Proposed Reform of Zoological Nomenclature. 277 
‘etraogallus, Gypaetos, are examples of the appropriate use of 
compound words. 
g. Specific names derived from persons—So long as these 
complimentary designations are used with moderation, and are 
restricted to persons of eminence as scientific zoologists, they may 
be employed with propriety in cases where expressive or charac- 
teristic words are not to be found. But we fully concur with 
those who censure the practice of naming species after persons of 
no scientific reputation, as curiosity-dealers (e. g. Caniveti, Bois- 
soneauti), Peruvian priestesses (Cora, Amazilia), or Hottentots 
(Klass). 
h. Generic names derived from persons.—Words of this class 
have been very extensively used in botany, and therefore it would 
have been well to have excluded them wholly from zoology, for 
the sake of obtaining a memoria technica by which the name of a 
genus would at once tell us to which of the kingdoms of nature it 
belonged. Some few personal generic names have, however, crept 
into zoology, as Cuvieria, Mulleria, Rossia, Lessonia, &c., but 
they are very rare in comparison with those of botany, and it is 
perhaps desirable not to add to their number. 
t. Names of harsh and inelegant pronunciation.—These words 
are grating to the ear, either from inelegance of form, as Huhua 
Yuhina, Crawirex, Eschscholizi, or from too great length, as 
chirostrongylostinus, Opetiorhynchus, brachypodioides, Thecodon- 
tosaurus, not to mention the Enaliolimnosaurus crocodilocephaloides 
of a German naturalist. It is needless to enlarge on the advan- 
tage of consulting euphony in the construction of our language. 
As a general rule it may be recommended to avoid introducing 
words of more than five syllables. 
k, Ancient names of animals applied in a wrong sense.—It has 
been customary, in numerous cases, to apply the names of animals 
found in classic authors at random to exotic genera or species 
which were wholly unknown to the ancients. The names Cebus, 
Callithriz, Spiza, Kitta, Struthus, are examples. This practice 
ought by no means to be encouraged. The usual defence for it 
is, that it is impossible now to identify the species to which the 
name was anciently applied. But it is certain that if any 
traveller will take the trouble to collect the vernacular names 
used by the modern Greeks and Italians for the Vertebrata and 
Mollusca of southern Europe, the meaning of the ancient names 
may in most cases be determined with the greatest precision. It 
has been well remarked that a Cretan fisher boy is a far better 
commentator on Aristotle’s ‘ History of Animals’ than a British 
or German scholar. The use however of ancient names, when 
correctly applied, is most desirable, for ‘“‘in framing scientific 
NEW SERIES.—VOL, XVIII. NO. 11.—OCTOBER 1863. 2N 
