108 MADREPORARIA. 



method of labelling specimens, according to locality, is needed for tlie recent forms, it is far 

 more necessary, though I admit tar more difficult of application, for the fossil. It is more 

 difficult on account of the time element which lias to be introduced. What is, however, certain, 

 is that the whole of this European fossil Poritid fauna requires a close study with new 

 descriptions based upon a comparative study of the specimens now preserved in European 

 museums and waiting to be rescued from their specific names. 



One point of some importance remains to be noticed. On applying our metliods of 

 deciding whether a fossil Poritid is a Goniopora or a Foritcs, it is remarkable how completely 

 the views of earlier writers have to be revised. So many, which were at one time thought to 

 be Poritcs, have in this Catalogue to be classed as Goniopora. In Vol. IV. there are nearly 

 sixty European fossil Goniopoi-m, while in this Volume we have no more than seven Foritcs 

 from tlie same region, and some of tliese very doubtful. Whether this lends any support to the 

 view expressed in Vols. IV. and V. that Poritcs is morphologically a derivative of Goniopora, 

 by tlie suppression of the tertiary septa, furtlier research can alone pronounce an opinion. At 

 the same time it must be remembered that this list is far from complete. When the specimens 

 of fossil Poritids, now in different European collections, come to be worked over, one might 

 expect that at least a larger proportion would turn out to be Porites than that here given. 



The first coral to be mentioned in this group should naturally be that called Porites 

 panicea of the Bracklesham beds of Hampshire, described and figured by Lonsdale in Dixon's 

 " Sussex " (1850), p. 156, pi. i. fig. 7. But examination of the original specimen, which is 

 preserved in the Museum, shows that it was what Milne-Edwards and Haime * described it, 

 namely, an cxplanate Astrceopora. 



97. ? Porites Paris Basin 1. {P. Parisiornm prima.) 

 [Auvei's, Valmondois, Hauteville (Eocene).] 

 Syn. Litharwa heherli M.-E. & H., Britt. Foss. Corals (1850) p. 39. 



Description. — The corallum is said to be a convex mass, frequently built up of superimposed 

 layers. 



The calicles are described as 3 mm. in diameter, polygonal, superficial. The walls were 

 hardly distinguishable. The septa, twelve in number, nearly uniform, wedge-shaped, were 

 thick near the walls. They were very perforated, with denticulate edges and with spine- 

 shaped lateral granulations which may meet across the interseptal loculi as synapticulre. 

 The columella is said to be weakly developed and apparently consisting only of the more 

 internal teeth of the septa. 



This is clearly one of the doubtful forms. Its description is entirely from Milne-Edwards 

 and Haime. Its twelve septa seem to fix it as a Porites, but their fusion-formula is not 

 given, lience it is impossible to be quite certain ; wliile lastly, the great size of the calicles 

 affords another and very serious element of uncertainty. I know of no Poritcs with calicles 

 so large, yet on the other hand, the twelve septa is a definite character. 



A specimen in the Museum which was labelled " Litharcm lichcrti " was dcscrilied in 

 Vol. IV., p. 138. 



* Hist. Nat. dus Coralliaires iii. (i860) p. 169. 



