240 



NA rURE 



{Jtdy 14, 1 88 1 



been to America for the purpose of examining types, and 

 the result is that up to the date of publication his work 

 must be as complete as personil labour and an unlimited 

 expenditure of time and money could render it. Again, 

 the author's well-known travels in various pirts of Europe 

 and Siberia have made him acijuainted with the natural 

 history of a number of the species described in his book, 

 and have given him a practical knowledge which must 

 have stood him in good stead at every turn. It is not in 

 this journal only that he will receive the meed due to his 

 energy and perseverance, but he is sure to receive the 

 gratitude of every ornithologist for a monograph of two 

 such difficult families as the Thrushes and Warblers have 

 always proved themselves to be. 



Although adopting Mr. Sharpe's classification of the 

 Passcrcs, he finds that this arrangement is artificial ; but 

 we are not sure that the arrangement of our author is 

 altogether free from a similar charge. No one who has 

 not studied the birds above mentioned can have the 

 slightest idea of the extraordinary difficulty which the 

 student would experience who tries to classify the 

 Warblers on structural characters only, and we find 

 no fault with Mr. Seebohm when he makes the style of 

 coloration a generic character in these birds. But that 

 the author himself feels a little uncertain in his key to 

 the genera of the Warblers is shown by his introduc- 

 ing some of the genera three times in the Clavis under 

 different sections, and it reads somewhat curiously to 

 learn that one of the characters of the genus Aero- 

 cephalus is to have " the bill acrocephaline (or phyllo- 

 scopine) " ; the truth being that, as in the case of the 

 species of Warblers, the genera so run one into the other 

 that it is difficult, if not impossible, to define the exact 

 natural limits of each. These remarks, however, almost 

 appear hypercritical when one turns to the actual descrip- 

 tive work of the author, and examines the complete way 

 in which the synonyms are given and the descriptions 

 elaborated, and this with the utmost conciseness con- 

 sistent with completeness. One thing is evident from the 

 list of specimens, that the British Museum series of these 

 birds is a very full one, and we note with pleasure the 

 constant generosity of the author himself in supplying 

 specimens from his own collection. In the case of a bird 

 like the common Willow Warbler, for instance, the series 

 of specimens embraces nearly every locality whence the 

 species is known, so that its geographical distribution is 

 absolutely illustrated by the skins in the British Museum 



In his classification of the sub-family Turdina, or True 

 Thrushes, colour again plays an important part in classi- 

 fication, but we cannot complain of his arrangement, 

 which seems to be perfectly natural, although we shill 

 not be surprised if some ornithologists urge that some of 

 the genera included in Erythacits and Mrymecocichla 

 have at least as good grounds for separation on the style 

 of colour as have some of the genera allowed by Mr. 

 Seebohm. But not only will protests be raised on the 

 score of nomenclature of certain species, but the novel 

 feature of hybridisation and imperfect segregation of 

 species introduced by the author will doubtless be sub- 

 jected to severe tests. His opinions on the imperfections 

 in the code of zoological nomenclature propounded by the 

 British Association are well known, but the critic who 

 attempts the task of dealing with the author on this point 

 must clear himself of the charge (only too true we fear) 

 that he knows of no writer wlio attempts to carry them 

 out in their entirety. Mr. Seebohm observes (Introduc- 

 tion, p. 11): "I have accordingly adopted the law of 

 priority with the following modifications: — that names 

 which have been extensively misapplied must b: re- 

 jected, and names otherwise unobjectionable must be 

 retained, if a majority of ornithological writers have used 

 them, even though they may not be the oldest. The 

 adoption of this conformation of the law to the practice of 

 the good old times would ah. i have another immense 



advantage. It would enable us to omit the authority for 

 thj specific name, as all the names would henceforth be 

 pbirimontm auctorum, and thus the stigma that our 

 names are after all trinomial would be avoided." We 

 must demur to this reasoning, which is heterodox enough 

 to cause the shade of Strickland to arise, and will doubt- 

 less bring forward protests from many surviving framers 

 of the British Association code. But we ourselves 

 feel that this practice would very often cause a manifest 

 injustice to the early writers, and we think that this is 

 proved in some instances by Mr. Seebohm himself, as for 

 instance with the name of the Dartford Warbler, which 

 he calls Sylvia proviucialis (Gmel.), although he admits 

 that Boddaert's name of Motacilla ttndata, published five 

 years before Gmelin's work, and admitted by such 

 authorities as Prof Newton and Mr. Dresser, is referable 

 to the species. Boddaert's name is founied on the Pitte- 

 clioit de Provence of Daubenton, and Mr. Seebohm him- 

 self admits that " the figure is sufficiently good to leave 

 no reasonable doubt as to the species intended to be 

 designated ; and Boddaert's name may therefore be held 

 to be ' clearly defined.' Nevertheless there seems to be 

 no sufficient reason why the name in common use should 

 be changed." Here we consider that the long oblivion 

 which enveloped Boddaert's nomenclature was due, not 

 to any fault of Boddaert himself, but entirely rests with 

 subsequent naturalists, who did not consult his work ; and 

 that therefore Boddaert has no right to suffer for the 

 shortcomings or laziness of his successors. We are aware 

 that the scarcity of the book makes Boddaert rather an 

 exceptional case, but the principle applies to many of the 

 writings of the fathers. As however the rules of nomen- 

 clature must sooner or later be re-discussed by the British 

 Association, we may leave the defence of his principles to 

 Mr. Seebohm himself, feeling sure th.it no one can read 

 his opinions on this subject without feeling that he has a 

 good deal to say for his view of the case. 



One great feature of the present volume is the courage 

 which the author has shown in applying the doctrine of 

 the evolution of species to the birds as they exist at the 

 present day. This principle was to a small extent admitted 

 by Mr. Sharpe in his previous volumes, when he allowed 

 the existence of sub-species, or, as Mr. Seebohm names 

 them, con-species. The great risk that we see in Mr. 

 Seebohm's method lies in the fact that it affords too easy 

 a solution for otherwise difficult problems, but we must 

 remember that the author was himself witness to the 

 inter-breeding of the Carrion Crow and the Hooded 

 Crow in Siberia, and we know that this also takes place 

 in certain parts of Great Britain. Having seen this with 

 his own eyes, and brought back to this country a large 

 series of the hybrids, it was only reasonable for him to 

 suppose that other birds are also capable of hybridising, 

 and we think that the author proves his case with regard 

 to the two Blue Rock Thrushes {Moniicola cyauus and 

 iMonticoIa so/i/nriiis), which in certain parts of China 

 inter-breed ; and it is most curious that the vast majority 

 of the birds found in the winter quarters of the Eastern 

 Blue Rock Thrush, from Burmah and Malaisia to the 

 ]\Iollucca Islands appear to be hybrids. According to the 

 author, Cet/ia cantans and Ceftia minuta also inter-breed, 

 and produce an intermediate form which he calls Ccttia 

 ccintans w/« //A?, are-introduction of trinomial nomenclature 

 which we do not at all like. The intermediate form, too, 

 appears to be principally found in the Island of Formosa, 

 though also met with at Chefoo, on the mainland opposite 

 Japan, while one of the other forms is an inhabitant of 

 Japan, with the exception of one Formosan skin in the 

 author's collection, and the other is said to breed in South 

 China and Hainan. Of these three forms then we should 

 suppose that the Formosan was the oldest bird from 

 which the other two had developed themsehes, but that 

 they had not as yet become entirely separated as distinct 

 species. We must wait for more evidence with regard to 



