DR. KUNTZE AND HIS REVIEWERS. 279 



two after the making of a change, no inconvenience is felt, 

 and no complaints are made. 



Against the 1735 starting-point Dr. Schumann assumes the 

 singular and surely untenable position that the wort as regards 

 genera, is a list of naked names of genera without diagnoses. 

 He does not deny that equivalents are offered, nor question 

 the fact that, in most cases if not in all, every body kneAv at 

 the time and may now easily ascertain what plants were 

 meant to be embraced by each generic name ; so then his 

 position is one of extreme pedantry. "All undiagnosed 

 genera are with us simply noniina niida, no matter whether 

 by the citation of some figure, or by the adducing of some well 

 known plant as the type of the genus, we are able to identify 

 the genus or not," he says; and from this singularly arbitrary 

 stand-point he concludes 17873 the date of the "Genera Plant- 

 arum," to be the right point of departure. Against that start- 

 ing-point we have no more to say, but this reason for selecting 

 it is an astonishing one. I think all systematic botanists of 

 any experience know well that, wfiile generic diagnoses are 

 often the most crude, unsatisfactory, and even sometimes 

 wholly impossible means of ascertaining w^hat an author 

 meant for his genus, the naming of a certain species as the 

 type of it, usually leaves not the least room for uncertainty 

 about it. Here I see the possible occasion for still another 

 great revolution in nomenclature; and I earnestly hope no 

 one may set about reforming generic names from this strange 

 stand- point. It would be found the worst of all principles; and 

 surely a great congress would need to be convened at the 

 outset, not to determine the greatest number of syllables to 

 be allowed in a generic name, but to settle far more grave and 

 difficult questions, as, for example, what number of words, as 

 a minimum, shall be necessary in the diagnosis of a genus, to 

 render valid the name that may have been proposed for it. 



In commenting upon the reviews, both of Mr. Hemsley and 

 Mr. Jackson, I purposely omitted reference to what they had 

 to say respecting the citing of ancient authors as sponsors for 

 genera; though wdien the latter gentleman went to the length 



