OCR Text |
Show 316 DR. C J. FORSYTH MAJOR ON FOSSIL GIRAFFIDJE. [Mayo, We shall consider on the present occasion how far the prediction has been fulfilled, and see at the same time that the authors of the ' Fauna Antiqua Sivalensis' have themselves contributed to realize their anticipation. 1. GIRAFFA. First, as to the forms ascribed to the genus Giraffa itself. There is one species which for nearly 50 years has haunted palBeontological papers, from which it is high time that it should disappear. This is the Giraffa (Camelopardalis) biturigum, Duv., said to come from a Tertiary deposit at Issoudun near Lyons 1. Anyone who examines with a little attention this supposed fossil, now preserved in the Museum of the Jardin des Plantes, may perceive at once that we have before us no fossil whatever, but the mandibular ramus of a recent specimen of Giraffa camelopardalis. It was found at the bottom of a dry well in the courtyard of a house belonging to a chemist, and it seems to have found its way from the apothecary's shop to the place where it was discovered, in order to render it more valuable. Besides this spurious fossil, half a dozen Tertiary forms have been ascribed to the genus Giraffa. The family is beyond doubt; but though we cannot for the moment assign them to any other genus than Giraffa, this reference ought, in my opinion, to be considered as provisional. In Palaeontology, even when we assign a generic name to some form imperfectly represented, it is with the reserve, though sometimes unexpressed, that more complete finds will modify the original opinion. The form which appears to have the best claims to rank as a species of the genus Giraffa is the Giraffa sivalensis (Falc. & Cauth), with which we have been made more thoroughly acquainted by Lydekker's description 2, founded both on teeth and bones, and leading to the conclusion that the Siwalik Giraffes were constructed on the same plan as the living species. Even iu this case I would not be too positive as to the genus, the skull being unknown, and the reference of the bones and teeth to one and the same form, though very probable, not being beyond all doubt. 1 Duvernoy," Sur une machoire de girafe fossile decouverte a Issoudun (dep. de l'lndre)," Notes communiquees a l'Acad. des Sciences, seances du 15 mai et du 27 novembre 1844 ; id. Ann. Sc. Nat. 3e serie, t. i. p. 136, pi. 2 (1843;. See also on the same subject:- II. Falconer and P. T. Cautley, " O n some Fossil Remains of Anoplotherium and Giraffe, from the Sewalik Hills," Proc. Geol. Soc. of London, no. 98,1844, postscript.-Blainville,' Ostuographie,'Atlas, Genre Camelopardalis, pi. ii. (Camelopardalis biturigum).-Gervais, ' Zoologie et Paleontologie franc.,' deux, ed., Paris, 1859, p. 142.-A. Gaudry, ' Comptes Rendus de l'Academie des Sciences,' vol. xl. p. 802 ; seance du 26 novembre, 1860.-R. Owen, ' Palaeontology,' 2nd edit, Edinburgh, 1861, p. 409.-A. Gaudry, ' Animaux fossiles et Geologie de l'Attique,'Paris, 1862, pp. 249, 250.-L. Riitimeyer, "Beitrage zu einer natiirl. Geschichte der Hirsehe," Abb. d. schweiz. palaontol. Gesellsch. vol. viii. Erster Theil, p. 73 (Zurich, 1881).- R. Lydekker, M e m . Geol. Survey of India, ser. x. Indian Tert. and Post-tert. Vertebr. vol. ii. pp. 102, 111 (Calcutta, 1884).| 2 R. Lydekker, I. c. vol. ii. pp. 103, 112. |