BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="l_raty" data-source="post: 3052954" data-attributes="member: 24811">Technically, what d'Albertis wrote about this bird is not a description--the notes just state where the bird was obtained, and that, while similar to another, known species, it "differs in some particulars". A description is supposed to explain in which characters the new taxon differs from other already known taxa, not just state that differences exist. The description here is Sclater's footnote.The dedication is clear and explicit. (And from this dedication, the way the name was constructed can easily and unambiguously be deduced. Which makes its English name all the odder...)<a href="https://archive.org/stream/annalidelmuseoci71875muse#page/829/mode/1up/search/raggi" target="_blank">Salvadori & d'Albertis, 1875</a>:"This species was hitherto known only by two mutilated skins, which D'Albertis obtained at the Orangerie Bay. He recognized it as new and proposed that it be called with the name of the Marquis Francesco Raggi of Genoa, his friend, for whom it was described by Sclater under the name of P. raggiana, [...]"</blockquote>