358 Annals of the South African Museum. 



for the genus a new family, which may he called the- Sphenosuchidae, 

 and which on account of the uncertainty as to the occurrence or 

 absence of clavicles, cannot be satisfactorily included in any of the 

 defined orders of the Archosauria. 



FAM. NOTOCHAMPSIDAE, nov. 



NOTOCHAMPSA ISTEDANA, Broom. 



Text fig. 17, 18. 

 1904. Broom. Geol. Mag. Dec. V, Vol. I, p. 502. 



The only hitherto-published description of Nofochampsa is that by 

 Broom who gave a very brief notice of the two forms from the 

 Stormberg Beds which he included in the genus. At the time of 

 writing that paper, the remains of the larger animal (N. istedumt) 

 had not been completely developed, but Broom considered that enough 

 was shown to place the forms in the Crocodilia (Mesosuchia of Huxley). 

 A short time ago 'Watson suggested that the larger form was possibly 

 not a crocodile at all, but was related to Stegonins. I have therefore 

 further developed the fossil in the hope that it would be possible 

 to settle its systematic position. There are now displayed .the im- 

 pressions of most of the bones of the top of the skull, most of the right 

 ramus of the lower jaw with the whole symphysis, the shoulder girdle 

 (right scapula, two coracoids, and an interclavicle), the proximal end 

 of the right humerus, the humerus, radius, ulna, carpus, and meta- 

 carpus of the left side, part of the femur, tibia, and fibula of the 

 left side, most of the dorsal armour, and some ribs. These remains 

 merit a somewhat fuller description than that already given. 



Skull. Unfortunately, although further development has shown 

 a little more of the top of the skull, nothing can be seen of the 

 structure of the palate. 



In the middle line, as preserved, the skull has a length of 101*5 mm., 

 while its greatest length is 117 mm. The length of the lower jaw 

 from the symphysis to the articular surface is only 106 mm. Little, 

 therefore, can be missing from the front of the snout although the 

 anterior borders of the nares are not seen. The nares must, in con- 

 sequence, have been almost terminal. In his restoration of the skull 

 Broom figures the nares as being typically crocodilian, i.e., coalesced 

 into one central opening in the premaxilla, and thus adds about 

 14 mm. to the length of skull as preserved. This, I think, is a 

 misinterpretation of the structure because, in the first place, the 

 disparity in length between the mandible and skull becomes too 



