200 EDWARD L. RICE 
mously exaggerated. In Emys the upper part of the quadrate 
is described as forming a ‘hollow cone.’ The entire quadrate 
is very massive, and located more posteriorly than in the lizards, 
so that its posterior margin must be deeply excised for the stalk 
of the columella auris. In Testudo, on ossification, it actually 
forms a canal around the columella. 
In stage 5 of Eumeces the quadrate is movably attached to 
the otic capsule by way of the fused processus paroticus and 
crista parotica. The more complete cartilaginous union with 
the procesus paroticus in earlier stages has been described (p. 
156), together with Versluys’s interpretation of the processus 
paroticus as the processus dorsalis of the columella auris. In 
the turtles, according to Gaupp (’05 b) and Bender (12), and in 
the crocodile, according to Gaupp (’05 b), the quadrate is free 
in early stages, although soon fusing with the otic capsule. I 
have no opinion to express concerning the bearing of these 
observations upon the vexed question of the relation of the 
streptostylic and monimostylic types of skull structure. 
Anterior to the quadrate (and entirely separate from it in 
stage 5 of Eumeces) is located a group of cartilages which stand 
in intimate relation to the pterygoid bone and the basipterygoid 
process—epipterygoid, processus pterygoideus, and articular 
cartilage. These have been mentioned in connection with the 
orbitotemporal region (p. 172). In harmony with the view of 
Parker (’80, ’83), they are explained by Gaupp (91 a, ’91 b, and 
later papers) as belonging to the first visceral arch. Thus the 
epipterygoid (fig. 3, epipt.) is homologized with the processus 
ascendens of the amphibian quadrate, while the processus ptery- 
goideus is represented by the horizontal rod of cartilage (figs. 1 
and 3, pr.pt.) extending forward from the foot of the epipterygoid 
in a shallow groove of the pterygoid bone. 
That the nodule of cartilage (fig. 1, pr.pt’.) in connection with 
the lateral anterior branch of the pterygoid bone is merely an 
isolated fragment of this rod can hardly be questioned, in view 
of Gaupp’s observation of a continuous extension of the ptery- 
goid process into this position in Lacerta. A similar discontinu- 
ous fragment of the pterygoid process is described by Schauins- 
