Type of Homo sapiens

[Richard Jensen]

Okay, here's the exact text of Stearn's "lectotypification":

        'Since for nomenclatorial purposes the specimen most carefully
        studied and recorded by the author is to be accepted as the type,
        clearly Linnaeus himself, who was much addicted to autobiography
        must stand as the type of his _Homo_ _sapiens_!  This conclusion
        he would have regarded as satisfactory and just.  As he himself
        said, "_Homo_ _nosce_ _Te_ _ipsum_." '

I remember asking in August if this was sufficient to declare a
lectotype.  As Rosenberg notes, Linnaeus' comment refers solely to
the genus, not to the species.  I don't know the ICZN, so I defer to
others.  Is this sufficient to declare that Linnaeus' mortal remains are
the lectotype for _Homo_ _sapiens_?  Stearn's comment strikes me as a
remark made in passing or as an interesting observation, not as a formal
declaration of a lectotype.  Or, does the ICZN permit such casual
statements to form the basis for typification?


Richard J. Jensen      |   E-MAIL: rjensen at saintmarys.edu
Dept. of Biology       |   TELEPHONE: 219-284-4674
Saint Mary's College   |   FAX: 219-284-4716
Notre Dame, IN  46556  |