206 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



irregular intervals. I suppose it will not be doubted that Herrich- 

 Schaffer's work was properly published, but this appeared at all sorts 

 of dates (vide H.-S. ' G B. Regensburg,' 1809), and the same remark 

 equally applies to the 'Biologia Centrali-Americana ' and all such 

 works." [Sir G. Hampson remarks that each part of these works was 

 issued at a definite date, but that Hiibner, according to Geyer's 

 account, kept his type set up, and printed off and issued a few copies 

 whenever there was a demand for them.] "The authors of British 

 Association Code laid down the following rule : — 



" ' § 12. A name which has never been clearly defined in some 

 published work should be changed for the earliest by which the object 

 shall have been so defined ' ; and they previously remark : ' Definition 

 properly implies a distinct exposition of essential characters ; and in 

 all cases we conceive this to be indispensable, although some authors 

 maintain that a mere enumeration of the component species, or even 

 of a single type, is sufficient to authenticate a genus.' 



"No one will be disposed to doubt the necessity for full definition 

 of all genera published after the acceptance of the British Association 

 Bules, but it was impossible for authors who lived and died before 

 these rules were made known to act up to them. All previous work 

 must be tested by the meaning of the word ' definition.' Definition 

 does not consist of a generic term accompanied by a greater or less 

 number of mere words which are not diagnostic (e.g. the majority of 

 Walker's genera in the British Museum Catalogues), but 'definition' 

 means that the genus proposed shall be capable of comprehension. 

 Hiibner's works exemplify the two types of genera. In the ' Tenta- 

 men ' we have genera which are readily understood, for the type is 

 always cited : we turn to Hiibner's figure and can understand what 

 species was intended, and for ourselves test whether the genus be valid 

 or not ; on the other hand, in the ' Verzeichniss ' the generic name 

 is accompanied by what out of courtesy is called a diagnosis : these 

 genera are for the most part composed of incongruous material, and it 

 is impossible to ascertain what was the original type of the genus, but 

 they are accompanied by some ' verbiage,' and if we follow the British 

 Association ruling they must be accepted, whereas from a scientific 

 point of view the ' Tentamen ' genera, being monotypical and capable of 

 absolute identification, are much more worthy of recognition. Citation 

 of type is practically equivalent to definition, for anyone can under- 

 stand what was intended by an author like Hiibner, who figured all 

 the species with which he was acquainted. I am therefore disposed 

 to think that Hiibner's 'Tentamen' genera comply with the require- 

 ments of ' definition,' and as they were ' published ' we are bound to 

 accept them. 



" The requirements of § 2 of the German Zoological Society, 

 ' Als wissenschaftlicher Name ist nur derjenige zulassig, welcher in 

 Begleitung einer in Worten oder Abbildungen bestehend und nicht 

 misszudeutenden Kennzeichnung durch den Druck veroffentlich 

 wiirde,' are complied with, for Hiibner's species are figured. 



" If the citation of a type subsequently identified with certainty 

 either from specimens or from a recognisable figure is not to secure 

 the acceptance of a genus, the types of many of Felder and Bogen- 

 hofer's genera (and equally species) are rendered useless and take no 



