304 
NATJTILOIDEA. 
fine spiral lines. We are, however, not in a position to identif)’ 
the Bohemian species conclusively with any other, neither have 
d’Orhigny, Geinitz, Stoliczka, and Sharpe done so. There is a 
crushed specimen in the Prague Museum from the clay of Priesen, 
having a diameter of 40 millim., and showing a central siphuucle. 
Two silicified examples from Bdhm.-Leipa are respectively 10 and 
15 millim. in diameter. Three examples from Lenesic have very 
simple and nearly straight sutures. The largest example shows 
very beautiful cross-barred ornaments upon the sheU. 
“ Nautilus incequalis, Sowerby, from the Chalk Marl, is perhaps a 
small example of Nautilus suhlavigatus. 
“That our Nautilus Reussii could be simply a young example of 
N. Deslonychamjpsianus^ as d'Orhigny affirms of N. suhlcrvigatus^ 
Sow., can hardly be the case, because our tolerably well-preserved 
example fails to show any indication of the sharp keel whicli borders 
the umbilicus in N Deslongchampsianusy 
HoHzon. Upper Cretaceous. 
Locality. Lenesic, Bohemia. 
Kepresented in the CoUection by a single example (No. 89003). 
Nautilus Liibanoticus, Foord and G. C. Crick. 
1878. Ammonites Traskii, O. Fraas, Aus dem Orient, Theil ii. Geol. 
Beobachtungen am Libanon, ]>. 97, Taf. iv. f. 4. (Ao^ of Gabb.) 
1886. Nautilus, sp., Noetling, Eutwurf einer Gliederimg der Kreide- 
formation in Syrien uud Palastina, Zeitschr. der Deutschen geol. 
Gesell. Baud xxxviii. Heft iv. p. 846. 
1890. Nautilus Lihanoticus, Foord and G. C. Crick, Ann. & Mag. Nat. 
Hist. ser. 6, vol. v. p. 404, f. 6. 
Sp. Char. “ Shell much inflated, rapidly increasing, broadest 
in the umbilical region. Umbilicus probably closed. Test orna- 
mented with prominent acute ribs, separated by interspaces rather 
exceeding their own width. Some of the ribs bifurcate in the 
region of the umbilicus. 
Remarks. “All the specimens are casts more or less crushed and 
distorted, and nothing is seen in them of the septa or siphuncle ; 
nevertheless the ornaments of the test are sufficient to distinguish 
the species from others which it may resemble. The general form 
of N. Lihanoticus suggests that of N. elegans, J. Sowerby, but the 
character of the ornaments in the latter differs from that of the. 
former, the ribs being at once broader and closer together in 
Sowerby’s species than they are in the present one ; and this dis- 
tinction is maintained even in casts. Fortunately one of our 
specimens has a portion of the test preserved, and it is here figured 
