X 
INTRODUCTION. 
“ In the same volume there are at least as many names of a simi¬ 
lar character in use in the other departments of Zoology; and as 
many of both kinds in the other two volumes of the work ; so that 
from fifty to sixty generic names are ‘ doubly employed ’ in the Noc- 
tuidae alone : — a practical example of showing his opinion of the 
inferiority of generic to specific names used ‘ homonymically ! ’ What 
notion can an individual obtain of the affinities, &c. of an insect by 
calling it Brassicae? Certainly none: but if he uses the double 
name Pieris (or Mamestra) Brassicae, he at once becomes acquainted 
with its position, and recognizes its allies.” 
“ Perhaps some of the alterations cited above may arise from M. 
Guenee not studying other branches of Zoology—the Nomenclature 
of Agassiz w r ould, however, have set him right — but that he 
sometimes expressly changes the names of species the two following 
references will sufficiently prove ; viz. :— 
Vol. i. p. 166. Calogramma picta, Guer. = Festiva, Don. 
‘J’ai adopte le uom de M. Guerin, celui de Donovan etant 
affecte, depuis longtemps, a une espece du genre Noctua.’ 
(Regardless of there being a Noctua picta, Dab.) 
Id. p. 223. Celaena Herbimaeula, Gu. = Celsena renigera, Step. 
‘Je n’ai pu conserver son nom (renigera) qui designe depuis 
longtemps une Agrotis bien eonnue.’ 
“ And at the end of the 3rd vol. p. 399 he inserts, by way of 
‘Errata' a list of 21 specific names ‘ doubly employed’ by him, 
with the new names he proposes to substitute for them. Not¬ 
withstanding these corrections others must be made by the followers 
of his system—one instance will suffice to show this. Haworth has 
described and Wood well-figured, a N. American species, Erastria? 
