( xxiv ) 



Some antliors, acceptiDg tlie word "type" iu the orilinar.y sense implying that 

 the specimens called types are typical iudividnals, very jirojierly reply that these 

 tyi'es are often aberrant specimens, 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 

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

 eminent representative of the species (or variety) than another, the word " type " 

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

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

 scientists, with the objects named, which are the ])rodnct of nature. Certainly 

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

 no names. The tyjie is as such not at all the type of the species, but is the 

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

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

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



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

 when proposing a new name, to lay an avoidable burden on scientists — and who 

 do not consider themselves infallible — should mark one individual as tijpe (= typm) 

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

 and one individnal 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 those names of composite species and varieties of which 

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

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

 named genus or higher category respectively. Temnora brisaeus of Walker 

 (1.^.50) has no standing, because it is a mixture of several species, of which one 

 is Cramer's pylus (1779). Dalman's Hemaris (1816) is a synonym of Macro- 

 glossum (1777), becanse it includes the type of Macroglossum. And for the 

 same reason the subfamily name Macroglossinae (1875) becomes a synonym of 

 iksiinae (1819). Ambulyx of Walker (1856) cannot stand, as it includes 

 Amph/pterus of Hiibner (1822). In general terms :— 



If ,1 is based on a, 



or on a and b, which arc not cospccitic, respectively not congeneric, etc., 



OT on a.b.c, 

 and B is based on a, 



or on b and a, 



or on a and b, 



or on c and a, 



or on a and r, 



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



then i? is a synonym of A. 



