68 CO. Lapworth—Recent Discoveries in Sweden. 
TV.—Own Lrynarsson’s Recent Discovertes in SwEDISH GEOLOGY. 
By Cuartes Larworru, F.G.S., etc. 
(PART II.) 
(Continued from p. 37.) 
On the Graptolites of Gothland (Om Gotlands Graptolither). By 
G. Linnarsson. Ofv. af. Kongl. Vetens. Akad. Foérh.; 1879, No. 5, 
pp. 12. 
ae island of Gothland, so rich in all other Silurian fossils, is re- 
markably poor in Graptolites. Angelin and Lindstrém simply noted 
the fact of their presence, but did not attempt their identification. 
At Dr. Lindstrém’s suggestion, Mr. G. Linnarsson here describes and 
ficures the two species that have been procured from these strata, 
from examples now in the Riks-Musei of Stockholm. 
The commoner form in the Gothland beds is the familiar species 
Monograptus priodon, Bronn. The author gives a careful description 
of this form, principally from the Gothland examples, which appear 
to be in a good state of preservation. He points out that, as in the 
examples from Dalarne, Westrogothia, and Britain, the polypary 
in this species is perfectly straight throughout, except near the 
proximal extremity, where it is slightly recurved. He admits, how- 
ever, with characteristic candour, that this latter feature gives colour 
to Barrande’s reference of the Bohemian sub-spiral forms to this 
species. I would here remark that the beautifully curved example 
figured by Barrande (Grapt. de Bohéme, plate i. figs. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 
7, 8, 9) is the only one of those placed by him under M. priodon, 
which agrees strictly with our British species in the form and 
relations of the thece. The examples illustrated in his figures 
2, and 10 to 14, if they are correctly figured (and no one who 
has honestly studied Barrande’s works can doubt this), cannot be 
M. priodon, as I understand it, but must belong to some species as 
yet undescribed. 1 have myself occasionally detected specimens not 
unlike Barrande’s fig. 1, but they are excessively rare, and, like his, 
have the appearance of having been unnaturally distorted. 
Linnarsson points out very correctly that M. priodon is, perhaps, 
more closely allied to Monogr. lobiferus, M-Coy, than to the typical 
form of . Halli, Barr., near which I have referred it. ‘The latter 
is, however, a most variable form, and many of our extreme British 
varieties have been generally referred to Monogr. priodon. 
IM. Ludensis, Murch., and If Clintonensis, Hall, are placed by the 
author among the synonyms of Jf priodon, but he is careful to note 
that in the present state of our knowledge they are most conveniently 
regarded as distinct. That their individual distinctness will eventually 
be placed beyond question appears to me to be quite clear. With 
regard to J Ludensis, quoted by Murchison, from the Lower 
Ludlow beds of Siluria, neither Mr. Hopkinson nor myself, nor 
