (Rafinesque). Manmut perpetuates the old confusion of the American mastodon and the Siberian mammoth paleontologyfor anotherfifty years, but it here- and is inconvenientbecause of its apparently erroneous afterceased to be the onlyimportant fossil locality connotation. Many students therefore refuse to use it, in the records. without denying its technical validity. Nevertheless the Jeffersoncontroverted Daubenton's belief that generic name Manimtutfor the American mastodon has some justificationeven beyond its unquestioned priority. the mastodonremains are fromtwo differentani- Rembrandt Peale (1803b) was well aware that the two mals or that theybelonged either to the elephant animals are not the same, but he argued at some length or to the rhinoceros-pointsalready sufficientlythat the American, not the Siberian, animal should be settledby Collinsonand Hunter-and he espoused called "mammoth." "Mammoth," he maintained, merely Hunter's conclusionthat the animal was a car- meant a large, legendary animal. Tales of the pretended mammothof Siberia "as an animal so called, are entirely nivore. fabulous." The real fossil animal found in Siberia, in It is curious that regardingone aspect of the fact a sort of elephant, was called "mammoth" without problemJefferson reached at this timethe correct more right than the real fossil animal of America, also solution,and was apparentlythe firstto do so, but called a "mammoth" for 60 years by thousands ignorant of the origin of the word. The American animal is not thathe reachedit on erroneousgrounds. He ex- an elephant and had no name [when Peale wrote] unless plained the northerndistribution of mammoths it continuedto be called a mammoth. and mastodonsby the affirmationthat theywere Peale's argumentfrom usage is, of course, now reversed not elephants,which are tropical,but a verydiffer- and Cuvier's (later) name mastodon has long had the ent species adapted and peculiarto cold climates. sanction of custom, but consideration of Peale's state- ments and of its precedentsdoes show that Mammut, for Indeed afterHunter the subject stagnatedboth the American mastodon,has a historical background for- in Europe and in America,with some repetition gotten by most of its present opponents and perhaps in and discussionof whathad alreadybeen done,but some measure compensating for its admitted inconveni- with no importantoriginal contributionsin the ence. In this study I use the legally correct and historicname publishedrecords until well into the 1790's. In Mammut aniericanuwiii. 1792 anotherlandmark was passed whenKerr ap- 21 Excepting Franklin as having been in London and in plied a technicalLinnaean name to the animal, contact with English naturalists there, and Jeffersonas Elephas americanuts,without otherwise contribut- having made no real contributionto the solution. The ing to knowledgeof it. This specificname, now Reverend Robert Annan wrote what might be called a paleontological memoir in 1785 and this was published in recognizedas prior and valid, was almost com- America in 17/93,but he did not advance knowledge in pletelyoverlooked during the late eighteenthand any importantway. He shrewdly guessed that his fos- earlynineteenth centuries, when there was a spate sils, found oil the Walkill River (north of New York of synonyms.20 City) in 1780, might be similar to some supposed elephant bones found in England, but he was unaware of the 20 Cuvier called this and allied forms "mastodontes" in solution to this problem achieved by the English savants the vernacular and the name survives both colloquially more than fifteenyears earlier.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 151 humanrace have made the extirpationof the ter- who at about the same time (1799 and subse- rificdisturber a commoncause?" quently) produced all the essentialsof the final The second type of "incognitum,"now called solution: The elephant-likeanimals then known the mammothbut unnamedby Turner,was cor- from North America were really of two kinds. rectlyinferred to be herbivorous. Two kinds of Both were relatedto the livingelephant but both tusks were recognized,really correspondingwith belongedto separate,wholly extinct species. One, mammothand mastodontusks, but it was denied the "mammoth"of the Americans,the "masto- that eitherkind could belong to the carnivorous donte" of Cuvier (in 1806 and later), was quite "mammoth" (i.e., mastodon). Turner opposed unlike the mammothof Siberia. The other was the authoritativeview of Jeffersonand otherswho like, if not identicalwith, the latter. The mam- deniedthe existenceof extinctanimals: mothof Siberia was also extinctand not of the "We are now acquaintedwith the skeletonsof same species as any living-elephants. All these five several large animals,22all of which are, at formswere herbivorous. They could live in the present,unknown [as livinganimals]: and as two northbecause theywere northernspecies and not of those skeletonswere but recentlybrought to the same as the tropicalforms of today. It was light,may we not expect to he gratified,in these Cuvier's good fortunethat he had the materials times of research,with other discoveriesof a and it was the world's good fortunethat he had similarkind? Can we believe!then, that so many the intelligenceto discriminatethe true and the and such stupendouscreatures could exist forcen- false in all the precedingwork of the eighteenth turies and be concealed fromthe pryingeye of centuryand to unifyand amend these facts and inquisitiveman ?" Turner was a betterprophet inferencesinto a statementof the case that has and philosopherthan paleontologist. provedpermanently valid, aside fromunimportant So far fromthe vanishedmilieu, it is difficult details. forthe historianto knowhow muchwas a subject of conversationamong the learned,perhaps even WISTAR AND JEFFERSON commonknowledge, before it reached cold print and appears in retrospectas a discovery. Thus it "But it is ever to be regretted,that the principal cultivatorsof naturalscience, in the is impossibleto be sure how much creditattaches UnitedStates, are professionalcharacters, who cannot,without es- to Turner's recognitionof the two species previ- sentiallyinjuring their best interests, devote to these ously confusedin the literatureand to his insist- subjects,that sedulous attention which they demand. ence thatboth were extinct,especially when these . . .In some respects,they are, certainly,better pointsmust be singledout, in the lightof present qualifiedto undertake,and to perform,the task than knowledge,from the midstof so muchthat verged the naturalistsof Europe."-Benjamin Smith Barton, on the nonsensicalwhen it was writtenand now 1804. seems utterlyabsurd. Whateverthe personalities Until near the turn involved,the memoir does provethat the finalsolu- of the century,American vertebratepaleontology tion to the problemwas at least in the air, so to was almost solely concerned with speak, in Americanscientific circles.23 the mammothand mastodonand almost all the importantstudies Whateverits philosophicalmerits, Turner's pa- were made in Europe, by the French or per cannot be called scientificand it was Cuvier English. Late in the 1790's began the expansion that was to continue 22 The two "incognita," now called mammoth and so enormously to our own day. American fossils mastodon, the large bones from a cavern in Virginia, now began to be found in greater variety and Ameri- called Megalontyx,and the South Americanmegathere. can naturalists began to study them. For the fifth,Turner was probably counting the mega- In the long roster of American vertebrate there twice (once as such and once as what he curiously paleontologists, the name of Caspar Wistar should calls "The Megolicks of Paraguay"), or referring to some allied form (G. G. S., note). stand firstin time. lie published only two short 23 George Turner, "one of the Judges of the Western papers in this field, but one of these was the first Territory,"was elected a member of the American Philo- technical study of professional quality to be writ- sophical Society Jan. 15, 1790. In or about 1792 he ap- ten by an American or to be published in America. to parently moved Philadelphia and was thereafter one He also displayed an interest and exerted an in- of the most constant and active participants in meetings fluence of the Society until the beginningof 1800 when in rapid disproportionate to the paucity of his pub- succession he was elected a curator,defrauded the Society lished work. It is ironic that the traditions of of $500, and was expelled from it. later vertebrate paleontology should have trans-

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 152 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

i i 1,!,! i 1 | 1

| |

| I | . W | | | ., | i S.fuBi B 1 11 1|11 || _ g 11 I I |1 I | I | I | | I | | I | I | | I | I | |

I * | l | 1 I _-

- l. . | 1 FIG. 14. Dr. CasparWistar, President of theAmerican Pflilosophical Society, first American author of competent technicalstudies of fossilbones. Portraitby Sully,from the American Philosophical Society.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 153 ferredto Jeffersonmuch of the creditthat Jeffer- rectedto search for the rest of the skeleton,but son, himself,rightly granted to Wistar. neitherthe resultsof the searchnor theiropinions Wistar was born in Philadelphiaon Sept. 13, on the bone are recorded. This may have been 1761,and like mostof the scientistsof his and the the firstdinosaur bone to come to learned atten- immediatelyfollowing period he receiveda medi- tion. Thereafter Wistar became the Society's cal education,24in Philadelphia,London and Edin- usual authorityon fossilbones. He was, for in- burgh. Returningto Philadelphia,he taught in stance, refereefor Turner's paper of 1797, dis- the forerunnersof the Universityof Pennsylvania cussed on a previous page, and afterJefferson's and was Professor of [human] Anatomythere treatmentof them, the Megalonyx bones were after1808. In 1811 he publishedthe firstAmeri- turnedover to Wistar forfurther study. can textbookof anatomy,but his was not an age This was the occasion for Wistar's firstformal of voluminous publicationor of evaluation by paleontologicalmemoir, completed and published bibliographyand his printedstudies in otherfields in 1799.27 This paper is a model of cautious, were almostas scantyas in paleontology. When accurate scientificdescription and inference,an scarcely twenty-sixyears old, in 1787, he was achievementalmost incredible in view of the elected a memberof the American Philosophical paleontologicalnaivete of his associatesand of the Society, which thereafterwas a dominatingin- lack of comparative materials. The objective fluencein his professionaland social life and on part of the paper is so clear,complete, and correct whichhe, in turn,had a strongand beneficialef- thatit has neverbeen significantlybettered for the fect. He becamea curatorof the Societyin 1793, same or similarobjects. vice-presidentin 1795, and was presidentfrom The available specimensincluded a radius, an 1815 untilhis death on Jan. 22, 1818. It is sig- ulna, threeclaws, and halfa dozen moreproximal nificantthat of the fourgreat early presidentsof toe bones (Fig. 15). They had been found,as the Society,Franklin, Rittenhouse, Jefferson, and Jefferson(1799) recorded,in GreenbriarCounty, Wistar,all but Rittenhousewere at some timepar- Virginia [now in West Virginia], by workmen ticularlyconcerned with vertebrate paleontology.25 excavating for niter (or saltpeter)in the floorof Almost immediatelyafter his election to the a cave belongingto one Frederic Cromer. Some Society, on Oct. 5, 1787, Wistar, jointly with ofthe bones were dispersed as curiosities,but some TimothyMatlack,26 presented a paper on a large were saved by Colonel John Stewart,of Green- thighbone foundnear WoodburyCreek in Glou- biar County,and a Mr. Hopkins of New York. cester County,New Jersey (Early Proceedings, These salvaged remainswere broughttogether by p. 154). Matlack, Wistar, and Rogers were di- Jeffersonand presentedto the American Philo- sophical Society. What Jefferson,himself, made 24 Of the eleven Americans who (in my opinion) made of themwill be mentionedlater. It is typicalof the most significant contributions to the literature of paleontology in 1799-1842, nine were educated as physi- the roles of Wistar and Jeffersonin this history cians, one had been a saddler by profession (W. C. Red- thatthe latterobtained the specimensand thatthe field; S. W. Peale, not counted among these eleven but formerinterpreted them. otherwise importantin paleontological history, was also Although imbued with scientificcaution to a trainedas a saddler), and one was trained for the ministry degree altogetherexceptional in that (Edward Hitchcock). day and far 25 Wistar's successor at the Universityof Pennsylvania, from universal in ours, Wistar did not stop at Horner, also shared this interest. In passing it may be simple descriptionbut drew physiologicaland noted that Wistar's anatomical collectionswere the mucleus taxonomicinferences. From the radiusand ulna, of the Wistar and Horner Museum of the Universityof he concluded that the palm of the hand would Pennsylvania, merged with the Wistar Institute in 1892, and that contrary to what seems to be a common belief present inwards, not downwards or backwards. the Wistar Institute was not founded by Caspar Wistar From the shortnessof the metapodialsand the but by his great-nephew Isaac Jones Wistar. Caspar formand arrangementof the other known foot Wistar's life is well summarized by Packard, 1936, who bones, he inferredthat the animal did not walk gives references to other biographical studies. on its toes and that the last phalanx was not re- 26 Matlack is one of the forgottenworthies of vertebrate paleontology, with which he was periodically concerned 27 Scott (1927) and others have understandably as- on behalf of the American Philosophical Society. He sumed that Wistar's memoir was read in 1797, like the was one of the earlier members and was Secretary of others published in the same (1799) volume of the the Society in 1781-1783. He died in 1829. As far as Transactions. The Proceedings, however, show that the I can learn, none of his paleontological studies has ever paper was not submitteduntil March 1, 1799. It prob- been published. ably was printedwithout being read to a meeting.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 154 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPS(IN

FIG. 15. Toe bonesof Megalonyxjeffersoni, from Wistar's classic memoir,1799. Drawn in chalkby Dr. W. S. Jacobsand engravedby JamesAkin for the Transactionsof the American PhilosophicalSociety. This illustra- tionand the accompanyingmemoir marked t-he beginning of technicalvertebrate paleontology in America. (Repro- duced fromthe N. Y. Lyceumcopy, now in the AmericanMuseum, used by L. S. Mitchillin his pioneerstudies.) tracted(as in the felines). This correctreason- musthave beenequally brilliant and revolutionary. ing fromsuch fragmentaryremains of an animal For instanceon Jan. 17, 1806, he reportedto the totallynew to humanknowledge was unqualifiedly Society that a skull recentlysent by Dr. Sam brilliant. Brown froma cave in Kentuckybelonged to a As regardsthe zo6logicalaffinities of the new peccary (Early Proceedings). This firstidenti- animal,Wistar was stillmore cautious but no less ficationof a fossilpeccary was correct(as shown successful. He observedthat among living ani- by Leidy's laterdescription and figureof the same mals, "the megalonix,"as he called it (afterJef- specimen) and it long antedated the generally ferson),was mostnearly comparable to the sloth, acceptedtime of this discovery. yet quite distinct. Available knowledgeof the During 1806 and 1807 Wistar collaboratedin only previouslydiscovered extinct giant sloth, Jefferson'sefforts to obtaincollections of bones of Megatheriurn,was limitedto one poor illustra- the mastodonand associated animals and when tion, but Wistar observedthat the animal from these effortswere so richlysuccessful (as will be Virginia was not the same as the Megatherium. relatedin due course), Jeffersonsent for Wistar Since 1799 we have learned'much more about (letterof March20, 1808), who wentto theWhite Megalonyx than Wistar knew, but we have not House and studied the collection. Wistar's ob- had to correctany essentialpoint in his account. servationson the Jefferson-Clarkcollection were Accidentand his habit of makingverbal com- communicatedto the PhilosophicalSociety on Feb. municationsrather than printedpublications have 3, 1809. This paper was to have been published deprivedus of some observationsby Wistar that in the Transactions,but it was lost by the com-

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 155

mitteeof refereesand an advertisementfailed to duced. It should not be considerediconoclastic recover it. It was in part rewrittenand what (althoughI have alreadylearned that it seems so was intendedas the beginningof the description to my colleagues) to state that he was not a of the Jefferson-Clarkcollection appeared in the vertebratepaleontologist in any reasonable sense Transactionsin 1818.28 Wistar died beforethe of the words, that he never collecteda fossil or paper was printedand his other observationson gave one a technicalname, and that his scientific the collectiondied withhim. contributionswere negligible or retrogressive. This 1818 paper is brieferand of less funda- Jefferson,himself, was perfectlyaware thathe had mental importance than Wistar's memoir on no accomplishmentsas a studentof paleontology, Megalonyx,but -it also exemplifieshis skill. De- or as a researchscientist, and in sayingso one is scribingtwo incompleteskulls, he demonstrated not rejectingany pretensionsof his, but only at- that the firstwas a large deer of some sort but tackinga subsequentfalse legend.29 distinctfrom the most nearly comparableliving Jeffersonwas, nevertheless,an importantfigure forms,the wapiti and the moose. Harlan sub- in the rise of vertebratepaleontology, to whichhe sequentlygave the fossil a specificname, Cervus made two contributionssuch as no otherman of americanus. The species is valid btutthe name the time could or did make: he helped to make was a homonym;the animal is now called Cer- paleontologya respectableand honored pursuit, valces scotti. The genericname Cervalces Scott and he was largely instrumentalin bringingto- reflectsthe minglingof charactersof Cervus and gether the materials necessary for its advance- Alces observedby Wistar. The second skull was ment. referredto the genus Bos, whichthen included all As the foremostcitizen of the young nation, the bovines,and was shownto be sharplydistinct Jefferson'soutspoken and excited interestin fos- but believed to be allied to the bison. Harlan sils conferredon their study the dignity and laternamed the speciesBos bombifronsand Leidy prestigeinseparable from his personalityand posi- removedit to a new genus, Bo8theriurm.It is tion. The materially shrewd and self-styled now knownto be morenearly allied to the muskox, "practical" American tradesmen,artisans, and a formof which comparativematerial was prob- farmerstended to look down on the "useless" ably not available in Philadelphia. Althoughthe pursuitof pure science,as some of themstill do. identificationby Wistar was less brilliantthan his His worstenemies could not considerJefferson a otherwork, the error,if it catnbe called such,was fool,and it had to be grantedthat a subjectcould one of degreeand not of kind. not be wholly worthlesswhen he proclaimedit An importantfeature of Wistar's work is that valuable. For years he lost no opportunityto he was not dealing with the mastodon,already obtainand examinebones, and for a timea room made relativelyfamiliar. by some sixty years of in the White House was especiallyset aside and study,but with extinctspecies that were entirely piled high with them. unknown to science before they came into his This matterof prestigedid., indeed, work both hands and that representeddistinctly more dif- ways. If Jeffersonuplifted the status of paleon- ficultproblems of identificationand relationships. tology,he did not escape condemnationfor his Jeffersonhad broughttogether these specimens, associationwith this distrustedsubject. Thence had presentedthem to the Society, and in this the once suppressedbut oftenquoted stanza by sense was responsiblefor the increaseddiversity William Cullen Bryant: of knownAmerican fossil mammals. Go, wretch,resign thy presidential chair, Thomas Jefferson,whose lifeis too well known Disclosethy secret measures, foul or fair, to need any summaryhere except in its paleon- 29 tologicalaspects, has become a fabulousfigure to The necessary correctionof this legend extends also to contradictionof the usual belief that Jeffersonwas the paleontologists,few of whomknow what he really only or the first president of the United States to be did butmost of whomconsider him as thefather or concerned with vertebrate paleontology. Priority in this founder of vertebratepaleontology in America, respect goes to the limit of possibility; it belongs to no as the discovererand nomenclatorof Megalonyx, less a figure than George Washington. Speaking of what we now know to have been mastodon remains, and so on. Jeffersonwas surelyone of the great- collected in 1780, Robert Annan wrote (1793, p. 164): est men that his race and nation have ever pro- "His Excellency, General Washington, came to my house to see these relicts. He told me, he had in his house a 28 This rewrittenversion apparentlywas not read to the grinder which was found on the Ohio, much resembling Society. It must have been completed in 1817. these."

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 156 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

Go searchwith curious eyes for horned frogs, Big Bone Lick and desirousof enlargingthe So- 'Mid thewild wastes of Louisianianbogs; ciety's collectionof mastodon bones, which by Or Wherethe Ohio rollshis turbidstream 1806 already includedall parts except the skull. Dig forhuge bones, thy glory and thytheme. In 1804 Dr. William Goforthhad made a large The precociouspoet was thena childof thirteen collectionat Big Bone Lick and he had later con- and this ridiculeof his betterswas doubtlessin- veyedthis to Pittsburgh,with a view towardsale spired by his elders,who were at this time,and to the PhilosophicalSociety or to Peale for his particularlyin Bryant's environment,much ex- museum. Jeffersonbecame interested in this ercised by Jefferson'sembargo policy (an early collection,and in 1806 he and Wistar corre- precedentfor appeasement,so opposed by Jeffer- sponded with Dr. Goforthconcerning it, but in son's mootedpolitical heirs). the meantimean adventurervariously known as In his role as patron of science, Jefferson Ash, Ashe, and Arvil had obtainedthem on con- greatlyencouraged the studyof vertebratepaleon- signmentfor sale. This individualconveyed the tology by the American Philosophical Society bones to England wherehe made a great stirwith whilehe was its president(1797-1814). He also themand eventuallysold them,but Dr. Goforth acted for a time as presidentof the board of saw nothingmore eitherof his bones or of the trusteesof Peale's PhiladelphiaMuseum, which, moneythat they brought. (The correspondence as relatedelsewhere, included the firstpublic ex- and otherdetails are well given in Jillson,1936.) hibitionof fossilvertebrates and the firstmounted Althoughhe no longer had any bones to sell, fossilskeleton in America. Dr. Goforthwas greatlyinterested in obtaining Jefferson's'other, equally importantr6le in the more for Jeffersonand the Society,and he pro- historyof paleontology was well expressedby him- posed an expeditionfor that purpose. "I think," self as early as 1782 in a letterto Mr. Steptoe: he wroteto Jefferson,"with 10 or 12 hands (who "A specimenof each of the severalspecies of bones mustbe found,victuals, and liquor), I could coIml- now to be found,is to me the most desirableob- pletelysearch the whole Lick. The expensewould ject in natural history."30Jefferson's efforts to- be about $1.25 each man per day; we could take wards this end were constantand fruitfulfrom provisionsfrom this town, or take a hunterto kill about 1796 to 1807. His otherduties, including for us." (Althoughliquor is no longeraccounted the presidencyof the United States, inevitably a legitimatepart of collectingexpenses, expedi- preventedany personalparticipation in the search tionarycosts have increasedconsiderably.) and there is no indicationthat he even saw a Jeffersonrefused this offerand instead made bone in situ or collectedone, but he was instru- an arrangementwith his acquaintanceMr. Ross, mental in saving many specimens that would then owner of Big Bone Lick, and sent Captain otherwisehave been dispersed and he actively Clark to do the collecting. During the summerof promotedthe searchfor them through his volumi- 1807 Clark workedwith ten laborersfor several nous correspondenceand throughexpeditions, at weeks and forwardedthe resultsto Washington. least one of which he personallyfinanced. The These bones,about threehundred in number,were bones thus gatheredwere invariablysubmitted to the ones installedin the White House in 1808. Wistar for study and identificationand the ma- Because the large bones of the mastodonwere al- jority of them were presentedto the American readywell known,Clark concentratedattention on Philosophical Society. The famous Megalonyx smallerbones and obtainedan excellentrepresenta- bones,already mentioned, were obtainedby Jeffer- tion of extinctruminants. There were,of course, son throughhis correspondents,and, as will later some mastodonremains as well as some of the be related,the Lewis and Clark expedition,sent mammoth (in modern terminology),but there out by him,acquired a few importantfossils. were also fossilbison, muskoxen, and deer. This Jefferson'smost important fossil collection, is the collectionthat Wistar examinedin Wash- however,was that made for him, and at his ex- ingtonin 1808 at Jefferson'sinvitation and later pense, by Clark after his returnfrom the far in Philadelphia,as alreadyrelated. All specimens West. Jeffersonhad long been interestedin selectedby Wistar were presentedto the Society, and many of them are still in the Academy of 30 Collected writings; also in Osborn, 1935, where most Sciences of Philadelphia. Of the remainder,Jef- of the pertinentpassages in Jefferson'sletters are con- venientlycompiled, togetherwith too enthusiastica state- fersonretained a few and sent the rest to Paris, ment of Jefferson'spaleontological accomplishments. wheresome of themare now on exhibitionin the

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 157

Museum d'Histoire Naturelle in the Jardin des It is a measureof his greatnessthat Jefferson Plantes, or were immediatelybefore the present continuedhis powerfulaid to paleontologyand his war. Afterthis major successJefferson, who was warm friendshipwith its studentseven when it 65 and consideredhimself old, seemsto have taken became evidentthat this aid and these students littleactive part in paleontology. He returnedto were revealingthe falsityof views that he had Virginia, became much concernedwith the uni- vehementlyand almost religiouslyexpressed and versity,and had less opportunityfor contactswith maintainedduring the greaterpart of a long life. the PhilosophicalSociety, retiring from its presi- dencyand beingsucceeded by Wistarat the begin- MUSEUMS AND THE PEALE FAMILY ning of 1815. "The bones of the MAMMOTHfirst produced the Jeffersonmade only one attemptat personal idea of a Museum,which, after eighteen years of identificationof a fossiland wroteonly one paper rapidapproach to maturity,under the unprecedented in this field,the famous memoiron Megalonyx, exertionsof an individual,has in its turnenabled read in 1797 and publishedin 1799. Like most you to place among its treasuresnearly a perfect of Jefferson'swritings, this paper is a model of skeleton of the MAMMOTH-the first of American eloquenceand a pleasureas a literaryproduction. animalsin the firstof AmericanMuseums."-Rem- As scientificresearch, it departsfrom inaccurate brandtPeale, 1803. observationsand proceeds by faultymethods to Vertebratepaleontology is now primarilya mu- an erroneousconclusion. Jeffersondecided that seum subject. Indeed a collectionof fossilbones the bones were those of a great cat, some three made available to the public-and most are-be- timesthe size of a lion. The factthat the conclu- comes a museum,whether so called or not. Even in sion was wrongobviously does not, itself,war- the universitycenters of teachingin the subject rant characterizingthe paper as unscientific,but are almost invariablyrelated to museums either the methodsand viewpointdo.31 After finishing withinthe university(e.g., the Peabody Museum the and paper, quite possiblyon consultingwith at Yale, the Museum of ComparativeZoology at Wistar this is although not recorded,Jefferson Harvard,the Walker Museumat Chicago) or out- saw a figureof Megatheriumnand recognizedthe side it (e.g., the AmericanMuseum and Columbia possibilityof relationshipsor identitybetween that University). This close interrelationshipbetween animal and the megalonyx,but he unfortunately fossilsand museumsarose almostat the beginning read his memoiras writtenand permittedit to be of scientificvertebrate paleontology in America, publishedin the originalform two years later. It and quite at the beginningof public museums has alreadybeen shown that Wistar was success- here. Without ignoringthe value of other mu- ful whereJefferson had failed. seum sciences,it may fairlybe claimedthat verte- As a theoristor naturalphilosopher, Jefferson's brate paleontologyhas been the most important slight paleontologicalwork must also be regret- single factor in the rise and popularizationof fullydismissed as poor. Althoughhe was one of natural historymuseums. This is perhaps its the most enthusiasticamateurs of the bones of greatestcontribution to the social, as opposed to extinctanimals, he neveradmitted that theywere the scientific,history of America. extinct. "For if one link in nature'schain might It is said that the firstnatural history museum be lost,another and anothermight be lost,till this in anythinglike the modernsense was the Ash- whole systemof thingsshould evanish by piece- molean at Oxford (England) founded in 1667. meal" (Jefferson,1799, pp. 255-256). Thus we In the relativelyrude colonialdays, no such insti- unexpectedlyfind Jefferson, who did so much for tutionsexisted in America, althoughindividuals paleontologyin otherrespects, resolutely opposing had collectionsof curiosities,just as the "cabinets" the firstgreat generalization on whichpaleontology of medieval nobles antedatedtrue scientificmu- dependsas a science,a generalizationalready well seums in Europe. Thus prior to the revolution knownand acceptedamong his morestrictly scien- one Arnold had a collectionof birds and insects tificcolleagues. in Norwalk, Connecticut,but this was a private matter. (See Goode, 1901.) 31 It mayalso be pointedout as a matterof recordthat The beginningsof museumsin Americacan- be the technicalname MegalonyxJefferson, so oftencited, has no existence. Jeffersonused the word "megalonyx" moredefinitely seen, although still in an embryonic onlyas a vernacularequivalent of "great-claw,"and not stage, in the cabinets of several societies. Of as the Linnaeanname of a genus. these, the cabinet of the AmericanPhilosophical

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 158 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

Society was probablythe most important. It principallyby the sale of single admissionsand was a going concernin 1770, and on April 20 of season tickets(to whichGeorge Washingtonsub- thatyear it was suggestedthat the cabinetbe en- scribedamong many other outstanding men of the creasedby requeststo merchants,soldiers, sailors, time). The museumsoon outgrewthe quarters and othersfor "new & curiousplants, animals & in Peale's house, and in 1794 it was installedin fossils" (Early Proceedings). This collection the hall of the American PhilosophicalSociety- thusdefinitely antedates that of the CharlestonLi- it thenoccupied the veryroom in whichthis paper brarySociety, which has been consideredby some was presentedin 1942. Except for the "S.W. & historians(e.g., Bragg, 1923, Smallwood, 1941) S.E. cornerrooms on the secondstory," the whole as the firstmuseum in Americabut whichwas not buildingwas leased to Peale, who made himself starteduntil 1773. In any case, and subjectagain responsiblefor its maintenance (including the to the difficultyof designatinga "first" in the janitorialcare of the Society's reservedrooms) midst of a gradual growth,the firstAmerican and for the Society'sown collection,of whichhe natural historymuseum definitelyorganized as was alreadyone of the threecurators. such, public and independent,was apparently Fossil vertebrateswere displayedin this mu- Peale's PhiladelphiaMuseum, in whichvertebrate seum fromthe start,indeed it was the acquisition paleontologyand the AmericanPhilosophical So- of some mastodonremains in 1785 thatgave Peale cietyplayed the leadingparts.32 the idea of startinga museum,but the most im- Charles Willson Peale (born April 15, 1741, portantpaleontological event connected with it was died February22, 1827), founderof the firstof the collectionand mountingof a mastodonskele- severalPeale museums,was apprenticedas a sad- ton. This was far the firstfossil skeletonever dler and followedthis trade for a few years,but mountedin America (whichnow has moremounts failedand abandonedit in 1764. He thentook up of the sortthan the rest of theworld put together) painting,studying in England in 1767-1769, and and it was probablythe second in the world.33 he is probablybest rememberedas the mostindus- In 1799 bones were foundon the farmof John trious portrayerof George Washington. After Masten,Orange County,New York. Masten and the revolution,in whichhe servedwith distinction, his neighbors,upwards of a hundredstrong, pro- he gatheredtogether in his house at Third and ceeded to excavate with more energythan care, Lombard streets,Philadelphia, not only a number some of the men indulgingin spiritsto the point of portraits'paintedby himselfbut also a collec- of becoming"impatient and unruly,"so that it is tion of miscellaneousnatural objects including not surprisingto learnthat many of the firstbones some mastodonremains from Big Bone Lick. In found were brokenand some destroyed. C. W. 1785, Peale decideddefinitely to convertthis into Peale was seekingsuch an attractionfor the mu- a museumand to that end he studiedtaxidermy seum and when he heard of the incident,in 1801, and methods of preservationin general, which he visited Masten, purchasedsuch bones as had were very rudimentaryat that time. He either survivedthe orgy,and obtainedpermission to dig inventedor was one of the firstexponents of some for more. The pits had filledwith water,which of the most importantmuseum proceduresstill was lowered with great difficultyand expense. current,such as the use of arsenic and alum on "Rich and poor, men, women, and children,all skins and presentingbirds and other animals in flockedto see the operation,and a swamp always habitatgroups with paintedbackgrounds. noted as the solitaryabode of snakes and frogs, The growingPeale museumwas organizedas a became the active scene of curiosityand bustle public institutionwith a board of directorsunder (RembrandtPeale, 1803) (Fig. 16). The work Thomas Jeffersonas president. The directorsin- proved so costlythat a loan of $500, withoutin- cluded Wistar and other prominentmembers of terest, was obtained from the Philosophical the PhilosophicalSociety, to whichPeale had been Society. elected in 1786. The museum was supported The resultwas most of the skeletonof a mastodon,but the lower jaw and a few otheressential 32 On the lives of C. W. Peale and his sons see especially Sellers, 1934. On activities in the American Philo- 33 As far as I can learn, the firstwas a Megatherium sophical Society, see Early Proceedings. On the museums, skeleton found at Lujan (near Buenos Aires), Argentina, Colton, 1909. On the Peale mastodons,Rembrandt Peale, sent to Madrid in September, 1789, by the Marquis de 1803, and Warren, 1855. Without citation of authority Loretto, Viceroy of Buenos Aires, and mounted in the for each point, the present account is assembled from Royal Cabinet, Madrid, by Jean-BaptisteBru in or about these and a few other, less importantsources. 1795.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 159

_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ '

FIG.' 16. Excavating the first Peale mastodon. Found nea.r Newburgh, N. Y., in 1799 and excavated in 1801. The skeleton found here was for a time mounted in the Hall of the American Philos'ophical Society. Of the three men holding the scroll, that to the left is Dr. Charles Willson Peale and the other two are believed to be Titian and Rembrandt Peale. From Osborn, 1923, after a photoo-raphiccopy in the American Museum of the contempo- raneous painting by Rembrandt Peale, belonging to. Mrs. Bertha White. partswere lacking. A secondattempt on the farm exclamationof all: a freshsupply of grog went of CaptainJ. Barber,where fossils had been found round . . ." (R. Peale, 1803). in 1793, eleven miles fromMasten's, was disap- It was proposedto completethe firstand third pointing. A finalattempt was made on the farm skeletonsby restorationone fromanother and one of Peter Millspaw, who had found bones about side fromthe other. The only serious lack was 1798 sometwenty miles west of theHudson River. the top of the head and the end of the tail. The Here a skeletonwas found,which, although much work of restorationwas done mostlyby Rem- less completethan the first,included the long- brandtPeale and the missingbones were carved sought lower jaw. "The unconscious woods fromwood-the presenttechnique of using plas- echoedwith repeated huzzas, which could not have ter casts was availablethen, and it is not apparent been moreanimated if everytree had participated why this much more practicalprocedure was not in thejoy. 'GraciousGod, whata jaw! how many followed. animalshave been crushedbeneath it !'34 was the The first and most complete skeleton was 34 [A belated survival of the theorythat the mastodon mountedin the PhilosophicalSociety's Hall (Fig. was a carnivore.] 17). It was leftthere when part of the museum

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 160 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

FIG. 17. The Peale mastodon,excavated in 1801. This was the firstfossil skeletonto be mountedin America and the secondin theworld. It stoodfor a timein the Hall of the AmericanPhilosophical Society and laterin. In- dependenceHall, Philadelphia.From Warren,1855. was movedto IndependenceHall in 1802,and was 22, 1778, while his fatherwas at Valley Forge, finallyremoved to thelatter place in '1811. In this died October3, 1860) took thisoccasion to study historicbuilding, occupied until 1828, the mas- art in Europe and he became probablythe best todon was in the southeastcorner of the second artistin thattalented family, although one of the floor. The less completeskeleton, the thirdex- least interestedin naturalhistory despite his ac- cavated by the Peales but the second of two re- tivityin the mastodonwork. The second mas- stored by them,was taken to England in 1802 todonskeleton was one of the attractionsof Rem- by Rembrandtand Rubens Peale and thereRem- brandtPeale's BaltimoreMuseum, establishedin brandt wrote the family'smost significantpub- 1814 and sold to Barnumin 1845. In 1846 War- lished contributionto paleontology,his Historical ren boughtthe skeletonfor his Boston Museum Disquisitionon the Mammoth(1803). Like the and it was later acquired,along with Warren's Peales' work in general,this small volume is of mastodonand elephantheads, teeth,scapulae, and ribs. greatimportance for the historyof collectingand A rathercrude woodcut of the wholeskeleton was pub- of museums but made no particularscientific lishedby Anderson(in Bewick,1804), a famousearly contribution.35Rembrandt Peale (born February Americanillustrator (see Smallwood,1941, where Ander- son's cut is reproducedand referencesto otheraccounts 35 Despitehis intimateacquaintance with the subject and of his life.andwork are given). Probablythe best idea. his artisticpropensities, Rembrandt Peale did not include of what this historicmount looked like is given by an illustrationof the mastodonskeleton in his book,the Warren's lithograph(1855), reproducedin this paper, (very rare) plate of whichhas comparativefigures of Fig. 17.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 161 own,much more complete mastodon by theAmeri- as ship's surgeon,then returnedto Philadelphia can Museum of Natural History,where it is still and receivedhis M.D. in 1818, the year of Wis- preservedbut is consideredtoo imperfectto war- tar's death. He soon succeeded Wistar as the rantbeing remountedand exhibited. principalauthority on fossil vertebratesin this, AfterC. W. Peale's deathhis PhiladelphiaMu- theleading center of suchstudies. He was elected seum,which had startedas a seriousand scientific institutiondespite its commercialaspects, suc- cumbedto the meretriciousinfluences that affected ......

.,4...... R. manysuch exhibitsaround and after1840, became .iEfs...... :. a glorifiedpenny arcade, and was eventuallysold i, . E . i . L . E ..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..E.i,...... i\...... to P. T. Barnum. The historicfirst mastodon jo-:. e^..iiSt-0,T, ;l skeletonwas destroyedby firein one of thatshow- man's dimeexhibits. While popularand publicmuseums passed into the hands of Barnumand his imitatorsand were, fromthe pointof view of social and'educational progress,blasted by theirbrazen touch, the collections of academies,lyceums, and societies continued to grow and to multiplyand formedthe soil fromwhich great public museums on a scien- tificrather than catchpenny basis arose laterin the nineteenthcentury. The collectionof the PhilosophicalSociety was of course retainedby it when the Peale collection was removedfrom the hall. In 1807 and subsequently,the Society'sfossil collection was enriched by the munificenceof Jeffersonand othersand -becameprobably the best in America. -In '1849the Society gave up the maintenanceof its cabinet and the specimenswere depositedin the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia,where many of themstill are. (Details of the specimensstill recognizableas havingbelonged to the Societyare given in an appendixto this paper.)

FIG. 18. Dr. RichardHarlan, first American vertebrate RICHARD HARLAN paleontologist,from a bust formerlyin the possessionof "Millionsand millionsof years have been con- his son, Dr. George Cuvier Harlan. Photographpre- sumedin establishingthe presentorder of creation; sentedto the AmericanPhilosophical Society by Richard countlessmyriads of animatedbeings had appeared Harlan's grand-daughterMrs. Edward Meguer. and disappearedfrom the diversifiedscene, ere yet to the American Philosophical Society in 1822 thewonder, Man, was accomplished."-Harlan,1835. and his firstpaper, observationson mammoth Vertebratepaleontology did not becomea sepa- teeth,was publishedin 1823. Two yearslater he ate vocation during the period now under sur- published the firstvolume, on mammals,of a vey, but among those Americans who pursued projected complete Fauna Americana, and a sum- various aspects of this science as an avocation, maryof all knownfossil mammals was included. RichardHarlan was thefirst to do so continuously The volume,which was, indeed,a translationand and over a considerableperiod, the firstwho may compilationwith little originality,had a hostile be said to have had a careeras a vertebratepaleon- receptionand the proposedsecond part, on rep- tologist. Like most biological scientistsof his tiles,was abandoned. In spiteof thisdisappoint- day, Harlan was trainedas a physician. Born in ment,he continuedto writefrequent short papers Philadelphiaon September19, 1796, he studied on fossilsand in 1835 mostof thesewere reprinted medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. withcopious additions, in his Medicaland Physical While still a student,he made a voyage to India Researches,ranging over almost the whole field

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 162 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON of natural historyas well as medicine,which he greatly in quantity,largely throughhis efforts, continuedto practice. In 1838 he removed to but changed little in quality. Cuvier's theories New Orleans, whence he sent occasional paleon- and methodsseemed adequate, indeed complete, tological notes to the PhilosophicalSociety, the and it was not until a vastlygreater quantity of AmericanJournal of Science, and othersuntil his informationhad accumulatedthat the next great death on September 30, 1843. (On Harlan's advance became possible. This next advance, to life,see Fisk, 1932, and his citations.) evolutionary,phylogenetic paleontology, came Harlan was not a paleontologicalpioneer in the afterthe end of Harlan's life. same sense as Wistarand his predecessors. When Harlan's most importantoriginal contributions he began his studies,Cuvier's work was completed to paleontologywere in the fieldsof objectivede- and was eagerlystudied by Harlan. The science scription,nomenclature, and taxonomy. He was was establishedand organized: Harlan had only the firstAmerican to apply Linnaean names to to practice it. Saying that he did practice it, American fossil vertebrates,36so that this im- ratherthan advance it in any more fundamental portant aspect of American vertebratepaleon- way,is not derogatorybut is a matterof historical tologymay be said reallyto begin with him. A perspective. Harlan's lifetimecoincided with a list of genera and species to whichhe gave tech- sort of plateau in the rise of vertebratepaleon- nical names is dull, but it best displaysthis essen- tology,when knowledgeof the subject increased tial part of his work:

Harlan's Name and Date Current Name or probable Synonymyand Comments Fish Saurocephalus, 1824 Saurocephalus HarlanD S. lanciformis,1824 S. lanciformisHarlan J Reptiles Ichthyosaurus missouriensis,1834 Cf. M3fosasaurusmissouriensis Harlan Batrachiosaurus, 1839 For "I." missouriensis. Technical status uncertain-one of these may be a Batrachiotherium,1839 t valid name for an American mosasaur genus Crocodilus mnacrorhyncus,1834 Bottosaurus harlani (v. Meyer, 1832). Von Meyer's name was based on Harlan's study,but was published before Harlan's own name Ichthyosaurts coniformis,1835 Uncertain. The type was from Bath or Bristol, England.-The description of an English fossil by an American is significantof the changing status of American Science Mammals Megalonyx, 1825 Megalonyx-authorship disputed, usually referredto Jefferson. This reference is certainlyerroneous. Harlan may have been the firstto use the name in a valid Linnaean form and hence may be its technical author Megalonyx laquteatus,1831 Included remains of Megalonyx jcffersoniiand Mylodon harlani. Antedates the latter,but is usually considered a synonymof the former Orycterotherium,1842 Mylodon Owen, 1840 0. missouriense,1842 Mylodon Harlani Owen, 1840 Basilosaurus, 1834 Basilosaurus Harlan. Often, but incorrectly,called Zeuglodon Owen, 1839. A cetacean but firstdescribed as a reptile Delphints calvertensis,1842 Lophocetus calvertensis (Harlan) Tapirus mastodontoides,1825 Cooper (1831) thoughtthis a mastodon and later writers have all made it a synonymof Mammut aniericanum,but it is possible that it is really a tapir, in which case the name is valid and antedates any other for our fossil tapirs Bos bombifrons,1825 Bootherium bonibifrons (Harlan) Bos latifrons, 1825 Bison latifrons (Harlan) Cervus antericanus,1825 Cervalces scotti Lydekker, 1898. Harlan's species was valid, but his name was a homonym 36 The firstperson to do so was Robert Kerr, a British compiler or hack writer,who included the name Elephas amnericanus,for the American mastodon, in an edition of Linnaeus in 1792.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 163

The list is not long, but it is very impressive tology in this country. The number of pre- when viewed in its historicalposition. No one Pleistocene fossils available to Harlan was so else, eitherAmerican or European, named nearly small and theiroccurrences were so spotty,both so many or nearly such a varietyof American stratigraphicallyand zoologi'cally,that no picture fossil vertebrates before Leidy. Besides the of a general,still less of a gradual,sequence could species named by Harlan, he describedand dis- possibly have been derived from them. What cussed others named by his contemporaries.or fossils he did have were neverthelessplaced in then still withoutdistinctive names. Practically the geologicalcolumn with almost perfect correct- all of the genera and species describedor recog- ness althoughof coursewith far less precisionthan nized by Harlan are valid taxonomicunits, de- has subsequentlybecome possible. spite the fact that theirnames have mostlybeen Harlan's most importantbroadly theoretical or changed by retroactiverules of nomenclaturefar philosophicalstudies are given in his papers "On in the futurewhen Harlan wrote and by a nar- the Affiliationof the Natural Sciences" (Harlan, rowingof the scope of such units,also long sub- 1835, pp. xiii-xxxix) and "On the Successive sequentto his period.37 Formationsof Organized Beings" (Harlan, 1835, Harlan's views as to the affinitiesof thesefossil pp. 232-252). The firstof these essays beau- vertebrateswere also generallycorrect, according tifullyexpresses the essentialinterrelationship of to the best classificationsof recent vertebrates the whole of creation and the necessary inter- thenavailable. Such errorsas callinga mosasaur dependenceof all branchesof Ichthyosaurus,or a fish(Saurocephalus) a reptile, the studyof nature and of man. It emphasizes were virtuallyinevitable in view of the nature of the constantflux of nature,the the materialavailable and of the generalconfusion profoundchanges that have occurred in what theologians of the time regardingfossils of lower vertebrates, still consideredthe eternally studyof whichlagged behindthat of fossilmam- static face of the earth and species of its in- mals. Harlan's most strikingfailure was in con- habitants. sidering Basilosaurus a reptile, but even this Harlan was thoroughlyfamiliar with the theory cannot be imputedeither to ignoranceor to un- of organic evolution as expressed by Erasmus scientificprocedure. He recognizedboth mamma- Darwin, Lamarck, and especially Virey. Al- lian and reptiliancharacters in the remainsof this though Virey was the least importantof these animal, so totallyunlike any mammal that had precursors,he did give a clear and on the whole previouslybeen known,but felt,as anyone might surprisinglymodern expression of the evolution- have, thatthe latteroutweighed the former. The ary principle. Harlan gave an adequate summary correctionwas not made for five years, and it of Virey's views and a briefer abstract of came fromRichard Owen, the greatestcompara- Lamarck's. For religious authority he cared tive anatomistof the age, in London where ma- little: "All theologicalconsiderations aside, we terials for comparisonwere incomparablymore would be inclinedto take the facts as theyare." abundantthan those available to Harlan. Beyond this, Harlan's opinions were somewhat Harlan was also the firstAmerican student to equivocal. Species are absolutely immutable: obtain a thoroughgrasp of the conceptof a suc- "Between species and species naturehas drawn a cession of fossilfaunas, an idea originatedlargely line of separation,which time cannot change nor by European stratigraphersand invertebrate the sophistryof man obliterate." But if species paleontologistsand systematicallydeveloped for do not change,as units,they have neverthelessre- vertebratepaleontology by Cuvier. This helped peatedlybeen replacedby otherspecies. If evolu- to make Harlan's studiesmodern in tone and led tion is true,Harlan saw thatpaleontology should to a really orderlyscience of vertebratepaleon- give the final and direct evidence for it. Such evidence went as far as to demonstratethis 37 re- Aside from his descriptionsand discussions of others, as Harlan was the firstto designate twelve fossil vertebrate placement, Cuvier had shown. Even this was species (or analogous groups). How far from negligible enough to stamp its supporters,like Harlan, as this was, can be judged by the fact that Cuvier, whose infidels,but he aptlyreplied that when those who career overlapped that of Harlan, knew fewer than eighty resort to the "puerile practice of calling names species of fossil vertebrates in all, gathered from four . . . interferein questionsof science,it is always continentsand described by numerous authors. The descriptionof one hundred new species now is hardly more forthe purposeof suppressing,not for promoting remarkable than the descriptionof one at that time. knowledge."

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 164 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

Where, then,did the new species come from? Harlan was so muchthe mostimportant Ameri- Early nineteenthcentury paleontology gave no can contributorto vertebratepaleontology in the answer. Every known fossil species appeared early nineteenthcentury that he has been treAted full-fledgedand remained as such until it dis- at some length. Space will not permitso full a appeared. It was thereforea proper scientific discussionof the work of any other in the same inferencefor Cuvier and, followinghim, Harlan period,or even a list of the many who then had to believe that species were immutable. The somethingto say on the subject. Most of these tendencyof the evidence actually at hand was may,indeed, be dismissedeither as inexperienced correctlyinterpreted: the failure lay in lack of personswho createdmore confusionthan clarity, comprehensionof the great inadequacy of that e.g. James Pedder (see Simpson, 1936), or as evidence to prove the conclusionand in lack of men who were,indeed, able scientistsbut who revision to see that the fillingin of the gaps could, viewed knowledge of fossil vetrebrateswithout as it later did, prove the opposite. Harlan had adding significantlyto it, e.g. Benjamin Smith no clear answer to the problemof the origin of Barton. species. He avoided direct statementof divine Vertebrate paleontologythen had two main creationand, somewhatobscurely and uncertainly, centers. In Philadelphia the American Philo- he suggestedthat species arose by spontaneous sophical Society and the Academy of Natural generation. Each varietyof earth has its char- Sciences had as active workers,besides Harlan, acteristicplants and animals. When the flux of such figuresas Godman,Hays, Horner,and Mor- geological conditionschanged the earth,perhaps ton. In New Yorrkthe Lyceum of Natural His- the new sortof earthproduced new species of life tory included not only its principal founder, -a daringand, to us, curioushypothesis but one Mitchill,but also Cooper and De Kay. In New as consistentwith the factsthen known as was the England Hitchcock and the Redfields did im- theoryof evolutionin its more primitiveforms. portantwork withoutbeing so closely associated Finally Harlan attackedthe idea of the gradual witha particularscientific group, although Hitch- perfectingof organisms,an idea then already in- cock was a memberof the AmericanPhilosophical volved in evolutionaryphilosophy and still,a cen- Society,to which belongeda strongmajority of tury later, a topic of philosophicdiscussion and thosethen concerned with f9ssil bones. considerablemisunderstanding. "Throughout the John Davidson Godman (December 20, 1794- whole animal creation,no one being is imperfect; April 17, 1830, see Miller, 1931) spent his short but . . . each is equally finished'and perfectly lifein manyplaces, Annapolis,Baltimore, Cincin- adaptedto performits part in the spherein which nati, Philadelphia,New York, the West Indies, its destinyhad placed it." This too sweepingand but the years most importantfor science were admittedlysomewhat crude perceptionof the fact thosein Philadelphia,where as RemnbrandtPeale's of adaptationon all levels of organizationwas ac- son-in-lawand, fromhis thirtiethyear, a member companiedby Harlan's equally crude but equally of the Philosophical Society he was part of a propheticbelief that new environmentalconditions circle of naturalistsamong whom fossil bones would be accompaniedby the emergenceof new were a constantsubject of discussion. His great species adapted to the new conditions. Here are work was the AmericanNatural Historyin three all the essentialelements of advancedevolutionary volumes,1825-1828, and several species of fossils theoryexcept one: the actual transmutationof were mentionedin this. His original contribu- one species to another. The fossils known in tion to paleontologywas the description(to the Harlan's day were simplytoo few to supportthis Philosophical Society) of Tetracaulodonmasto- finalstep, or to reveal to him where his thought dontoideutm,a purportednew genus and species was tending. differingfrom Mammut americanum(or Masto- don as it was then usually called) in HARLAN'S CONTEMPORARIES giganteum havingsmall tusks in the lowerjaw. This started "Je terminedonc ici cetteedition . . . laissant'a an occasionallyacrimonious controversy in which mes successeursa cultiverun champque je n'ai fait Godman,Hays, and othersmaintained the taxo- en- qu'ouvrir,et qui bien certainementleur donnera nomic validityof this distinction,while Harlan riches toutescelles que core des moissonsplus que and others insisted that the lower tusks were recueiller."-Cuvier,in theclosing passage of j'ai pu Time has sus- the last edition of his great OssemensFossiles merely juvenile or anomalous. (1836). tained Harlan's contentionas regards the speci-

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 165 mens then in question,although the lower tusks wholly withdrawingfrom the Society. Aside were normaladult charactersin ancestralmasto- fromhis paleontologicalhobby-it was littlemore dons then unknown and their taxonomic sig- -Hays had a very distinguishedcareer as a nificance was a reasonable hypothesis when pioneerophthalmologist and medical editor. advanced by Godman. Horner and Morton may be consideredas the This skirmishbecame part of a feud between respectivesuccessors of Wistar and Harlan. Like Harlan and IHays that was less prolonged but theirpredecessors, as well as Godman and Hays, scarcelyless bitterthan that between Cope and their training was medical; Wiliam Edwards Marsh later in the century. Thus early appeared Horner (June 3, 1793-March13, 1853,see Miller, a tendencytoward personal rivalryin vertebrate 1932) became Wistar's prosectorand eventually paleontologyof which,happily, only the last faint (afterJ. S. Dorsey) his successorat the Univer- trace still remains as a blot on the science, or sityof Pennsylvania. The medicalschool of that ratheron its practitioners.Isaac Hays (July 5, universitymay be said to have been his great life 1796-April 13, 1879, see McCrae, 1932) was of work, but he also wrote the firstAmerican text almost exactly the satne age as Harlan, but his on pathologyand a treatiseon human anatomy. incursionsinto paleontology were metby thelatter He was a friendof Leidy, with whom he visited with the scorn of the master for the neophyte Europe in 1848, and he probablyhad a part in -an attitude somewhat justified by the facts, turningLeidy's attentionto fossilbones, which in to those facts. however unjustifiedas a reaction itselfwould give him a place in the historyof Indeed in this field Hays did lack both the ex- vertebratepaleontology. Aside fromthis, he was perienceand the judgmentof Harlan. His pub- active with Hays in promotingthe subject in the lishedpaleontological studies were almostconfined PhilosophicalSociety. He also made a detailed to the elucidationof the differencesbetween two examinationof Koch's collection,which will be supposedgenera and seven supposedspecies all of which are now agreed to be merely individual brieflymentioned on a laterpage, and made sober variants of Mammut arnericanumn,as Harlan correctionsof the extravagantnonsense publi- claimedat the time. It was the beginningof the cized by thatdubious individual-a featof no mean strugglebetween the splittersor species-makers difficultyand importance. and the lumpersor synthesists.38 Samuel George Morton (January 26, 1799- In spite of this failing,Hays' paleontological May 15, 1851, see Fisk, 1934) was one of the activitiesin the PhilosophicalSociety, to whichhe truly great figuresin the historyof American was elected in 1830, were miaanyand beneficial. paleontology,but his originalcontributions were He was for years the membermost concerned moreextensive in the fieldof invertebratepaleon- withbuilding up the Society'scollection of bones, tologythan in that here under review. He was withdemonstrating the peculiaritiesand diversity extraordinarilyversatile even for a period when of these,and with communicatingpaleontological scientificversatility was the rule and he also made news to the othermembers. As the disagreement importantpioneer studies of medicine,geology, of the two men developed,Harlan tended to use zoology, and physical anthropology. His geo- the Academy as his stronghold,although never logical specialtywas the Cretaceousand his most importantpublication was the Synopsis of the 38 Hays did, however, describe one species that was un- Organic Remains of the CretaceousGroup of the questionablydistinct, "Mastodon" chapmani,now referred (by Osborn) to Stegomastodon. This was based on a United States (1834). Along with more funda- single broken molar of unknown origin and it remains mentalstudies. of fossil shells,this and his other a paleontological mystery to this day. No other tooth works on related subjects summarizedthe few exactly like it has ever been found, but it seems to be known Cretaceous vertebrates. The most im- most closely allied to forms common in western United States and in South America but very rare or absent in portantinnovation was inclusionof several sorts the eastern states. Osborn several times listed Hays' of fossilshark teeth, usually identified by Agassiz, species as from Nebraska and went so far as to claim who was 'considerablyinfluenced by Morton. that it was the first fossil ever found in the western territories (1931, p. 32)-a claim that could not be sup- (Aside fromthis, Agassiz's Americancareer falls ported even were this origin demonstrated. Since the beyond the limit set-for this review and is not locality is really unknown and might have been almost furtherconsidered.) In general, Morton con- anywhere from Canada to Patagonia, its bearing on the tinued the same sort of systematicpaleontology geographic extension of paleontological discovery seems to me too dubious to merit emphasis or furthermention. that had been initiatedby Harlan, but accom-

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 166 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

plishedless as regardsvertebrates because of the Harlan, he describedsome fossils very much in paucityof Cretaceousmaterial. themanner of today,and he also summarizedthem Morton became a memberof the Academy of in more general works such as the Zoology of Natural Sciences of Philadelphiawhen 21 years New York, forwhich he is best remembered. of age and continuedthere all his life,being presi- In spite of the interestand activitycentering dentof theAcademy when he died. It was largely around theseworthies of the Lyceum,greater im- his doing that the Academy became the great portanceattaches to the work of Hitchcockand center for vertebratepaleontology in the late Redfield. Hitchcock (May 24, 1793-February 1840's and continuedpre-eminent for severaldec- 27, 1864, see Merrill, 1932), one of the most ades thereafter.He was also a memberof the famous figuresof American geology, was edu- AmericanPhilosophical Society (elected in 1828) cated for and entered the ministry,but while and was instrumentalin the movementby which studyingtheology at Yale he fell under the in- the Academy became the local institutionfor fluenceof Silliman and became an ardentgeolo- prosecutingresearch and the Society a national gist as well. So littledid the two fieldsof en- organizationfor promotingscience and diffusing deavor conflictfor him that he later wrote a its results. This developmentof functionsis re- treatiseon the religionof geology and was for flectedin the transferof the Society's fossil col- a time Professorof Geology and Natural The- lectionsto the Academyin 1849, duringMorton's ology. He initiated the great geological and tenure. paleontologicaltradition of AmherstCollege, where In New York, the Lyceumof Natural History, he taughtfor many years and of which he was foundedby Mitchillin 1817, could claim no such for a time president. As directorof the Massa- dignifiedantiquity as the PhilosophicalSociety in chusettsgeological survey,1830-1833 and 1837- Philadelphia,but it was an activeyounger brother 1841, he became particularlyconcerned with the and soon concerneditself with most of the sub- fossils of the Triassic sedimentsof the valley of jects discussedat the Society,including vertebrate the ConnecticutRiver. Solomon Ellsworth,Jr., paleontology. Its most importantearly success of East Windsor, Conn., had found some bones was the acquisition of remains from Big Bone in the red sandstones in 1818. Nathan Smith Lick, some of themcollected by William Cooper, (1820) recorded the discovery,considering the who wrote one of the best and most complete bones as possibly human. They are still pre- descriptionsof the lick and its fossil fauna served at Yale Universityand were identified (Cooper, 1831). much later (Lull, 1915) as belongingto a primi- Samuel Latham Mitchill (August 20, 1764- tive dinosaur,Anchisaurus. In 1841 Hitchcock September7, 1831) was considered"a chaos of described and figuredsome natural bone casts knowledge,""remembered more for the goodness fromEllington, Conn., but these could not then of his heart thain the strengthof his head" be identified. It was not until 1858 that Hitch- (Newell, 1934). He practiced medicine, saw cock had a specimensufficiently complete to dem- long servicein the nationalCongress, and at vari- onstrateits reptiliannature, and the dinosaurian ous timeswas professorof naturalhistory, chemis- affinitiesof these bones were finallydemonstrated try,agriculture, botany, and materiamedica. Ex- by Cope in 1870. cept forsome mineralogicalstudies, his researches In the meantimethe footprintsin these strata, consistedchiefly of compilations,such as a list of so muchmore abundantthan bones,had long ex- known American fossils in his translationof cited popular conjectureand in 1836 Hitchcock Cuvier's Theory of the Earth (1818). He was, produceda firstscientific study of them. At that however,the firstto announcethe occurrenceof timehe believedthat all the trackswere those of Megatheriumin North America (1824) and of birds,and fromthe starthe held that the tracks walrus bones as far southas Virginia (1828). could be so classifiedas to producea classification James EllsworthDe Kay (October 12, 1792- of the animalsthat made them-a taxonomicand November21, 1851, see Shaw, 1930) mightbe nomenclaturalproblem on which general agree- called the Harlan of the Lyceum except that his mentstill has not been reached. In the firstpaper, paleontologicalwork was much less extensive. the footprintswere placed in seven species (and He was also a physicianand an ardentnaturalist, four additionalvarieties) regardingwhich Hitch- althoughhis main interestsand associationsseem cock made a penetratingcomment: "When I to have been more literarythan scientific. Like speak of species here, I mean species in orvetol-

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 167 ogy,39 notin ornithology.And I doubtnot, that gists of the time,but he was, with Hitchcock,an in perhapsevery instance, what I call a species in exception to the rule that paleontologistswere the formerscience, would be a genusin the latter." primarilyphysicians. Like the elderPeale, he was Here, again, Hitchcockraised a question that is apprenticedas a saddler and followedthat trade just beginningto find an approximateanswer, for some time. In later life he became a trans- more than a centurylater. In 1837 Hitchcock portationpromoter and he establishedthe first divided the tracks into many-footed(insects or, barge line on the Hudson. His most remarkable otherinvertebrates), four-footed and two-footed. scientificaccomplishment was his proposal (first Among the last, he recognized some as more publishedin 1831) of the rotarytheory of hurri- reptile-likeand some as morebird-like, without as- canes, based on observationsof the great New sertingdefinitely that theywere made by reptiles England stormof September3, 1821. This ex- or by birds. Thus at this early date he rejected posed him to attackand opprobriumat the time, previouspositive (but erroneous) statementsthat but historyhas vindicatedhim and honors him birdsmade the tracksand he suggestedthat some, as a great pioneerin meteorology.He was, inci- at least,could be reptilian,which has since proved dentally,the firstpresident of the AmericanAs- to be true for almostall of them. Hitchcockde- sociationfor the Advancementof Science (1848). voted some thirtyyears to gatheringand studying Redfield'smost importantpaleontological work thesetracks, mostly after 1842,and he was chiefly consistedof seven shortpapers on Triassic fishes, responsiblefor the superb collectionof them at most of thempublished in the AmericanJournal AmherstCollege. of Science. Only threeof thesepapers were writ- -As a digression,this exceptioncalls attention ten prior to 1842, but even at that date Redfield to the small part that the early colleges and uni- had establishedthe presenceof theseancient fishes versitiesplay in this history. In later periods, in Massachusetts,Connecticut, New Jersey,and educationalinstitutions were major factorsin the Virginia. He named one new genus and seven developmentof vertebratepaleontology, but in the new species,and he describedand discussedseveral earlieryears therewere no professorsof paleon- others. With one minorexception, his taxonomic tology,no separate courses in the subject, and unitsare all acceptedas valid by twentiethcentury almostno researchon it in connectionwith teach- revisers,despite the usual, inevitablechange in ing. The Universityof Pennsylvaniawas the nomenclature-a remarkablerecord. His ideas of firstto have competentstudents of fossil verte- the affinitiesand of the stratigraphicrelationships brates on its faculty,Wistar and his successors, of thesefish were also generallycorrect, within the but theirresearch in this field'was connectedwith establishedclassificatory framework of thattime.41 the PhilosophicalSociety and the Academy,not Almost all the really inmportantadditions to the University. There was a mastodontooth at knowledgeof Americanfossil vertebratesduring Yale Collegeas earlyas 1786 (see Parsons, 1793), this period were made by men who have now probablythe firstvertebrate fossil in an American been mentioned. Isolated exceptionsare provided college collection,and Silliman mentionedfossil by WilliamWilliams Mather of Ohio, who named vertebratesin his geology course, but there was the firstAmerican mammoth to be distinguished no professionallycompetent student of such re- fromthe Siberianprototype ("Elephas" jacksoni, mainsat Yale untilMarsh (1865). Amherstwas 1838) and JohnW. Foster,also then workingin probablythe firstcollege to possess any consider- Ohio, who named the firstdiscovered American able collectionof vertebratefossils under the study fossilrodent (Castoroides, 1838). The latterdis- and care of a qualifiedfaculty member.- coverywas, however,made, or at least was first William C.40 Redfield (March 26, 1789-Feb- reported,in 1837 by Samuel Prescott Hildreth, ruary12, 1857, see Humphreys,1935) was a stu- who gave a figureof Castoroidesremains without dentof Triassic fossils,like IHitchcock,but mainly namingthem.42 of thefish of thatperiod. He was the firstAmeri- 41 The first paper on these subjects by a Redfield, in can specialiston fossilfish. Such studieswere an 1837, was in fact writtenby W. C. Redfield's son, John avocationfor him as theywere for all paleontolo- Howard, but he did not follow this up and the elder Red- field is the importantfigure. 39 ["Oryctology"was then a usual name for "fossil 42 The announcement was anonymous and is usually zo6logy,"or what we now call "paleontology."] attributedto Foster, but Hay, 1929, credits it to Hildreth. 40 One of the interestingpeculiarities of this remarkable Hildreth also proposed the ntameOvis mammillaris for a man was that his middle initial was only C., and did not supposed fossil sheep, but this was probably based on stand for any name. remains *of a domestic sheep.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 168 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

One more personalityof this period demands clearlybelonged to the commonAmerican mas- special attention:Albert Koch, an energeticand todon,already a very familiaranimal to paleon- colorfulman of no scientificability. His history tologists,but theywere crushedand this,together and writingsare so picturesqueand, in some re- with ignorantreconstruction and fantasticarticu- spects, amusing that they still attract attention lation,enabled Koch to point out numeroussup- and have been overemphasized. The danger of posed differencesand to claim that he had found this undue emphasisis that it tends to give the two new giganticanimals, one an ally of the mas- impressionthat Koch's work was typicalof the todon and the other entirelynew and to be time or outstandingin it, a serious distortionof dubbedthe Missourium. historyand a graveinjustice to the able and honest Koch had already,in 1838, found bones of a Americanscientists who had been doing excellent reputedlyclawed mastodonin Gasconade County, work in vertebratepaleontology for more than a Missouri, and he later, in 1840 or 1841, found generationbefore Koch appearedon the scene. stillmore in BentonCounty, where the occurrence Koch's data and publicationshave littlescien- of large fossils had been known since at least tificvalue and hardlymerit mention here unless 1806.44 From bonesacquired at one or all of these possiblyas comic relief. The incidentdoes, how- places he then constructeda skeleton32 feet in ever, involve two points of some historicalim- lengthand 15 in heightwith a skull 6 feet long portance. First,Koch did gatherlarge collections, circledround about by tusks 21 feet fromtip to parts of which eventuallyreceived more sober tip along the curvatureand 15 feetstraight across treatment. Second, the popular acclaim and pri- thehead. Then lo! the M-Hissouriumstood revealed vate profitof his transactionsare revealingas as none otherthan the Leviathanof holy writ,a regardsthe social environmentof Americansci- proposition almost self-evidentand sufficiently ence towardthe middleof the nineteenthcentury. demonstratedto impious doubtersin a point by Through the effortsof the great research mu- pointcomparison of the skeletonwith the descrip- seums, of scientificeducators, and of astute but tion givenin Job (Koch, 1841 and subsequently). conscientiouspopularizers, the presentgeneration This wonderfulLeziathan Missourii skeletonwas of vertebratepaleontologists has inheritedan en- eventuallyacquired by the BritishMuseum, where vironmentin which paleontologyis a relatively it was reducedto the prosaicdimensions of Mam- familiarand toleratedsubject. There is no wide mut arnericanumand is still on display (or was appreciationof its more abstruseaspects, but the beforethe bombingof the Museum). resultsas presentedto the public are known to Koch's subsequent career as a collector of be the outcomeof seriousresearch and are gener- Basilosaurusbones in the southand as a showman ally rejectedif theirorigin is not respectable.43In exhibitinghis marvels in America and Europe Koch's day even the most rudimentaryconception happilylies beyondthe period set forthis historical of paleontologywas confinedto a handful of review. learnedmen and the populaceas a whole accepted DISCOVERY OF WESTERN FOSSILS his astonishinglyunscielntific presentations with greateracclaim than was grantedto any of the "founda fish back bone pitrifiedalso the hd. just resultsof soberwork. belowthe ISd. on the top of a hill Situatedon the L.S."-Log of theLewis and ClarkExpedition, Sept. many details regardingsome Althoughhe gave 10, 1804. of his discoveries,Koch's reportsinspire no confi- dence and it is often dubious where and under It is generallystated that the discoveryof verte- what circumstancesindividual specimens were ac- brate fossilsin the westernplains and mountains quired. Accordingto his account,his first"Mis- dates from 1846 when Dr. Hiram Prout, of St. sourium"bones were found"in May, 1839,on the Louis, made knowna titanotheretooth from what premisesof Capt. Palmer, 22 miles south of St. are now called the Big Badlands of South Dakota. Louis, in Jeffersoncounty, Missouri, in the im- The importanceof this discoverywas exception- mediate vicinityof Sulphur Springs, on Little 44 Because his firstpublication is extremelyrare and Rock creek" (Koch, 1839). The large bones all becausehis laterpamphlets were not clear in this matter, it is oftenassumed that the Missourium was fromBenton 43 For exampleeven a franklyand intentionallyfan- Countyor sometimesthat it was fromGasconade County. tasticrecent motion picture made the gestureof having If such an artificialmonstrosity can be. said to have a a reputablepaleontologist vouch for its cartoonsof pre- type locality,Jefferson County is typicalfor the Mis- historicanimals. souriumn.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 169 ally great and it is true that it, as nearlyas any one incident,marks the beginningof the inte'nsive search for westernfossils that is still unabated, nearlya cetiturylater, and thathas been the principal factorin the pre-eminenceof this sciencein America. Neverthelessthis discoveryhad ante- cedents'andit was far frommarking the absolute beginningof the discoveryof westernfossils or of theirscientific study. When Prout's "Palaeo- ;i AA therium'was found,vertebrate remains from both the'near and the far West were alreadyknown in :':'rA~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... considerablevariety, and such findshad been made sporadicallyfor morethan fortyyears (Fig. 19). In 1782 (or perhaps1781), Jeffersonwrote, "A Mr. Stanley,taken prisonerby the Indians near the mouthof the Tanissee [TennesseeRiver], re- lates thatafter being transferredthrough several tribes,from one to another,he was at lengthcar- ried over the mountainswest of the Missouri [Rocky Mountains?]-to a riverwhich runs west- wardly: thatthese bones [fossil bones, presumed by Jeffersonto be of thesame kindas thosefound at Big Bone Lick] aboundedthere, and that the nativesdescribed to him the animalto whichthey

CESCMSCHOLTZ BA1Y

F~IG. 20. Type of Saurocephaluslanci'formis Harlan, 1.824,found by Lewis and Clark in 1804, one of the first westernfossil discoveries.Drawings by Titian Peale (engravedby Lawson), fromHarlan, 1835.

belongedas stillexisting in the northernparts of theircountry; from which description he judged it to be an elephant"(Jefferson, 1825, p. 59). If Mr. Stanley'sstatement was authentic,this is the earliestknown reference to westernfossil bones, 1 but it cannotbe called a d'iscovery. It was Jeffersonwho was chieflyresponsible for sendingout the famousLewis and Clark expedition,and the AmericanPhilosophical Society

-. -leo - was also involvedin the originof this plan and concernedwith its execution. This party made the firstexplicit 'recordsof western fossil localities and brought back the firstspecimens. 1. _ Their first discovery was the fossil fish that Harlan (1824, 1835) described as Saurocephalus lanciformtis(Fig. 20). .He gave its origin as follows: "Abouitsixteen years ago, tere was de 45I.e., about 1808. The necessarycorrection for lapse FIG. 19. Localities and dates of some discoveries of of time was not made in Harlan's publicationof 1835, fossil vertebratesprevious to 1842 in some of the more whichstill referredto this as "aboutsixteen years ago"~ western and outlyingparts of North America. (G. G. S., note).

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 170 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON positedby Lewis and Clark,in the cabinetof the here flowingalmost due south and, second, be- AmericanPhilosophical Society, a fossil organic cause if eitherside could be called south of the remainof some unknownmarine animal. During riverit would be the (south-) west side and Sol- the expeditionof these gentlemenup the river dier's River is on the otherside. A possibleex- Missouri, in the year 1804, this specimenwas planationis that Lewis meant "starboardside," foundin a cavernsituate a few milessouth of the i.e. east, not "south side," when he wrote "S. river,-neara creeknamed Soldier'sRiver. . . . A side." Clark habituallycalled the rightside, ori- few miles down the river,at Council Bluff,there entedby the directionof travel,the "S. side" or are hills of considerablesize... "S.S.," althoughit is true that Lewis sometimes The specimenand its originallabel (Fig. 21) used "N." and "S." for northand southand "L." are now in the Academyof Natural Sciences of and "R." for left (larboard) and- right (star- Philadelphia,catalogued as No. 5516. The-hand- 'board) insteadof "L." and "S." respectively.In writingof the label is not Clark's but is almost any case the specimenshould be eitherfrom what surelyLewis's. It reads: is now Harrison County,Iowa, or fromwhat is now WashingtonCounty, Nebraska. The speci- No 9 men,itself, apparently indicates an Upper Creta- petrefedjaw boneof a fishor someother ana- ceous marinedeposit, which is also puzzlingbe- -malfound in a cavern(some distance) a few cause no such depositis noted in this vicinityon milesdistant from the Missouri. (the) S. side of the geologicmaps availableto me. Its occurrence theriver-6th of August1804. in a cavernis also somewhatanomalous and can (The words in parentheseshave been crossedout be explainedonly by occurrencein the wall rock, in the original.) not in a cave deposit,properly speaking. Althoughless explicitthan Harlan's statement, This is the only Lewis and Clark vertebrate this label is in agreementwith it, because August fossilthat has been technicallydescribed and the 6 was the date on which the party passed the only one that I have been able to locate in sur- mouth of Soldier's River. The findingof the viving collections,but Clark recordedtwo other fossilis not mentionedin the journals of the ex- discoveriesof remarkableinterest in his journal, pedition. Soldier's River is still so called and it and thesewere announcedin the earliestauthentic flowssouthward into the Missouriin Iowa, above account of the expedition(Allen edition,1814). Council Bluffs. Harlan's statementand the ap- That publicationis importantas puttingthe finds parentagreement of Lewis's label that the fossil on definiteand public recordat the time,but the was found south of the Missouri near Soldier's incidentsare morefully given in the originaljour- River are confusing,first, because the Missouriis nal (Thwaites edition), whichwill be quoted.

FIG. 21. Originalfield label of Saurocephaluslanciformis, in Lewis's handwriting, pasted on the specimen.Photograph from the Academyof Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 171

......

.....~~~......

FIG. 22. Clark'smanuscript map of part of the YellowstoneRiver. Pompey'sPillar ("Tower" on the map) is at the leftmargin of this sheet. The place marked"White Clifts"north of the riverto the rightof the middle of the figureis where Clark founda fossil bone in 1806, probablythe firstdiscovery of a westerndinosaur. Originalin the AmericanPhilosophical Society, published as Plate 51 of theatlas of Thwaites,1905.

Clark's journal for Monday,Sept. 10, 1804: shows the island with red "Ceeder" as 'I. au Cedar." The localityis now in South Dakota, . . . Passed the lowerpoint of an Island covered withred Ceeder Situated in a bendon theL. S. [lar- near the Nebraska line, between Niobrara and board,south, side] this Island is about2 Miles in Wheeler. Upper Cretaceousmarine beds occurin lengthbelow this on a hill on theL.S. we foundthe thisvicinity and, althoughthe specimenmay have backbone of a fish,45 feetlong tapering to thetale, been a fish (exaggeratedas to size), it was prob- Some teeth&c. thosejoints were Seperatedand all ably a mosasauror plesiosaur. Petrefied. Still more interestingis this entryin Clark's journal for Friday,July 25, 1806: The publishedversion of 1814 adds that frag- mentswere collectedand sentto Washington,but dureingthe time the men were getting the two big nothinghas been learned of the fate of these. horns[sheep, shot for food] whichI had killedto The manuscriptmap (Thwaites edition,atlas, theriver I employedmy self in gettingpieces of the ribof a fishwhich was Sementedwithin the faceof map 546) does not designatethe fossillocality but therock this rib is (about 3) inchesin Secumpher- 46 The editor'slegend to thismap is "Routefrom May enceabout the middle it is 3 feetin lengththo a part 21-aboutJune 20, 1804,"but there is somemistake, be- of the end appearsto have been brokenoff (the causethe map shows the camping place of Sept.9-10 as fallenrock is near the water-theface of the rock wellas CedarIsland, passed on Sept.10. whererib is is perpend[icula]r-4i[nche]slengthwise,

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 172 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON a littlebarb projects I have severalpieces of thisrib partsof the skeletonof a mosasaur,named Mosa- the bone is neitherdecayed nor petrifiedbut very saurus maximilianusby Goldfuss (1845), who rotten. the part whichI couldnot get out may be stated that Prince Maximilian zu Wied had ob- seen,it is about6 or 7 Miles belowPompys Tower tainedit duringhis travelsin interiorNorth Amer- in the face of the Lar[boar]d [north]Clift about ica. "Sie waren von Major O'Fallon, ehe- 20 feetabove the water. dem maligen Agenten fuirdie IndianischenNationen The manuscriptmap (Thwaites edition,atlas, des oberenMissouri, in der Gegenddes Big-Bend, map 51; Fig. 22 of thispaper) shows the locality, einer grossenKrummung des Missouri,zwischen marked "White Clifts," withoutmention of the Fort Lookoutund Fort Pierre,gefunden, nach St. bone. Pompey'sPillar (as it was called in subse- Louis gebrachtund in dem Gartendes damaligen quent publication) is on the south side of the Besitzers [O'Fallon's] niedergelegtworden." YellowstoneRiver below Billings,Montana, and The specimenis clearlyfrom Upper Cretaceous still bears that name. Hell Creek (latest Creta- marinebeds, perhapsfrom the Pierre shales,and ceous) beds outcropalong the rivernear here,and it came fromnear the typelocality of that forma- the "fish" rib doubtlessbelonged to one of the tion,in whatis now South Dakota (not fromNe- dinosaursfor which that formation is now famous. braska or Missouri,as sometimesstated). Had Lewis's clue been followedup, investigation In 1835 (p. 284) Harlan noted thatthe Prince of the westerndinosaur fields would have been de Wied, on passing throughPhiladelphia, told advancedby two.generations-theirdiscovery, in a him of thisacquisition and suggestedthat the ani- scientificsense, was not made until 1877. mal might be the same as Harlan's "Ichthyo- In 1834 Harlan describedto the AmericanPhi- saurus" missouriensis-a conclusionthat we now losophicalSociety a specimenthat he called "Ich- know to have been at least approximatelycorrect. thyosaurus"Missouriensis, actually a mosasaur, Various discoveriesbefore 1842 west of but althoughthe errorwas thena naturalone and was near the Mississippiare not properlywestern in soon correctedby Harlan (1835) to the extentof the presentsense, but discoveriesin westernMis- saying that the specimenis quite distinctfrom souri,not far fromthe Kansas line, may be men- known ichthyosaursand should be placed in a tioned. The occurrenceof fossilmammals in Ben- separate genus. This specimen was given to ton County,Missouri, was knownat least as early Harlan by Major N. A. Ware, who had obtained as 1806, when Benjamin Smith Barton wrote to it froma trader. The label,as quotedby Harlan, Cuvier (1834, Vol. II, p. 270, and elsewhere) was as follows. "qu'un voyageurintelligent a vu dans uli endroit particulier,pres de la rivieredes Indiens Osages, A traderfrom the Rocky Mountains, on his return, near the Yellow stoneknobs or hills,observed, in a des milliersd' ossemensde cet animal [theAmeri- rock, the skeletonof an alligator-animal,about can mastodon],et qu'il y a recueilli,entre autres, seventyfeet in length;he brokeoff the pointof the dix-sept defenses, dont quelques-unesavait six jaw as it projected,and gave it to me [presumablyto pieds de long et un pied de diametre:mais la plu- Ware]. He said thatthe head partappeared to be part de ces os etaientdans un grand etat de de- aboutthree or fourfeet long. composition."Barton sent a molarto Cuvier,who Elsewhere in his description,without citation placed it in the Cabinetdu Roi. of authority,Harlan spoke of the localityas on Probably at this time and certainlywithin the the banks of the Missouri near its junctionwith following thirty years, the American Philo- the Yellowstone. "Near" musthere be used in a sophical Society received various specimens, very relativesense, because the specimenis cer- mostlyof mastodons,from Benton County. Some tainly fromUpper Cretaceousmarine rocks and of Hays's types of species now consideredsyno- such strata do not appear in the valley of the nymsof Mammutamericanurn, described by him Missouri for morethan fiftymiles upstream from in 1834, are supposed to have come fromthere, its junctionwith the Yellowstoneor downstream althoughthere appears to be some confusionof for severalhundred miles. record betweenthis region and Big Bone Lick. A similarbut more importantfind was made The Society'sinterest in the Benton Countyfinds at about the same timeor earlier,probably around culminatedin 1844, shortlyafter the period here 1830 and surelybefore 1835, although the descrip- considered,in the purchaseof the large collection tionof it was not publisheduntil 1845. This was of S. H. Whipple. Such of these specimensas an excellentskull and mandiblewith considerable surviveand are still recognizableas to originare

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 173 now to be found in the Academy of Natural cites and quotes various early authors,not all of Sciences of Philadelphia. whomare mentionedin the presentcondensed ac- The most famous,or notorious,collection from count). Dr. Eschscholtz,whose name was and Benton Countywas, however,that made in 1840 still is attachedto the bay in whichthe discovery by AlbertKoch, whichincluded his "Missourium" was made, found that supposed mountainsalong skeletonalong with bison, deer, megathere,and the shore were in fact pure ice, with the surface mylodontbones. Koch's activitiesare mentioned covered with dirt. Kotzebue wrote, "An indis- elsewherein this paper and are now cited only putable proof that what we saw was real ice, is as includinganother relatively early westerndis- the quantityof mammoths'teeth and bones,which covery. were exposed to view by the melting,and among Althoughthe Pleistocenemammals of western whichI myselffound a veryfine tooth." In 1827 Missouri mightbe consideredas representingthe an English expedition under F. W. Beechey extensionof the easternfields, rather than as dis- visited the locality,which they named Elephant coveriesin what we now thinkof as trulywestern Point, and collectedfossils that were describedby fossilfields, no such qualificationcan apply to the Buckland (1831). His faunallist included"Ele- discoveryof bones of the same geological age in phant"-Siberian mammoth,"Urus" extinct Oregon in December,1839. These remainswere bison, musk-ox, "Deer" - caribou, and horse. foundby a Mr. Ewing Young on the "Walham- The musk-ox and some of the caribou remains met" (Willamette) or Multnomahriver, a tribu- were consideredmodern, but these animals did tary of the Columbia,in latitude440 N. (hence exist in the Pleistoceneof the regionand the speci- near the present city of Eugene, Ore.). They mens of themwere quite possiblyfossils. Many came into the hands of Mr. H. C. Perkins of other expeditionshave since visited the locality, Newburyport,Mass., who (lescribed them in a whichcontinues to yieldspecimens in considerable letterpublished in theAmerican Journal of Science numbers. (Perkins, 1842). Although he proclaims him- Finallyit may be mentionedthat Mexico, where self "a tyro in palaeontology"(thus reflectinga Europeans first saw fossil bones in the New general recognitionof that science as such and World, had by 1842 yielded more specimensin of the technicalitiesalready involved in pro- some variety, including mastodons and horses ficiencyin it), Perkins' descriptionsand figures (see Meyer, 1840, Cuvier, 1834 and elsewhere). are recognizabletoday and appear to be accurate.47 (It is remarkablethat aftermore than four cen- The specimensincluded parts of "fossilelephant" turies of continual,if usually casual, discovery (mammoth),a tarsal of the "fossil ox" (extinct and sporadic study, the undoubtedlyabundant bison), a tooth correctlyreferred to Mylodon fossilvertebrates of Mexico are still very incom- Owen, and a humerusalso correctlyreferred to pletelyknown and have receivedlittle really sys- "the megatherioidtribe," i.e., in later language, tematicattention.) to the Gravigrada or ground-sloths. (In fact, the humerus,like the tooth,belonged to Mylodon; SCIENTIFIC PERIODICALS theseparts had not thenbeen foundin unequivocal "It is painfulto perceivewhat conspicuous blanks association.') are yetleft for America to fillup, and especiallyin The early discovery of fossil vertebratesin those importantbranches, American geology and Alaska may be mentioned,as being literallyin Americanorganic remains. This feelingis greatly westernNorth America, althoughfrom the his- increasedby the occasionaltaunts and sneerswe see torical point of view as regards explorationin directedagainst us, in foreignscientific works. ... this period Alaska mightperhaps betterbe con- It is forthis object, as well as for the diffusionof sideredas part of Siberia. thelove of scienceat home,that this monthly journal Mammoth remains were found in Alaska on is aboutto be established."-Prospectusof Feather- of Geology August 8, 1816, by the exploring party under stonhaugh'sMonthly American Journal and NaturalScience, 1831. Kotzebue (see Kotzebue, 1821; Maddren, 1905, has an excellentaccount of these occurrencesand The rise of a scienceinvolves not only expand- ing knowledgeand changingideas but also more 47The derogatory summary by Hay (1902) of this physical requirements:trained men, materials, pioneer paper on western fossils could not have been writtenby any fair critic who had read the paper, which libraries,laboratories, instruments, and means of is, in fact, excellent for its period. recordingand spreadinginformation. During the

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 174 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON period under consideration,American vertebrate Proceedings,printing of whichwas begunin 1838. paleontologyrequired and acquired no special Duringtheir shorter span priorto 1843,ten papers facilitiesin the way of laboratoriesand equipment. on this subject appeared in the Journal (1823- Its librarieswere those of the earlylearned socie- 1842) and Proceedings(1841-1842) of the Acad- ties, an exceptionallyimportant historical subject emy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. Most but one not particularlyrelated to this one facet of thesewere also by membersof the Philosophical of scientifichistory. Somethingof the develop- Societyand the two representessentially the same mentof professionallycompetent students and of researchcenter. The publicationsof the Society the acquisitionof specimenshas been related. It continuedto be and are todayamong the mostim- remainsto mnentionbriefly the rise of publication portantmediums of publicationfor this science. facilitieswith respectto vertebratepaleontology. Althoughvery active in the epoch of Leidy and Until well into the nineteenthcentury a prin- Cope, the Academy thereafteralmost ceased to cipal means of diffusingscientific information was work or publish on vertebratepaleontology, but not publication,as we know it, but personalcor- therehas been some revivalof interestin the last respondence. Such correspondencewas not an year or two. informalaffair, lightly entered into, but a serious The other importantsociety publication for responsibilitycarefully arranged and religiously early vertebratepaleontology was the Annals of maintained. The seventeenthand eighteenthcen- the Lyceum of Natural History of New York, turyAmerican naturalists acquired and contributed publicationof whichbegan in 1823 and whichhad knowledgealmost entirelythrough their corre- ten papers on this subject in 1824-1842. This spondents,usually European pundits. Even in periodicalalso survives,as the Annals of theNew the nineteenthcentury one findsno less a man York Academyof Science. Since 1842 it has pub- than Benjamin Smith Barton contributingto lished a few very importantvertebrate paleon- vertebratepaleontology not by any publications tological contributions,but such publicationhas of his own but by gathering"intelligence" and been quite sporadic. transmittingit to his paleontologicalcorrespond- The firstscientific journal in the United States, ents, among whom was Cuvier. In 1811 Jeffer- as opposed to society transactionsand the like, son was asked by Count John Potocki to enter was probablyMitchill's Medical Repository,New into a treatyof correspondenceon this and re- York, founded in 1797. Many such ventures lated subjects and, pleading old age,48he trans- were begun early in the nineteenthcentury, in ferredthe petitionto Barton. It oftenappeared almostall cases as personalundertakings of scien- that the early American scientificjournals were tificmen with wide correspondence.As a few less mediumsfor papers preparedas such forthe examplesthere may be mentionedBarton's Phila- press than printed compilationsof the editors' delphia Medical and Physical Journal, 1804, - scientificcorrespondence. Coxe's Emzporimrnof Arts and Sciences, 1812, In frank imitationof such venerable institu- Featherstonhaugh'sMonthly American Journal of tions as the Royal Society of London, formal Geology and Natural Science, 1831, and Rafi- memoirswere read beforethe American,Philo- nesque's AtlanticJournal and Friend of Knowl- sophical Society and the American Academy of edge, 1832. All of thesewere publishedin Phila- Arts and Sciences. No little informationhas delphiaand all were short-lived,as was Mitchill's been lost because manyof these papers were left journal. They included some notices of fossil in manuscript,but in 1769 the PhilosophicalSo- bones, but these involved little in the way of ciety began to publish Transactionsand in 1785 original contributionsexcept for Featherston- the AmericanAcademy followed suit. The latter haugh's journal, which had an importantpaper publicationhas been of comparativelyminor im- on "Big Bone Lick" by Cooper. portancefor vertebrate paleontology, despite emi- As regards our subject, the greatest of all nence in otherfields, but the Transactionsof the journals is unquestionablythe AmericanJourtnal AmericanPhilosophical Society, oldest of Ameri- of Science,founded by Benjamin Sillimanof Yale can scientificperiodicals, published the relatively Universityin 1818. Its firstissue containedin- largenumber of twelvepapers in thisfield between structionsfor collectingfossils. In 1820-1842 1799 and 1842, while seven more appeared in the the astonishingnumber of 43 papers or noticeson in that periodicaland 48 It turnedout that Jeffersonoutlived Barton by fossilvertebrates appeared elevenyears. it has ever since continuedand is today a leading

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 175

mediumin this science. Perhaps no other peri- teethand thatthey could be definedby determina- odical in the world has publishedso many con- tion of thesepoints of difference.It was feltthat tributionsto vertebratepaleontology (see Lull, species were neverthelessrelated and that their 1918). closer or more distant affinitiescould be de- terminedby greater or lesser resemblancesin THE STATE OF KNOWLEDGE IN 1842 theirfossilized remains. It was knownthat structure and functionwere correlatedand that habits "Is not sciencea growth? Has not science,too, its embryology?And must not the neglectof its could to some extent be determinedfrom mor- embryologylead to a misunderstandingof the prin- phology. ciplesof its evolutionand of its existingorganiza- American fossils and American studentshad tion?"-Spencer. contributedto these results,which were nevertheless more largelydependent on work done in So much has been accomplishedby American Europe. Americanpaleontology had been for a vertebratepaleontologists in the last centurythat time more or less parasiticon European and was we fall into the habit of thinkingthat everything still satellitic,but it was rapidly ceasing to be worth while in our field is the product of this either. The principles developed mainly in period. We stillthink of ours as a youngscience, Europe were now as well known and as well and in doing this we make the mistakeof those used in America as anywhere. Americans had beautieswho so acquire the habitof being thought achieved professionalstatus and had laid a solid young in their twenties that continue they to basis on which Leidy and his successorswere to think that they are young in their sixties. As stand, fullyco-operative in internationalscience sciences of comparable such scope go-excluding but in no sense inferior. This achievementhad broad categoriesas biology or chemistry-verte- been encouraged by the American scientificso- brate paleontologyis now an old science. It is, cieties and would have been long delayed or im- for instance, considerably older than nuclear possible without them. The American Philo- physicsor geneticsor psychology. Unlike these sophical Society had been the most important sciences,it was a going concern a centuryago, single factorof this sort. with a definedfield of study,a group of recog- In this broaderfield of principlesand theories, nized specialists,a body of organized materials, the most importantthings that were not known a sound methodologicalroutine, and a systema- were the nature of the relationshipsbetween tized set of theories. species and the mode of originof the new species By way of review and summary,the sig- that continuallyappear in the sequence. The nificance of the developmentfollowed on the hypothesesof affinityby commonancestry and of precedingpages may be judged by statementof the extentof its resultsin 1842. origin by evolution had been stated and were Vertebratepaleontology was then in what is being discussed,in Americaas well as in Europe, usuallycalled the Cuvierianstage, because Cuvier but theywere not generallyaccepted and, indeed, gatheredtogether the productsof many decades the evidence did not stronglysupport them. It of work by many students,weeded out most of was vaguelyfelt that species appearedby creation the errorsand contradictions,and lefta generally or spontaneous generation-which were merely sound and consistentsystem. Fossil bones were pious ways of repeatingthe obvious fact that no knownto be the remainsof animals. These ani- one knew how they appeared. Their affinities mals were known to be entirelyextinct, xvith a mightmean thatthey were closer or more distant few exceptionsamong the most recentof them. copies of some abstract and supernal model- They were known to have lived througha long whichwas not muchmore than a sly philosophical sequence of epochs, extendingover millions of way of ignoringthe observed relationshipsand years. It was knownthat each successiveepoch beggingthe question. In these respectsthe last had characteristicand differentanimals, that fish centuryhas seen real and fundamentalprogress, appeared beforereptiles and reptilesbefore mam- far as we stillare fromthe ultimategoal. mals and thatwithin each major groupthe species The systemof taxonomythat we use now was were relativelyshortlived and were continually already definitelyestablished and in use. The replaced by other species. It was known that details of classificationand nomenclaturehave species differedfrom each other in more or less changedgreatly with the complicationof increase constantmorphological characters of bones and in numberof knowngroups and withclarification

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 176 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON and standardizationof concepts, but the basic method has not changed in the last century. Americanshad contributednothing to the inven- /-\ ) | V-T,-ss ~tpr*Sl802 - ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ --705,1801e+)( f'Xs 3 tion of this method,but by 1842 theyhad adopted Mas+od ons hse s, 18-57 it and they were already destinedto be among the most importantstudents to develop and to . i 1l J Cre1>aceo ~~~~~sF'ghes, I I C*-S+roides _.--~^~\\\/ \1 1787, 824, e+c perfectit. i i X~~~)18:551_ O. , >}Dnosaur? 1787 ,,, XMofzene doophirL On the more concreteplane of the actual quan- BSi89 Lk,/ the number '766 ancd tity of knowledge, of known facts 04~O~earlier Meg~~y1 1827 / ~~~~~~~~797 ratherthan the methodsfor their study and ar- I 8'~~~~~~~'' ~ ~ is- 18W58 rangementand the theoriesfor their interpreta- tion, the differencebetween 1842 and 1942 is

muchgreater. This is an inevitableresult of the 1 _---vn ._. \ farnro+hs ------_-. / irn Carolirna sonmetimesmisunderstood phenomenon that the before 1743 rate of accumulationof factsdepends very largely on the existing means for using those facts in # \ X AS~~~~~harK1-ceth

some scientificway once theyhave been acquired. N qega+heriurrL 1823 Nevertheless,the studentwho feelsthat American iX Basilosaurus vertebratepaleontology began with Leidy may be 1834- <>\o ~ ~~~~~~~~~X /sso 4. M0 ...*oo 00 astonishedat theextent of knowledgebefore Leidy identifiedhis firstfossil. FIG. 23. Sites and dates of some of the fossil vertebrate In 1842, Paleozoic vertebrateswere just becom- discoveries in eastern United States prior to 1843. The ing knownin America. The Devonian fishSau- dates are in general those of discovery but in some cases ripteriswas found in 1840, but publishednotice are dates of publication, see the text. These are only a of it was not to appear until 1843. In 1841 Sir few of the outstanding discoveries. In 1842 Pleistocene mammals, particularly,were also known from dozens of William Logan had found Carboniferousfoot- other localities scattered all over the region covered by printsin Nova Scotia, and he soon brieflymen- the map. tioned them (Logan, 1842), although serious study of them was long delayed.49 Despite this known,but a considerablefauna had been found understandablelag as regards the Paleozoic, the in the Cretaceousfronm the Atlanticcoast to South eastern Triassic faunas were already ratherwell Dakota and Montana. This included a variety known in 1842. The Connecticutvalley tracks of fishesand reptiles-dinosaursamong themal- were known in considerablevariety and it was thoughthe entity"dinosaurs" had not been de- correctlybelieved that some of them were made fined. The western Cretaceous mosasaurs were by extinctreptiles. A few bones of these reptiles alreadyrepresented by good specimens. Included had been foundbut could not yetbe clearlyclassi- amongthe supposedCretaceous fishes and reptiles fied. Triassic fishes from Massachusetts,Con- therewere probablysome that are reallyEocene necticut,New Jersey,and Virginia had been well -a confusionthat is even now not entirelycleared classified. up, so that the studentsof 1842 cannot be very Jurassic deposits are practicallyabsent from severelycondemned for it. the parts of North America that had then been The great faunas of American Tertiary land explored and no vertebratesof that age were vertebrateswere stillquite unknown,although the almost immediately.A 49 See Lambe, 1904, who also summarizes the later his- discoverywas to follow tory of Canadian vertebrate paleontology. Although the beginninghad been made on Tertiary marine true discovery of American fossil vertebrates was made vertebrates. Basilosaurus, the Eocene cetacean, by a Canadian in what he claimed as part of Canada and was discoveredin 1832 and after some under- although Canadian invertebratefossils were described in standable fumbling its general structure and the eighteenthcentury and continually since then, almost nothing of value was done with strictlyCanadian fossil affinitieshad become reasonablywell known by vertebrates until about 1860. Since that time there have 1842. The firstMiocene dolphinwas described been very eminent vertebrate paleontologists in that part in 1842. Tertiary shark teeth,mostly Miocene of America-Dawson, Whiteaves, G. F. Matthew, Lambe, in age, had been gatheredas curiositiessince pre- and Parks, to mention only a few-but Canada hardly figures in a history of the science limited, like this, to Colunmbiantimes and had received some able, the years before 1843. technicalstudy by 1842.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 177

The Pleistocene mammalianfauna, which in- Kentucky,Louisiana, etc., but theyhad not been cludes strikinglylarge animals, which is often clearlydistinguished from the closelysimilar living well-exposed in unconsolidated deposits, and species. Harlan had claimeddiscovery of a fossil which may occur almost everywherein eastern tapir, but the identificationwas queried or re- North America, was of course much the best jected-although fossiltapirs do occur under like knownpart of vertebratepaleontology. The rich circumstances,it still is not certainthat Harlan microfaunahad not yet attractedattention, but reallyhad one. almostall the main typesof largerextinct Pleisto- A fossil peccaryhad been found and correctly cene mammalswere already familiar. The only identifiedas to family,but pertinenceto an ex- extinctrodent surely distinguished was the giant tinctgenus and specieshad not been clearlyestab- Castoroides. Among carnivores,bears and the lished and the discoverywas not widely known greatcat Pantheraatrox had been foundas fossils, even among paleontologists. The rare and pe- but it was not yet establishedthat these were culiar cervidnow called Cervalcesscotti had been extinct species. Bones of the living species of found and properlydistinguished. Other fossil walrus were knownfrom as farsouth as Virginia. deer belongingor verynearly allied to recentspe- Edentates had received special attention. The cies had also been discovered. The great-horned materialwas still incomplete,but all threeof the Bison latifronswas known and named. Small- easterntypes of groundsloths, Megalonyx, Mylo- hornedPleistocene bisons had also been found in don, and Megatheriumn,had been foundand dis- Kentucky, Oregon, Alaska, and probably else- tinguishedand theiraffinities were as well known where,but it had not been proved that they be- as was possible beforediscovery of the annectant longedto extinctspecies. The remarkableextinct and ancestralolder South Americantypes. Ceta- muskoxennow called Boatheriumbombifrons and ceans of probable Pleistocene age were known, Syiwboscavifrons were both known,although the but had attractedlittle attention because theydid distinctionsbetween them and betweenthe latter not appear to be distinctfrom living forms-still and the livingmuskox were not completelyclari- trueof thegreat majority of Pleistocenecetaceans. fied. The recentspecies of muskoxhad also been Much more work had been done on probos- found fossil in Alaska. cideansthan on any otherfossil vertebrates. The Among North American Pleistocenemammals Americanmastodon, now called Mammut ameri- of moderateto large size, somethingwas known canum, was completelyknown and well under- of almostevery well-marked group with the prob- stood. Competentlyrestored mounted skeletons able exceptionsof theglyptodonts, large canids, and had been on exhibition for some forty years. camels. In judging the importanceof these few There was still some disagreementas to whether major omissions,it mustbe rememberedthat these the great amountof observedvariation was intra- are relativelyrare fossilsin regionsthen belonging specificor representedgeneric and specificdiver- to the United States, aside from Florida which sity,but the more able studentsheld the former was a recentand little-studiedacquisition. (correct) view. One other valid species, Stego- Looking backward from the vantage point of mastodonchapmani, had been found and for all 1942,the knowledgeavailable in 1842 seems small practical purposes lost again. Mammoths had but highlysignificant-and its greatestsignificance been distinguishedfrom mastodons and it had been is that withoutit we would not have nearly so suggested,but not clearlyestablished, that some high a vantage point now. If one could have American mammothswere distinct from those looked forwardfrom 1742, the progressthat was of Siberia and Alaska, where these fossils were to be made in the ensuingcentury would have ap- also known. Mastodon remainshad been found peared incrediblygreat. at localitiesfar too numerousto mentionover a greatarea fromNew Englandto westernMissouri. APPENDIX The occurrenceof sirenianbones along the At- lanticcoast fromNew Jerseyto Georgiahad been A. Records of Early VertebratePaleontological observed,but identificationhad gone no further Activitiesof the AmericanPhilo- than to establish their generally manatee-like sophicalSociety character. In 1838 the Society startedpublication of its True fossil horses were known fromscattered Proceedings and thereafterits more important localitiesin New Jersey,Pennsylvania, Maryland, paleontological activities were made generally

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 178 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

available at the time and are cited as contempo- ing them to have illustrationsprepared, and re- raneous publications in various bibliographies. questingPeale to put the bones "in the best order, Before thatdate a large amountof workconcern- for the Society'suse." ing vertebratepaleontology was done, but only a May 26, 1797. (Proc.) A letterfrom J. Caf- small proportionof this was published in the fery of Nashville tells of mammothbones at Transactions. The survivingrecords of these Manscoes Lick near the mouth of the Cumber- earlieractivities, to and including1837, are very land and offersto make a collectionwhich was incompletebut are of great historicalinterest. authorizedto the extentof $100. [The outcome They consist of manuscriptproceedings, printed of thisplan is not recorded.] in 1884, and lettersto the Societyor its officers, July21, 1797. (Proc.) Reading of Turner's most of which have never been printedbut are memoiron mammothbones and its referenceto preservedin the Archivesin the Society'sLibrary. James,Wistar, and Seybert. [The memoirwas Notes on these are given below in temporalse- published,1799, and has been discussed above. quence. The notation"(Proc.)" refersto "Early Thomas C. Jamesand Adam Seybertwere secre- Proceedings" (Amer. Philos. Soc.. 1884), and tariesof the Society,not personally concerned with the notation"(Ms.)" refersto lettersin the Ar- fossilbones.] chives. (The list of lettersin the Archiveshas Jan. 19, 1798. (Proc.) "Jeffersonpresented a been suppliedby Mrs. GertrudeHess.) Bone of the Mammothsome time ago found in Mar. 5, 1784. (Proc.) "Nicola presentedOb- Virginia." servationson petrifiedbones foundnear the Ohio; Oct. 10, 1798. (Ms.) Samuel Hodgdon,Phila- thigh-bone,tusk and grinder,brought to the city delphia,to JonathanWilliams. Three barrelsof by Maj. Craig." [Mr.,later General, Lewis Nicola bones receivedfrom Pittsburg [possibly from Big was elected Curator of the Society in 1769 and Bone Lick]. again in 1779-1785, inclusive. He does not ap- Mar. 1, 1799. (Proc.) "Wistar's description pear to -havepublished any observationson fossils. of the Bones of the unknownanimal, referred to This is the firstrecorded connection of the So- Dr. Shippen." [The Megalonyxbones, previously ciety, as such, with fossil vertebrates,although describedby Jefferson. The entry shows that antedatedby personalcontacts of Franklin,Jef- Wistar's work was completedin 1799, not 1797. ferson,and othermembers.] Several Shippenswere early members. This one Oct. 5, 1787. (Proc.) "A large thigh bone was probablyDr. William Shippen,Sr., a former found near Woodbury creek in Glocester [sic] vice-president.] county,N. J. [perhapsa Hadrosaurus], was de- Mar. 15, 1799. (Proc.) "Dr. Shippen re- scribedin a paperby Mr. Matlackand Dr. Wistar; portedDr. Wistar's descriptionsof the Bones to who, with Dr. Rodgers,were requestedto search be very accurate. Publicationordered." [Pub- forthe missingpart of the skeleton." [If the sec- lishedthe same year.] retary'sconjecture bracketed in theprinted version July24, 1801. (Ms.) Charles Willson Peale, is correct,as it may be, thiswas the firstdinosaur Philadelphia,to Robert Patterson. Requests loan foundin NorthAmerica, or probablyin theworld, of $500 from the Society to help completethe but verificationis now impossibleand this cannot skeletonof the mammoth. be accounteda true discovery. The paper was July24, 1801. (Proc.) Special meetingcalled neverprinted, and thereis no recordof the results to considerPeale's requestfor a loan. Resolved of furthersearch. Mr. Matlack was Timothy to makethe loan for fourmonths, without interest. Matlack, an early memiber,secretary of the So- Aug. 21. 1801. (Proc.) Peale's bond and cietyin 1781-1783. He died in 1829. He does mortgagereceived and $500 paid to him. [This not appear to have publishedany of his paleon- enabledcompletion of his excavations,as discussed tologicalobservations.] onla previouspage.] Mar. 18, 1791. (Proc.) "T. Matlack's de- May 7, 1802. (Proc.) Peale is allowed to scriptionof 'a large Tusk found in the back leave part of his museum in the Society's Hall county'was read, and two pieces of the tusk ex- while the remainderis moved to the State House hibited." [See precedingnote.] [IndependenceHall]. [For sequels, see Jan. 17, Mar. 10, 1797. (Proc.) Resolutionon Jeffer- 1806, and Dec. 6, 1811.] son,s memoiron Megalonyx [publishedin 1799], June 10, 1802. (Ms.) Samuel Brown, Lex- referringit to the publicationcommittee, instruct- ington,Ky., to JohnVaughan. Discusses a skull

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 179

"of the Ox Kind" forwardedto the Society and vious correspondencewith Dr. Brown, who pre- argues againstthe possibilitythat "the two kinds sentedthem to the Society. Brown describedthe of largeteeth" belonged to the same animalat dif- cave, in Rockcastle Co., Ky., in Trans. Amer. ferentages. [The ox-like skull was that later Philos. Soc., VI, 1804, pp. 235-247. Wistar's namedBison latifronsand firstdescribed by Rem- identificationis correctas far as it goes, and is brandtPeale, 1803a. Contraryto occasionalstate- muchthe oldestidentification of an Americanfos- ments,this historictype was not fromBig Bone sil peccary,although overlooked because not pub- Lick, proper,but froma site ten or fifteenmiles lishedat thetime. Leidy describedthis fine speci- distant. Unfortunatelythis letter from Brown men and named it Euchoerus macrops,1853. It gives no detailsof the discovery. The two kinds is now believedto belongto Platygonuscompres- of large teethwere doubtlessthose of the mam- sus and is still preservedin the Academy.] moth (now so-called) and the mastodon. Al- June20, 1806. (Proc.) Wistar is to commu- thoughthere is littleevidence that he, personally, nicatewith Jefferson regarding bones supposedto collectedor studied fossil bones, Dr. Brown de- be in New Orleans. [No particularsare given. serves noticein paleontologicalhistory because he Referenceis probablyto the Goforthcollection, was instrumentalin obtainingsome notablespeci- whichwas takento New Orleans by Ash at about mens for the Society. See also Nov. 1, 1805,and this time.] immediatelyfollowing entries; also Oct. 17, 1806.] Sept. 19, 1806. (Proc.) "Dr. Wistar reported, Mar. 7, 1804. (Ms.) W. Lewis, Campbell that Jeffersonwould attend to the bones found Co., Va., to Thomas Jefferson.Donates a bone in Ohio." [Probablythe same collectionas that and some rocksto the Society. concernedin the precedingentry.] Sept. 17, 1804. (Ms.) TristramPatton, Sec- Oct. 3, 1806. (Proc.) "Tooth of the Mam- ond Creek, Monroe Co., Pa., to William Hem- moth from Montgomerycounty, Virginia, ex- bel, Jr. Respectingfossil bones intendedfor a hibitedby Dr. Barton." [Details of this discovery museum. seem to have been lost. It is not cited in later April 9, 1805. (Ms.) Samuel Brown, Lex- compilations.] ington,Ky., to John Vaughan. Brown will for- Oct. 17, 1806. (Proc.) Brown's and Jeffer- ward bones to the Society. [See below.] about mammoth[mastodon] bones April 27, 1805. (Ms.) William Bartram, son's letters and Vaughan, who are Kingsessing,to . Bones to be forwarded referredto Wistar, Peale, to [Jeffersonat] Monticello. to correspondwith Dr. Goforth. [Wistar wrote Nov. 1, 1805. (Proc.) Donation "from Dr. to Goforthon Dec. 1, 1806. The letterwas pub- Sam Brown of Lexington,Kentucky, Cranium, lishedin The Navigator,1814, p. 201, and is copied toothand pieces of bone foundin Saltpetrecave." in Jillson,1936, p. 39. "Brown" is Dr. Samuel Nov. 4, 1805. (Ms.) Samuel Brown,Lexing- Brown of Lexington. "Vaughan" is John ton, Ky., to Thomas Jefferson. Skull and jaw Vaughan, frequentlymentioned in the recordsbe- of unknownanimal sent to the Society. cause he cared for much of the Society's corre- Dec. 20, 1805. (Proc.) "From Dr. Brown of spondence,although he apparentlyhad no other Kentucky,the head bones of a new animal found personalinterest in fossilvertebrates.] in Saltpetrecave. . . . The cave bones referredto Nov. 21, 1806. (Proc.) Part of a mammoth Dr. Wistar." [See next entry.] [mastodon?] jaw is donated. [No particulars.] Jan. 17, 1806. (Proc.) The skeletonof a re- Jan. 23, 1807. (Ms.) William Goforth,Cin- cent Asiatic elephantis to be placed in the same cinnati,Ohio, to Thomas Jefferson.Details con- room with Mr. Peale's "mammoth"[mastodon]. cerningmam"moth [mastodon] bones. [This is [Thus the mastodonskeleton was still in the So- the lettergiven withoutdate in The Navigator, ciety'sHall althoughthe Peale Museum in Inde- 1814, and Jillson,1936. It has been discussedon pendenceHall had been establishedand the mas- a previouspage of thispaper.] todonwas latermoved there, see May 7, 1802,and Feb. 25, 1807. (Ms.) Thomas Jefferson, Dec. 6, 1811.] Washington,D.C., to Caspar Wistar. Encloses "Dr. Wistar reportedthat the Cave bones 'prove letterfrom Goforth and proposesto obtaina col- to be the Bones of the Head of the Pecary of S. lection for the Society from Big Bone Lick. America,as describedby Daubenton in Buffon's [This famousletter has been printedin Jefferson's works.'" [These are the bones concernedin pre- collectedwritings and frequentlycopied, e.g., Os-

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 180 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON born, 1935, Jillson,1936. The enclosurewas the archives." [These observationswere includedin letterof the precedingentry.] Harlan's Fauna Americana,1825. "Osteopera" is Mar. 6, 1807. (Proc.) Jeffersonproposes to stilla puzzle. It was apparentlyan aguti,but no obtain mammoth[mastodon] bones for the So- other fossil aguti has ever been found in the ciety. A list of those wanted has been sent by United States. On the otherhand, the explana- Wistar. Dr. Goforth'sletter to Jeffersonis re- tion thatit was a recent,imported specimen is not ceived. [As notedon a previouspage, the upshot entirelyprobable.] of thesenegotiations was that Clark,not Goforth, June 15, 1825. (Ms.) Jer. Van Rensselaer, was employedto make a collectionat Big Bone New York, to John Vaughan. The New York Lick and that a large numberof specimenswere Lyceumforwards a cast ofthe jaw ofMegatherium dulyreceived by Jeffersonand by the Society.] to the Society. [This was undoubtedlythe jaw Feb. 3, 1809. (Proc.) Wistar read a paper from Skidaway Island, Georgia, the firstsurely on bones procuredby Jeffersonfrom Big Bone identifiedMegatherium from North America.] Lick. Referredto Barton,Peale, and McDowell. Dec. 2, 1825. (Proc.) Dr. [Samuel] Colhoun [The Clark Collection. Wistar's manuscriptwas presentsa drawingof a mammothto the Society. lost,see next entry. J. McDowell was Councillor Jan. 31, 1829. (Ms.) William Cooper, Phila- of the Society.] delphia, to John Vaughan. Mr. Doifeville of Mar. 17, 1809. (Proc.) Wistar's manuscript Cincinnatihas Megalonyx bones and it is hoped has been lost and an advertisementfor its return that the Society may acquire them. [I find no is to be insertedin a public paper. [The manu- evidence that this was done and no subsequent scriptwas not recovered.] referenceto thesebones.] June 21, 1811. (Proc.) Dr. [Benjamin May 20, 1831. (Proc.) Hays read a paper Smith] Barton exhibited a Megatheriumclaw on mastodons. Referred to Lea, Pickering, froma cave at the foot of Cumberlandmountain Wetherill. in Tennessee. [Megatheriumis not reportedfrom June 17, 1831. (Proc.) Hays' paper reported Tennesseein recentcompilations. This may have forpublication. [Published 1834.] been Megalonyxor Mylodon,but the specimenis Sept. 16, 1831. (Proc.) Casts of mammoth not now known.] bones to be given to the Academy of Natural Dec. 6, 1811. (Proc.) Peale's Museum has Sciences. been entirelyremoved [from the Society's Hall] Oct. 29, 1831. (Ms.) Richard C. Taylor of to the State House [IndependenceHall]. Peale's the Athenaeum,Philadelphia, to John Vaughan. requestto cancel his lease referredto Patterson, Harlan is to have access to fossilsin the Society's Vaughan, and Collins. [In March, 1812, the rooms. [The Athenaeumthen occupied part of rooms were leased to Mr. Sully and Peale's lease the Hall.] terminated.] Dec. 2, 1831. (Proc.) Dr. Hays invitedto Dec. 2, 1817. (Proc.) George Chambers, exhibit mastodon bones borrowedfrom various Chambersburg,Pa., to JohnVaughan. Forwards museums. A paper by him referredto commit- bones requestedby the Society. [Proboscidean tee. remains had been found near Chambersburgat Dec. 16, 1831. (Proc.) The bones-exhibited least as early as 1806.. This doubtlessrefers to by Hays with remarksby Harlan. Hays' paper a later findof the same sort.] to be published. Dec. 20, 1817. (Proc.) G. G. Bogert, New July20, 1832. (Proc.) A donationof bones York, to John Vaughan. Encloses documents from Mr. Bry of Arkansas referredto Harlan, relativeto fossil"elephants." Pickering,Horner. [See next entry.] Aug. 20, 1824. (Proc.) Dr. DeKay [of the Sept. 21, 1832. (Proc.) Committeeon Bry's New York Lyceum] to be permittedcasts of the bones reportedby letter. Bones referredto Har- Society'sMegalonyx bones. lan for description. [These were the firstknown Jan. 21, 1825. (Proc.) Le Sueur permitted remainsof Basilosaurus or "Zeuglodon."] to draw such bonesas have alreadybeen described Mar. 15, 1833. (Proc.) Moulds of mastodon in the Transactions. bones have been made. Six sets of casts ordered. April 1, 1825. (Proc.) Harlan read a paper Oct. 4, 1833. (Proc.) Sets of these casts to on a fossil tapir, a hare, and a new genus of be sent to Paris and London. Curatorsto report rodents, Osteopera. Ordered "enrolled in the on distributionof casts.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 181

April 18, 1834. (Proc.) Curatorsreport that of the materialsthat were at some time in the mastodon casts cost $30 and are ready for ex- Society's collections. changeor sale at thatprice. Fishes: B. The Collectionof VertebrateFossils of the Carcharodon negalodon. 2 teeth. Ricehope AmericanPhilosophical Society Estate, Cooper River,South Carolina. Presented by Thomas Jefferson.The Society is known to Thanks to the effortsof Jeffersonand of numer- have had other shark teeth,but these were not ous othersbefore and afterhim, the Society had recognizedin the Academy'spresent collection. in the early nineteenthcentury a collection of Saurocephalus lanciformnis.Jaw fragments. Americanvertebrate fossils that was probablythe Type. Missouri River. Collectedby Lewis and largestand most nearlycomplete of any then in Clark. existence. When its cabinetwas started,the So- Unidentified. Vertebra. Paris. ciety was the only institutionin America where permanent and satisfactorycare for scientific Reptiles: specimenswas provided. By about 1842, how- The Societyis knownto have had a numberof ever, there were numerousother institutionsfor fossilreptiles, mainly from the late Mesozoic and the storage,study, and exhibitionof such speci- early Tertiaryof New Jersey,but these have not mens and it became increasinglyevident that the been identifiedin the Academy'srecords. ratherembarrassing function of curatorshipof so bulky a collectionwas not necessaryto the So- Mammals: cietyand thatit interferedwith the primaryaims Carnivores: of a nationalorganization for the promotionand Ursus americanus. Skull. A cave in Ken- diffusionof useful knowledge. In Philadelphia tucky. the Academyof Natural Sciences had taken over Panthera [or "Felis"] atrox. Jaw. Type. the more local and specializedfunctions of a mu- Natchez, Miss. Collection of William Henry seum and researchinstitution, and the collections Huntington,presented to the American Philo- of the Societywere depositedin the Academyto- sophical Society in 1836. Although not so re- ward the end of 1849. corded,it is probablethat the Society'sspecimens Approximately160 yearshave elapsed since the of Equus complicatusfrom Natchez were also part Society began its collectionof fossil vertebrates of the Huntingtoncollection, which is also be- and in thatperiod the vicissitudesof timeand the lieved to have includedmastodon specimens, not vagaries of individualshave caused the loss of identifiablein the Academy's records. still sur- manyspecimens. Others,although they Edentates: vive, have become dissociated from records of Megalonyx their origin and can only be shown by circum- jeffersoniii. Foot and limb bones. Type. West stantial evidence ever to have belonged to the Virginia. Society. Doubtless many in this categoryhave Cetaceans: been overlookedand it is likelythat this was the Basilosau4ruscetoides. 4 vertebrae. "Ala- source of numerous specimensin the Academy bama." "Dr. S. G. Morton." Not catalogued that are not labeled as comingfrom the Society. as from the Society. There is evidentlymuch The followingis a summarylist of specimensnow confusion,but this lot, cataloguedunder numbers in the Academy and known to have come from 12944 and 12949, either is or includes the first the Society's collection,prepared by me fromthe specimensof Basilosaurus,sent by JudgeH. Bry Academy's catalogues and other records, made to the Society in 1832 and fromthe Ouachita or available throughthe kindnessof Dr. Edwin Col- Washita River in Louisiana (not Alabama). Al- bert and Mr. Robert Chaffee. The systematic thoughthis materialwas the author's hypodigm names are as far as possible those now in use, forthe genus, Basilosaurus, it does not includethe althoughactual reidentificationof the specimens technicaltypes of the species B. cetoides. has not been attemptedand doubtlesswould re- Proboscideans: sult in changes. In the lightof the dates,the list Since the Society is authoritativelysaid (by is impressiveand it should be emphasizedthat it Wistar and others) to have had almostevery bone includes only a portion,probably less than half, of the mastodonskeleton by 1808, at latest,it is

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 182 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON obviousthat the greater part of thiscollection was Symbos cavifrons. 5 molars. Natchez, Miss. lost or is not now recordedas having belonged 1 metacarpal. Big Bone Lick. Clark-Jefferson to the Society. collection. Mammutainericanum. 3 mandibles,19 molars, Bison antiquts. Horn core. Type. Big Bone and 1 patella from Big Bone Lick, at least in Lick. partfrom the Clark Collectionmade forJefferson, Bison latifrons. Horn core and base of skull. includingHays' types of "Mastodon jeffersonii," Type. "Big Bone Lick"-really about ten miles "M. cuvieri,"and "M. godmani." 1 skull,"Ohio," fromthe lick, itself. (Presented by Dr. Samuel perhaps fromBig Bone Lick, Kentucky. 1 jaw Brown,but not so recorded.) One molar. Sus- withoutlocality data, type of "M. collinsii" of quehannaRiver near Pittston,Luzerne Co., Pa. Hays. 10 tusks, 19 mandibles,2 upper tooth Bison sp. Two vertebrae. Big Bone Lick. series,83 molars,and 27 vertebraefrom Benton County,Missouri. 3 molars from Pittston,Lu- REFERENCES zerne Co., Pennsylvania. (Most of the material All of the publications here cited (and a great many fromBenton Co. was not acquired until 1844.) more) have been consulted either by or for the author in preparing this paper. This is in no sense an adequate Stegomastodontchapmnani. Molar. Type. Lo- bibliography of the subject but it includes most of the calityunknown. importantliterature, whether or not it is explicitly cited Mannonteus primigenius. 11 molarsfrom Big in the text. Where there is a choice of editions or Bone Lick (probablyClark Collection). 7 molars sources, accessibility has been considered. For instance most biographical notices are cited from the concise and and 1 mandiblefrom Benton Co., Mo. 4 molars widely available Dictionary of American Biography,which withoutlocality date. Most of these specimens, contains referencesto other more detailed or older sources perhapsall, will probablyprove to belongto other some of which were consulted without being listed here. of mammothswhen restudied. Similarly Goode's important historical studies are cited species in the collected edition of 1901 although they appeared Stegodon insignis. Two molar fragmentsand separately at various earlier dates. When two dates are a cast ofthe cranium. SiwalikHills, India. From given, that in parenthesesis the date of the reading of a Rev. JamesR. Campbell. paper or of its first more obscure publication and that Part of a molar. Si- without parentheses is the date of an available printed Stegodon elephantoides. version. The best general bibliographyis in Hay, 1902, walik Hills, India. Rev. JamesR. Campbell. although it is very incompletefor this early period. Jill- Unidentifiedproboscideans. A tusk fragment son, 1936, has an excellent bibliographyof Big Bone Lick, and part of a rib from the Siwalik Hills, the most important single early fossil locality, and Osborn, 1936, has a nearly exhaustive bibliography of literature former(probably also the latter,without record) on the mastodon, the most important early fossil dis- fromRev. JamesR. Campbell. covery.

Perissodactyls: ALLEN, J. A. 1876. The American bison, living and ex- Equus cornplicatuts.Molar. Paratype. Nat- tinct. Meem.Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard -Univ., IV, No. 10. [Includes an excellent summary of the his- chez, Miss. Two molars. Pittston,Luzerne Co., tory of discovery of fossil bisons.] Pa. Four bones. Big Bone Lick. American Philosophical Society. 1884. Early proceed- Equus sp. Partial mandible. Natchez, Miss. ings . . from the manuscript minutes of its meetings, from 1744 to 1838. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., Artiodactyls: XXII, pt. III, No. 119.* [The principal source for Platygonttscornpressus. Skull and jaws. Type the early historyof the Society, and one of the main sources for the early history of American paleon- of Euchoerus nacrops. SaltpetreCave, Kentucky. tology.] From Dr. Samuel Brown. -. 1940. List of papers and books in the society's Hippopotamutsamphibius. Molar. Val d'Arno, publicationsclassified according to subject. Pamphlet. Tuscany. Philadelphia. ANDERSON, ALEXANDER. 1804. See Bewick, 1804. Hippopotanu,is sivalensis. Molar. Siwalik ANNAN, ROBERRT. (1785) 1793. Account of a large Hills, India. animal found near Hudson's River. Mem. Amer. Cervalcesscotti. Skull-Type-and two antler Acad. Arts Sci., II, part 1, pp. 160-164. [A masto- bases and fourother bones. Big Bone Lick. The doni,but Annan did not attempt an identification.] typeis surelyand theothers are probablyfrom the * So designated on the jacket, and this is the real serial Clark-Jeffersoncollection. order of printing, but the text heading has "Vol. I. Part I." and the title page has no serial designation. A Bo8theriumibombifrons. Skull. Big Bone "Vol. I. No. 1." was printed in 1838 and of course has Lick. Clark-Jeffersoncollection. nothing to do with this later reprintingof older minutes.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 183

Archives Canadiennes. (1905) 1907. Sommaires des BURPEE, LAWRENCE J. 1926. The Oxford encyclopedia documents 'a Paris accompagne d'un index. Rapport of Canadian history. 1 Vol. London. [Article on Arch. Canadiennes, An. 1905, I, VI Partie, pp. 1-668. Longueuil, etc.] [Also an English edition,but this has a misprintand CATESBY, MARK. 1743. The natural historyof Carolina, an ambiguous translation in a pertinentpassage.] Florida and the Bahama Islands. Vol. II. London. ASHE, THOMAS. 1806. Memoirs of mammothand vari- COLLIN, NICHOLAS. (1789) 1793. An essay on those in- ous other extraordinary and stupendous bones, in- quiries in natural philosophy, which at present are cognita, or nondescriptanimals found in the vicinity most beneficialto the United States of North America. of the Ohio. 1 vol. Liverpool. [A rehash of most Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., III, pp. iii-xxxvii. [Read of the previous publicationson Big Bone Lick fossils; April 3, 1789; recommendationto gather the bones of Ashe's collection was stolen from Dr. Goforth.] the "mahmot," p. xxiv.] ATWATER, CALEB. 1820. On some ancient human bones, COLLINSON, PETER. (1767) 1768a. An account of some etc., with a notice of the bones of the mastodon or very large fossil teeth, found in North America. mammoth,and of various shells found in Ohio and Phil. T'rans. Roy. Soc. London, LVII, pp. 464-467. the West. Amler. Jour. Sci., (1) II, pp. 242-246. . (1767) 1768b. Sequel to the foregoing account of BALL, SYDNEY H. 1941. The mining of gems and orna- the large fossil teeth. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, mental stones by American Indians. Bull. Bur. Amer. LVII, pp. 468469. Ethnol., No. 120, pp. xi--xii, 1-77. [Fossils men- COLTON, HAROLD SELLERS. 1909. Peale's Museum. Pop. tioned as ornaments.] Sci. IlMonthly,LXXV, pp. 221-238. BARTON, BENJAMIN SMITH. 1804. [James Wright's COOPER, WILLIAM. 1824. On the remains of the Mega- letter of 1762 to John Bartram.] Philadelphia Med. therium recently discovered in Georgia. Ann. Lyc. Phys. Jour.,I, pp. 154-159. [Letter falsely attributed Nat. Hist. New York, I, pp. 114-124. to James Logan. See copy of original, published in * 1828. Further discovery of fossil bones in Georgia, present paper.] and remarks on their identity with those of the . 1805. Letter to M. Lacepede, of Paris, on the Mlegatherium of Paraguay. Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. natural history of America. Tilloch's Phil. Mag., New York, II, pp. 267-270. XII, pp. 97-103, 204-211. . 1831. Notices of Big Bone Lick. MlonthlyAmer. -. 1814. Archaeologiae Americanae telluris collec- Jour. Geol. Nat. Sci., I, pp. 158-174, 205-217. tanea et specimina, or collections with specimens for . 1833. A report on some fossil bones of the Mega- a series of memoirs on certain extinct animals and lonyx from Virginia, with a notice of such parts of vegetables of North America. 1 vol. Philadelphia. the skeleton of this animal as have been hithertodis- BELLIN, N. 1744. Carte de la Louisiane cours du Mis- covered, and remarks on the affinitieswhich they sissippi et pais voisins dediee a M. le Comntede Maure- indicate. Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. New York, III, pp. pas, Ministre et Secretaire d'Etat Commandeur des 166-173. Ordres du Roy. Paris. -, J. A. SMITH, AND J..E. DE KAY. 1831. Report of BEWICK, THOMAS. 1804. A general historyof the quad- Messrs. Cooper, J. A. Smith, and DeKay to the rupeds. 1st American edition. 1 vol. New York. Lyceum of Natural History on a collection of fossil [Illustrated by Alexander Anderson; has a woodcut bones disinterred at Big Bone Lick, Kentucky, in of the mounted Peale mastodon.] September, 1830, and recentlybrought to New York. Separately issued and in BLUMENBACH, JOHANN FRIEDRICH. 1797. Abbildungen Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XX, pp. 370-372. naturhistorischerGegenstande. Heft II, Nos. 11-20. CRAMER, ZADOK. 1806-1824. Gottingen. ["Ohio-Incognitun.''] [Various notes on Big Bone Lick.] The Navigator, 1806, pp. 41-42; . 1799. Handbuch der Naturgeschichte. 6ste Aufl. 1808, pp. 69-70; 1811, pp. 117-120; 1814, pp. 114, 256-262; 1 Vol. Gottingen. ["Mammutt ohioticum."] [Also 1817,pp. 104,225-230; 1818,-pp. 101,222-227; 1824, in 7th ed., 1803.] pp. 86, 201-206. BLUMER, GEORGE. 1929. Benjamin Smith Barton. Dic- CROGHAN, GEORGE. (1765) 1831. [Journal.] See tionary of AmiiericantBiography, II, pp. 17-18. Featherstonhaugh,G. W., 1831. BRAGG, LAURA M. 1923. The birth of the museum idea CUVIER, GEORGES L. C. F. D. 1796. Memoire sur les in America. Charleston Mus. Quart., I, 150th anni- especes d'elephans tant vivantes que fossiles. Mag. versary numnber,pp. 3-12. [Claims Charleston Li- (or Rev.) Entcycl.,an IV [1796], III, No. 12, pp. 440- brary Society's Museum as oldest in America, but 445. cabinet of Am. Philos. Soc. was older.] . 1799. Memoire sur les especes d'elephans vivantes BUCKLAND, WILLIAM. 1831. On the occurrence of the et fossiles. iT/em. Inst. Nat. Sci. Arts, Sci. Math. remains of elephants and other quadrupeds in the Phys., II, An VII [1799], pp. 1-22. ["Elephas cliffsof frozen mud in Eschscholtz Bay, withinBering aimericanus."] Strait, and in other distant parts of the shores of the . 1804. Sur le megalonix,animal de la familledes Arctic seas. Beecher's Narrative of a Voyage to paresseux,mais de la taillede boeuf,dont les ossemens the Pacific and Behring's Strait . . . on H. M. S. ont ete decouvertes en Virginie, en 1796. Ann. Mus. Blossom, Appendix, pp. 593-612. Hist. Nat., V, pp. 358-376. BUFFON, GEORGES Louis LECLERC DE. 1778. Histoire 1806a. Sur les elephans vivans et fossiles. Ann. naturelle, generale et particuliere. Suppl., V, Des Mius. Hist. Nat., VIII, pp. 1-58,93-155, 249-269. epoques de la nature. [On PI. IV, a mastodon tooth 1806b. Sur le grand mastodonte. Ann. Mus. Hist. from Big Bone Lick sent to Buffon by Collinson; Nat., VIII, pp. 270-312. there are numerous later editions.] 1806c. Sur differentesdents du genre des masto-

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 184 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

dontes, mais d'especes moindres que celles de l'Ohio, FISK, DANIEL MOORE. 1932. Richard Harlan. Diction- trouvees en plusieurs lieux des deux continents. Ann. ary of American Biography, VII, pp. 273-274. Mus. Hist. Nat., VIII, pp. 401-424. . 1934. Samuel George Morton. Dictionary of * 1808. Sur les os fossiles de ruminanstrouves dans American Biography, XIII, pp. 265r-266. les terrains meubles. Ann. Mus. Hist. Nat., XII, pp. FOSTER, J. W. 1838. Organic remains. 2nd Ann. Rept. 333-398. [Figures Bison latifrons as an aurochs.] Geol. Surv. Ohio, pp. 79-83. [Castoroides.] . 1812, 1821-1824, 1825, 1834-1836. Recherches sur 1939. Head of Mastodon giganteum. Amer. Jour. les ossemens fossiles de quadrupedes. [1st ed., 4 Sci., XXXVI, pp. 189-191. vols.; 2nd ed., 5 vols. in 7; 3rd ed., 5 vols. in 7; FRANKLIN, BENJAMIN. (1767, 1768, etc.) 1906. The life 4th ed., 10 vols. text, 2 vols. plates.] Paris. and writings of Benjamin Franklin, edited by Albert DANIEL, FRANCOIS. 1867. La famille C. de Lery. In, Henry Smyth. New York. [Or any other of the Nos gloires nationales ou histoire des principales many editions; this contains both the Croghan and familles du Canada (2 vols., Montreal), Vol. II, pp. Chappe letters, Vol. 5, pp. 39 and 92; the Jared 67-240. Sparks edition has also been used in this study.] DARLINGTON,WILLIAM M. 1893. Christopher Gist's GODMAN, J. D. 1825. Description of the os hyoides of journals, with historical,geographical and ethnological the mastodon. Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, notes, and biographies of his contemporaries. 1 vol. IV, pp. 67-72. Pittsburgh. . 1825, 1826, 1828. American natural history. 3 DAUBENTON, LOUIS JEAN MARIE. (1762) 1764. Memoire vols. Philadelphia. sur des os et des dents remarquables par leur gran- 1830. Description of a new genus and new species deur. Mllm. A cad. Roy. Sci., Paris, An. 1762, pp. of extinct mammiferous quadruped. Trans. Amer. 206-229. Philos. Soc., (2) III, pp. 478-485. [Tetracaulodon DE KAY, JAMES E. 1842. Zoology of New York, or the miastodontoideumi.] New York fauna. Parts I, III, and IV. GOLDFUSS, AUGUST. 1845. Der Schadelbau des Mosa- DIAZ DEL CASTILLO, BERNAL. (1568) 1927. The true saurus, durch Beschreibung einer neuen Art dieser history of the conquest of Mexico. Translated by Gattung erlautet. Nova Acta Acad. Caes. Leop.- Maurice Keatinge. 1 vol. New York. [There are Carol., XXI, pp. 173-200. many other editions of this classic work. Because GOODE, GEORGE BROWN. (1888) 1901a. Museum-history of its greater accessibility,the citation is of a recent and museums of history. Ann. Rept. Smithsonian reprintof a translation first published in London in Inst. for 1897, Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., Pt. II, pp. 65- 1800; the passage pertinentto this study is almost at 81. [This and the following articles are historical the end of Chapter VI of the firstbook or part and reviews rich in otherwise obscure information,but is on p. 143 of the 1,927reprint.] too general to give many details about paleontology.] DUDLEY, J. (1706) 1855. [Letter to the Rev. Cotton -. (1890) 1901b. The origin of the national scien- Mather, D.D.] In Warren, 1855, pp. 196-197. tificand educational institutionsof the United States. DUNBAR, WILLIAM. 1809. Letter to Thomas Jefferson Ann. Rept. Smithsonian Inst. for 1897, Rept. U. S. relating to fossil bones, and to lunar rainbows ob- Nat. Mus., Pt. II, pp. 265-354. served west of the Mississippi. Trans. Amer. Philos. (1886) 1901c. The beginnings of natural history Soc. (o.s.), VI, pp. 55-58. in America. Ann. Rept. Smithsonian Inst. for 1897, William DURALDE, MARTIN. 1809. Communication to Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., Pt. II, pp. 357-406. bones, etc. found in the Dunbar relative to fossil (1887) 1901d. The beginnings of American west of the Mississippi. Trans. countryof Apelousas, science. The third century. Ann. Rept. Smithsonian Phil. Soc. (o.s.), VI, pp. 55-58. Amer. Inst. for 1897, Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., Pt. II, pp. EASTMAN, CHARLES R. 1911. Triassic fishes of Con- 409-466. ["The third century" is 1782-1887.] necticut. Connecticut Geol. Nat. Hist. Surv., Bull. GUETTARD, JEAN -TIENNE. (1752) 1756a. Memoire dans No. 18. [Includes historical notes and revision of lequel on compare le Canada a la Suisse, par rapport some of the species described by the Redfields.] a ses mineraux. Mem. Acad. Roy. Sci., Paris, An EDWARDS, TIMOTHY. (1788) 1793. A description of a horn or bone, lately found in the river Chemung, or 1752, pp. 189-220. on Tyoga, a western branch of the Susquehanna, about . (1752) 1756b. Suite du memoire dans lequel twelve miles from Tyoga Point. Alem. Amer. Acad. compare le Canada 'a la Suisse, par rapport 'a ses Arts Sci., II, Pt. 1, p. 164. [Probably a mastodon mineraux. Seconde partie. Description des mineraux tusk.] de la Suisse. Mem. Acad. Roy. Sci., Paris, An 1752, FEATHERSTONHAUGH,G. W. 1831. Rhinoceroides al- pp. 323-360. leghaniensis. Monthly Atner. Jour. Geol. Nat. Sci., HARLAN, RICHARD. 1823. Observations on fossil ele- I, pp. 10-12. [Cited as a curiosity-the "fossil" was phant teeth of North America. Jour. Acad. Nat. not organic.] Sci. Philadelphia, III, pp. 65-67. . 1831. The journal of Col. Croghan. Monthly 1824a. On a new fossil genus of the order Enalio Amer. Jour. Geol. Nat. Sci., I, pp. 257-272. [The Sauri (of Conybeare). Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila- journal has been printedrepeatedly, with some varia- delphia, III, pp. 331-337. tions; this appears to have been the first publication . 1824b. On an extinct species of crocodile not and to have been taken from the original journal, before described; and some observations on the which was in Featherstonhaugh's possession.] geology of west Jersey. Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila- FERLAND, JEAN BAPTISTE ANTOINE. 1882. Cours d'his- delphia, IV, pp. 15-24. toire du Canada 1534-1759. 2 vols. Quebec. . 1825a. Fauna Americana; being a description of

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 185

the mammiferousanimals inhabitingNorth America. from the states east of the Mississippi River and 1 vol. Philadelphia. from the Canadian provinces east of longitude 95?. * 1825b. Notice of the plesiosaurus and other fossil Carnegie Inst. Washington, Pub. No. 322. [This and reliquiae from the state of New Jersey. Jour. Acad. the following volume contain many data on early Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, IV, pp. 231-236. fossil discoveries and sites.] * 1828. On the examination of the large bones dis- . 1924. The Pleistocene of the middle region of interred at the mouth of the Mississippi River and North America and its vertebratedanimals. Carnegie exhibited in the city of Baltimore, Jan. 22, 1828. Inst. Washington, Pub. No. 322A. Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XIV, pp. 186-187. . 1929 and 1930. Second bibliography and cata- . 1831a. Description of the fossil bones of the logue of the fossil Vertebrata of North America. Megalonyx discovered in "White Cave," Kentucky. Carnegie Inst. Washington, Pub. No. 390. Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, VI, pp. 269-288. HAYS, ISAAC.* 1830. Description of a fragmentof the 1831b. Description of the jaws, teeth,and clavicle head of a new fossil animal, discovered in a marl pit, of the Megaloniyx laqueatus. Monthly Amer. Jour. near Moorestown, New Jersey. Trans. Amer. Philos. Geol. Nat. Sci., I, pp. 74-76. Soc., III, pp. 471-477. [Saurodon.] - 1834a. On some new species of fossil saurians * 1834. Descriptions of the inferior maxillary bones found in America. Rept. British Assoc. Adv. Sci., of mastodons with remarks on the genus Tetra- 3rd meeting, Cambridge, 1833, p. 440. caulodon (Godman). Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., IV, 1834b. Critical notices of various organic remains pp. 317-339. hithertodiscovered in North America. Trans. Geol. . 1841a. Notice of the presence in Philadelphia of Soc. Peninsylvania,I, pt. I, pp. 46-112. a collection of fossil bones, brought to the city by . 1834c. Notice of fossil bones found in the Terti- Mr. Albert Koch, of St. Louis. Proc. Amer. Philos. ary formation of the State of Louisana. Trans. Soc., II, pp. 102-103. Amer. Philos. Soc., IV, pp. 397-403. . 1841b. Remarks on a new variety of Tetra- . 1843d. Notice of the discovery of the remains of caulodon. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., II, pp. 105-106. the Ichthyosaurutsin Missouri, N. A. Trans. Amer. [Given by Hay as part of my 1841a, his 1841A.] Phil. Soc., IV, pp. 405-409. . 1842. [No Title.] Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., II, . 1834e. Announcementof the findingof Ichthyo- pp. 183-184. [Cited under "Owen, --" in Amerf. saurus missourienisisand Basilosautrus. Bull. Soc. Philos. Soc. list of publications; discusses Owen's Geol. France, (1) IV, p. 124. theory that the presence of tusks in mastodon lower 1835. Medical and physical researches: or original jaws is a juvenile character.] memoirs in medicine, surgery, physiology, geology, HILDRETH, SAMUEL PRESCOTT. 1837. Miscellaneous ob- zoology, and comparative anatomy. 1 vol. Phila- servations made during a tour in May, 1835, to the delphia. [A compilation of essentially distinct falls of the Cuyahoga, near Lake Erie; extracted papers, the particulars of the ten most directly from the diary of a naturalist. Amer. Jour. Sci., paleontological of which are given by Hay, 1902, as (1) XXXI, pp. 1-84. [Usually attributedto J. W. Harlan, 1835A-J.] Foster. Fossil beaver, Castoroides.] 1839a. [Letter regarding Basilosaurus and Batra- HITCHCOCK, EDWARD. 1836. Ornithichnology. Descrip- chotheriutm.] Bull. Soc. Geol. France, X, pp. 89-90. tion of the footmarks of birds (Ornithichnites) on- . 1839b. On the discovery of the Basilosaurus and New Red sandstone in Massachusetts. Amer. Jour. the Batrachiosaurus. London and Edinburgh Philos. Sci., (1) XXIX, pp. 307-340. Mag. Jour. Sci., XIV, p. 302. -. 1837a. Ornithichnites in Connecticut. A m e r. 1840. A letter from Dr. Harlan addressed to the Jour. Sci., (1) XXXI, pp. 174-175. presidenton the discovery of the remains of Basilo- . 1837b. Fossil footsteps in sandstone and gray- saurus, or Zeuglodon. Trans. Geol. Soc. London, wacke. Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XXXII, pp. 174-176. (2) VI, pp. 67-68. . 1841. Final report on the geology of Massa- 1841. Description of the bones of a fossil animal chusetts. Vol. II. Northampton. of the order Edentata. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., II, HORNER, WILLIAM E.t 1840a. Note of the remains of No. 20, pp. 109-111. [Dated 1842 by Hay.] the mastodon, and some other extinct animals, col- % 1842a. Bones of the Orycterotherium. Amer. lected together in St. Louis, Missouri. Proc. Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XLII, p. 392. Philos. Soc., I, No. 13, pp. 279-282. [Reprinted in . 1842b. Notice of two new fossil mammals from Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XL, pp. 56-59, 1841; this copy Brunswick canal, Georgia; with observations on is listed by Hay as a separate publication, Horner, some of the fossil quadrupeds of the United States. 1841A.] Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XLIII, pp. 141-144. . 1840b. Remarks on the dental system of the . 1842c. Description of a new extinct species of mastodon, with an account of some lower jaws in dolphin from Maryland. 2nd Bull. Proc. Nat. Inist., Mr. Koch's collection. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., I, pp. 195-196. ["Delphinus," Lophocetus calvertensis.] No. 14, pp. 307-308. [Listed by Hay as Horner, . 1842d. [No title.] Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila- delphia, 1842, pp. 189-190. [List of bones from the * According to the records of the Am. Philos. Soc. the Brunswick canal, see 1842b.] paper listed by Hay, 1902, as Hays, 1842B, was issued in HAY, OLIVER PERRY. 1902. Bibliography and catalogue 1843. of the fossil Vertebrata of North America. U. S. tAccording to the records of the Amer. Philos. Soc. Geol. Surv., Bull. No. 179. the papers listed by Hay, 1902, as Horner, 1842A, and . 1923. The Pleistocene and its vertebratedanimals Horner and Hays, 1842A, were issued in 1843.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 186 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

1841B; according to the Amer. Philos. Soc. this num- further revised, supposed 5th edition, Dublin, 1843, ber was issued in 1840.] is usually cited, as by Hay.] . 1841. On the dental system of the mastodon. . 1842. On the genus Tetracaulodon. Proc. Geol. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., II, pp. 6-7. [Omitted in Soc. London, II, pp. 714-716. Amer. Philos. Soc. list of publications.] KOTZEBUE, OTTO VON. (1816) 1821. A voyage of dis- HUMPHREYS, WILLIAM JACKSON. 1935. William C. covery into the South Sea and Beering's Straits in Redfield. Dictionary of American Biography, XV, the years 1815-18. 3 vols. London. [Discovery of pp. 441-442. mammothremains, Vol. I, pp. 219-220, entryfor Aug. HUNTER, WILLIAM. (1768) 1769. Observations on the 8, 1816.] bones commonly supposed to be elephant's bones, LAMBE, L. M. 1904. Progress of vertebratepaleontology which have been found near the river Ohio, in in Canada. Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada, 2nd ser., X, America. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lonidon, 1768, Sect. IV, pp. 13-56. LVIII, pp. 34-45. LEWIS, MERIWETHER, AND WILLIAM CLARK.t 1814. His- JEFFERSON, THOMAS. (1782) 1825. Notes on the State tory of the expedition under the command of Cap- of Virginia. 1 vol. Philadelphia. [Written in 1781, tains Lewis and Clark, to the sources of the Missouri, revised in 1782, first privately printed in Paris in thence across the Rocky Mountains and down the 1784, then prepared for press "in their original form River Columbia to the Pacific Ocean. Performed and language" in 1787; the editionconsulted is that of during the years 1804-5-6. By order of the govern- H. C. Carey and I. Lea, Philadelphia, 1825; as re- ment of the United States. Prepared for the press gards the pertinentand quoted passages, they may all by Paul Allen, Esquire. 2 vols. Philadelphia. be taken to date from 1782 even though other, ap- [Various faulty or spurious accounts had been pub- pended passages bear dates as late as 1801.] lished in 1806-1813, but this was the first authentic (1797) 1799. A memoir on the discovery of cer- publication; the rough journals were turned into a tain bones of a quadruped of the clawed kind in the running narrative by Nicholas Biddle and Allen's westernparts of Virginia. Trans. A4m1er.Philos. Soc. work was purely editorial.] (o.s.), IV, pp. 246-260. - . (1804-1806) 1904-1905. Original journals of the JILLSON, WILLARD ROUSE. 1936. Big Bone Lick. An Lewis and Clark expedition 1804-1806. Edited with outline of its history geology and paleontology to introduction, notes, and index, by Reuben Gold which is added an annotated bibliography of 207 Thwaites. 7 vols. and atlas. New York. [The only titles. Big Bone Lick Assoc. Pub., No. 1.* 1 vol. publication of the actual journals on which the many Louisville, Kentucky. histories of the expedition, published in 1814 and JODOIN, ALEX, AND J. L. VINCENT. 1889. Histoire de later, were based.] Longueuil et de la famille de Longueuil. 1 . vol. LOGAN, W. E. 1842. [Abstract mentioning Canadian Montreal. Carboniferous footprints.] Proc. Geol. Soc. London, KELLOGG, LOUISE PHELPS. 1930. William Clark. Dic- III, Pt. II, p. 707. tionary of American Biography, IV, pp. 141-144. LULL, RICHARD S. 1915. Triassic life of the Connecti- KERR, ROBERT. 1792. The animal kingdom or zoological cut valley. Conn. State Geol. Nat. Hist. Surv., Bull. system,of the celebrated Sir Charles Linnaeus; Class No. 24. [Includes summary and revision of Hitch- I. Mammalia. 1 vol. London. [A translation and cock's work.] revision of Gmelin's revision; Elephas americanus, 1918. The developmentof vertebratepaleontology. the first Linnaean name applied to an American Amier.Jour. Sci., XLVI, pp. 193-221. [Briefly sum- fossil.] marizes the subject as a whole, but has special ref- KINDLE, E. M. 1931. The story of the discovery of erence to the Ainerican Journal of Science on its Big Bone Lick. Kentucky Geol. Surv., Ser. VI, XLI, 100th anniversary.] pp. 195-212. LYELL, CHARLES. 1842. On the fossil footprintsof birds . 1935. American Indian discoveries of vertebrate and impressions of raindrops in the valley of the fossils. Jour. Paleont., IX, pp. 449-452. Connecticut. Proc. Geol. Soc. London, III, pp. 793- KOCH, ALBERT. 1839a. Remains of the mastodon in 796. [Also (1843) in Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XLV, Missouri. Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XXXVII, pp. 191- pp. 394-397.] 192. MADDREN, A. G. 1905. Smithsonian exploration in . 1839b. The mammoth (mastodon? Eds.). Amer. Alaska in 1904, in search of mammoth and other Jour. Sci., XXXVI, pp. 198-200. [Anonymous ex- fossil remains. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., XLIX, No. tract from the Philadelphia Presbyterian, attributed 1584, pp. 1-117. [Good 'historical account.] to Koch by Leidy.] MARSH, 0. C. 1879. History and methods of palaeon- . 1841. Description of the Missourium, or Missouri tological discovery. Pamphlet. New Haven. [Ex- leviathan; together with its supposed habits. Indian cellent for orientation within the whole history of traditionsconcerning the location from whence it was this subject, but has nothing on American paleon- exhumed; also, comparisons of the whale, crocodile, tology except brief lists of names and a slight sum- and Missourium, with the leviathan, *as described mary of some of Marsh's own work.] in the 41st chapter of the book of Job. Pamphlet. St. Louis. [This is the first it is dated edition; both t The name was habitually written "Clarke" by his 1840 and 1841-the latter is apparently correct. An friend Jeffersonand many others and it so appears more almost identical edition was issued in Louisville and often than not in contemporaryliterature including early a revised edition in London, both also in 1841. The editions of the journals. It is "Clark" on the title of this * The only number issued. edition,but "Clarke" in the text.

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BEGINNINGS OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY 187

MATHER, COTTON. 1714 (collected volume dated 1717). at the Egyptian Hall, with an inquiry into the claims An extract of several letters from Cotton Mather, of Tetracaulodon to generic destinction. Proc. Geol. D.D., to John Woodward, M.D., and Richard Waller, Soc. Lotndon,III, pp. 6894695. Esq.; S. R. Secr. Philos. Trans. (Roy. Soc. Lon- . 1842. Koch's collection of mammalian remains. don), XXIX, No. 339, pp. 62-71. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., II, No. 22. pp. 183-184. MATHER, W. W. 1838. [No title.] Amer. Jour. Sci., [Listed by Amer. Philos. Soc. as by "Owen, -. (1) XXXIV, p. 358 and pp. 362-364. [Notes on Consisting of a critical review and discussion of mammothteeth in Ohio.] Richard Owen's theories by Hays, the paper should MCCRAE, THOMAS. 1832. Isaac Hays. Dictionary of be assigned to the latter as author.] American Biography, VIII, pp. 462-463. PACKARD, FRANCIS R. 1936. Caspar Wistar. Diction- MERRILL, GEORGE P. 1932. Edward Hitchcock. Dic- ary of American Biography, XX, pp. 433-434. tionary of American Biography, IX, pp. 70-71. PARSONS, SAMUEL H. (1786) 1793. Discoveries made MEYER, HERMANN VON. 1840. [No title.] Neues Jahrb. in the Western Country. Meni. Amer. Acad. Arts Min., 1840, pp. 576-587. [On Uhde's collection of Sci., II, Pt. 1, pp. 119-127. [Visit to Big Bone Lick Mexican antiquities, including mastodon and horse in 1785.] fossils, etc.] PEALE, REMBRANDT. 1802a. A short account of the MILLER, WILLIAM SNOW. 1931. John Davidson God- mammoth. Tilloch's Philos. Mag., Londoni,XIV, pp. man. Dictionary of American Biography, VII, pp. 162-169. 350-351. -. 1802b. On the differenceswhich exist between the 1932. William Edmonds Horner. Dictionary of heads of the mammoth and elephant. Tilloch's American Biography, IX, pp. 233-234. Philos. Mag., London, XIV, pp. 228-229. MITCHILL, SAMUEL L. 1818. Observations on the geol- . 1803a. Account of some remains of a species of ogy of North America; illustratedby the description gigantic oxen found in America and other parts of of various organic remains found in that part of the the world. Philos. Mag., XV, pp. 325-327. world. Cuvier's "Essay on the theory of the earth," . 1803b. An historical disquisition on the mam- American edition of Kirk and Mercein, New York, moth, or great American incognitum,an extinct, im- pp. 319-431. mense, carnivorous animal whose remains have been - . 1824. Observations on the teeth of the Mega- found in North America. 1 vol. London. therium recently discovered in the United States. PERKINS, H. C. 1842. Notice of fossil bones from Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. NVewYork, I, pp. 58-61. Oregon, in a letter to Dr. C. T. Jackson. Amer. -, J. A. SMITH, AND W. COOPER. 1828. Discovery of Jour. Sci., (1) XLII, pp. 136-140. a fossil walrus in Virginia. Annt. Lyc. Nat. Hist. RAFINESQUE, C. S. 1814. Compendio della ricerche del New York, II, pp. 271-272. Sig Cuvier sopra i quadrupedi pachidermi fossili. MORTON, S. G. 1834. Synopsis of the organic remains Specchio Sci., II, no. 12, pp. 182-183. Palermo. of the Cretaceous group of the United States, illus- REDFIELD, JOHN HOWARD. 1837. Fossil fishes of Con- trated by 19 plates, to which is added an appendix necticut and Massachusetts, with a notice of an un- containing a tabular view of the Tertiary fossils described genus. Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. New York, hitherto discovered in North America. 1 vol. IV, pp. 35-40. - . 1835. Notice of the fossil teeth of fishes of the REDFIELD, W. C. 1838a. Newly discovered ichnolites. United States, the discovery of the Galt in Alabama, Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XXXIII, pp. 201-202. and a proposed division of the American Cretaceous 1838b. Fossil fishesin Virginia. Amer. Jour. Sci., group. Amer. Jour. Sci., (1) XXVIII, pp. 276-278. (1) XXXIV, p. 201. 1842. Description of some new species of or- 1839. Fossil fishes of the red sandstone. Amer. ganic remains of the Cretaceous group of the United Jour. Sci., (1) XXXVI, pp. 186-187. States; with a tabular view of the fossils hitherto -. 1841. Short notices of American fossil fishes. discovered in this formation. Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci. Amer. Jouir.Sci., (1) XLI, pp. 24-28. Philadelphia, VIII, pp. 207-227. ROMER, ALFRED S. 1941. Vertebratepaleontology. Geol. NEWELL, LYMAN C. 1934. Samuel Latham Mitchill. Soc. Amer., 50th Anniversary Vol., pp. 105-135. Dictionary of American Biography, XIII, pp. 69-71. [History of the period 1888-1938.] OSBORN, H. F. 1923. Mastodons of the Hudson high- Roy, J.-EDWARD. 1911. Rapport sur les archives de lands. Nat. Hist., XXIII, pp. 3-24. [Summary of France relatives 'a l'histoire du Canada. Pub. Arch. historyof discovery.] Canada, No. 6, pp. i-iv, 1-1093. - . 1931. Pioneers of paleontology in America 1571- SCOTT, WILLIAM BERRYMAN. 1927. Development of 1847. In Osborn's "Cope: master naturalist," 1 vol., American palaeontology. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., Princeton, N. J., pp. 4-33. LXVI, pp. 409-429. . 1935. Thomas Jefferson as a paleontologist. SELLERS, HORACE WELLS. 1934a. Charles Willson Peale. Science, LXXXII, pp. 533-538. Dictionary of American Biography, XIV, pp. 344- - %.1936, 1942. Proboscidea. A monograph of the 347. discovery, evolution, migration and extinction of the . 1934b. Rembrandt Peale. Dictionary of Ameri- mastodonts and elephants of the world. 2 vols. can Biography, XIV, pp. 348-350. (Vol. I, 1936; Vol. II, 1942.) New York. . 1934c. Titian Ramsay Peale. Dictionary of OWEN, RICHARD. 1839. Observations on the teeth of American Biography, XIV, pp. 351-352. the Zeuglodont,Basilosaurus of Dr. Harlan. Proc. SHAW, WILLIAM B. 1930. James Ellsworth DeKay. Geol. Soc. Londot, III, pp. 24-28. Dictionary of American Biography, V, pp. 203-204. - . 1842. Report on the AMissourium now exhibiting SIMPSON, GEORGE GAYLORD. 1936. Misconstructing a

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 188 GEORGE GAYLORD SIMPSON

mastodon. Nat. Hist., XXXVII, pp. 170-172. [Ped- WARREN, JOHN C. 1855. The Mastodon giganteus of der's interpretationof the Mastodon as a gigantic North America. 2nd ed., with additions. 1 vol. tortoise.] Boston. 1942. The discovery of fossil vertebratesin North WISTAR, CASPAR. 1799. A description of the bones de- America. Jour. Paleont., in press. posited by the president in the museum of the so- SMALLWOOD, W. M., AND SMALLWOOD, M. S. C. 1941. ciety, and representedin the annexed plates. Trans. Natural history and the American mind. 1 vol. Amer. Philos. Soc. (o.s.), IV, pp. 526-531. New York. . 1818. An account of two heads found in the SMITH, NATHAN. 1820. Fossil bones in red sandstone. morass called the Big Bone Lick and presented to Amer. Jour. Sci., II, pp. 146-147. the Society by Mr. Jefferson. Trans. Amer. Philos. THWAITES, REUBEN GOLD (editor). 1905. Original journals of the Lewis and Clark expedition 1804- Soc., I, pp. 375-380. [In the Amer. Philos. Soc. list 1806. 7 vols. and atlas. New York. of publications this is erroneously classified as "An- TURNER, GEORGE. (1797) 1799. Memoir on the ex- thropology"; the heads were not human.] traneous fossils denominatedmammoth bones; prin- ZITTEL, KARL ALFRED VON. 1901. History of geology cipally designed to show that they are the remains of and palaeontology to the end of the nineteenthcen- more thaii one species of non-descriptanimal. Trans. tury. Translated by Marie M. Ogilvie-Gordon. 1 Amer. Philos. Soc. (o.s.), IV, pp. 510-518. vol. London and New York. [Still the best orien- VOLWILER, ALBERT T. 1930. George Croghan. Dic- tation in this broader field, but the subject of the tionary of American Biography, IV, pp. 556-557. present study is barely mentioned.]

This content downloaded from 150.135.114.183 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 21:55:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions