260 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, isyo. 



undertook to reproduce metallic reflectious of plumage. The feathery Iris of these 

 exquisite creatures is always fascitiatiug, aud there are no more favorable subjects 

 for glittering plates. The work, indeed, was not exclusively a monograph of the 

 Hummers, but the Ilistoire Naturelle des Colibris et des Oiseaux-mouches formed 

 a large part of the undertaking. Scientific names were not used in the Ois. Dor., 

 but a technical nomenclature of the subjects of the work was furnished by Vieillot 

 in 1817. 



The first great illustrated work on Hummers exclusively was Lesson's, published 

 in parts, from 1829 to 1832, the parts being afterward grouped in three separately 

 titled volumes. This author described and figured in colors upward of 100 (about 110) 

 species, many of which were actually new, and to many more of which new names 

 were given. A very few genera, additional to or in place of Brisson's, had mean- 

 while been proposed ; but Lesson was the first to introduce any considerable number 

 of new generic names. Many of those, however, which Gray and others have since 

 cited as generic, were certainly not used or intended as such by Lesson, being simply 

 vernacular designations of certain " tribes " and " races" among which he distributed 

 the TrochUidd', such words as •' Bleuets " and "Queues dtroites ," for example. French 

 authors were (and I think many of them still are) such sinners in spelling that it is 

 not always easy to say what words of theirs they would have us take as technical. 

 Possessing a copious and voluble vocabulary, largely supplemented by gesture- 

 speech or shrug-language, and violating in their articulation the usual powers of 

 written characters, they not only acquired a trick of gallicizing technical words, but 

 they also cultivated a characteristic habit of rising superior to orthography. If 

 Vieillot could write Cripsiriua for Cryptorhina without flinching, we need not wonder 

 that Lesson invented Ornismj/a, which he defended as against Ornithomyia, or that 

 some of his successors reached the height of Oi-niismial 



The Huunuers have always been objects of study peculiarly agreeable to French 

 ornithologists. Their daintiness, so to speak, seems to suit the national genius. 

 French literature, therefore, figures in the written history of these birds to an extent 

 greater than that observable in any other family of birds. About the time we 

 have reached, however, several English names became prominent in the present con- 

 nection, as those of Swainson, Vigors, Loddiges, and especially Jardine, for Gould 

 had not then begun the work which was afterward to identify his name with Tro- 

 chilidine literature. Swainson had already classified the Hummers as a part of his 

 general scheme, describing some new species and establishing certain genera. In 

 1833, and thus upon the heels of Lesson's memoirs, Sir William Jardine prepared his 

 monography, to the valuable and agreeable text of which Lizars contributed beauti- 

 ful illustrations. The home of the Hummers was heard from the same year in La 

 Llave's Memoria, and Schreibers's Collectanea of same date consisted only of these 

 birds. From this time until the beginning of Gould's great work in 1849 appeared 

 no monographic treatise on Troch'ilidw. But the period was one of great activity, 

 among both English and French writers ; the accumulation of material was rapid 

 and incessant, and many papers of these years described new genera and species, 

 though too often hastily and inadequately. In England, Gould and Eraser were 

 busy with their materials. In France, the writings of Lesson continued; Bourcier 

 became prominent in the number of his papers ; while Boissoneau, De Lattre, Gervais, 

 Longuemare, and others made their respective contributions. This was the period of 

 accumulation rather than of elaboration ; numberless new names were introduced, 

 but among them were many synonyms, both generic and specific, little or no sys- 

 tematic revision of the subject being effected, unless Gould's Draft Arrangement, 

 the precursor of his Monograph, be considered of such character. 



The thirteen years, 1849-1861, during which Gould's work was pending, marked the 

 next period in the history of the subject. The preparation of this great work held 

 its author, already recognized as the leading Trochilidist, to his subject ; and the 

 appearance of successive parts served as a continual stimulus to others to move in 



