CHITON. 13 
° 
the species, not possible for me to demonstrate. A fourth sy- 
nonym, likewise, is produced in the twelfth edition, (‘ Seba, 
Mus.’ 3, t. 1, f. 14), a wretched engraving, which neither agrees 
with the description nor approaches at all to the other refer- 
ences. The ligament* is delineated as bestudded with small 
circles, probably meant for spine-cavities, or perhaps prickles. 
One could almost fancy that, through some carelessness in 
copying, the fresh synonyms of this and the succeeding species 
had been transposed, for both Edwards and Seba exhibit the 
squamosus of Born, a species which bears not the remotest 
likeness to the prickly margined aculeatus. Schroéter, for his 
ideal of this species, has selected a seven-valved Chiton that re- 
minds us a little of the occidentalis of Reeve: his figure 
(Einleit. Conch. vol. iu. pl. 9, f. 19), evidently taken from an 
eroded individual, exhibits scattered granules or small tubercles 
upon all the valves alike; there are no arched striz delineated. 
Gmelin and his train of followers adopt this determination, to 
which I must demur. 
Chiton aculeatus, 
He who would identify the aculeatus of Linnzeus must place 
his sole reliance upon the description ; for although three syno- 
nyms are appended, they throw no light upon the still ambiguous 
species. The worn example engraved in the ‘Thesaurus’ of 
Rumphius exhibits not a vestige of character: the figures of 
Kdwards (B, not D as in the text) and Seba, on the contrary, 
present marked features, but such (scaly margins) as are opposed 
to the definition. Linnzus, in his published correspondence, 
acknowledges that he has erred in citing the former of the two 
for aculeatus : itis an admirable representation of the sqwamosus 
of Born, to which species the latter (Seba’s figure), also, bears 
a decided resemblance. Murray’s execrable engraving, in the 
“ Ameenitates ” (vol. vii. pl. 3, f. 1), so often quoted as an accre- 
dited delineation of the Linnean aculeatus, if not actually. 
* In figure 15, which is stated by Seba to be the under side of the same 
shell, the apertures for tufts of bristles are plainly manifest, whilst the ether 
warkings are absent. 
