1859.] HISLOP GEOLOGY AND FOSSILS OF NAGPUB. 1G3 



head with a long muzzle, armed with formidable sharp sauroid teeth, 

 and rows of smaller ones. This Sir P. Egerton considers to be allied 

 to the Sphyreenodus of the London clay. Another ichthyolite, of 

 much less considerable dimensions, possessed cycloid scales of a 

 pattern hitherto unrecognized. 



On the west side of Phizdura, which is only 3 miles E.S.E. of 

 Miingali, there is a hill of trap somewhat like that at Dongargaum, 

 but not so high. It also overlies a fossiliferous deposit, though not 

 of yellow limestone as there, but of red clay exactly like that which 

 is cultivated at the base of Gidad Hill. The organic remains at 

 Phizdura may be gathered in abundance from the surface of a field, 

 and comprise bones of large Pachyderms, coprolites of various sizes, 

 a Saurian tooth, the vertebra of a large Fish, and fragments of the 

 plastron of a freshwater Tortoise. I have no doubt that the Pachy- 

 dermatous bones will be found the same as those dug out from a bed 

 under trap at Jabbalpur, the connexion of which with the inter- 

 trappean shell-stratum of that district has never yet been made out. 

 Phizdura supplies the wanting link. There we have Pachyderms 

 and Molluscs together in one and the same deposit. If, as it may 

 be presumed, the Pachyderms of Phizdura are identical with thoso 

 at Jabbalpur, then, there being no question that the shells of Phiz- 

 dura are the same as those of the fossiliferous intcrtrappcan deposit, 

 it follows that the bone-bed under trap at Jabbalpur is contem- 

 poraneous with the slieU-bed between trap there as in other localities 

 of Central India. 



To determine, then, the age of this deposit, sometimes stibtrap- 

 pean, sometimes intcrtrappcan, becomes an important consideration. 

 In a paper presented to the Bombay Br. lloyal Asiatic Society in 

 March 1853, I gave my reasons for believing that it was Eocene. 

 I suppose this will now be conceded by all. The only subject of 

 uncertainty is to what subdivision of the Eocene it belongs. The 

 examination of our fossils has not been carried far enough to justify 

 any very- determinate opinion on this point, and it becomes me 

 therefore to speak with hesitation. 



The only Indian formation with which the rocks under discussion 

 can be compared is the Xummulitic, so amply illustrated by D'Arcbiac. 

 Not one of his fossils, however, seems to lie specilieally identical 

 with ours, though there is a considerable resemblance in form be- 

 tween his Natica Dolium, Twrritttta aflmis, and cast of a CerWwwn 

 on tho one hand, and our A. Stoddardi, '/'. prastonga, and cast of 

 C. Stoddardi on the other. Though there is little similarity in 

 shape between his Vioorya VemeuiU and our V* fiuifbrmu t yet it 

 shows at least an approximation in age between the Nummulitie 

 and our Intcrtrappcan to find that these are the only two formations' 

 as yet known to imbed species of this genus. 15ut perhaps the 

 fossa] that bears most closely on the matter in hand is the Phyaa 

 mmmuUtioa. D'Arcniac does not seem to be quite sure whether 

 the fossil is a Vhysa; Inii 1 think there can bo little question that 

 bis figures represent spa [mens of that genus. His Pkysa may not 

 be fully grown, in which case it may be specifically identical with 



VOL. XVI. — l'AKT I. N" 



