272 JOURNAL OF CONCHOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 9, JANUARY, I9OO. 



points here which may have a bearing on our present enquiry: (i) 

 Leach died six years prior to the issue of the British Association 

 rule which condemned his nomenclature, and therefore he could make 

 no defence, and give no explanation of his reasons; and (2) the last 

 years of his life were spent in Italy. The importance of this fact will 

 be seen later on. 



The principles which guided Leach in his choice of names have 

 been given to us by the author himself in the introduction to his work 

 (p. xii.) : " Respecting the names that I have given to what I consider 

 distinct genera, I have always invariably named the genera, as far as 

 possible, from their essential characters ; except only when I have 

 perceived that the names of the parts constituting a generic distinc- 

 tion might probably equally apply to some other genus not yet 

 discovered ; and where I have not been enabled to find sufficient 

 and certain essential characters, I have followed the rule laid down 

 by Fabricius, the first naturalist who attempted to form a natural 

 arrangement of insects, ' Nomina generica nil significantia omnino 

 optima] and, as far as possible, I have selected, according to the rule 

 laid down by the same author, that ' Nomina barbara nullo modo sunt 

 toleranda.'" It would be wrong to translate l nil significantia' as 'non- 

 sense names' ; Fabricius and Leach meant merely that in their 

 framing of names there was no attempt made to describe the character 

 of the genera represented — that is, the names had no reference to the 

 intrinsic qualities of the genera ; they were not 'definitions' so much 

 as mere 'labels.' 



In selecting names, however, which on the one hand would not 

 carry with them any descriptive significance, and on the other hand 

 such as would not be branded as ' barbarous,' Dr. Leach was not 

 arbitrary. He seems to have had a special fondness for (1) geo- 

 graphical terms, and (2) names derived from persons. In regard to 

 the former, he favoured such as had a flavour of antiquity, for besides 

 visiting the great quarry of classical literature which has furnished all 

 departments of science with so many names, he borrowed particularly 

 any which had a biblical or oriental connection. Similarly with his 

 choice of personal names. He went to classical sources for many, 

 but it is evident that he had strong leanings towards those mentioned 

 in Scripture, or which occur in connection with the histories and 

 legends of eastern nations. I may indicate a few of these names 

 which he suggested in illustration of these points, although of course 

 it must be remembered that in many cases Leach's proposed nomen- 

 clature has been superseded. 



I. — Among Leach's generic names borrowed from geographical 

 sources are the following]: — 



