212 The Kent's Hole Machairodus. [April, 



containing five figures, two of them representing different 

 aspects of a portion of the upper jaw of a horse, whilst the 

 remaining three were those of two incisors of Machairodus, 

 in all respects closely resembling the incisor of Mach. latidens 

 from Kent's Cavern, figured, as already stated, by Professor 

 Owen. Besides the figures, there is nothing on the plate but 

 the words " J. Scharf del, 1837." 



On the strength of these three figures it has recently been 

 concluded that MacEnery found two incisors in Kent's 

 Hole,* but, in reply, it may be stated that there is nothing 

 to indicate that the plate in question belonged to the cavern 

 series, or represented Kent's Hole fossils ; and that, if it did, 

 it could not have been the plate to which he referred, as it 

 contains but five figures, whilst his reference was to " figs. 

 8 and 9." In short, it seems impossible to deny that the 

 evidence that MacEnery found more than one incisor is 

 certainly very inconclusive. 



It is perhaps worthy of remark that Professor Gervais, in 

 his Zoologie et Palccontologie Franqaises has the following 

 observation under "Machairodus latidens": — "Fossil from 

 England in Kent's Cavern. I cite this species among our 

 fossils of France from a single incisor' found near Du Puy 

 (Haute Loire) by M. Aymard, in soil probably diluvian, 

 and which he has communicated to me ; this tooth quite 

 resembles, by its crenulated edges, that which was dis- 

 covered in England by Mr. MacEnery, and that of 

 De Blainville and M. Owen."t Is it possible that the 

 figures in the plate under notice are those of the two 

 Machairodus incisors, found one in Kent's Hole, by Mac 

 Enery, the other near Du Puy, by Aymard, and placed side 

 by side for comparison ? 



III. The Era of the Kent's Cavern Machairodus. — It has 

 been already stated that one of the difficulties in the 

 way of the acceptance of MacEnery's reputed discovery, 

 was that the Machairodus remains found in continental 

 Europe belonged to deposits of higher antiquity — those of 

 Epplesheim and Auvergne being miocene, and those of 

 the Val d'Arno pliocene ; and though the difficulty was 

 at least partially removed by the fact that the Kent's Hole 

 fossils, though of the same genus, belonged to a distinct 

 species, it was still held to be so remarkable as to require 



* See " The British Pleistocene Mammalia." By W. Boyd Dawkins, M.A., 

 F.R.S., and W. Ayshford Sanford, F.G.S., Part iv., Pal. Soc, 1872, pages 

 185—188. 



t Op. cit., 2nd edit., 1859, p. 231. 



