36.2 Dr. E. Hartert on the new 



sharpei, not the opposite, as has been done in the List. 

 The committee has not been consistent either, for dougallii 

 has been altered by them into dougalli. The reason for the 

 decision of the International Commission and Congresses 

 is clear. It was felt to be desirable that the name of the 

 person, after whom a species is called, should be obvious. 

 If the name is latinized, the original spelling is often 

 obliterated. Take, for instance, sharpei : it is clear that this 

 name can only have been Sharpe, while sharpii leaves it 

 doubtful whether he was called Sharp or Sharpe, as both 

 names would be latinized into Sharpius. In the case of 

 Sterna beryii the spelling has been altered into S. beryei, 

 under the supposition that the man's name was Berge ; but 

 it has been suggested that he may have been called Berg, 

 which is an equally common name, though it has finally 

 become known that his name was Bergius. 



The same remark applies to other names : rayi has been 

 altered to raii, but rayi is correct. 



The name of the Black-headed Wagtail is feldegg and not 

 '"'' feldeggi," given in honour of Freiherr von Feldegg who lived 

 at Spalato, not " Spalatro.'^ Michalielles wrote " Feldegg " 

 and " Neumayer," not putting his dedication names in the 

 genitive. This is perfectly permissible and has often been 

 done. Humming-birds have been cAled fanny , guy , edward, 

 Julie, alice, claudia, eva, cora, etc., and we have no right to 

 alter these names to famiyce or fannice, guyi, edwardi, julice, 

 alicice, claudicB, eva, cores. 



The committee found fault with the name rufitergum for 

 the British Jay ; according to the reviewer's recollections of 

 classical Latin, which he was once supposed to have mastered, 

 the name is correct, meaning the red-back, and standing on 

 a par with the frequently used rufipes, Jlavipes, albifrons^ 

 albifacies, albigula, albinucha, etc., etc. 



It is, in the reviewer's opinion, regrettable that the 

 " practice now common of repeating the specific name," viz. 

 for "typical" subspecies, has not been adopted, and thus 

 another discrepancy between the B. O. U. and the Hand-list 

 and other modern works has been created. 



