122 Recent Literature. [j a u n 



name, that it has "the profound merit of priority, and, hoping it may make 

 toward the long-desired goal of stability in nomenclature, I have chosen to 

 adopt it, " we regret to find in another instance that he deliberately violates 

 the rules of the International Commission by choosing to emend the spell- 

 ing of the genus Ithagenis. If everyone chooses for himself in matters 

 of names we shall certainly not arrive very soon at the desired goal. How- 

 ever, these are but technical matters, which the reviewer may perhaps be 

 pardoned for mentioning, since they are constantly coming to his attention 

 in all sorts of exasperating forms in the varied literature of the day, but 

 we now cheerfully adopt Capt. Beebe's suggestion and pass on to things 

 worth while. 



Immediately preceding the systematic part of the work is an admirable 

 introduction of thirty-one pages, giving a resume of many subjects which 

 are treated more in detail under the various species. This contribution 

 is one of the most important portions of the text and is deserving of careful 

 study by all interested in the general problems of ornithology as well as in 

 the pheasants in particular. 



In its perusal we notice that Capt. Beebe follows Sharpe in the general 

 classification of the pheasants, and omits the Turkeys and Guineaf owl which 

 figured in Elliott's monograph, but which are now considered to represent 

 quite independent families. While omitting most of the subfamily Perdi- 

 cince, which are not popularly regarded as pheasants, and were not included 

 in the family in Elliot's day, he retains in his work two genera, the Blood 

 Partridges and the Tragopans, which Elliot considered members of the 

 family and which are generally considered as pheasants. Thus we see 

 that the word pheasant and the family Phasianidse are by no means 

 coextensive terms. While adopting Sharpe's four subfamilies Capt. 

 Beebe does not do so blindly, and has the satisfaction of citing an excellent 

 character for their separation which we do not think has been previously 

 used, i. e. the order of molt of the tail feathers — a character of particular 

 interest to the reviewer, as he called attention to it in another connection 

 in 1896. Another character which he makes use of is geographic distribu- 

 tion, and "by refusing to include in any single genus species whose ranges 

 coincided or overlapped" he effected "a breaking up or coalescing of 

 certain genera whose status had been in dispute." While strict adherence 

 to this rule in genera of more numerous species would not be practicable 

 the principle involved is one that deserves more consideration than has 

 usually been accorded to it. External modifications of structure, espe- 

 cially in such wonderfully plumaged birds as the pheasants, often obscure 

 their true relationships and these are often revealed by a study of their 

 geographic distribution. Considering this subject further and entirely 

 apart from the systematic relationship of the species, Capt. Beebe con- 

 cludes that the pheasants are of northern origin and that the farther south 

 we go the greater is their specialization. In this investigation he would 

 we think have been justified in including the twenty-nine genera of Perdi- 



