The World Before the Deluge

by Louis Figuier

The Apes begin to abound in species; the Stags were already numerous.

Fig. 175.—Head of Rhinoceros tichorhinus, partly restored under the direction of Eugene Deslongchamps.

The Rhinoceros, which made its appearance in the Miocene period, appears in greater numbers in the Pliocene deposits. The species peculiar to the Tertiary epoch is R. tichorhinus, which is descriptive of the bony partition which separated its two nostrils, an anatomical arrangement which is not found in our existing species. Two horns surmount the nose of this animal, as represented in [Fig. 175]. Two living species, namely, the Rhinoceros of Africa and Sumatra, have two horns, but they are much smaller than those of R. tichorhinus. The existing Indian Rhinoceros has only one horn.

The body of R. tichorhinus was covered with very thick hair, and its skin was without the rough and callous scales which we remark on the skin of the living African species.

Contemporaneously with this gigantic species there existed a dwarf species about the size of our Hog; and along with it several intermediate species, whose bones are found in sufficient numbers to enable us to reconstruct the skeleton. The curvature of the nasal bone of the fossil Rhinoceros and its gigantic horn have given rise to many tales and popular legends. The famous bird, the Roc, which played so great a part in the fabulous myths of the people of Asia, originated in the discovery in the bosom of the earth of the cranium and horns of a fossil Rhinoceros. The famous dragons of western tradition have a similar origin.

In the city of Klagenfurth, in Carinthia, is a fountain on which is sculptured the head of a monstrous dragon with six feet, and a head surmounted by a stout horn. According to the popular tradition still prevalent at Klagenfurth, this dragon lived in a cave, whence it issued from time to time to frighten and ravage the country. A bold cavalier kills the dragon, paying with his life for this proof of his courage. It is the same legend which is current in every country, from that of the valiant St. George and the Dragon and of St. Martha, who nearly about the same age conquered the fabulous Tarasque of the city of Languedoc, which bears the name of Tarascon.

But at Klagenfurth the popular legend has happily found a mouth-piece—the head of the pretended dragon, killed by the valorous knight, is preserved in the Hôtel de Ville, and this head has furnished the sculptor for his fountain with a model for the head of his statue. Herr Unger, of Vienna, recognised at a glance the cranium of the fossil Rhinoceros; its discovery in some cave had probably originated the fable of the knight and the dragon. And all legends are capable of some such explanation when we can trace them back to their sources, and reason upon the circumstances on which they are founded.

The traveller Pallas gives a very interesting account of a Rhinoceros tichorhinus which he saw, with his own eyes, taken out of the ice in which its skin, hair, and flesh had been preserved. It was in December, 1771, that the body of the Rhinoceros was observed buried in the frozen sand upon the banks of the Viloui, a river which discharges itself into the Lena below Yakutsk, in Siberia, in 64° north latitude. “I ought to speak,” the learned naturalist says, “of an interesting discovery which I owe to the Chevalier de Bril. Some Yakouts hunting this winter near the Viloui found the body of a large unknown animal. The Sieur Ivan Argounof, inspector of the Zimovic, had sent on to Irkutsk the head and a fore and hind foot of the animal, all very well preserved.” The Sieur Argounof, in his report, states that the animal was half buried in the sand; it measured as it lay three ells and three-quarters Russian in length, and he estimated its height at three and a half; the animal, still retaining its flesh, was covered with skin which resembled tanned leather; but it was so decomposed that he could only remove the fore and hind foot and the head, which he sent to Irkutsk, where Pallas saw them. “They appeared to me at first glance,” he says, “to belong to a Rhinoceros; the head especially was quite recognisable, since it was covered with its leathery skin, and the skin had preserved all its external characters, and many short hairs. The eyelids had even escaped total decay, and in the cranium here and there, under the skin, I perceived some matter which was evidently the remains of putrefied flesh. I also remarked in the feet the remains of the tendons and cartilages where the skin had been removed. The head was without its horn, and the feet without hoofs. The place of the horn, and the raised skin which had surrounded it, and the division which existed in both the hind and fore feet, were evident proofs of its being a Rhinoceros. In a dissertation addressed to the Academy of St. Petersburg, I have given a full account of this singular discovery. I give there reasons which prove that a Rhinoceros had penetrated nearly to the Lena, in the most northern regions, and which have led to the discovery of the remains of other strange animals in Siberia. I shall confine myself here to a description of the country where these curious remains were found, and to the cause of their long preservation.