ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE. 373 



not to adopt such compound words as are of too gi*eat length, 

 and not to corrupt them in trying to render them shorter. The 

 names Gallopavo, Tetraogallus, Gi/paetos, are examples of the 

 appropriate use of compound words. 



(g.) Specific names derived from persons. — So long as these 

 complimentary designations are used with moderation, and are 

 restricted to persons of eminence as scientific zoologists, they 

 may be employed with propriety in cases where expressive or 

 characteristic words are not to be found. But we fully concur 

 with those who censure the practice of naming species after 

 persons of no scientific reputation, as curiosity-dealers (e.g. 

 Canheti, Boissoneauti) , Peruvian priestesses {Cora, Amazilia) 

 or Hottentots {Klassi). 



(h.) Generic names derived from persons. — Words of this class 

 have been very extensively used in botauy, and therefore it 

 would have been well to have excluded them wholly from zoolo- 

 gy, for the sake of obtaining a memoria tec/mica by which the 

 name of a genus would at once tell us to which of the kino-- 

 doms of nature it belonged. Some few personal generic names 

 have, however, crept into zoology, as Cuvieria, Mulleria, Rossia, 

 Lessonia, &c, but they are very rare in comparison with those 

 of botany, and it is perhaps desirable not to add to their number. 

 (i.) Names of harsh and inelegant pronunciation. — These words 

 are grating to the ear, either, from inelegance of form, as Hu- 

 hxia, Yuhina, Craxirex, Eschsclioltzi, or from too great length, as 

 chirostrongylostinus, Opetiorhi/nchus, brachypodioides, Thecodon- 

 fosaurus, not to mention the Enaliolimnosaurus , crocodilocepha- 

 loides of a German naturalist. It is needless to enlarge on the 

 advantage of consulting euphony iu the construction of our 

 language. As a general rule it may be recommended to avoid 

 introducing words of more than five syllables. 



(k.) Ancient names of animals applied in a wrong sense. — It has 

 been customary, in numerous cases, to apply the names of ani- 

 mals found in classic authors at random to exotic genera or 

 species which were wholly unknown to the ancients. The 

 names Cebus, Callithrix, Spiza, Kitta, Struihus, are examples. 

 This practice ought by no means to be encouraged. The usual 

 defence for it is, that it is impossible now to identify the species 

 to which the name was anciently applied. But it is certain 

 that if any traveller will take the trouble to collect the verna- 

 cular names used by the modern Greeks and Italians for the 

 Vertebrata and Mollusca of Southern Europe, the meaning of 

 the ancient names may in most cases be determined with the 

 greatest precision. It has been well remarked that a Cretan 

 fisher boy is a far better commentator on Aristotle's 'History of 

 Animals' than a British or German scholar. The use however 



