Autorité : The name of this bird was accredited in Peters (1945) to "C. Reichenbach 1795", and this appears to have been followed, e.g. by Meyer de Schauensee (1966). However, C. Reichenbach did not exist. Until 1908, this species was generally cited as Chlorestes caeruleus (Vieillot), i.e. Trochilus caeruleus Vieillot 1817 (vol. 7, p. 361), though in fact the earliest use of this name appears to be Audebert & Vieillot 1802 (vol. 1, p. 40). Berlepsch (1908, p. 266 footnote), apparently on
the basis of a letter from C. W. Richmond to Ernst Hartert, pointed out that this name was predated by notatus. The first reference in literature to the species appears to be "No. 48 Trochilus . . ." Richard & Bernard (1792, p. 117). On this was based Trochilus notatus G.C. Reich (1793). Berlepsch used this, the earliest name, but quoted the date as 1795.
This date was repeated by Peters (1945) who also made the error of transliterating Reich as Reichenbach. I have examined a microfilm copy of Reich's rare paper, and confirm the name and that the date there quoted is 1793. There is no reason to suppose that this date is incorrect, and if Berlepsch had reason to believe that the date of publication was actually later than the date cited, he would probably have commented. It seems likely, therefore, that the date 1795 is a misprint. The correct citation of Chlorestes notatus should therefore be: G. C. Reich, 1793, Magazin des Thierreichs (Erlangen) 1, Abth. 3, p. 129. Based on Richard & Bernard 1792, Cat. Ois. env. de Cayenne a la Soc. par M. le Blond, in Actes Soc. Hist. Nat. Paris, i, 1: 117.

© British Ornithologists' Club 1996 (http://biostor.org/reference/112078.text)