Annals of the Tkansvaal Museum. 
71 
subject, on a future occasion. I will avail myself, however, of the present 
opportunity to give an outline explanation of the condition of L. PutterUli. 
I do this especially, because another explanation of the condition of certain 
fossils has recently been given by Watson (5), with which I cannot agree. 
The bones of Putterilli have been displaced in all directions and this 
has most probably not taken place after their enclosure in matrix. In 
that case the bones must have been loosened from each other before or 
while they were covered up by sediment. The disintegration of the con- 
nective tissue may have taken place while the carcass was lying in water, 
but also while lying on dry land. In either case the sedimentation must 
have been so slow that the disintegration had removed all connection 
between the bones before they were finally fixed in sediment. 
Now, if L. Putterilli died on the bank of a river at low tide or in those 
parts outside the normal bed of a. river, which are occasionally covered 
by floods, the bones of the animal could have been disconnected long before 
the arrival of the next flood. The rising water will in this case not only 
cover the bones with sediment, but will also displace them in all directions. 
Watson mentions several skeletons of Pareiasaurus and one of Pro- 
colophon in all of which the bones still articulated or nearly so. The con- 
dition of these fossils is part of his argument to prove that the Beaufort 
beds have been laid down largely by wind-action. The skeletons must 
then have been covered chiefly by aeolian sediment. It seems to me, 
however, that skeletons, of which the bones are practically still articulating, 
must have been covered up very quickly, so that the disintegration had 
not time enough to loosen the joints. This can easily happen when an 
animal drowns in a flood, but is certainly not normal with aeolian sedi- 
mentation in areas of abundant life. 
The Skull. 
The general circumference of the skull is the same as that of 
L. latirostris. There is, however, a slight difference in the slope of the 
preorbital portion. In latirostris the angle between the preorbital portion 
and the top surface of the frontals and the parietals is in the vicinity of 
sixty degrees and in Putterilli this angle is nearer to forty-five degrees 
(see PI. X). 
General dimensions : 
Distance between the front edge of the jaw to the hinder 
end of the mutual suture of the parietals 283 mm. 
Distance from the hinder end of the left squamosum to 
the middle of the upper edge of the jaw 344 mm. 
Greatest breadth over the squamosa 283 mm. 
The height of the skull could not be ascertained, because 
the ventral as well as the occipital side are still 
covered with matrix. The height of the occipital 
plate, however, could be found : 
Distance from a line connecting the articulation sur- 
faces of the quadrata to the front end of the mutual 
suture of the parietals on the top surface 154 mm. 
