3 The New York Years (1931–1953)

Zoological Nomenclature 335
Copenhagen but since his basic understanding of the rules of nomenclature had
impressed everybody, he was soon elected as a Commissioner and served with
distinction from 1954 until 1976. The Copenhagen Decisions on Zoological Nomenclature
(Hemming 1953) document that Mayr was the driving force at this meeting.
His proposal for “The Principle of Conservation” on page 119 of this document
reads:
“Any specific name which has been published for not less than 60 years and
which has been adopted for a given taxonomic unit (a) in at least ten publications,
and (b) by two or more authors shall be deemed to be worthy of conservation in
the interest of stability. […] Such a name is not to be replaced by a senior subjective
synonym where the latter has not been applied to the taxonomic unit concerned
during the preceding 50 years.”
He also participated in the formulation of an alternative draft submitted by
W.I. Follet, E. Mayr, R.V. Melville and R.L. Usinger and printed on page 122 of
the Copenhagen Decisions. Stresemann who had participated in the Copenhagen
Congress and the Colloquium on Zoological Nomenclature wrote to R. Moreau
(England): “I am just back from a three weeks journey which brought me first
to Copenhagen; Meinertzhagen may have told you already of the splendid results
of our efforts to stabilize nomenclature by overthrowing the tyranny of absolute
priority. We had to struggle very hard for reaching our goal and without the
cleverness of Ernst Mayr would probably never have attained it” (25 August 1953).
The Copenhagen Decisions served as the working basis for the “Section of
Nomenclature” at the XVth International Congress of Zoology held in London
(16–23 July 1958), where Mayr again played a leading role, rhetorically skilful and
effectiveindiscussions.DuetohiseffortstheCongressadoptedaStatute of Limitation
(Article 23b of the Code) giving automatic protection to names that had been
in unchallenged use for 50 or more years (“50-year rule”). In November 1969, the
International Commission adopted a revised wording of Article 23b again making
clear that the well-used junior name is automatically protected. By its provisions
(“at least five different authors and at least ten publications”) it excluded de facto
all areas of animal taxonomy that are inactive (Mayr et al. 1971e). The compromise
wording adopted in 1972 emphasized that a prior but unused name should not
upset a synonym in established usage, and the 1985 Code describes (Article 79c)
criteria constituting prima facie grounds for the Commission’s conserving a name
by the suppression of a disused senior synonym (Melville 1995). Bock (1994b) and
Hemming (1995) summarized the general history of the International Commission
of Nomenclature and the various meetings during the International Congresses of
Zoology.
The only textbook in the field of nomenclature during the 1950s was Methods
and Principles of Systematic Zoology by Mayr et al. (1953a) with its well-reasoned
promotion of stability. It was read by every young taxonomist and eventually more
and more zoologists realized the absurdity of the “Law” of Priority. In his Principles
of Systematic Zoology Mayr (1969b) included on over 80 pages not only the text
of the Code of Nomenclature but also a detailed interpretation of all its Rules.
This is the only such detailed commentary and far more informative than the