Chirotherium herculis ’—Problems posed by the first finds
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11877925 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Geoffrey Tresise (a Liverpool Museum: National Museums and Galleries on Merseyside , William Brown Street, Liverpool, L3 8EN, U.K., corresponding author) |
| Year | 1991 |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 565-576 |
| Publication date | 1991-11-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Annals of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0003-3790 • E-ISSN: 1464-505X |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/00033799100200451 |
| OpenAlex | W2074077977 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 3 |
In 1838, Sir Philip Egerton described a new type of fossil footprint from the Triassic sandstones of Tarporley, Cheshire, which he called Chirotherium herculis. The following year he reported a second find of the same type of footprints in Chester. The subsequent history of the Tarporley footprints is outlined and the possibility that two footprints from the second find are included in the collections of the Grosvenor Museum, Chester, is considered. The existence of a tracing made in 1839 when the footprints were found provides proof that they do not correspond to the Grosvenor Museum's specimens
Astronomy · Physics · Archaeology and ancient environmental studies · Archaeology and Rock Art Studies · Philosophy · Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
| Highly cited | No |
|---|