Bibliographical Notices. 453 



Azara, Levaillaiit, and a host of others, who established many very 

 excellent genera, but have necessarily lost the credit of their dis- 

 coveries owing to their having neglected to employ for the designa- 

 tion of them the one language recognized by the world of science. 



There are one or two other points in which we think the principles 

 adopted by Mr. Gray in the present edition of his List do not work 

 well. In the preface it is stated that the synonymy commences with 

 the edition cf Linnseus's ' Systema Naturae ' pubUshed in 1735. Now 

 Linnseus had not at that time invented bis binominal system, and it 

 is therefore neither correct nor necessary to commence our present 

 nomenclature from so early a period. The question, what edition of 

 the ' Systema Naturae ' we ought to begin with, has been already 

 discussed in a previous review of a former edition of Mr. Gray's book 

 in this ^Magazine *, and Mr. Gray has himself acknowledged, in the 

 preface to his List of 1844, that the 'invaluable principle' of the 

 binominal system was not estabhshed before 1758; but in his pre- 

 sent work he always begins by quoting the edition of 1 735, and seems 

 even to give that and the other earlier editions an occasional pre- 

 ference over the subsequent and more perfect publications. At the 

 same time he takes it for granted, that the first species on the list of 

 each of these editions was intended to be the type of the genus, — a 

 point which appears to admit of much argument. The adoption of 

 these principles in the present edition has caused some rather im- 

 portant changes in the types and names of certain well-known 

 genera ; changes in zoological nomenclature, where the maxim 

 ' quieta nan movere ' ought to carry more than ordinary weight, 

 and in which, we think, other naturalists will be rather loth to fol- 

 low. For example, Alca is now referred to the Puffins {A. arctica) 

 instead of the Great Auk, and Chenalopex\ (a term always hitherto 

 appropriated to the Anas cegyptiaca) is proposed to be used for the 

 Alca inipermis, as having been so applied by Moehring in 1752 ! The 

 type of the genus Tanagra is altered, because the T. episcopms 

 ("always hitherto considered as such) does not stand first in Linnseus's 

 list. Now the very fact that Linnaeus placed first one and then 

 another species at the head of his genera seems conclusive against 

 the neeessify of invariably adopting the first species as the type. 

 Lideed Mr. Gray has not ventured to carry out these rules through- 

 out to their legitimate result. Had that been done, he must have 

 used Strix for the Horned Owls {Bubo), and Faico for the Eagles 

 {Aquila), and besides that have introduced a variety of other equally 

 objectionable changes. 



Again, although it cannot be questioned that the saine name 

 ought not to be used in zoology for two different animals, and there 

 are also strong reasons for an alteration when names even closely re- 

 semble one another, Mr. Gray's changes on these grounds occasionally 

 go beyond what seems absolutely necessary. Harpuctes certainly 

 ought not to be liable to be mistaken for Arpactus, or Lophura for 

 Lophyrus, and we hope therefore ^Ir. Gray will not be imitated in 



* See Mr. Strickland's article in the ' Annals and Magazine ' for 1851. 



