HELIX. 368 
the preceding species, I feel no hesitation in asserting the 
identity of nitidus with the Linnean Helix. In justice to Dra- 
parnaud, it must be observed that his Planorbis complanatus 
was not asserted by him to be the H. complanata of the Swedish 
naturalist. 
Helix viwyens. 
Our author was not in possession of this quaint-looking shell, 
which he described from a specimen in the Tessinian Museum. 
In his own copy of the ‘Systema’ he has added “ List. 99, 
f. 100” to the figures previously referred to ; this, as well as 
his published synonyms of Argenville and Bonanni, have been 
all quoted for the Anostoma depressum of Lamarck, of which 
the H. ringens has been generally considered the exact equiva- 
lent. Whether this identification, based principally upon the 
pictorial synonyms, should be assented to, admits of grave 
doubt. ‘Testa magnitudine H. lapicide, sed magis convexa, 
livida, anfractu in medio carinato albo” scarcely coincides with 
a comparatively large shell, whose painting is described as 
“ albida, superne linea rubente circulari.”’ In respect to colour, 
the representation by Lister is most agreeable to the language 
of the ‘Systema,’ being delineated as of an almost uniform 
sombre hue. There are also certain discrepancies about the 
number of teeth or folds in the aperture of the shell, but 
the occasional presence of smaller intermediate denticles in 
A. depressum may account for this. Six only are enumerated 
by Linnzus; seven are mentioned by Lister; while the accurate 
Miiller has ascribed eight to a shell, whose painting at least 
corresponds with the Lamarckian depressum. Moérch has sug- 
gested the A. globulosum of Lamarck as the true ringens of 
Linneus, and I believe he is right, for the size, colouring and 
toothing are in accordance with the description in the ‘ Systema,’ 
and as no figures of that now common shell were then extant, 
it was natural that Linneus should cite the nearest approach 
to its features that he was acquainted with. 
