67 
IIALLSTADT BEDS. 
Comparing it with such Ceratites (?) as are figured in 
Munster’s plate 14, we find these ornate species have hut two 
lateral lobes in Munster’s figure ; but Klipstein’s have three; 
and this is probably nearer the truth. 
Comparing with other true Ceratites, we find 0. parcas , Yon 
Bucli, is very like in the sutures, but has no ribs on the 
whorls; while C. noclosus, also from the Trias, has branched 
and even knotted ribs, and an extra lobe. 
Ammonites robustus , Yon Hauer (Denkschr., vol. ix., pi. 2), 
is a species very like ours, but cannot be the same. Ours has 
closer, and straighter, and continuous ribs, compared in parts 
of equal size and age with A. robustus. Nor are any of the 
ribs of our species intermediate or broken, as in Hauer’s plate 
3, fig. ].. 
Is it not rather strange that Quenstedt, in his admirable 
treatise, should have placed the “ Globosi” so far from the 
true Goniatites and Ceratites ? The analogy seems much 
the closest with these. 
ORTHOCERAS. 
Plate 8, figs. 7-10. 
Of the three species here figured, not much can be said, for 
even a perfect Orthoceras is hard to identify. 
0. pulchellum , Von Hauer (Naturwiss. Abh., vol. iii., pi. 1) 
is perhaps the nearest in form, and in the distance of the 
septa from one another, to our figures 8, 10. But 0. sali- 
narium of the same author is also much like, and only seems 
to differ in the transverse lines which ornament it. (Ceph. 
Salzk., t. 11.) To one or other of these, the former in pre¬ 
ference, I would refer the above figures. 
But fig. 9 has closer septa, and must be a distinct species. 
And fig. 10 represents a small oval species, which Prof. 
Suess assures me is extremely like one from Mount Sandling 
in the Hallstadt beds. I have for the present declined to 
name it. There are no septa visible, and it might be a Den¬ 
tal ium, 
