SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONSVOLUME 66, NUMBER 13
THE TEETH OF A MONKEY FOUNDIN CUBA(With One Plate)
BYGERRIT S. A1ILLER, JR.
(Publication 2430)
CITY OF WASHINGTONPUBLISHED BY THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIONDECEMBER 8, 1916
Zfii Bov^ (gfafttntore ipvceaBALTIIIOUE, MD., U. S. A.
THE TEETH OF A MONKEY FOUND IN CUBABy GERRIT S. MILLER. Jr.(With One Plate)In 191 1 Ameghino described as Montaneia anthropomorpha asupposed new genus and species of American monkey from Cuba/He based his account on a nearly complete set of mandibular teethfound associated with human remains in a cave near Sancti Spiritus.Dr. Louis Montane, the discoverer of these teeth, brought thespecimens to Washington in December, 191 5, and asked me to com-pare them with the South American material in the National A'luseum.On making this comparison we at once saw that the likeness of theCuban teeth to those of Ateles, noticed by Ameghino,^ amounted tosuch complete identity that in the absence of further evidenceMontaneia could not be regarded as a distinct genus. The exactagreement in all essential characters between the type of Montaneiaand an Ateles from Tehuantepec is shown by the accompanyingphotographs (plate i). The only structural difference that can beobserved is the unusual development in the Cuban specimen of thehypoconulid or '' fifth cusp " in each of the molars, a peculiaritywhich caused Ameghino to see in the dentition a resemblance to thatof man and the higher anthropoids.^ Examination of numerous speci-mens shows that the hypoconulid in Ateles varies so much in size anddistinctness that its degree of development must be considered as anindividual or specific character and nothing more.Ameghino remarks that the discovery made by Doctor Montaneis noteworthy in view of the fact that no monkeys now occur inCuba (p. 318). Not only do the islands of the Greater Antilles lackmembers of this group, but all * the living and recently extinctmammals yet found on them appear to be related to a South Ameri-
^ An. Mus. Nac. Buenos Aires, ser. 3, Vol. 13. p. 316.
' " Se parecen a los de Ateles y mas todavia a los del hombre '' (p. 318).
' " La conformacion de las coronas de las muelas persistentes se parece alos monos antropomorfos y al hombre. y todavia mas a este ultimo que aaquellos " (p. 317).
* With the exception of the Jamaican Orycoinys, an animal whose historyhas almost certainly been different from that of the Antillean insectivores,ground-sloths, and hystricine rodents.Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 66, No. 13
2 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 66
can fauna much older than any which is known to have includedmodern genera of monkeys. These circumstances, together withthe facts that spider-monkeys are habitually tamed by the Indians intropical America, and that the type of " Montaneia " was found ina cave used for human burial, make it seem probable that this par-ticular set of teeth owed its presence in Cuba to man's agency. Ifthis assumption were true it should be possible, so far as this can bedone with such incomplete material, to identify the animal with somespecies now alive.As the teeth of "Montaneia" dififer specifically^ from those of allthe spider-monkeys in the National Museum I sent copies of thephotograph here reproduced to Dr. J. A. Allen and to IMr. OldfieldThomas. Dr. Allen could find no Ateles in the American Museumof Natural History that he would regard as probably conspecificwith the animal whose teeth were represented. Mr. Thomas wroteunder date of February 19, 1916, that a specimen in the BritishMuseum collected at Nanegal, Ecuador, and supposed to be referableto Ateles fuscipes Gray, agreed " fairly closely " with the teeth of
"Montaneia," though it did not show the unusual depth of theV-shaped notch on outer side of m^ and m^. As the notches inquestion appear to have been made somewhat unduly conspicuousby the lighting of the specimen when it was photographed, this dis-crepancy is probably not very important. While not willing, on thesole basis of the mandibular dentition, to assert specific identitybetween the Ecuadorean Ateles and the animal to which the Cubanteeth belonged, Mr. Thomas and Mr. Martin A. C. Hinton, who alsocompared the photograph with the specimen, did not regard suchidentity as impossible.' Nothing further seems needed to lead to thefollowing conclusions
:
That the teeth of the animal described by Ameghino as Montaneiaanthropomorpha have no more than a superficial resemblance tothose of the Pongidae and Hominidae.That the generic name Montaneia Ameghino, 191 1, must for thepresent be placed in the synonymy of Ateles Geoffroy, 1806.
' The chief peculiarity is the large size. Measurements : canine, 5.4 x 6.8
;
height of canine from base of enamel on outer side, 11.6; anterior premolar,5.0x5.4; median premolar, 4.0x5.0; posterior premolar 4.2x5.2; first molar,6.2x5.2; second molar, 6.2x5.6; third molar, 6.0x5.4.*"To say that Montaneia was probably or possibly conspecific with theEcuador Ateles would be too strong, but I would not say it wasn't" (Thomasin letter dated March 23, 1916).
NO. 13 TEETH OF A MONKEY FOUND IN CUBA—MILLER 3That while the specific name Montaneia anthroponiorpha cannotnow be referred with certainty to the synonymy of any knownAteles, the resemblance of the Cuban teeth to those of a specimenfrom Ecuador makes eventual identification with a living- speciesseem probable.That without much doubt the presence of these spider-monkey'steeth in Cuba was due to the agency of man.
EXPLANATION OF PLATE(Both figures natural size)Fig. I. Ateles neglectus'S.t.mhzvdt. Tehuantepec, Mexico (No. 13858, U. S.National Museum).Fig. 2. Ateles sp. Cuba. (Type of Montaneia anthroponiorpha Ameghino.)