OF THE TKNTH EDITION OF LINX.EUS, 121 



the privilege of being. For iu all the work I have scarcely in 

 a single instance been vinable to obtain from the library of the. 

 Natural History Mvisenm what books I have wanted to verify 

 Linneeus's quotations, however rai-e and obscui'e they have been. 

 Without such an advantage it would have been impossible to 

 do the work at all. 



With regard to the method used for finding the type-species of 

 the Linnean genera, I would di'aw attention to the very consider- 

 able extent to which the principle of tautonj^my is available. In 

 ai. great propoi'tion of cases Linnseus selected as a generic name a 

 term which had been used by eai-lier writers for the single name 

 of a member of the genus, so that among the species of any given 

 genus there is commonly one which has among its synonyms the 

 name used by Linnaeus for the genus. 



These names are generally quoted from Gesner, and comprise 

 the most conspicuous and best-known members of each genus, so 

 that in nearly all cases the genotype selected on this system is the 

 very one which by general consent we should wish to have for the 

 type. Any other rule that has been suggested, either "first 

 species " or " elimination," is liable to produce results by no means 

 so satisfactory — indeed, the many objections to both are too well 

 known to need any insistence upon here. Nor can any later and 

 arbitrary selection of types without reason assigned be taken as 

 necessarily valid. 



In two cases only, those of Simia and Dasypus, are results 

 arrived at difierent from those obtained by previous wi'iters. The 

 shifting of the latter name from the rarer '•'■ Eujihractihs'^ to the 

 really common Tatusia is unfortunate, but is necessary if we are 

 to get the benefit of the general stability which is obtainable from 

 the acceptance of the principle of tautonymy. 



The case of /Simia, however, is very different, and I confess to. 

 hoping that the suggestions which are now being made for some 

 overruling decision in the case of certain well-known but 

 technically misapplied names may be carried out, both a,s to a 

 number of such names in general and to Simia in particular. 



But it seems advisable, nevertheless, to put the technical case 

 irrespective of the prospect of any such decision, and therefore 

 (while hoping that a fiat attaching Simia to the Orang may go 

 forth) I have to point out that this name should be applied to 

 the Macaques, with S. sylvana (the Barbary Ape) as its type, 

 while Anthropopithecus will remain available for the Chimpanzees. 



Should no such fiat as I speak of ever come to pass, this allo- 

 cation of Simia is at least better than its application to the 

 Chimpanzees. Not only is it less confusing in itself, owing to the 

 consequent total abolition of the combination Simia satyribs, con- 

 nected for a century with the Orang, but now sought to be applied 

 to the Chimpanzee, biit also the genus to which it goes, that of the 

 Macaques, is already ma,rked as the victim of a. noraenclatural 

 change, for Pithecns antedates Macaca, and therefoi'e one change 

 is not much worse than the other. . . - .... 



