[3]. Le Cedo Nulli à bandes, ou dont la robe jaunâtre se partage en quatre bandes, l’inférieure et celle du milieu sont comparties de marbrures blanches, les deux autres sont remplies, l’une de quatre cordelettes à point blancs, la seconde de trois seulement. Tom. 1, p. 442.
[4]. This shell, though sufficiently intelligible among the figures of Kircher’s shells, engraved and published by Bonanni, and also in the works of Lister and some others, escaped the notice of Linnæus. So late as the tenth edition of Systema Natura it does not appear. Gmelin describes this shell with much accuracy in his edition of the last mentioned work, under the specific name of Scapha.
[5]. “Testa varicibus æqualibus longitudinalibus, &c.” is an incorrect reading of Professor Gmelin. If we examine the Linnæan description of the Museum of the Queen of Sweden, Mus. Lud. Ulr. to which Gmelin refers, we shall find it to be as might be naturally expected, “testa costis æqualibus;” for it is the ribs, and not for veins that Linnæus intended. Linnæus refers to the 10th edition of his Systema Naturæ, which is not mentioned by Gmelin, and here we again meet with the same reading “testa costis æqualibus, &c.” We have been the more explicit in pointing out this error, because we observe that one Conchologist, not long since, in the absence, doubtlessly, of the moment, has translated literally the Gmelinian text in describing Buccinum Harpa.
[6]. Lot 75 of the 60th day. July 2nd, 1806.
[7]. This article is thus described in the last day’s sale, lot 81, “An elegant and unique pink variety of the imperial sun, drawn up with the anchor of a ship, from the depth of sixty fathoms, in Cook’s Straits, New Zealand.” Sold for £24 3s.
[8]. In Orchard-street, Portman-square, Thursday, April 13th, 1815. Vide lot 84.
[9]. Système des animaux sans vertèbres, p. 86.
[10]. We have lately understood that the editors of Encyclopædie Methodique, now publishing in Paris, intend giving figures of the Papiliones of the Equites family, which Fabricius has described. This endeavour to illustrate Fabricius is under the direction of Mons. Latreille, a Member of the National Institute, an Entomologist himself, of acknowledged talent, and one to whose great ability, as well as personal urbanity, we are happy to bear our testimony of praise. In the absence of more conclusive authority, the conjectures of Mons. Latreille would be, unquestionably, useful; but we shall, ourselves, tread the same path, and as we trust, may assist also, in no small degree to dispel the darkness which at present overshadows this fair portion of the science. As we are, ourselves, possessed of the authentic evidences, by means of which, the species of Fabricius can be immediately identified, we have no occasion to wander into the labyrinths of conjecture: we at once arrive at the certainty of truth. The annunciation of this design, on the part of the French editors, leads to a conclusion of the importance attached to this endeavour: it need be only stated on our part, that the illustrations we shall subjoin to such of the Fabrician species as may pass under our own observations, will be precisely taken from the individual objects which Fabricius has described.
[11]. “Cornua cervina—bois de cerf.”—Seba.
[12]. “Horum processus admodum producti sunt; ut ideo Cornua cervina appellentur ob qualemcunque similitudinem. Corpus tamen Cochleæ semper pro ratione ramorum minus est, quam in Muricibus superioribus.”[[12a]]—Seba T. 3. tab. 77. p. 172.