Chap. I.] historical summary. 9 



important discovery of the remains of a gigantic Saurian, supposed 

 to be an Iguanodon, near Ootatoor, there is but little referring 

 to the Cretaceous rocks in Mr. Schlagintweit's paper that had not 

 been noticed by previous observers. The statement that the depo- 

 sits of Pondicherry, Verdachellum, and Trichinopoly are continuous, 

 and characterized by the same fossils, is indeed erroneous, but as 

 will be seen by the accompanying map, the strike and dip of the rocks 

 is so uniform, as very naturally to lead to the above conclusion on a 

 mere cursory, survey, and the general aspect of the fossils, which alone 

 could be noted by a person making a rapid journey, is also sufficiently 

 uniform to explain Mr. Schlagintweit's mistake. 



To sum up briefly the principal results of the labors of our predeces- 



Srimmary of the pre- ^^^'^^ '^^"^ ^^^^«^^- ^^^^ ^^^ Cunliffe, as workers in 

 *^^^i°g- the field, and to Professor Edward Forbes and Sir 



Philip Egerton at home, must be attributed the merit of having first 

 established the existence of rocks of Cretaceous age in Southern India, and 

 of having accumulated, and worked out, the most valuable mass of fossil 

 evidence bearing thereon, that has hitherto been placed on record. To 

 the scientific skill and acumen of Professor Forbes, we are further indebted 

 for pointing out the characteristic differences of the fauna of the Yerda- 

 chellum and Trichinopoly (Garudamungalum) beds on the one hand, and 

 the Pondicherry beds on the other ; and of assigning to each its apj)roxi- 

 mate position in the scale of geological sequence ; a position, which the 

 additional evidence lately obtained on the spot, has only tended to confirm. 



We have seen that the conclusions of this eminent Palaeontologist 

 have been called in question by the late M. D'Orbigny and M. D'Archiac, 

 both authorities of well-founded celebrity ; and it is in no spuit of 

 disparagement of these gentlemen, that we pronounce the present confir- 

 mation of Professor Forbes's view to afford a new proof, were such 



B 



