latiora quam alta ; quartum hexagonum, posticè sinuatum, subcarinatum ; quintum
irregulariter pentagonum, carinatum : cost alia declivia; quorum primum et quartum
trapezoidea, secundum et tertium quadrata, quartum omnium minimum : marginalia
l»via, quadrata, margine extremo paulo replicato : scutum nuchale quadratum, antice
angustatum. Sternum planum, ad latera rotundato-subearinatum, anticè truncatum,
posticè trigono-emarginatum ; nigricans, vel olivaceum, flavo plus minus variegatum :
scuta guiaría triangularía; humeralia trapezoidea, intùs angustiora ; pectoralia et
abdominalia quadrata ; femoralia trapezoidea ; analia rhomboidea.
Testce ossew mensura.
une. lin.
Longitudo d o r s i......................................................... 5 5
Latitudo ejusdem ; 4 o
Longitudo s t e r n i 5 2
Altitudo..................... 2 0
The want of a proper appretiation of the characters of the Testudinata has
in no instance been more strikingly shown, or led to greater confusion and
difficulty, than in the case of the present species. From the time of Linnaeus
until the present hour, this doubt and confusion have continued to perplex
naturalists. The common freshwater Tortoise of Europe, described by Lac6-
pftde, from different ages and varieties/under the names of “ la jaune,” “ la
ronde,” “ la bourbeuse,” is, in fact, Terrapene europcea, the structure of which,
as a Box Tortoise, I demonstrated in the second volume of the Zoological
Journal. These three designations of Lac6pede were, it appears,’a sufficient
authority to lead many subsequent writers to describe these different varieties
or ages of the species in question as distinct, retaining the names of europcea
and lutaria. On a careful examination of Lac6p&de’s descriptions, however,
I thought I could here and there discover some traces of a different species;
and his figure of “ la bourbeuse” in the original edition of his great work,
appears to me certainly to have been taken from an individual of that now
under consideration, and for which I have retained the name of lutaria,
although the description is generally that of Terrapene europcea*. The three
descriptions of this author, however, are, with the slight and doubtful exceptions
I have just alluded to, referrible to the latter animal ; and had it not
been for the figure I have mentioned, I should not have thought myself justified
in retaining the name of lutaria.
Mr. Gray, appretiating the difficulties with which the subject was obscured,
cut the knot instead' of untying It, and named the species “Emys vulgaris,
Common Terrapin,’.’-*-a term which could only have been assigned to it from
his having “ seen more than twenty living,” for it certainly is not more numerous
than many other species of the genus.
• The figure and description of Emys caspica given by the traveller Gmelin,
which Wagler calls;“ Descript, et icon pessim.” and afterwardsIcon misera-
billima,” must have been—for I have not seen them—insufficient to have
realized the identity of that species with the one now under consideration.
A good figure and an excellent description of Emys caspica, given by Wagler
in thé .second fasciculus of his “ Descriptiones et Icon.es Amphibiorum, enable
me, however, now decidedly to conclude that this also must be considered as
a synonym of my present species : and this view is confirmed by the examination
of a specimen of Emys caspica in the British Museum, authenticated,
if I mistake not, by its undoubted habitat.
Upon the whole, then, I have come to the conclusion that Lacépède s figure
of “ la bourbeuse” indicates the present species,, on which ground I have
retained the name of Ei lutaria, and that it is identical with E. caspica of
Ginelin and Schweigger. 1
The best description which has hitherto appeared of it is that of. Wagler,
to which I have, before; alluded ; and his; account of its localities, as well as of
its habits, is so terse and satisfactory, that I cannot do better than give it in
his own words.
, “ Habitat ad mare Caspicum ac in Dalmatia, prope Ragusam, in Sylva Val
di Umbla dicta, montibus altis adumbrata ac vegetationis mira pulchritudine,
ficis, Cypressis, palmisque luxuriante. In medio vallis fons paludem parvam
* This is not a solitary instance of a discrepancy between the figures and descriptions in the Work of Lacépède ; his description
professing to belong to Testudo geometrica being taken from a specimen of T. actinodes, whilst the figure is a correct one of the species