RULES OF ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE. 31 



We therefore recommend the adoption of the folio-wing proposition : — 

 § 2. The binomial nomenclature having originated with Linnaeus, the law 

 of priority in respect of that nomenclature, is not to extend to the writings 

 of antecedent authors, and therefore specific names published before 1706 

 cannot be used to the prejudice of names published since that date. 



[It should be here explained, that as the works of Artedi and Scopoli have 

 already been extensively used by ichthyologists and entomologists, the names 

 contained in or used from these authors should not be affected by this provi- 

 sion. This is particularly requisite as regards the generic names of Artedi, 

 afterwards used by Linnaeus himself. Brisson also, who was a contemporary 

 of Linnasus and acquainted with the ' Systema Naturae,' defined and pub- 

 lished certain genera of birds which are additional to those in the twelfth edi- 

 tion of Linnaeus's works, and which are therefore of perfectly good authority. 

 But Brisson still adhered to the old mode of designating species by a sentence 

 instead of a word, and therefore while we retain his defined genera, we do 

 not extend the same indulgence to the titles of his species, even when the 

 latter are accidentally binomial in form. For instance, the PerdLv rubra of 

 Brisson is the Tetrao rufus of Linnaous ; therefore as we in this case retain 

 the generic name of Brisson and the specific name of Linnaeus, the correct 

 title of the species would be Perdix rafa (Linn.). 



[Generic names not to be cancelled in subsequent subdivisions.'] 

 As the number of known species which form the groundwork of zoological 

 science is always increasing, and our knowledge of their structure becomes 

 more complete, fresh generalizations continually occur to the naturalist, and 

 the number of genera and other groups requiring appellations is ever becom- 

 ing more extensive. It thus becomes necessary to subdivide the contents of 

 old grotips, and to make their definitions continually more restricted. In 

 carrying out this process, it is an act of justice to the original author 'that his 

 generic name should never be lost sight of; and it is no less essential to the 

 welfare of the science, that all which is sound in its nomenclature should 

 remain unaltered amid the additions which are continually being made to it. 

 On this ground we recommend the adoption of the following rule : — 



§ 3. A generic name, when once established, should never be cancelled in 

 any subsequent subdivision of the group, but retained in a restricted sense 

 for one of the constituent portions. 



[Generic names to be retained for the typical portion of the old genus.] 

 When a genus is subdivided into other genera, the original name shoidd 

 be retained for that portion of it which exhibits in the greatest degree its 

 essential characters as at first defined. Authors frequeutly indicate this by 

 selecting some one species as a fixed point of reference, which they term the 

 " type of the genus." When they omit doing so, it may still in many 

 cases be correctly inferred that the first species mentioned on their list, if 

 found accurately to agree with their definition, was regarded by them as the 

 type. A specific name, or its synonyms, will also often serve to point out 

 the particular species which by implication must be regarded as the original' 

 type of a genus. In such cases we are justified in restoring the name of the 

 old genus to its typical signification, even when later authors have done 

 otherwise. We submit therefore that 



§4. The generic name should always be retained for that portion of the 

 original genus which was considered typical by the author. 



Example. — The genus Picumnus was established by Temminck, and in- 



