( xxiv ) 



Some antliors, acceptinjj (lie wurd "tyiic" in tlie ordinary sense implying that 

 till' sjieeiniens called tyjx's arc tyjiii-il iii(li\ idiials, very pnijierly rejily that these 

 t\]<L-s are often alierrunt sjircinicns, and very seldom the most typical for the 

 group of individuals to which they belong. This confusion of the verbal and 

 the technical meaning of the word "type" misleads those authors to insist further 

 that, there being no " types " in nature, one individual being no more a pre- 

 eminent rej)resentative of the species (or variety) than another, the word " tyjie " 

 as a nomenclatorial term has no standing. It is ohvions that those authors fall 

 into a deplorable error of confounding the names, which are the jjroduet of 

 scientists, with the objects named, which are the product of nature. Certainly 

 there are no types in the nomenclatorial sense in nature, but there are also 

 no names. Tiie type is as such not at all the type of the species, Init is the 

 type of the arbitrary name given to the first specimen or specimens, and applied 

 by common consent to all the specimens which belong to the species, of which 

 tlie type-specimen is only a member, like any other individual. 



Those who have the stability of nomenclature at heart, and are unwilling, 

 when pro})osing a new name, to lay an avoidable burden on scientists — and who 

 do not consider themselves infallible — should mark one individual as type (= ti/pus) 

 of the name, and make a clear statement to that effect when publishing the name — • 

 and one individual only. Every care should be taken to have such individuals 

 preserved. There is neither justification for opposing this usage by which the 

 systematists benefit enormously, nor for employing the purely nomenclatorial term 

 " type " in any other nomenclatorial sense than the one here advocated. 



As a name is not valid if the animal or plant has already an earlier valid 

 name, we reject also all tliose names of composite species and varieties of which 

 one of the components has an earlier valid name, aud the names of composite 

 genera aud higher categories which comprise the type of an earlier validly 

 named genus or higher category respectively. Temnora brisacus of Walker 

 (18.56) has no standing, because it is a mixture of several species, of which one 

 is Cramer's pylas (1779). Dalman's Ilemaris (1816) is a synonym of Macro- 

 glossum (1777), because it includes the type of Macroglossiim. Aud for the 

 same reason the subfamily name 2Jacro(/Ioss/nac (1875) becomes a synonym of 

 Sesiinae (1819). Ambul(/x of Walker (1856) cannot stand, as it includes 

 Amplypterus of Hiibner (1822). In general terms : — 

 If A is based on a, 



or on a and b, which are not cosjiecific, respectively not congeneric, etc., 



ovm a,b,c, „ „ „ „ „ 



and B is based on a, 



or on i and a, 



or on a mu\b, 



or on ^ and a, 



or on a and ^, 



or on b, a, c, or a, b, c, or a, c, b, etc., „ „ „ „ 



then JJ is a synonym of A. 



