272 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 



arms are not well preserved in either of these specimens. In the 

 example of B. Bruguierianus [B.M. No. 74,106], from the Lower 

 Lias (obtusus-zone) near Charmouth, there are only a few scattered 

 hooklets, whilst the arms of B. elongntus [B.M. No. 39,855], from 

 the Lower Lias of Charmouth, are represented by a confused mass 

 of hooklets. Of the other fifteen examples, in one [B.M. No. 39,857] 

 there are merely a few solitary hooklets ; in another [B.M. No. 66,360], 

 the number of the arms is very indistinct; in two [B.M. Nos. 39,859 

 and 48,894], the remains of only two arms are preserved; in one 

 [B.M. No. 47,715], there are traces of three arms; in two [B.M. 

 Nos. C. 315 and 39,856], there are indications of three, or possibly of 

 four, arms; in one [B.M. No. 66,359], there is a confused mass of 

 probably four arms; and in one [B.M. No. C. 310], there are the 

 remains of four, or possibly of five, arms. In each of the remaining 

 six specimens six arms can be more or less clearly made out, whilst 

 there is not a single example in which more than six uncinated arms 

 are preserved. 



Dr. Jaekel states that the specimen described by him had four 

 uncinated arms, the outer one on each side longer than the others, 

 but he concludes that there were originally eight such arms, the 

 others either lying embedded in the matrix, or having been removed 

 from the exposed surface of the fossil, a conclusion based chiefly 

 upon the evidence of a specimen in the collection of the Berlin 

 University, that, although on the whole not so well preserved as his 

 own, nevertheless, according to that author, exhibited eight arms each 

 with its double row of hooks. Besides these eight arms Dr. Jaekel 

 considered that there was a fifth pair, probably longer than the rest, 

 and not provided with hooks. The photograph so kindly sent me \)j 

 Dr. Zittel included besides the specimen described by Dr. Jaekel 

 another Cephalopod with uncinated arms that he had received from 

 Dr. Jaekel. It is labelled "Lias, Lyme Regis." The hooklets have 

 the thickened bases like those examples referred to in the present 

 paper. For the determination of the number of the arms the 

 photograph is not so sharp as one could wish, but in that specimen 

 also the present writer does not see evidence of the existence of more 

 than six arms. 



Of the six specimens in the British Museum collection that exhibit 

 six uncinated arms, four [B.M. Nos. 47,020, 47,716, 82,895, and 

 C. 3,007] are stated to be from the Lias of Lyme Regis; one 

 [B.M. No. 39,901] is from the Lias of Charmouth; and one [B.M. 

 No. C. 5,026] is the type-specimen of Professor James Buckman's 

 Belemnoteuthis Montefiorei from the Lower Lias shales between 

 Charmouth and Lyme Regis. The exact horizon of the fossils has not 

 been recorded. The remains are preserved on the surfaces of slabs. 



The arms vary in length and seem to be arranged in three pairs, 

 a short, a medium-sized, and a long pair. Since the arms are usually 

 found to be symmetrically disposed, and as they would be arranged 

 symmetrically around the head, it may be concluded that the body of 

 the animal, together with any lateral appendages which it may have 

 possessed, was wider than thick, and that the aspect of the body that 



