SOCIETIES. 137 



his return, yielding much against his inclination to the urgent pressure 

 of his intimate friend Newman, he set to work to thoroughly examine 

 our nomenclature, with a view to bringing it into accord with that iii 

 use in France. The result was the first edition of his Si/uonipnic List, 

 which was completed in 1850, and was based — so Stephens tells us — 

 u]»uu the 1840 edition of Boisduval's Index Methodicns. The reform 

 effected was highly unpalatable to many of the older entomologists, 

 but the List gradually laid hold of English workers until it ))ecame the 

 standard authority in this country. In 1859 a second edition was 

 })ublished, in which a good many alterations — due to the influence of 

 Guenee — were made ; and this was followed in 1865 by a Supjilement. 

 By this time Doubleday had liecoine acquainted with Staudinger's 

 Catalogue of 1861, and substituted some of the names adopted in that 

 work for those used l)y himself in 1859. Newman, whose well-known 

 work was commenced in 1867, and comjjletcd early in 1871, adopts 

 these names ; we note epiphron for eaasiopc, medca for blaadina, medon 

 for agestis, icarns for alexis, malrw for alveolus, isogramiuata for 

 haworthiata, &c. In 1871, the same year that Standinger's second 

 edition saw the light, i\[r. W. F. Kirl)y — then in Dublin, l)ut now in 

 the Natural History Museum at South Kensington — who had been 

 Avorking at the question of nomenclature on his own account, produced 

 A Si/noui/)uic List of European Bhopaloeera, a Avork Avell w(n-thy to rank 

 Avith Staudinger's second edition. He accepts to the full the Liav of 

 priorit}', but differs from Staudingcr in some of the details of its appli- 

 cation ; in particular, giving a much greater authoritatiA'e A'alue to the 

 Vienna Catalogue. This Avork Avas the sul)ject of a crushing rcA^icAv in 

 the Zoologist hy NcAvman, in Avhich he expends the A'ials of his Avrath 

 on the " laAv of priority," and all its su})2)orters ; six months later he 

 rencAvs the assault in a reA'icAv of a pamphlet on the subject by Mr. 

 LeAvis, iDut strangely Avinds up the latter article Avith these Avords, " AVe 

 must by some Liav dispose of one of tAvo names. If "priority" l)e not 

 that " laAv," Avhat is ?" At the end of last year (1892) Mr. Kirby published 

 the first vol. of a similar work dealing with the Heteroeera. In 1873, 

 Doubleday produced a final su2)plement to his list, in Avhich the earlier 

 one of 1865 Av^as incorporated. Tliis, hoAvever, has neA'er lieen much 

 folloAved. Finally, in 1881, ajjpeared the Entomologist Si/noni/mir List 

 l)y Mr. South. This, st) far as trivial nomenclature goes, is, for the 

 Macro-lepidoi)tera, an almost exact reproduction of that adopted by 

 Staudingcr, only nine names being essentially different ; additional 

 synonyms of British authors — Avith whom Staudingcr confesses himself 

 im})erfectly ac(piainted — are, hoAvcA-er, added. As regards the ]\Iicro- 

 lepidoi^tera, Wocke's nomenclature is not so closely folloAved, the Editor 

 having considered it in the light of the researches made by English 

 Avorkers like Barrett and Stainton. It must be menticnied that 

 Staudinger's classification and arrangement are not rejiroduced by 

 Mr. South, Avho prefers to take that of Boisduval and Guenee, repro- 

 duced by Doubleday, as his basis, altering it as little as possible. Of 

 Macro-lepidoptera, 165 of Douljleday's trivial names are replaced by 

 others ; in some cases, as parallelaria and virgularia, the change is a 

 return to the names used by Doubleda}^ in his first edition. The 

 changes are in the main due, 1st, to the more rigorous application by 

 Staudinger of the " laAv of priority ; " 2nd, to the resuscitation by 

 Staudingcr of Hufnagel and Kottemburg ; 3rd, to the extent to Avhich 

 Staudinger rejects the authority of the Vienna Catalogue ; the 



