118 
Psyche 
[June 
DESCRIPTIONS PLUS TYPES VS. DESCRIPTIONS 
ALONE. 1 
By Clarence E. Mickel, 
University of Minnesota. 
In a recent article in Psyche [36(3) :228-231, September, 
1929] entitled “Down with the Type-Cult/' Professor Em- 
brik Strand of the University of Riga, Latvia, condemns 
the practice of designating type specimens when a new 
species is described, charges that their use is contrary to 
the International Rules of Nomenclature, and urges the 
principle that the description should be the final and only 
authority in deciding disputed points regarding the identity 
of a species. 
The principal arguments advanced by Professor Strand 
in his opposition to the use of types may be summarized as 
follows : (1) that the early authors such as Linne, Fabricius 
and others did not designate or use types, therefore we 
should not; (2) that the establishment of species on the 
basis of types is opposed to the rules of nomenclature; (3) 
that even if one asserts that the types have been used only 
in order to verify and better the descriptions, it is likewise 
an abuse, if it leads to conclusions that are quite contra- 
dictory to the descriptions; (4) that type specimens are 
the fashion because certain taxonomists by their use are 
able to dominate taxonomy, and therefore have a personal 
interest in maintaining the practice; (5) that in most cases 
the types are not accessible to the worker, that on this 
account it will soon be impossible to write a monograph if 
the examination of the types is to be considered a necessary 
prerequisite, and that therefore the practice of designating 
'Published with the approval of the Director as Paper No. 215, 
of the Miscellaneous Series of the Minnesota Agricultural Experiment 
Station. 
