( 278 ) 



THE B.O.U. LIST OF BRITISH BIRDS.* 



Interest in this List centres in its nomenclature, and before 

 we proceed to discuss it in detail we must congratulate the 

 Committee on having overcome many of the prejudices which 

 have been resj)onsible for delajdng the advent of uniformity 

 in nomenclature. That the B.O.U. List of 1915 has brought 

 us one step nearer to this desired end there can be no doubt. 

 In the preface we find the following admirable statement : — 



" The first aim of our system of nomenclature should undoubtedly 

 be uniformity and fixity, and most zoologists are now agreed that 

 this can only be attained by keeping to the strict law of priority." 



Now if the Committee had acted up to this precept and 

 had kept to the strict law of priority throughout and had 

 decided difiticult questions by reference to the International 

 Rules and Opinions, there would have been little need of 

 criticism here, but unfortunately prejudice obtrudes its 

 unwelcome presence here and there and the result is 

 inconsistency. 



Our sole interest in nomenclature is centred in the desire 

 for uniformity and fixity. To discover and fix the correct 

 names has become highly necessary to the unchecked progress 

 of our science, but the labour involved is often great and 

 almost always thankless and the time so occupied is naturally 

 grudged by those who would far sooner be spending it over 

 the birds themselves. 



It is necessary, therefore, to discuss the differences in the 

 names used in the B.O.U. List and our Hand-List, as it is 

 only by such discussion that agreement can be reached 

 and the two lists are not so far apart as to make this much 

 desired end at all impossible of realization. In this con- 

 nexion we may here quote from a review of the B.O.U. List 

 in the last issue of the Auk the following : — 



" Comparing the present work with the original 1883 edition, we 

 find 92 changes in specific and 51 in generic names ; and yet the 

 " Hand-List " of Hartert et ah, which seemed to some so impossible, 

 contained only 111 specific changes and 72 generic! " 



It must be noted that the manuscript of our Hand-List 

 was more than half-finished before the new edition of the 

 B.O.U. List was thought of, and since the publication of 

 the Hand-List much has been written on the subject of 

 nomenclature, and some of the new facts brought to light 

 have caused some of the names used by us to be no longer 

 tenable. This, of course, was only to be expected, as since 



* A List of British Birds compiled by a Committee of the British 

 Ornithologists'' Union. 2nd and Revised Edition, 1915. Wesley. 7s. 6d. 



