BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
were only dates of preparation of MS. Richmond then recorded that Volume I. 
apparently appeared in two parts, pt. i. being received by the Paris Academy on or 
before June 24th, 1850, while part n; was presented at the meeting of Feb. 3rd, 1851. 
I note, however, that Bonaparte had presented proof-sheets as follows : Vol. XXX. 
Stance of Feb. 11th, 1850, p. 139, is written “ Comme on a pu le voir par le Conspectus 
dont il a fait hommage a T Academie et a chacun des Membres de la Section de Zoologie, 
c’est par les Perroquets, ces Singes de3 Oiseaux, que M. Oh. Bonaparte commence la 
grande serie des Oiseaux. . . Les deux cent soixante-quinze especes par lui admises.” 
This is not recorded in the Bull. Bibl., and the Psittaci occupy the first eight pages, the 
last half of the eighth page blank. Later at the Seance of March 11th, 1850, pp. 291-295, 
the Order 2 Acciptres is presented, and this is again not in the Bull. Bibl., while there is 
a page and a half blank at pages 55-56 which completes the Accipitres. Yet when the 
seclio pri?na, 1 vol. in 8vo, is acknowledged in the Bull. Bibl. for the Seance, June 
24th, 1850, there is no break in the book, so that we do not yet know where “ sectio 
prim a ” ends. 
In the Comptes Rendus, Vol. XXXI., p. 424, Sept. 16th, 1850, Bonaparte refers to 
“ p. 244 de son Conspectus Avium, Leyde, Mars 1850.” This is the date of the page, 
not of publication. A curious feature is that Carus and Engelmann give (Vol. II., 
p. 1115, 1861) “ II. Sectiones. 1850-51. 8. VI. 464 pag.whereas there are 543 
pages and no “ VI. pp.” in the Volume I. as now accepted. 
While it is certain it appeared in two parts as follows : 
Pt. I., pp. 1-272 (?) C.W.R. June 24th, 1850. 
11., (?) 273-543. Feb. 3rd, 1851. 
the point of division is not exactly known. 
The unfinished second volume appeared in three parts of which the dates are not 
known. 
Pt. I., pp. 1-159 (160 blank). 1855 (after April 15th). 
II., pp. 161-184. 1856, 
111., pp. 185-232. Oct. 1st, 1857. 
The confusion with Reichenbach and Cabanis caused by the exchange of Manuscript 
and contemporary publication of their works has been discussed in the Austral Av. 
Rec., Vol. V., pp. 12 et seq ., 1922, where I concluded the legitimate order of publication 
to be considered is Bonaparte, Cabanis and then Reichenbach. 
The names quoted in the first volume of Bonaparte are Barrabandius , Merops lewini, 
Circus gouldi , Athene ocellata , Strix megaera “ Temm.,” Cuculus mridirufus , Menura 
alberti, Hyloterpe, Rhipidura nassata “ Ill.,” Smicrornis occidentalis n.n., Falcunculus 
gouldi , Certhia leucopiera “ V.,” Zoster ops gouldi , Turdus squamatus, Steganopleura , 
Oriolus regnis , and Barita strepens. In the second volume are Brucliigavia , Hemiegretta , 
Ibis peregrina, Leucocarbo , Microcarbo stictocephahis , Thalassoica polar is, Halobaena 
typica , Adamastor typus , Ardetta gouldi . 
Many of the Petrel names generally quoted from this place prove to have been 
published first in the Comptes Rendus Acad. Sci. Paris, q.v . 
Annales des Sciences Naturelles (Paris), Ser. IV., Zool., Vol. I., No. 2, pp. 105-128, 
May 15th, 1854; No. 3, pp. 129-152, June 26th, 1854. 
Conspectus Systematis Ornithologise. 
Commonly quoted as ;c C.S.O.” and acknowledged at the Paris Academy, Vol. 
XXXVIII., p. 953, May 29th, 1854. Most of the “ new ” names here are nomina 
nuda or else published in some other place simultaneously. The nomina nuda in many 
cases are correctly typified by G. R. Gray in the Cat. Gen. Subgen. Birds, April 1855, 
q. v . 
In his List of Writings published in 1850, Bonaparte includes a “ Conspectus systematis 
Ornithologise, Leyde, 1850. Deux editions ont ete successivement publiees” : 
Revue Mag. de Zool., 1857, May No., pp. 204-209, Monographie du genre Turdien 
Oreocincla . 
13 
