л 
bo 
MESSRS. NEWELL ARBER AND J. PARKIN ON 
THE BENNETTITEA, 
Apart from such fossils as may well be included within the term 
Cycadales, there are others, differing in toto as regards the type of fruc- 
tification. During the last thirty-six years we have gradually come to 
know more of these Mesozoic plants. The earliest account of their structure 
relates to Williamsonia gigas, described by Williamson *, in 1870. This 
was followed immediately by the important work of Carruthers f оп 
Bennettites and other genera, also founded on British material. Solms- 
Laubach f, some years later, added considerably to our knowledge of this 
group, from British and Italian specimens of the latter genus. —Lignier $ 
has also contributed further information with regard to Williamsonia and 
Bennettites, from French material. 
From these researches it has become clear that neither of these genera 
ап be regarded as members of the Cycadales, but must be placed in a new 
group of ordinal rank, the Bennettites ||. 
But by far the fullest, and from our point of view the most important 
work, which has been carried out on these fossils, is that of Wieland @ on 
the magnificent material of Bennettites (Cycadeoidea) ** collected from the 
Jurassic and Cretaceous rocks of the United States. The earlier, preliminary 
papers ЇЇ of this author have now been supplemented by a complete account, 
published in the sumptuously illustrated volume, entitled * American Fossil 
Cycads, which appeared last autumn. It is to this work that we are specially 
indebted for the first adequate description of the amphisporangiate strobilus 
of the genus, as well as for much further information on the subject of the 
habit and structure of these fossils. Wieland’s work has also cleared up. 
many points which were left obscure by the British, French, and Italian 
material, earlier examined. 
This study of the American Bennettiteee has further emphasized the fact 
that not only did there exist a great abundance and variety of Cycad-like 
Mesozoic plants, which cannot be included in the Cycadales, but that 
some of them warranted the distinction of being regarded as more closely 
related to the Angiosperms than to Gymnosperms. In fact the Mesozoic 
Веппе еж, as we now know them, appear to afford the long sought for 
clue to the phylogeny of the Angiosperms, especially on our view of the 
primitive features of the flower, already discussed. 
* Williamson (1870). t Carruthers (1870). 
i Solms-Laubach (1890) ; Capellini and Solms-Laubach (1891). 
$ Lignier (1894, 1901, 1903', 1904). 
|| This term is now employed in a much wider sense than that originally intended by 
Carruthers. Engler (1897) pp. 5, 341, adopts the derivative Bennettitales. 
< Wieland (1906). 
** We regard these generic names as synonymous, though we express no opinion as 
to priority. tt Wieland (1899, 1901). 
