1869. 
231 
and of childron, and are mere familiar nicknames." Mr. Marshall admits them to 
be now " sanctioned by usage " — 
— nsus, 
Quern penes arbitrium est, et jus, et norma loquendi. 
Many familiar, nay many contemptuous nicknames, h ave become honourable 
and hereditary surnames. Whatever the origin of redbreast may have been, it is 
now the recognised vernacular name of a particular species of bird, given as a noun 
substantive in all dictionaries, used as a noun substantive by all writers ; and I 
make bold to proclaim my adhesion to redbreast as a compound noun substantive, 
as grammatically correct, and (if logic has anything to do with the question) as 
logically correct as blackbird. If it be not, will Mr. Marshall favour us with the 
grammatical, logical, and correct name of that which in " the language of the 
vulgar " ie called the redbreast ? It seems to me an utterly untenable doctrine 
that the name of every bird is nngrammatical, illogical, or incorrect, if it do not 
contain the subject, bird. I hold thrush to be as good an English substantive as 
blaclibird, eagle as good as butcher-bird, swan as good as lyre-bird ; just as I hold 
shark to be as good an English substantive as swordfish, crab as crawfish, moth aa 
butte'ifiy. 
But let us leave the redbreast and go to the bluebeard. " We might nickname 
an individual Brazenbeard, having no fear of genders before our eyes. But in 
Latin Ahenobarba, -oe, fern., will not do for a man's name. His name, like himself, 
must be masculine, and accordingly we have the adj. Ahenoba/rbus, taking its gender 
from the rkal sitb ject, from the man, and not from his beard. " It is quite true 
that the Eomans had a Domitius Ahenobarbus ; it is equally true that they had an 
vEmilius Barbula, who was probably " downy " in more senses than one. They 
might equally well have had an .i^milius Ahenobarbula or Ahenobarba. I am not 
aware that any one has ever argued, certainly there is nothing in my previous remarks 
to suggest, that in Latin the name of a man could be feminine. Barbula, as the 
name of a Roman Consul, was masculine, as Ahenobarba would have been. There 
was a distinguished man, Q. Fabius Maximus by name, who had a wart on his 
lip, was cautious in war, and possessed a mild temper ; from these peculiarities 
he acquired three surnames or nicknames (I care not which they are called), 
Verrucosus, warty ; Cunctator, tarrier ; and Ovicula, the lamb. And if a few 
more examples be required of a " slovenly idiom" which is said to be "impossible 
in Latin," take L. Pontius Aquila, Cn. Com. Scipio Asina, L. Calpumius Bestia, 
Martianus Felix Capella, P. Cornelius Dolabella, P. Corn. Lentulus Sura, and two 
or three Emperors, such as C. Caesar Caligula, M. Aur. Ant. Caracalla, and Serv. 
Sulpicius Galba. The italicized feminine nouns substantive, when applied as names 
of men, were, of course, masculine. 
The next sentence of Mr. Marshall's reply, that " words containing only some 
attribute of the subject must in Greek and Latin be adjectives, agreeing in gender 
with their real subject, and with nothing else," simply begs the question at issue 
between us. (It will be observed that there are now two subjects — the REAL 
SUBJECT, and the graphic or poetic subject.) I have never disputed " that golden 
rule of our youth, that an adjective agrees with its substantive, &c.," or urged that 
this rule " is to be evaded in zoological names." If Acanthosoma be an adjective. 
