48 



lively indicated (p. 4), but the nearer affinities to other 

 Saurians, recent and fossil, are not followed out beyond 

 a demonstration of the generic difference, indicated by 

 the term Bhinosaurus. 



The characters recorded and illustrated of this uni- 

 que fossil have much interested me and have been sub- 

 jects of frequent study and comparison, especially in 

 the course of acquisition of successive evidences of fos- 

 sil Eeptilia of the order Labjjrinthodontia *. But not 

 until a recent acquisition of a fossil skull from South 

 Africa, fig-s 1 — 5, have I had in hand a specimen which 

 seemed to repeat^ at least, the family-characters exem- 

 plified in the Memoir on Bhinosaurus. 1 subjoin figures of 

 my fossil and propose to indicate the characters by which 

 it agrees with Bhinosaurus F., also those in which it dif- 

 fers therefrom, and certain additional characters, which may 

 be present in the Moscou fossil, but which point to an or- 



Fgi. 1. 



Petrophryne grannlata. 



der of Beptilia distinct from 

 the Sauria proper. 



As in Bhinosaurus the 

 skull is depressed, in form 

 of an obtuse cone, of which 

 the posterior breadth sur- 

 passes two thirds of the 

 length; and in a greater de- 

 gree than in Bhinosatirus, 

 as it nearly equals the length 

 of the skull. The muzzle is 

 obtuse, the nostrils large, al- 

 most round, or a full ellipse, 

 and distant: they are se- 



») Owen, 'Anatomy of Vertebrata'; 8» vol. 1, p. 14. °Ord. Х11Г. 



