Downloaded from http://jgslegacy.lyellcollection.org/ at New York University on February 17, 2016

406 r~~es or ~ eRO~eXr S0C~Tr. [May 10,

I append a list of the organic remains from the "Nubisn Sand- stone" series :~ ! Orthis Michelini...... Wsdy-Nalb r.imestoue. ! Streptorhynchus crenistria .... I Spirifera (fragments of) .... Murchisonia ...... Eulima? ...... Rhodocrinus ...... ~ Poteriocrinus ...... Lepidodendron Mosaicum . Wady-Nasb Sandstone. ! Sigillaria, sp. ,, ,, [The sign ! prefixed to the names of the fossils indicates that the specimens were collected by the Sinai Survey; and the sign 9in- dicates the determination of Mr. Salter.] In conclusion I venture to suggest that the Adigrat Sandstone in Abyssinia, described and so named by Mr. W. T. Bl~nfordt, is of the same age as the Nubian Sandstone. It appears to have escaped the notice of that author that the Sandstone of Adigrat is slmilAr in character and general appearance to the Nubian Sandstone, and that it, moreover, overlies the schistose rocks in the same manner, and contains iron-ore and psilomelane, as in Sinai. Mr. Blanford surmises, however, that "both the coal-bearing beds of Chelga and the Adigrat Sandstone may belong to a portion of the great series associated with [] coal in India" (lee. r p. 175); but the Talcheer and other coals are referred by Messrs. Blanford and Theo- bald to a age (Mere. Geol. Surv. India, vol. i.). NOTE.--My attention has been called since the reading of this paper to Prof. Unger's observations on the Fossil Wood from Assuan and Um-Ombos, in the Nile valley (Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xv. Misc. p. 13, 1859). The wood belongs to a coniferous tree of the Araucarian division, and is named Dadoxylon ~j?/ptiacum; its habitat is assumed "to be the sandstone, which occurs extensively in Upper Egypt and Nubia, between the granite and beds," in which case Dadoxylon a~jypt/acum was contemporaneous with Lepidod~endron mesa/cure and S/g//lar/a. Prof. Unger argues, from the presence of this genus, that the sandstone, "hitherto of doubtful rank in the geological series, as no organic remains have been found in it," should be ranked in the Permian, rather than in the Keuper or the Cretaceous formation; but from the palmonto- logical evidence alone he might have argued equally in favour of its age.

3. On the DISCOVERYof t~e GLUTTON (GULO LVSCUS)~n BRITAIN. By W. BoYv D~wxn~s, Esq., M.A., F.R.S., F~G.S. THE caves in the Mountain Limestone which forms the magnificent gorge of the Ekry, near Cefn, St. Asaph, have furnished from time t Geology and Zool. of Abyssinia, p. 170. Downloaded from http://jgslegacy.lyellcollection.org/ at New York University on February 17, 2016

1871.] 1)~W~INS--OVT.OI,USCUS IN BRITAIN, 407

to time a remarkably complete series of . That which opens on the terraced side of the cliff in the grounds of Cefn, first described by the Rev. E. Stanley in 1833, and subsequently by Dr. Falconer, contained abundance of Reindeer, associated with Cave-lion, Cave-bear, Grizzly Bear, Hymna, Elephas antiquus, Hi_p- popotamus major, .Rhinoceros tichorhinus, and 27. hemit~echus. And nearly all these occurred in a second cave, at Cefn, explored by Mr. Williams Wynn in 1869-70. A third cave, at Galtfaenan, explored last winter by Mr. Mainwaring and Mr. Hughes, has fur- nished the remains of Reindeer and Bear, and the traces of Hyaenas ; while a fourth, at Plus Heaton, in part dug out by Mr. Hughes and Mr. Heaton, has yielded Weft, Bison, Reindeer, Horse, and Cave- bear, and a remarkably fine lower jaw which proves that the Glutton inhabited Great Britain during the pleistocene, or quaternary age. Mr. hyshford Sanford and myself had, indeed, obtained, in 1865, the crowns of three canines from the caves of Banwell, and Bleadon, and of Oower, which belonged to this ; and we accordingly in- serted it, without figure or description, in the list of the British Pleistocene Mammals, published by the Palmontographical Society in 1866. This discovery at Plas Heaton renders any doubt as to its being a true pleistocene British species altogether impossible. The jaw consists of the left ramus, docked of the angular and articular portions, which are broken off close behind tl~e first true molar. Dn comparison with the lower jaws of the Glutton in the British Museum, from Norway, and also from the caves of Gai- lenreuth and Sundwig, I find that the Welsh specimen is slightly larger than the latter, and considerably larger than those of the animal now living in Europe. With this exception, there is not the slightest difference between them. The peculiar ridging and grooving of the inner side of the alwolar border, which at first sight appears as the accidental result of the inflammation of the periosteum, is common to all which I have examined ; and, taken in combination with the great alveolar width, affords a means of determining at once a fragment of the jaw from that of any other animal. The premolar and molar series, also, axe crowded together in a very short alveolar space, and occupy the upper and outer margin of the jaw, instead of occupying its superior surface, as in the majority of the carnivores. The peculiar wrinkled pattern of the enamel separates the teeth at once from those of any carnivore which are likely to be confounded with them, except the Hymna, which is put out of court by the larger size and different form of all its teeth except the upper incisor 3, and the first upper premolar. The first of these bears a strong superficial resemblance to the canine of the Glutton, but is differen- tiated by the enamel surface of the latter being more deeply and irregularly grooved, and by the cingalum passing from the posterior to the anterior ridge being much less prominently developed. The upper premolar 1 of Hymna can be determined at once from the second lower premolar of the Glutten, which it closely resembles in its single fang and proeumbent form, by the crown of the latter being set Downloaded from http://jgslegacy.lyellcollection.org/ at New York University on February 17, 2016

408 P~~es oF rm~ eBoxoexc~ eocle~r. [May 10, on the fang much more obliquely, and by the obtusely po.'mted apex ri~ing abruptly from the anterior border instead of sweeping nearly equally upwards from the posterior and anterior borders. The pre- molar series of the Glutton may be separated from that of the Caniehe and Feli&e by the great transverse thickness of its teeth, and the ab~ sence of the anterior and posterior accessory cusps. The first lower true molar is distinguished at once from that of the Cani&e by the stoutness and obtuseness of the two sectorial blades, and by the non-development of a cusp on the postero-inner edge of the base of the posterior blade. The tubercular portion also of the Glutton is much smaller and more talon-like (consisting of a very obtuse triangular cusp) than in any of the Cani&v. With these excep- tions, I do not know of the teeth of any carnivore with which those of the Glutton under consideration can be confounded. The following Table shows the relation of the lower jaw of the Glutton from Plas Heaton to those found in the caves of Germany, and to a recent specimen preserved in the British Museum. The Welsh fossil in every dimension is larger than any of the rest, and must have belonged to an animal proportionally more robust than any of the others. The measurements are taken in decimals of an inch.

Alveolar space occupied by molar series from Pro. 2 to M. 1 ...... I'95 z'9 s'85 i'86 l'7z Depth of ramus beneath Pro. 2 x'i 0"95 o'98 0"95 o'9 Depth of ramus beneath M. 1.. o'96 o-$8 o'96 o'95 o'85 Length of crown of canine ...... 0-8 o'$z Antero-posterior measurement o'z 9 o'~4 o"z4 o'28 o"2 5 Pro. 2. ~ Transverse ,, o'z o'l 9 o's8 o'18 o"15 / Height ...... o'2 o'15 o'16 o'I5 o'x5 [ Antero-posterior measurement 0"36 0"36 0"35 0'35 0"34 Pm. 3. ~ Transverse ,, o-24 o-~ 3 o'z I o'2 o'2 t Height ...... 0"24 o'z3 o'zl o'~2 o'z Antero-posterior measurement 0" 5 0"5 0"5 0"45 o'49 Pro. 4: Transverse ,, o- 3 o'~ 9 o'26 o'29 o'25 Height ...... o"3 o.~ 9 o'29 c'28 o'26 Anter~posterior measurement 0"95 o'92 0"88 c"9 o-Sz M. 1. Transverse ,, o'4z o'4 o'38 0"4 o'34 {Height .... o'4z 0"4 c'4 0"4 o"36-~

I am able to detect no specific difference between the Gulo slodwus of Goldfuss, from Germany, and the living form, Gulo luscus of Lin- naeus. The fossil carnivore was larger than the living, probably because in pleistocene times the competition for life was not so keen as it is now among the mammalia. Man in those early times bad Downloaded from http://jgslegacy.lyellcollection.org/ at New York University on February 17, 2016

1871.] DAWK~S--aVLOLVSCUS I~ ~Rrr~. 409

not increased and multiplied to such a degree as to upset the eeconomy of nature, by driving the wild animals away from their feeding- grounds, and robbing the carnivores of a large portion of their food. To this cause I should assign the larger size of nearly all the pleis- tocene mammalia, as compared with those which are undoubtedly their lineal descendants, such as the Cave-lion, the Cave-hyaena, and the Stag. The Glutton at the present day inhabits the inclement northern regions of the Old World, to the point where the forests gradually die down into the lonely wastes of the "Tundras," and is to be found in Norway, Sweden, Lapland and as far east as Kamtschatka. In the New World it ranges, under the name of Wolverine, north- wards from the latitude of Canada. It was seen by Ross in the 70 ~ parallel in the winter ; and its bones have been met with in Melville Island. Its southern limit in Asia is the latitude 50 ~ where it occurs in the Altai. In Europe its southern limit is not clearly de- fined; but it has steadily retreated northwards as the vast forests of Germany and Poland gradually fell under the axe of the woodman. According to Eichwald, it once lived in the Lithuanian region along with the Bison, which still lingers there under the protection of an Imperial ukase ; and Zimmermann adduces proof of its having been killed as far south as Helmstadt, in Brunswick +. In the pleistocene caves of Germany it is found abundantly, with the Reindeer, Cave-lion, and Hyaena, at least as far south as Gailenreuth, in Bavaria, where it was first discovered by Dr. Goldfuss. It is figured and described froni the caves of Belgium by Dr. Buckland's great rival, Dr. Schmer- ling. We might therefore naturally expect to find the animal ranging over our island at a time when it formed part of the main- land of Europe, and offered flee access to the same animals (the Reindeer, the Lemming, and the Horse) as those which still furnish food to the living Glutton in Siberia. The presence in Great Britain of a creature adapted for enduring the severity of an Arctic winter, and not now found in any hot regions, along with the Rein-deer, Lemming, and Musk-Sheep, implies that the pleistocene winters were of an Arctic severity--just as the , found under precisely the same conditions, and associated with the same group of animals, points to a hot summer like that which obtains on the Lower Volga. The intimate association in one spot of a nlmals now confined re- spectively to the hottest and coldest regions seems to me to admit of no other explanation. I have added to this essay a list (see p. 410) of the pleistocene animals found in the various caves hitherto explored in the valley of the Elwy, as supplementing the Table of the Distribution of the British mammals published in the Quarterly Journal, May 1869.

* The authorities consulted for the range of the Glutton are Blaaius (Fauna der WirlmlthiereDeutschlands), Zimmermann (SpecimenZoologi~e Geographicae ), and Sir John Richardson (Fauna Boreali-Americana). Downloaded from http://jgslegacy.lyellcollection.org/ at New York University on February 17, 2016

410 PS~Cnvnms oF ~ eEO~XCAL ~r. []Kay 10,

r

Ursus spel~eus ...... it ferox ...... it Gulo luscus ...... Meles taxus ...... Canis vulpes ...... ~t lupus ...... it Hyaena spehea ...... it Cervus tarandus ...... it elaphus ...... it Bison priscus ...... *t Hippopotamus major ...... 4t Equus caballtm ...... it Rhinoceros hemitcechus ...... it tichorhinus ...... Elephas antiquus ...... ~t Arvicola amphibia ......

From this list all reference to the series of prehistoric mammalia, and to the traces of prehistoric man, has been omitted.

DISCUSSI01~. Mr. HuoK~s indicated the exact position in which the jaw of the Glutton was found, but pointed out that, owing to the excavations of keepers, Badgers, Rabbits, &c., the earth was so much disturbed in that part that it was impossible to be sure of the original relative position of the bones. He showed that the Plas Heaton Cave was on a hill rising from the top of the plateau, while the Cefn, Brysgill, and Galtfaenan Caves were in the gorge cut through that plateau, and therefore that the Plas Heaton Cave was probably formed, and might possibly have been first occupied, at a much earlier period than the others. As it appeared to pass under that part of the hill which is overlapped by heavy drift, he thought it quite possible that this may have been a preglacial cave, and that by-and-by we may find evidence of a preglacial fauna in it. The Rev. W. S. SrMo~s mentioned that in some of the pet-holes in the roof of the Cefn cave he had procured silt containing remains of shells determined by Mr. Jeffreys to be marine. Mr. HuGrr~.s explained that these shells had probably been washed in from the superficial marine drift of the district. Mr. Dxwxi~s, in reply, expressed his belief that though the ex- cavation of the caves in question might have taken place at different periods, yet that their occupation was, geologically speaking, con- temporaneous.