1922] Kellogg: Pinnipeds from Miocene and Pleistocene Deposits 47 



occurrence of fossil walrus in Russia. Cuvier also thought he recog- 

 nized a vertebra of a fossil walrus among the bones found at Angers, 

 Department of Maine-et-Loire, and also among certain teeth found 

 in the Department of Landes, France. Blainville 12 was inclined to 

 agree with Cuvier. To understand blunders so widespread on the part 

 of early describers it must be recollected that their material was often 

 very fragmentary. 



In quick succession there followed many other discoveries of 

 supposed walruses. In 1835 Jager 13 found a canine, a fragment of 

 a mandible, and fragments of ribs in the sandstone quarry of Baltrin- 

 gen near Biberach, Germany. He attributed these remains to the 

 walrus, and proposed the name Trichecus, but Pictet 14 recognized them 

 as belonging to a sirenian. 



When Duvernoy 15 first mentioned two teeth found in a formation 

 of white rock south and east of Oran, in Algeria, Africa, he thought 

 they belonged to some marine mammal, possibly the walrus. Blain- 

 ville, 16 a few years later, figured these same teeth and discussed their 

 relationship with the ruminants. 



The earliest progenitor of the Odobenidae is known only from a 

 mandibular ramus found on the sea beach at Yorktown, Virginia. 

 This specimen was described and figured by Berry and Gregory 17 and 

 its age was determined as the upper Miocene. 



During the Pliocene, fossil walrus remains are known only from 

 Europe. A right mandibular ramus, found in the Upper Crag of 

 Port Wyneghem near Antwerp, Belgium, was described by Du Bus 15 

 as Alachthcrium cretsii. Following this discovery Van Beneden re- 

 examined the type and in his memoir associated several other skeletal 



i- Blainville, H. M. D., Osteographie ou description ieonographique, vol. 2, 

 pp. 43-44. 1839-64. 



13 Jager, G. F., tiber die fossilen Saugethiero welehc in Wurtemberg in 

 versehiedenen formationen aufgefunden worden sind, nebst geognostisehen be- 

 merkungen iiber diese formationen, pt. 1, pp. 1-2, pi. 1, figs. 1-3; pt. 2, p. 203. 

 Stuttgart, 1835-39. 



i* Pictet, F. J., Traite de Paleontologie (2), vol. 1, p. 234. Paris, 1853. 



15 Duvernoy, G. L., Note sur quelques dents fossiles d'Oran. C.-E. Acad, des 

 Sci., Paris, vol. 5, p. 494. 1837. 



16 Blainville, H. M. D., op. cit., vol. 2, p. 46; Atlas, vol. 2, pi. 10, fig. 5. 



17 Berry, E. W., and Gregory, W. K., loc. cit. 



is Du Bus, Vicomte B., Sur quelques mammiferes du crag d 'Anvers. Bull. Acad. 

 Roy. Sci. de Belgique, Brussels (2), vol. 24, no. 12, p. 566. 1867. 



is Eutten, L., Over fossiele Trichechiden uit Zeeland en Belgie. Versl. Wiss. 

 Nat. Afd. K. Akad. Wet, Amsterdam, vol. 15, pt. 2, pp. 798-811, pi. with figs. 1-6. 

 1907. Proc. section sciences Eov. Acad. Sci., Amsterdam, vol. 10, pp. 2-14, pi. with 

 figs. 1-6. 1908. 



