What do you think?
Rate this book
The Naming of the Shrew: A Curious History of Latin Names
Latin names--frequently unpronounceable, all too often wrong, and always a tiny puzzle to unravel--have been annoying the layman since they first became formalized as scientific terms in the eighteenth century. Why on earth has the entirely land-loving Eastern mole been named "Scalopus Aquaticus" or the Oxford ragwort been called "Senecio Squalidus" (translation: "dirty old man")? What were naturalists thinking when they called a beetle "Agra Katewinsletae," a genus of fish "Batman," and a trilobite "Han Solo"? Why is zoology replete with names such as "Chloris Chloris Chloris" (the greenfinch) and "Gorilla Gorilla Gorilla" (a species of, well, gorilla)? The Naming of the Shrew will unveil these mysteries, exploring the history, celebrating their poetic nature, and revealing how naturalists sometimes get things so terribly wrong. With wonderfully witty style and captivating narrative, this book will make you see Latin names in a whole new light.
320 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 6, 2014
39 people are currently reading
640 people want to read
About the author
John Wright
673 books40 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name. ^1
John Wright is the author of the River Cottage Handbooks Mushrooms, Edible Seashore, Hedgerow and Booze and also The Naming of the Shrew, a book which explores the infuriating but fascinating topic of how and why plants, animals and fungi earn their Latin names. As well as writing for national publications, he often appears on the River Cottage series for Channel 4. He gives lectures on natural history and every year he takes around fifty 'forays', many at River Cottage HQ, showing people how to collect food - plants from the hedgerow, seaweeds and shellfish from the shore and mushrooms from pasture and wood. Over a period of nearly twenty-five years he has taken around six hundred such forays. Fungi are his greatest passion and he has thirty-five years' experience in studying them.
John Wright is a member of the British Mycological Society and a Fellow of the Linnaean Society.
John Wright is the author of the River Cottage Handbooks Mushrooms, Edible Seashore, Hedgerow and Booze and also The Naming of the Shrew, a book which explores the infuriating but fascinating topic of how and why plants, animals and fungi earn their Latin names. As well as writing for national publications, he often appears on the River Cottage series for Channel 4. He gives lectures on natural history and every year he takes around fifty 'forays', many at River Cottage HQ, showing people how to collect food - plants from the hedgerow, seaweeds and shellfish from the shore and mushrooms from pasture and wood. Over a period of nearly twenty-five years he has taken around six hundred such forays. Fungi are his greatest passion and he has thirty-five years' experience in studying them.
John Wright is a member of the British Mycological Society and a Fellow of the Linnaean Society.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
December 31, 2018
To me, and to everyone whose curiosity knows no sensible bounds, names are not mere appellations, but things in themselves. Each has its own history and revealing etymology.
The first half of this book is very funny as it explores some of the weird and wonderful names taxonomists have given to various animals, insects, flowers etc. (everything, in fact!). Ostensibly Latin, they often are more Latinised words (Psephophorus terrypratchetti, anyone?) created to honour someone or, in many cases, just to have some fun. The translations back to English are equally amusing. I think my favourite might be Nessiteras rhombopteryx (named by Sir Peter Scott in 1975) which translates as ‘the Ness monster with diamond-shaped fin’ but is my favourite because it turns out that it is also an anagram of ‘Monster hoax by Sir Peter S’.
You would not believe the complications that can arise in naming things. It put me in mind of Asimov’s robot series where three simple rules generated a plethora of stories derived from unforeseen situations that caused conflicts between the rules. Giving a binomial name to everything sounds simple, but sometimes two people give different names to the same thing without knowing about each other, or two people give the same name to two different things, or someone won’t accept the name someone else has given to something, or something turns out to be something different to what the person naming it thought it was or…the list goes on. Evolution doesn’t help, either.
The second half of the book is somewhat heavier with far fewer laugh out loud moments and a lot more science as it looks at the history of naming and the debate over what constitutes a species.
It’s all very interesting, but I would not recommend reading it cover to cover: this is more a book to dip into over several days (my copy was a Christmas present finished on New Year’s Eve). If you read it all in one go, I think it would become a bit heavy and, possibly, a bit boring. But read over several days mixed in with other things it is very entertaining (for the first half) and interesting (the second half).
The first half of this book is very funny as it explores some of the weird and wonderful names taxonomists have given to various animals, insects, flowers etc. (everything, in fact!). Ostensibly Latin, they often are more Latinised words (Psephophorus terrypratchetti, anyone?) created to honour someone or, in many cases, just to have some fun. The translations back to English are equally amusing. I think my favourite might be Nessiteras rhombopteryx (named by Sir Peter Scott in 1975) which translates as ‘the Ness monster with diamond-shaped fin’ but is my favourite because it turns out that it is also an anagram of ‘Monster hoax by Sir Peter S’.
You would not believe the complications that can arise in naming things. It put me in mind of Asimov’s robot series where three simple rules generated a plethora of stories derived from unforeseen situations that caused conflicts between the rules. Giving a binomial name to everything sounds simple, but sometimes two people give different names to the same thing without knowing about each other, or two people give the same name to two different things, or someone won’t accept the name someone else has given to something, or something turns out to be something different to what the person naming it thought it was or…the list goes on. Evolution doesn’t help, either.
The second half of the book is somewhat heavier with far fewer laugh out loud moments and a lot more science as it looks at the history of naming and the debate over what constitutes a species.
It’s all very interesting, but I would not recommend reading it cover to cover: this is more a book to dip into over several days (my copy was a Christmas present finished on New Year’s Eve). If you read it all in one go, I think it would become a bit heavy and, possibly, a bit boring. But read over several days mixed in with other things it is very entertaining (for the first half) and interesting (the second half).
September 16, 2016
“To me, and to everyone whose curiosity knows no sensible bounds, names are not mere appellations, but things in themselves. Each has its own history and revealing etymology.” John Wright is known in the UK as TV chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall’s go-to expert on foraging, especially fungi. His enthusiasm for the arcane details of Latin naming comes through clearly in this thorough history of taxonomy. At first I thought it would be a groaningly pun-filled book of arbitrarily arranged trivia, but by Chapter 2 Wright won me over. You’ll learn about Linnaeus and the taxonomists who preceded and followed him; rules for species naming and the meaning of common Latin prefixes and suffixes; the wildly divergent sources of names, from discoverers’ names to mythology; and the endless complications of a field where species are always being lumped, split, or re-evaluated. One of my favorite facts was that aloe vera and the boa constrictor are among the very few species whose English names are the same as their Latin ones.
April 6, 2020
4.5 named starz for this useful and funny introduction to the wondrous world of taxonomy.
To begin with a little digression> whenever I read fantasy books and I encounter those author-made names (e.g. Kaladin), new and original creations, I will find them pretty (or not xD), but a little empty, unless the author chooses to explain their etymology.
Similarly, the beauty of scientific names pertaining to the natural world (such as the tautonymic Gorilla gorilla gorilla) is expanded by a knowledge of their history and meaning. One can develop a proper fascination for them, as many scientists and amateur naturalists have done throughout the last centuries. Scientific names are ever evolving, just like the subjects they are denoting, and keeping up with them is a brave endeavor. This book is a helpful aide for that (even if some of the names it mentions have already changed in the five years passed since its first edition xD).
PS>Thank you, Mr Wright, for making me so curious about fungi :D
To begin with a little digression> whenever I read fantasy books and I encounter those author-made names (e.g. Kaladin), new and original creations, I will find them pretty (or not xD), but a little empty, unless the author chooses to explain their etymology.
Similarly, the beauty of scientific names pertaining to the natural world (such as the tautonymic Gorilla gorilla gorilla) is expanded by a knowledge of their history and meaning. One can develop a proper fascination for them, as many scientists and amateur naturalists have done throughout the last centuries. Scientific names are ever evolving, just like the subjects they are denoting, and keeping up with them is a brave endeavor. This book is a helpful aide for that (even if some of the names it mentions have already changed in the five years passed since its first edition xD).
PS>Thank you, Mr Wright, for making me so curious about fungi :D
November 21, 2017
There’s a lot of hilarity to be found in the Linnaean species names, from Crikey steveirwini to the unfortunate Rubus cockburnianus (named in honour of the Cockburn family, of course – how can you doubt it). I figured a book digging into all this would be interesting, or at least entertaining enough to beguile an eight hour plane ride.
Not so much. The author is undoubtedly – and commendably – enthusiastic. He’s dug around in all the vagaries of zoological and botanical naming, and he’s found some gems. He also tries to explain exactly how these names are coined and accepted. Unfortunately, he’s rather longwinded about it, and it becomes a long list of funny names joined by some anecdotes. Some of them I’m glad enough to know, but I did get rather tired of the idea by chapter four, and started wondering when the light at the end of the tunnel was going to show.
Reviewed for The Bibliophibian.
Not so much. The author is undoubtedly – and commendably – enthusiastic. He’s dug around in all the vagaries of zoological and botanical naming, and he’s found some gems. He also tries to explain exactly how these names are coined and accepted. Unfortunately, he’s rather longwinded about it, and it becomes a long list of funny names joined by some anecdotes. Some of them I’m glad enough to know, but I did get rather tired of the idea by chapter four, and started wondering when the light at the end of the tunnel was going to show.
Reviewed for The Bibliophibian.
March 1, 2020
well researched but poorly laid out!! wright clearly has a deep love for the subject matter but i don't think i'd have finished the book if i wasn't already 'into' binominal nomenclature.
gotta take away some stars for the author making an insane throwaway comment about how bringing back the idea of subspecies within Homo sapiens would "glory in our heterogeneity rather than pretending it does not exist" ????? just very weird and he also quotes eugenicist freak michael a. woodley while doing so.
gotta take away some stars for the author making an insane throwaway comment about how bringing back the idea of subspecies within Homo sapiens would "glory in our heterogeneity rather than pretending it does not exist" ????? just very weird and he also quotes eugenicist freak michael a. woodley while doing so.
Read
November 4, 2014I initially suspected this taxonomy primer was going to be one of those compendia of moderately amusing oddities which are always intended to do well around Christmas, but it's really a very wise book: "Philosophy is essential for mathematicians, an aid to physicists, worthless to chemists, and a disaster for biologists." Not that it isn't funny too - sometimes in the manner of a wry monograph from fifty or a hundred years ago (except minus the awkward politics), but as often simply silly. Consider the section on the algae genus Vaginaria, originally named by Kuntze (some of whose work, as if that were insufficient, was later revised by one Fuckel). It also abounds in astounding trivia. Who knew that Celsius originally had his scale run from zero as boiling to 100 for freezing (just the sort of silliness you wouldn't get with Fahrenheit), or that humans are more closely related to the coelacanth and lungfish than they are to other fish? There's also an intriguing little section on Furia infernalis, an apparently non-existent bugbear which reads very much like 19th century morgellons. I am surprised, though, that the rattlesnake's Latin name gets no mention - translating as 'terrible castanet', it's surely one of the greats.
November 14, 2017
As a professional taxonomist, I like reading books like this, as I often get questions about why anyone should bother learning about (in my case) chewing lice. This is a good introduction to taxonomy, although light on the subject of why. Weirdly, however, the book twice cites the "herpetologist" Raymond Hoser, one of the worst things to happen to taxonomy in the 21st century. This stuck out to me, as I know what kind of crap he does -- particularly bizarre that someone who names genera after his dog just to spite others and who publishes regularly in a "journal" that calls people who disagree with their taxonomic conclusions nazis, would have any negative opinions about people naming species after Darth Vader.
But that's a minor issue that only taxonomists will pick up. Other than that, this is a good book.
But that's a minor issue that only taxonomists will pick up. Other than that, this is a good book.
October 26, 2015
This is not a book in which everyone will delight, but as a source of anecdotes to amuse small children in Biology, to elucidate the great mysteries of biological nomenclature, to giggle at the rude names, or puzzle over the mysteries of whether you have monophyletic or paraphyletic clades… wonderful.
April 17, 2018
"The Naming of the Shrew", от Джон Райт, проследява историята на таксономията, преди и след Линей, и описва същността на биноминалната номенклатура, дала и продължаваща да дава имена на живите организми. Дали ще са прецизни (и лишени от въображение), дали ще почитат някого (от цар Борис III, през жената на колега, до Хан Соло, Чубака и вещиците от Света на Диска), или пък ще са продукт на "таксономичен онанизъм" (когато откривателят кръщава откритието на себе си), зад много от наименованията се крият любопитни и забавни истории. Такава книга не може да мине и без латинска граматика, на която авторът отделя цяла (Ужас!) глава.
September 18, 2018
Parts of this, like the first bit, were fascinating and quite humorous (in a nerdy way, maybe). Like this line: "The 'Linnaean system' is still what people think of on the rare occasions they think about taxonomy at all." And, of course, all the discussion of strange and humorous Latin names.
It was all quite well written, but I did think a few sections were too slow and detailed for the average layman. I learned a lot (though there was so much information I'm not sure how much I'll retain, and some left me only with a basic grasp of the topic).
Though I know that Latin names for plants and animals sometimes change (I've been researching cactus and a couple of important local species have changed scientific names between the publications of various sources), I've always rather thought of them as consistent, as more reliable than the multiple and changeable and fallible common names. This book, more than anything, disillusioned me about that. Well, they're still more consistent than common names, but they're not consistent. But I guess it's good that our names can bend and change along with our ever-expanding knowledge.
I did find it a bit condescending (or maybe just overly academic) when he complained about so many cultures and scientists in the past classifying plants by unscientific principles such as…gasp…what is edible and what is poisonous and what is medicinal. Those seem very logical and pragmatic categories to me. Even now, if I get lost in the wilderness, I'm afraid I'd rather know what's edible than which genera are most closely related in the evolutionary tree.
I still don't think I'll ever remember more than a few Latin names, despite how much I love nature. Maybe I should make it my new goal.
I recommend this for anyone interested in the topic and unafraid of some deep delving and a LOT of Latin.
It was all quite well written, but I did think a few sections were too slow and detailed for the average layman. I learned a lot (though there was so much information I'm not sure how much I'll retain, and some left me only with a basic grasp of the topic).
Though I know that Latin names for plants and animals sometimes change (I've been researching cactus and a couple of important local species have changed scientific names between the publications of various sources), I've always rather thought of them as consistent, as more reliable than the multiple and changeable and fallible common names. This book, more than anything, disillusioned me about that. Well, they're still more consistent than common names, but they're not consistent. But I guess it's good that our names can bend and change along with our ever-expanding knowledge.
I did find it a bit condescending (or maybe just overly academic) when he complained about so many cultures and scientists in the past classifying plants by unscientific principles such as…gasp…what is edible and what is poisonous and what is medicinal. Those seem very logical and pragmatic categories to me. Even now, if I get lost in the wilderness, I'm afraid I'd rather know what's edible than which genera are most closely related in the evolutionary tree.
I still don't think I'll ever remember more than a few Latin names, despite how much I love nature. Maybe I should make it my new goal.
I recommend this for anyone interested in the topic and unafraid of some deep delving and a LOT of Latin.
March 17, 2020
This book is a really comprehensive and charming introduction to the complex world of taxonomy, of which I have already been acquainted with through my degree. Its chapters cover binomial name origins, the intricacies of naming and renaming species, the more amusing names out there (a right laugh) and then explores the history of taxonomy. We take for granted that we know what is what, but it took many centuries and thinkers to get to where we are. Mr Wright puts it correctly to say that writing this book is like writing a history of WWII in May 1944. Taxonomy is constantly shifting and that's the exciting aspect of it to him, but it also links us to history because when you say a species' binomen, you know a taxonomist lovingly found it, described it, identified it to be new and its type (that is, the exact specimen that was studied) is stored somewhere in the world so you can refer to it.
It makes the field sound exciting and dynamic, although I have to admit there were times that I struggled to press on. Despite Mr Wright's amusing prose, this can be a dry topic if you don't share the enthusiasm, especially when you get bogged down in the many terms used to describe different names for the same species. However, he manages to take a light and hearty tone throughout which eventually helped me finish the book. I have to say, the rude names chapter was laugh out loud!
I'd recommend it for those who are already inclined toward the topic, but if you're a newbie and want to take a punt at taxonomy, his clear explanations and likeability will help you learn.
It makes the field sound exciting and dynamic, although I have to admit there were times that I struggled to press on. Despite Mr Wright's amusing prose, this can be a dry topic if you don't share the enthusiasm, especially when you get bogged down in the many terms used to describe different names for the same species. However, he manages to take a light and hearty tone throughout which eventually helped me finish the book. I have to say, the rude names chapter was laugh out loud!
I'd recommend it for those who are already inclined toward the topic, but if you're a newbie and want to take a punt at taxonomy, his clear explanations and likeability will help you learn.
February 17, 2021
I really hope non-scientists read this book. Overall well-written and full of curious little facts.
There was a point in the middle where I gave up on the book for a while but this probably says more about my state of mind at the time (tired master's student) than about the book. Because when I picked it back up again I raced through the last few chapters. I do quite like the author's style. And I am so happy that he doesn't just talk about animals, hooray for plants (I'm a plant scientist), and I was more than happy to learn about the world of fungi (I really need to learn more about mycology).
So I think most of this book is very good, a curious read for non-scientists. And as a scientist I enjoyed the thorough referencing (I have bookmarked a bunch of those papers to read them later). There's also a very useful glossary at the back.
I don't know if other people would have enjoyed some diagrams or tables for unfamiliar words, but you can look these up elsewhere online (I also have books like the illustrated Kew Plant Glossary or Latin for Gardeners if I want to learn more).
There was a point in the middle where I gave up on the book for a while but this probably says more about my state of mind at the time (tired master's student) than about the book. Because when I picked it back up again I raced through the last few chapters. I do quite like the author's style. And I am so happy that he doesn't just talk about animals, hooray for plants (I'm a plant scientist), and I was more than happy to learn about the world of fungi (I really need to learn more about mycology).
So I think most of this book is very good, a curious read for non-scientists. And as a scientist I enjoyed the thorough referencing (I have bookmarked a bunch of those papers to read them later). There's also a very useful glossary at the back.
I don't know if other people would have enjoyed some diagrams or tables for unfamiliar words, but you can look these up elsewhere online (I also have books like the illustrated Kew Plant Glossary or Latin for Gardeners if I want to learn more).
September 17, 2022
I had high hopes for this book, and it started off well. The first chapter brings good humour, and set high expectations. But in all honesty, I should have stopped reading after that. Wright somehow manages to combine an approach that is much, much too dry for any casual reader, and simultaneously too superficial for the seriously inclined, or for the fellow taxonomist like myself.
Wright makes no mention of the major strides recently made in refining the species concept, or of integrative taxonomy. He makes several claims and statements that are simply false. Wright is out of touch with modern taxonomy; this book feels like it was written 30 years ago, by both content and style. Wright clearly doesn’t know a single female taxonomist or think that they’re worth mentioning; his history is a boys’ club from top to bottom. His style is often krass, and he uses several slurs. All-told, he doesn’t seem like the kind of chap with whom I’d want to go on a mushroom foraging trip.
Wright makes no mention of the major strides recently made in refining the species concept, or of integrative taxonomy. He makes several claims and statements that are simply false. Wright is out of touch with modern taxonomy; this book feels like it was written 30 years ago, by both content and style. Wright clearly doesn’t know a single female taxonomist or think that they’re worth mentioning; his history is a boys’ club from top to bottom. His style is often krass, and he uses several slurs. All-told, he doesn’t seem like the kind of chap with whom I’d want to go on a mushroom foraging trip.
February 23, 2020
📉📈 👈 My reading experience of this book. Started out the first 1/3 super interesting funny and engaging, I leaned lots of cool facts about taxonomy (there is a fly named after Beyonce for example) and then it got very bitty. It picked up again at the end and I left the epilogue with a greater appreciation for the history and the contentions of Naming species.
February 7, 2017
A serious and yet light hearted look at the birth of Taxonomy this is a book well recommended for any one interested in botany or someone that just likes John Wright and his wry humour when talking about his love of Fungi.
September 27, 2017
Well I can't say that I'm any more knowledgeable about taxonomy now, but that is my failing rather than the author. A fascinating book, but one to dip in and out of rather than devour at one sitting.
September 4, 2018
Funnier and more engaging than I expected while also being informative. I'm guessing having some familiarity with taxonomy/Latin binomials helps in enjoying this book, but it's definitely not just for specialists.
December 6, 2017
Some sections are a bit long winded but overall it's interesting. The author's enthusiasm for his subject definitely shines through.
December 2, 2018
All things equal, it's a very interesting take on a topic that's hard to be interested in. Very good information, though, especially the history of taxonomy, which I really knew nothing about.
April 11, 2020
I enjoyed this but I have to admit that a lot of it went over my head. A good book to read if you are interested in the naming of natural history and the current science behind it too.
August 25, 2021
Nice read, though it can get into a looot of details through which ia hard to navigate without prior knowledge
August 31, 2024
Such a fascinating book. It took me a little while to get through this book due to the sheer amount of information it contains, but I thoroughly enjoyed it!
April 4, 2021
I loved this book! If you have any interest in the natural world, be it keeping exotics, plants or general outdoorsiness, please read this book, especially if you're a fan of proper taxonomic names, honestly it's enlightening to be able to see into the world of taxonomy and have a little more insight as to where there's names come from
February 25, 2017
John Wright's writing on the science of taxonomy is not simply an informative read, it is an entertaining and personal account on his passion with names. Although I expected (wrongly) the book to be a simple list of odd Latin names, it gives much more: besides a lengthy chapter dedicated to the oddities of naming, the history, rules, important figures, and current problems of taxonomy all get their own chapter. Sometimes the text does meander a bit, and some parts (especially the 'important figures' part) tended to be a bit too dry and technical, the overall writing is lively, humorous, well-researched, and all in all and essential read for lovers of Lating names. (That, and you gain the neat party trick of knowing funny Latin names.)
June 16, 2022
Fascinating, educational, and entertaining (but I got a bit lost towards the end). Just make sure you never offend a taxonomist, they may just name a new horrible species after you 😁
October 23, 2015
This book is a short introduction to everything about biological taxonomy. It goes into the complex areas just enough to let the reader know they are complex (sometimes with just a sentence listing the jargon involved), but it touches on pretty much every aspect of the field. Wright laces it throughout with a good sense of humor, so the prose never drags. Some might prefer more or less attention to certain areas (I myself would suggest a little less pre-Linnaean history and a little more about bacteria), but the book does at least touch on pretty much everything relevant. I must disclose that Wright drew from my own website for part of the book (and now vice versa), and I get mentioned by name. But the book should be enjoyable even for people without our quirky interests.
April 29, 2015
Very amusing. Toward the middle it starts to get more bogged in the details of how to write a description that will make your name for your newly discovered species "legal" but even there, there are touches of humor. And the first few chapters, wherein we discover that many zoologists, mycologists, and botanists read fantasy series and watch SF movies, are a riot - species named after the witches in Terry Pratchett's Discworld series, for example. If you are a fan of useless scientific trivia, this book will amply repay the reading.
February 18, 2015
This book goes beyond my limit of understanding on several occasions (although I'll admit that that is not too far to travel) but I never found it boring, off-putting or even unreadable. Esoteric at times yes, but infinitely readable. The book shed a vast amount of light on a subject I knew nothing about. And, though there is a hell of a lot I will never be able to fix in my brain, well done to Wright for undimming my eyes a little
May 8, 2020
Superb book. A good balance of different smaller topics within the larger topic of Latin Names. Some of the topics are quite dry, and they are dealt with appropriately and at a length that keeps things interesting. Somehow it took me forever to read, and will almost certainly be revisited several times more.
I interviewed John for a podcast, worth a listen for anyone interested in this book. https://pinecast.com/listen/66943e49-...
I interviewed John for a podcast, worth a listen for anyone interested in this book. https://pinecast.com/listen/66943e49-...
Read
August 14, 2016Scientific to an extent, with the author specialising in mushrooms and fungi, discussing the orders and classes of species as first laid out by Swedish man Linnaeus in the 1700's. But also talking about how slight name variations can sometimes mean vastly different things.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews