^{page 193 note 1} Bull. Soc. Linn. Norm. v. p. 172, pl. viii. fig. 6.

^{page 194 note 1} op. cit. p. 140.

^{page 194 note 2} To complicate matters still more, the type species is not enumerated in the Prodrome list as a Purpurina, but as a Turbo, “munie de fortes ondulations longitudinales, et de nombreuses cotes transverses. France, Bayeux (Calvados).” As if this was not enough, we have also (Prod. i. p. 299) Trochus bellona. This is quite a different thing; it is referred to in the text of the T. J. p. 284, and figured, pl. 316—figs. 1–4—whilst Turbo bellona, the future type of the genus Purpurina, is omitted altogether from the text.

^{page 194 note 3} Deslongchamps here uses the word longitudinal in a sense which some would call transverse.

^{page 194 note 4} Cf. Tawney, Dundry Gasteropoda, p. 3 of separate Memoir.

^{page 195 note 1} There are several species of Purpurina in the Inf. Ool. of Bradford Abbas. The most common is a very coarsely marked shell, hitherto unnamed, as far as I know.

^{page 196 note 1} A small Natica is described by Lycett from the Cornbrash, which I cannot find in any collection. As it may be necessary to publish a supplemental plate at the end of this Memoir, further reference is deferred.

^{page 197 note 1} Proc. Cottes. Nat. Club, vol. i. p. 56.

^{page 197 note 2} Like so many Phillipsian errors, which seem to have a singular fascination for some people.

^{page 199 note 1} Judd, Geology of Rutland, p. 25

^{page 201 note 1} N.B. Misled by Phillips–s mistake, these authors refer to it as “Bath Oolite.”

^{page 202 note 1} See Introduction.

^{page 203 note 1} As this “G. O.,” so often used in the third edition, is very apt to impose upon the unwary, it is as well to state that it does not mean Great Oolite, but Grey Oolite! From bad to worse one might say, as the Grey Limestone (zone 3) is very rarely oolitic.