1241 llecunh of Ihe Geological Surveg of India. [voL. xi. 
whole Gondwana system, a break amply shown to exist both on palseontological 
grounds, and, which is of far greater importance, on geological evidence. With 
the Panchet bods the reign of ferns and jEquisetacem appears to end, the flora of 
the upper beds (I am simply taking Dr. Feistmantel’s own data) consists very 
largely of gymnosperms, ferns being relatively less numerous, although still 
abundant. The geological break is unmistakeable. In the coal-fields of the Damuda 
valley, the Panchets, together with the underlying gi’oups, were ujjheaved and 
disturbed before the intinision of the trap dykes believed, on good evidence, 
to be of Rajmahal age. Now, to admit that the beds above, and those below 
this huge break, both belong to one of the smallest groups of the European series 
would be tantamount to confessing the fact that fossil plants are worthless for the 
determination of minor divisions, consequently the upper beds are pushed up 
into the lias A\dth which they have little or no connexion, and the lower groups 
fitted into one of the established grooves in the trias with which they are equally 
unconnected. I quite admit the temptation, to every one who is fond of order and 
who prefers certainty to doubt, to adopt this plan of pigeon-holing strata, if I 
may so term the process ; it is neat and compact, and it has only one objection, 
which is, that it is radically false and unscientific. That the affinities of the 
Panchet fauna and flora are, on the whole, triassic, is not new, and the only additional 
evidence obtained of late years, such as the irndhor examination of the reptilian 
fauna of South Africa,^ and the classification of the LabyrintJwdontiaf whilst by 
no means conflicting with the original oj^inion that the Panchet beds might be 
lower mesozoic or upper paleozoic, is a waming against an attempt at correlating 
these Indian formations too closely with the European sub-divisions. To define 
the relations of the Panchet group by substituting Keuper for trias is, I believe, 
a retrograde step in the present position of our knowledge; the gain is merely a 
change in names, not in acquaintance with facts, and the nomenclature is more 
likely to need subsequent correction. 
Damuda series : Mdngli beds .—Before entering into the question of the rela¬ 
tions of the Damuda flora, I must devote a few words to the Mangli beds. I 
believe that Dr. Feistmantel’s expressed opinions as to the relations of these beds 
are untenable. The question is partly palreontological, partly geological, and, 
as the first alone has been treated by Dr. Feistmantel, I shall deal with it before 
the other. The opinions from which I dissent will be found at length® in a 
“ Note on Estheria in the Gondwana Formation,” and I would beg any one who 
wishes fully to appreciate the importance of the facts I am about to state, before 
going farther, to read Dr. Feistmantel’s remarks. He concludes that “the 
Mdngli beds cannot belong to the Damuda series at all, and that they are rather 
to be considered as the uppeimost continuation of the Panchet gi-oup.” This 
opinion, it must bo remembered, is opposed to my own * * after I had examined the 
' Owen: Q. J. G. S., Vol. XXXII, p. 352, and Brit. Mus. Cat., S. Af. Kept. 
’ ivepts. Brit. As. 1874, pp. 150., &c. 
* liec. G. S. 1., Vol. X, p. 26. 
‘ -Mem. G, S. I., Vol. IX, p. 326. 
