A NEW SPECIES OF EEIXACETJS EROM (E:NI^^GEN■. 25 



identical with the present form would be E. major ; but, as already 

 mentioned, it is impossible to consider that species as more than a 

 nominal one ; it is. however, quite probable that the unnamed 

 large species from 8ansan may be identical. 



As the (Eningen specimen cannot, therefore, be identified with any 

 named form, it may be regarded as a new species, for which the 

 name Erinaceus oeningensis is proposed. This species may be defined 

 as agreeing nearly in size and the number of roots to the upper teeth 

 with E. cdgirus, but distinguished by the proportionate size of the 

 incisors and true molars. It is somewhat difiicult to determine 

 whether the characteristic features of the dentition of E. eiorojJOMS 

 indicate a higher or lower degree of specialization than that obtain- 

 ing in the other existing species ; but since the (Eningen species agrees 

 in this respect with the latter group, and that group comprehends 

 such a large number of forms, it is not improbable that the dentition 

 of E. eurojoceus is the most specialized. Considering, then, that the 

 peculiar features of the dentition of E. europoeus may be of com- 

 paratively recent origin, and taking into account the close general 

 resemblance in size and structure existing between E. oeningensis 

 and the larger Palaearctic forms like E. europceus and E. cdgirus, it is 

 not improbable that the former may be the parent stock from which 

 one, or perhaps both, of these species were derived. The small 

 dimensions of the Lower and Middle Miocene E. arvernensis and E, 

 sansaniensis may, perhaps, also indicate that the parent stock of some 

 of the smaller existing Asiatic species likewise originated in the 

 Tertiaries of Europe. 



EXPLA^'ATIOlSr OF PLATE II. Figs. 3, 4. 

 Erinaceus miingensis, Lydekker. Oraniura from the Upper Miocene of CEningen : 

 fig. 3, palatal aspect, natural size ; fig. 4, right upper dentition, X 2. 

 British Musenm (no. 42824). 



DiSCFSSION. 



Mr. E. T. Newton remarked on the smaU differences between the 

 lesser fossil animals of the later Tertiaries, more especially the 

 Pliocene, and those of the present day ; and while not doubting the 

 validity of Mr. Lydekker's new species of Hedgehog, called attention 

 to the tendency there had been, at a time when it was thought that 

 no fossil species could be the same as a recent one, to give new 

 names ; but when recent forms were traced back in time, it was 

 found that they extended much further than was anticipated, and 

 some of the fossil species turned out to be identical with the recent. 



Dr. Woodward said that this specimen, with many others, was 

 obtained by Dr. Oswald Heer, when a student. The specimens 

 were purchased by Dr. van Breda, and the money was used by 

 Heer to pay his college fees. 



Mr. Ltdekeer, in reply, agreed with Mr. J^ewton's remarks, and 

 said that in this case he had insisted on affinities rather than 

 differences from existing species. Still the distinctions were marked. 

 All fossil hedgehogs came very near recent forms, and this one 

 was closely allied to Palaearctic species. 



