There, have been brought from Ava, found on the left bank of the Irawaddy, in N. lat. 20° to 21°, near the wells of petroleum, in narrow ravines, sand-hills, beds of gravel, ironstone, and calcareous breccia, evidently a diluvial formation,—fossil bones, shells, and wood. Bones of the mastodon, equal in size to those of the Ohio, a grinder 1612 inches in circumference, a humerus, measuring 25 inches round the condyles, with several [p357] grinders and bones of younger individuals, and fragments of tusks: fossil molares of the rhinoceros, resembling two species of a genus named by Cuvier Anthracotherium: bones like an animal of the horse kind: remains of crocodiles, supposed to be the gavial, or long-nosed alligator of the Ganges, (not now known in the rivers of Ava.) The fossil bones were upon or near the surface, more or less exposed, not decomposed or rolled, and are of animals that died there. The bones are petrified, and deeply coloured with iron, the substance siliceous and very hard. The blocks of wood are larger than the trees growing there, but it is not known if they are of the same kind. “An idle notion is entertained by many, that these fossil remains have been generated by a petrifying quality in the water of the Irawaddy[68], but I think they are the result, as elsewhere, of one of the last catastrophes; in fact, the remains of a former world, before man was called into existence.”—Morning Herald, Sept. 14, 1827.
Bones of the mastodon have been found in Europe, mixed with menagerie collections, which cannot possibly be attributed to any other origin than that of sports of the amphitheatre. They are found in western Siberia, which was conquered by Sheibani, Genghis Khan’s grandson, A.D. 1242, and held 300 years, and whose first capital was at Tiumin[69], on the river Tura, near the Ural mountains, where the remains of the mastodon were found. Ava was conquered by the Grand Khan Kublai in 1272, in a battle with the king of eastern Bengal, in which there were a thousand elephants[70]. The places where they have been found in America correspond with history and tradition so faithfully, as to assist the other numerous proofs of Mexico and Peru having been conquered by the Moguls, in the year 1283, and the bones of the mastodon are there found, as well as remains of elephants, precisely like those of Siberia[71]. With regard to the tooth found at Harwich, the [p358] British kings Cuneboline[72] and Arviragus had representations of elephants on their coins. The bones of elephants, rhinoceroses, and crocodiles found in Ava are not, as those found in Europe and Siberia, what are termed extraneous fossils; the same kinds of animals being natives of the spot in Ava. The one like the horse cannot be ascertained; but the kings of Pegu, in former times, had camelopards, and, therefore, probably, zebras in their calichars, or parks; they also had unicorns, ostriches, and rein-deer[73]. Timur Khan, grandson of Kublai, who invaded Siberia with such powerful armies, resided at Tali, in Yunan, N. lat. 25° east of the Irawaddy[74].
The writer is of opinion that all those fossil bones found in Ava are of species still in existence: they may have floated down from more northern parts, the river in question being as long as the Ganges, said to be navigable into China; and has its source in Thibet,—(see RENNELL’s Memoir, p. 217.) According to the hypothesis of the writer, Montezuma’s ancestor was a Mongul grandee from Assam; and mastodontes’ remains have been found in Mexico, and those beasts are, as above related, supposed to be found alive near the Missouri.
This is the first instance the writer has met with of similar bones not being extraneous; and is, therefore, a remarkable fact, which excites the strongest suspicion that their species are still living. Ava is a new world on a small scale, and this collection of bones will, very probably, at no distant date, lead to positive proof of the existence of other quadrupeds, now conjectured by naturalists to be extinct. With respect to the local position, it is in all probability the old bed of the river, as [p359] the beds of those in Asia change in a wonderful manner.—(See Rennell, p. 255.)
A skeleton of an elephant or mastodon, for it is not known which, was found in a tomb in Mexico, which had evidently been built on purpose.—(Clavigero, vol. i., p. 84.) No authority whatever dates the foundation of Mexico earlier than A.D. 1324. The Aztecs advanced from Culiacan, when they took possession of the marshes, and founded Mexico: other Aztecs had preceded them who had arrived by land; but the writer hazarded a theory[75] that Montezuma’s ancestors had, like those of the Natchez and of the Incas, arrived in America by sea with elephants, under Mango Capac; and he has had the satisfaction to find a confirmation of his conjectures in a decade written by Peter Martyr, the Milanese, (employed by Ferdinand V., King of Castile and Arragon, and who died in the year 1526,) addressed to Adrian VI., who had been co-regent of Spain with Cardinal Ximenes. “Montezuma spoke thus to Cortez:—We have heard by our ancestors that we are strangers. A certain great prince, in ships, before the memory of all men living, brought our ancestors unto these coasts; whether voluntarily or driven by tempest it is not manifest; who, leaving his companions, departed into his country, and, at length returning, would have had them to have gone back again. But they had built houses, and joining themselves with the women of the country had begotten children, and had settled. Wherefore our ancestors, having chosen a senate and princes to govern the people, refused to go, and he departed with threatening speeches. Never any appeared unto this time who denied the right of that captain and commander. We think, therefore, that the king who sent you derived his descent from him, and all the kingdoms which we possess are yours[76].” It is impossible to know clearly what the allusions to the return of the great commander may mean, but whatever it be, it does not change the date. As the Mexicans considered Cortez to be a child of the sun, the great prince must have been a descendant from Genghis Khan; and thence the [p360] terrors and submission of Montezuma and the Mexicans, who had always dreaded such a visit.
The Aztecs had sojourned in Culiacan and other places, from the date of the arrival of the ships, till they proceeded to Anahuac. The foundation of Tenochtitlan (or Mexico) having been in 1324, and the first king, Montezuma’s ancestor, elected in 1377; therefore, the empire, when Montezuma died, had lasted only 144 years; and this calculation is from the most authentic documents known, that is, the pictures in Purchas’s collection. In Harris’s Voyages, vol. ii., p. 97, Montezuma is said to have told Cortez, that it was only a century since they had been settled where they were, meaning, probably, that it was not two centuries.
Thus an elephant being found in a tomb in Mexico, and others in tombs in Siberia, is an additional argument to the strong ones already produced, for the Mexicans being the Moguls blown from the shores of Japan, A.D. 1283, which appears irresistible; and also that mammoths and mastodontes are not extinct, being found either living or fossil in all the places in America, which agree with the traditions on that subject, and with the histories of China and Japan[77].
THE TAPIR.
The Tapir was supposed to be peculiar to the New World: two fossil species, one of them gigantic, have been found in [p361] France, Germany; and Italy[78]. The remains of a tapir being found at Florence, with those of other quadrupeds usually exhibited by the Romans, was an unaccountable fact, till it was known, through Sir Stamford Raffles, that the tapir exists in Sumatra. We know that the Romans carried on a commerce with India, which employed one hundred and twenty ships annually, and that they had the power of being supplied with all the animals of those regions, by means of country ships, which traded to the ports of Musiris and Barace, those which the Romans frequented. Moreover, the author of the Periplus, p. 36, describes Sumatra. It appears, therefore, evident that the Romans procured tapirs from that island, if they be not inhabitants of Africa. The British king, father of Caractacus, had a tapir on one of his numerous coins[79]; which may be reckoned among many other proofs that the ancient Britons were not quite so ignorant and barbarous as is generally, but unjustly, imagined. The discovery of this tapir shows how little is yet known even of those countries in which Britain has, for a length of years, had establishments. The tapir is probably what the natives have reported as a river-horse, a much more appropriate name for it than for the African beast. “The descriptions of the hippopotamus,” says Baron Cuvier, “by Herodotus and Aristotle, are supposed to have been borrowed from Hecatæus of Miletus, and must have been taken from two very different animals, one of which is the true hippopotamus, and the other the antelope gnu of Gmelin[80].” Now, as it appears that the Indians described by Herodotus by the name Padæi, is an exact account of the Batta in Sumatra,—(Dr. Leyden thinks them the same word, as the Indo-Chinese pronounce B as P[81],)—it is rendered probable that that island was known to the Greeks, long before the Romans possessed Egypt. On these grounds, I venture a conjecture that Aristotle and Herodotus alluded to the tapir, which is amphibious, but the gnu is not. The tapir is probably the küda-ayer of Sumatra, and the conda-aijeer, or river paard, of the [p362] Javans.—(See MARSDEN’s Sumatra, third edition.) With respect to the gigantic tapir, it is as probable that those regions (apparently less known to moderns, as regards zoology, than to the Greeks and Romans) may contain gigantic tapirs as ouranoutangs, near eight feet high, so lately discovered.