Dear Paul,

to the understanding of the generic names Nassa and Nassarius and the
acceptance of the familyname Nassariidae is useful another viewing.
To the genus Nassa RÖDING 1798 (non LAMARCK 1799) has been designed
according to a number of authors (Winckworth 1945; Iredale & McMichael 1962;
Cernohorsky 1969) the type Nassa serta BRUGUIÈRE 1789. This genus belong to
the subfamily Rapaninae, Muricidae (S.P. Kool, "Phylogenetic analysis of the
Rapaninae", Malacologia, 1993, 35 (2): 155-259). Nassa serta is not an
European species.
In the older literature has been used the name Nassa LAMARCK 1799 for
Nassarius DUMÉRIL 1808.
Because of the priority of the name Nassa RÖDING 1798 is Nassa Lamarck 1799
a synonym to it.

Nassariidae: Thiele (1929) and Wenz (1938) divided the suborder Rachiglossa
(order Neogastropoda) into the suberfamilies Muricacea, Buccinacea and
Volutacea. The use of these groupings has W.F. Ponder (1973, "The origin and
evolution of the Neogastropoda", Malacologia, 12 (2): 295-338) considered
open to question. He proposed to retaining these groups and also the
families Buccinidae, Melongenidae, Nassariidae and Fasciolariidae treated as
subfamilial, because the magnitude of the differences is not great and there
are practically no anatomical features which can be used consistently to
separate them.
This view has not yet found the general acceptance for manifold reasons.
While some (primarily Australian) authors agree with the proposed use, are
European colleagues (Bouchet & Warén, 1985; Unitas Malacologica "Clemam
Check List for European Marine Mollusca" with the Internet addresse
http://www.mnhn.fr/base/malaco.html) still (for the moment?) inclined to use
the traditional groupings.