210 BEITISH AND EUROPEAN FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 



latter the freshwater beds of the Valley of the Thames, of the 

 Avon in Worcestershire, of Gaytonthorpe, and of the Biel- 

 beck in Yorkshire, together with the marine deposit of the 

 Valley of the Nar.' This generalization is open to tbe same 

 grave objections just now stated — namely, that it is directly 

 opposed to the mammalian evidence, and would imply the 

 intercalation of the boulder-clay and till between the Norfolk 

 lacustrine and the Thames Valley nuviatiles, whereas the 

 mammalian remains and shells alike wotdd seem clearly to 

 indicate that the Grays Thurrock beds were deposited ante- 

 riorly to any portion of the boulder-clay and till. Mr. 

 Trimmer's general expression of there having been two Ele- 

 phantine periods is correct, but not so the positions which 

 he assigns to them. The Pliocene Elephants preceded the 

 glacial period, while the Mammoth and its associates inha- 

 bited the country after the emergence of the land, and in all 

 probability during the decline of the glacial period. 



It was my intention to have entered in some detail on the 

 circumstances under which Elephant remains are met with 

 in the bone-caves properly so-called, and in the cavernous 

 fissures ; but the length to which this communication has 

 already extended deters me from the discussion of so large a 

 subject on the present occasion. I shall merely observe now 

 that I believe the caves, like tbe lacustrine deposits and 

 gravels, furnish evidence of Elephants of two distinct faunas, 

 both in England and in France. In the Cefh and Kirkdale 

 caves, for example, remains of Euelephas antiquus, and in every 

 instance of young animals, have been discovered ; while the 

 fissure cavern of Kent's Hole has yielded grinders of the true 

 Mammoth, both of young and old animals. If the two faunas 

 have inosculated it is in some of those caves, which have been 

 inhabited during both periods, where the most decisive proofs 

 will be found. 



With regard to the geographical range of the true Mam- 

 moth, my inquiries have led me to the conclusion that 

 although still of vast extent it is much more limited than the 

 area hitherto assigned to it. The result of my observation is 

 that it never extended to the southern side of the Alps, although 

 met with in the great valley of Switzerland. This result I 

 am desirous of stating with the diffidence and reserve with 

 which a negative fact involving any generalization ought 

 always to be expressed. The grounds upon which it is rested 

 are these : — That, after a very careful search among the col- 

 lections at Florence, Turin, Milan, and Pavia, with the 

 assistance of Messrs. Angelo Sismonda, Bellardi, Cornalia, 

 and Crivelli, respectively in these different cities, I never met 

 with a single grinder of Euelephas primigenius which was not 





