Sept. lo, 1874] 



NATURE 



379 



arduous a task. The volume before us shows that their 

 hopes were not misplaced. The " Hand-List of Birds," 

 by the late I\Ir. G. R. Gray, invaluable as it is on account 

 of its extensive indexes and easy method of reference, 

 has a very definite and narrow limit of utility ; it is an 

 essential supplement to a library, but gives no detailed 

 information itself. The work before us has a very different 

 scope. Besides the nomenclature and the synonomy of the 

 whole bird-class, it will contain the complete description 

 of each species from the hand of one of our most able 

 and enthusiastic ornithologists, based upon the linest 

 collection in the world, the deficiencies of which, through 

 the liberality of the trustees and the energy of its super- 

 intendent, arc being so rapidly diminished, that, as we 

 are told in the introduction, of the 354 certain species of 

 diurnal birds of prey at present known, less than thirty ai'e 

 desiderata in the collection. Woodcuts, scattered through 

 the volume, help to illustrate many of the peculiarities of 

 the heads, tarsi, and toes of the species to which they refer ; 

 whilst twenty or so coloured plates, from the pencil of 

 Mr. Keulemanns, assist in indicating the special charac- 

 ters of type-specimens and rare forms. 



A glance through the work tends strongly to confirm 

 our prejudice against the existing rules of avian nomen- 

 clature, and makes us hope that before long some im- 

 provement in the direction of simplification will be 

 adopted. The system of Linna;us was a binominal one, 

 no doubt ; but though that at present in vogue still retains 

 that name, it has gradually drifted into a quadrinominal 

 system. The number of species of birds is certainly 

 large, but hardly beyond the grasp of a binominal nomen- 

 clature. As it is, each bird receives its two Latin names, 

 generic and specific, added to which is that of the author 

 who originally described it as such, in brackets or not, 

 according to whether he placed it in some other genus 

 or in the one in which it is retained. Could not some 

 universal congress be formed to determine once for all a 

 name for each species, based on the laws of priority, pre- 

 sent knowledge, and euphony, and so fix the appellation 

 of all now known birds, as a starting-point for future 

 workers, so that it need no longer be felt that the publica- 

 tion of every new book which has any pretension to sound 

 work will bring with it changes in the naming of even 

 our most familiar species, which are as confusing as they 

 are unimportant ? In the work before us the well-known 

 smallest of the diurnal birds of prey is shown to have to 

 be placed in a new genus, Microliicrax, instead of retain- 

 ing its habitual name Hi'crax, whilst the King Condor 

 must in future be Calhiu/cs instead of Gyparchus, the 

 Black Cuzzard changing to Catharistcs or Cathaiiita, 

 according to the appreciation of gender in the author 

 transcribing it. 



The Turkey Buzzard fares still worse. Its generic dis- 

 tinctness from the last-mentioned bird must have struck 

 Mr. Ridgeway in the United States and Mr. Sharpe in 

 this country almost simultaneously. Both authors must 

 have had the works in which they announce their pro- 

 posed change in proof at the same time. The "History 

 of North American Birds," however, appeared shortly 

 before the volume under present review, and consequently 

 the still-born CEiiops has to sink into a synonym of 

 Rlunogiyphus. A similar fate has awaited Unibitinga 

 itrkincia, which will have to stand as Antenor instead of 



Erythrocnema. Among other fresh genera we find LopJio- 

 iriorchis, which includes Spisai'tiis /cieneriaxidi S. isidorii j 

 and i/ra/r/orf/z/j, containing otX^ Astur macrurus ; and 

 others. With regard to species, Mr. Sharpe has separated 

 off the smaller brown Condor as .5". acqitntorialis ; the 

 Turkey Buzzard, with yello'A^ head and white irides, as R. 

 pcniigra; an As/in; obtained by Mr. Wallace in Lom- 

 bock and Bouru, as A. wallacii ; and a Falcon, whicli 

 Prince Bonaparte and Prof. Schlegel consider a melanism 

 of F. severus, as F. rcligiosns. 



Next with regard to the classification which is adopted ; 

 as the work does not profess to be more than a catalogue 

 and a key for the identification of the specie;, it woul I 

 not be fair to expect that in the separation of the different 

 families and genera described all the known peculiarities 

 should be given ; sufficient for the ready identification of 

 each being all that is required. Consequently when the 

 sub-family Polyhorincc of the_family Falcoiiidc^ is divided 

 up as in the folIowing[table, without any further definition, 

 it is evident that the author only attempts to give a 

 minimum, and not a miximum number of distinguishing 

 features. 



POLVBORIN.E. 

 Key to the Genera, 

 a. Middle tail-feathers not elongated. 



ci. Nostrils oval . . . . Polyborus. 

 b'. Nostrils jound . . . Ibicter. 

 /'. Middle tail-feathers extremely elong\ted ; lie-id 

 with elongated plumes. 

 a. Nostrils vertical ovals; 

 forehead with erect 



crest Cariama. 



b'. Nostrils perpendicular 

 ovals ; forehead not 



crested Serpentarius. 



In the above instance we are astonished, as miny 

 others will no doubt be, not so much at the slightness of 

 the differentiation of the genera, as at the fact that Carhviia 

 and Sejpeiitarius are placed in such intimate relation 

 with the Caracaras. The illustrious Nitzsch, whose 

 opinions on classification are more to be relied on than 

 those of any other zoologist, it is true, placed the Secre- 

 tary Bird with the Accipitres, though he retained the 

 Cariama with the Bustards. More recently there has 

 been a tendency, which is daily becoming stronger, to 

 combine tlje one with the other. The question then arises, 

 are they Bustards or arc they birds of prey ? Internal 

 structure is'overpoweringly in favour of the former posi- 

 tion ; and such being the case, it is almost to be regretted 

 that no further notice has been taken by Mr. Sharpe of 

 their peculiarities than the statement that in two out of 

 the four genera of the Polyborins, the median tail feathers 

 are elongate, whilst in the other two they are short, espe- 

 cially when Pandion is placed in a sub-order by itself ; 

 and, as it happens, has its foot accidentally represented 

 without the ungual phalanges or any of the three anterior 

 toes. For though Serpciitariits presents strongly marked 

 external facial resemblances to Polyborus, which, by the 

 way, are not to be found in Cariama, nevertheless in 

 other respects they both differ so much from all other true 

 Accipitres, that it would be impossible, even if they were 

 birds of prey, to do otherwise than place them in a sub- 

 order by themselves ; which is the same thing as saying 



