Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T08:38:38.267Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

V.—Rodents from the Pleistocene of the Western Mediterranean Region

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

C. I. Forsyth Major
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a former publication I have dealt with the anatomy of Prolagus sardus (Wagn.), from the Sardinian and Corsican Pleistocene, in comparison with that of its Tertiary relatives. The following pages deal with the geographical distribution of Pleistocene Prolagus and its bearing on more general questions.

When Ouvier discovered, in the ossiferous breccia of Corsica, remains of a ‘Lagomys,’ which he believed to be closely related to the Siberian Lagomys alpinus, he also suggested other analogies between the faunas of the two regions—Siberia and Corsica (as well as Sardinia), and commented upon the supposed relationship between the insular Mouflon and the Siberian Argali. Similar views were expressed by B. Wagner.

Pumpelly, Loeard, and Lortet sought to establish a connection between a supposed Corsioan ‘ice-age,’ as attested by the trace of ancient glaciers, and the former existence in the island of a supposed inhabitant of cold regions, the Lagomys corsicanus. Hensel had, however, shown before, in 1856, that the affinities of Lagomys sardus from the Sardinian bone breccia are not with the recent Lagomys (Ogotona), but with a Miocene type, for which he proposed the generic name Myolagus (antedated by Prolagus, Pormel). He was in consequence inclined to assume a Tertiary age for the breccias in which the Prolagus occurred (and, indeed, for the whole of the Mediterranean bone breccias). A similar view has again been brought forward of late years.

I myself pointed out (1) that the Corsican Lagomys likewise belonged to the genus Prolagus, as indeed had already been suspected by Hensel from his inspection of Cuvier's figures; (2) that the Tertiary age of the Corsican and Sardinian breccias could not be upheld, above all, because the mollusca occurring in them, as Loeard bad shown to be the case in the ossiferous breccia of Toga, near Bastia, are still living in the neighbourhood.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 2 , Issue 10 , October 1905 , pp. 462 - 467
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1905

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 462 note 1 Forsyth, Major, “On Fossil and Recent Lagomorpha”: Trans. Linn. Soc. lond. (2), vol. vii, pp. 433–520 (1899).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 462 note 2 “Ossements fossiles,” vol. iv, pp. 201, 202 (1823).

page 462 note 3 d., Denkschr. Münchner Akademie, vol. x, p. 783 (1832).Google Scholar

page 462 note 1 Pumpelly, R., “Sur quelques traces de glaciers dans l'île de Corse”: Bull. Soc. géol. France (2), vol. xvii, p. 81 (1860).Google Scholar

page 462 note 2 Locard, A., “Note sur les Bréches osseuses des env. de Bastia (Corse)”: Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat. Lyon, vol. i, pp. 48, 49 (1872).Google Scholar

page 462 note 3 Lortet, “Etude sur le Lagomys corsicanus (Cuvier) de Bastia (Corse)”: ibid., p. 56.

page 462 note 1 Zeitschr, . deutech. geol. Ges., vol. viii, pp. 689–703 (1856).Google Scholar

page 462 note 5 Centralbl, . f. Min. Geol. und Pal. No. 18, p. 562 (1902).Google Scholar

page 462 note 6 Op. cit., p. 696.

page 462 note 7 Forsyth, Major, “Breccie ossifere e stazione neolitica in Corsica”: Rend. R. Ist. Lomb. Scienze e Lettere (2), vol. xiii, pp. 432–435 (1880).Google Scholar

page 462 note 8 Forsyth, Major, “Scoperte Paletnologiche in Corsica”: Archivio per l'Antropologia e l'Etnologia, vol. x (1880).Google Scholar

page 462 note 9 Ferton, Ch., “Sur l'Histoire de Bonifacio a l'époque néolithique’: Actes Soc. Linn. Bordeaux, vol. liii, pp. 129–147, 347–366 (1898).Google Scholar

page 462 note 10 Forsyth, Major, in Atti Soc. Tosc. Sc. Nat.; Proc. Verb., 9th March, 1879, p. Ixxii; id., in Kosmos, vol. vii, p. 6 (1883).Google Scholar

page 462 note 11 Forsyth, Major, “L'Origine della Fauna delle nostre isole”: Atti Soc. Tosc Sc. Nat.; Proc. Verb., vol. iii, pp. 36–42, 113–133, 192 (1881–1883Google Scholar). Id., “Die, Tyrrhenis. Studien über geogr. Verbreitung yon Thieren und Pflanzea im westl. Mittelmeergebiet”: Kosmos, vol. vii, pp. 1–17, 81–106 (1883Google Scholar). Id., Tyrrhenis”, “Ancora la: Atti Soc. Tosc. Sc. Nat.; Proc. Verb., pp. 13–21 (1883).Google Scholar

page 464 note 1 Bull. Soc. Malacol. Ital., vol. ix, pp. 224–230 (1883).

page 464 note 2 De Stefani, C, “Nouvelles Observations géol. sur l'île de Sardaigne”: C. R. Paris, vol. cxiii, p. 607 (1891).Google Scholar

page 464 note 3 de Lapparent, A., “Traité de Géologie,” 3 ed., p. 1540 (1893); 4 ed., pp. 1804, 1805 (1900).Google Scholar

page 464 note 4 “Die Tyrrhenis …”: Kosmos, , vol. vii, p. 106 (1883).Google Scholar

page 464 note 5 Depéret, Ch, “Les Animaux Pliocénes du Roussillon”: Mém. Soc. géol. France; Paléontologie, Mém. No. 3, pp. 56, 122 (1890).Google Scholar

page 464 note 6 Depéret, Ch, “Etude de quelques gisements nouveaux de Vertébrés Pléistocénes de l'île de Corse”: Ann. Soc. Linn. Lyon, vol. xliv, pp. 125, 126 (1897).Google Scholar

page 464 note 7 Kosmos, vol. vii, p. 105.

page 464 note 8 Op. cit., pp. 125, 128.

page 465 note 1 Op. cit., p. 122.

page 465 note 2 Kosmos, vol. vii, p.6 (1883).

page 465 note 3 Arch. Mus. Hist. Lyon, vol. i, p. 43 (1872).

page 465 note 4 Atti sc. Nat.; Proc. Verb., vol. iv, pp. 139–145 (1884).

page 465 note 5 Ch., Depéret, “Sur l'origine et la dispersion géographique du Lagomys corsicanus”;: C. R. Paris, vol. cxxxv, pp. 884–886 (1902).Google Scholar See also Almera, & Bofill y, Poch, “Consideraciones sobre los Kestos fosiles cuaternarios de la Caverna de Gracia (Barcelona)”: Mem. R. Acad. Ciencias y Artes de Barcelona, vol. iv (3), No. 33, pp. 7, 8 (1903).Google Scholar

page 466 note 1 Oss. foss., vol. iv, p. 174, pl. xiii, fig. 4 (1823).

page 466 note 2 Op. cit., p. 763.

page 466 note 5 Op. cit., p. 695.

page 466 note 4 Busk, G, “On the Ancient or Quaternary Fauna of Gibraltar”: Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond., vol. x, p. 58 (1876).Google Scholar

page 466 note 5 “Some of the brightest records of the military glory and prowess of our country are indissolubly connected with Gibraltar. A great nation like England cannot afford to neglect, or disregard without reproach, whatever bears on the natural history or archæology of so renowned a possession’ (Busk, & Falconer, , in Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. London, vol. xxi, p. 368, 1865).Google Scholar Meanwhile, we leave it to French geologists to set us right on the geological age of the ‘rock’ (see Suess, , “La Face de la Terre,” vol. i, p. 229, footnote 4, 1897;Google Scholar and Lapparent, “Traité de Géologie,” 4th ed., p. 1098, 1900), and to a German malacologist to enlighten us on the recent malacological fauna of Gibraltar (see Kobelt, , “Studien zor Zoogeographie,” vol. ii, pp. 225, 243, 1898).Google Scholar And last, not least, we throw away (undeveloped) palæontological collections brought together under exceptionally favourable circumstances by an enthusiastic collector.

page 466 note 6 “From this fissure ton-loads of mammalian remains were obtained during the scarping of the cliffs, but unfortunately these have long been dispersed” (Ramsay, & Geikie, J, in “Geology of Gibraltar,” Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. London, vol. xxxiv, p. 521, 1878).Google Scholar