Literatur

235

is duly entered in the Catalogue as a Plesiotype.
The term Plesiotype is then simply a short way of
saying “specimen figured or discussed but not a
type”.
The definition of Neotype, includes two concep-
tions: the first, when the Primary Types are enti-
rely lost; the second, when they are merely imper-
fect. In the first case, we appear to be safe in
regarding the Neotype as a true Standard of refe-
rence, but in the second case there is always some
uncertainty. Suppose, for example that the Holotype
is a single tooth, and suppose that the Neotype is
a complete skeleton, in the jaw of which occurs a
tooth exactly like the Holotype, then specific iden-
tity, tough probable, cannot possibly be proved;
indeed future researches may bring to light another
skeleton of a different species from the Neotype,
but also having teeth like the Holotype. In such
cases the only safe plan is to retain the original
name for the Holotype alone, regarding the species
if you will as insufficiently described, and to give
new names to the complete skeletons. A classical
instance in which such a course has been followed
is Archaeopteryx, the first specimen of which was
only a feather, Archaeopteryx lithographica, while
the two better known species, to either of which
it might have belonged, are A. macrura and A.
siemensi. It was for the first case that the term
was defined by Cossman in 1904, thus filling a gap,
the existence of which I had pointed out in Science
of 28 May, 1897. It is a pity that Dr. Schuchert
did not keep the term restricted to this meaning,
and that he did not make the very slight restric-
tion of the term Plesiotype that would have enabled
him to apply it to the so-called Neotypes of his
second category. In its present significance Plesio-
type seems to me, as it has seemed to many others
to be so vague as to be valueless.
It is very easy to criticise this array of terms
and this minute subdivision of type-material as heilig
over elaborate or unintelligible to the ordinary na-
turalist. It may, therefore, be well to point out
some of its advantages. In the first place, the or-
dinary naturalist has no call to worry himself about
the matter. If he does not understand what a Ple-
siotype or a Chirotype is, he may rest assured that
he is missing nothing of any consequence to him-
self. The Information which these terms are in-
tended to convey is serviceable only to expert syste-
matists and to the curators of large museums. The
latter are hereby provided with a short, or, if they
choose to use the suggested Symbols, with a still

shorter, means of marking their lab eis or giving
valuable Information in their working lists, registers,
and catalogues. The saving of time and space is
incontestable. As for the minuteness of subdivision,
every Step which leads to greater exactitude of work
is to be welcomed. The mere existence of such a
term as Genotype may remind the proposer of a
new genus that it is advisable to select a particular
species by the distinctness of which his genus should
stand or fall. So also the term Holotype may re-
mind him how a large number of systematists con-
sider that one specimen, and one only, should be
selected as type, so as to avoid any possible source
of confusion. Or again, we shall not have a museuni
buying a collection under the idea that it contains
an author’s types, i. e. Holotypes or Cotypes, when
it has nothing more valuable than Metatypes or
Idiotypes. Public money has been wasted thus
before now, work of a lamentable slopiness has
been thrust upon the world, and irremediable con-
fusion has been wantonly propagated, simply be-
cause working naturalists did not follow the prin-
ciples and practice here at last crystallised in the
System so clearly set before us by Dr. Schuchert.
F. A. Bather.
Altona: Lehmann, Prof. Dr. Otto. Führer durch
den Raum des Altonaer Museums auf der 3. Deut-
scheit Kunstgewerbe-Atisstelhmg Dresden 1906.
Dresden 1906. 49 S. 8°.
Basel. Öffentliche Kunst-Sammlung in Basel.
LVIII. Jahresbericht. Nette Folge II. Erstattet
von Prof. Paul Ganz, Konservator. Mit einer
Beilage (Paul Ganz: Über die Schweizerische
Glasmalerei und ihre Bedeutung für die Kunst-
geschichte) und einer Tafel. Basel 1906. 24 S. 8°.
Bergen. Vestlandske Kunstindustrimtisetims Aar bog
for aaret 190g. Bergen 1906. 140 S. 8°. 74
Textabb., Marken u. 4 Tfln. (Mit Abhandlungen
von Joh. Bögh über Bergensche Zinngießer und
Bergensche Goldschmiede.)
Boston. Handbook of the Museum of fine arts
Boston. Boston, U. S. A., 1906. 204 S. 8° mit
Plänen u. zahlreichen Abbildgn. — Wird noch
besprochen werden.
Braunschweig. Herzogliches Museum. Ausstellung
alter Goldschmiedewerke Bratcnschweigischen Ur-
sprungs oder Besitzes. Vom 16. bis 30. September
1906. Braunschweig 1906. 23 S. 8°. ■