﻿42 FOSSIL REPTILIA OF THE 



i 



marked by parial articular surfaces, showing the haemal arches to be articulate therewith 

 over the vertebral interspaces" 1 — the discovery of the grand proportion of the skeleton of the 

 individual at the Enslow quarries adds a demonstration that the haemal arch in an anterior 

 caudal vertebra (fig. 10) attained a length of 1 foot 2 inches; and that the neural spine 

 "probably rose twelve inches above the canal/' 2 giving a total vertical extent of upwards 



of a yard to such anterior caudal. The vertebras probably 

 Fig- 10. exceeded in this dimension at the middle of the tail. 



The modifications of the caudal vertebras in parts of the 

 tail of Cetiosaurus longus, as exemplified by specimens from 

 the Great Oolite described and figured by Phillips (' Geology of 

 Oxford,' 8vo, 1871), are similar to those in the instructively 

 preserved Dinosaur from the Dorsetshire Lias). Compare 

 fig. 2, p. 260 (Cetiosaur), Phps., op. cit., with fig. 1, 

 PI. VII (Scelidosaur), Ow., Monogr. cit., figs. 1, 2, 3, 

 p. 265 (Cetiosaur), with figs. 1 and 3, Tab. IX (Scelidosaur) ; 

 and figs. 1, 2, 3, p. 266 (Cetiosaur), with figs. 6, 7, 8, Tab. 

 IX (Scelidosaur). 



The broad subquadrate coracoid, with rounded angles, of 

 the Cetiosaurus longus from the Enslow quarries (fig. 8) 

 repeats the characters of that bone in the type of the species 

 (' Report,' p. 102). In the Oxford giant the bone measures 

 " from the glenoid cavity to the extremity near the scapular 

 margin (incomplete) 18 inches; if complete, probably 20; 

 breadth between scapular and sternal margins, 18*5 inches; 



Caud al vertebra, Cetiosaurus longus, 1 



r Vthnat.size. (Ph P s. > ixxxix, P .259.) greatest thickness 5 -0." (Phillips, op. cit., pp. 270, 271.) 



The scapula of Cetiosaurus resembles that in Scelido- 

 saurus, with rather less concavity of the anterior border, and rather more concavity of 

 the posterior one (comp. Fig. 2, with Monogr. cit., Tab. Ill, Scelidosaur). It sur- 

 passes the humerus in length in a minor degree than in Scelidosaurus, and in a still 

 less degree than in Iguanodon. 



In the characters of the dermo-skeleton Cetiosaurus would seem not to agree with 

 Scelidosaurus. It is very improbable, if there had been such agreement, that not any 

 skin-scutes or spines should be shown in connection with the large proportion of the 

 skeleton of one and the same individual brought to light on the excavated oolite of 

 Enslow Rocks at Kirtlington. 3 



The same negative evidence in all the various finds of fossil remains on which the 

 genus was based suggested, in 1841, the idea that the tegument of Cetiosaurus might be 



1 ' Report,' &c, pp. 101, 102. 



2 Phillips, op. cit., p. 259. 



3 Phillips, op. cit., diagr. lxxxiv, p. 250. 



