346 Annals of the South African Museum. 



was put forward by Baily and by Griesbach, and was supported by 

 Kossmat after a careful study of the geographical distribution of the 

 Ammonites of Southern India. M. de Grossouvre concludes that 

 the Pondoland fauna is at least as closely related to the fauna of 

 the Chalk of Europe as to that of Southern India. 



Whilst it must be allowed that the relationship of the Pondoland 

 and South Indian faunas is not so close as Griesbach supposed, 

 there is nevertheless a considerable resemblance between them, and 

 it seems to me to be greater than the resemblance of the Pondoland 

 fauna to that of the European Chalk. Only three species appear to 

 be common to Pondoland and Europe, viz., Pecten (Neithea) 

 quinquecostatus, Sow., Astarte {Eripliyla) lenticularis (Goldf.), and 

 Pseudoj^hyllites Inclra (Forb.). Eleven others are represented in 

 Europe by allied forms, viz., Inoceramus cxpansus, Baily, Protocardia 

 Hillana (Sow.), Margarita radiatula (Eorb.), Pseudomelania [Oonia) 

 sp., Turritella Bonei, Baily, Actceon {Trochactaon), sp., Hauericeras 

 Gardeni (Baily), H. Bembda (Forb.), Gaudryceras Kayei (Forb.), 

 Mortoniceras Soutoni (Baily), and Baculites capensis sp. nov. The 

 resemblance is naturally greater to the European faunas which are 

 of fairly shallow water character than to those of deep water. 



A point of difference between the Pondoland and South Indian 

 faunas is seen in the presence of the genus Mortoniceras, which 

 is abundant in the former, but apparently does not occur in the 

 Trichinopoli and Ariyaliir horizons of India. This genus is also 

 well represented in Europe and North America. Another difference 

 is the absence of Pachydiscus in Pondoland, whilst it is well repre- 

 sented in Southern India. 



De Grossouvre considers that the Pondoland deposits are of 

 Lower Senonian age, and belong in part at least to the Coniacian. 

 He places them at the limit of the Coniacian and Santonian 

 divisions, but admits that the existence of Campanian (Upper 

 Senonian) is indicated by the presence of Pseudophyllites Indra 

 and Gaudryceras Kayei. The opinion that the deposits are of 

 earlier date than the Campanian appears to be based chiefly on 

 the presence of Mortoniceras Soutoni and M. Stangeri, which 

 De Grossouvre regards as closely allied to species found in the 

 Coniacian and Santonian stages in Europe. Another allied 

 species of Mortoniceras does, however, occur in the Campanian 

 of Europe. That the two Pondoland species {M. Soutoni and 

 M. Stangeri) are really of Campanian age is, I think, established 

 by their association in the same bed with Hauericeras Bemhda, 

 Gaudryceras Kayei, and Hamites (Anisoceras) indicus, not one 



