1885.] Recent Literature. OQ 



the foundation of all inquiries into the history of individual species; and 

 when it is answered in the affirmative, the study of ornithology is found 

 to possess a new interest, many obscure points become comparatively 

 clear, and the old treatment of the subject requires modifying in various 

 wavs." "The acceptation of the hypothesis of evolution," he says, 

 "implies the recognition of species in the process of formation"; and 

 adds : "It is easy to find examples of species in every stage of develop- 

 ment, from mere local races to well-defined sub-species." He discusses 

 in this relation the interbreeding of birds, upon which he lays great 

 stress as affording an explanation of intermediate forms. The influence 

 of environment upon the evolution of species is thus to a large degree 

 strangely ignored. As we have elsewhere said,* we cannot agree that 

 interbreeding has anything like the importance in this connection that Mr. 

 Seebohm assigns to it, or that it is by an}' means adequate to account 

 satisfactorily, except in a small number of cases, for intermediate forms, 

 many of which are so obviously due to environment. Neither can we 

 quite agree that "in the tropical regions birds vary much less than they 

 do in the arctic regions," or "that tropical species are well-defined," in 

 comparison with those of other regions, but rather that variation within 

 one given area as compared with another is dependent upon the relative 

 diversity of the conditions of life in the one area as compared with the 

 other, and in part to the varying degree of plasticity in different groups 

 of birds. 



As regards classification, Mr. Seebohm seems inclined to ignore all 

 recent progress, because systematists have not yet come to an agreement 

 in regard to all points, or even all important points, and so goes back to 

 the "artificial sequence adopted by Cuvier, which has at least the practical 

 value that it is well-known, and thus obviates to a large extent the trouble 

 of reference to an index" (!). He accordingly begins with the Raptorial 

 Birds, and on reaching the Singing Birds, places them all in a single 

 'family Passeridje,' recognizing for British Birds eleven ' sub- families' 

 which are the equivalents of the families usually .recognized by modern 

 writers. 



In respect to the 'vexed question of nomenclature,' he has throughout 

 his work "set the Rules of the British Association at defiance, being con- 

 vinced that, so far as ornithology is concerned, they have done infinitely 

 more harm than good." His panacea for the evil is the utter disregard of 

 the law of priority, and the adoption of an 'auctorum plurimorunf rule; 

 that is, the selection of "the specific name which has been most used by 

 previous writers." In respect to genera, he follows the Stricklandian 

 Code with modifications, some of which are manifest improvements. For 

 instance, it seems sound doctrine that "Whenever the name of a species 

 has been selected for the name of a genus, the species whose name has 

 been so adopted becomes of necessity the type of such genus." 



For subspecies he adopts what may be termed a Seebohmian system of 

 trinomials, first instituted by him in his British Museum Catalogue of the 



* Ibis, 1883, pp. 226-228. 



