MUREX. 289 
T. pyrum with the M. lotoriwm of Linneus (as first intelligibly 
defined), but a recent perusal (long after these pages had been 
penned) of Mérch’s critical sale-catalogue of Count Yoldi’s col- 
lection proves that another has arrived at a similar conclusion 
by an independent path of inquiry. 
In the last-published edition of the ‘Systema,’ a figure in 
Rumphius, generally considered meant for Triton lotoriwm, was 
doubtfully cited, hence the accepted though illogical conclusion 
of the identity of that shell with the Linnean species. We 
have reason to believe, indeed, that our author had eventually 
(subsequently, however, to his published definition in the 
‘Museum’) resolved upon the selection of that Triton (Sowerby, 
Genera Shells, Trit. f. 1) as the type of his Murex lotoriwm, 
for, in his own copy of the ‘Systema,’ he has erased the note of 
interrogation to the Rumphian figure, and changed the M? in 
the reference to Argenville into B (a beautiful and characteristic 
engraving of the Triton lotoriwm of authors). Both of these 
synonyms (as well as Regenfuss’ figure of it) had been originally 
and wrongly annexed to femorale, which it followed in the tenth 
edition; perhaps, then, there was some error in printing, for 
the lower portion of the synonymy of number 456 (ed. 10) 
would suit 457, whilst the reference attached to the latter bears 
far more likeness to 458; even the numeral “5” in the 
‘Museum’ may have been a misprint for “3.” This, however, 
is mere surmise. 
Murex pileare. 
This species was pictorially defined in the tenth edition of 
the ‘Systema,’ since the quoted engraving of Gualtier (the 
only one referred to in that publication) was not opposed to 
the few characters mentioned in the brief description. Addi- 
tional figures of the same species (Seba, vol. iii. pl. 57, £. 23, 24), 
and others of T’. succinctus (Seba, vol. in. pl. 57, f. 29, 31), 
were added in the twelfth edition. Notwithstanding, it appears 
that neither of the two delineated was intended, but, in accord- 
ance with the locality, J’. corrugatus, a shell which equally (or 
even better) suits the description, but of which there was no 
delineation then extant. That species (Reeve, Conch. Icon. 
2P 
