Chapter III: Front Matter (3)

The generic arrangement exhibited in the manuscript differs essentially from that which appeared in the final edition of his 'Systema Naturæ.' As a whole, it is decidedly inferior, yet it segregates certain natural groups, such as _Lyra_ and _Cassida_, the value of which have been acknowledged by all modern naturalists. The following list and sequence of the genera comprised in it, cannot, indeed, be regarded as an entire system, for certain groups, viz., _Chiton_, _Lepas_, _Teredo_, _Sabella_, and the typical forms of _Mya_, _Mactra_, and _Anomia_, were not at that period represented in the Museum; but it is not devoid of interest, since it manifests a transitional stage in the progressive advance to that matured scheme which was finally elaborated in the pages of his revised 'Systema.'

Dentalium.
Patella.
Nerita.
Helix.
Turbo.
Trochus.
Turricula.
Buccinum.
Lyra.
Morion.
Conus.
Voluta.
Strombus (not that of the 'Systema').
Harpago (=Strombus).
Murex.
Cassida.
Cypræa.
Bulla.
Haliotis.
Nautilus.
Cymbium (=Argonauta).
Spondylus.
Ostrea.
Pecten.
Arca.
Pinna.
Mytilus.
Solen.
Tellina.
Chama (not that of the 'Systema').
Cunnus (=Venus).
Pholas (not that of the 'Systema').
Trunculus (=Donax).
Bucardium (=Cardium).

Besides the four genera (_Chiton_, _Lepas_, _Teredo_, _Sabella_) that were excluded from this catalogue, either from the absence of specimens, or from mistrust of their being veritable Testacea, six of the remaining 32, namely, _Pholas_, _Mya_, _Mactra_, _Chama_, _Anomia_, and _Serpula_, were likewise omitted, not being yet eliminated from _Solen_, _Bucardium_, _Spondylus_, _Ostrea_, and _Dentalium_. To counterbalance these, we find no less than eight subsequently abandoned groupings:

_Turricula_ (an undefined amalgam of the long-spired species of _Buccinum_, _Murex_, and _Strombus_).

_Lyra_ (the _Harpa_ and _Purpura_ of the Lamarckian school).

_Morion_ (an unnatural compound of _Eburna_, _Auricula_ proper, _Pythia_, _&c._).

_Strombus_ (a combination of the immature members of the received genus with _Pyrula_, _Fasciolaria_, and other allied forms).

_Cassida_ (nearly the modern _Cassis_).

_Pecten_ (equal to _Lima_ and _Pecten_).

_Chama_ (the _Tapes_ of recent conchologists).

_Pholas_ (chiefly composed of _Artemis_ and _Lucina_).

It may be remarked, moreover, that the simple univalves commence, and the bivalves close the series; the exact converse of the order in which they are marshalled in the two principal editions of the 'Systema Naturæ.'

I feel assured, after a careful study of the manuscript, that the names eventually allotted to the shells of the 'Museum' did not result from a careful comparison of the royal specimens with the typical examples in the private collection of our author, but were attached to the species, either from the identity of the written and printed synonymy, or from the general accordance of their described features with the meagre characteristics enumerated in the prior publication.

The erased nomenclature of the species, however, was very dissimilar, and was scrupulously based upon a supposed identity of the specimens with those delineated by Rumphius, Klein, and d'Argenville. Assuredly at that period of his career, our author entertained the same profound respect for the laws of priority which is professed by all modern naturalists; and I hesitate not to affirm that, from the crude and inharmonious theories of his predecessors, he eliminated a system of Conchology that was better suited to the requirements of the age he lived in than any more elaborate arrangement would have been. For simplicity attracts the student, whom a more complex (even if more natural) method would repel; and for the collection of an adequate mass of materials wherewith, eventually, to build up a more symmetrical and widely-based structure, a multitude of comparatively unskilled labourers is more efficacious than a small knot of the most erudite architects.

Before inviting the attention of my readers to the original headings of the 'Museum Ulricæ,' and to my brief account of the variations in the written copy from the text of the printed version, I must premise, that it has not been my practice invariably to notice, in the summary, such trifling differences of construction as the preferential use of the ablative for the nominative case, where the verbal change involved no alteration of the precise meaning.

MUSEUM LUDOVICÆ ULRICÆ REGINÆ.

CONCHYLIA.

CHITON, LEPAS.

Nothing relating to these two genera was found in the copy.

PHOLAS.

The _Pholas_ of the manuscript is perfectly dissimilar to that of the 'Systema.' Our author had evidently, when he first wrote the 'Museum Ulricæ,' not appreciated the remarkably striking characteristics of this group, having located the only species he then knew (for _P. candidus_ seems a subsequent discovery) with the _Solens_.

P. CANDIDUS. Not mentioned in the manuscript.

P. CRISPATUS. _Sol._ ovatus, obtusissimus, cardinis dente depresso rotundato.

The Appendix to Lister was not cited; "Habitat in Anglia, Suecia," was appended to the description, which in many respects was inferior to the published one. The account of the hinge was merely "Cardo dente dilatato rotundato extus excavato."

MYA.

The three incongruous forms assorted as _Myæ_ were not so united in the MS.; the second being very properly placed with the _Mussels_, the other two ascribed to _Solen_.

M. LUTRARIA. _Sol._ ovali-oblongus, cardine laterali dilatato semiorbiculato.

In lieu of the reference to Lister (whose work does not appear to have been consulted by our author at the period when this portion of his manuscript was written), plate 45, figure N, of Rumphius was quoted as illustrative. The published account of the hinge is much more complete than the written one, which was apparently drawn up from a worn specimen; it ran as follows: "Cardo extus vix gibbus, intus constans laminis 2 semiorbiculatis concavis introrsum spectantibus."

By a slip of the pen, in my "Ipsa Linnæi Conchylia," I had termed Brown's figure of the Linnean _Mya lutraria_, _L. oblonga_, instead of _L. elliptica_.

M. PERNA. _Myt._ lævis, cardine terminali unidentato.

The intended name was _M. Magellanicus_.