8 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



ORTHOGRAPHICAL AND CLASSICAL "EMENDATIONS" 

 IN NOMENCLATURE. 



By Louis B. Prout, F.E.S. 



So much has ah-eady been written on this thorny and very 

 uninteresting subject that I ought to apologise for bringing it 

 forward at all ; but, as I am doing a good deal of work at entomo- 

 logical nomenclature, I feel it necessary to state succinctly the 

 reasons which have led me to cast in my lot with the compara- 

 tive few who reject "emendations" altogether (excepting in so 

 far as to add in brackets " recte " so-and-so). 



1. They are fatal to stability in nomenclature, giving occasion 

 for endless controversy on matters of personal opinion and taste. 

 E. g. because the name siterata of Hufnagel was not published 

 with an etymology, and no satisfactory one could be found, it 

 was seriously argued that it must be a misprint for " Uterata " ; 

 but what possible proof have we that this was so ? And is 

 Uterata, Don., to sink as a homonym to please these faddists ? 

 If anyone wants to see what intricacies originate from the ad- 

 mission of "emendations," let him turn toProc. Ent. Soc. 1870, 

 pp. v-viii. 



2. It is sometimes very difficult to say what is absolutely 

 the ideally classical form of a name, even when we know the 

 root. See Ent. Mo. Mag. xxxvi. p. 194. 



3. Names are names and nothing more, and insect names 

 are no more subject to the rules of orthography than personal 

 names. When we " classically amend " Mr. Smyth and Mr. 

 Phillips, and turn Miss Clara George into Clarus George, we may 

 reasonably begin to interfere with the insects. 



4. It is absolutely illogical to allow names which are obviously 

 mere combinations of letters with no meaning, such as the oft- 

 quoted Datana, &c., of Walker, and yet to reject or alter others 

 because their spelling does not indicate their meaning with 

 sufficient accuracy. 



Of course, I am not advocating bad spelling or incorrect 

 construction ; the Epichnoptorix, &c., of Hiibner are as great an 

 eye- sore to me as to anyone, and I would conclude by urging 

 nomenclators to act up to their best light, but at the same time 

 pleading for the absolute inviolability of a name as first pub- 

 lished ; it is what I have long desired, but I had not the " courage 

 of my convictions " until emboldened by the decided position 

 which my friend Mr. Kirkaldy is taking (Entom. xxxiii. p. 26) in 

 dealing with the Khynchota. 



246, Eichmond Road, N.E., Nov. 10th, 1900. 



