Abstract
I WISH to say how thoroughly I agree with Mr. Lydekker in his remarks on the unwisdom of transposing zoological names, and on the confusion caused by this objectionable practice. To the instances which he has mentioned I may add the following cases relating to two well known and familiar species of animals. Linnæus called the only European hare known to him Lepus timidus, and for many years that name was applied to the common brown hare of Central Europe, while the northern hare, which changes to white in winter, was known by Pallas's appropriate name, Lepus variabilis. This was the nomenclature used by Blasius, by Bell in his “British Quadrupeds,” and in all the ordinary text-books of zoology. It was, however, pointed out some years ago, first, I believe, by Lilljeborg, that the Lepus timidus of Linnæus had been based mainly upon the northern or variable hare, or that at all events Linnæus had confounded the two species together. In these circumstances obviously the test plan was to call the middle-European brown hare by its next given name, Lepus europeus, and this course has Deen adopted by most writers. But the advocates of unrestricted priority are not content with this, and insist upon calling the variable hare Lepus timidus, the consequence being that when that name is used it is impossible to know which of two perfectly distinct animals is intended by it.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
SCLATER, P. The Transposition of Zoological Names. Nature 72, 30 (1905). https://doi.org/10.1038/072030a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/072030a0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.