VI PREFACE 



not, why not ? They will have to explain clearly their reasons 

 for differing from me, and I have little fear as to their ultimate 

 conversion. 



To the ornithological students, and to the critics on the 

 staffs of the popular daily and monthly journals who differ from 

 me, I should like once more to explain my reasons for employing 

 the names I do. I have not adopted the names given in the 

 tenth edition of Linnaeus "Systema Naturae" (1758), but have 

 preferred those of the twelfth edition (1766). Therein I follow 

 the rules of the British Association. American and German 

 ornithologists start their nomenclature from 1758, because in this 

 year Linnaeus first promulgated a strictly binomial nomenclature. 

 Good ! But, after death, a man would surely wish to be judged by 

 his most recent work, not by his earlier publications. Therefore, 

 it seems to me most reasonable to adopt the nomenclature of 

 the twelfth edition of the "Systema Naturae," as being the last 

 edition published by Linnaeus himself, and containing his 

 latest notions. In the eight years which elapsed since the 

 publication of the tenth edition, Linnaeus must have felt that 

 his knowledge had gained somewhat, otherwise he would not 

 have altered any of his work in his twelfth edition. Few critics 

 have fallen foul of me on this score, and indeed the changes 

 of nomenclature would be trifling, even if this adoption of the 

 1758 edition became universal, needless as it seems to me. 



The chief point of offence laid to my door is rather the 

 employment of an identical generic and specific name, and I 

 find that all my explanations on the subject have failed to 

 convince the " man in the street." I should like to explain 

 myself once more, and I trust that the following example (Ex 

 uno dlsce o nines) may suffice to illustrate the principles of 

 nomenclature that I champion. 



I take it that no one, whether adopting the tenth or the 

 twelfth edition of Linnaeus' "Systema," will object to the prin- 



