BIHANG TILL K. SV. VET.-AKAD. HANDL. BAND 13. AFD. IV. N:0 O. 33 



Pecten and Cunuus present not a trace of a binary nomen- 

 clatiire, and, with onc exception, not a single trivial name, 

 the nomen specificum following directly upon tlie generic name. 

 Jn the other genera true binominals oceur only here and there, 

 while frequent use is made of a current nomen triviale alone, 

 mostly from Rumphius; sometimes it is remarked: »has no no- 

 men triviale», while, on the other hand, the diagnosis, the 

 »nomen specificum», is preceded by a: »may be called», accor- 

 <ling to old custom. Thus it is seen that LiNN/EUS, while 

 strictly working out in 1753 for the Species Plantanim the 

 binary nomenclatnre he had long kept in readiness, and while 

 calling it into play chiefly for the Vertebrates in the Museum 

 Adolphi Friderici of 1754, at the same time used it but par- 

 tially and by way of trial only, when describing the Queens 

 cabinet and when lecturing on the Testacea and the Insects 

 in 1752 and 1755, until he finally applied it when working 

 out the Animal Kingdom, in 1756 and 1757, for the so-called 

 tenth edition of Systema Naturae 1758, which he introduces 

 thus: »finem operis obtinuero, si inde . . . nomina magis sta- 

 biliantur, imprimis Trivialia et Generica.» 



The frequent references to figures in the works of prece- 

 ding authors form a very striking feature of the Lectures of 

 1752, and give additional support to the view that the chapter 

 on Testacea was in the main an abstract of the M. L. U. as 

 it existed already as a MS. It seems even probable that 

 LiNN^US actually had before him the very schedules he had 

 written down some weeks before in the Queen's cabinet, and 

 read out of them what he found convenient to mention, at 

 the same time pointing out in the authors he had at hand the 

 figures of those species of which he had no specimens to show 

 in his own collection or in the Museum Upsaliense. In the 

 Prolegomena he reviews the conchological authors up to the 

 time. He mentions Aldrovandus and Johnston, Columna with 

 l)is commentator Major, and Harderus, and briefly comments 

 on the works of Lister, Petiver, Rumphius, Barrelier, Lang, 

 Hebenstreit, d'Argenville, Gualtieri. »The principal authors 

 for a serious study of this order are Bonannus, Lister, Rum- 

 phius, d'Argenville and Gualtieri. Whoever possesses these 

 may dispense with the rest.» The following were accessible 

 to LiNNiEUS; those numbered are quoted in the Lectures. 



