244 Triassic Echinoderms of Bakony. 
survived though the Encrinidae perished. No obscure or metaphysical reasons are 
required ; but it is of interest to note that with the passing of the Encrinidae we bid 
farewell to what may be regarded as the last representatives of the Palaeozoic 
types of Crinoid, the direct descendants of Carboniferous genera. 
Turning to the fragments of Echinoid Test, we find in the Cserhat group only 
one determinable species, but of that there are 27 specimens. This is regarded as 
a new species, Triadocidaris persimilis ; but its close relationship to the St. Cassian 
T. subsimilis is pointed out on p. 75. The remaining fragments of test are both 
few and obscure, but appear to represent about six other species. The total num- 
ber of test-fragments (including jaws) from the Cserhat group is 42. 
The Jeruzsdlemhegy group has yielded 63 test-fragments ; and these represent 
at least eight clearly distinct and recognisable species. Probably there are remains 
of 10 or 11 species, as opposed to the 7 from Cserhat. Of these species three, 
with a doubtful fourth, are referred to Triadocidaris; two, and a doubtful third, 
to Miocidaris; one to Anaulocidaris; two to Mesodiadema; and one to Diadem- 
opsis. The species of Triadocidaris and Miocidaris suggest a connection with the 
St. Cassian fauna, but none of them agrees with described Cassian species; on the 
contrary they indicate a higher horizon. Triadocidaris practernobilis and T. immu- 
nita approach the Diademoid type of ornament; the species of Miocidaris, in their 
wide interambulacrals with contiguous or confluent svrobicules, seem to have 
passed beyond the evolutionary stage of the Cassian species. It is, however, 
the presence of Mesodiadema and a probable, though primitive, Diademopsis that 
definitely marks the horizon as supra-Cassian; and the actual reference of it to 
Raiblian is confirmed by the unexpected identification of our Mesodiadema latum 
(p. 118) with the interambulacrals provisionally referred by Wourmann to his Cidaris 
Schwageri (p. 229) 
The distinction that study of the crinoids and of the echinoid tests enables 
one to draw between the Cserhat and Jeruzsélemhegy groups is fully confirmed by 
the Echinoid Radioles. The evidence is strong enough, but there are reasons for 
doubting whether it is quite so strong as inspection of the Table would lead one 
to suppose. According to that Table, the radioles fall into about a score of 
species, of which only four are new. Of these species, 7 are confined to the Cser- 
hat group, and 4 to the Jeruzsalemhegy group. In three of the others there is a 
special form characteristic of the Jeruzsalemhegy group. The remainder are few 
in specimens and several of these are doubtful. This evidence then is conclusive 
as to the distinctness of the faunas; it appears to be no less conclusive as to their 
age. Seeing that nearly all the Cserhat radioles are assigned to well-known 
Cassian species, while in the Jeruzsdlemhegy group are such species as 
Anaulocidaris testudo and Cidaris parastadifera, less familiar but still known 
from Raiblian localities elsewhere, the conclusion seems so inevitable that all 
the previous laboured argument looks unnecessary if not absurd. But I think 
any one with a wide knowledge of Echinoids would have criticised me had I based 
an argument as to age onradioles alone. Although the Cserhat radioles are referred 
to Cassian species, it must be remembered that the same is not the case with the 
Cserhat fragments of tests. It is therefore quite possible that the radioles do not 
really belong to the same species as do their isomorphs at St. Cassian: the tests 
may be different, and yet the radioles indistinguishable. Although by the necessities 
