FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42  
43   >>  
the outer hair there appeared everywhere a wool, very soft, warm and thick, and of a fallow-brown color. The giant was well protected against the cold. The whole appearance of the animal was fearfully strange and wild. It had not the shape of our present elephants. As compared with our Indian elephants, its head was rough, the brain-case low and narrow, but the trunk and mouth were much larger. The teeth were very powerful. Our elephant is an awkward animal, but compared with this mammoth, it is an Arabian steed to a coarse, ugly dray horse. I had the stomach separated and brought on one side. It was well filled, and the contents instructive and well preserved. The principal were young shoots of the fir and pine; a quantity of young fir cones, also in a chewed state, were mixed with the moss." Mammoth bones are found in great abundance in the islands off the northern coast of Siberia. The remains of the rhinoceros are also found. Pallas, in 1772, obtained from Wiljuiskoi, in latitude 64 deg., a rhinoceros taken from the sand in which it had been frozen. This carcass emitted an odor like putrid flesh, part of the skin being covered with short, crisp wool and with black and gray hairs. Professor Brandt, in 1846, extracted from the cavities in the molar teeth of this skeleton a small quantity of half-chewed pine leaves and coniferous wood. And the blood-vessels in the interior of the head appeared filled, even to the capillary vessels, with coagulated blood, which in many places still retained its original red color. We find that Mr. Boyd Dawkins and Mr. Sanford assert that the cave-lion is only a large variety of the existing lion--identical in species. Herodotus says: "The camels in the army of Xerxes, near the mountains of Thessaly, _were attacked by lions_." Sir John Lubbock, in his Prehistoric Times, page 293, says the cave-hyena "is now regarded as scarcely distinguishable specifically from the _Hyaena crocuta_, or spotted hyena of Southern Africa," while Mr. Busk and M. Gervais identify the _cave-bear_ with the _Ursus ferox_, or grizzly bear of North America. What is the bearing of these facts on the question of the antiquity of the remains found in the bone caverns? Do these facts justify men in carrying human remains, found along with the remains of these animals in the caves, back to the remote period of one or two hundred thousand years?--a long time, this, for flesh upon the bones and food in the stomach
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42  
43   >>  



Top keywords:

remains

 
filled
 

vessels

 
rhinoceros
 

quantity

 

chewed

 
stomach
 

animal

 

compared

 

appeared


elephants

 
Herodotus
 

species

 

variety

 

existing

 

identical

 

thousand

 
Thessaly
 

attacked

 

hundred


mountains

 

camels

 

Xerxes

 

Sanford

 

coagulated

 
places
 
capillary
 

interior

 
retained
 

original


Dawkins
 

assert

 

remote

 

caverns

 
Africa
 

Southern

 

Hyaena

 

crocuta

 
spotted
 

Gervais


question

 
America
 

grizzly

 

antiquity

 

identify

 
specifically
 

animals

 
Prehistoric
 

Lubbock

 

period