Schimper[519] speaks of this species as possibly the pith-cast of _Equisetites columnaris_, but his opinion cannot be maintained; the species first described by Bunbury has considerably larger stems than those of _E. columnaris_. It is not impossible, however, that _E. columnaris_ and _E. Beani_ may be portions of the same species. The chief difference between these forms is that of size; but we have not sufficient data to justify the inclusion of both forms under one name. Zigno[520], in his work on the Oolitic Flora, figures an imperfect stem cast of _E. Beani_ under the name of _Calamites Beani_, but the species has received little attention at the hands of recent writers. In 1886 Starkie Gardner[521] figured a specimen which was identified by Williamson as an example of Bunbury’s species; but the latter pointed out the greater resemblance, as regards the external appearance of the Jurassic stem, to some of the recent arborescent Gramineae[522] than to the Equisetaceae. Williamson, with his usual caution, adds that such appearances have very little taxonomic value. Fig. 60 is reproduced from the block used by Gardner in his memoir on Mesozoic Angiosperms; he quotes the specimen as possibly a Monocotyledonous stem. The fossil is an imperfect cast of a stem showing two clearly marked nodal regions, but no trace of leaf-sheaths. A recent examination of specimens in the museums of Whitby, Scarborough, York and London has convinced me that the plant named by Bunbury _Calamites Beani_ is a large _Equisetites_. As a rule the specimens do not show any indications of the leaf-sheaths, but in a few cases the sheaths have left fairly distinct impressions. [Illustration: FIG. 61. _Equisetites Beani_ (Bunb.). From a specimen in the British Museum, ⅔ nat. size. (No. V. 2725.)] In the portion of stem shown in fig. 61 the impressions of the leaf segments are clearly marked. This specimen affords much better evidence of the Equisetaceous character of the plant than those which are simply internal casts. The narrow projecting lines extending upwards from the nodes in the figured specimen probably represent the divisions between the several segments of each leaf-sheath.