THE PAST HISTORY OF MONOCOTYLEDONS 177 



These are known only from the leaves, which exhibit a form of 

 venation characteristic of the living forms. 



In the Miocene of Bohemia, Schimper has distinguished another 

 form by the name M. bilinicum. In the North American Tertiaries, 

 Lesquereux recognises a species he names AI. coniplicatum, whilst 

 his Zingiberites dubiiis is perhaps doubtfully referable to Musaceae. 



xxvi. Zingiberaceoi. 



Heer records Zingiberites from the Upper Cretaceous of Green- 

 land, Atane, and the Tertiary of Switzerland and Sam land, so that^ 

 whatever value we may place upon these resemblances in leaf-form, 

 the group would seem to have been well established in Tertiary 

 times. In the Eocene of Paris, Anomophyllum and Atiofnocarpum 

 have been detected. 



xxvii. Cannacece. 



The Cannophyllites of the Parisian Eocene is thought to represent 

 a fossil Canna. 



VIII. MiCROSPERM^ (Gynandrse). 



XXX. Orchidace(z. 



The group Microspermse is considered on a priori grounds to have 

 existed in Tertiary times. Massalongo, indeed, describes forms of 

 fossil plants representing bulbs with leaves from the Eocene of Monte 

 Bolca, renowned for the perfection of its fossil-, insect-, and fish- 

 remains. These he designates Protorchis and Palceoorchis. Many 

 fossils assigned to Cyperacete and other groups might equally well be 

 placed under this heading, so little do we know them, as yet, except 

 by their external characters. 



Summarising briefly these results, we find that of the families of 

 monocotyledons examples of all but the following have been recorded 

 from Cretaceous, Tertiary, or Post-Tertiary rocks, viz. : — 



Restiace^e, Pontederiacese, Amaryllidaceae, Taccaceae, Marantaceae 

 Burmanniacese, or, in other words, out of some thirty families twenty- 

 four are represented in a fossil state. 



If all the fossil monocotyledons, however, that have rapidly been 

 passed in review be regarded as authentic — and many of these have 

 been noted as doubtful or errors — they would not form so abundant 

 a flora as that of the Coal-measures itself, even if we mclude the 

 whole of the fossil monocotyledons from the earliest beds up to the 

 most recent or latest. 



The first forms to appear come, as we have seen, from the 

 Cretaceous of Europe or America, and all earlier fossils assigned to 

 them are doubtful. 



In speaking of the advent of Angiosperms, Professor Seward in 



