I0 PROCEEDINGS OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. [June 9, Fig. 8. Bone-cellsfrom a Reptile from the Wealden, described as Bird, fig. 1. P1.13. vol. v. Geol. Trans. 2nd Series. 9. Bone-cells from a Bird from the Wealden, fig. 6. P1. 13. vol. v. Trans. Geol. Soc. 2nd Series. DESCRIPTION OF PLATE II. Fig. 1. Radius and ulna of Pterodaetylusgiganteus, in the cabinet of Mrs. Smith of Tunbridge Wells. 2. Head of one of the same bones (a), fig. 1. 3. Bone-cells from the bone (b), fig. 1. 4. Part of a bone, in the possession of Mr. Toulmin Smith, similar to that described by Professor Owen as from a Bird, and figured in Pl. 39. vol. vi. fig. 2. Trans. Geol. Soc. 2nd Series. 5. Bone-cells from the specimen represented by No. 4. 6. Vertebra of a Mammal from Stonesfield slate, in possession of Mr. Morris. 2. On the Geology of some parts of the ,fflpine and Mediterranean regions of SOUTH-EASTERN EUROPE. By AMI Bov~, M.D., F.G.S. &c. DR. Bov~ in this communication states his views in reference to the classification of the nummulitic rocks and the connected strata in various places round the shores of the Mediterranean. He points out especially the great extent of these deposits in European Turkey, as shown in a corrected copy of his Geological Map of that country which he has forwarded to the Society. In this map he also indicates the occurrence of Silurian formations in Carinthia, Styria, and some of the neighbouring regions. 3. On the relative .4ge and Position of tl~e so-called Nummulite Lime- stone Of ALABAMA. By C. LYELL, F.R.S. and V.P.G.S. IN a former paper published in the Quarterly Journal of the Geolo- gical Society of London (vol. ii. p. 405, May 1846), I stated that the limestone containing abundantly the Nummulites Mantelli, Mor- ton, which occurs near Suggesville, Clarksville, and other places be- tween the rivers Alabama and Tombecbee, in the State of Alabama, was a member of the Eocene tertiary group, and that so far from con- stituting any part of the cretaceous formation, as had formerly been imagined, it holds in reality a place high up in the Eocene series of the South. In the same memoir I gave a section extending from Claiborne through Suggesville and Macon to the west of Clarksville, Alabama, in which the position of the so-called nummulitie limestone was explained. It was stated to be newer than all the beds of the well-known Claiborne Bluff, and I mentioned that "the bones of the gigantic cetacean called Zeuglodon by Owen were everywhere found in Clarke County, in a limestone below the level of the nummulitic rock and above the beds which contain the greater number of per- fectly preserved eocene shells, such as Cardita planicosta and others." 1847.] LYELL ON THE NUMMULITE LIMESTONE OF ALAB&MA, 11 (Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. ii. p. 409, May 1846.) At the time that my first communication was written, I had not finished my explorings in Alabama, nor visited St. Stephen's Bluff on the Tom- becbee river, where I afterwards obtained additional proofs of the order of superposition above indicated; nor had I then compared the Eocene strata at Vicksburg with those of Jackson in the State of Mississippi, which throw light on the same question of relative posi- tion. Before adverting to these last-mentioned localities, I will first offer a few observations on the country between Claiborue and Clarks- ville, for I understand that doubts have been lately thrown on the correctness of the views which I have expressed relatively to the true age and place in the series to be assigned to the "rotten limestone of Alabama," and the associated rock in which the fossil first named Nummulites Mantelli by Morton abounds*. Before restating the grounds of my former opinion and corroborating them with fresh proofs, it may be well to say something of the nature and zoological relations of the discoid bodies from Alabama which have passed under the name of Nummulites, and which constitute the chief part in bulk of considerable masses of limestone in certain districts. Having obtained many sl3ecimens both from Alabama and from Vicksburg in Mississippi, in which the structure of this fossil was beautifully preserved, I first showed them to Prof. E. Forbes, who at once pronounced them not to be Nummulites, but related to some living plants or zoophytes which Mr. Jukes had brought from Au- stralia. Mr. Lonsdale, who examined them immediately afterwards, said, "They arc certainly not Nummulites, but allied to some of the bodies usually termed Orbitolites, and are, I believe, corals, in the usual acceptation of that word." Afterwards Mr. Forbes having compared the American fossil with the living species from Australia, and satisfied himself of its near affinity, sent me the following note, dated June 14th, 1847 :-- " On the so-called ~'UMMULITES MANTELLI. "The American' Nummulites Mantelli,' judging from Mr. Lyell's specimen, is not a Nummulite, nor is it a foraminiferous shell. It is a species of Orbitolites, and consequently a Zoophyte (probably Asci- dian). The genus Orbitolites was established by Lamarck for the reception of a fossil of the Paris basin, the Orbitolites complanata, which may be regarded as the type. Other tertiary species and a Maestricht fossil were associated by Lamarck in the same genus, in which he also placed the ' Orbitolites marginalis' of the European seas. Respecting the true position of the last-named body, however, there is considerable doubt. "The Orbitolites complanata is very nearly allied to the American t Sir R. Murchison announced to the Geological Society of London at their meeting May 26th, 1847, that he had just received a letter from M. Agassiz, in which he stated "that M. Desor had clearly shown that the rotten limestone of Alabama was not cretaceous, as Morton and Conrad had supposed, nor Eocene, as Lyell had considered it, but was of the age of the Terrain Nummulitique of Bia- ritz." 12 PROCEEDINGS OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. [June 9, fossil. The Orbitolite8 elliptiea of Michelin, from near Nice, and that author's Orbitolite, Pratti, are also closely allied species. " In British strata, species of Orbitolite, are recorded from the greensand of Milber Down, from the chalk of Lewes and from the coralline crag of Sutton. It is possible however that bodies belong- ing to distinct genera have been placed together in our lists. " Mr. Jukes has collected at Swan River in Australia numerous disciform bodies, apparently Ascidian Zoophytes, which occur there in great numbers upon marine plants resembling Zostera, and when dead are found in great abundance in mud, procured by the dredge from various depths under seventeen fathoms. These discs are usually about half an inch in diameter and are composed of minute cells. They appear to me to belong to the same generic group with the ter- tiary Orbitolites, and such appears also to have been the opinion of Defrance, for we can scarcely doubt that these are the bodies alluded to by him (in the following passage) as living in the seas of New Holland: ' Cette esp~ce (i. e. Orbitolite, complanata of the Paris basin) a les plus grands rapports avec celle que l'on trouve ...... vivant clans les mers de la Nouvelle Hollande.' (Dict. des Sc. Nat. t. 36, Art. Orbitolite.) Marginopora of" Quoy and Gaimard seems to be a similar if not identical body. "As the subject stands at present, then, we have no right to infer from the presence of an Orbitolite, however abundant, that the stra- tum in which it occurs belongs to one period more than another, between the commencement of the cretaceous epoch and our own times *." A few days after I had received this communication from Mr. Forbes, a letter reached me from M. D'Orbigny, of which I subjoin a translation :-- " DEAR SIR, " Paris, 18th June, 1847. "I have been long acquainted with the fossil body which you for- warded to me, and at this moment I am printing, in an elementary work, all the mistakes concerning it ; it is, in fact, of all genera that perhaps which has been most often misunderstood, and I should call it the greatest culprit in geology. It is a genus nearly allied to Or- bitolina, and which I have named, in consequence of this analogy, Or5itoide,. It has always been taken for a nummulite, though it differs from it by the most marked characters. I have known many species, such as the O. media, papyracea, and that which you have for- warded to me, and which I had designated by the name of Jmericana. The Orbitoide, are found in the cretaceous and tertiary formatioI~s, the 2Vummulina in the tertiary only. Such at least is the result of my numerous investigations on this subject. The species that you have forwarded to me had been sent me from North America, with a great number Of tertiary and cretaceous shells; it came to 'me with- out any information respecting it, and I am anxious to know where you found it. "Yours, &c., "To C. Lyell, Esq.'" "ALCIDE D'ORBIGNY." * The Plagiostoma dumosum of Morton is decidedly a Spondylus. 1847.] LYELL ON THE NUMMULITE LIMESTONE OF ALABAMA. 13 The American fossil therefore now under consideration will hence- forth be called Orbitoides Mantelli, retaining the specific name first given to it by Dr. Morton. In my former paper I endeavoured to point out the cause of the obscurity in which the true age of the nummulitie or orbitoidal lime- stone of Alabama had been involved, it having been considered some- times as an upper cretaceous group, and at others as intermediate between the cretaceous and the Eocene formations.