of tlie British Shrews. 35 



observed considerable differences of colour. Both authors speak of 

 it as being found in nearly the same situations as the S. araneus, — 

 in barns,, gardens, &c. the latter adding that it is not of unfrequent 

 occurrence. 



Desmarest, * Fred. Cuvier, t and Fischer, % in their descriptions 

 of the S. tetragonurus, add nothing to what had been previously 

 said by Geolfroy. 



Although I have referred above our British araneus to the S. 

 tetragonurus of Duvernoy, I think it not impossible it may still be 

 the same as the S. araneus of Linnaeus. This indeed cannot be in- 

 ferred from the brief description in the twelfth edition of the Sys- 

 tema Natura, in which there is no mention made of the teeth. But 

 in the Fauna Suecica, (edit. 1761,) he speaks of the upper middle 

 incisors as bifid and curved, the lower ones serrated ; the canines 

 (lateral incisors) in the upper jaw as four in number, and very 

 small. These characters are not inapplicable to our species; for 

 although there are really Jive lateral incisors above, the fifth is so 

 minute as readily to escape observation. M. Duvernoy was led by 

 the description in the work last referred to, to consider the Lin- 

 neean araneus (the only European true Sorex known to the Swe- 

 dish naturalist,) the same as the species afterwards called fodiens ; 

 but this is explained by the circumstance of his (Duvemoj's) fodiens 

 having in fact the same dentition as our araneus ; and he seems tohave 

 been moreimpressed with theidea that it was distinct from his araneus 

 (which it certainly is) than with the possibility of its being his te- 

 tragonurus, with which, as above shewn, our araneus ought pro- 

 bably to be associated. — But however this may be, as there is some 

 doubt attached to the Linneean species, I should feel inclined in this, 

 as in all similar cases in which there have been two or more species 

 confounded under the same name, to continue that name to that one 

 in particular which has been best characterized by subsequent authors. 

 Hence, without any reference to Linnaeus, I should propose suffer- 

 ing the name of araneus to remain with the species so well describ- 

 ed by Daubenton, Geoffroy, and Duvernoy, and calling ours (at 

 least till it be shewn that it is not the species so designated by Her- 

 mann,,) by that of tetragonurus. 



We must now proceed to make some remarks respecting the S. 

 fodiens of this country, which, as before stated, it is hardly possible, 

 in the present state of the subject, to identify with complete cer- 



* Mammal, p. 150. •(• Diet, des Sci. A'aL Tom. xxxiii. p. 425. 



f Si/nops. Mammal, p. 253. 



