FROM THE LOWER CHALK. 215 



■described under that name; there never was any mistake about the typical form of this 

 species ; although its generic and specific names have been frequently changed ; in justice 

 to its original author I have restored its old name. It appertains to the Medial Chalk. 



4th. E. abhreviatus. — This species was proposed by Lamarck for a large flint mould 

 figured by Leske ; but whether that form is the prototype of the Urchin to which I now 

 apply the name is uncertain, for moulds seldom possess specific characters and ought 

 never to have been described and figured as representatives of species ; moulds having 

 been so admitted by former authors have led to interminable confusion, and E. abhre- 

 viatus is one of many examples that might be adduced of this error. My learned friend, 

 Professor Desor, in his valuable Monograph, has cited thirty-one references to Galerites 

 abbreviata, Lamk., and given excellent figures of one of the varieties, which is the 

 G. vulgaris of Goldfuss and Bronn. The first figure that can be relied upon as truly 

 representing E. abhreviatus, Desor, is that given in Woodward's ' Geology of Norfolk,' pi. v, 

 figs. 2 and 3, p. 47, where it is entered in his stratigraphical list of fossils as G. vulgaris, 

 I have a series of type-specimens of this Urchin from the same chalk pits, and have 

 ascertained the accuracy of this identification ; we next find that G. vulgaris, Woodward, 

 is G. angulosa, Desor, pi. iv, figs. 5 — 7, and Caratomus liemisph(Bricus, Desor, pi. v, 

 figs. 14 — 19 ; both these species were drawn and described from English specimens collected 

 from the White Chalk of Norwich, and sent by the Marquis of Northampton to Professor 

 Agassiz, so that there can be no mistake about the identity of the original specimens most 

 beautifully and accurately figured in Desor's valuable work. 



A. — Species from the Lower Chalk. 



EcHiNocoNUS CASTANEA, Brongniart, 1822. PI. LI, fig. 2 a — g, fig. 3. 



Ntjcleolites CASTANEA, Brongniart. Geol. Environs Paris, pi. q, figs. 13, 14, 



1S22. 



— — Defrance. Diet. Sc. Nat., tome 35, p. 214, 1825. 

 Galerites castanea, Agassiz. Echinod. Foss. Suisse, pi. xii, fig. 7 — 9, p. 77, 



1839. 

 Catopygus CASTANEA, Agassiz. Prodrome des iScbiniJes, p. 185, 1835. 



Pykina CASTANEA, DesmouHns. Etudes Echiiiides, p. 185, 1837. 



Galerites Kothomagensis, Agassiz. Cat. Syst. Ectyp., p. ". 



— CASTANEA, Besor. Monogr. des Galerites, pi. iv, figs. 12 — IC, p. 23, 



1842. 



— — Agassiz and Besnr. Catal. rais. des Echinides, Ann. Sc. 



Nat., 3rd series, vol. vii, p. 149, 1847. 



— — Morris. Catalogue of British Fossils, p. SO, 1854. 



— — Forbes. Mem. Geol. Surv., Decade iii, pi. vii, 1850. 

 EcHINOCONUS CASTANEA, d'Orbigny. Revue deZool., p. 21, 1854. 



Galerites Kothomagensis, Sismomla. Echin. Foss. de Nizza p. 51, pi. 2, figs. 8 10, 



1843. 

 EcHiNocoNUS CASTANEA, Cotteau. Paleoutol. Frau^aise, t. vi, p. 503, pi. 990. 



— — Be Loriol. Ours, de la Suisse, pi. xiv, fig. 1, 1873. 



