208 j\Jr. F. A. Bather on British Fossil Crinoids : 



fussf and was referred by liim to Gyailwcrlnus. Since tlie 

 diagnosis of that genus given by Goldfuss was simply a 

 1]'ansh\tion of Miller's, it follows that C. geometricus was 

 legarded by its author as possessing but one plate in the anal 

 area. Neither the figures of Goldfuss nor that given by J. 

 riiillips in his ' Palaeozoic Fossils of Cornwall &c.,' pi. Ix. 

 tig. 41* (1841), show the anal plates. The Austins, in their 

 Monograph, p. 61 (1845), likewise referred this species to 

 Cyatliocrinus^ speaking as though there were one anal plate 

 only, placed as in Cyathocrinus ; in fact the diagram of 

 Cyafhocrinns on p. 58 is said to be taken from C. geompJricus. 

 C. F. Roemer J appears to have found Miller's description of 

 Cyathocrinus planus quite unintelligible, and consequently 

 proposed to take Miller's second species, now known as Taxo- 

 crinus tuberculafi/s, as the type of Cyathocrinus, while he 

 made C. geometricus the type of a new genus, Sphcerocrinus. 

 From his diagnosis of Sphcerocrinus we learn that he supposed 

 the genus to have only three infrabasals, while he again 

 mentions, though with some doubt, the single anal plate. 

 Eoemer's view was adopted by G. and F. Sandberger in ' Die 

 A^ersteinerungen desRheinischenSchichtensystems in Nassau,' 

 pp. 389, 390 (Wiesbaden, 1850-1856). Joh. MliUer § was the 

 first to point out the correct structure of C. geometricus, 

 describing a new variety of it, or possibly, as he regarded it, 

 a closely allied species, under the name Poteriocrinus hemi- 

 spha^ricus. He showed that there were five infrabasals, and 

 that the anal area possessed aradianal, an anal .r, and another 

 small plate (ri) on the right of anal cc, resting on the radi- 

 anal. L. Schultze || placed all varieties of this species under 

 the one head Poteriocrinus geometricus, and gave figures 

 (Taf. V. figs. 6 d, 6/) entirely confirming 3liiller's descrip- 

 tion and figures of the anal area. It is odd that Messrs. 

 Wachsmuth and Springer, who refer to both MUller and 

 Schultze, should still have kept this species under Cyatho- 

 crinus in the first ])art of their Revision, saying (p. 83), "it 

 has all the characters of Cyatliocrinus, not only in the con- 

 struction of the calyx, but also of the vault." In 188(3, 

 however (llev. III. 226; Proc. p. 150), they were inclined to 



t ' Petrefacta Gerniaiua!/ vol. i. part 3, p. 18U, tab. Iviii. ivj:$.b(i,b 

 (1831). 



X " ISeitrh'ge zur Kenntiiiss der fossilen Fauna des Devoiiischeu Ge- 

 Ibirges am Rbeiu," Veihandl. d. uaturhist. ^"er. d. preuss. Rbeiulaude, 

 ytb ,Iahrg. pp. 3(a 3(ii» : Et'iiu, 18")!. 



§ " lober iit'uo Ecbiiudeinieu dos EilVler Kalkes," Abbnndl. k. Ak. 

 \Viss. l^filin, Jabi'g. ].^ot;, p. l'-A), 'I'af. ii. lijis. 4, o. (i. 7 (I8.")r). 



II " Monograpbie drr Ecliiiv drniH'ii des EiHer KalkiV Dcnkscbr. k. 

 Ak. AViss. luatb.-iiat. CI. Bd. xxaj. (18G0) p. ."il ; W'wn, ISO". 



