INDEX TO THE HISTORIA CONCHYLIORUM. 
46 
Tab. Fig. 
1027. 2. Is an inverted copy from the Historia Animalium Angliae, t.7. f. l6; and appears 
to be the spiral termination of a Serpula resembling Serpula lumbricalis. 
1028. 3. Is the Mur ex Bulbus of Brander and Chemnitz, and the Fusus bulbiformis of La¬ 
marck and Sowerby. 
1029. 4. Phasianella orbicularis of Sowerby. 
— 5. The inside cast of a Melania. 
1030. 10. Is probably the damaged shell of a Pleurotoma, but I am wholly unacquainted 
with the species. 
1031. 11. Is an inverted copy from the Historia Animalium Anglise, t.7- f- 15 ; and Lister 
says it is found “ in Iapidicinis saxi plumbiferi regionis montosae Craven dictse.” 
It is probably a land shell; and in shape approaches nearly to the species which 
Draparnaud has erroneously arranged as an Auricula , with the name of Auri¬ 
cula lineata. 
— 12. An inside cast of the Melania HeddingtoneYisis of Sowerby. 
1032. 13. Is probably an undescribed species of Melania. 
1033. 6. Voluta costaria of Lamarck ; and the same species is figured in Chemnitz, vol. xi. 
with the name of Cochlea mixta. It differs from the Voluta costata of Brander 
and Sowerby, in having only eight instead of nine longitudinal plaits. 
— 7- I s the Strombus spinosus of Linneus and Chemnitz, the Murex costatus of Gme- 
lin, and the Voluta spinosa of Lamarck: the Valuta spinosa of Sowerby is a 
variety of the same species; and it has been confounded by Brander with his 
Strombus Luctator, which is the Voluta musicalis of Lamarck. I have a beau¬ 
tiful specimen from Grignon, with transverse buff-coloured stripes: and Linneus 
to his description of the species has added, “ Mirum colores perennare in fossili 
“ testa.” 
1034. 8. Ancillaria buccinoides of Lamarck. 
1035. 9. Voluta perita of Brander. 
1036. 16. Is an inverted copy from the Historia Animalium Angliae, t. 7-f-11. and is the 
Trochus similis of Sowerby; which name in his Index has been changed to 
Trochus Anglicus. 
— 17. Is probably the Trochus nodulosus of Brander, and the Trochus monilifer of La¬ 
marck. 
1037- 14. Appears to have been intended for the Turbo reticulatus of Brander, but is not a 
1038. 15. Mr. Miller has suggested that this may be a cast of the Rostellaria Parkinsoni of 
Mantell, with the claws broken off. 
1039. 18. Ammonites IValcottii of Sowerby. 
1040. 18. b. Ammonites Nutfieldiensis of Sowerby; and the figure has been quoted, with a 
query, by Lamarck, for his Orbulites striata. 
1041. 19. Ammonites Braikenridgii of Sowerby; and is an inverted copy from the Historia 
Animalium Anglise, t. 6. f. 1. 
— 20. Bruguiere has quoted the Historia Animalium Angliae, t. 6. f. 2. for his Ammonites 
bifrons , and this figure is a copy; but it is certainly nothing more than a cast 
of Ammonites kValcoitii. See 1.1039- f. 18. 
_ 21. Ammonites bisulcatus of Bruguiere; and this species differs from the Ammonites 
planicosta of Sowerby, in having two dorsal grooves. The figure is copied from 
the Historia Animalium Angliae, t. 6. f. 3; and is quoted in Jameson’s Appendix 
to Cuvier s Theory, by the name of Ammonites spatosus. 
1042. 22. Ammonites communis of Sowerby; and is copied from the Historia Animalium 
Angliae, t. 6. larger fig. 5. 
_ 23. Ammonites annulatus of Sowerby; and this figure is an inverted copy from the 
smaller fig. 5. of the table last referred to. The specific name of annulatus 
must be changed, for it had been before given to another species by Von Schlo- 
theim ; and the confusion which has been thus introduced is pointed out by 
Brongniart, in a note at p. 392 of the “ Description Geologique des Environs de 
“ Paris.” 
1043. 23. b. These figures have been copied from the Appendix to the Historia Animalium 
Angliae, 1.1. f. 10 to 12. and represent the sinuous margins of the dissepiments 
which form the internal chambers of the Ammonites. 
