/|.6 Forgo/ten Pea/hers. [,^( 



Emu 



July 



Phillip, on 26th January, 1788, he cites many references to the 

 bird which has given the title to our magazine. When The 

 Etiiu was started the then editors consulted authorities versed in 

 philology,* and, after receiving their opinions, decided that the 

 vernacular and spelling adopted by the Australian Association 

 for the Advancement of Science should be adhered to. Mr. 

 Fletcher's citations justify this decision. From Captain Tench's 

 " Narrative of the Expedition to Botany Bay, &c.," dated 1879, 

 he quotes :— " The bird which principally claims attention is a 

 species of Ostrich, apparently nearer to the Emu of South 

 America than any other we know of," and gives the captain's 

 description of physiological and structural details of the bird. 

 Mr. Fletcher claims that the whole story of the nomenclature of 

 the Emu rests on the possession by Captain Tench of a copy of 

 Goldsmith's " Animated Nature " (a work consulted before the 

 spelling of the name of this magazine was decided upon). In 

 this work three species of Striithera are given — • " under 

 vernacular names only, as the Ostrich, the Emu, which many 

 call the American Ostrich, and the Cassowary." He proceeds 

 to say that Captain Tench and his colleagues held " a sort of 

 scientific inquest upon the new bird." But Mr. Fletcher shows 

 that Tench's account leaves us to draw our own conclusions 

 upon two important matters — namely, exactly how the verdict 

 that it was not the American Emu was arrived at, and whether 

 their verdict was a unanimous one. The spelling of Emu was 

 changed in subsequent English publications, in deference to 

 British authorities, who possibly declined to recognise the bird 

 as a new species, and thought it only a variety of the Cassowary. 

 Captain Hunter, says Mr. Fletcher, is the only writer who uses 

 the spelling Emew, but thinks that possibly this was due to a 

 typographical error " which passed unnoticed." This theory is 

 hardly tenable, as Prof. Newton, who has made a study of the 

 word, uses by preference Emeu, a closely allied form, but one 

 which, as has been pointed out by Mr. T. S. Hall, of the Melbourne 

 University, is open to serious objections. When Prof Tucker 

 was consulted, he wrote: — "It appears to me that the pronuncia- 

 tion attached to the words was that of our Emu, and with the 

 usual practice of early travellers, who were not phoneticists, the 

 spelling was open to variation.* The current form in ancient 

 times was not Emeu." Mr. Fletcher claims that the name 

 " was not given in a haphazard way, but that it was the outcome 

 of a genuine attempt to name the bird correctly," which, 

 judging from many other authorities consulted, was undoubtedly 

 done. Those who wish to pursue the subject should consult 

 vol. i., p. 5, 1st January, 1907, of TJie A?istralzati Naturalist, for 

 the full text of Mr. Fletcher's paper. 



* The Emu, vul. i. , ]>. 5. 



