86 



Notice of a Fossil Fish. 



The linguial bone* 6, fig. C, is large, broad, and flattish, and is 

 narrow and undivided at the apex. The hinder margin is but little 

 arched, is uneven, presenting a few irregular points. The breadth of 

 the linguial bone at the base is almost two inches, and its length 

 one and three-quarter inches. 



The upper surface of the fossil fig. A, presents the same anomalous 

 structure as the corresponding portion of Siluroid fish. No. 1, the 

 anterior orbitar process, 2 anterior frontal bone. No. 4, ethmoid 

 bone, 3-3 nasal bone on either side, 5-5 maxillary bones with 

 6, 6 fossa for the insertion of cirri. To establish the correct names 

 of the bones above referred to in the fossil, it would be necessary 

 to refer more particularly to the comparative osteology of Siluroid 

 fishes, which, as nothing has as yet been done on the subject, as 

 far as I know, would be more than could be expected in a casual 

 notice of this nature. 



But without entering into further details, sufficient exactness for 

 the present object has been secured, by a careful comparison of 

 the fossil with the recent head of Silurus hoalis, and Silurus rita, 

 Buch., two species which, although not so closely allied to the 

 fossil as some others which we might have examined, were still 

 sufficiently near, to present all, or nearly all, its corresponding 

 characters. The only peculiarity the fossil presents as compared 

 with the species above referred to, is the process No. 5, fig. A., 

 which we cannot venture to explain, further than by supposing it to 

 represent the superior maxillary bone on either side. 



Fig. B represents the front view of the fossil : all the figures are 

 about half the natural size. 



Of the importance with which this subject has been re- 

 garded, no better instance need be adduced than the remarks 

 of the Editor of the Journal in which the first account of this 

 fossil appeared, the late Mr. James Prinsep, who informs 

 his readers in a note, *^That the fossil is so extraordinary 

 as to require no apology for outstripping strict rules, (as 

 in the case of the Sivatherium), and introducing Dr. Can- 

 tor's account of it to the Journal, from the text of the Re- 



* This was also overlooked by Dr. Cantor, 



