2^0. 4] COUES'S ORNITH. BIBLIOGRAPHY TROCHILID^. 677 



1854. Bonaparte, C. L. — Continued. 



of the same name by different authors and the vaiying orthogTai)hy of names, there are aetu- 

 ally more generie names than there aro species in this family ! 



I regard Bonaparte's services to the science of Ornithology to have ceased in 1830. The 

 sum total of his after contributions to the subject, to the time when death cut short his 

 schemes, is not only a worthless but a pernicious aggregate. In his latter years, Bonaparte 

 •simply played chess with birds, with himself for king: le roi s amuse! Scheme followed 

 scheme, tableau tableau, conspectus conspectus, witli perpetual changes, incessant coining 

 of new names, often in mere sport — it was nothing but turning a kaleidoscope. It may have 

 been fun for him, but it was death to the subject. Besides his pedantries and his pleasant- 

 ries, he had two very bad habits, neither of them any better than a trick, by which lie juggled 

 other authors out of the way to make room for himself. Under a thin pretence of making due 

 grace to his peers, he would take their names, invest them with a new sigiiilicance. and place 

 "Bp." after such names in their new association; and then bestow a new name upon the 

 genus thus deprived of its rightful designation — killing two birds with one stone. Again, 

 he usually took a specific name for a generic one, and to the species thus left nameless he 

 would give a new name — scoring two for himself again. "When, as sometimes happened, these 

 two tricks fell together, he was enabled to write "Bp." four times where it should not once 

 have appeared. Add to all this that he was utterly regardless of orthography — often wrote 

 the same name in diiferent ways — quoted others' names so carelessly as to make them look 

 like new names — renamed the same thing often in mere forgetfulness — made genera in joke, 

 for a chance for a pun, or to compliment a friend — and let the most slovenly printing pass — 

 with all this, I say, we have .a state of things that is a disgrace t« himself, a scandal to sci- 

 ence, and only to be adequately characterized by the word abominable. 



The present article may stand in illu.stration of the justness of my censure. It is one of 

 four in which within as few years Bonaparte disarranged the Hummers. There is his article 

 in the Consp. Av. 1849; one in the Compt. Rend. 1850; one in the Ann. Sc. Nat. 1854; and 

 the present. He calls it only ' ' the skeleton " ol^ his studies ; we may wonder wliat it would 

 be if filled out. It is a mere list of the names of 80 genera and 322 species. It is impossible 

 for any one who has not made a special study of the Hummers to tell which are here new 

 names and which are not. Many are here used for the first time, and many others, botli of 

 his own and of others', are used in such novel application, or are so differently spelled, that 

 they become dejure newnames. I give the following list, being those that have "Bp." after 

 them : — 



Myiaetina, Doleromyia, Leucippus, Orthornis, Guyornis, i). 249. Pygmornis, p. 250. Lead- 

 heatera, Reliomastes, Ornitliomyia, Sourcieria, p. 251. Godigena, Lafresnaya, Chrysobron- 

 ehue, Seliotryppha (sic: Gould), Eriocnemys (sic; Keich.), p. 252. Raiuphomicron, Myia- 

 beillia, Adelomyia, Florisuga, Delattria, p. 253. Cyanomyia, AmaziUus, Chrysiironia, p. 254. 

 Saucerottia, Sporadinus, I'haumantias, JuUamyia, p. 255. Sapphironia, Arocettinii..i, Cepha- 

 lepis (sic; Lodd.), Loddiggiornis, Disevra, p. 256. Thaumastura, Lophorinus. Gouldia, 

 Gouldomyia, p. 257. 



It is directly pertinent to the subject of Bonaparte's abuse of names in this family to refer 

 to his other schemes, which are not formally citable in this part of my Bibliography. 



In the Ann. Sc. Nat, 4th ser., i, 1854, Bonaparte has inserted one of his perpetual conspectus, 

 embracing Trochilidce. Here he is not only at the tricks I have exposed, but commits an 

 ultra-Napoleonic jjiece of fatuity: namely, citing a number of names as if Reicbenbaeh's, 

 which the latter never published (see Elliot, Class, and Syn. Troch.,liia, p. 188). Conse- 

 quently the reproach of them falls upon Bonaparte. Such are Aline, ITosqueria, Luciania, 

 Derbomyia, etc. 



Bonaparte was seldom thoughtful enough of the convenience of others to indicate whether 

 a "Bp." name was newly proposed or not; and it is consequently not easy for anyone to 

 decide upon the original reference to be given in such cases. Thus, in his ' ' Xote sur les 

 TrochUid^s," in Comp. Rend, {vide supra, 1850), he has a number of names ; and I notice that 

 Mr. EUiot quotes this place and date as the original reference to them. Most if not all of 

 them, however, occur in his Consp. Av. of date 1849. 



As the latter is a general work which does not come in this portion of my Bibliography, I 

 wiU here give a list of the Bp. genera in it — being those which Gray correctly attributes to 

 "Bp. 1849" in his Handlist: — 



Phaetornis (= Phaethornis, Sw.), p. 07; Lafresnaya, Dory/era {=Dorifera, Gld. i. p. 68; 

 Colibri, Heliotrix {=Heliothryx,Jioie),'p. ti9; Delattria, Leadbeatera, Heliomaster, p. 70: Cae- 

 ligena (ex. Less), Leucippus, Bourcieria, Florisuga, p. 73; Avocettinus, Chrysuronia, p. 75 p 

 Saucerottia, AmaziUus, p. 77; Thaumatias, p. 78; Ramphomieron, i5. 79; Sephanoides {ex. 

 Less.), p. 82; Cephalepis{ex.l,oA(l.),-p. 83; J)iscoswm, p.84; Thaumastura, p. 85; t?o!(Mi(T, p. 86. 



1854. BOURCIER, J. Noiivelle e.spece dn genre Hylocharis [chlorocephalu.s], Boie. 

 < Rev. et Man. deZool.,\i, 1854, pp. 457, 458. 



