366 JOURNAL OF THE PLYMOUTH INSTITUTION. 
moschatus, Linn.,= Musk rat; 2. S. vulgaris, Owen, = Common 
shrew; 8. Zalpa europea, Schm., = Common mole; 4. Zrogontherium 
Cuviert, Fisch. ; 5. Castor fiber, Owen, = Beaver; 6. Ursus speleus, 
Blum., = Cave bear; 7. U. arvernensis; 8. Canis lupus, Linn., = — 
Wolf; 9. C. vulpes, Briss., = Fox; 10. Machairodus sp.; 11. Cervus 
megaceros, Owen, = Gigantic Irish deer; 12. C. capreolus, Linn., = 
Roe deer; 18. C. elaphus, Linn., = Red deer; 14. C. polignacus, 
Fale. ; 15. C. carnutorum, Dawk.; 16. C. verticornis, Dawk. ; 17. C. 
sedgwickit, Gunn; 18. Bos primigenius, Boj.,= Wild bull; 19. 
Hippopotamus major, Nesti, = Great hippopotamus; 20. Sus scrofa, 
Linn.,= Common wild pig; 21. Zquus caballus, Linn., = Common 
horse; 22. Rhinoceros etruscus, Fale ; 23. &. megarhinus, Christol; 
24, Elephas meridionalis, Nesti; 25. £. antiquus, Fale.; 26. £. 
primigenius, Blum., = Mammoth.* ; 
It is satisfactory to find from the foregoing list, that the Forest 
bed of Cromer, like the Kent’s Hole Breccia, does contain remains 
of Bears, including the Cave bear; and that the two deposits agree 
also in neither of them having yielded any relics of the Hyena. 
So far therefore as Palzontology can throw any light on the 
question it is decidedly to the effect that if the Kent’s Hole 
‘Breccia was deposited before the second continental period it is 
not to be expected that remains of Hyzena will be found init. It 
must be unnecessary to remark that should further researches in 
the Breccia disclose traces of any other of the Cromer species, 
there will be nothing surprising in the fact, as they may have 
been washed in with the fragments of grit. The only thing that 
can prejudicially affect the argument employed here would be the 
discovery of remains of the Hyzena in the oldest known deposit 
in Kent’s Hole, or in beds, which lke the submerged Forest of 
Cromer, belong to the first continental period. It should be added 
that should the Hyzena itself be found hereafter in the Cavern 
Breccia, or at Cromer, cr both, it would simply vitiate the par- 
ticular evidence here adduced in favour of the glacial or pre-glacial 
age of British men, and it would leave the question of so great an 
antiquity for man an open question to be proved or disproved by 
other evidence. 
2nd. I am not aware that Sir C. Lyell has written anything on 
* See “Cave Hunting,” by W. Boyd Dawkins, M.A., F.R.8., F.G.8., F.S.A., 
1874, p. 418. 
