334 THE ZOOLOGIST. 



found it in a small streak of the conglomerate, about fifty feet 

 above the ferruginous conglomerate (zone of Hippotherium 

 antelopinum), and about a quarter of a mile north of where he 

 found the flints. He says that it was no doubt in situ when 

 found, and that it took some time to free it from its resting place 

 in the bed. This find was made while he was mapping the 

 petroleum field at Yenangyoung, and was mentioned by him for 

 the first time in 1895, in his paper on the Tertiary system of 

 Burma,* when he described the facets on the bone as a natural 

 result ; and said, " That side on which the bone rested was 

 considerably rubbed, thus indicating the result of friction on the 

 underlying sand produced by the gentle rocking of the bone by 

 the waves while lying on the beach." Subsequently, in 1896, he 

 saw a figure of a scapula of Equus which had been similarly 

 rubbed down, and which Prof. Dames considered to have been 

 rubbed by human agency, and, in his article in ' Natural Science,' 

 in 1897 — referred to early in this article — he first suggested that 

 the bone he had found was probably an additional witness for 

 the Tertiary origin of the chipped flint flakes, but he gives the 

 layer in which he found it as being " fifteen to twenty feet, per- 

 haps a little more," above the zone of H. antelopinum, instead of 

 fifty feet, as stated in his article in 1897 in the ' Records.' 



Whichever may be the correct distance above the bed, it is 

 clear that, as the bone was pulled out of the layer in which it had 

 up till then been undisturbed, there is no necessary connection 

 between it and the flint chips which, as we now see, are to be 

 found lying out on the plateau far above the conglomerate. In 

 fact, if, as seems to me, the flints could not have come from this 

 bed, the bone cannot possibly explain their origin. 



Dr. Noetling says, in favour of this bone, that at any rate 

 there is no similar wearing away of substance to be observed in 

 any of the hundreds of specimens which he collected at Yenang- 

 young, nor in the collection of Siwalik remains in the Museum 

 of the Geological Survey ; so that " it is therefore beyond doubt 

 that, whatever the verdict may be as to the origin of these curious 

 facets, the specimen here described is at present unique." 



I have already mentioned earlier in this article that on our 

 first visit to Yenangyoung we found, among other remains, an 

 * ' Records of Geological Survey of India,' 1895, vol. xxviii. p. 77. 



