PART 4.] 
Feistmantel: Fossil Floras in India. 
121 
22. Gangamopteris cyclopteroides, Fstm.—from the Barakars in the Karharbari 
coal-field and from the Talchirs. The genus in Australia occurs in the 
mesozoic rock of Victoria. 
23. Gangamopteris Whittiana Fstm. from Raniganj field. The genus is mesozoic. 
24. Belemnopteris Wood-Masoniana, Fstm.—New genus and new species, from 
Raniganj field. 
25. Palceovittaria Kurzi, Pstm., nov. gen. and spec.—from Raniganj field. 
CYC A BE A CE2R. 
26. Nceggerathia Dislopi, Bunb.—from the Ivamthi beds. 
27. Nceggerathia comp. Yosgesiuca, Bronn—from Kunlacheru, Godavari District. 
This species, to which our specimen is very near, is in Europe known only 
from triassic beds. 
28. Glossozamites Sloliczhanus, Fstm.—from Karharbari coal-field. In Europe 
this genus ranges from Lias to Cretaceous. 
CONIFERAE. 
29. Voltzia acutifolia, Bgt.—from Karharbari. 
30. Voltzia heterophylla, Bgt.—from Karharbari. 
31. Albertia speciosa, Schimp.—from Karharbari. 
From what I have said in this section we can draw the conclusion— 
That the Damuda flora exhibits itself guile decidedly as mesozoic and most naturally 
as of triassic age, as out of tliirty-one species known at present, there are nineteen distinctly 
mesozoic forms, of which six species evidently triassic, four species of rhostic, and the 
others of generally mesozoic affinities. 
But also, the other twelve species, amongst which Glossopteris is represented by six 
species, have no paheozoic affinities; and of all the species of Glossopteris, only one 
might be identical with one in Australia. 
c.— What is the analogy of our Damuda Series with the lower coal-measures in 
Australia l 
This point, as Mr. Blanford truly observes, must he taken into consideration ; hut the 
analogy is by no means what he seems to think it. 
Any instructive or conclusive comparison can only be made between series that possess 
fairly represented and characterized flora. For our Damudas this condition can only be said 
to exist in the upper coal-measures in Australia, and in some exclusively plant-bearing rocks 
of Europe. 
I think those palaeontologists who declared the whole Australian flora as absolutely 
jurassic, did not distinguish the lower and tipper portion of the coal-measures. The first 
contains forms which could never support this assertion ; while the upper measures con¬ 
tain, besides those plants without analogy, some other forms which certainly can justify the 
supposition of a jurassic age. 
- On page 83 Mr. Blanford gave a scheme of the formations in the New South Wales coal¬ 
field (1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6). Nos. 1, 2 (Wianamatta and Hawkesbury beds), it is true, have yielded 
no distinct Glossopteris; hut in Tasmania, from where identical fossils with those of these 
} In Europe the most charac¬ 
teristic species of triassic 
beds. 
