i’ART 1.] Blmi/ord: Palceonlological Relations of the Gondivdna System. 147 
Noeggeratkia Ilislopi ; of these, Vertebraria is very rare and the Noeggeratlda difEers 
from the Damuda form, whilst the commonest plants of the Karharbari strata, 
Gangamopteris cyclopteroides and Neuropteris valida, are unknown in the Damuda 
series. Moreover, although the Talchirs are, as a rule, nnfossiliferous, a few 
remains of plants have occasionally been found in them, and all hitherto found 
have been Karharbari species. It appears, therefore, clear that on pateontological 
grounds the Karharbari bods must bo separated from the Damudas and classed 
with the Talchirs, and that this distinction is eonfinned by differences in mineral 
character between the Damuda and Karharbari beds. Thus, the lower Gond- 
wanas of Bengal consist of three weU-defined sub-divisions, Panchet, Damuda 
and Talchir, each with a distinct flora. I should add that Mr. Hughes, who has 
more experience of the Gondwana bods, and especially of the lower Gondwauas, 
than any other officer of the Geological Survey of India, concurs in the distinc¬ 
tion of the Karharbaii beds from the Damudas. 
There can, at the same time, be no question that there is a distinct and very 
marked connexion between the flora just cited, and that found in the Bunter 
group of Europe. The connexion is, on the whole, not so great as that which 
exists between the plants of the Damuda series and those of the Australian coal 
measures; but stiU, if Voltsia hdernpliylla be correctly determined, and I see no 
reason for doubting the identification, one characteristic Bunter plant is present in 
the Karharbari beds, and two other Karharbari forms, Neuropteris valida and the 
AlbeHia, appear to be closely allied to the Bunter species. The connexion with the 
coal measures of Australia (Newcastle and Stony Creek) beds is not, on the 
whole, so strong as in the Damudas, although Gangamopteris angustifolia' is a 
species found in the Newcastle group, and the Vertebraria, Glossopteris and 
NoeggeratMa are closely allied to Australian coal measure forms, so that altogether 
there is quite as good reason on the evidence of the flom for connecting the 
Karharbari beds by homotaxis with the Australian bods, classed as paleozoic 
by the most competent Australian geologists, as with the lower trias of Europe. 
In the Karharbari beds, too, as in all other Gondwana plant-bearing beds, there 
are relations to several different European formations. Thus Equisetpm Meriani 
to which a Karharbari plant is said to be nearly allied is upper triassic (Keuper), 
Sagenopteris is upper triassic, rhastic and jurassic, being apparently best developed 
in the oolites; Glossozmiites is not known below the lias. 
It is m’ged by Dr. Eeistmantcl ^ that the triassic and mesozoic affinities of the 
Karharbari plants, belonging to the lowest known flora of the Gondwana system, 
tend to show that the Karharbari beds are “ triassic or at least mesozoic,” and he 
points out the bearing of this fact upon the age of the overlying Damudas. So 
‘ This circumstance was not noticed by Dr. Feistraaiitcl, Rec. G. S. 1., Vol. IX, p. 138, when 
he recorded the occurrence of G, angusiffoHa at Karharbari, He only mentioned the existence of 
the species in Victoria “in certainly mesozoic rocks,” together “with Tceniopterii Daintreei, 
McCoy, which is characteiistic of mesozoic rocks in Queensland.” See ante, p. 143. Qangamop- 
teris angustifolia was originally described as a Cgelopteris by M:cCoy from the Newcastle coal 
measures, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 1847, Sor. 1, XX, p. 148. 
Rec. G, S. I„ Vol. X, p. 139. 
