Crinoidea, Encrinidae. 7 
which the relationship is doubtful, and for these I shall, following the example of 
Beyricu, adopt the noncommittal term — Extrochus. 
As regards the application of specific names to such fragments, it seems to 
me that if our descriptions are to be of practical service to stratigraphers, then they 
must be accompanied by names. A description without a name is soon lost sight 
of, whereas a name compels attention until at last it finds its proper position, if 
only as a synonym. 
Terminology. —The terms employed for the columnal characters scarcely 
need special definition so far as the Encrinidae and earlier Pentacrinidae are con- 
cerned. But in dealing with the stem of the Pentacrininae, it has been found necess- 
ary to revise and coordinate the terminology. In case of doubt, recourse should 
be had to the explanations there given (see p. 24 et sqq.). 
ENCRINIDAE. 
For definition, see Barner «The Echinoderma» p. 181; vol. Ill in «Treatise 
on Zoology» ed. E. R. Lankxester; 1900. 
Encrinus. 
1760. Excrinus C. F. Scuurze: Betrachtung der versteinerten Seesterne etc. 4to. Warschau und 
Dresden, p. 21. 
1768 Helmintholithus Encrinus (pars) Liwnaeus: Syst. Nat., XII, vol. III, p. 169; et 7. Entrochus 
(pars)? p. 168, non /s7s Extrocha, I, p. 1288. 
1801. Encrinus (pars) LAMARcK: Systéme des Animaux sans vertébres etc. 8vo. Paris, p. 379. 
1802. Encrinites J. F. BLuMeNpacu: Abbild. naturhist. Gegenstande, Heft 6, No. 60. 
History of the Genus. — It is strange that authors should, almost uni- 
versally, ascribe the genus Encrinus to Lamarck; stranger still that they should 
nearly always prefer to quote the «Histoire Naturelle», dating from 1816, instead 
of the «Systéme», dating from 1801; strangest of all that they should not have 
recognised that the type of Lamarck’s Encrinus is E. caput-medusae, which is a 
synonym of Jsis asteria Linn. and a well-known member of the Pentacrinidae. 
Biumensacu also (1779) had included this species in Eucrinus, necessarily as its 
sole representative among living forms. Fortunately, by accepting the name pub- 
lished by C. F. Scuutze with excellent figures, we save ourselves from the revolu- 
tion that adherence to BLumensacu and Lamarck might otherwise entail. It is, how- 
ever, worth while to remember that those writers were perfectly justified in applying 
the name Encrinus to what most zoologists (whether rightly or wrongly) call a 
Pentacrinus, for Acricota, the inventor of the term Excrinus, undoubtedly intended 
by it a portion of stem composed of Pentacrini (the Asteriae columnares of later 
writers)'; moreover, among the figures referred to by Linnagus as covered by his 
Helmintholithus Encrinus, those of Pentacrinids are quite as prominent as those 
of the accepted Encrinus, while his Isis Asteria is defined as «Encrinus capite 
stellato, etc.» (Syst. Nat. XII, p. 1288). 
1 See Quensrept: Petrefactenk. Deutschlands IV, p 452; 1875. Also Baruer: Pentacrinus: 
a name and its history; Nat. Sci. XII, pp. 245—256; 1898. 
