But if we can't be sure, I am afraid that the name saulii will stand,
taking Stephanie's remarks into consideration.
Do you already know of the "lucaensis"? A bursid named after a persons son?
Also a tricky one.

Gijs


----------
> Van: Harry G. Lee <[log in to unmask]>
> Aan: [log in to unmask]
> Onderwerp: Re: Saul
> Datum: maandag 31 januari 2000 12:44
>
> Dear Stephanie,
>
> Welcome back to the list-serve!  Through your research we know that the
> date of publication of Murex sauliae (or saulii) was 1841 and that the
name
> Fusinus anni must be emended to F. annae.  It is a fact that Lovell Reeve
> and George Brettingham Sowerby II were close collaborators more most of
> their respective lives.  Sowerby illustrated Reeve's Conchologia Iconica.
> I strongly suspect that if there was an intention on the part of Sowerby
to
> honor a male relative of Miss Saul, Reeve would have been one of the
first
> to know.
>
> Harry
>
>
> At 03:33 PM 1/31/00 -0800, you wrote:
> >To Harry et al
> >>
> >>Although G. B. Sowerby II didn't exactly state he was naming Murex
Saulii
> >[sic]
> >>after Miss Jane Saul, it is quite obvious that he knew of a specimen(s)
of
> >this
> >
> >From the what he said in the paper there is in theory at least three
> >specimens that should make up the syntype series which were originally
in
> >the following collections One in Saul's collection, one in Stainforth's
> >collection and one in Reeve's collection.
> >
> >>new taxon in her (then already famous; now at Cambridge, UK)
collection.
> >>Placing myself in a contemporary readership and considering the
author's
> >renown
> >>as a "shocking latinist,"  I would argue that Reeve's emendation of the
> >>specific name to "Sauliae" was "justified" (ICZN-speak for kosher), but
it a
> >>isn't an "air-tight case" (and G. B. S.'s linguistic deficiencies might
be
> >>deemed "irrelevant" to the nomenclatorial argument in an ICZN
proceeding).
> >
> >This may be true but unless Reeve asked Sowerby if that is what he
intended
> >and has indicated as such - even Reeve is only making an assumption. It
> >could be just as easily possible that Miss Saul asked GB. Sowerby to
name
> >the shell after some relative etc as well (the obvious assumption is not
> >always the correct one) so if we assume L. Reeve had some idea of what
was
> >going on or there is some note on the actual specimen (if it still
exists)
> >then we could accept this but otherwise we have to leave it as is.
> >Regardless of how bad Sowerby was considered to be with latin.
> >
> >>I presume the actual date of publication of the original description of
Murex
> >>Saulii [sic] in Proc. Zool. Soc. London was 1841; or was it 1840?
> >
> >The date of publication was 1841, the volume of the Proc Zool Soc Lond
is
> >1840. The meeting at which the paper was read was either Oct or Nov 1840
-
> >I don't have the intervening pages. And the paper directly proceeding
this
> >one was by his father and named two Philippine land snails including
Helix
> >annulata (Helicostyla annulata).
> >
> >I enjoy a lot going back to the original literature and things like the
> >above are the reasons I have made special efforts to find and see the
> >original descriptions especially of Australian species I am working
with.
> >For example by doing this I have in the last 18 months or so corrected
> >several errors including the following two taxonomic errors.  One was an
> >extremely rare one by Tom Iredale for the correct author of a small
> >estuarine nerite which had been in the museum collection files etc since
> >1938 and the other was one of the 72 species of freshwater snails am
> >currently writing up which was described in 1863 by Fraunfeld but for
the
> >last century or so it was thought he named it in 1865 instead.
> >
> >>Did Snyder (1986) actually say he named Latirus anni for his wife?  Can
you
> >>provide the reference?
> >
> >The full reference is
> >Snyder,MA., 1986. Fusinus anni (Gastropoda: Fasciolariidae), a new
species
> >from southeastern Australia. Journal of the Malacological Society of
> >Australia. 7(3-4):125-129.
> >
> >on page 128 it says - This species is named for my wife, a good friend
and
> >a helpful critic.
> >
> >It is interesting to note that Winston Ponder of the Australian Museum
had
> >intended once to revise the Fusinus group (but alsa this will not
happen)
> >and had intended to name the above species after his own wife Julie -
but
> >when Martin indicated that he thought the species was new to Winston -
> >Winston helped him out with some extra notes etc.
> >
> >Stephanie
> >
> >
> >
>
>***************************************************************************
***
> >Stephanie A. Clark
> >
> >Invertebrate Identification
> >Unit 4/17 Morris Street
> >PO Box 418
> >Summer Hill, NSW 2130
> >Australia
> >
> >phone  61 (02) 9799 5689  fax  61 (02) 9799 5610  mobile  0412 372388
> >email [log in to unmask]
>
> Harry G. Lee
> Suite 500
> 1801 Barrs St.
> Jacksonville, FL 32204
> USA   904-384-6419
> <[log in to unmask]>
> Visit the Jacksonville Shell Club Home Page at:
> http://home.sprynet.com/~wfrank/jacksonv.htm
>
> oo  .--.  oo  .--.  oo  .--.
>  \\(____)_ \\(____)_ \\(____)_
>   `~~~~~~~` `~~~~~~~` `~~~~~~~`