Dr. Heineken on Cermatiu. 43 
-but as it appears to have been taken from a single species, (the Scol. co- 
‘leoptrata of Linneus), and is so minute, I have selected such parts as 
more especially elucidate the species, of which his essential characters are 
the following—* 14 paires de pattes ; corps jaune roussatre, avec trois 
“© lignes d’un noir bleuatre le long du dos, et des fascies de la méme cou- 
‘* leur sur les cuisses.”” In the ‘* Genera Crustac.,’’ &c. Vol. I, p. 77, 
published subsequently to the Histoire, he says, “* Pedibus triginta ; cor- 
* pore rufo-flavescente, lineis longitudinalibus pedumque fasciis cceru- 
*€ Jeo-nigris :’” and whoever compares these descriptions with Fig. a, 
will at once, I think, agree that ours is the Seut. araneoides of Latreille. 
The following is the list of synonyms in the “ Genera: “ Scutigére 
“ araneoide Lat., Hist. Vol. VII, p. 88.—Scolopendra coleoptrata, 
“ Linn., Syst. Nat. ed. 13, Vol. I, pars 2, pag. 3015.—La Scolopendre 
“ 4 28 pattes, Geoff., Hist. des insect. Vol. Il, p. 675.—Jvlus araneoi- 
*« des, Pall., Spic. Zool. fase. 9, tab. 4, fig. 16.—Scolopendra coleop- 
“ trata, Fab., Entom. Syst. Vol. If, p. 389, and Panz., Faun. insect. 
* Germ. fasc. 50, fig. 12.”” The synonyms given by Lamarck (Ani- 
maux sans Vertébres, Vol. V, p. 29,) of his Seut. longipes, are, Scolo- 
pendre a 28 pattes, Geoff., Vol. II, p. 675, No. 2, and Julus araneoi- 
des ? Pall., Spic. Zool. 9, p. 85, t. 4, f. 16: and of his Scut. coleop- 
trata, Scolopendra coleoptrata, Panz., fasc. 50, i. 12, clearly identifying 
his two species with Latreille’s araneotdes. Dr. Leach’s essential cha- 
racters ate, “* Corpore livido ; pedibus luteis:”’ ‘ few, and far between,”’ 
it is true, but sufficient when backed by the habitat, to leave no doubt as 
to its being our Fig. b. ‘ Corpore flavescente, glauco ; dorso lineis 
** tribus longitudinalibus purpureo-nigris, una centrali, duabus lateralibus 
** e maculis constantibus ; antennis croceis, pallidis ; pedibus flavescenti- 
** glaucis, violascenti annulatis; oculis atris,’’ are the very words in 
which I should have thought that I had happily described our Fig. a. They 
are Risso’s description of his Cerm. variegata. 1 should perhaps have 
added, incisuris (scutellorum marginibus) pallidis; but as Dr. Leach has 
not noticed them in his description, although they are shewn in the figure, 
and as Latreille only says in the generic characters, “les bords semblent 
“ representer une espéce de stigmate,’’ I conclude, either that Risso 
overlooked them in his species, or considered them of no consequence ; 
that they really are immaterial, or that they are strictly generic marks. 
