Vol. xvi.] 40 



Hiiiid-list (IV., p. l.>3, 190:3) luis rejected the name Daxllas 

 assigned to the Niyhtiii^'ale in our List of British Birds 

 and has used in its place the name Aedou, given to the 

 Niii'htiny-ale in 1817 by Thomas Forster in his ' Synoptical 

 Cataloy-ue of British Birds' (p. 53). Although this name 

 is not defined, it must be allowed that there can be no 

 doubt of what Forster intended, as he writes 'Aedon 

 LUSciNiA, Nightingale.' Now in a recently published 

 article on ^ Birds from Kilimanjaro (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 

 vol. XXVIII., p. 895, 1905), Mr.' Oberholser, striving to put 

 his British brother right, has made another error on this 

 much-vexed question. Mr. Oberholser (prompted by Dr. 

 Richmond) states that * Aedon ' of Forster (op. cit., j). 5-3) 

 is posterior to ' Luscinia'' of the same writer (op. cit., 

 p. 14), and that the latter term should, therefore, be 

 adopted. But if Mr. Oberholser had read Forster's Preface 

 he would have seen this passage : — ' In the following 

 Catalogue the large capitals will designate the Linneaii 

 name, according to the arrangement now adojtted. The 

 small Roman letters will mark the names of the old writers 

 brought to light again by Dr. Leach.' 



" On turning to p. 14 of Forster's Catalogue we find at 

 the head of ' Genus xxiv. ' Sylvia luscinia in lanje 

 afjiitals, showing that this is the name adopted by the 

 author for the ' Nightingale,' to which the Fnglish, French 

 and (jlerman vernacular names are also added. On the 

 inner side of the same page in smcdi Romans are placed the 

 words ' Luscinia Aedon.' These are of course not in- 

 tended for new generic terms, as Mr. Oberholser 

 suggests, but are merely ' names of the old writers brought 

 to light by Dr. Leach.' It follows that the only new 

 generic name given to the Nightingale by Forster in the 

 work referred to is ' Aedon,' as above quoted, and as used 

 by Dr. Bowdler Sharpe in his ' Hand-list.' But it is not 

 necessary to consider the rival claims of Aedon and Luscinia 

 to be the generic name of the Nightingale, because, as has 

 lately been discovered, the old classical name Philomela 

 has precedence of both of them. In the first part of his 

 description of tlie Collection of the University of Rostock, 



