Mammoth meridionalis, when the specie lived?

[Kutembea]

Hello!

 

I´m learning more about earlier mammoth species, and have some questionmarks when it comes to mammoth meridionalis. Most of the literature says that the specie lived between 2,5 - 1,5 million years ago. But I´ve been in contact with a seller, and this seller claims that there were meridionalis mammoths  living in Hungary between 800.000 - 1.000.000 years ago. The seller also said that meridionalis fossils they´ve found/bought from north sea have sometimes been between 1.000.000 - 1.500.000 years old.

The fact that the information is so different, have made me pretty confused. And I´m also questioning the fact that I haven´t found a more detailed story of the actual extinction of the specie?

It´s a very trustful team of sellers I´m talking about, and I´ve been buying several fossils from them and haven´t been given any reason to not trust them so far. 

But since there is a gap of fivehundred thousand years, at least, I still want to reach out for the opinion of others. Because now I don´t really know what to think..

 

Ps. I´m thankful for any little details you can give me!  

[Fossildude19]

I would ask the seller if they have any scientific literature that supports this claim.  

 

[Max-fossils]

On 8/16/2018 at 3:00 PM, Kutembea said:

The seller also said that meridionalis fossils they´ve found/bought from north sea have sometimes been between 1.000.000 - 1.500.000 years old.

Pretty much all of the mammoth fossils from the North Sea are Mammuthus primigenius, and most likely not that old. Their age usually hovers around the 40'000 years. 

 

Mammuthus meridionalis is a species that lived in Southern Europe, so you shouldn't be finding any of its bones in the North Sea. I do believe it lived in Hungary though, and if it did it was around 2,5 to 1,5 million years ago (so before M. primigenius). 

 

The seller is most likely wrong in what he is saying. Here are the different possibilities:

 

A) the Hungarian fossils he has are M. meridionalis, but are older than what he is saying

B) these fossils are much younger than he says, and are from M. primigenius

C) the fossils are a little bit younger than he says, and are from M. trogontherii (but this is unlikely because this species is pretty rare)

 

I hope this helps