May 28, 1897.] 



SCIENCE. 



847 



one generation to finish the ' Tierreich. ' The 

 prospectus does not even contain an estimate 

 as to the aggregate number of volumes or signa- 

 tures the whole may embrace, and the present 

 reviewer has no means of furnishing such an 

 estimate except for a limited branch. The 

 first part, relating to birds, having been issued, it 

 is possible to calculate the size of the portion 

 relating to the class Aves, and to assert that, if 

 the same plan is followed throughout, the birds 

 alone will fill 10 large octavo volumes of about 

 600 pages each. The question then is. How 

 many volumes are the other classes to occupy, 

 and how many the insects alone ? 



The price cannot be considered high, in view 

 of the character of the work. Eegular sub- 

 scribers who bind themselves to take all the 

 parts published during the first five years will 

 have to pay an average price of Mark 0.70 per 

 signature, or about 18 cents, while the various 

 parts will be sold separately at a rate about one 

 third higher. On the above calculation the 

 birds when concluded would cost about 65 dol- 

 lars to subscribers and 87 dollars to others. 



As stated above, the first part is now pub- 

 lished and is before us.* It treats of the goat- 

 suckers and swifts and is the work of Mr. 

 Ernst Hartert, the director of the museum in 

 Tring. If the rest of the work is going to keep 

 up with the standard set by this beginning 

 there can be no doubt that the undertaking will 

 be a scientific success. But then, Mr. Hartert 

 is not only exceptionally fitted for this work, 

 but he has also had exceptional opportunities. 

 Brought up with German thoroughness, he was 

 transplanted to England, where, unfettered by 

 national prejudices, he was free to select and de- 

 velop the best sides of English methods. Five 

 years ago he monographed these very families 

 of birds for the catalogue of the British Museum, 



* Das Tierreich. Eine Zasammenstellung und 

 Kennzeiohnung der rezenten Tierformen. Herans- 

 gegeben von der Deutschen Zoologischen Gesellschaft. 

 Generalredakteur : Franz Eilhard Schulze. — 1. Lie- 

 ferung. Aves. Redakteur : A. Reichenow. — Podar- 

 gidse, Caprimulgidoe und Macropterygidoe bearbeitet 

 von Ernst Hartert, Direktor des Zoologischen Mus- 

 seums in Tring ( England ) . Mit 16 Abbildungen im 

 Texte. — Berlin. Verlag von R. Friedliinder und Sohn. 

 1897. 8vo. viii + 98 pp. 



with the unrivaled material of that institution 

 before him. He has thus had an opportunity 

 to study specimens of nearly all the species he 

 treats of, and his work thus partakes but little 

 of the character of a compilation. The first 

 part of the Tierreich is a condensed review, in 

 German, of that monograph brought down to 

 date. On the whole, the changes are few, show- 

 ing how well the work was done from the start. 

 21 species and subspecies are recognized as 

 having been added since 1892, while it has only 

 been necessary to add or reinstate five species 

 and subspecies described previous to 1892. On 

 the other hand, only two or three species then 

 recognized as such have now been reduced to 

 subspecies. Two additional genera are recog- 

 nized, viz.: Cosmetornis, reinstated, and Nan- 

 nochordeiles, established in 1896. The changes 

 in nomenclature are not many. The author 

 has accounted for most of the changes in a 

 separate paper published in the Ibis for 1896, 

 to which those wishing further detailed infor- 

 mation are referred. One important change in 

 nomenclature, however, has not been noted 

 there, as it was brought about by Dr. Eeichenow 

 only a short time ago. The latter found that 

 Pallas has not established the genus Ajms for 

 Monoculus apus, Lin., as previously supposed, 

 but that Scopoli, who proposed Apus for the 

 Swift in 1777, had on a previous page established 

 the genus Apos for the Monoculus. Of course, 

 the latter is only a lapsus in transliterating 

 a-ovc and is, in every sense of the word, a 

 synonym of Apus, which must, therefore, be 

 considered preoccupied. Eeichenow considers 

 the case parallel to that of Picas and Pica, 

 names allowable under the codes of nomencla- 

 ture, but there is absolutely no similarity be- 

 tween the cases. The latter generic appella- 

 tions are distinct and separate Latin classical 

 names for widely diff'erent birds, though the 

 philological root of the two words is probably the 

 same. But in Apos and A]ms it is the same 

 word, by some lapsus, or another, mutilated in 

 the case of Apos. Were we to accept Eeich- 

 enow's ruling we should have one species Apos 

 apus, the monoculus, and another Apus apus, 

 the bird, which would nearly nullify the idea 

 of zoological nomenclature, viz. : to have a dif- 

 ferent name for each different species. 



