^^'i'hqs^'] proceedings OF THE NATIONA.L MUSEUM. 127 



family CerianthidjB is abolished, Cerianthus and Arachnactis being 

 associated with his Actiniues pivotantes to form the family Ilyanthid;e. 

 These comparisons refer to the broad features of the groups, there being 

 differences in detail in some. Many new genera were established by 

 Gosse, as for instance, Bolocera, Bunodes and Aiptmia, and this, as 

 well as his disregard for the most part of non-British forms, renders it 

 difficult to make a detailed comparison between the two authors. 



By the exclusion of the Lucernariadfe the Anthozoa obtained the 

 limitations which they noAV possess, except that the Hydrocorallines 

 still continued to be referred to the group. Agassiz indeed upheld their 

 hydroid character, but it was not until Moseley's brilliant observations 

 ('78) were made, that they were definitely assigned to the position long- 

 before pointed out for them by Rapp. . 



As already stated, subsequent authors were more influenced by Milne- 

 Edwards than by Gosse in drawing up their classifications, though 

 the division into smaller groups was not unlike that proposed by the 

 latter. Gosse's smaller divisions were more or less adopted and sub- 

 ordinated to Milne-Edwards's system. It will be altogether unneces- 

 sary to refer to all the classifications i)resentingtliese features, but still 

 it will be convenient to give one or two examples, choosing those which 

 ]>resent most historical value. 



One of these may be the classification proposed by Verrill in 1865, 

 wliich outdoes even that of Milne-Edwards in placing inordinate im- 

 portance upon the corallum. Verrill divides the Cnidaria or Polypi 

 into 3 orders, /. c, (1) Madreporaria, (2) Actinaria, (o) Alcyouaria,the in- 

 crease from the number proposed by Milne-l^^dwards l)eing accomplished 

 by raising the Madreporaria from the subordinate position they occu- 

 pied in the order Zoantharia and making them of ecpiivalent rank with 

 the Alcyonaria. The division of the Actinaria which Verrill proposed 

 Mas as follows : 



Suborder 1. Zoantliacea. 



Familios. Zoantliida- and J}er<>idie. 

 Suborder II. Antipatbacea. 



Families. Antipatbidie aud Ger.udida-. 

 Suborder III. Actiuacea. 



Families. A('tinidie,Tbalassiantbidir, Miuyidic, Ilyantliida-, Ceriant.liida^. 



This arrangement is important in giving the Zoanthids a greater 

 importance than liad hitherto been assigned to them, and in separating 

 the Cerianthidfe from the llyanthidiP, though they do not receive the 

 same position that Milne-Edwards gave them. The family ActinidiTe- 

 Verrill divided in various subfamilies, differing somewhat from the 

 equivalent groups of Gosse and Milne-Edwards, a subfamily Phellime 

 being established for the genus FhelUa. Milne-Edwards' Phyllactiuje 

 and Thalassianthina? he unites together in his family Thalassianthidte, 

 which is subdivided into the subfamilies Phyllactinie, Thnlassianthinje, 

 Heterodactylinse and Discostominae (Verrill, '68), the members of 



