1SS4.I S'i'F,jNK(;i'.i>; "// ('/i<i/n;<s ill Niiiiiiiicldtii II-. 119 



slin'hk'sl doiil)! that PIcct ropJia )ics (^f iSi^ i*^ ;"' imcc^iulitional 

 s\ iiom tn of Caicari iis^ '^*^03- ^" 1S23, Meyer first incliided 

 nivalis in the genus originally created for lappntiiciis ; he still 

 used Plectrophauca. although he of course knew Becbstein's 

 name ver\- well ; luit ]Me}cr and the ornithologists of that date 

 were not very scrupulous in that respect, changing old names 

 very often onlv for the reason that they did not seem appropriate 

 enough. IIowe\er, the t\ pe of the genus Plectrophajtes of 1823 

 is still iappo/n'c/is^ and no interpretation can ever prove the con- 

 trar\ . Kaup. in 1829, first made nivalis the type of his Plectro- 

 phanes. We have here before us a case exceptionally clear ; we 

 have either to accept a new* name, my Plectropheitax^ or to vio- 



LTiXTLV CHAXGE TIIK TVPE OF A GENUS AGAINST OUR BETTER 



KNOWLEDGE. But wlicre are we going if such a thing be 

 allowed ? 



The critic in -The Ibis' savs that "excellent reasons may be 

 found for rejecting rt'/zv terms given by Schafier, Gunnerus (!), 

 and Hasselquist." The latter, of course, is not acceptable to 

 ornithologists starting from 1766, but I am quite unable to see 

 the "excellent reasons for excluding the other two, especially 

 Gunnerus." ( !) 



1 repeat what I said about Gunnerus. viz.. that he wrote after 

 1766: he was a strict biuomialist ; the language he used for his 

 descriptions was Latin ; his descriptions and diagnoses are clear 

 and well defined; he was at the time a man of high scientific 

 standing, and recognized as a first-class naturalist; his different 

 writings were well known and well studied by his contempora- 

 ries : and. finalh. liis botanical names are accepted and gene- 

 rallv ussd in modern botanv. I ask once more, Where are the 

 •excellent reasons' for his exclusion ? 



The same remarks are for tlie greater part applicable to 

 Schafier also. As examples of his diagnoses T quote those 

 accompanving the names proposed l)v me to be revived. 



One page ^2 of his 'Museum Ornithologicum'* we find : — 



* The full title of this book is: Museum | ornithologicum | exhibens | cnvmerationem 

 et descriptionem | avivm | qvas | nova prorsus ratione sibi paratas | in museo svo | 

 asservat | D. Jacobus Christianus Schaeffer | eccl. ev. Ratiob. past, superint. et van. 

 consist, ass. primar. | ser. et pot. regi Dan. Norv. a consiliis et professor. | .\cad. imp. 

 natvr. cvr. Petr. Lond. Berol. Upsal. Rob. Monac. et Mauntr. | soc. hist. Goett. bot. flor. 

 patr. .Svec. phys. Lond. Goth | soc. oecon. Cell. Bern. Lvs. Styr. Bvrgh. Lips, et plvr. 

 Tevt. membrum | acad. sclent. Paris, a litterarum commercio. | — | LIT tabulae aevi 

 incisao et cnloribus distinctae. I — I Ratisbonae MDCCLXXTXX. 



