452 Bibliographical Notices. 



and the sight of the four or five thousand names contained in the 

 Index thereto, will render naturalists rather more careful in further 

 increasing the already too gigantic proportions of the * Corpus Gene- 

 rum Avium* 



Another fruitful source of useless synonyms is, that there are still 

 one or two writers on ornithology who reject a generic name unless 

 it be formed classically and out of pure Greek or Latin. It is hard to 

 refuse one's sympathy to those who recoil from such odious names as 

 Smithiglaux\, KaupifalcoW^ GraydidascalusXW, CorythaixoidesWWy 

 and Strigymhemipus !!!!!; but it has been now universally agreed 

 that barbarism is not sufficient excuse for superseding already esta- 

 bUshed names by new ones, and we fear that Dr. Cabanis' and Pro- 

 fessor Reichen bach's classical alterations of even such names as these 

 will be placed in all future catalogues of Bird-genera (as in Mr. 

 Gray's) among the mass of useless synonyms. On the other hand, the 

 present work goes quite in the opposite extreme from those of the last- 

 mentioned writers. If, from the ignorance or mistake of the proposer 

 of a genus, the name happens to be wrongly spelt, there seems to be no 

 reason whatever why such an error should be retained in perpe- 

 tuum. That would indeed be unnecessary stickling for the law of 

 priority. Yet Mr. Gray appears to hold, that right or wrong we are 

 bound to adopt the spelling originally given by the proposer of the 

 genus, and to allow of no corrections or emendations even of faults 

 due to typographical errors only. Now it must be recollected, that 

 we profess to use the Latin language in our present system of nomen- 

 clature, and we ought to follow its rules as closely as possible. In 

 such names therefore as Thryothorus^ Pycnosphys, Scotornis and the 

 like (where there is no doubt of what the creators of the names in- 

 tended by them), it seems ridiculous that we should be called upon 

 to continue such palpable errors as to write them Thriothorus, Pyc- 

 nosphrys and Scortornis. Mr. Gray has — we think, unnecessarily — 

 increased his already sufficiently laborious undertaking by attempting 

 to quote every variety of reading to every generic name which the igno- 

 rance of authors or the mistakes of their printers have caused. Of 

 what good can it be to perpetuate the fact that somebody has been 

 stupid enough to write Nyctidromus Nyctydromus, and Oreotrochilus 

 Oriotrochilusi What benefit can we derive from being reminded 

 that Eulampis has been misprinted Culampis, and Selasphorus Selos- 

 phorus ? Surely it would have been better to have left such inaccu- 

 racies unnoticed and forgotten. 



Again, we fear that confusion is likely to be caused by the intro- 

 duction of the French names which Mr. Gray has permitted in some 

 parts of his List, and which in some cases he seems to give a pre- 

 ference to over the corresponding Latin terms. It may be true that 

 M. Lesson was the first to indicate the genera Chrysuronia and Cross- 

 opthalmus under the French names Les Chrysures and Les Pica- 

 zores, but that is no reason why these last names should be intro- 

 duced into a scientific list of genera, where Latinity is or ought to be 

 a first condition to any claim for recognition. If we once open the 

 door to non-Latin names, we shall be deluged with those of Buffon, 



