Cypselidse^ Caprimnlgidse, and Podargidse. 365 



without an author's name attached to it, not treated like a 

 new name, but merely as an acknowledged term to designate 

 that form of the species under consideration which M'as first 

 introduced into science. I may be allowed to add that the 

 first-described form must, for practical reasons, always be 

 called the " typical " one, and that the question of the real 

 ancestral or oldest form should not be taken into considera- 

 tion when establishing this sort of nomenclature, because 

 we are but very seldom able to say, a priori, which form 

 existed first, and because any other consideration than 

 simple priority would lead to a constant disturbance of 

 our trinomial nomenclature. In cases where a species of 

 the genus is already named '^ typicus " (which cases are 

 rare), the name might, faute de mieux, be repeated, or a 

 new name for the should-be forma typica may be invented. 

 Such questions are left more or less untouched in most 

 " Codes of Nomenclature,'' and therefore I wish to call 

 the attention of all friends and students of exact systematic 

 work to them. 



Other distinguished authorities — contrary to Dr. Sharpe, 

 who calls them by binomial names — do not name subspecific 

 forms at all, though they have a good notion of their exist- 

 ence. Let us take, as an example, Caprimidgus macrurus 

 in Blanford's ' Birds of India.' Under that binomial title arc 

 included such different forms as C albonotatus and C. atri- 

 pennis. Although these are best considered as subspecies, and 

 not as species, because they are connected by intermediate 

 forms with C. macrurus, the extremes of these forms are so 

 different that every student who enters the field will regard 

 them as different species, they, i. e., the extremes, being more 

 distinct from each other than many forms universally recog- 

 nized as species. I am sure that no Indian field-ornithologist 

 would understand the uniting of C. albonotatus from North 

 India with the Ceylonese C. atripennis under one name, and 

 that he would gain much more knowledge, and comprehend 

 much better their relations, if they were treated under 

 different heads as subspecies, as then he understands that 

 they are not considered identical, though they intergrade — • 

 intermediate specimens, when met with, being also thus 



2d 2 



