4 PLEISTOCENE MAMMALIA. 



the occurrence of the hippopotamus as far north as York and the association of its 

 bones with those of boreal animals like the mammoth. The subject, which was 

 fully discussed at about the same date by .). Geikie 1 (1872), had already been 

 considered by Lyell and Prestwich. The various explanations suggested are 

 discussed in the sequel (p. 7). 



At this date Boyd Dawkins was of the opinion that the Pleistocene form 

 IT. major was distinct from II. amphibius. The same opinion was held by Falconer. 

 Other records from various parts of England now followed — by Thompson 2 (1809) 

 from Motcomb, Dorset ; by Busk :j (1872) from the Thames Valley at Acton and 

 Turnham Green; by Boyd Dawkins and Mello 4 (1879) from Cresswell Crags. In 

 his paper on the distribution of British post-glacial mammals 5 (1869) Boyd 

 Dawkins mentions twenty-four localities where Hippopotamus had been found in 

 river deposits and four in caves. 



In 1884 appeared Lydekker's important memoir on the Bunodont Suina of the 

 Indian Siwalik and Narbada beds.' 1 He suo-o-ested the mero-ini>- of Falconer and 

 Cautley's genera Tetraprotodon and Hexaprotodon, and even of Leidy's genus 

 Chasropsis, in the genus Hippopotamus. In opposition to the ordinary view he 

 considered the missing incisor in //. amphibius to be the second, not the third. In 

 his ' Catalogue of the Fossil Mammalia in the British Museum ' (1885) Lydekker 

 included all the Hippopotamida? in the genus Hippopotamus. 



Although de Blainville as early as 1844 had affirmed 7 the identity of the fossil 

 //. major with the living //. amphibius, nearly all subsequent writers had continued 

 to regard the two as distinct species. This was the case, for example, with Forsyth 

 Major 8 in his paper on the Mammalian fauna- of the Val d'Arno (1885). Woyd 

 Dawkins, however, in a note appended to this paper, stated his belief that the two 

 belong to the same species, and Lydekker expressed his agreement with him. 

 Later writers, including Woodward and Sherborn 9 (1890) and Boule 10 (1910) have 

 accepted this conclusion. 



.Next to those of the Val d'Arno and Palermo, probably the most remarkable 

 accumulation of hippopotamine bones found in Europe, is that of Harrington near 

 Cambridge, 11 where the remains of a whole herd, including individuals of all ages, 

 were discovered in 1878. Osmond Fisher 13 (1879) first gave an account of the deposit, 



1 ' Geol. Mag.,' ix, p. 164. 2 Loc. cit., vi, p. -Jut;. 



3 'Quart. Journ. Geol. Soe.,' xxviii, p. 465. ' Loc. cit., xxxv, p. 724. 



5 Loc. cit.. xxv, p. 192. c ' Palseont. Indica,' ser. 10, iii, p. 35. 



7 • Osteographie,' fasc. vii, p. 61. 8 • Quart. Journ. G-eol. Soc.,' xli. p. 1. 



'■> ' Catalogue of British Fossil Vertebrata,' p. 351. 

 10 'Les G-rottes cle G-rimaldi,' i. fasc. iii, p. 193. 



' For an illustrated account of the Barrington Beds see Hughes, ' Proc. Geol. Assoc.' xxii (1911), 

 p. 268. See also Boule, 'Bull. Soc. Geol. France" [4], vii (1907). p. 382. 

 12 ' Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,' xxxv, p. 670. 



