Dr. E. Luiinlicrg on Dinary Nomenclaln^-e. l.'i.) 



tiviublesome questions arise one after the otlier, and well- 

 known names wliich have been almost exclusively and 

 niianimously used in zoolofjical literature are proposed to be 

 thruwn overboard or, still worse, to be used for quite 

 (iiirorcnt genera and speeics of animals. One of the very 

 worst examples may be quoted to illnstrate this. I suppose 

 that not one zooloj^ist did not know that the name Cerco- 

 pitheciis designated the Gucnons or Long-tailed African 

 Monkeys. IS'ow an American zoologist has made the dis- 

 covery that Cercopithecus was, at an earlier date, given by 

 Gronoviusto the South-American Tamarius, formerly called 

 Midas or Leontocebus, and he demands, by virtue of the law 

 of priority, the transfer o£ the name Cercopithecus to the 

 latter, while the Guenons are favoured with the hitherto 

 almost unknown name Laslopyga. AVhat an awful confusion 

 must arise by such a proceeding is easily imagined ! It is 

 not much better when the name Amia is taken from the 

 ganoid fish, which, hitherto, has been known in literature 

 under this name, and transferred to the percoid genus 

 hitherto called Apof/on, and so on. 



The question then presents itself: "■ Is this in accordance 

 with the International Rules of Zoological Nomenclature?^^ 

 The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 

 which has been elected by the International Zoological Con- 

 gresses for the purpose of solving difficult problems of 

 nomenclature, has already given an affirmative reply to this 

 question by its " Opinion " rendered as no. 20 *. But 

 errare humanum est, and I venture to think that this Opinion 

 itself is against "the International Rules of Zoological No- 

 menclature,^' and I will endeavour to prove this point. 



The quoted " Opinion 20 " is written by the Secretary to 

 the International Commission, Dr. Stiles, who discusses the 

 question whether the genera of Gronovius shall be accepted 

 or not in the following way : " An examination ofGronow's 

 (1753) Zoophylacii [&c.], Fasciculus primus, estal)lishes the 

 fact that Gronow uses mononominal generic names, quoted 

 with references from other authors or published with dia- 

 gnosis. Under the genera he cites species, with references 

 or diagnosis or both ; these species are not named hinominallij \ 

 except so far as binominal names are given in synonymy ; 

 essentially, Gronou/s specific desir/ nations are polynominal f 

 and diagnostic'^ (/. c. p. 49). Nevertheless, Dr. Stiles con- 



* Smithsonian Publications 1938. 

 t Italics by the present writer. 



