.350 
>’AUTILOIDEA. 
RemarTcs. It is quite clear, from Forbes's description and figure 
of this species, that he was dealing with a species of though 
he compared it with Nautilus \^Hercoglossa~\ sinuatus, J, Sow. The 
fact that Forbes’s specimen came from Pondicherry (having formed 
part of Messrs. Kaye and CunlifiPe’s Collection (1840) of Southern 
Indian fossils) is remarkable, because the rocks in the neighbour- 
hood of Pondicherr}' are of Cretaceous Age’, whereas the lowest 
horizon of Aturia in Europe and America is Lower Eocene. 
Stoliczka has added to the difficulty by confusing Forbes's species, 
A. Delpliinus, with the Nautilus [^Uercoglossa^^ Danicus^ figured by 
Blanford (‘ Pala^ontologia Indica’’), which is a totally different 
fossil, as anyone may see by comparing the figures and descriptions 
of the two. Xot only is the last named a highly inflated shell, but 
its sutures, instead of presenting the distinct lancet-shaped lobes 
characteristic of Aturia^ and well shown in Forbes’s figure, have 
the perfectly rounded outline of those of the typical forms of Iler- 
coglossa. Moreover, in Forbes’s figure the forwardly directed lobes 
of the sutures on the sides of the shell are nearly in the middle, 
whereas in N. [//.] Danicus^ as figured by Blanford (loc. cit.), they 
are close to the umbilicus, on tbe inner fourth of the sides. 
The specimen which I have referred to A. Delphi tins ^ Forbes, sp., 
is from Kotri^ (Sind), where the Banikot group (Lower Eocene) 
occurs. To the north-west of Kotri the brown limestones of this 
group are said to be well developed. The specimen, which is of 
a brown colour, has some hard matrix adhering to it, which is made 
up of comminuted fragments of shells, &c. It is somewhat crushed 
on one side and distorted, but the front aspect of it shows unmis- 
takably the characteristic lobes and large siphuncular orifice of 
Aturia. The sutures are also seen, though faintly, on the sides of 
the shell, which retains the test in an altered condition. 
The present species bears a close resemblance to the Nautilus 
Aturi^ var. Australis, and it is difficult to point out in what respect 
they differ from each other. Until better specimens of the Indian 
form are forthcoming it may be best, however, to keep them 
separate. 
^ Dr. Stoliczka has proved that tbe general homotaxis of these beds is Middle 
and Upper Cretaceous, and that tbe Neocomian and Oolitic forms, which led 
to a portion of the beds being classed as’Lower Cretaceous, are less numerous 
than the Middle Cretaceous species with which they are associated. (Extract 
from Medlicott and Blanford’s Man. of the Geol. of India, 1879, vol. i. p. 268.) 
2 Mem. Geol. Surv. India, 1861, p. 24, pi. x. If. 4, 4 a. 
^ Formerly written Kotree. 
