Books Received | Published:

[Book Reviews]


    THE above-named (445 pp. in all) contain six original contributions and notices. Of the former, one, by Dr. Karl Fritsch, is botanical, and deals with the flora of Madagascar; another, by Ludwig Hans Fischer, is devoted to personal adornments among the native Indians and, of the four which remain, three are zoological, the fourth, by Dr. Felix Koerber, being meteorological. Dr. Fritsch's communication, apropos of collections made by Dr. Paulay on the voyage of the “Saida,” adds to the genera Blepharis and Walleria each a new species, while new varieties of Hibiscus vitifolius and Cynorchis fastigiata are described. Dr. Fischer's paper gives an account of his journeys and collections made on behalf of the Vienna Museum. It is a most interesting and carefully executed work of 30 pp., with six plates and 51 admirable woodcuts. The author's notes on ear ornaments are especially commendable, but when all is done as by him it becomes difficult to particularize. This monograph bears the same stamp of excellence as those of Dr. Otto Finsch and Prof. Hein which have preceded it (cf. NATURE, vol. xlii. p. 157), and ethnologists owe the authorities of the Vienna Museum a debt of gratitude for the manner in which they have enriched the literature of their subject. Of the zoological treatises, one (by Dr. Gottlieb Marktanner-Turneretscher) is a Report upon the Hydroids in the Museum collection. The Gymnoblastea and Calyptoblastea are chiefly dealt with; several new forms are described, localities and donors' names are sufficiently recorded, and a Report upon the Hydrocorallines is promised. The two remaining contributions are entomological. One, by Dr. J. Kreichbaumer (13 pp.), is a continuation of the author's previous Report on the Ichneumonidæ in the Museum; new genera and species are described. The other is a lengthy monograph of the Linnean genus Sphex (266 pp., with 5 plates) by Franz Friedr. Kohl. The author acknowledges his indebtedness to the collections of other Museums and of private individuals, from many of which types have been lent him, and he makes a point of excepting “the material in the London Museum, which contains the greatest number of types.” This is greatly to be regretted, in consideration of the pretentious nature of his work, which purports to be a revisionary monograph of the genus; he promises a companion treatise on the allied genera Ammophila and Sceliphron, and we sincerely hope that, in preparing this, arrangements may be made whereby he shall consult our national cabinet.

    Annalen des k.k. naturhistorischen Hofmuseums, Wien

    Bd. V., Nr. 2 and 3, 1890.

    Access optionsAccess options

    Rent or Buy article

    Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


    All prices are NET prices.

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and Permissions

    About this article


    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.