102 
Annals of the Transvaal Museum 
reason whatever to accept such a condition, for the figure is not an outer 
view of the left tibia, but an inner view of the right one. The following points 
will demonstrate this conclusion: A lateral view would not only show the 
sulcus malleoli but also the proximal articulation surface, because the latero- 
posterior corner is the lowest part of the head of the tibia in Plateosauridae 
and Anchisauridae. Neither of these two are visible in the figure. The border 
between the side figured and the distal surface is horizontal, as is the case 
with the medial border of the distal end of the tibia in all Triassic Theropods. 
In the figure the anterior border of the distal end passes from the anterior 
end of this horizontal border upwards and forwards (the anterior border of 
the proximal end is on the left-hand side) . In an outer view of the left tibia, 
in which the anterior surface of the bone is visible, the anterior border of the 
distal surface would pass from the left end of the horizontal medial border 
upwards and backwards. An inner view of the left tibia and an outer view 
of the right one would have their anterior surface on the right-hand side. 
Dr Broom does not give the distances of the trochanters from the proximal 
end of the femur. Taken from the figure, the upper end of the trochanter 
major lies at a distance of io cm., and the upper end of the trochanter quartus 
at a distance of 18 cm. from the proximal end of the bone. In our femur, 
therefore, the trochanter major is situated relatively lower than in Gryponyx 
africanus. 
A comparison with Plateosaurus stormbergensis Broom ( 9 , p. 162) is practi- 
cally impossible from the “ descrip tion.” Dr Broom mentions three bones, 
the metacarpale, the femur and the pubis. Of the femur the length, the 
breadth of the distal end and the distance from the proximal end to the top 
of the median trochanter are given as principal measurements. Essentially 
the description of this bone consists of the statement that it agrees very 
closely with the femora of existing species of Plateosaurus. The existence of 
this close agreement is greatly appreciated, so much so, that one develops an 
irresistible wish to know exactly how this femur differs from those described 
before. However, to arrive at this knowledge, it is necessary to have among 
others another principal measurement, the distance of the trochanter major 
from the proximal end, which Dr Broom does not give. I conclude, from the 
figure of the femur of Plateosaurus stormbergensis ( 9 , p. 164), that the proximal 
end of the femur in our form is more massive than in the type from the 
Stormberg. 
The head of the tibia of our form is relatively much broader than that of 
M assospondylus Harriesi. 
A comparison of the tibia of our form with that of the European Plateo- 
sauridae shows that the tibial head of our form is relatively much bigger than 
that of Plateosaurus Reinigeri and that the relations of the head of the tibia 
in Plateosaurus erlenbergiensis, Plateosaurus poligniensis , Gresslyosaurus robus- 
tus and in Pachysaurus ajax are quite different from those in our form. 
It follows from the above considerations that the present form is new and 
belongs to a new genus. I therefore propose to call it Eucnemesaurus fortis 
n.g. et sp. (ev = good, nv^pr] = tibia, o-avpos = lizard; fortis — strong). 
Gryponyx transvaalensis Broom. 
Through the kindness of Dr Broom the Transvaal Museum now possesses 
the type specimens of Gryponyx transvaalensis. These consist of a claw- 
phalanx and the distal end of a metatarsale. The claw has been described by 
Dr Broom as belonging to the first digit of the right manus (8, p. 82, fig. 3). 
The clawphalanx is high and strongly curved. Its right side is somewhat 
