OF THE GENERA ZAMITES AND PTEROPHYLLUM. 111 
have been regarded as Monocotyledonous leaf-impressions, and in the one case the same 
plant has been figured by different authors under totally distinct names, though almost 
invariably in the belief that its affinities lay with the same group. It will thus be found 
that the present consideration of Zamites grandis goes far to undermine the supposed 
evidence for the existence of Monocotyledons in the earlier Triassic epochs. It is also 
hoped that the present study will throw light on some of the earlier Mesozoic represen- 
tatives of the Cycadophyta. 
I would here express my thanks to my friend and pupil Mr. L. J. Wills, B.A., of 
King’s College, Cambridge, who has made the important discovery of the first specimens 
of Zamites grandis from England*, for placing the material at my disposal for 
description. 
Iam greatly indebted to Professor Rothpletz, of Munich, for the loan of, and for 
permission to figure, the fine specimen of Pterophyllum Bronni described here, as well 
as for facilities for studying the collections in the Munich Museum. 
I would also return my sincere thanks to Prof. Zeiller, of Paris; to Prof. Solms- 
Laubach and Prof. Benecke, of Strasburg; to Prof. E. Fraas and Dr. E. Schütze, of 
Stuttgart, and to Prof. Beckenkamp, of Würzburg, who have all most generously 
assisted me, either by allowing me free access to the collections under their care, or by 
other aids in connection with this and other studies of the comparatively little-known 
Triassie flora. 
ZAMITES GRANDIS, nom. nov, 
While the genus Zamites is known from the Paleozoic rocks, it has not hitherto been 
definitely recognised from the Trias, although it is a most abundant frond-type in the 
Rheetic, Jurassic, and Wealden formations. Only one fossil, and that, as we shall see 
(p. 115), of a very doubtful nature, has been recorded under this name from the Bunter 
of the Vosges. Renault and Zeiller t have called attention to the absence of any evidence 
of this type of frond in the Triassic rocks. On the contrary, as I hope to show here, 
Zamitean fronds have been frequently described and figured during the last 60 years, 
for rocks of this age in various parts of Europe, though under other names, and these 
Triassic fronds, which in my opinion should be included within this genus, possess certain 
peculiarities which have led most observers into error with regard to their real affinities. 
The Genus Zamires, Brongniart, 1828. 
1828. Zamites, Brongniart, Prodr. Hist. Végét. foss. p. 94. 
1844. Yuccites, Schimper & Mougeot, Monogr. Plant. foss. Vosges, p. 42. 
1870. Macropterygium (pars), Schimper, Traité, vol. ii. p. 132. 
1870. Yuccites ( pars), Schimper, ibid. p. 426. 
1871. Paleozamia, Phillips, Geol. of Oxford, p. 169. 
1878. Yuccites (pars), Zigno, Fl. foss. Form. Oolith. vol. ii. p. 7. 
1891. Yuccites (pars), Saporta, Plantes Jurassiques, vol. iv. p. 69. 
* Wills (1907). t Renault & Zeiller (1886), p. 328. : 
üt 
