280 Reviews — Guide to Palceontology. 



the chief groups into which the class is divided. The same brevity 

 is noticeable in regard to the Invertebrates ; and there is also a 

 short notice of the Fossil Plants. The concluding sections of this 

 part refer to the very interesting historical and stratigraphical collec- 

 tions exhibited in the Department. The fine series of fossil footprints 

 is also mentioned ; and in this connection we notice that the student 

 is liable to be misled by the unfortunate slip of the name Clieiro- 

 therium occurring in the text, while the explanatory illustration bears 

 the legend CMrosaurus. 



The author in treating of the Reptiles and Amphibians follows in 

 the main the classification adopted in the Museum Catalogues. In 

 retaining the name Ornitlwpsis (p. 10) in place of the earlier 

 Eoplosaurus (p. 12) the author sets, however, a false precedent, 

 since if we do not hold by the rule of priority there is not the 

 least reason why Ornitlwpsis itself should be held preferable to 

 Eucamerotus : indeed the reverse is the case, since the remains on 

 the evidence of which the name Ornithopsis was proposed were never 

 figured by their describer, while those described as Eucamerotus were 

 fully illustrated. 



The magnificent series of Ichthyosaurian and Pliosaurian remains 

 preserved in the Museum meets with full recognition ; the illustra- 

 tions indicating the chief structural peculiarities of these groups. 

 The description of the anatomical structure at p. 33 is, however, 

 one of those instances to which we have already alluded where the 

 technicalities seem to be too great. Thus we very much doub 

 whether the ordinary reader will have the slightest idea what an 

 ' obturator notch,' or a ' precoracoid ' means. If indeed such terms 

 are introduced at all in a work of this nature, they should be fully 

 explained and illustrated by diagrams. 



In raising the peculiar Placodonts to the rank of an order, the 

 author departs from the usual view without any sufficient justifica- 

 tion. In the diagnosis of the order Anomodontia we again deplore 

 the extreme technicality of the terms, and venture to affirm that these 

 will be utterly unintelligible to the ordinary visitor, while the 

 student will of course seek elsewhere for his information. If such 

 technicalities are admissible at all, it should surely have been clearly 

 explained by the aid of a figure that the precoracoid of many 

 Anomodonts differs from that of all other Reptiles in being an 

 absolutely distinct bone. The features in which these Reptiles 

 approximate to the Monotreme Mammals might also have been 

 advantageously indicated, as they are the most interesting points in 

 connection with the group. A protest must also be entered against 

 the decisive reference of the Karoo System of the Cape to the 

 Trias, in face of the arguments brought against this view by Mr. 

 W. T. Blanford and others. Some of the figures illustrating the 

 osteology of the Anomodonts are all that can be desired. 



Notices of historical and type collections, and of stratigraphical 

 and other special groups of specimens, at pages 92-100, comprise 

 remarks on Sir Hans Sloane's, Brander's, William Smith's, Sowerby's, 

 Gilbertson's, Searles Wood's, F. E. Edwards', and Davidson's collec : 



