IOO 
Recent Literature. 
[April 
ferent from those usually assigned it. It embraces not only the typical 
Thrushes (subfamily Turdince of authors generally), but the Sylviidce 
(subfamily Sylviince of this work), and the Saxicolidce , which form part of 
the present author’s Turdince. On the other hand the Mimince , so gener- 
ally of late regarded as a subfamily of the Turdidce , are excluded. In 
respect to genera, Mr. Seebohm is eminently and, as we believe, laudably 
conservative, but in matters of nomenclature he is in some points a law 
unto himself. In other respects he shows himself to be refreshingly inde- 
pendent and untrammeled by traditional methods of working. In his “In- 
troduction” he strikes the key-note of, for our English friends, a new 
departure in respect to the treatment of subspecific forms so boldly and 
with such a true ring that we cannot resist the inclination to let him be 
heard in part in his own words, even at the expense of extending this no- 
tice beyond usual limits. 
In respect to genera and generic characters his position is somewhat out 
of the usual line, as may be seen from the following summary of his 
remarks on these points, and he expects to be thought more or less heter- 
odox in his treatment of genera.* “If I am accused,” he says, “of disturb- 
ing the existing genera of birds, in some instances by cutting up recog- 
nized genera, and in others by uniting several together, I can only plead 
that I have not done so capriciously, but in order to facilitate the perception 
of the community of origin, which must more and more interest those 
who accept the theory of evolution.” After alluding to the fact that it has 
been “accepted as an axiom amongst ornithologists that genera must be 
founded upon structural characters,” he states that in the first part of his 
work he “made use of characters that are not structural in defining some 
genera,” and in other cases “considered so-called structural characters as 
having only value enough to divide genera into subgeneric groups,” while 
in the second part of the work he has convinced himself “that these so- 
called structural characters have no generic value at all.” and further states 
that he was obliged to fall back upon “colour or pattern of colour as the 
only character which indicates near relationship. In my opinion,” he 
continues, “the pattern of the colour in the family or subfamily of Tur- 
dinse is a character which is more trustworthy (as showing community of 
origin), which in fact dates further back than the shape of the wings, tail, 
and bill.” Of the Sylviince, with 104 species, only 7 genera are recognized, 
which average 15 species each, the largest genus, Phylloscofius , having 
25, while the genus Sylvia has 23. The subfamily Turdince , which in- 
cludes the Bluebirds, Robins, and Stonechats, as well as the typical 
Thrushes, with 240 species, is divided into 11 genera, averaging 22 each, 
while some of the larger genera, as Geocichla , Turdus, and Merula , have 
respectively 40, 48, and 52 species each. While on the subject of genera 
we may add that the genus Turdus includes all the New World Thrushes 
*That such will be the case is already evinced by a paper by Mr. L. Stejneger (Proc. 
U. S. Nat. Mus., 1882, pp. 449 et seq.) entitled “ Remarks on the Systematic Arrange- 
ment of the American Turdidce" (received since the preparation of this review), in 
which Mr. Seebohm’s genera and generic characters are considered. 
