2998 THE ZooLocist—APRIL, 1872. 
judgment on what is yet to come. If, therefore, the work in its 
entirety, in its completed state, prove a good, a safe, a sound and a 
seductive guide to the student, the author as well as the translators 
must suffer materially by my expressing an adverse opinion of that 
small portion which may or may not fairly or sufficiently represent 
the whole. ‘I'he extracts I have made from the ‘ Birds of Europe,’ 
from ‘Cage Birds, and from ‘Yarrell’s History of British Birds,’ 
give a perfectly correct idea of the respective works, because each 
work is destined to be, when completed, a collection of what 
Gilbert White would have called “ Monographs,’* and the “ mono- 
graphs” I have selected, viz., the kestrel, the gray parrot, the 
Greenland falcon, and the Iceland falcon, are most agreeable and 
attractive, although I doubt not perfectly fair specimens of the 
entire works. In the three Parts hitherto published of ‘ Bird- 
Life’ there are no monographs to be selected, but each page, apart 
from the context, is to say the least an unsatisfactory example of 
the whole, because of its incompleteness. Nevertheless, I will do 
my best to give an intelligible and fair idea of what the work is 
to be. 
The qualifications necessary to produce a really good translation 
of any work on Science are threefold; a knowledge of the subject, 
a knowledge of the original language, and a knowledge of the 
language into which it has to be translated. In the present 
instance I cannot compliment the translators on being perfect in 
either qualification: the English is at times loose and careless, the 
meaning of the original seems imperfectly understood and imper- 
fectly rendered, and the translation of the vernacular names of the 
birds is very questionable. I will not give examples of these 
defects, because it would answer no good purpose, but propose to 
select passages which will enable the reader to judge for himself. 
The following passage, implying that the fear of man on the part 
of the feathered creation results from experience and is not 
instinctive, is entirely in accordance with my own conviction; but 
the author does not seem fully to explain his meaning: thus, when 
he contrasts the conduct of the Asiatic and African adjutants, he 
doubtless states facts, but leaves the explanation to the reader :— 
* Tt will be observed that the word “monograph ” when applied to a species has 
a different signification to the word when applied to a genus, a difference on 
which it were totally irrelevant and unnecessary to dilate here. 
