122 Miscellaneoics. 



a thing notorious, a piece of elementary knowledge in this line of 

 research, that Gronovius is in no sense an authority for Linnean 

 nomenclature. He is as much a pre-Linnean in regard to names 

 as if he had written in the seventeenth instead of in the eighteenth 

 centur5\ He does not name his species, but gives definitions. He 

 still uses the cumbrous method, from which it was the great glory 

 of Linnseus to relieve zoology. But, whether Gronovius be deemed 

 to be within or without the era of Linnean terminology, whether 

 he be an authority or not, there is something almost comic in the 

 notion that he invented the generic name Astacus. Seba, who, 

 though not a binominalist, at least gives names to some of his species, 

 in the third volume of his 'Thesaurus,' which has 1758 on the 

 titlepage, has several Astaci scattered about, the first-mentioned 

 being '■'Astacus fluviatiUs, Americanus," not a crayfish, but a prawn, 

 and the second ^^ Astacus marinus, Americ^mus," the American 

 lobster. Any one who may nevertheless fancy that Seba borrowed 

 Astacus from Gronovius should consult the ' Fauna Suecica ' of 

 Linni3eus, 1746. On page 358 will be found the two numbers, 

 1248, 1249, each referring to a " Cancer macroiirus" dealt with 

 in the pre-Linnean or Gronovian style, without a specific name, 

 though clearly distinguished by the synonymy, the characters, 

 and various observations : the first as a lobster, tlte second as a 

 crayfish. The synonymy of tho first in an unbroken column re- 

 iterates the name Astacus from a long line of authors : Astacus, 

 Astacus, Astacus, Astacus, Astacus verus, Astacus marinus communis, 

 and then Astacus marinus five times over. There is a touching 

 appeal against future misnomers in that Astacus verus oi Aldroyanili. 

 The reason for assigning Astacus to Leach rather than to one of his 

 predecessors is obvious. The earlier science grouped under it not 

 only lobsters and crayfishes, but many incongruous forms. For 

 example, out of the 13 species which Gronovius brings together, 

 the three which ho figures correspond apparently to Pahr7no7i faus- 

 tinus de Saussure, Att/a scahra Leach, and Corophium volutator 

 Pallas, two prawns and an amphipod. Fabricius, though he 

 decently begins with Astacus marinus, has an equally miscellaneous 

 group. Leach, in 1814, began a more reasonable delimitation. In 

 strictness, no doubt, the name of the lobsters genus should be given 

 as Astacus (Fabricius, 1775), Leach, 1814, s. r. ; the conciser form 

 which 1 have used will, in an unpretentious manual, for its brevity's 

 sake, pass muster with all but professors. 



One other correction of tho history of Crustacea is proffered 

 by Professor Bell. He says " ' Poiamohia, Leach, 1819 ' (p. 207), 

 should read Potamohius, Samouelle, 1819 [preocc. by Leach]." 

 While busy over his Gronovius, he has failed to observe my own 

 correction of Potamobia into Potamohius, made with acknowledg- 

 ments to Miss Kathbun on page 40 of ' Natural Science ' for last 

 July. The rest of his correction is doubly wrong. Neither was 

 SamoueUe the parent of Potamohius, nor was that name in 1819 

 preoccupied by Leach or anyone else. Samouelle, in the 'Ento- 

 mologist's Useful Compendium,' 1819, shows by acknowledgments 

 in the Dedication, the Preface, and the body of the work that the 

 account which it contains of the Crustacea is simply due to 



