132 On Use and Abuse of Generic Terms. 



compiled one volume, Dr. Gadow two. Neither of these 

 invented a single new genus. Mr. Salvin in his volume 

 introduced one new genus ; Mr. Hargitt four; Capt. Shelley 

 five, four of which he had previously published ; Mr. Ogilvie 

 Grant, in a volume and a half, six new genera ; Count Salva- 

 dori, in the volumes on the Parrots and Pigeons, 12 genera, 

 of which he had already published 5 ; while Dr. Sharpe, in 10^ 

 volumes, has favoured us with 108 new genera. It is obvious 

 that the " genus-standard " of Dr. Sharpe must be very 

 different from that of Messrs. Hargitt, Seebohm, Salvadori, 

 and others, who in 9| volumes have been content with 28 

 new genera, as against his 108. 



Dr. Sharpe has certainly made some genera that will stand 

 the test of time. No one can carp at Clytoceyx as not being 

 a good genus ; but at least 100 of his generic diagnoses 

 would have been treated as simply specific by his collabora- 

 teurs in the B. M. Catalogues, if we may judge by their own 

 generic definitions. My complaint of this " genus-facture '' 

 is that it is absolutely capricious ; that the authors seem to 

 be guided by no settled principles ; that it overloads us with 

 synonyms ; and that, so far from being a help, it is an actual 

 hindrance to the student. In fact, it is doing for genera what 

 Brehm did for species ; and as most writers ignore his species, 

 so, in mercy, it is to be hoped that many of these genera will 

 be consigned to oblivion. Among the prominent offenders 

 are several of our German friends and our American cousins, 

 but of native authors certainly Dr. Sharpe is pre-eminent ; 

 and I fear he does not improve with age, for his last volume, 

 with its 18 new genera, 16 of which comprise but 17 species, 

 surpasses all its predecessors. There are indisputable 

 genera in the same volume which comprise but one or two 

 species, but what analogy is there between such genera as 

 Notornis, Tribonyx, or Pennula, and Amaurolimnas, Limnoye- 

 ranus, and Sarcogeranus? or, to take an earlier example, 

 Rhinocorax — a true Raven, if ever there was one, but trans- 

 ferred to geuei'ic solitude, because its upper nasal bristles 

 have an upward turn ? I can only say that if genera are to 

 be so multiplied we shall soon be little better off than 



