54 SVEN LOVEN, ON TUK KC HINOIDEA DESCKIBED BY LINN.^;US. 



M. r.. T'., tliere can be no greater error. \Mnle in rcgard to 

 liis svstomatic uuits. tJic specics, it was generally tlie great aim 

 of LiNNiEL>i to introdiico as sucli, above all, forms kuown to 

 himself from actual observation, it is absolutely certaiu that 

 of the more tliau uine hundred species in tbe M. L. U. every 

 one luid in the Qiieen*s Cabinet its prototvpe from whicli, to 

 the exclusion of evervthing else, the description was made. 

 And eousequently this alone can guide to its idcntification. 

 Even in our days, when zoologists luive ut hand really skilfid 

 artists, it i? still an unsafe method to determine species from 

 hgures alone, and wlierever a discrepancy occurs, the decision 

 ought to lie with the words of the authors own description, 

 not Avitli tlie work of his assistiug draftsmans pencil. So much 

 the more, then, is it hazardous to try to make ont Linnean 

 species from the tigures he <|UOtes, and so much the greater 

 reason is there to attach full weight to his descriptions and 

 to do our best to analyse them so as to understand them 

 thoroughly. 



The brevity of the style of Linn.ecs is proverbial. While 

 holding in avowed abhorrence tlie sort of descriptive style he 

 termed oratoriaP^; wiiile unerringly observant of the rules of 

 compendiousness he had himself laid down so forcibly-), and 

 ahvays having in ready eommand the ianguage of strict ter- 

 minoloev. he o-enerallv attained in the construction of his 

 diagnoses and descriptions that degree of terseness he had so 

 much at heart and characterised in the well-known maxim: 

 »Nomina specifica cito, tuto, et jucunde distinguaut species».^) 

 His diagnoses and descriptions of the Echini will be seen to 

 comc verv near t]\is ideal, — tlie diagnoses, however, in too 

 many iustauces not uutil subjected to a critical examination 

 and cleared of some gra^e errata and perplexing blunders 

 coramittcd by hurried copyists, faidts Avhich undoubtedly have 

 had their share in many a raisunderstanding, almost unavoid- 

 able in the absence of the description. Here the notes from 

 the Jjcctures in the autumn of 1752 have been of the greatest 

 service. While treatiuo- of the Testacea, Linn.eus, as alreadv 



') Phil. r.ot. p. 133. 



-) 1'iilcritudo artis brevitatem e.xposcit, uain quo simplicLus, eo etiam 

 et ruelius. et stultum est facere per plura. quod fieri potest per pauci- 

 ora: Natura euim ip.sa coiupendiosissiraa est in omni sua actione. Ib. 

 p. 228. 



') Ib. p. 226. 



