26 



NOTE ON THE GENUS ABICIA OF GEAY. 

 By H. 0. N. Shaw, F.Z.S. 

 Read 8th December, 1911. 

 The sub-genus Aricia was created by Gray in liis Descriptive 

 Catalogue of Shells, 1832, pp. 7-12, which, it has been conclusively 

 proved, was never published, and can therefore only be regarded as 

 a manuscript.' It was formed on conchological grounds for fifty- 

 two species of Cyprcea, in which were included C. moneta and 

 C. annulus (p. 8), and contained a collection of species wbich in no 

 way resemble each other. Whether the characters of the shells were 

 sufficiently distinctive on wliich to form a sub-genus, which has by Gray 

 himself and others been raised to generic rank, is a matter for each 

 Cypraeologist to determine for himself. The point in question is this. 

 As the Bescriptive Catalogue cannot be accepted as a publication, the 

 first time the generic or sub-generic appelhition Aricia was published in 

 connexion with Mollusca was by Herrmannsen, Indicis generum Malac, 

 suppl., p. 12, 1852, and contained C. moneta only, but as he gave no 

 description ot the genus it must be considered as first puhlished in 

 the Genera of Recent Mollusca, H. & A. Adams, vol. i, pp. 265-6, 1854, 

 type C. annulus, next C. moneta. Previous, however, to this use by 

 Herrmannsen in 1852, Adams in 1854, or even by Gray in 1832, 

 ^r/>?'rthad been employed generically by Savigny in \S22, '^ JDescription 

 de VEgijpte: Systeme des A^melides, vol. i, pt. iii, pp. 3, 12; also 

 by Robineau - Desvoidy in 1830, Esxai sur les Myodaires, p. 486; 

 and by Macquart in 1835, Histoire naturelle des Insectes Dipteres 

 (Suites a, Buffon), vol. ii, p. 285. It is therefore clear that this 

 name cannot, according to the rules of priority, be retained for 

 a genus or sub-genus of Mollusca. As I have already indicated, 

 Gray's genus contained widely different species, and the group 

 consisted of fifty-two species of Cyprcea. The next writer to split up 

 CyprcBa into different genera (on anatomical grounds) was Troschel, 

 I)as Gehiss der Schnecken, vol. i, pp. 205, 212, 1856. In this 

 work he used the genus Aricia, Gray, and created the sub-genus 

 Monetaria for ten species of Cyprcea, containing C. moneta, C. annulus, 

 and C. obvallata. Since Aricia was created for C. moneta amongst 

 others, it is clear that this genus or sub-genus, according to the value - 

 assigned to it, must now be known as Monetaria, Troschel. 



Jousseaume in 1884, Bull. Soc. Zool. France, p. 96, used Monetaria, 

 Troschel, as a genus. Although be restricted the species contained 

 in it to C. moneta, C. icterina, C. amiulus, and C. obvallata, he retained 

 C. moneta as his type. A footnote by'Rochebrune, Bull. Soc. Malac, 

 France, vol. i, p. 74, 1884, gives in six lines a certain amount of 

 the information contained in the present paper, but as no references, 

 etc., are given, it is hoped that the further information now added 

 may be of use. 



^ Sherborn & Shaw, " Sowerby's Conchological Illustraticnis and Gray's 

 Descriptive Catalogue of Shells": Proc. Malac. Soc, vol. viii, pt. vi, 

 pp. 331-40, Sept., 1909. Shaw, "Notes on the genera Cyprcea and 

 Trivia" : ibid., pt. v, pp. 289-90, July, 1909. 



'■^ Date taken from Sherborn, " On the Dates of the Natural History portion of 

 Savigny's Description de VEgypte " : Proc. Zool. Soc, 1897, pp. 285-8. 



