1884.] 165 [Garman. 



coo pocoo ;" and these names as pronounced by the natives dis- 

 tinguish with much accuracy the birds to which they are applied, 

 for one who has seen and heard them. Without special demand for 

 conciseness, as in writing and printing, the length of the name is 

 often increased at the will of the speaker by repetition. Proba- 

 bly many of the earliest names originated in similar practice. In 

 the earlier literature, whatever may have been their origin, the 

 names are generally more concise, most often monomials, and in 

 many cases they are still in use as names of more or less compre- 

 hensive groups. Previous to the sixteenth century, knowledge did 

 not call for very close distinctions, and such names as Canis, 

 Felis, Falco, and Bufo were sufficiently definite. Afterwards as 

 differences in the kinds of dogs, cats, falcons, and other animals 

 came to be recognized and recorded the binomial was commonly 

 used. The genus was subdivided and such names as Raia laevis, 

 Raia aspera, and Raia oxyrhynchus became numerous. Further 

 increase of knowledge, accompanied by desire to make names as 

 suggestive as possible and by lack of system, lengthened the names 

 and introduced a vast amount of confusion. Names such as Sciurus 

 virginianus cinereus major are not rare in the literature of the 

 century immediately preceding Linne. In the work of Artedi we 

 find the most suggestive designations as well as the best attempt 

 at system. Here the generic name is followed by an enumeration 

 of characteristics amounting to a short description ; " Coregonus 

 maxilla superiorelongiore, pinna dorsi ossiculorum quatuordecim," 

 for example. Convenience aside, this method worked tolerably 

 well when the describer knew a number of individuals or when the 

 species was well known, but when represented by a single speci- 

 men the species was frequently unrecognizable. For purpose of 

 reference in literature it was necessary to use numbers. The in- 

 troduction of the binomial system by Linne, or the introduction 

 of system and the return to binomials, secured an amount of con- 

 venience in length of the names that much more than compensated 

 for the loss of some of their suggestiveness, and brought about a 

 general agreement in their use and a degree of permanence which 

 contributed greatly toward the dissemination of science. The con- 

 traction which names underwent is illustrated b} 7 the case of the 

 Coregonus cited above, which became Coregonus lavaretus, Linn. 

 Recognition of plants and animals by their scientific names has 



