18 W. T. Blanford — On the Scientific Names of [No. 1, 



Hircus mgagrus, var. 1. Gray, Cat. Ung. Furc. B. M. (1852), p 159. 



Capra megaceros, Bapho-chhe, (Markhor) or large wild goat. Cun n ingham's Ladak, 



p. 199, PI. 17, (1854). 

 Hircus megaceros, Adams, P. Z. S., 1858, p. 525. 

 Capra megaceros, Blyth, Cat. Mam. Mus. A. S., p. 176 (1863). — Jerdon, Mammals of 



India, p. 291 (1867). 

 Hircus Falconeri, Gray, Cat. Rum. Mam. B. M. 1872, p. 53. 

 Capra Jerdoni, Hume, Proc. A. S. B. 1874, p. 240. 

 Markhor, Afghan: Ea-che, (Bawa-che and Eapho-che $ and <j> ), Ladak. 



I have already referred to the Capra bezoartica of Linneeus. This 

 was founded on the various accounts of the hezoar goat given by older 

 writers, amongst whom was Aldrovandi. Blyth has derived the specific 

 name bezoartica, which he adopts* for the common Indian antelope, from 

 Aldrovandi, and Jerdont has followed Blyth in this as in most questions of 

 mammalian nomenclature, so that in both lists this animal stands as Anti- 

 lope bezoartica, Aldrovandi. 



Now there is no rule more generally admitted, amongst English zoologists 

 at least, than that specific names given before the publication of the 12th 

 edition of Linnseus's Systema Naturae in 1766 are invalid. J Aldrovandi§ 

 dates from 1621. 



* Cat. Mam. Mus. As. Soc. p. 171, No. 528. 



t Mam. Ind. p. 275, No. 228. 



X Unless there is agreement amongst naturalists as to the adoption of rides for 

 nomenclature, it is evident that the sole object of a scientific terminology, that all peo- 

 ple of whatever race, despite difference of language, should employ the same term for 

 the same animal, plant, mineral, &c, would not he gained. Any one would suppose 

 that this is a self-evident proposition and that it is to the advantage of all naturalists to 

 agree to fixed rules of nomenclature, hut, strange to ' say, it is incredibly difficult to 

 induce many to consent to any rules. So long as the absurd idea exists that species 

 and genus-makers have rights which require protection, so long will anarchy prevail. 

 The law of priority is established for general convenience and to enforce a fixed 

 nomenclature, not to commemorate the makers of species. 



The rules drawn up by a Committee of the British Association in 1842 (Eept. Brit. 

 As. 1842, p. 106) and approved, with slight alterations, by another Committee of the 

 same body in 1865 (Eept. B. As. 1865, p. 25) are the fairest yet proposed for regulating 

 scientific nomenclature, and they should be adopted until other rules are established by 

 general consent. To many naturalists in India these rules do not appear to be known, 

 and I may therefore be excused for referring to them. The rules of Linnaeus are 

 republished at the commencement of the "Nomenclator Zoologicus" of Agassiz, but so 

 many of them have been broken habitually for years, that they have become obsolete. 

 Had they been enforced, zoological nomenclature would never have become the chaos 

 it now is, and much advantage would I think be gained if they were better known than 

 they are, and their gereral spirit at least adopted. 



§ Aldrovandi, Quad. Bis. p. 256, under Capra bezoartica, gives a figure probably 

 meant for the Indian antelope, but in the text he describes several species, one of them 



