PART 2.] 
Medlicott : Sul-Himalayan Series in Jamu. 
57 
region proper, to the north of the Salt Range. We may he well satisfied if we can make 
out there an assignable boundary for the top of the Subathu group. This remains to 
be done. 
A word is necessary on the Subathu group itself: at Subathu, where it was first brought 
to notice through the collections of Major Vicary, described by D’Archiac and Haime, and 
all along the Himalaya up to Mari, the formation is principally made up of brown, olive, 
and red clays, with subordinate earthy limestone ; the base of the group being very sharply 
defined throughout by very characteristic beds resting upon much older rocks. In my 
Memoir of 1862, owing to the mistake already noticed regarding the coal of Dandli, and 
other causes, such as the specific difference of the fossils as noted in D’Archiac and Haime’s 
work, I remarked upon the want of agreement between the Subathu group and the nummulitic 
band of the Salt Range. From the continuous observations of this season I was greatly 
struck by the remarkable correspondence between the thin nummulitic band at the east end of 
the Salt Range and the very base of the Subathu group. The point is important with reference 
to the great change that takes place in the formation to the westward, both in the northern 
and southern region—the immense and rapid increase of limestone. From Mr. Wynne’s de¬ 
scription of the Mari ground, it would appear as if the “ Subathu group ” overlay his “ Hill 
nummulitic limestone;” but I am disposed to think, and information sent me byMr. Lydekher 
strengthens the notion, that this great limestone takes the place of the upper Subathu 
deposits. The coaly band, common to both regions, continues at the base of the formation 
all through the Salt Range and beyond it to the west. Thus it appears possible that the 
Subathu group of the Himalayan region may contain representatives of Mr. Blanford’s 
Nari and Kirthar groups, and even of his Ranikot beds, in Sind. 
Our observations of this season have strongly brought before us the necessity of indicat¬ 
ing an upper division in the Siwalilc group of my Memoir of 1862, to represent the great 
conglomeratic zone and its equivalents at the top of the formation. We found repeated 
confirmation of my remark that the distribution of these Siwalik conglomerates is coincident 
with the proximity of the Great Himalayan rivers, they being generally represented 
elsewhere by brown clays undistinguishable from recent alluvium, or, if conglomeratic 
in this position, the pebbles are of local debris, not the hard torrent-shingle of the great 
conglomerates. There is no better example of this than at the Satlej, where there are 
some 4,000 feet of deposits highly conglomeratic throughout and very coarse in the upper 
portion. All are vertical, the strike being most easily followed continuously; and thus, 
within seven miles of the Satlej, in the parallel section above Basoli (Madanpur), we find only 
about 500 feet of conglomerate in the middle of over 3,000 feet of brown sandy clays. It 
was in these beds that Mr. Theobald found remains of Bubalus and Came'lus; and Mr. 
Lydekher insists upon their separation from the main Siwalik deposits on palaeontological 
grounds, suggesting that they may be the same as the Narbada fossil-beds. Upon this 
question of identification I think further consideration is needed. If the old alluvium of the 
Gangetic plains, which Falconer identified with the Narbada bone beds, are the equivalents of 
these vertical upper Siwalik strata, wherein the plains are we to look for the representatives 
of the very ancient high-level terrace deposits already described along the base of the Hima¬ 
laya as post-tertiary? I am inclined to think that these may rather be grouped with the 
old valley-gravels of the Peninsula. The gap between them and the top Siwaliks must be 
very great. 
(An outline-map for this paper will be given in a later number). 
