OF SOUTHERN INDIA. 65 
In this sub-family we have to mention one genus, which is represented in 
the cretaceous fossils of the South Indian deposits. There exist still great differ- 
ences as to the defining of the different genera of the pzzuroromivs, as may be 
seen on a review of Adams’s, Carpenter’s, Gray’s, Chenu’s and others’ researches. 
We had already occasion to state, (Sitzungsb. Akad.Wien., 1865, Vol. LIT, Revision 
&e., p. 86) that there is no hope of arriving at any satisfactory understanding on 
this point, unless the very numerous fossil species are included in such a classifica- 
tory attempt. Even greatly increased anatomical researches will in this case not 
bring the point in question much farther. 
a. Sub-family,—CLATHURELLIN A. 
X. CYTHARA, Shuhmacher, 1817. 
(Vide Adams’ Gen. I. p. 98; Cithara*, Gray’s Guide, 1857, p. 40.) 
H. and A. Adams remark, that “in the slight dilatation of the mantle margin, 
in the short spire, and in the corrugated inner and thickened outer lips,” this genus 
“somewhat resembles Morwm (Oniscia) among the Cuasszpip#.” Gray places 
Cithara (= Cythara) actually in the last named family, that is, next to Oniscia in 
one sub-division. 
I may first remark, that I compare our fossil species only with those typical 
forms of Cythara, as Cyth. marginelloides, citharella, stromboides and others, but I 
am not prepared to say, whether all the species quoted by Adams under Cythara 
should remain within the limits of this genus. In comparing the cretaceous species 
here under description with Cyth. marginelloides, it is instantly apparent, that no 
reasonable ground can be given for a generic separation of the two species, inas- 
much as the general form is nearly the same, the inner lip corrugated, the outer lip 
thickened, toothed internally, and posteriorly with an insinuation of the margin. 
When we farther compare the two oldest known species of Oniscia and Cythara 
respectively, as here stated and figured on Plate V, we see that they agree very 
much in the form and structure of their shells, that the corrugation and partial 
granulation of the inner lip of the Oyth. ecretacea is at least remarkably like 
that of Oniscia costellata, and that the thickenings of the outer lip with the blunt 
exterior edge are formed in a perfectly identical manner in both; but that the margin 
of the outer lip of the Oythara has posteriorly a sinuosity, and so still retains the 
principal character not only of the genus, but at the same time that of the entire 
family of the Pzzvrorouzps, as I have previously remarked. It must be said, that 
the insinuation of the outer lip is an essential character of the Przevrorourps, as 
also partially of the Coyzpz. A second very marked character in our cretaceous 
species and in most other living species of Cythara is the straightness of the anterior 
canal, which in all Cassrprp# is constantly recurved or turned upwards. As the 
* From Mr. Mérch’s notes on a few of Link’s genera it would appear, that Cithara, Klein, is the same as Harpa, 
Lam., and that there ought to be two sub-divisions established Harpalis, Link (H. antiquata), and Harpa Lamk. (H. 
costata). (Proceed. Zool. Soc. Lond, 1862, p. 227.) 
8 
