34 CODE OF NOMENCLATURE, 



in such cases they acquire a new meaning, and should be quoted on the au- 

 thority of the first person who used them in this secondary sense. It is true, 

 that several old authors made occasional approaches to the Linnaean exact- 

 ness of generic definition, but still these were but partial attempts ; and it 

 is certain that if in our rectification of the binomial nomenclature we once 

 trace back our authorities into the obscurity which preceded the epoch of its 

 foundation, we shall find no resting-place or fixed boundary for our re- 

 searches. The nomenclature of Ray is chiefly derived from that of Gesner 

 and Aldrovandus, and from these authors we might proceed backward to 

 yElian, Pliny, and Aristotle, till our zoological studies would be frittered 

 away amid the refinements of classical learning." 



So far the original B. A. Code, 1842 ; which, upon the foregoing considera- 

 tions, recommended the following proposition : 



"2. The binomial nomenclature having originated with Linnaeus, the law of 

 priority, in respect to that nomenclature, is not to extend to the writings of antece- 

 dent authors." 



The exact date here implied is 1766 ; and this is explicitly reaffirmed by 

 the Bath Committee in 1865, l who added to the foregoing 2 the words, in 

 brackets : " [and therefore the specific names published before 1766 cannot 

 be used to the prejudice of names published since that date.] " 



The action of both the B. A. Committees related, of course, only to Zool- 

 ogy. Commenting upon their action, Dall continues : 



" It is saiid that in the original draft of the report the number of the edition 

 of the 'Systema Nature' was left blank, and afterwards filled up by the 

 insertion of the ' twelfth.' This insertion renders the paragraph, otherwise 

 judicious and accurate, glaringly incorrect. What motive resulted in the 

 selection of the twelfth as opposed to the tenth, or of any special edition after 



1 "III. The Committee are of opinion, after much deliberation, that the XTIth 

 edition of the ' Systema Naturre' is that to which the limit of time should apply, 

 viz. 1766. But as the works of Artedi and Scopoli have already been extensively 

 used by ichthyologists and entomologists, it is recommended that names contained 

 in or used from these authors should not he affected by this provision. This is par- 

 ticularly requisite as regards the generic names of Artedi afterwards used by Lin- 

 naeus himself. 



" In Mr. H. E. Strickland's original draft of these Rules and Recommendations 

 the edition of Linnaeus Was left blank, and the Xllth was inserted by the Manchester 

 Committee. This was done not as being the first in which the Binomial nomencla- 

 ture had been used, as it commenced with the Xth, but as being the last and most 

 complete edition of Linnaeus's works, and containing many species the Xth did not. 

 For these reasons it is now confirmed by this Committee, and also because these 

 rules having been used and acted upon for twenty-three years, if the date were altered 

 now, many changes of names would be required, and in consequence much confusion 

 introduced." Recommendations of the Bath Committee, prefixed to the Revised Code, 

 1865. 



