194 Dr Hibbert on the Limestone of Burdiehouse 



ous. Owing to this structure, and to their rounded form, it was 

 conceived that they were the epiphyses of vertebrae ; but other 

 specimens having been obtained in which an external lamellar 

 structure might be also remarked, this notion was discounte- 

 nanced, and the relics in question were adjudged to be large 

 scales. But, with regard to the animal to which these scales 

 might be referred, no supposition was hazarded. Indeed, some 

 little mystery regarding them may possibly subsist at the pre- 

 sent moment. {Other representations of these scales appear in 

 Plate X. and Fig. 2 and 3.) 



A second description of scales possessed great thickness. They 

 were adorned with a brilliant enamel of a nut-brown colour. They 

 were of an angular, rhomboidal, or polygonal form, and most of 

 them exhibited small pits or dots upon their surface, (see Plate 

 XL Fig. 4 to 7). Now, it is certain that any opinion which could 

 be formed from these scales was at the best equivocal. Although 

 I at first advocated their exclusively saurian character, yet, when 

 I saw a large specimen of the Lepisosteus, named by M. Agas- 

 siz the Lepidosteus, which is preserved in the British Museum, I 

 immediately considered the possibility that the scales might be- 

 long to some animal of the finny tribe, which suspicion was stated 

 in the memoir that I read at a sectional meeting of the British 

 Association. At the same time, a comparison made with various 

 crocodiles, collected from different countries, not only shewed me 

 scales of the self same form and thickness ; but even the very pits 

 or dots by which I at first conceived the scales of the Burdie- 

 house animal were to be distinguished. So far, then, the saurian 

 evidence was scarcely decisive. 



In the third place, a discovery was made of bony rays of ex- 

 traordinary dimensions and beautifulJy configurated. (See Plate 

 XL Jig. 1, A and B. Others also, of a different form, and of less 

 size, were found. Regarding these relics, no question at all could 

 arise. They evidently belonged to fish, and could not by any pos- 

 sibility be confounded with the remains of reptiles. 



