Crinoidea, Encrinidae. 11 
Note on additional specimens. — Professor Laczk6 has lately for- 
warded some material from Veszprém (Giricses-domb, lower stratified limestone), in 
which are two trochitae (#7 and m) generally resembling the specimens h—I, but 
with distinctly concave side-faces. The measurements in millimetres are as follows: 
Specimenaae a x m n 
Piston embers ancy vos ©. 8 9 
: least 7 16 1:0 
penite greatest . 18 1°2 
Inet ie eee eee 15 2°3 
No. of crenellae . . 18—20 15 
Length of crenellae . 05 0-4 
There is no rim; the crenellae have not the peculiar notched appearance that 
characterises Dadocrinus; they show signs of arrangement in five groups. It is 
possible that the longer of the two trochitae is really compound, as described for 
Encrinus by Go.pruss (Petrefacta Germ. p. 178) and for Holocrinus by R. WaGNER 
(Jena. Zeitschr. XX, p. 8; 1886). 
Encrinus granulosus. 
(Plate I, fig. 10.) 
1834. Apiocrinites > granulosus Minster; Neues Jahrb. f. Mineral. 1834, p. 8. 
1841. Encrinus granulosus (MONst.). — MUwster : Beitr. z. Petrefactenk. IV, p. 53, pl. V. figs. 11-19. 
1845. Encrinites granulosus Mtnst. — A. v. KuipstTetn: Geol. Ostlich. Alpen. p. 276, pl. XVIII, 
figs. 20—22, 
1865. Encrinus granulosus Mtnst. — G. C. Lause: Denkschr. Akad. Wiss. Wien. Math.-Nat. Cl. 
XXIV, Abt. 2, p. 271, pl. VIII a, figs. 7—12. 
1875. Encrinus granulosus Mtnst. — F. A. Quenstept: Petrefactenk. Deutschlands, IV, p. 485, 
pl. CVII, figs. 91, 96, 97. 
1875. Encrinus cf. silesiacus F. A. QuensteDT: Petrefactenk. Deutschlands, IV, p. 486, pl. CVII. 
figs. 98—101 (? 102). 
1889. non Lucrinus granulosus Mtnst. — S. v. W6HRMANN: Jahrb. Geol. Reichsanst. Wien, 
XXXIX, p. 191, pl. V, fig. 8. 
History of the species. — The previous synonymy is given by Lausg, 
but, as explained above, I do not accept his inclusion of Flabellocrinites cassianus. 
Judged from the figures alone, the specimens represented in Laung, pl. VIII a, 
fig. 10, c, d, e, appeared to me doubtful. This was only because they were badly 
drawn. They really are quite normal, of the type of the proximal region of the stem. 
The closure of the grooves to form the canals, seen in these and similar specimens, 
is the first stage in the evolution of the so-called Traumatocrinus, which has a 
joint-face in other respects closely resembling that of this type of columnal. 
The columnals referred to E. granulosus by S. von Wourmann (1889) differ 
from this species in the heterotomous branching of the striae, which are not granular, 
and are much finer than in E. granulosus. 
QuenstepT (1875) sought to separate from this species those columnals in which 
the ridges are relatively fine and almost reach the central canal. He compared them 
to Entrochus silesiacus. To this course there are two objections: first, as Beyricu 
pointed out (Crin. d. Muschelkalks; Abh. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1857, Phys. Kl. No. 1, 
