Catalogue of the Birds of Japan. 19 



gists, if it aimed at scientific accuracy, failed in consequence 

 of the multiplicity of facts with which it had to deal. There 

 seems, however, to be a tendency at the present time to carry 

 the idea of a binomial nomenclature to a pedantic extreme. 

 It is a common practice amongst ornithologists to quote 

 specific names without authorities, under the cover of ad- 

 hering to a strictly binomial nomenclature. In nine cases 

 out of ten no harm is done by omitting the authority ; but in 

 the tenth case it leaves the precise species intended to be dis- 

 criminated open to doubt. Exactness is the foundation of 

 all scientific research; and the moment any doubt attaches 

 to the meaning of a term, that moment such term ceases to be 

 scientific. The fact that the same specific term has been applied 

 by diflerent ornithologists to different species, makes the addi- 

 tion of the authority to the specific name in many cases a neces- 

 sity, — an unwelcome necessity, no doubt, to the binomial no- 

 menclator, but not the less an absolute necessity to the truly 

 scientific student. It would be well if the complication 

 stopped here. Unfortunately, in too many instances, a dif- 

 ference of opinion exists amongst eminent ornithologists as 

 to which species were intended to be discriminated by certain 

 terms made use of by some writers. For example, Saxicola 

 stapazina is a name intended to discriminate a certain species 

 of Chat. Saxicola stapazina (Linn.) professes to restrict that 

 name to the species of Chat to which Linnaeus gave the name 

 of Motacilla stapazina; but since the publication of Dresser's 

 ' Birds of Europe ' the title Saxicola stapazina (Linn.) ceases 

 to have a definite meaning, and the reader must always be 

 in doubt as to whether a bird so described be the Saxicola 

 stapazina of Linnaeus apud Latham, Vieillot, Temminck, 

 and a host of other authors, or the Saxicola stapazina of 

 Linnaeus apud Dresser, two totally distinct birds. At all 

 costs scientific accuracy must be preserved ; and I see no pos- 

 sible alternative but to complicate our ornithological nomen- 

 clature still further by calling the Black-eared Chat Saxicola 

 stapazina (Linn.) et Dresser. 



It would be well for the simplicity of ornithological no- 

 menclature if its complications could even stop here. From 



c 2 



