a =a 
OE a 
RAYMOND: CORRELATION OF THE ORDOVICIAN STRATA. 205 
the railroad or highway southwestward from Kegel, one continues to 
find Cyclocrinites as the common fossil until the coarse-grained, white 
limestone of the Wassalem is reached. After crossing the outcrop 
of this formation, the beds above are similar to those below, though 
with less shale, and still full of the Cyclocrinites. 
- Cyclocrinites seems to be confined very largely to the district west 
of the longitude of Reval. It is reported by Schmidt from the Jewe 
at Jewe and from the Wesenberg. At Jewe I succeeded in finding a 
few small specimens of Coelosphaeridium cyclocrinophilum, and this 
is probably the fossil which Schmidt had seen. At the quarries at 
Wesenberg I saw no Cyclocrinites, though I looked for it particularly, 
especially on my second visit, after I had collected many specimens 
at Kegel and in the loose blocks on Dago. It is therefore, I think, 
safe to assert that Cyclocrinites is a very rare fossil, if present at all, 
at Wesenberg. 
Stolley reports no species from the quarries at Wesenberg, though 
he visited that locality, and also had access to the material collected 
by Schmidt (in Dorpat). Stolley (51) described or reported five 
species, Cyclocrinites balticus, C. schmidti, C. mickwitzi, C. roemeri, and 
C. spasskii, from Esthonia, all from the region southwest of Reval, 
and in the strata above the Wassalem. 
At the United States National Museum I have seen specimens 
collected by Professor Schuchert at Wesenberg while in company with 
Akademiker Schmidt, and which are labeled Cyclocrinites spasskiv. 
These specimens are none of them spherical, though some of them 
might be interpreted as fragments of spheres. Moreover, they do not 
show the surface structures of Cyclocrinites, and they do show that if 
they were originally spherical, they were not hollow spheres, but had a 
structure extending nearly to the center, as in Coelosphaeridium. I, 
myself, collected many similar specimens, as they are very common at 
Wesenberg. They are certainly not Cyclocrinites, and probably not 
Coelosphaeridium, but this identification, which was probably made 
by Professor Schmidt, explains the listing of Cyclocrinites from Wesen- 
berg. 
Summarizing what has been said on the preceding pages, it appears 
that: — , 
lst, the fauna of the strata above the Wassalem is more like that of 
the Kegel than that of the Wesenberg. 
2nd, that the typical Wesenberg fauna is not found in the same 
region as the typical Kegel fauna, but that both the Wesenberg and 
the Kegel rest upon the Jewe and are followed by the Lyckholm. 
