Mr. H. Seebohra on the Genus Sylvia. 311 



it as a variety of the Blackcap. Gmelin founded his Mota- 

 cilla hortensis on the " Fauvette " of Brisson and Buffon ; and 

 according to the strict letter of the law his name ought to 

 be adopted. But inasmuch as Gmelin only defined the female, 

 and that in terms insufficient to distinguish it from the im- 

 mature Barred Warbler, and inasmuch as his name has been 

 applied so universally to the Garden-Warbler for more than 

 half a century, we arc perfectly justified in ignoring it in 

 favour of Sylvia orphea of Temminck (Man. d'Orn. p. 107, 

 1815), on the ground that the latter ornithologist was the 

 first to ' ( clearly define " the Orphean Warbler, and to give 

 it a name which remains free from the taint of having been 

 misapplied to other species. 



RiippelPs Warbler stands undisputed as Sylvia rueppelli of 

 Temminck (PL Col. iii. p. 245, 1823). 



The specific name of the Whitethroat given by Linnaeus 

 having been adopted for the genus, it becomes necessary to 

 discover the next earliest name which has been clearly defined. 

 Professor Newton decides in favour of rufa of Boddaert ; and 

 this decision is accepted by Mr. Dresser. Boddaert's name is 

 founded upon D'Aubenton's figure of ' ' La Fauvette rousse " 

 (PL Enl. 581. fig. 1). But it is impossible to accept this 

 figure as a clear definition of a Whitethroat, a common and 

 perfectly well-known bird, fairly figured (PL Enl. 579. fig. 3) 

 under its familiar name of " La Fauvette grise ou la Grisette." 

 It is equally impossible to determine what bird stood as model 

 for D'Aubenton's plate of " La Fauvette rousse/' I venture 

 to suggest that the artist "evolved" the figure (< out of the 

 depths of his moral consciousness," and coloured it to agree 

 with Buffon's description of " La petite Fauvette rousse." It 

 is impossible to identify either Brisson's " Fauvette rousse " 

 or Buffon's ' ' petite Fauvette rousse " with any known bird ; 

 but we may confidently assert that neither description can be 

 accepted as a clear definition of a Whitethroat. In my 

 opinion Boddaert's name falls to the ground for want of a 

 clear definition. There is no evidence to prove that Bod- 

 daert attempted to define any species ; and probably no one 

 would have been more astonished than he himself to hear 



