32 THE AUSTRAL AVIAN RECORD [Vol. III. 



Thus he wrote : " Falco harpyia Linn. Gen. 42.o." To the 

 casual reader this indicates " Falco harpyia Linn.," but this 

 is not so, as the little " o " governs the matter, and by this 

 Boddaert intended to show that he named the Daubenton 

 plate " Falco harpyia," and that it was referable to the 

 Linnean genus and was not included by Linne. This 

 explanation is necessary, as when Sherborn examined the 

 book he saw the inadequate manner in which Boddaert 

 treated the whole subject, and recognising that Boddaert 

 was accepting the Brissonian binomials and trinomials as 

 valid, only included in the Index Animalium those names 

 to which Boddaert had attached the word " mihi." 



The eagle-eyed priority hunters of the last generation 

 had, however, detected Boddaert's usage and had dug out 

 of obscurity the Boddaert ian names, and such are in common 

 use at the present time. Many of these common names are 

 omitted from the Index Animalium, and this omission may 

 cause trouble. We hereafter give a list of those. 



Considering the book as a whole, its composition and its 

 rarity, we think the wisest course would have been to reject 

 the whole of the names in it. This course we would 

 undoubtedly have adopted had we been the finders of the 

 book ; apparently, however, the last generation were " priority- 

 mad," a term coined by one of them to stigmatise the younger 

 generation who dared on this plea to correct their errors. 

 Throughout the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum 

 each author, with few exceptions, took advantage of 

 Boddaert's work to " upset " well-known names ; by this 

 means, as the Catalogue was authoritative, Boddaert's names 

 gained acceptance with little criticism, and are an example 

 of the folly of " nomina conservanda." Well-known names, 

 without question of confusion thereby being incurred, were 

 cast without sj^mpathy into the sink of synonymy, and there 

 was no cry about the matter. The " new " names were 

 accepted without clamour, and it is probable that the present 

 generation could not name the outcast without reference. 

 We would further note that the authors who did not make 



