[Taxacom] Was page priority ever a Rule of the ICZN?

Stephen Gaimari SGaimari at cdfa.ca.gov
Fri Apr 16 20:19:13 CDT 2010


Apparently, even though the "first reviser" principle had been part of rules from 1901 to 1948 (see http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/44294#477), the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology (1948, Paris) applied the principle of page priority, to be enforced retroactively (i.e., names selected by first revisers previously were rejected if they didn't have page priority), replacing Article 28 of the Règles starting in 1948 (see http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/43830#398). There was a long and very interesting discussion in volume 10 (1953-1954) of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (see http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/44294#474. In the "Copenhagen Decisions on Zoological Nomenclature. Additions to, and Modifications of, the Règles Internationales de la Nomenclature Zoologique" (1953), they recommend reinstatement the First Reviser principle in place of the principle of Page Precedence for Article 28 of the Règles. It reads as follows (since I don't have a link to point to, and since I am a pretty fast typer!), on pages 66-67:

-----------------
Article 28.
123. Reinstatement of the "First Reviser" Principle in place of the Principle of "Page Precedence" for determining the relative status of names published in the same work and on the same date: The Colloquium recommends that the decision taken in Paris in 1948 to substitute the principle of page, line and word precedence for the principle of the First Reviser should be reversed, the original provisions in Article 28 being reinstated with the addition (1) of the definition of the action to be accepted as the action of a First Reviser recommended in paragraph 124 below, and (2) of the Recommandation submitted in paragraph 125 below.

124. Definition of action constituting selection by a "First Revisor": The Colloquium recommends the addition to Article 28 of the following definition of the action constituting action by a First Reviser:-

The expression "selection by a First Reviser" is to be rigidly construed, and such a selection is to be deemed to have been effected:-

(a) in the case of generic names, only when an author, after citing two or more such names published in the same book and on the same date, clearly indicates by whatever method, (a) that he is of the opinion that the type species of the nominal genera so named represent the same taxon, and (b) that he is selecting one of the generic names concerned, to the exclusion of the other name or names, to be the name to be used for the genus concerned; 
(b) in the case of specific names, only an author, after citing two or more such names published in the same book and on the same date, clearly indicates by whatever method, (a) that he is of the opinion that the nominal species so named represent the same taxon, and (b) that he is selecting one of the names concerned, to the exclusion of the other name or names, to be the name to be used for that taxon.

125. "Recommandation" urging authors, when acting as "First Revisers", other things being equal, to apply the Principle of Page Precedence: The Colloquium recommends the addition to Article 28 of the following Recommandation:-

An author, when acting as a First Reviser in regard to two names of the same taxon published in the same book on the same date, is advised to select, other things being equal, the name which appeared first in the work in question, as judged from the standpoint of page and line precedence.
-----------------

So it appears that there was a brief (1948-1953) period where the Principle of Page Precedence was enforced, but it was shot down pretty quickly.

Cheers, 
Steve


Dr. Stephen D. Gaimari
Program Supervisor (Entomology)
 
Plant Pest Diagnostics Center
California Department of Food and Agriculture
3294 Meadowview Road
Sacramento, CA 95832, USA
 
Tel. 916-262-1131, Fax 916-262-1190
E-mail sgaimari at cdfa.ca.gov
http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/ppd/staff/sgaimari.html

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Barry Roth
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 5:01 PM
To: TAXACOM
Subject: [Taxacom] Was page priority ever a Rule of the ICZN?


TAXACOM member Richard E. Petit e-mailed me the following, shedding light on the history of page priority in the zoological code.  Thanks, Dick!
 
"A year or so ago I searched the old Codes and found no trace of a "page priority" rule except for its very limited application as a Recommendation (not a Rule) in 69A.10 which, as the 10th in a succession of preferances would probably never apply.  I am rather sure I checked all issues of the Code as well as the Strickland Code and the Bradley Drafts.  I may have missed a version of the Règles"
 
Barry Roth




      
_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here






More information about the Taxacom mailing list