For a long period it was customary to base Echinoid classifi-cation exclusively on the characters of the test alone. It was not until the beginning of this century that other characters were also taken into consideration, starting with my work on the “Ingolf” Echinoidea I, 1903, in which I pointed out that characters of great classificatory value were found also in the structure of the pedicellariae and spicules. Through using these characters it was found that the numerous forms of Regular Echinoids, referred on account of the great uniformity of their test-characters to some few large “genera”, e.g. Echinus, Strongylocentrotus, Cidaris, in reality belonged to a number of various generic types, even to different families. In the following year, 1904, in my “Siam” Echinoidea, I pointed out that also the structure of the teeth was of primary classificatory importance, this being further worked out by Jackson, 1912, in his Phytogeny of the Echini, where the characters of the whole dental apparatus were found to afford characters of the greatest importance, and where the excellent names Aulodonta, Stirodonta, and Camarodonta were coined, names which will have to be adopted in Echinoid classification.