i88 
Annals of the Transvaal Museum 
priority, original spelling of generic names and the adoption of subspecies 
under trinomials. Immediately after the last volume on the Birds of S. 
Africa had been completed by Sclater (in 1905), he published a Check List, 
in which a few additions and emendations appeared, but taken as a whole, 
the nomenclature remained the same. In 1910, Dr J. W. B. Gunning and 
Mr (now Dr) A. K. Haagner published another Check List, in which they 
followed the system and nomenclature of Reichenow. In 1896, the late 
Captain Shelley started a beautiful work on the Birds of Africa', but at 
the time of his death in 1910, only five volumes in six parts had appeared; 
another part was subsequently completed by Mr W. L. Sclater, but the 
work as a whole is still incomplete. In 1899, the late Dr Sharpe started his 
Handlist of Genera and Species of Birds and completed this by 1910. In 
all of these publications there is seen a divergence of views and a con- 
sequently different application of names to both genera and species, and 
to anyone who wishes to criticise the methods I have followed and the 
number of changes effected, I would refer these works for comparison of 
the names in use. Reichenow’s work is perhaps the most consistent where 
species are concerned ; but his conception of what are genera does not appeal 
to one’s reason, since above all things consistency can alone bring about 
uniformity, and Reichenow has simply lumped together a number of 
species which are similar in appearance, without regard to the important 
characters of structure. Reichenow is not alone in following this method, 
and I do not criticise him in particular, but mention his work merely in 
illustration of where the system of nomenclature has recently been at fault. 
In Britain and in Europe this method of “genus lumping” (as it has come 
to be called) is still prevalent; but in North America ornithologists have 
been more consistent and have pursued a progressive policy ever since 
they undertook the classification of their own birds, so that today we find 
in the monumental work of Dr R. Ridgway {The Birds of North and Central 
America) a consistent recognition of the genera, of which few contain many 
species. If we read back into the history of ornithological classification, 
we find that, from the days of Linne onwards, more and mpre genera came 
to be recognised, up to about the time when Darwin wrote his first great 
works on the evolution of species. Darwin’s theory raised the hostility of 
the systematists, and although latterly it came to be recognised that this 
theory had come to stay, there still remained a tacit opposition to the 
methods recommended by Darwin, to study the minutest details both in 
the laboratory and the field, and we find most important characters being 
thrust aside as though they had little value to the progress of knowledge. 
This method of omitting important characters may not have had its origin 
in actual opposition to the theory of evolution; but the accumulation of 
material may have involved so much labour that the primary necessity 
was to get this material catalogued, and cataloguing came to be regarded 
as the primary need. Without some grounds to work upon, it is no easy 
matter to follow the evolution of species, since the worker must have a 
personal knowledge of the countries and habits of the species before he can 
hope to arrive near the truth ; and I have no doubt that this has to a large 
extent prejudiced workers in Europe against the introduction of this theory, 
as it was well nigh impossible to understand how the characters of the 
species of Africa were affected by their environment when judged by the 
