436 Rennie's Habits of Birds. 



tertaining Knowledge. 12mo; in the two parts, or one 



volume, 380 pages and 82 woodcuts. London. 



This work is richly stored with valuable quotations, and 

 contains a proportion of original facts, duly, yet properly, 

 noted by the subjoined initials " J. R." Both the quoted 

 and the original facts and remarks are digested into chapters 

 inscribed with the following titles : — i. Habits of cleanliness in 

 birds; n. birds solitary and gregarious on account of food ; 

 in. on account of shelter or assistance; iv. pairing; v. pecu- 

 liarities in pairing; vi. structure of eggs ; vn. colour of eggs ; 

 viii. facts observed in hatching ; ix. evolution of the chick ; 

 x. sheltering of the young; xi. feeding the young ; xn. train- 

 ing of young birds by their parents; xm. vocal organs of 

 birds ; xiv. language of birds ; xv. xvi. songs of birds ; 

 xvii. imitation and mimicry of birds ; xvin. longevity of 

 birds ; xix. the phoenix ; the bernacle goose. 



Younger students in ornithology may experience an ad- 

 vantage in getting interleaved their copy of this work, and in 

 noting down, upon the blank leaves, the facts that they may 

 observe, and the views which may arise to them, in con- 

 nection with those expressed in the work, whether they 

 coincide with these or oppose them. 



Stephens, J. F., F.L.S. &c. : The Nomenclature of British 

 Insects, Part I. extending to, and including, the order 

 Hymenoptera. 8vo. London, 1833. 

 I have just received the second edition of Mr. Stephens's 

 Nomenclature of ' British Insects, which is in many respects an 

 improvement upon the first edition ; especially in the number- 

 ing of the genera and species, and in giving the synonymes of 

 both. I have, however, a few remarks to make respecting 

 certain improvements of which it is still susceptible. In the 

 first place, I wish the families had been numbered as well as 

 the genera ; it gives a more systematic appearance to the 

 work, and assists the reader in understanding "what is what." 

 For the same reason I wish that the primary divisions of the 

 orders had been designated by some name (such as tribe, 

 section, &c), instead of arbitrary marks, such as "§." . The 

 synonymes are liable to the following ambiguity : e. g. we have 

 " Byrrhus, 1. Pilula, Lin. ater, 111. v." Now, does this mean 

 that the B. ater of Illiger is a variety of the B. pilula? or that the 

 B. pilula was considered by Illiger as a variety of his B. ater? 

 I would next ask how it happens that we have such entries as 

 this: " Elmis, 11. nitens, Mull, cupreus, Step." Why did 

 Mr. Stephens give the name of cupreus to this insect, and 

 then adopt that of nitens? Both these are cases which fre- 

 quently occur, and stand in need of explanation. When 



