124 On Dr. Gerard’s collection of Spiti fossils. [No. 2 
On Dr. Gerard’s collection of fossils from the Spiti vailey, im the 
Asiatic Society's Museum.—-By Henry F. BuanForp, Esq. A. &. 
iS Ay Tas) GRAS 
The paper, of which the following is a revised copy was read before 
a meeting of the Asiatic Society about eighteen months since, but 
its publication was fortunately deferred for a time, in order that the 
illustrations which now accompany it might be completed. In this 
interval, my friend, Mr. Theobald, returned from a visit to the Spiti 
valley, and on looking through the fossils which I had described, he 
communicated to me his conviction that certain of the specimens 
which | had identified as European Liassiec species,* were not from 
the Spiti valley at all, but, in all probability, Whitby fossils which 
had been accidentally mixed up with Dr. Gerard’s collection. These 
specimens had been admitted on the same authority as the majority 
of the others, viz., the Rev. Mr. Everest’s figures in the 18th. Vo- 
lume of the Asiatic Researches, and owing to the neglected state of 
the collection, and the absence of labels on the majority of the 
specimens, there had been no means of detecting his error. 
The examination of undoubted Whitby fossils, of Col. Strachey’s 
Niti collection and also of M. Jaquemont’s collection in the Musée @’ 
Histoire Naturelle at Paris, led me to the same convicticn as Mr. 
Theobald, viz., that the Liassic species were in reality English speci- 
mens, and I accordingly wrote a postscript to that effect to be pub- 
lished together with the original paper. Shortly afterwards, how- 
ever, I returaed to India and as the paper had not then been put 
into type, I considered it better to withdraw and modify it in accord- 
ance with the above correction. 
A very considerable alteration had indeed become necessary The 
eollection as originally examined consisted of a fauna in part Triassic, 
in part Liassic, and partly also Upper Oolitic, some of the species 
being either identical with species from the Oxford clay or closely 
allied to forms of that age. The ‘Triassic specimens were not 
sufficiently numerous to lead me to infer the existence of a distinct - 
formation of that age, and I contemplated the possibility of there being 
* Ammonites heterophylius, Sow. Ammonites bifrons, Brug. Ammonites conca- 
vus, >ow. Ammonites Lhouarsensis, D’Orb. Ammonites communis, Sow. and Pec- 
ten equivalvis, Sow. Five of these were figured by Mr. Everest in the 18¢h 
Volume of the Asiatic Researches, as forming part of Dr. Gerard’s collection. 
