*7 2 Recent Literature. [January 



which of them should he most correctly employed. Such poims are left 

 for the decision of those who use the 'Index.' But so much time is often 

 lost in ascertaining where and when a generic name was first given, that 

 it is believed that the information thus accumulated in a handy form can- 

 not fail to be of much practical value. 



"The author does not profess that the 'Index' is complete, but as Libra- 

 rian of the Zoological Society of London, and thus with one of the best 

 series of ornithological books in the world at his command, he has done 

 his utmost to render it free from errors and omissions. Except in the few 

 cases [ten only !] where they are marked with an asterisk, all the refer- 

 ences have been personally verified." 



Mr. Sclater states that the plan and execution of the work "are entirely 

 due to Mr. Waterhouse," and that he has "only assisted him by general 

 advice, by looking over the proof-sheets, and by writing these few words 

 of preface." 



With such facilities, and with the aid of such previous compilations in 

 the same line as those of G. R. Gray, Agassiz, Bonaparte, Giebel, Mar- 

 schall, and Scudder. there should certainly be very few omissions, and very 

 few errors of citation, yet the work being of human origin a few such im- 

 perfections should be inevitable, but so far as we have examined they are 

 extremely rare.* 



The most serious defect in the work and, we cannot help feeling, a 

 glaring one, relates to its plan and scope, by which all work (except Bris- 

 sonian) done prior to the twelfth (1766) edition of Linnaeus's 'Systema 

 Naturae' is ignored; — and this too in the year 1SS9, in face of the fact 

 that three fourths of the biologists, taking the world at large, begin with 

 the tenth (1758) edition of Linnseus's great work, or earlier, as the start- 

 ing point for generic names! Consequently over forty Linnaean generic 

 names adopted in the tenth (1758) edition are ascribed to the twelfth (1766), 

 and some twenty others to Brisson, who adopted them in 1760, mostly 

 from Linnaeus, or some earlier writer. 



Another defect to which it seems necessary to call attention is the occa- 

 sional citation of purely vernacular- French names (mostly from Cuvier 

 and Lesson) as though they were proper generic terms. This reprehen- 

 sible fashion was started by G. R. Gray in 1S40 (in 'A List of the Genera 

 of Birds', etc.) ; these are not only cited in the work under notice (many 

 of them in fact properly enough, being in a certain sense adopted as, or 

 at least treated as, generic or subgeneric names by Gray), but we meet 

 with a number of new ones, as, e. g., 'Barbacous,' 'Cacatoes,' and 'Jabi- 

 rus' from Cuvier, and 'Cai'aca' ( = "Les Ca'i'acas" Less.), 'Papegais', etc., 

 from Lesson. Gray Latinized and adopted many such terms, and they 



* E.g., Buceros, Linn., 1758, is ascribed to Briinnich, 1772; P/iaethon, Linn., 1758, 

 is ascribed to Illiger, 1811 ; Bombycilla, a Brissonian name, is credited to Vieillot, 

 1807; u Abia, Agassiz, 1840,'' is incorrectly given as "=flabia Cuv." Turning to 

 Habia (p. 91) we find it there credited to Vieillot, 1817, where, however, it is em- 

 ployed as merely a French vernacular name. Habia, as a proper generic name, dates 

 really from Reichenbach, 1850, as fully shown some five years ago by Dr. Stejneger in 

 'The Auk' (Vol. I, 1884, p. 366). 



