On two new Enduthioduiit i^X'neni ( ProdicijH(>(h>ii and OihsIIioi-- 

 tenodon). — By R. Hroom, M.D., B. Sc, C.M.Z.S. N'ictoria 

 College, Stellenboscli. 



Ill 187G Owen (lesci'il)<.Ml a poi-tiuu of the skull and iiiaiidiltle 

 oL' a large reptile resembling in many respects sonn^ of llu^ larger 

 species of Oudenod(j)i but differing in having a number of teeth 

 on the palate and the mandible. To the new form Owen gave the 

 name of Etulothiodon hathystonia, and regardeil it as forming the 

 type of a distinct family of the Anonwdontia — the "Enddlliiodoii- 

 ti'(y A few years later (187'.>) he described a new species Endo- 

 tltindon uniseries, differing from the first described species among 

 other things in having but a single row of teeth instead of two or 

 three rows as in the other. Seeley in 1(S95 described a new form 

 under the name of (Jri//)foci/n.()doti simus, somewhat resembling 

 Endotliioduti t(n/srrirs l)ut having sm.all canine teeth, ^^s early 

 as 1(SG(S Huxley had described another allied form as Pi-iatriodun 

 McKai/i, but its true affinities were only first recognised by Seeley 

 in l(Sljr), who rightly places it among the Endothiodonts. Ht;eley 

 has also suggested that EnduLliiudun uniseties ought to be made 

 the type of a new genus Esoterodo7i, and with this I thoroughly 

 agree. 



These four genera are the only Endothiodont genera that have 

 as yet been described; and while it is generally recognised that 

 they form a distinct group by themselves, there is some difference 

 of opinion as lo where this groui) should be placed. Owen believed 

 that EtidolkiodiHi is closely related to Oaden()d()n^-iX\\>.\ Lydekki'r is 

 also of the opinion that the Emlotkiodontidm should be placed in 



