144 SPECIES OF THE SYSTEMA. 
drawing was meant for the “Great common Mussel of the 
Netherlanders.” We are reminded, too, by the habitat, that 
Linneus regarded both these figures as intended for the Eu- 
ropean species, of which, at that period, they were the nearest 
likenesses extant. It is somewhat astonishing that none of 
the additional engravings cited in the synonymy of the twelfth 
edition, unless, perchance, that of Gualtier, which is not so un- 
like the Rumphian figure, exhibit the same shells as those 
originally referred to: Petiver and Lister (359, f. 198) represent 
the radiated M. Americana of Leach (tulipa, var. of Lamarck); 
Adanson, the Modiola termed by him Lulat, &c., &e. The re- 
strictive “semipedalis, subviolacea, cortice nigro,’ however, 
excludes all figures, as representations, which do not harmonise 
with these particulars, and clearly points out our native shell 
as the type of the Linnean species. The “ extus violacea, intus 
alba” of the ‘Museum Ulrice’ further corroborates the esta- 
blished identification. The only changes made by our author 
in his revised copy of the ‘Systema’ are the erasure of “ List. 
256 (a typographical error for 356) f. 195,” and the addition of 
“ Postice testa ultra nates producta, edentula,” and some ob- 
scure alteration in the erroneous reference to Bradley. 
Hlptilus wanes. 
The Anodonta cygnea var. Cellensis (Rossmis. Iconog. pl. 19, 
f. 280) is marked for this species in the Linnean cabinet. The 
figure 8 of Lister belongs to 153, not 198: the latter was con- 
sequently a typographical error. From the correctness of the 
thus easily amended synonymy, its abundance, and the Eu- 
ropean locality, the shell was early recognised by concholo- 
gists. 
Mytilus anatoues. 
The Anodonta complanata (Ziegl. in Rossmiissl. Iconog. pt. 
iv. pl. 20, f. 283) is contained in the box thus marked in the 
Linnean cabinet, and agrees (pl. 2, f. 1) well with the descrip- 
