In the configuration and angle of the occipital plane the Megatherium indicates the same general correspondence with the Edentate type, which has been pointed out in the descriptions of the crania of the Glossothere and Scelidothere: and the resemblance to the Scelidothere is not less striking in the small proportional size of the cranium in this quadruped, which surpasses the rest of its class in so great a degree in the colossal proportions of its hinder parts.

Having detected in the base of the skull of the Scelidothere an articular semicircular pit for the head of the styloglossal bone, similar to, but relatively smaller than, that remarkable one in the skull of the Glossothere, it became a matter of interest to determine whether this structure, which does not exist in any of the existing Edentals, should likewise be present in the gigantic type of the Megatherioid family. The result of a careful removal of the matrix from the basal region of one of the cranial fragments of the Megatherium was the detection of this articular cavity, in each temporal bone in the same relative position as in the Glossothere and Scelidothere. The styloid articular cavity is relatively smaller, and shallower, than in the Glossothere, its proportions being much the same as those of the Scelidothere. The cranial or posterior extremity of the stylo-hyoid bone in the Scelidotherium is bent upwards at an obtuse angle (Pl. [XXI].), and terminates in an articular ball which rotates in this cavity. The size of this bone, and its mode of articulation, indicates great power and muscularity of tongue in the Megatherioids, and calls to mind the importance of that organ in the Giraffe, which subsists on the same kind of food as that which I have supposed to have supported the Megatherioids, although the general organization of these animals and the mode in which the foliage was brought within reach of the tongue are as opposite as can well be imagined.

The anterior condyloid foramen presents scarcely one-half the absolute size of that of the Glossothere, whence we may infer a correspondingly inferior development of the tongue in the Megathere. The fractured parietes of the cranial cavity of the Megatherium every where exhibit evidences of the great extent of the air-cells or sinuses continued from the nasal cavity: on the basilar aspect of the cranium they extend as far back as the jugular foramina: the whole of the basi-sphenoid being thus excavated, and permeable to air, derived from the sphenoid sinuses, (Pl. [XXX]. fig. 2.). The vertical diameter of the cranial cavity is four inches, eight lines; its transverse diameter, which is greatest in the posterior third part of the cavity, corresponding with the posterior part of the cerebrum is six inches: from the indications afforded by the remains of the cranial cavity in Mr. Darwin’s specimens, I conclude that the brain of the Megatherium was more depressed, and upon the whole, smaller by nearly one-half than that of the Elephant; but with the cerebellum relatively larger, and situated more posteriorly with relation to the cerebral hemispheres: whence it may be concluded that the Megatherium was a creature of less intelligence, and with the command of fewer resources, or a less varied instinct than the Elephant.

It has been usual to characterize the Megatherium, in conformity with the concurrent descriptions of Bru, Cuvier, and D’Alton, by the dental formula of molares ⁴⁄₄ ⁴⁄₄, i. e. by the presence of four grinding teeth on each side of the upper, as of the lower jaw. It was the agreement of the excellent authorities above cited in this statement, which induced Mr. Clift and myself to regard a single detached tooth, which formed part of the valuable collection of remains of the Megatherium deposited in the Hunterian Museum by Sir Woodbine Parish, as being, from its comparatively small size, the tooth of either a younger individual or of a smaller species of Megatherium. Upon clearing away the matrix from the palatal and alveolar surface of one of the cranial fragments of the Megatherium in Mr. Darwin’s collection, I was gratified by the detection of the crown of a fifth molar, corresponding in size and form with the detached tooth, above alluded to: its small size, and its position have doubtless occasioned its being over-looked in the cranium of the great skeleton at Madrid.

The anterior molar of the upper jaw presents a nearly semicircular transverse section, with the angles rounded off; the three succeeding teeth are four-sided, with the transverse somewhat exceeding the antero-posterior diameter: they are rather longer and larger than the first: the last molar is likewise four-sided, but presents a sudden diminution of diameter, and is relatively broader. The following are the respective dimensions of the upper maxillary teeth.

First Molar.Second Molar.Third Molar.Fourth Molar.Fifth Molar.
In.Lines.In.Lines.In.Lines.In.Lines.In.Lines.
Length8694948752
Transverse diameter1924232014
Antero-posterior diameter152020111010

Besides the differences in size, the upper molars vary as to their curvature: this difference is exhibited in the vertical section of these teeth figured in Pl. [XXXI]. The convexity of the curve of the first, second and third molars is directed forwards; the fourth is straight, its anterior surface only describing a slight convexity in the vertical direction; the fifth tooth is curved, but in a contrary direction to the others; and the bases of the five molars thus present a general convergence towards a point a little way behind the middle of the series.

The next peculiarity to be noticed in these remarkable teeth is the great length of the pulp-cavity (d), the apex of which is parallel with the alveolar margin of the jaw: a transverse fissure is continued from this apex to the middle concavity of the working surface of the tooth, which is thus divided into two parts. Each of these parts consists of three distinct substances,—a central part analogous to the body or bone of the tooth or ‘dentine,’ a peripheral and nearly equally thick layer of cæmentum, and an intermediate thinner stratum of a denser substance, which is described in Mr. Clift’s memoir on the Megatherium as ‘enamel,’ and to which substance in the compound teeth of the Elephant, it is analogous both in its relative situation, and relative density to the other constituents.

Microscopic examinations of thin and transparent slices of the tooth of the Megatherium prove, however, that the dense layer separating the internal substance from the cæmentum is not enamel, but presents the same structure as the hard ‘dentine’ or ivory of the generality of Mammalian teeth; and corresponds with the thin cylinder of hard ‘dentine’ in the tooth of the Sloth. No species of the Order Bruta has true enamel entering into the composition of its teeth; but the modifications of structure which the teeth present in the different genera of this order are considerable, and their complexity is not less than that of the enamelled teeth of the Herbivorous Pachyderms and Ruminantia, in consequence of the introduction of a dental substance into their composition corresponding in structure with that of the teeth of the Myliobates, Psammodus, and other cartilaginous fishes.

The microscopic investigation of the structure of the teeth of the Megatherium was undertaken chiefly with the view of comparing this structure with that of the teeth of the Sloth and Armadillo, and of thus obtaining an insight into the food, and an additional test of the real nature of the disputed affinities of the Megatherium. The central part of the tooth (c. Pl. [XXXI].) consists of a coarse ivory, like the corresponding part of the tooth of the Sloth. It is traversed throughout by medullary canals ¹⁄₁₅₀₀ of an inch in diameter, which are continued from the pulp-cavity, and proceed, at an angle of 50°, to the plane of the dense ivory, parallel to each other, with a slightly undulating course, having regular interspaces, equal to one and a half diameters of their own areæ, and generally anastomosing in pairs by a loop of which the convexity is turned towards the origin of the tubes of the fine dentine, as if each pair so joined consisted of a continuous reflected canal, (c. fig. 1, Pl. [XXXII].) The loops are generally formed close to the fine dentine. In a few situations I have observed one of the medullary canals continued across the fine dentine, and anastomosing with the corresponding canals of the cæmentum. The interspaces of the medullary canals of the coarse dentine are principally occupied by calcigerous tubes which have an irregular course, anastomose reticularly, and terminate in very fine cells. The more regular and parallel calcigerous tubes, which constitute the thin layer of hard dentine, are given off from the convexity of the terminal loops of the medullary canals. The course of these tubes (b. fig. 1, Pl. [XXXII].) is rather more transversely to the axis of the tooth than the medullary canals from which they are continued. They run parallel to each other, but with minute undulations throughout their course, in which they are separated by interspaces equal to one and a half their own diameter. As they approach the cæmentum they divide and sub-divide, and grow more wavy and irregular: their terminal branches take on a bent direction, and form anastomoses, dilate into small cells, and many are seen to become continuous with the radiating fibres or tubes of the cells or corpuscles of the contiguous cæmentum. This substance enters largely into the constitution of the compound tooth of the Megatherium: it is characterized, like the cæmentum of the Elephant’s grinder, by the presence of numerous radiated cells, or purkingian corpuscles, scattered throughout its substance, but may be distinguished by wide medullary canals which traverse it in a direction parallel with each other, and forming a slight angle with the transverse axis of the tooth. These canals are wider than those of the central coarse dentine, their diameter being ¹⁄₁₂₀₀th of an inch; they are separated by interspaces equal to from four to six of their own diameters, divide a few times dichotomously in their course, and finally anastomose in loops, the convexity of which is directed towards, and in most cases is in close contiguity with, the layer of dense dentine.