BUCCINUM. 239 
439, but the example is of no typical authority, in any case, 
since our author clearly did not possess the species when he 
wrote the ‘Systema,’ for he has omitted the name in the lists 
appended to both editions of it. It is requisite, then, to care- 
fully investigate both the cited figures and descriptions. ‘The 
engraving of Petiver represents Dolium fimbriatum, a shell which 
is excluded by the “apertura edentula” of the diagnosis; simi- 
larly the Doliwm olearium of authors, fairly delineated by 
Rumphius (and this figure was queried, as uncharacteristic, by 
Linnzus), and more doubtfully so by Gualtier, is excluded by 
the passage “sulcis obtusis lineola elevata interstinctis.” Bru- 
guiére, who animadverted upon this discrepancy, nevertheless 
yielded to that traditional recognition by Schréter, &c., which 
was based upon the figures only; and the majority of writers 
have followed in his wake. Crouch, however, in his ‘ Introduc- 
tion to Lamarck’s Conchology,’ has figured (pl. 19, f. 2) a shell 
(Dolium zonatum of Green, Albany Instit. vol. 1. p. 181, pl. 4; 
D. crenulatum of Philippi, Abbild. Conch.) that precisely answers 
to both the description and the locality of the Linnean shell. 
As no engraving of it was extant at the date of our author’s 
publication, it is not surprising that his synonymy was erro- 
neous. A superb example of it was found along with the larger 
Linnean shells, but it may be doubted whether it was not of sub- 
sequent introduction. Either, then, we must regard that shell 
as the pristine oleariwm, or entirely omit the name as a Linnean 
species. 
Bucci galea, 
From the vast magnitude (“sepe capitis humani’’), the 
Mediterranean locality, and the correctness of the synonymy, 
it was impossible not to recognise this species in the Doliwm 
galea of authors (Reeve, Conch. Icon. vol. vi, Dol. pl. 1). A 
young example of it is still preserved in the Linnean cabinet, 
but in place of 439 has been carelessly marked 339, which 
numerals, in the twelfth edition, indicate a Cowry/ and in the 
tenth edition a species (Bulla pallida) that we know from our 
author’s catalogues he did not himself possess, and one, more- 
over, whose characteristics do not at all suit the specimen. 
