200 Recent Literature. [April 



the days of Aristotle, Pliny, and ^Elian to the present time. All separate 

 works of any importance, whether general, faunal, or monographic, are 

 noticed at greater or less length, according to their merits or importance, 

 except that the faunal works noticed are limited, in consequence of their 

 being so numerous, "to those countries alone which form the homes of 

 English people, or are commonly visited by them in ordinary travel." 

 We miss, therefore, all reference to such important works as Tschudi's 

 'Fauna peruana,' Burmeister's 'Thiere Brasiliens,' Salvin and Godman's 

 'Biologia Centrali-Americana,' etc. Furthermore, it was found necessary 

 to leave unmentioned all "treatises which have appeared in the publica- 

 tions of learned societies, or in other scientific periodicals." While a 

 bibliography of ornithology is here neither attempted, nor is to be prop- 

 erly looked for in such a connection, all works which have had important 

 bearing upon the progress of the science are duly noted, and their influ- 

 ence critically weighed. The various prominent systems of classification 

 are also set forth, and the "rise of the present more advanced school of 

 ornithologists" is traced in considerable detail. Its origin is attributed 

 to the 'few scattered hints' contained in Nitzsch's 'Pterographische Frag- 

 mented published in 1S06. But the attempt made by Merrem, in his 'Tenta- 

 men Systematis naturalis Avium' (1812), "must be regarded as the virtual 

 starting-point of the latest efforts in Systematic Ornithology." In chron- 

 ological order are discussed the labors of De Blainville (1815), Jacobson 

 (1S20), Nitzsch (1S20-40), L'Herminier (1827), Berthold (1831), Cuvier 

 and Geoffrey (1832), Gloger (1834). Macgillivray (1837), Blyth 183S). 

 Brandt (1836-39). Miiller (1845-47), Cabanis (1847), Parker (1S60 and 

 later), Lilljeborg (1S66), Huxley (1S67). A. Milne-Edwards (1867-71), 

 Marsh (1S70), Sundevall (1S72-74), Garrod and Forbes (1873-83), Sclater 

 (18S0), and others less prominently identified with the subject. The 

 classification of birds is finally discussed from the author's own standpoint, 

 but he presents no formal system, considering it evident that our knowl- 

 edge of the class is too imperfect to enable systematists to construct a 

 phvlogenetie scheme. Finally, after passing the ordinal groups in review, 

 he deals with the supposed high rank of the Turdida?, which he claims is 

 not "borne out by their alliances, nor by the size of their brain, nor by 

 character of plumage." On the other hand, he claims, with Macgillivray 

 and Parker, "that at the head of the Class Aves must stand the Family 

 Corv/clce, of which family no one will dispute the superiority of the genus 

 Corvies, nor in that genus the pre-eminence of Corvits corax — the widely- 

 ranging Raven of the Northern Hemisphere, the Bird perhaps best known 

 from the most ancient times, and, as it happens, that to which belongs 

 the earliest historical association with man." — J. A. A. 



Ridgway on the American Red Crossbills.* — In his 'Review' of the 

 American Red Crossbills {Loxia curvirostra group) Mr. Ridgway is 



* A Review of the American Crossbills (Loxia) of the L. curvirostra type. By 

 Robert Ridgway. Proc. Biolog. Soc. of Washington, II, 1883, pp. 84-107. (Separates 

 issued April 30, 1884.) 



