Liml-hones 0/ Massospondylus (?) Browni. 



125 



so much expanded ; the condyles are less developed back- 

 ward, and the inner lateral trochanter appears to be more 

 proximal in position. The external proximal trochanter is 

 rather better marked than in Massospondi/lus carinatus^ but 

 rather less marked than in Eushelesaurus. The inner lateral 

 trochanter is not quite so near to the proximal end as in 

 Belodon or FalcEOsaurus, the bone in the latter genus being- 

 Fig. 13. Fig. 14. 



f 



Massospondylus (?) Broivni, 

 Fig. 13. — Eight femur, anterior aspect. 

 Fig. 14. — Right femur, internal aspect. 



more slender, more compressed above the external trochanter, 

 and otherwise of different character. On the whole, the bone 

 approximates nearest to MassosjJondyluSy indicating an animal 

 about three fifths of the dimensions of the type, with the 

 femur not more than half the diameter of the larger bone at 

 its extremities. 



It is not certain that these remains may not be referable to 

 Hortalotarsus. That could only be determined by discovery 

 of the tibia or other distinctive element. While there is this 

 possibility that the remains may belong to the Eagle's Crag 

 genus, I prefer, in the absence of evidence, not to affirm the 

 identity. The differences from Massospondylus are sufficiently 

 obvious to prevent inconvenience from recording the species 

 as (?) Massospondylus Browni. 



I am indebted to Mr. Brown for the opportunity of 

 making this description. 



