^{page 216 note 1} [Plate XI will appear with the second part of Professor Gregory's paper in the June Number of the Geological Magazine.—Editor.]

^{page 216 note 2} Fourtau: Notes Éch. foss. Égypte, 1900, p. 17.Google Scholar

^{page 216 note 3} Fourtau: ibid.., p. 21; and Crét. massif Abu Roash, C.R., vol. cxxxi (1900).

^{page 216 note 4} Fourtau, Révision Éch. foss. Égypte: Mém. Inst. Égypt., vol. iii, fasc. 8 (1899), pp. 607, 623.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 1} Max Blanckenhorn, Neues zur Geol. & Pal. Aegyptens: Zeit. deut. Geol. Ges., 1900, p. 33.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 2} Beadnell, Cret. Eeg. Abu Roash: Rep. Geol. Surv. Egypt, 1900, pt. ii (1902), pp. 18, 19, 20, etc.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 3} Dacqué, Mitth. Kreidecomplex Abu Roash: Palæontogr., voI. xxx (1903), p. 354.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 4} Fourtau, Révision Éch. foss. Égypte: Mém. lust. Égypt., vol. iii, fasc. 8.(1899), p. 718, pi.iii, figs. 11, 12.Google Scholar

^{page 218 note 1} From its double rows of granules around the bases of the ambital interambulacral tubercles.

^{page 219 note 1} Pseudodiadema libycum, Desor, 1858: Syn. Éch. foss., p. 72.Google Scholar Heterodiadema libycum, Cotteau, 1864: Pal. franç., Terr. crét., vol. vii, p. 522, pi. 1124. Cotteau, Peron, & Gauthier, 1879: Éch. foss. Algér., fasc. 5, p. 201, pl. xv, fig. 5. Gauthier, 1889: E'ch. foss. S. Hauts-Plat. Tunisie, p. 68.Google Scholar

^{page 219 note 2} Like Acanthechinus.

^{page 220 note 1} Having two small plates (or patella) in the compound ambulacral plates.

^{page 221 note 1} P. de Loriol: Crét. Fauna Portugal, vol. ii (1887), Échinodermes, p. 62, pl. x, figs. 3–6.Google Scholar

^{page 221 note 2} Cotteau, : Pal. franç., Ter. crét, vol. vii (1867), p. 823, pl. 1197.Google Scholar

^{page 222 note 1} Cotteau, : Pal. franç., Terr. crét. (1864), p. 587, pl. 1139, figs. 7–12.Google Scholar

^{page 222 note 2} From the plan of the tuberculation.

^{page 222 note 3} Cyphosoma sancti-arromani, Gauthier, 1889: E'ch. foss. Sud Hauts-Plateaux Tunisie, pp. 81–82, pl. v, figs. 8,12, 13, non figs. 9–11.Google Scholar

^{page 224 note 1} From Jebel Gunneh, the locality of the type-specimen.

^{page 224 note 2} de Loriol, P.: Faune Crét. Portugal, vol. ii (1887), Échinod., p. 52, pi. ix, fig. 4, from Up.Carentonian.Google Scholar

^{page 224 note 3} Phymosoma major, Coquand, 1863: Géol. et Pal. Constantine, Mém. Soc. Émul. Provence, vol. ii, p. 256, pi. xxvii, figs. 16, 17.Google Scholar

^{page 224 note 4} Cotteau, : Pal. franç., Terr. crét., vol. vii (1864), pi. 1143, fig. 5.Google Scholar

^{page 224 note 5} Gauthier: Éch. foss. Sud Hauts-Plateaux Tunisie, pi. v, figs. 9–11, non figs. 8, 12, 13.Google Scholar

^{page 225 note 1} Cotteau, Peron, & Gauthier: Éch. foss. Algér., fasc. 5 (1879), p. 172.Google Scholar

^{page 225 note 2} D'Orbigny: Pal. franç., Terr. crét., vol. vi, p. 544, pi. 1005, figs. 7–9.Google Scholar

^{page 225 note 3} See e.g. the figure in Cotteau & Triger: Éch. Dep. Sarthe, p. 368, pi. liii, figs. 1, 3.Google Scholar

^{page 225 note 4} See Desor: Syn. Éch. foss., p. 174, pi. xxiii, figs. 6–9.Google Scholar

^{page 225 note 5} Peron & Gauthier: Éch. foss. Algér., fasc. 6 (1880), p. 86. pi. vi, figs. 3–7; fasc. 7 (1881), p. 91.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note 1} Compt, . Rend., vol. lxxviii (1867), p. 198.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note 2} Person & Gauthier: Éch. foss. Algér., fasc. 5, p. 172, pl. xii, figs. 3–6.Google Scholar