240 MM. Pictet and Humbert on the Fossil Fishes 



labelled as coming from Mount Carmel ; M. Agassiz saw in the 

 Zurich Museum a specimen of this species sent from Saint-Jean 

 d'Acre*; Mr. Williamsonf found it at Gebel-Suneen (very 

 probably Sannina), near Beyrout; and, finally, as we have just 

 seen, M. de TchihatcheflF has procured it at Makrikoi near Con- 

 stantinople, where it is associated with Eurypholis Boisseri and 

 Cyclobatis oligodadylus. 



The deposit of Hakel must have been formed at a very slight 

 distance from the land ; for our late researches aflforded a wing- 

 less orthopterous insect. 



With regard to the second deposit, we have nothing to add 

 to what Botta has said on the subject, with the aid of certain 

 opportunities for comparison which we have not had at our dis- 

 posal. 



The convent of Sahel Alma, situated 17 or 18 kilometres 

 north of Beyrout, is erected on a sharp declivity which descends 

 to the sea. It is immediately beneath the walls of the convent, 

 in a field of mulberry-trees, and covered solely by the vegetable 

 earth, that the calcareous marl containing the fishes occurs. 

 With Jhera we have collected Crustaceans and two Ammonites. 

 These latter fossils are, unfortunately, not suflSciently preserved 

 to admit of a strict determination. 



Valenciennes, in examining the fishes collected at Makrikoi 

 by M. Tchihatchefi", found a species of a new genus, which he 

 named, without, however, describing it, Strymonia sirica%. It 

 comes from a light limestone perfectly identical with that of Sahel 

 Alma, while the other species occur in a limestone very similar to 

 that of Hakel. It would seem, therefore, that the two fish-beds 

 of Lebanon are found also at Constantinople. 



Age of the two Ichthyological Faunas of Mount Libanus, 

 according to palceontological data. 



We think we are able to establish as almost certain that both 

 these faunas belong to the Cretaceous period. It would be, on 

 special grounds, impossible to attribute them to the Jurassic. 

 The greater number of Teleostean fishes which they afibrd, to- 

 gether with the absence of Ganoids, show them to be unques- 

 tionably posterior to that period. 



It seems to us no less evident that they are not Tertiary faunas. 

 For proof we have : — 



1 . The presence of two species of Ammonites in the beds of 

 Sahel Alma, and of an Aptychus in those of Hakel. 



* It is very possible that Saint-Jean d'Acre and Mount Carmel corre- 

 spond to one and the same locality. 



t Proceed. Geol. Soc. Lond. vol. iii. p. 291. 



X Bull, de la Soc. G^ol. de France, 2« s^rie, 1851, t. viii. p. 301. 



