XAniLID^. 
345 
I 
! \ Edwards * separated the English examples of Aturia ziczac into 
I two varieties, the first being J. Sowerby’s Nautilus ziczac^ and the 
second, which he called Variety /3, Charles worth’s form. The latter 
he compared with the Dax shells, owing to its compressed whorls ; 
I the former with the “ Erench, Belgian, and German shells,” and, 
j I provisionally, the Piedmontese and Maltese shells also, making alto- 
* gether a very diverse assemblage. 
' An interesting paper was published a few years ago by Dr. H. B. 
^ Geinitz “ of Dresden, on Nautilus Alabamensis, Morton, N. ziczac, 
' J. Sow., and N. lingulatus, v. Buch. The author gives his reasons 
1 for concluding that all these forms belong to one and the same 
I species, viz. Aturia ziczac, J. Sowerby, sp. His attention was 
\ drawn to the subject by seeing a specimen in the Eoyal Mineralogical 
j Museum at Dresden of the Nautilus Alabamensis of Morton, from 
j the Tertiary rocks of Claiborne in Alabama. This species (well 
figured in the paper in question) was pronounced by v. Buch himself, 
in Dr. Geinitz’s presence, to be “ Vautilus lingulatus,” v. Buch. 
After very carefully comparing a specimen of Aturia ziczac from 
Bracklesham (one of the typical localities) with a young specimen of 
the “ Vautilus lingulatus ” from Kressenberg, Bavaria, I have come 
to the same conclusion regarding them as Dr, Geinitz has done, viz,, 
that the two species are identical. An examination of fig. 74 will, 
I think, convince anyone that this is the case. It will there be 
seen that in the form of the shells and of their sutures there is no 
appreciable difference between the two species ; and I may add that 
my friend Mr. G. C. Crick had already referred the Kressenberg 
species to Aturia ziczac. Of course it is a little unfortunate that 
all the English shells belonging to the present species are imma- 
ture ; but there is no reason whatever for supposing that their 
form would become modified in any material degree when they 
attained adult age. It is just possible, indeed, that it may be a 
dwarfed or depauperated variety that we have in the London Clay 
of this country, but further evidence would be required to settle that 
point. 
Horizon. London Clay (Lower Eocene). 
I Localities. Highgate, Chalk Farm, Hampstead ; Middlesex : 
Sheppey. 
The Collection includes Sowerby’s type figured in the ‘ Mineral 
^ Mon. of the Eocene Mollusca, pt. i. Cephalopoda, 1849, Mon. Pal. See. 
pp. 54-56. 
^ Veues Jahrbuch fur Min. &c. 1887, Band ii. p. 53. 
