128 F. A. BATHER, CRINOIDEA OF GOTLAND. 



There are fourteen species described under the name of Cyathocrinus in Anoklins 

 »Iconographia». Of these C. interbrachiatus has been referred l>v Messrs. Wachsmuth and 

 Springer to Gnorimocrinus under the new name G. Loveni (Revision, I, 50); and the 

 same writers have doubtfully placed C. granulatus in Arachnocrinus. With the former 

 reference I agree, but not with the latter. C. granulatus is without doubt a synonym of 

 C. incurvatus; while that species is here referred to Gissocrinus. All the other forms in 

 the Iconographia belong to Cyathocrinus; but some of the species are not well founded, 

 while others are synonyms. Thus, the specimens named C. alutaceus belong partly to 

 C. ramosus and partly to C. acinotubus; one of the type-specimens of C. latvis is an ab- 

 norma! calyx of C. ramosus, while the other is an abnormal specirnen of a hitherto unde- 

 scribed species, C. visbycensis; C. monilifer was based on an abnormal and strongly marked 

 specirnen of the same species; lastly C. zonatus cannot well be regarded as other than an 

 old specirnen of C. ramosus. As for the specimens described as C. acinotubus, C. longi- 

 manus and C. ramosus it would be impossible to separate them from the descriptions and 

 figures given. Fortunately there is no doubt as to the type-specimens, and it is easily 

 seen that in the case of C. acinotubus these represent a distinct species; those of C. longi- 

 manus and C. ramosus, however, are in a confusion that is almost inextricable. I have 

 done my best to separate the two species in accordance with the more important of the 

 type-specimens; but with this curious result, that what we are bound to take as C. ramosus 

 is the form to which Angelin intended to apply the name Itmyimanus and vice versa. 

 The only other way out of the difficulty would have been to have ignored Angelin's 

 species altogether. Such a cutting of the Gordian knöt would no doubt have greatly 

 lightened not only my labours, but those of all future students of these fossils; it is 

 however a method to be employed only in cases of absolute necessity, and in this one the 

 knöt could be unravelled. There are one or two specimens that I ain unable to refer to 

 any of the described species, and for them I venture to propose the new name C. Dianos. 



This gives a total of nine species of Cyathocrinus from Gotland, eight of which 

 appear to be peculiar to that region. They may be arranged in three groups. as follows: 



Group I. C. visbycensis, n. sp. c 



Group II. 

 Gi"oup III. 



The following key shows the characters of these groups. There are of eourse other 

 differences between the species than those therein mentioned; but those differences must 

 be looked for under the several diagnoses. 



C. 



acinotubus, Ang. 



(1, 



f 



c. 



striolatus, Ang. 



d 





c. 



Diana', n. sp. 





f 



c. 



glaber, Ang. 





f 



c. 



muticus, Ang. 





f 



c. 



distensus, Ang. 





f 



c. 



longimanus, A. no. 





f 



c. 



ra mosus, Ang. 





f 



