T .    3 H^U.

P u 6) p\(a^




June 1915—December 1919.


Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants. England.

Edited by


Missing Vol.5 Nos. 2,3,5 to 8





June 1915—December 1919.


Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, England.

Edited by


London :

WITHERBY & CO. 326 High Holborn.


On Columba pallida Latham. (Plate I.)    ..    ..    ..

On the Ornithology of the Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles (Levrault)    ..    ..    ..    ..    • •

Raperia godmance    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..

Two New Subspecies ..    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..

On Certhia atricapilla Latham (Plate II.) ..    ..    ..

On the “ Table des Planches Enlum.” of Boddaert    ..

Additions .... to my Reference List ,.    ..    ..

Pluvialis dominicus fulvus    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..

List of Additions of New Subspecies to, and Changes in, my List of the Birds of Australia ..    ..    ..    ..

New Subspecies and Notes on Species    ..    ..    ..

The Re-Discovery of two lost Birds (Plate III.)    ..    ..

Notes on Some Extra-limital Parrot Names ..    ..    ..

On a Collection of Birds from the Macleay Museum, Sydney,


Silvester Diggles, Ornithologist (With Portrait)    ..    ..

A Mistake of Latham’s ..    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..


Avian Nomenclatorial Notes    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..

Additions and Corrections to Mathew’s List ..    ..    ..

Alfred John North, Ornithologist (With Portrait)    ..    ..

On Pachycephala melanura Gould    ..    ..    ..    ..

On Turdus maxillaris Latham    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..

A Forgotten Ornithologist    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..

The Validity of Some Generic Terms ..    ..    ..    ..

Additions .... to my 1913 List ..    ..    ..    ..

Australian Ornithologists    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..

Samuel Albert White (With Portrait) ..    ..    ..

Thomas Carter (With Portrait) ..    ..    ..    ..

William David Kerr Macgillivray (With Portrait)    ..    ..






25 31



53 69 79 91


















Austral Avian Record



Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, England



Price Ipfc Net

WITHERBY & CO., 326 High Holborn, London, W.C.

June 30th, 1915.

• •

A 85?>lbx O



Vol. III., No. 1.

June 30th, 1915.

page . 1


On Columba 'pallida Latham

On the Ornithology of the Dictionnaire des

Sciences Naturelles (Levrault) ......... 5



Raperia godmanœ    ...

Two New Subspecies


By G. M. Mathews.

Plate I.

In the Gen. Synopsis Birds, Suppl. II. 1801, p. 270, Latham described a “ Pale P(igeon). The bill and legs in this bird are brown, the general colour of the plumage greenish white, the head and neck inclining to ash colour ; the greater quills are plain, but the rest marked irregularly with black on each side the shafts ; the two middle tail-feathers are dusky, the others very pale or whitish ; the outer edge of the wings and the quills are dusky. Inhabits New Holland ” Upon this was based the name Columba pallida, given in the Index Ornith. Suppl. 1801, p. lx.

This name does not seem to have come into recognition until Gould, in the Introduction to the Birds of Australia, 8vo ed., p. 67, 1848, cited it as a synonym of Cuculus inornatus Vig. and Horsf., as figured in his Birds Austr., Vol. IV., pi. 85. It may be here noted that Gould assisted Strickland in the examination of the Lambert drawings, and apparently

recognised the bird there named Columba 'pallida as a Cuckoo, though neither to Strickland nor Gray was it familiar.

Apparently upon Gould’s citation as above, Cabanis and * Heine made use of Latham’s name for the Cuckoo, for which they proposed a new generic name Heteroscenes (Mus. Hein., Vol. IV., pi. i., p. 26, 1862). Being thus endorsed, Gould himself made use of it in the Handb. Birds Austr., Vol. 1., p. 615, 1865, but referred the bird to the genus Cacomantis, calling the Cuckoo, Cacomantis pallidus Latham.

This usage became general and does not seem to have been questioned until 1905, when in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XII., p. 217, Hartert called the Cuckoo Cuculus variegatus as of Vieillot, writing :    “ I believe we can use Vieillot’s name

variegatus (though I admit that the description is not at all convincing) if we accept Pucheran’s statements, Z.c. How, on the other hand, Latham’s name Columba pallida came to be accepted for this cuckoo is incomprehensible. It would seem that Messrs. Cabanis and Heine (Mus. Hein., IV., p. 26) have first been guilty of it. Their quotation, and also the one in the Cat. B., XIX., p. 261, most likely copied without verification, is wrong, because the name Columba pallida is first given in the Ind. Orn. Suppl., p. lx. (1801), and not in the Syn. Suppl., II., p. 270, where it is only called the Pale Pigeon.’ There is hardly anything in Latham’s description that refers to the cuckoo in question ; but what disagrees most is the description of the tail, which is said to be ‘ very pale or whitish ’ with ‘ the two middle tail-feathers dusky,’ and that of the wings.”

In the Ibis, Jan. 1906, p. 55, North, however, would not accept variegatus but proposed to recognise inornatus Vigors and Horsfield, the name by which this bird was known from 1827 to 1862. In my Handlist, 1908, p. 57, I used inornatus following North, but in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., Jan. 1911, p. 16, I reverted to Cuculus pallidus, giving as explanation : “ Dr. Hartert, in the Nov. Zool., XII., p. 217, 1905, first cast doubt upon the traditional identification of Latham’s Pale Pigeon with the Cuckoo. From an examination

of the Watling drawings, from which Latham drew up his descriptions, Sharpe (Hist. Coll. B. M., Vol. II., p. 145, 1906) tentatively referred the type drawing of Latham’s Pale Pigeon to Lopholaimus antarcticus Shaw. Such an extraordinary identification led me to examine the Watling drawings, which are preserved in the British Museum, and I find the drawing to be unmistakeably that of the Cuckoo, and hence Latham’s name must be reinstated. The points of inaccuracy raised by Dr. Hartert are visible on the drawing, but it is quite a good representation of the Cuckoo, and however Sharpe wrote his note comparing it with L. antarcticus I cannot understand, save that it was purely a lapsus calami.” The Watling drawings have been well worked and were discussed in the Hist. Coll. B. M., by Sharpe, as above noted. There can be little doubt that sufficient care was not taken by Dr. Sharpe in this case and consequently my own very careful study made alterations inevitable. The comment by the Editors of the Emu on my criticisms read (Vol. XI., p. 130) : “ Still more puzzling are some of Watling’s old drawings, with which the late Dr. Sharpe sought to establish the priority in nomenclature of certain Australian birds. Now Mr. Mathews states there is room for doubting the identification of the names given by Sharpe to several of the drawings. Well may Australians ask—‘ Why rely on the doubtful drawings of a botanist against the life-like coloured figures of so great an ornithologist and author as Gould ? ’ Bed-rock priority run riot, people are apt to say.” 1 can fully appreciate the difficulty over-seas workers must have in deciding “ when doctors disagree,” so have obtained permission from the Trustees of the British Museum to make and publish exact copies of the doubtful drawings so that workers denied the privilege of actual examination can judge as to the value of my own conclusions. In the present case it should be remembered that Gould was the first to recognise this drawing as that of the Cuckoo and at once, as he was a strong believer in bed-rock priority, admitted its usage,

The plate here given is a faithful copy in the minutest detail of the painting made by Thos. Watling about the year 1790. It must, when criticising, therefore be remembered that 125 years have elapsed since it was made, and allowance given for the draughtsmanship, etc. When this is done I am sure all Australian ornithologists will agree with me that it is a good figure of the Cuckoo in immature plumage, and that Latham’s name, as confirmed by Gould, is tenable.


By G. M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.

A publication entitled “ Dictionnaire des Sciences naturelles . . . par plusieurs Professeurs du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle et des autres principales Ecoles de Paris,” was commenced in Paris in 1804, the publishers being “ Levrault, Schoell et Cie.”

The articles on birds were by C. Dumont. Five volumes only were issued in 1804-06 and the work was suspended.

In 1816 it was resuscitated under the same title, the authors however reading . . . Par plusieurs Professeurs du Jardin du Roi, et des principales Écoles de Paris.

An explanation was given on the first leaf that “ Les cinq premiers volumes de cet ouvrage furent publiés dans l’intervalle de 1804 à 1806. On en fait la remarque ici, pour ne pas etre soupçonne de donner comme nouveau un ouvrage qui ne l’est pas. C’est par des supplemens que ces cinq premiers volumes ont été ramenés au niveau des connoissances actuelles, et ces supplemens se trouvent placés à la fin de chacun des volumes auxquels ils se rapportent. F. G. Levrault.” It was apparently published at Strasbourg and Paris, as the title-page bears the imprint :    “ Strasbourg, F. G.

Levrault, Editeur. Paris, Le Normant, rue de Seine, No. 8.” Some volumes at the end read :    “ Strasbourg, de l’im

primerie de F. G. Levrault, imprimeur du Roi,” others, “ Imprimerie de le Normant, Rue de Seine, No. 8.”

Though some of the contributors differed, C. Dumont still was the only author of the bird articles. Towards the end, however, Lesson introduced some articles and also collaborated with Dumont in others. It might be here observed that Lesson became Dumont’s son-in-law.

Valenciennes also monographed the Woodpeckers, etc., in this work, while Desmarest dealt with Parrots.

Some time ago, while preparing the synonymy of Australian

and Neozelanic birds, reference was made to this work, and it was seen that in many cases it had been overlooked. We therefore had to carefully work through it, and we found that new names were not common. It was not an easy task, so we thought it as well to note all the names that seemed strange.

We propose to put on record such as we have noted, not with the idea that our list is absolutely complete, but as a suggestion to the systematic worker in every continent that this Dictionnaire should be consulted.

In order to make this article useful, we have taken the trouble to get the date of publication as near as possible. This matter has been more or less neglected up to the present time, but it is really important. In this Journal many exact dates of works have already been given, but we note that our foremost systematic ornithologists seem careless about these details, even failing to make use of these items when presented to them.

From the Bibliographie de la France (by an extraordinary lapsus written in error Bibliothèque Française, p. 154, of this volume) we have gained the following information.

A prospectus in quarto is recorded on June 15, 1816, in which it is stated that the first livraison will appear in August, the second in September, and then every two months.

On July 20, 1816, a prospectus in octavo is noted, but no further details.

The volumes themselves were received as follows :—

Vols. I. & II.

On Title






III. & IV.

3 3

3 3












VI. & VII.


3 3





3 3

3 3





3 3 x

3 3






3 3

3 3





XI. & XII.







3 3

3 3













Title Page,

, 1819.

Nov. 6, 1819.


9 9



April 8, 1820.




July 22, 1820.


9 9


9 9

April 6, 1821.





Jan. 26, 1821.





June 29, 1821.



9 9


Sept. 29, 1821.



9 9

Dec. 29, 1821.





Dec. 14, 1822.




Aug. 10, 1822.


9 9



Nov. 23, 1822.





June 28, 1823.


9 9

9 9

9 9

July 26, 1823.


9 9



Sept. 27, 1823.




9 9

Dec. 27, 1823.





May 29, 1824.


9 9



Aug. 14, 1824.




Nov. 13, 1824.


9 9



Jan. 22, 1825.





June 18, 1825.


? ?


Oct. 8, 1825.



9 9


May 31, 1826.



9 9


April 29, 1826.


9 9



April 29, 1826.





June 24, 1826.





Sept. 23, 1826.



9 9


Sept. 30, 1826.


9 9



Jan. 20, 1827.


9 9



Feb. 21, 1827.



9 9


May 19, 1827.




June 20, 1827.

XL Vili.




July 21, 1827.


9 9


9 9

Oct. 13, 1827.


9 9

9 9


Nov. 24, 1827.


9 9

9 9

9 9

Jan. 12, 1828.



9 9


April 12, 1828.



June 7, 1828.


On Title Page,


April 25,



? ? ? ?


Aug. 30,



5 5

Oct. 11,



5 5 5 5

5 5

Jan. 10,



5 5 5 5


Mar. 14,



5 5 5 5




5 5 55


July 10,


The chief points to be noted in connection with these dates, which show publication to have been of an erratic character, are those of several volumes whose issue appears to have been delayed.

Thus Vol. XVIII., though dated 1820, was not received until April 6, 1821, and a note is given : “ Le tome XIX. à paru,” and that volume, dated 1821, was recorded January 26, 1821.

When the XXIVth Volume was acknowledged, August 10, 1822, a note was given that “ Le XXIII.6 volume sera publié dans la courant du mois d’aout.” It did not appear until December 14, 1822, when another note reads : “ Le tome XXIV. a paru (voyez n. 5237),” but that referred to Vol. XXV., which had also been issued, November 23, 1822.

Volumes XXXVII. and XXXVIII., though dated 1825, were not received until May 31, 1826, and April 29, 1826, and at the latter date Vol. XXXIX., dated 1826, was simultaneously recorded ; though on April 12, 1826, a note had been given that : “ Trente-neuf volumes du text sont imprimés.”

On September 2, 1826, is given the news that “ Les tomes 41 et 42 du texte ont été imprimés à Strasbourg,” and these are catalogued on September 23, 1826.

-Vol. LIV. did not appear until April 25, 1829, and the title page is dated 1829, though Vols. LV., LVL, LVII. and LVIII. had all appeared previously.

The receipt of Volume LIX., which bears the date 1829, is altogether missing, being the only one not acknowledged.

The plates accompanying the Dictionnaire were issued at irregular intervals? sometimes with the volumes, sometimes

without, but fortunately this is of no consequence to the systematist, as they only bear vernacular names.

With regard to the first issue of the first five volumes we have not been able to get any exact dates, the first three volumes being apparently issued in 1804, the fourth in 1805, and the fifth and sixth in 1806. But in the beginning of the 6th Volume is written : “ Ce sixieme volume ótoit imprimé des le commencement de 1806 ; mais il n’avoit pas ete mis en vente, et avoit ete livre seulement a quelques souscripteurs.”

In the succeeding notes we record new names which do not appear in the synonymy of the species in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. That work must ever remain a standard in this connection, and it is remarkable how errors of commission and omission are still being perpetuated by our foremost workers. Even specialists in many cases have failed to add to the synonymy there given which we have commonly found to be incomplete. In many of the monographs new combinations abound, but these do not concern the systematist generally but are rather the care of the specialist and monographer. A majority of the new names are what have been termed “ useless synonyms,” but unfortunately such perform a purpose of invalidating later names, and it is most imperative that such should be carefully recorded in order to avoid error.

The very first name met with well instances this. In Voi. I., p. 344, Dumont proposed Aquila fusca for a form of the Golden Eagle, called by some writers Falco julvus. This is, at present, and probably always will remain, a useless synonym, but it invalidates Aquila fusca Brehm 1823, which name has just been used by the B.O.U. List of British Birds for the Spotted Eagle. Previously Brehm’s name had been considered a useless synonym, but a peculiar combination of circumstances made it apparently the valid name : it cannot, however, be maintained in view of Dumont’s usage. Dumont’s name was omitted from the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, though other new names and

combinations in the same article are there included. Had it been recorded, the error would not have occurred in the B.O.U. List.

In the Supplement to Vol. I., p. 88, Morphnus is introduced as of Cuvier : and on p. 89 Cymindis is also named. This appears to be the first publication of these names, as the volume was received October 12, 1816. Cuvier’s Règne Animal, from which they are commonly quoted, is dated 1817, but was actually published December 7, 1816, as recorded by one of us (Mathews, Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 18, 1911). The names, however, were used by Dumont in the Cuvierian sense, so no alteration, save in the reference, is necessary.

In Volume IV. Dumont monographed the genus Bucco, and most of these names appear in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XIX. On p. 52, however, he proposes Bucco variegatus as a new name for Bucco tamatia Linn.=Gmelin and also suggests brasiliensis as an alternative. These names are missing from the Catalogue of Birds synonymy.

On p. 56 Dumont introduced Bucco torquatus, which we find in use (Cat. Birds, Vol. XIX., p. 24) for a species of Melanobucco. On p. 195 we however observed that a species is called Malacoptila tor quota based on Bucco torquatus Hahn 1822 (Vogel. Lief 13, tab. 5). Of course this second usage is invalid, but this seems to have escaped the notice of the keen-eyed workers on South American Ornithology, as the latter appears in Brabourne & Chubb’s List of the Birds of South America published in 1912, p. 165. There seems to be a ready-made substitute in Bucco striatus, Spix Avium, sp. nov. Brasil, Vol. I., p. 52, pi. X2, f. 2, 1824, described from Rio de Janeiro.

On p. 63 Dumont introduced Limosa vulgaris as a new name for Scolopax limosa Linné = Gmelin ; Limosa varia, p. 64, and p. 66, Limosa rufa as a new name for S. lapponica Linn., and on p. 202, Scolopax galllnacea for S. major : none of these appear in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XXIV.

In Volume V. Dumont, under the heading “ Buse,”

associated the species Lacepede had differentiated under the genera Circus and Buteo.

On p. 454 he proposed Buteo plumipes, without reference to any previous user, writing, “ Cet oiseau, qui paroit etre le falco pennatus de Gmel.” and this introduction seems to forbid the usage of Buteo plumipes, as of Hodgson, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) 1845, p. 37, in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. I., p. 180.

In Vol. VI., p. 94, Dumont proposed Cacicus yapou as a new name for Cacicus persicus Linn., Plan. Enlum. 184, as the bird came from Brazil. We have not seen this synonym in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XI. At this time Vieillot’s Monographs in the Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat. were appearing, and that publication being pushed forward rapidly Dumont took advantage of this and practically bases his articles upon those of ~ Vieillot. Dumont freely exercised his judgment as to generic names, and thus many new combinations are noted but very few new names.

In Vol. X. Dumont proposed Colius quiriwa, p. 62, as a new name for C. senegalensis Gmelin and C. erythromelon Vieillot. This name is not cited in synonymy in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XVII., p. 344, but Colius quiriva Riippell 1845 is there given.

In Vol. XI. Dumont gives, p. 29, Ampelis ou Procnias carnobarba Cuv. as an alternative to Ampelis variegata Gmel. et Lath. : this synonym is not quoted in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XIV., p. 405.

Later the Cuckoos are monographed, the nomination and forms proposed by Vieillot being closely followed ; four new names are proposed, two of which appear in the Catalogue of Birds, and two do not, which is confusing.

p. 127. Cuculus pusillus is introduced as follows :

“ On trouve au Cabinet d’histoire naturelle de Paris deux coucous sans denomination particulière ; l’un, venant du Port Jackson, est de la taille de la rousserole, et a la tete grise, le dos brunâtre, la queue rayee transversalement de brun et de gris pâle, le dessus du corps blanchâtre, les pieds

jaunâtres et le bec noir ; l’autre, aussi de la Nouvelle-Hollande, n’est pas plus gros que la fauvette rousse, à laquelle il ressemble, ayant le dessus du corps roussâtre et le dessous blanchâtre. Le premier de ces oiseaux se rapporte probablement à quelques-uns de ceux qu’on a precédémment désignés avec plus de détails, d’apres des descriptions étrangères, et le second pourrait être nommé cuculus pusillus."

The description of this suggests the Neochalcites group, but without examination of type it cannot be determined. At the present time this is impossible, so the name must be carried to a suspense list till later.

On p. 142 Cuculus bengalensis Gmel. & Lath, is renamed Centropus ferrugineus, which is not given in the Catalogue of Birds. Two pages later a new species is described under the name Centropus javanensis. This is utilised in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XIX., p. 354, 1891, where it is quoted as ‘ Cuculus javanicus,” which proves the reference to have been copied second-hand.

The other new name, p. 145, is Leptosomus vouroug-driou, which is in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XVII., p. 2, where a printer’s error occurs, the first part of the specific name reading “ vourong.”

On p. 265 Trogon rosalba is proposed as a better name than Trogon collaris. This name, as of this introduction, does not appear in the Catalogue of Birds, but is quoted as of the Régne Animal, 2nd Ed., 1829, when Cuvier adopted Dumont’s suggestion.

In Vol. XIII. Dumont included under the genus Edolius the birds catalogued by Vieillot under Dicrurus : neither Edolius mystaceus, p. 517, nor Edolius leucophæus, p. 518, appear in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. III. The former was given to Levaillant, Ois. Afr., pi. 169, which Sundevall in his Critique concludes to ha^e been an artifact, the latter to pi. 170 of the same work. The figure recalls the Ceylon bird Buchanga insularis, Catalogue of Birds, Vol. III., p. 252, while Sundevall suggests cineraceus Horsfield as equivalent.

Dumont’s names are anterior to either, and the figure seems to us recognisable. The priority of introduction, however, must be given to Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. IX.. 1817, who named both : p. 587, Dicrurus leucophceus, and p. 588, Dicrurus mystaceus, neither of which names are noted by Sundevall nor recorded in the Catalogue of Birds as above.

In Vol. XV. occurs the following : p. 31, “ D’Epervier pygmee, Sparvius minutus Vieill., lequel se rapporte vraisemblablement au Nisus minimus du Museum de Paris. . . . C’est aussi dans cette contrée (South America) que se trouve l’Epervier a bec sinueux, Nisus strepsirynchos, du Museum, qui est d’un brun force en dessus, et roux, avec des bandes blanches, en-dessous.”

Neither of these names occur in the Catalogue of Birds, and we doubt whether the last can be determined from the very brief description.

In the XVIth Vol., on p. 217, is the interesting paragraph we here transcribe :

“ L’Oiseau qui porte, au Muséum de Paris, le nom de hobereau huppart, falco leuphotes, et qui est annoncé comme ayant ete trouve, à Pondicheri, par M. Leschenault. Il a une huppe occipitale de couleur noire, ainsi que tout le dessus du corps, a l’exception de quelques-unes des pennes secondaires des ailes qui sont blanches. La poitrine offre une sorte de collier blanc ; le ventre est traverse de grandes bandes rousses, et les marchettes sont noires. Il y a aussi au meme Museum un individu egalement indique comme venant de Pondicheri, et presente sous la denomination de hobereau à tete rousse, falco ruficeps, dont la tete et le dessus du con sont roux, la gorge et la poitrine blanches, les parties inferieures traversées de raies grises, et dont la queue, d’un gris ardoise avec les taches brunes endessus, offre en-dessous des bandes noires, plus larges à l’extremite, qui est bordee de blanc ; mais cet individu ne paroît pas etre encore dans son état parfait.” (Ch. D(umont.)

Neither of these names appear in the Catalogue of Birds, and while the correct determination of the second, without

examination of the type, seems doubtful, the first-named is undoubtedly based on the same bird as was later described by Temminck (Plan. Color., 2nd livr., pi. 10, Sept. 1820) under the name Falco lophotes. Fortunately there is little change in the name, but the authority must be quoted as Dumont and the first reference given as above.

On p. 529 Eicophaga crist at a is given as a new name for Ploceus cristatus, and this seems to be the first introduction of this generic name, and is not included in Waterhouse’s Genera Avium.

In Vol. XXI. on p. 266 a good description is given of the bird figured by Levaillant in the Oiseaux d’Afrique, pi. 178. Dumont proposed the name Motacilla aguimp, the specific name being the native name of the bird as recorded by Levaillant. This name seems to have been overlooked, and the bird is at present known under Sundevall’s name of Motacilla vidua, given thirty years later. Dumont’s name should be restored.

In Vol. XXII., p. 55, Dumont named the bird figured by Levaillant, Hist. Nat. Promerops, pi. 23, Upupa crocro : this synonym is not included in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XVI., p. 14.

On p. 179 Dumont wrote “ tandis que le râle d’eau, rallus aquaticus, est le type du genre Rallus ” : this confirms Fleming’s type-designation simultaneously made.

On p. 183 is proposed the new name Hydrogallina cyanifrons for Gallinula carthagena Latham : neither of these names appear in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XXIII., the bird being apparently indeterminable.

In the XXIVth Volume, p. 77, the names Jacamerops and Jacamaralcion appear : these names are used in the same sense in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XIX., as of Lesson, 1831, and they should apparently be dated back to this entrance.

On p. 83 Parra cinnamomea is used of Cuvier : this name does not appear in the synonymy of africana Gmelin, where we would refer it, in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XXIV., p. 76.

On p. 183, under the name “ Jaseur,” Dumont discusses the genus names Bombycilla Vieillot and Bombycivora Temminck, and proposes their rejection in favour of the new genus name Garrulus, p. 184, and would supersede also the specific names, introducing for the Bombycivora garrula of Temminck the names Garrulus europ^eus or major, and for the Bombycilla cedrorum of Vieillot the names Garrulus americanus or minor. None of these names appear in the Catalogue of Birds and now necessitate an alteration.

Some thirty odd years afterward Verreaux (Rev. Mag. Zool. 1857, p. 439, pi. xiv.) proposed Garrulus minor for a Jay, and this was used in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. III., p. 96. Hartert (Vogel. Palaark Fauna, Vol. I., p. 31) maintained Verreaux’s name for a subspecies of Garrulus glandarius, sinking as a synonym Garrulus oenops Whitaker, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, Vol. VII., p. xviii. As Verreaux was anticipated in his introduction by Dumont, Whitaker’s name now becomes available for the Jay.

In the XXVth Volume, pp. 5 and 6, Dumont renamed the two Skuas, confusing both species with the narrow long tail-feathers under one name, proposing for the mixture Lestris longicaudus : for TeUiminck’s Lestris pomarinus the name Lestris brevicaudus was preferred. Neither of these synonyms appear in the Catalogue of Birds.

In the XXVIth Volume Dumont, dealing with Finches, associated the Goldfinch, Siskin, Linnets and Serins with many extra-European forms under the genus name Carduelis. He introduced two new names, Carduelis communis, p. 528, for Fringilla carduelis Linne and, p. 548, Carduelis canar-iensis for Fringilla canaria Linne, neither of which appear in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XII., nor yet in Hartert’s Vogel. Palaark Fauna.

In Vol. XXVII., p. 215, Dumont proposed Oriolus para-diseus as a new name for Oriolus aureus Linn., in whose synonymy in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. III., p. 186, it is not included.

In Vol. XXVIII. Dumont described Phænicophaus superciliosus, p. 451, as of Cuvier. In the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XIX., p. 403, this name is used as of Cuvier, Diet. Hist. Nat., Vol. X., p. 55, 1826 : Dumont’s proposal is earlier and should be quoted.

The XXIXth Volume is one of the important ones, containing quite a lot of interest.

For one thing, it states more than once (p. 274) that the plates of birds of the Voyage of the Uranie were published before the letterpress, and that descriptions are here given for the first time.

On p. 69, Dacelo gaudichaud, Quoy and Gaimard, and Megapodius freycinet Quoy and Gaimard, are mentioned, but only as no mina nuda.

Under “ Martin,” for which Dumont used Cuvier’s name Cossyphus, three new species appear on p. 268. These are C. caudatus, striatus and mlnutus. The first-named is used in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. VII., p. 393, for a species of Argya, but as of Drapiez, Diet. Class d’Hist. Nat., Vol. X., p. 219, 1826. In that place Drapiez acknowledges the species-name to belong to Dumont, whose publication appeared three years before and hence must be quoted. The other two we have not identified, nor have we traced the names in the Catalogue of Birds, but as Dumont’s Cossyphus was heterogeneous we may have overlooked them.

On p. 274 a full description is given of Dacelo gaudichaud, figured but at that time not described.

On p. 280 appears : “ Alcedo ceyx purpurata Dum. Cet oiseau, de la taille d’une fauvette, a été rapporté de Java par M. Leschenault. Les parties supérieures du corps sont rousses ; les inférieures sont blanche, et le bec est roux.” This name is not included in the Catalogue of Birds.

Dumont, on p. 284, proposed to name Hirundo apus L. Cypseltjs vulgaris or niger, and for H. melba L. he introduced Cypselus albiventris.

These synonyms do not Appear in the Catalogue of Birds,

but we note that Stephens and Forster had suggested previously the same specific names for the Common Swift.

Under the name Megapode is the first long account of the birds of this genus. Dumont was apparently very friendly with Quoy and Gaimard as he thanks them for information. Dumont wrote (p. 414) :    “ Les naturalistes voyageurs lui

ont donne le nom de megapode, megapodius, à reason de la grandeur de ses pieds ; et dans un mémoire lu, le 6 Juin 1823, par M. Gaimard, à la Société d’histoire naturelle de Paris, le genre a été établi à peu près de cette manière.”

Then follows a very long description of Megapodius freycinet Q. and G. (p. 414), Megapodius La Perouse Q. & G. (p. 415), and p. 416, Megapodius Reinwardt.

The account by Gaimard above mentioned was published in Ferussac’s Bulletin as recorded, for the first time, in Mathews’ List of the Birds of Australia. Gaimard’s note appeared in July-August, 1823, and has little priority over the present publication which was acknowledged December 27, 1823. Gaimard gave short succinct diagnoses of the two first-named species, but not the third. None of these names as of these introductions occur in the Catalogue of Birds and the last-named causes an unexpected alteration.

On p. 416 we read the following wording : “ M. le professeur Reinwardt, Hollandois, a rapporté d’Amboine, dans les îles Moluques, un individu du meme genre, dont il paroît avoir fait present à son compatriote, M. Temminck, qui l’a dépose au cabinet d’histoire naturelle, et se propose de le faire figurer dans une des livraisons du Recueil de planches destinées a faire suite à celles de Buffon, sous le nom de Mégapode Reinwardt, Megapodius reinwardt P

Then follows a detailed description.

This is the bird figured in the Plan. Color 60e livr., pi. 411, Oct. 25, 1826, under the name Megapodius rubripes Temminck from specimens collected by Reinwardt from the “ ile d’Amboine.” It is also the bird named Megapodius rein-wardtii Wagler, Syst. Avium Megapodius, sp. 4, 1827.

Both these names are included in the Catalogue of Birds

in the British Museum, Vol. XX., p. 454, as synonyms of M. duperreyi Lesson and Garnot, Bull. Sci. Nat., Vol. VIII., p. 113, 1826. Dumont’s introduction has three years’priority over Lesson’s, and the name Megapodius reinwardt Dumont must displace M.1 duperreyi Lesson.

The type-locality needs investigation as the bird does not live at Amboina. The name M. reinwardti Wagler has been associated with the Aru Island bird, and in the British Museum Catalogue two specimens from the Lidth de Jeude collection, one of which was labelled Amboina, the other with no locality. A note is given to this effect : “ Both these specimens are exactly similar to birds from the Aroe Islands, and probably came from that locality.” We would therefore fix as the type-locality of M. reinwardt Dumont the Aru Islands, Amboina being an error.

We would note that Finsch, New Guinea, p. 180, 1865, included—

Megapodius reinwardtii Wagl. Lombok, Flores,

rubripes Tern. ... New Guinea, Aru Island

and Ke Island,

being unaware that these two names referred to the same bird, and he did not mention Megapodius duperreyi Lesson.

In Vol. XXXI., p. 554 Pyrgita mariposa was proposed by Dumont as a new name for Fringilla bengalensis Latham. This synonym is not included in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XIII., p. 400.

In Vol. XL. appears a monograph of the genus Ficus by Valenciennes, and this is carefully incorporated in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XVIII. We note, however, that Pious erythrops (p. 178) is used for a species of Geophloeus and this usage is still seen in Brabourne and Chubb’s List of the Birds of South America, 1912, p. 178, whereas there is a prior Ficus erythropis Vieillot, Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. XXVI., p/ 98, 1816.

Three new species of Lanius are introduced by Valenciennes on pp. 225-8, viz., L. melanoletjcos, vittatus and melanotis.

Though none of these appear in the Catalogue of Birds, we note that the last two have since been brought into use and it may be the other has. The first-named was proposed for a Cape Bird nine years before Jardine and Selby used the same name for a species, now placed in Urolestes, from the same locality.

A monograph of Columba, written by Desmarest, has been correctly cited in the Catalogue of Birds. It is here noted to remark that the species Columba zoeæ, p. 314, C. oceanica, p. 316, and C. cyanovirens, p. 343, must be quoted from this place, as this is the earliest introduction, the ones usually cited as of the Voy. Coquille not appearing until much later.

In the XLIInd Volume the genus Charadrius is monographed by Lesson, and this important article had been completely overlooked until Mathews in this Journal drew attention to it, none of the many names appearing in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XXIV., and this oversight has necessitated a few alterations already recorded.

In the XLVIth Volume, dealing with the genus Roitelet, Dumont wrote, p. 161 :    “ On pourroit aussi considérer

comme appartenant au genre Roitelet d’autres petits oiseaux, ranges près d’eux dans les galeries du Museum, sous les noms de fauvette verdâtre et de fauvette grivelee.

“ Le premier, apporte de la Nouvelle-Hollande par Pércn, a le bec grele et court, de couleur blanchâtre, ainsi que les pieds ; le dessus du corps est d’un gris rougeâtre, et le dessous blanchâtre, avec des teintes verdâtres ; la queue, dont le fond est brun, est bordee de blanc, et l’on voit une tache de cette derniere couleur au fouet de l’aile. On pourroit nommer cet oiseau Roitelet austral, Regulus australis.”

In the fiftieth volume Lesson, under the name Soui-Manga, wrote a monograph of the genus Cinnyris Cuvier. All the names appear to be recorded in the Catalogue of Birds, but the names given in the Zool. Voy. Coquille were given priority whereas this is the earliest publication. Since the dates of publication of the Coquille appeared in this Journal this fact

has been grasped by Streseman and the necessary alterations made (Nov. Zool., Vol. XXI., pp. 143-4, 1914).

On p. 37, however, Pomatorhinus isidorei is described, and this alteration has not yet been noted as Streseman did not procure this bird.

In the LVIIIth Volume, p. 504, Lesson proposedLeptosomus crombus : this name appears in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XVII., p. 2, as of Lesson, Traité, p. 134, 1830, but this is the earlier introduction.

The preceding notes may not include all the new names proposed in this work and are brought forward mainly with the purpose of attracting the attention of the specialist, and emphasizing the fact that it must be referred to by such in order to prevent the introduction of invalid names. The case of Garrulus minor may be cited in this connection, while Aquila fusca has already been commented upon.

The chief alterations due to this investigation are :

Malacoptila torquata (Hahn) becomes

M. striata (Spix).

Baza lophotes (Temminck) must read

Baza leuphotes (Dumont).

Motacilla vidua Sundevall must be replaced by

Motacilla aguimp Dumont.

Garrulus glandarius minor Verreaux must be rejected for

Garrulus glandarius œnops Whitaker.

Megapodius duperreyi Lesson becomes

- Megapodius reinwardt Dumont.



By Gregory M. Mathews.

Referring to the early British settlements in New South* Wales many books were published, and these were all prepared by different members of the same expeditions. Much of the matter is repeated, of necessity. One of the striking items was the discovery of Lord Howe Island, when one of the ships was on voyage between Sydney and Norfolk Island. The first publication was probably that entitled, “ The Voyage of Governor Phillip to Botany Bay,” dated 1789.

On p. 86 we read : “A small island, but entirely uninhabited, was discovered by Lieutenant Ball in his passage to Norfolk Island. In his return he examined it, and found that the shore abounded with turtle but there was no good anchorage. He named it Lord Howe Island.” This was on February 17th, 1788.

On the 6th of May we read (p. 108): “The ‘ Supply ’ sailed to Lord Howe Island for turtle,” and on the 25th (p. Ill), “ The ‘ Supply ’ tender returned from Lord Howe Island, but unfortunately without having been able to procure any turtle.”

On p. 177, Chapter XVII. commences with an account of Rio de Janeiro, Norfolk Isle and Lord Howe Isle : “ The following particulars respecting those places have very obligingly been communicated to the editor by Lieutenant Henry Lidgbird Ball.” On p. 182, regarding Lord Howe Island, is written : “ On the shore there are plenty of ganets, and a land-fowl, of a dusky brown colour, with a bill about four inches long, and feet like those of a chicken ; these proved remarkably fat, and were very good food ; but we have no further account of them. There are also many


very large pigeons, and the white birds resembling the Guinea-fowl, which were found at Norfolk Island, were seen here also in great numbers. The bill of this bird is red, and very strong, thick and sharp-pointed.”

On p. 255 in Lieutenant Watts’ narrative a more detailed account of the bird-life is given, but the lines I wish to emphasize at this time read :    “ Very large pigeons were

also met with in great plenty : likewise beautiful parrots and parroquets.”

Page 250 records how the Scarborough transport, also in May, 1788, called for turtle at Lord Howe Island and found none, but “ they brought off a quantity of fine birds, sufficient to serve the ship’s crew three days ; many of them were very fat, somewhat resembling a Guinea-hen, and proved excellent food.”

On p. 273 the White Gallinule is described from “ Lord Howe’s Island, Norfolk Island and other places ” and a plate given, but with regard to the “ very large pigeons” I find “ no further account of them.”

The next book to be published was the Journal of a Voyage to New South Wales, by John White, which appeared early in 1790. White was very interested in Natural History, and writing of the discovery of Lord Howe Island stated : ' “ They also found on it, in great plenty, a kind of fowl. . . . These not being birds of flight, nor in the least wild, the sailors, availing themselves of their gentleness and inability to take wing from their pursuits, easily struck theni^down with sticks. There were also many birds of the Dove ¡kind, as tame as the former, and caught with equal facility. Some of them were brought alive to this place.”

Many birds are figured, among them being the White -Fulica described on p. 238 and named Fulica alba, but nothing more is given in connection with the Pigeon.

Search through other narratives and accounts has revealed no more mention of this Pigeon and it has passed entirely into obscurity. As a matter of fact I had doubted its existence, as the accounts quoted above are all second-hand, and Pigeons

were common at Norfolk Island and I suspected confusion had occurred on this account. That this was a reasonable conclusion is evident from a study of these early descriptions where Norfolk Island birds were localised as from Sydney, and the “ Norfolk Island Pigeon ” so named by Latham is the Sydney bird and not the Norfolk Island species.

Dr. Godman has brought to my notice a book of paintings in his possession made by Mr. George Raper who went to Sydney in the ‘ Supply ” and returned in the “ Waaksamheyd.” These paintings are of great interest as supplementing those given in the narratives published, but most interesting of all is a magnificent painting of the Pigeon of Lord Howe Island. The other paintings of birds, animals and fishes are beautiful and exact and consequently this picture must be so.

Dr. Godman has given me permission to reproduce the painting, which will give a better idea of the bird than a detailed description.

In coloration it will be seen to be very different from any living species and it is impossible to exactly allot it to any known genus. It is referable to the group of large Fruit-Pigeons, but has no near relationship with Hemiphagq,, the extinct Pigeon'of Norfolk Island, which was only subspecifically separable from the existing New Zealand Pigeon. It recalls much more the New Caledonian Phcenorhina, and consequently is of much greater value than might at first be anticipated. The relationships of Lord Hove Island and Norfolk Island have long been a source of inquiry, and I have already noted in this Journal, Vol. I., p. 121, 1912, my intention to fully discuss these, but there indicated that the avian element of Lord Howe Island was more certainly of New Caledonian origin than Neozelanic. This newly-discovered painting is confirmatory evidence of an immensely strong character that my views were correct. It certainly has no claim to Neozelanic origin, while its nearest living relative seems to be a New Caledonian bird. As noted above, it is impossible to place it in any known genus or species, and I therefore propose Raperia, gen. nov.

Differs in coloration, the form of the bill and the length of the feet from other Fruit Pigeons.

Type, Raperia godman^e, sp. nov.

Named in remembrance of Geo. Raper, who made the painting and thus saved for posterity a sight of a beautiful bird which was rapidly extinguished on account of its prior lack of enemies.

Raperia godmanje, sp. nov.

Head and breast purple-mauve ; throat and upper neck white ; above dark brown, with the edges of the feathers lighter; under-surface brown; tail blackish; primaries brown lighter on the inside. Legs red ; eyes red, bare space round them dark red; base of bill and cere red, tip greenish. Wing about 220 mm. ; tarsus 46, bill 27, tail 120. Collected on Lord Howe Island in 1790.

The above description is from the reproduction.

Named in honour of Mrs. Godman, wife of Dr. F. D. Godman, in whose possession is the original painting and to whom m}' best thanks are due for permission to reproduce that painting and prepare this description.



Differs from I. m. dubuis in being larger.

Culmen 45 ; wing 140 mm.

Type, Geelong, Victoria.


Ethelornis magnirostris whitlocki, subsp. n. Differs from E. m. magnirostris in being much paler above. Type, Port Hedland, Mid-west Australia, 15th Oct., 1914.

G. M. Mathews.


Austral Avian

' / • • 1 • ,v* » . * * ^ ^



* ‘ % -    '■ . , - ' .

VOL. III. No. 2.


Price 1/6 Net

WITHERBY & CO., 326 High Holborn, London, W.C. ' November U)th, 1915.

'-flay - ?

- % ».



Voi. III., No. 2.    November 19th, 1915.



On Certhia atricapilla Latham    ...    ...    ...    ...    25

On the “ Table des Planches Enlum.” of Boddaert ...    ...    ...    ...    ...    ...    31

Additions ... to my Reference List......... 51

Pluvialis dominions fulvus ...    ...    ...    ...    ...    52


By Gregory M. Mathews.

Plate II.

In the Second Supplement to the Index Ornith. 1801, Latham described, on p. xxxvii., “ C(erthia) atricapilla ” thus :

“ C. fusco-viridis subtus albida, vertice genisque nigris.

Black-headed Creeper. Gen. Syn., Sup., II., p. 167, 26.

Habitat in Nova Hollandia ; long. poll. 6 ; rostrum modicum : lingua setacea.”

This was simply a short Latin translation of the account given on p. 167 of the “ Black-headed Cr(eeper) ” which reads :

“ Length six inches ; bill dusky ; tongue bristly ; top of the head, and Irom the base of the upper mandible, black, passing through the eye, and below it some way on each cheek ; hind part of the neck, back, wings, and tail pale green, but the wings and tail are brown, with pale edges ; chin, sides of the neck, and fore part of it, as well as the under parts of the body, dusky white ; legs pale brown.

Inhabits New South Wales.”

Under the name “ Meliphaga atricapilla Temm.” there appeared in the Plan. Color., 56e livr., pi. 335, fig. 1, 1825, a bird, about which was written by Temminck : “ Ce Philédon est mentionné par Latham, Syn. Supp. 2, page 167, sous le nom de Certhia atricapilla. H est essentiel de dire qu’on reconnait à la courte notice de l’auteur anglais, l’oiseau qui nous occupe ; mais il ne fait pas mention de la bande blanche très caractéristique placée sur l’occiput, j’aurais conservé quelque donte sur l’identité de notre espèce avec celle de l’auteur anglais si je n’avais vu à Londres le sujet, étiquete de la main de Latham, dans la collection de M. Bullock.” Jardine and Selby did not agree with Temminckj and * therefore figured two birds on pi. cxxxrv. of the Illus. Ornith., Vol. III., 1835. Figure 1 was named “ Meliphaga atricapilla nobis. Black-headed Honey Eater (not including var. A), Lath., Gen. Hist., IV., p. 175. Certhia atricapilla Lath., Ind. Om, Sup. XXXVII.”

Fig. 2 was determined as “ Meliphaga lunulata Vigors and lîo?8fiQ\à=Meliphaga atricapilla Temm., pi., col. 335, fig. 1.” An explanation was provided : “ The two birds which we have now figured appear to be involved in some obscurity with regard to each other. The lower figure, bearing the synonymy of Temminck’s PI. Coloriées, is referred by that ornithologist to Latham’s Black-headed Honey Eater, with which we disagree, as it entirely wants the lunulated band on the hind head ; and our bird at Fig. 2 also disagrees with Dr. Latham’s, in being entirely white on the throat and all its under parts. In this state, then, we have marked some of our synonymy with) a doubt, and have endeavoured to give as correct a representation as possible of the two birds before us.”

Later, Strickland, Gould and Gray worked through the Xambert Drawings, and Gray recognising a painting of a bird purporting to be Certhia atricapilla Latham, wrote in the Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Vol. XI., p. 191, 1843 :

Certhia atricapilla Latham—Certhia lunulata Shaw— Meliphaga lunulata V. & H. = Gymnophrys torquatus Swainson :

but not Meliphaga atricapilla Jard. & Selby. Name proposed to be used Melithreptes atricapillus Vieillot.”

Gould, however, did not accept this determination and continued the usage of Shaw’s name of lunulatus for the Meliphaga atricapilla of Temminck, and used melanocephalus of himself for the Meliphaga atricapilla Jardine and Selby. As a synonym of the former, in the Handbook, he placed “ Meliphaga brevirostris Vig. and Horsf. in Linn. Trans., Vol. XV., p. 315 ? ” and wrote (p. 569) : “ Dr. Bennett, of Sydney, and Mr. George French Angas have called my attention to a Melithreptus inhabiting New South Wales, which they consider to differ from all those figured by me in the folio edition, and which they state had been found breeding, proving, in their opinion, that it must have attained maturit}^. The remarks of those gentlemen were accompanied by two very fine skins, which, with two others that had been in my collection for some time, are now before me. At a first glance almost any ornithologist would imagine these birds to be the young of M. lunulatus, and I must admit that this was my own impression ; but upon a more minute examination and comparison, I perceive characters which render me somewhat doubtful of this being the case. In the first place, I find all the specimens larger and stouter than any of M. lunulatus to which I have access ; in the second, I have been informed that the bare space above the eye is greenish-blue, and not red ; all the under-surface of the body is sandy-brown in lieu of pure white : the axillary feathers are buff instead of white : the wings are brown, and not wax-yellow ; the crown of the head is brownish-black instead of pure black; and the lunate band on the occiput is greyish-buff, and not white.

. . . Should it ultimately prove to be distinct, then it must bear the inappropriate name of Melithreptus brevirostris, as I find it is strictly identical with the type-specimen of the bird so-called by Vigors and Horsfield, formerly in the collection of the Linnean Society, and now in the British Museum.”

The species brevirostris was subsequently recognised and admitted under that name, and it might be observed that

in the original description a note was added : “ This bird is said to be common by Mr. Caley, and to be called Cung’leer by the natives.”

When the Catalogue of Birds of the British Museum was written, the part dealing with Australian Honey Eaters was entrusted to Gadow, a worker with no interest whatever in the group and one who failed to realise the high standard set by his predecessors in the undertaking. Consequently the relations of the species lunulatus, melanocephalus and brevirostris to Latham’s Certhia atricapilla were not investigated and the latter name not even mentioned in synonymy.

However, being an authoritative publication, Gadow’s work was accepted by many ornithologists unable to criticise his incomplete compilation. That my strictures are mild will be seen by those who care to refer to the volumes of the Ibis immediately following the publication of the Catalogue, where Salvadori, Tristram and others plainly exposed Gadow’s ignorance of the subject he pretended to treat.

In 1906 the matter was independently revived by two writers—one, North of Australia, the other Sharpe of Great Britain. The former, writing in the Ibis, urged the acceptance of Certhia atricapilla Latham as anterior and equivalent to lunulatus Shaw, though admitting the description seemed imperfect.

In the Hist. Coll. Nat. Hist. Brit., Vol. II., p. 128, 1906, Sharpe, dealing with the Watling Drawings, wrote the following :

“ No. 105. Black-headed Creeper, Lath., Gen. Syn., Suppl. II., p. 167.    \

Certhia atricapilla Lath., Ind. Om., Suppl., p. xxxvn.

This figure is intended/for the bird usually called Melithreptus lanulatus (Shaw) ; ck/Gadow, Cat. B., IX., p. 204. Shaw’s -name is adopted by Dr. Gadow, but I cannot reconcile the description given by Shaw (Gen. Zool., VIII., p. 224, 1811)— with the 4 back, wings, and tail cinnamon-brown ’—with any species of Melithreptus. The name ought to have been dropped on this account, but it matters no longer, as

Latham’s name of atricapilla antedates Shaw’s name by ten years.

No. 106. Identified by Latham as his ‘ Black-headed Creeper,’ but it is a very poor representation, the back being brown, and no sign of the white on the nape.”

Following North and Sharpe, I used atricapilla for the “ lunate ” species in my Handlist of the Birds of Australasia, 1908.

Since then I have been continually revising the nomenclature of the Handlist, and one of my first corrections was in connection with this species. I gave the following explanation in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 19, 1911 :

“ Page 91 : Species 733. Melithreptus lunatus Shaw, in Vieillot, Ois. d’Or., Vol. II., p. 122, pl. 61 (1802)

replaces M. atricapillus nec Latham.

Page 92 : Species 741. Melithreptus atricapillus Latham, Suppl. Ind. Om., p. xxxvn. (1801)

replaces M. hrevirostris Vigors & Horsf.”

In the Ibis, p. 55, 1906, North advocated the adoption of Latham’s atricapillus for the bird known as lunulatus Shaw. He, however, observed that the distinguishing character of the latter species was not mentioned.

Sharpe (Hist. Coll. Brit. Mus., Vol. II., p. 128, 1906), from a study of the Watling Drawings, independently proposed the rejection of “ lunulatus ” Shaw, and also preferred atricapillus for the species previously known under the former name. The absence of the name-character in the description made me dubious as to the correctness of identifying “ lunulatus ” and atricapillus. I therefore have carefully studied the Watling figures, and find that the above alterations are necessary. The figure upon which atricapillus was founded is quite a good picture of the bird known as hrevirostris, Vig. & Horsf. It must be remembered that Latham’s descriptions were drawn up from these figures only, and consequently the colour values given by Latham depend entirely upon the artists. In the present instance the figure shows a dark head, which Latham concluded was

black; but upon comparing specimens of brevirostris and lunatus (for such is the name Shaw used) it was seen that the coloration of the figure agreed very well indeed with that of brevirostris, whereas it disagreed in many particulars with lunatus, which moreover was thrice well-figured in the same set of drawings, Nos. 129, 130, and 131 (cf. Hist. Coll. Brit. Mus., II., p. 132).

This account was quoted in full in the Emu, Vol. XI.. p. 130-1, 1911, in connection with these comments: And, further, still more puzzling are some of Watling’s old drawings with which the late Dr. Sharpe sought to establish the priority in nomenclature of certain Australian birds. Now Mr. Mathews states there is room for doubting the identification of the names given by Sharpe to several of the drawings. Well may Australians ask : ‘ Why rely on the doubtful drawings of a botanist as against the life-like coloured figures of so great an ornithologist and author as Gould ? ’ Bed-rock priority run riot, people are apt to say. . . . Australians have learned to know this familiar Honey-eater as the ‘ Brownheaded.’ To call it atricapillus (Black-headed), even if it were correct in accordance with strict priority, would be misleading and not according to nature.”

It is quaint that the above should be written in conjunction with a bird that Gould did not figure and which he only doubtfully recognised in the Handbook, although Caley wrote of it as “ common,” and in the above extract it is called “ familiar.” The first published figure appeared in 1904 in the Emu, Vol. III., pi. XVI., when was written : “ It is somewhat remarkable that the former, described by Vigors and Horsfield, and so long known/ should only now be figured.”

I now reproduce the original painting made by Watling and from which Latham drew up his description, and it must be immediately conceded that it is “ no doubtful drawing,” but considering the lapse of time and improvement in methods will bear favourable comparison with the painting made by Gronvold and reproduced in the Emu.


By Gregory M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.

The acquisition, by the senior author, of a very choice copy of this exceedingly rare work, and consequently its careful examination, made it evident that a detailed criticism of the names proposed in it was necessary. The junior author had, some years ago, tentatively prepared such a list, so it was considered opportune to now complete the work.

We would make some comments on the book as possibly we will incur some criticism as being “ priority hunters,” etc.

In the year 1874 a reprint was published under the editorship of W. B. Tegetmeier. The first paragraph of the Editor’s Preface reads :    “ M. Boddaert’s exceedingly rare

work, of which only a very few copies were printed, was published at Utrecht in 1783. Its present value to zoologists is due to its applying for the first time, to very many species, the presently received system of scientific nomenclature, and thus fixing, by reason of priority, the names of a considerable number of genera and species.” We are thus, in our pursuit of priority, a little over forty years behind. Our purpose in writing this note is to show that our ancestral priority hunters did not do their work completely and therefore left a little to reward our services.

The book consists of a collation of the plates of birds known as the Planch. Enlum. of Daubenton with the descriptions given in Buffon’s Hist. Nat., Brisson’s Ornith., Linné’s Syst. Nat., XHth Ed., etc. When no Latin name was otherwise available Boddaert sometimes proposed one, but as often he did not. In many cases he considered the Brissonian name, whether binomial or not, sufficient, and in some cases proposed names himself in a trinomial form. In many cases he put “ mihi ” after his new proposition, but in as many he omitted this precaution. Moreover, when he failed to distinguish his new name, he immediately continued in a puzzling manner with the information that it was missing from Linné’s work.

Thus he wrote : “ Falco harpyia Linn. Gen. 42.o.” To the casual reader this indicates “ Falco harpyia Linn.,” but this is not so, as the little “ o ” governs the matter, and by this Boddaert intended to show that he named the Daubenton plate “ Falco harpyia,” and that it was referable to the Linnean genus and was not included by Linné. This explanation is necessary, as when Sherbom examined the book he saw the inadequate manner in which Boddaert treated the whole subject, and recognising that Boddaert was accepting the Brissonian binomials and trinomials as valid, only included in the Index Animalium those names to which Boddaert had attached the word “ mihi.”

The eagle-eyed priority hunters of the last generation had, however, detected Boddaert’s usage and had dug out of obscurity the Boddaertian names, and such are in common use at the present time. Many of these common names are omitted from the Index Animalium, and this omission may cause trouble. We hereafter give a list of those.

Considering the book as a whole, its composition and its rarity, we think the wisest course would have been to reject the whole of the names in it. This course we would undoubtedly have adopted had we been the finders of the book ; apparently, however, the last generation were “ priority-mad,” a term coined by one of them to stigmatise the younger generation who dared on this plea to correct their errors. Throughout the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum each author, with few exceptions, took advantage of Boddaert’s work to “ upset ” well-known names; by this means, as the Catalogue was authoritative, Boddaert’s names gained acceptance with little criticism, and are an example of the folly of “ nomina conservanda.” Well-known names, without question of/confusion thereby being incurred, were cast without sympathy into the sink of synonymy, and there was no cry about the matter. The “ new ” names were accepted without clamour, and it is probable that the present generation could not name the outcast without reference. We would further note that the authors who did not make

use of Boddaert for innovations were not blessed with scruples, but simply suffered from lassitude. Where a Boddaertian name had been cited by some previous worker they unhesitatingly made use of it, but did no research work for themselves : the synonymy compiled by such workers proves this assertion, both by the errors apparent and its incompleteness.

The succeeding notes constitute an endeavour to rectify the shortcomings of such, and to account for the whole of the new names in this work. As we are unfamiliar with the Aves of the World, but are simply specialists in one geographical region, we are dependent to a great extent upon the synonymy compiled in the Catalogue of Birds, as rectified by such authorities as Hartert on Pabearctic forms, Reichenow on African forms, Hellmayr, Berlepsch, Braboume and Chubb on South American birds, and the Amer. Omith. Union’s Check List, 3rd Ed., for North American birds. In attempting to fix the Boddaertian names we have noted invalid names in use from other causes, and we will later give some notes on such so that rectification can be at once made. It is rather strange to us to see how slowly some workers are attracted by such corrections, though eagerly pointing out similar instances when made at first hand. Our only interest in the subject is the elimination of nomenclatural problems and gladly accept criticisms when logically provided, but dislike lawyer-like quibbling.

The following list of names is newly proposed in this book, but do not appear in Sherborn’s Index Animalium : it is provided so that it can be incorporated by users of that wonderful guide, and thus obviate further errors.



Fringilla carduelis capensis.


Psittacus luteus !

Not of p. 30.


Lanius violaceus !


Fringilla larvata !

Motacilla canadensis !

Not of Linne 1766.

„ aurantia !


7.    Fringilla dominicana cristata.

8.    Psittacus guttatus !

9.    Phasianus katraca !

10.    Turtur afra.

Psittacus pavua !

11.    Merula montana !

Muscicapa galatea !

12.    .Psittacus flavigula !

. Loxia nigro-aurantia !

Tangara major.

Buceo erythrocephalus !

13.    Fringilla canadensis.

14.    . Fringilla rosea.    Not of Pallas 1776.

15.    Merops bicolor !

16.    Turdus macrourus fasciatus !

Merula (Oorvus) brachyurus.

Not of Linné 1758.

Not of Müller 1776. Not of Müller 1776.

Not of Müller 1776.

:Turdus virens.

17.    „ terat !

Trochilus rubricauda.

Picus striatus !

20.    Loxia fusciventer !

Oriolus viridis !

Buceo flavigula !

Alcedo cancrophagus.

21.    Turdus philippensis !

. Oriolus cristatus;!

Ardea leucogaster !

Fúlica major !

Avocetta recurvirostra.

Turdus cyanurus !

24. Motacilla nigra.

Turdus merula atricapilla.

27.    Psittacus cyanopterus !    Not of p. 9.

28.    Falco piscator.

30. Emberiza migrans.

Psittacus vibrissa !



Psittacus cardinalis !


Picus fusco-fulvus ! Turdus jala !


,, juid?e. Muscicapa kinki ! Hirundo albiventer !

Psittacus torquatus ! Turdus madagascariensis !

Not of Müller 1776.


Muscicapa aurora !

,, fusca !

Not of Müller 1776, or

,, oliva !

of p. 33.


Motacilla nsevia !


Cuculus aeneus !


Oriolus ater !


Corvus nudicollis ! Picus punctigula ! Coracias cayanus !


,, chinensis ! ,, abyssinus Turdus manilla !

Upupa speccosa ! Turdus rufus.

Not of Linné 1758.


Oriolus violaceus. Fringilla ardens. Alauda nigra !


Motacilla undata ! Alauda matutina Emberiza flav. !

Muscicapa citrina. Trochilus viridigula.

,, violicauda !

,, amethystinus. Motacilla cinerea.

Not of (Tunstall) 1771.


Muscicapa pica !

„ rubinus !

,, carolinensis.

Not of Linné 1766.


43.    Motacilla superciliosa !

Pions anrantias !    Not of Linné 1766.

„ rnfns.

Upnpa varia !

Ampelis grísea.

44.    Motacilla citrea !

Parns cinctns !

Tangara rnfa !

45.    Tanagra grísea.

..    nigrignla !

„    pileata !

47.    Alcedo javana !

48.    Psittacns monachns !

Bnceros abyssiniens !

49.    Alcedo chloris !

Picns flavigula !

„ gríseo-cephalns !

Ampelis nivea !

50.    Tringa indica !

Tangara snlva. Err. pro fnlva.

Cncnlns gigas !

Formicarins cayanensis !

Perdrix tetrao.

51.    Tetrao pileatns !

Mnscicapa eqnes.

Tringa miles !

52.    Rallns longirostris !

Psittacns farinosns !

53.    Bncco viridis î\

,, wirens ! )

Cncnlns jacobinus !

Psittacns longicanda !

54.    Bnceros manillæ !

Fúlica parva !    Not of Forster 1781.

Ardea nycticorax cayanensis.


55.    Charadrius niger.

Ardea garzette major.

Anas javana !

Buceros scutata I

56.    Ardea naevia !

Sterna maxima !

The preceding are the names to which “ mihi ” is not appended, and it will be noted that the large majority of them are included in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, such being marked !

We propose to deal with the omissions in the order of Boddaert, and would observe that some have already been picked up by other workers and appear in the Amer. O.U. Check List 1910, as p. 41, Muscicapa citrina, this appears in that List on p. 324.

Further, typographical errors abound, and according to Opinion 26 of the International Commission these may be corrected. Consequently we do not think that our friend Mr. Claude Grant’s retention of Boddaert's Cuculus caprius will prove acceptable, as it is obviously simply a Boddaertian error for “ cupreus ” : two lines below will be seen “ mantana,” and Alca appears as Ahea on p. 47, Alca on p. 55, and Alia on p. 58. If such misprints were acceptable as valid names Ahea would be the genus-name for the Tufted Puffin and replace Lunda in the Amer. O.U. Check List, 3rd Ed., 1910, p. 25. We do not anticipate such a procedure.

The trinomials in the book provide some puzzling questions, as in some instances Boddaert seemed to have named the birds subspecifically, in others subgenerically. Thus, the first usage cannot be determined, as “ Fringilla Carduelis Capensis ” is written, and it cannot be guessed whether Carduelis was specifically intended or subgenerically proposed. This name is not cited in the Cat. Birds, Vol. XIII., p. 230, as a synonym of Pyromelana oryx (Linne) and there is also a prior Fringilla capensis of Müller 1776, while Fringilla carduelis is a Linnean species and Carduelis is a Brissonian genus.

There is here no complication, but we see plenty in the next trinomial to be dealt with.

Fringilla dominicana cristata.

This name is given on p. 7, followed by “ mihi,” to pi. 103. The name was not accepted by Sherborn, nor does it appear in the Cat. Birds. For the bird there figured the name Paroaria cucullata (Latham) is used (p. 809), and this name is maintained in Braboume and Chubb’s List of the Birds of South America, p. 385. The basis of this name is Loxia cucullata Latham 1790, and this name is invalid on account of the prior Loxia cucullata Boddaert, p. 24, and Loxia cucullata Muller 1776. Consequently the Paroaria must become known as

Paroaria cristata (Boddaert).

Other errors in connection with the names Loxia cucullata Boddaert and Muller which can be seen in the Catalogue of Birds appear to be rectified in Braboume and Chubb’s List, though the usage of Sporophila collaris (p. 366) based on Loxia collaris Boddaert while there is a prior Loxia collaria seems a dubious expedient.

Turtur aera.

This name appearing on p. 10 serves as the first introduction of the genus-name Turtur. We would emphasize the fact that one of us first indicated this in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVII., p. 503, 1910, and when Hartert accepted this emendation in the Hand-List of British Birds, by Hartert, Jourdain, Ticehurst and Witherby, p. 161, 1912, he omitted in the footnote to indicate the source of his information. This omission has led Stuart Baker in his valuable work on Indian Pigeons and Doves, 1913, p. 183, to credit Hartert himself with this correction.


This name is not yet settled with. It has comparatively recently been rejected in favour of Planesticus, as it was regarded as first proposed in 1816. In the Auk, Vol. XXXI.,

1914, Mathews gave some notes headed “ Some Binary Generic Names,” and there indicated some of the confusion that seemed inevitable through the suggested acceptance of “ binary ” authors. Merula is there mentioned as valid in 1793, but it is suggested it might date from an earlier “ binary ” writer. We now record its occurrence in this book in 1783 in two guises, and observe it calls for some action so that this ghost may be killed.

On p. 11 the following entry can be seen :—

“ PI. 182. Merle de Montagne. Buff., VI., p. 16. Briss. Ornith., p. 232, pi. XXI., 1. Merula montana Linn. syst. VI.”

Does such an introduction validate the genus-name Merula ? In the Vlth Edition of Linné’s Syst. Nat., published in 1748, the third species under Turdus (p. 29) is cited as “ Merula montana Fn. 186.” At this date Linne was obviously non-binomial, though absolutely binary. It has been decided by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature that the mere citation of a pre-Linnean name does not give it a legal status. Is the present case-a mere citation ? It appears to us to be so and a considered judgment is needed, as by accepting the present introduction as valid we can fix the genus-name Merula to the species Turdus torquatus ; if we reject this proposal, as seems just, on p. 16 we meet with—

“PI. 258. Breve de Bengale Buff. VI., p. 123.3. Merle vert de Bengale Bliss. Omith., IL, p. 316. Merula (Corvus) Brachyurus Linn. Gen. 50.15, short-tailed Crow Lath., birds L, p. 398.”

This citation cannot possibly be disregarded as there are no flaws in this. Here we see a direct and correct proposal of Merula for the bird classed by Linne in Corvus. This means that Merula would displace Pitta, a most undesirable alteration. We are not, at present, making this change, but unless a decision is soon arrived at in connection with “ binary ” generic names, even more undesirable innovations may become unavoidable.

On p. 24 another trinomial appears which may here be cited. PL 392 is called “ Turdus merula atrica'püla Linne, 107.418.” This is Turdus atricapillus Linne 107.18 (the 4 appears to have slipped in), and “ mernla ” would seem to have been snbgenerically added and would appear to have been regarded as a member of the Boddaertian group Merula.

Throughout the book there is snch a quaint disregard of genera, species and subspecies as regards the determination of the names of these plates, that it seems almost absurd that onr “ priority-mad ” predecessors should have accepted the nomenclature utilised in it as valid. We are simply endeavouring to complete their ill-starred unfinished work.

Tangara major.

This name is given (p. 12) to pi. 205, bnt was not used in the Catalogue of Birds, XI., where the later magnus Gmelin given to the same plate was used for a species of Saltator. However, in Brabonme and Chubb\s List, page 371, this name is rejected in favour of maximus P.L.S. Müller 1776, which is supposed to be founded on the same plate.

Müller’s description reads, p. 159 : “ Sie ist braun, unten rostfarbig. . . . Cayenne. Buff on.”

The bird for which the name is used is not “ braun,” and Muller’s name should be rejected. Neither does pi. 205 represent the Cayenne bird in good enough colouring for acceptance. It may be urged that there is no other Cayenne bird to which the name is applicable, but then it is not absolutely certain that the bird came from Cayenne, and there are other birds as near (or nearer) the figure from elsewhere. Then, on p. 38, Boddaert gave the name “ Coracias cayanus ” to pi. 616, and in the Catalogue of Birds Sclater cited this plate as a doubtful one of the bird he called magnus Gmelin. The figure there given is a splendidly coloured and accurate plate of the Cayenne bird called maximus by Braboume and Chubb, following Hellmayr (Nov. Zool., Vol. XV., p. 30, 1909) and Berlepsch (same Vol., p. 205). In order to meet criticism we would point out two discrepancies in pi. 616.

It shows a pale bill and green thighs. The pale bill may be due to bleaching, although immature birds have pale bills, while the green thighs may be due to the artist.

We therefore propose to rectify matters by advocating the usage of Saltator cayanus Boddaert in place of Saltator maximus Muller, as used in Brabourne and Chubb’s List, p. 371.

Fringilla canadensis.

This name, given on p. 13 to pi. 223, f. 2, was not admitted in the Catalogue of Birds, and does not seem to have since been recognised. Consequently the name used for the bird there figured, viz. Spizella monticola Gmelin, still persists in the Amer. Ornith. Union’s Check List, 3rd Edition, p. 263, 1910. As Gmelin’s name (Syst. Nat., p. 912, 1789) is absolutely equivalent and later than Boddaert’s, the bird must be known as

Spizella canadensis (Boddaert).

Trochilus rubricauda.

In the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XVI., p. 311, Clytolcema rubinea (Gm.) is used for the species figured on pi. 276, f. 4, though Boddaert had given the above name to the same figure fifteen years previously. Humming-birds have been monographed since then and several specialists, notably Hartert in Das Tier-reich, have dealt with them without recognising this fault, (and the erroneous name appears in Brabourne and Chubb'S List, p. 126. The correct name should therefore be

Clytolcema rubricauda (Boddaert).

• Trochilus viridigula.

This name given on p. 41 to pi. 671, f. 1, does not appear to have been hitherto determined. Mr. Charles Chubb, of the British Museum, has helped, by his splendid knowledge of these birds, to satisfactorily identify it and there is no doubt that the figure represents a specimen of the bird known as Lampornis gramineus (Gmelin). Specimens in the British

Museum agree quite accurately, and the species should henceforth be known as

Lampornis vntiDiGULA (Gmelin).

Trochilus violicauda.

This name was given to the second figure on pi. 671, and here again a satisfactory result has been arrived at through Mr. Chubb’s assistance. We have determined it as the bird later described by Vieillot (Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. VII., p. 349, 1817) as Trochilus nigricollis. This identification seems a good one though novel, as Berlepsch recently quoted it as a doubtful synonym of the preceding species, a result arrived at by Vieillot almost a hundred years previously, when he wrote (N.D., VII., p. 354) :—

“ Le Colibri a Queue violette, Trochilus nitidus Lath. ; Troch. albus, Gm., pi. 11, des Oiseaux dores, est un jeune colibri hausse-col vert (gramineus Gm.), qui commence á prendre les couleurs de l’adulte.”

It is interesting to note that the vernacular used in Braboume and Chubb’s List now agrees with the scientific name. The names nitidus Latham and albus Gmel. are absolute synonyms of violicauda Boddaert being given to the same figure.    -

We then conclude that for the species appearing in Braboume and Chubb’s List, p. 123, as L. nigricollis (Vieillot), the correct name is

Lamporxis violicauda (Boddaert).

Trochilus amethystihus.

Though Boddaert, on p. 41, proposed this name for pi. 672, f. 1, he has not yet received credit for it, the name being accredited to Gmelin in every Monograph, and even in Braboume and Chubb’s List, p. 145. The correct name is, however,

Calliphlox amethystixa (Boddaert), which is fifteen years earlier and which is exactly equal to Gmelin’s name.

Muscicapa bicolor.

This name appears on p. 19, and being three years earlier invalidates Muscicapa bicolor Sparrman, Mus. Carls, pi. 46, 1786. The latter is still in use as Cossypha bicolor for an African bird. The correct species name appears to be (.Muscicapa) dichroa Gmelin, Syst. Nat., p. 949, 1789, provided because Sparrman’s choice came later than Gmelin’s own. Cossypha was used as of Vigors, Zool. Joum., Vol. II., p. 396, 1826, in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. VII., p. 34, and maintained by Reichenow, Vogel Afrikas, Vol. III., p. 758, 1905, and still appears on the cabinets of the British Museum as it is used by Bannerman (Ibis, July, 1915, p. 497). In the last number of this Journal, p. 16, we observed that Dumont used Cuvier’s genus-name Cossyphus in 1823. We did not elaborate on this, as the publication of Cuvierian names is a study ia itself and the name Cossyphus was many years previously proposed for an Insect (Fabricius 1792). We make this note as our friend Dr. C. W. Richmond has written us that this appears to be the earliest use of Cuvier’s name, though we did not so regard it. We have not yet seen an earlier use, but it does not further interest us save from an academic view point. Gray, in the Cat. Gen. Subgen. Birds 1855, correctly placed these names, and we might record the fact that for accuracy no work has ever surpassed Gray’s. Thus p. 44, Gray gave—

“ Bessonornis Smith 184? Cossypha Vigors 1825 a. Dessonornis A. Smith 1836. a Nec Cossyphus Fabr. 1792,” and p. 67—

“ Acridotheres Vieill. 1816. Gracula Cuv. 1817.

Cossyphus Dum. 18 ?.”

The first species of Dumont’s Cossyphus is olivaceus, which is simply a new name for Manorine of Vieillot, as one of us has already recorded in this Journal, Vol. II., p. 102. We cannot accept the retention of Cossypha while Cossyphus is rejected, so the correct name of the bird known as Cossypha bicolor Sparrman will be

Bessonornis dichrous (Gmelin).

As noted by Gray, the genus-name was spelt Dessonornis, but Smith himself corrected this as a typographical error, and this correction must be accepted.

Falco piscator.

This name given to pi. 478 does not appear to have hitherto been recognised. According to our determination it is a good figure of the bird called in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XIX., p. 450, Schizorhis africana. The generic location may seem strange but not as peculiar as that of Latham, who called it Phasianus africanus (Index Orn., p. 631, 1790). We have brought this correction to the notice of Mr. Claude Grant, who had just worked at this species, and he has accepted our identification and will record this emendation in the Ibis. The correct spelling of the genus-name is now being used so that the name reads

Chizjbrhis piscator (Boddaert).

Motacilla superciliosa.

This name appears on p. 43 and is used in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. X., p. 301, but on account of its omission from Sherborn’s Index Animalium, a bird on the „British List is specifically named superciliosus, though the basis of this name is Motacilla superciliosa Gmelin 1789.

In Hartert’s Vögel Paläark. Fauna, Vol. I., p. 518, 1909, the subspecies Phylloscopus superciliosa superciliosa ex Gmelin 1788 (recte 1789) appears, on p. 519. P. s. humei (Brooks 1878), and p. 520, P. s. mandellii (Brooks 1880) are included. No available synonyms are recorded. On p. xl. of the “ Inhalt,” where Hartert (in a manner worthy of recommendation) noted the alterations and emendations proposed during the progress of his work, no further notes on this - species occur. Thus, in the Hand-List of British Birds, by Hartert, Jourdain, Ticehurst and Witherby, 1912, p. 60, Phylloscopus superciliosus still appears, and in the more recent B.O.U. List, 2nd Edition, published this year (1915) it is maintained, p. 84.

We have endeavoured to determine whether any synonym is existent, but as Hartert, in his monographic study, failed, we have concluded the Gmelinian, superciliosa is nameless. We however agree that humei is only subspecifically separable, so that would become the species-name. The genus-name also required more than a little consideration. Hartert’s generic association cannot be accepted unless the'generic definition became wide enough to cover some such group as “ small birds of a more or less greenish colour,” as some of the species have proportionally large bills or minute bills, have long wings or short wings, have weak feet or rather strong feet, etc., etc., and we are certain no worker could place a bird in “ Phylloscopus ” with any exactitude. For the Gmelinian superciliosa, however, Beguloides appears a good location, and we therefore propose for Motacilla superciliosa Gmelin, p. 975, 1789: Russia not Motacilla superciliosa Boddaert, p. 43, 1783, the new name

Reguloides humei premium.

Larius, recte Lorius.

On p. 42 Larius is introduced thus : “ Psittacus (Larius) ceclanensis mihi ” for pi. 683 “ Le grand Lory.” There can be no argument that there is purely a typographical error here present and that correction to Lorius is imperative. This view, which is indisputable, has been taken by Sherborn, who in the Index Animalium, p. 519, records “ Larius err. pro Lorius, P. Boddaert.”

This proposal has, however, been hitherto overlooked, and we have a double complication to face.

In the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XX., p. 393, Salvadori has recorded Psittacus ceclanensis as a synonym of Eclectus roratus Müller 1776 given to the same plate. This identification necessitates the acceptance of the genus-name Lorius in place of Eclectus. We view this alteration with little feeling, as there is a prior Ecledis Hubner 1826 which hangs over Eclectus as recorded in the List Birds Australia, p. xxvi., 1913. For the genus called Lorius in the Catalogue of Birds,

Vol. XX., p. 31 (where a footnote is given : “ The genus Lorius is generally attributed to Brisson, who did not use the name in a generic sense ”), Wagler’s name Domicella is available. As the vernacular Lory is in use for many species, the emendations will cause little confusion.

A specific alteration may be here proposed. In the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XX., p. 394, Eclectus cardinalis is used, based on Psittacus cardinalis Boddaert, p. 30. On p. 22 Eos cardinalis is used, based on Lorius cardinalis G. R. Gray, Genera Birds, App., p. 20, 1849, given to the “ Lori Cardinal Homb. & Jacq. Voy. Pole Sud. Oiseaux, pi. 24, bis 2.” But at that reference “ L. cardinalis ” is added to the genus Lorius. as expressed in Vol. II., p. 416, where appears “ L. cardinalis (Bodd.) PI. Enl. 518.” Consequently Gray’s name was invalid at its introduction and it does not seem to have since been rectified. We therefore propose the new name Eos GRAYI

for the species figured by Hombron & Jacquinot, Voy. Pole Sud. Oiseaux, pi. 24, bis 2.

Alauda nigri.

This name is proposed (note the typographical error again) on p. 46 for pi. 738, but it previously had been introduced on p. 40 for a different bird. Nevertheless, the second usage was made the base of Centrites niger in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XIV., p. 61; and when Richmond, in the Auk, Vol. XIX., 1902, p. 92, pointed out that Centrites should be replaced by Lessonia, as that name had been rejected in error, he did not observe this double usage, consequently in Brabourne and Chubb’s List, p. 269, Lessonia niger (Bodd.) appears. Gmelin, p. 792, gave the name Alauda rufa to the same plate, so that the correct name seems to be

Lessonia rufa (Gmelin).

Tanara sulva, recte fulva.

This name, given on p. 50, has been overlooked, and in Brabourne and Chubb’s List, p. 420, Lanio atricapillus (Gmelin)

is in use. Boddaert’s name is given to pi. 809, f. 2, which is the basis of Gmelin’s name (Syst. Nat., p. 899, 1789), so that the names are absolutely equivalent and the correct name to be used is

Lanio fulvus (Boddaert).

Perdrix tetrao.

A beautiful instance of the complications possible through the acceptance of Boddaertian names is here seen.

Thus on p. 51, “ PI. 828, Tinamou varié, Buff. VIII., p. 2 945 Briss. Ornith. II., o perdrix Tetrao, Linn., Gen. 103 o,” is written.

The logical conclusion is that Perdrix tetrao is here proposed for pi. 828, and only by a stretch of the facts can any other result be arrived at.

For this same plate Gmelin (Syst. Nat., p. 768, 1789) proposed the name Tetrao variegatus, and that species name is in use in Brabourne and Chubb’s List, p. 4.

The correct name would thus appear to be

Crypturus tetrao (Boddaert).

Alauda capensis.

Boddaert proposed this name with “ mihi ” attached on p. 45 for pi. 712. In the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XIII., p. 514, this is used as the basis of Certhilauda capensis, and apparently this usage still persists, as Reichenow (Vogel Afrika’s, Vol. III., p. 352, 1905) continues it.

There was, however, an earlier Alauda capensis Linné, which Boddaert had himself catalogued on p. 29, without however recognising Linne’s authority.

Gmelin, admitting Linné’s species, gave the name Alauda africana (p. 798) to pi. 712, thus exactly equalling Boddaert’s invalid nomination.

The correct name for Certhilauda capensis Auct. is then— Certhilauda africana (Gmelin).

Fringilla rosea.

This name given on p. 14 to pi. 230, f. 2, we do not find in the Catalogue of Birds, and we have not determined it. which is of little consequence, as the name is invalid on account of the prior use of the name by Müller 1776.


To this name, given on p. 16 to pi. 273, f. 1, the same remarks apply as to the preceding, the name dating back to Linné 1758.

Alcedo cancrophagus.

We have not traced this name given on p. 20 to pi. 334 in the Catalogue of Birds. It can be placed as a doubtful synonym of Halcyon senegalensis (Linné), Syst. Nat., 12th ed., 1766, p. 180, as the figure represents that species, but the bill is given as wholly red, instead of the under mandible black, and the underside painted buffy instead of grey.


This name given on p. 30 for pi. 511, f. 1, is not included in the Catalogue of Birds in the synonymy of Emberiza da Linné, though the plate is included.


This name given on p. 36 to pi. 587 is included in the Catalogue of Birds, but so many errors are apparent that the following notes may help to relieve the position.

In Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XIX., p. 402, a Ceuthmochares ÆNEUS is admitted, the basis of which is Guculus æreus Vieillot (Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. VIII., p. 229, 1817). If it be accepted that Vieillot’s æreus is a typographical error for œneus, then the Ceuthmochares must bear Stephen’s name æratus (Gen. Zool., Vol. XIV., p. 210, 1826).

On p. 412 Coua gigas is used, based on Boddaert’s Cuculus gigas, Tabl. PI. Enl., p. 56, 1783, for which is cited, “ Le Grand Coucou de Madagascar, PI. Enk, VI., pis. 587, 588, 1783.”

The name Cuculus gigas is given on p. 50 to pi. 815, “ Le Coucou verdâtre de Madagascar,” while the plates cited in the Catalogue of Birds are referable to quite another bird, the Leptosomus discolor (Hermann 1772).

Oriolus violaceus.

This name is given on p. 39 to pi. 646. Gray (Genera Birds, Vol. III., App., p. 34, 1849) recognised this plate as Quiscalus purpureus var. This synonym does not appear in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XL, p. 394, under Quiscalus versicolor, though an albino is catalogued. When this partial albino is compared with the plate, Gray’s identification is an absolute certainty, and Boddaert’s name passes into the synonymy of Quiscalus quiscula (Linné), as that name is used in the Amer. Ornith. Union’s Check List, 3rd Ed., 1910, p. 239. As exactly equivalent to Boddaert’s name may be recorded Oriolus ludovicianus Gmelin, Syst. Nat., p. 387, 1788, and Oriolus leucocephalus Latham, Index Ornith., p. 175, 1790.


This name given on p. 39 to pi. 647 we have not traced in the Catalogue of Birds, nor have we yet identified the bird.

Picus RUFUS.

Boddaert provided this name on p. 43 for pi. 694, f. 1, but in the Catalogue of Birds the name was credited to Gmelin, Boddaert’s usage being overlooked. It is now acknowledged that this is the species named by Linne Picus undatus, so that the only note necessary is the admission of Picus rujus Boddaert to the synonymy of Celeus undatus (Linne).

Motacilla nigra.

This Boddaertian name (p. 24) is not included in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. X., p. 411, as a synonym of Setophaga ruticilla (Linne), though the figure, pi. 391, f. 2, to which it was given is there recorded.

Motacilla cinerea.

This name was allotted on p. 41 to the bird figured on pi. 674, f. 1, and though this figure is referred to as a synonym of Motacilla alba in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. X., p. 464. Boddaert’s name is not mentioned. In any case it is invalid on account of the prior Motacilla drierea (? Tunstall), Orn. Brit. 1771.

Ampelis grisea.

This name given on p. 43 to pi. 699 has not been determined by us. The plate appears to represent the female of some species of Cotinga or allied genus, but we have found nothing exactly agreeing.

Muscicapa eques.

We have not specifically identified the plate, 831 f. 1, to which the name was given on p. 51, but the figure appears to have been drawn from a specimen of the genus Hadrostomus.

Ardea nycticorax cayanensis.

This name provided on p. 54 for pi. 899 is not cited in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XXVI., p. 131, where it should he placed as a synonym of Nycticorax violaceus (Linne).

Charadrius xiger.

Though this name does not appear in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XXIV,, p. 32, as a synonym of Pluvianus œgyptius (Linné), the plate (918) to which Boddaert gave the above name (p. 55) is there included.

Ardea garzette major.

This name appears in the Catalogue of Birds, Vol. XXVT., p. 90, in the synonymy of Herodias alba (Linné), though the plate, 925, on which it is based is given in the synonymy of Herodias egretta (Gmelin), p. 95, which is correct. Boddaert’s name is earlier than Gmelin’s, but cannot be used on account of the still earlier use of Ardea major by Linné (Syst. Nat., Xllth Ed., 1766, p. 236), for a different bird.

American ornithologists, since the publication of the Catalogue of Birds, have made other alterations due to the recognition of Boddaertian names, as Wilsonia citrina ex Muscicapa citrina Boddaert, Vireo griseus ex Tanagra grisea Boddaert, while Say omis phœbe Latham is used instead of Empidias fuscus, based on Muscicapa fusca Gmelin not Boddaert 1783 nor Miiller 1776. Muscicapa carolinensis Boddaert, Motacilla senegallensis Boddaert and Certhia viridis Boddaert have not concerned us much, as all these names are invalid : the first-named seems an obvious synonym of Tyrannus tyrannus Linné.

Although we have attempted to account for all the names hitherto determined as well as overlooked, we do not claim absolute completeness, and we are sure anyone who attempts ¡to check our work will absolve us for errors committed in the ¡examination of this perplexing work. As an instance we quote a name which attracted us at the last moment, viz., “ p. 7. PI. 115, f. 2, Fringilla fusca Linn., 112.32.” This indicates that this is a Linnean name, but it seemed unfamiliar and recourse to Sherborn’s Index Animalium did not disclose such a name. Reference to Linne shows that he called his species 112.32 Fringilla bengalus, and this means that Fringilla fusca is a new name proposed by Boddaert. Should other cases occur, they will be very difficult of recognition.


By Gregory M. Mathews.

p. 76. Austrotis australis melvillensis, subsp. n.

Differs from A. a. derbyi in being more blue-grey above and also in being larger.

Type, Melville Island, Northern Territory, 3rd June, 1912.


the austral avian record [Voi. ni.



Owing to the kindness of Miss Haviland I am able to give a description of a chick and immature of the above bird. (For adult, see my Birds of Australia, Vol. III., p. 75, 1913.)

Female, juvenile.—General colour above dark brown, including the head, back, wings, and tail, the feathers margined or spotted with bright golden yellow, upper wing-coverts paler brown with lemon-yellow spots and margins ; bastardwing, primary-coverts and quills dark brown with white edgings to the tips of the feathers, white shafts to the quills and greyish-brown on the inner webs ; outer tail-feathers paler brown than the middle ones and the light pattern inclining to whitish ; base of fore-head, a small patch behind the eye and hind neck covered with whitish down which have dark bases on the latter ; lores and fore-cheeks golden yellow, the feathers centred with brown ; hinder cheeks and throat similar but paler; chin and upper throat covered with white down ; fore-neck and breast greyish-brown, the feathers marked with lemon-yellow ; sides of body lemon-yellow edged with dark brown which gives a barred appearance ; middle of abdomen and under tail-coverts creamy-white, the lateral under tail-coverts marked with brown; axillaries and under wing-coverts dusky brown. Collected on the 14th of August, 1914, at Golchika, Lower Yenesei, by Miss Maud

D. Haviland.

Nestling in doivn.—Dusky black on the upper surface, with golden yellow tips to the down more or less mixed with white, the predominating colour being golden-yellow. Under-surface dull white with blackish bases to the thighs and under-surface of the wings. Collected on the 21st of July, 1914, at Golchika, Yenesei, by Miss Maud D. Haviland.



Austfitvtr Avi an. Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, Englandi •

WITHERBY & CO., 326 Hicrri Holborn, London^ W.C.

April- 1th 191G.    •


Vol. III., No. 3.

April 7th, 191(5.


List of Additions of New Sttb-species to, and Changes in, my “ List of the Birds of Australia”.................. 53


By Gregory M. Mathews.

p. 9. Turnix maculosa yorki, subsp. n.

Differs from T. m. pseutes Mathews in being lighter.

Type, Cape York.

p. 10. Colcloughia melanogaster goweri, subsp. n.

Differs from C. m. melanogaster (Gould) in having the black on the chest not so extensive.

Type, Gowrie, Queensland.

p. 10. Austroturnix pyrrothorax intermedia, subsp. n.

Differs from A. p. berneyi (Mathews) in being lighter and from A. p. pyrrothorax (Gould) in being darker.

Type, Wyangarie, Queensland.

p. 11. Pedionomus torquatus goulburni, subsp. n.

Differs from P. t. torquatus Gould in being lighter.

Type, Goulburne, New South Wales.

A S53lbx a

p. 14. Leucomeljena noreolciensis queenslandica, subsp. n.

Differs from L. n. norfolciensis (Latham) in being lighter above.

Type, Queensland.

p. 21. Leucosareia melanoleuca minor, subsp. n.

Differs from L. m. melanoleuca (Latham) in being smaller in all its measurements.

Type, North Queensland.

p. 34. Neonectris griseus nutcheri, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. II., pi. 77, p. 92.

Type, Sydney, New South Wales.

p. 36. Prioeinus cinereus dydimus, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. II., pi. 81, p. 120.

Type, New Zealand.

I designate as the type locality of Procellaria cinerea Gmelin Kerguelen Island.    ,


Differs from A. 1. leucocephala (Forster) in being smaller. Type, Sydney, New South Wales.

p. 38. Macronectes giganteus dovei, subsp. n.

Differs from M. g. giganteus (Gmelin) in its smaller size. Type, Sydney, New South Wales.

p. 39. Halobjena c^rulea victoria, subsp. n.

Differs from H. c. ccerulea (Gmelin) in being smaller.

Type, Victoria.

p. 40. Pseudoprion turtur nova, subsp. n.

Described and figured in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. II., pi. 93, p. 217.

Type, Sydney, New South Wales.

p. 42. Thalassogeron chrysostoma alexanderi, subsp. n.

Differs from T. c. culminaius (Gould) in not having the yellow of the bill so pronounced ; the bill is also smaller. Type, West Australia.

p. 43. Diomedella cauta rohui, subsp. n.

Differs from D. c. cauta (Gould) in having a brownish bill (not blue-grey).

Type, Sydney, New South Wales.

p. 44. Hydrochelidon leucoptera belli, subsp. n.

Differs from H. 1. leucoptera (Temminck) in its shorter measurements.

Type, Lord Howe Island.

p. 46. Thalasseus bengalensis robini, subsp. n.

Differs from T. b. bengalensis (Lesson) in its smaller size. Type, Cape York, Queensland.

p. 48. Onychoprion fuscatus kermadeci, subsp. n.

Differs from 0. /. serrata in being larger and in having the outer web of the outer tail-feather not all white.

Type, Kermadec Island.

p. 50. Megalopterus minutus kermadeci, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. II., pi. 117, p. 417.    '

Type, Kermadec Island.

p. 50. Procelsterna cerulea kermadeci, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia, Vol. II.,” pi. 118, p. 426.

T3^pe, Kermadec Islands.


p. 52. Gabianus pacificus kingi, subsp. n.

Differs from 0. p. pacificus (Latham) in its smaller size. Type, Queensland.

p. 78. Plegadis falcinellus rogersi, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “Birds of Australia,” Vol. III., pi. 179, p. 394.

Type, Parry’s Creek, North-west Australia.

p. 81. Egretta garzetta kempi, subsp. n.

Differs from E. g. immaculata in its smaller size.

Type, North Queensland.

p. 87. Chenisctjs coramandelianus mackayi, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. I., pi. 202, p. 36.

Type, Mackay, Queensland.

p. 88. Chenisous ptjlohelltjs rogersi, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. IV., pi. 203, p. 39.

Type, Parry’s Creek, North-west Australia.

p. 88. Chenonetta jtjbata alexanderi, subsp. n.

Differs from G. j. jubata (Latham) in its smaller size.

Type, North-west Australia.

p. 91. Virago castanea alexanderi, subsp. n.

Differs from Virago castanea castanea (Eyton) in having a smaller, narrower bill.

Type, South-west Australia.

p. 92. Spatula rhynchotis dydimus, subsp. n.

Differs from S. r. rhynchotis (Latham) in its smaller size. Type, South-west Australia.


Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. V., pi. 240, p. 88.

Type, Katherine River, Northern Territory, p. 119. Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota minor, subsp. n. Differs from E. c. chlorolepidota (Kulil) in its smaller size. Type, North Queensland.

p. 127. Licmetis tenuirostris derbyi, subsp. n.

Differs from L. t. pastinator (Gould) in having a much smaller bill.

Type, Derby, North-west Australia, p. 128. POLYTELIS S WAINSONII * WHITEI, Subsp. 11.

Differs from P. s. swainsonii fDesmarest) in being smaller and lighter green and the yellow on the head more orange.

Type, Tubbo Riverina, New South Wales, p. 129. Spathopterus Alexandra rogersi, subsp. n.

Differs from S. a. alexandrce (Gould) in being lighter in colour generally.

Type, North-west Australia, p. 137. Neopsephotus bourkii pallida, subsp. n.

Differs from N. b. bourkii (Gould) in being paler.

Type, Central Australia, p. 139. Neophema splendida halli, subsp. n.

Differs from N. s. splendida (Gould) in not having the back of the head blue or the red breast so pronounced.

Type, South Australia.

p. 143. Cyphorhina plumífera neglecta, subsp. n.

Differs from C. p. plumífera (Gould) in lacking the big tuft of feathers over the bill.

Type, Southern Queensland.

p. 150. Uralcyon sylvia dydimtjs, subsp. n.

Differs from U. s. sylvia (Gould) in being paler underneath. Type, Tully River, Queensland, p. 151. Etjrostopodtjs mystacalis victoria, subsp. n.

Differs from E. m. mystacalis (Temminck et Laugier) in its paler coloration.

Type, Victoria.    '

p. 154. Heteroscenes pallidtjs tasmanicijs, subsp. n. Differs from H. p. pallidus (Latham) in its smaller size. Type, Tasmania.


Differs, from P. p. phasianinus (Latham) in its smaller size. Type, Cape York, Queensland, p. 160. Menura novjehollandi^ intermedea, subsp. n.

Differs from M. n. novxhollandice (Latham) in having shorter tail.

Type, Southern New South Wales, p. 161. HARRIWHITEA ALBERTI RTJEA, Subsp. n.

Differs from H. a. alberti (Bonaparte) in being much more rufous above.

Type, Southern Queensland.

p. 162. Rahcinta gen. nov. Type Atrichia clamosa Gould.

Differs from Atrichornis in having the tail much longer in proportion to the wing.

Rahcinta clamosa.

p. 166. Micrceca brtjnneicatjda tormenti, subsp. n.

Differs from M. b. brunneicauda Campbell in lacking the buff on the throat and in having the inner web of the three outer tail-feathers with a large whitish spot.

Type, Point Torment, North-west Australia.

p. 18S. Belchera rosea qtjeenslandica.

Differs from B. r. rosea (Gould) in being paler.

Type, North Queensland.


Differs from P. p. flavida (Ramsay) in being yellower on the under-surface and more brownish-green above.

Type, Johnstone River, North Queensland.

p. 176. Quoyornis georgianus warreni, subsp. n.

Differs from Q. g. georgianus (Quoy et Gaimard) in being lighter.

Type, Warren River, West Australia.

p. 177. Tregellasia capito barroni, subsp. n.

Differs from T. c. nana (Ramsay) in being brighter yellow below.

Type, Barron River, North Queensland.

p. 177. Tregellasia letjcops paira, subsp. n.

Differs from T. 1. albigularis Rothschild and Hartert, in having the black on the sides of the face almost meeting under the throat.

Type, Paira, North Queensland.

p. 180. Gilbertornis rufogularis zanda, subsp. n.

Differs from G. r. rufogularis (Gould) in being paler above and in the grey band on the breast being absent.

Type, Victoria, 14-9-1913.

p. 191. Symposiachrus trivirgatus stalkeri, subsp. n.

Differs from S. t. gouldi (Gray) in being lighter above and the under-surface much less huffish red.

Type, Inkerman, Queensland.

p. 192. Monarcha melanopsis pallida, subsp. n.

Differs from M. m. melanopsis (Vieillot) in being paler. Type, Cape York.


Differs from G. r. robusta (Latham) in its larger size.

Type, Victoria.

p. 194. Paragraucalijs 'lineattjs atjstini, subsp. n.

Differs from P. 1. lineatus (Swainson) in not being so heavily barred.

Type, New South Wales.

p. 198. Samtjela cinnamomea samtjeli, subsp. n.

Differs from S. c. cinnamomea Gould (restricted locality, Fink River, Central Australia) in being paler.

Type, Gawler Ranges, South Australia.


Differs from P. n. nigrogularis (Gould) in being paler.

Type, South west Australia, p. 202. Pomatostomus ruficeps bebba, subsp. n.

* Differs from P. r. ruficeps Hartlaub in having the chestnut on the head much deeper in colour.

Type, South Queensland.

p. 208. Leachena gen. nov. Type Epthianura crocea Castlenau and Ramsay.

Leachena crocea

..    ,, crocea

..    ..    tunneyi.

~p. 212. Origma solitaria pallida, subsp. n.

Differs from 0. s. solitaria (Lewin) in being lighter.

Type, Blue Mountains, New South Wales.

p. 217. Milligania robustirostris Liberia, subsp. n.

Differs from M. r. robustirostris Milligan in being darker above.

Type, Liberia Soak, West Australia.

p. 219. Geobasileus ashbyi, nom. n., to replace Acanthiza ftaviventris Ashby pre-occupied.

p. 223. Oreoscopus gutturalis boweri, subsp. n.

Differs from 0. g. gutturalis (De Vis) in being darker.

Type, Cairns, Queensland.

p. 223. Acanthornis gouldi, new name for Acanthiza magna Gould 1855, pre-occupied.

p. 226. Leggeornis elegans warreni, subsp.

Differs from L. e. elegans in having the females darker. Type, Warren River.

p. 230. Sphenura brachyptera victoria, subsp. n.

Differs from S. b. brachyptera (Latham) in being darker. Type, Victoria.

p. 234. Campbellornis superciliosus pallida, subsp. n. Differs from G. s. superciliosus (Gould) in being paler.

Type, South-west Australia.

p. 240. Bowyeria boweri kurandi, subsp. n.

Differs from B. b. boweri (Ramsay) in being darker above and below.

Type, Kuranda, North Queensland.

p. 248. Neositta leucoptera lumholtzi, subsp. n.

Differs from N. 1. leucoptera (Gould) in having the brown bar on the inner webs of the primaries much darker.

Type, Queensland (North?).


Differs from Z. g. gouldi Bonaparte in being darker, especially below.

Type, Warren River, South-west Australia.


Differs from Z. a. albiventris Reichenbach, in being whiter below, the under tail-covers much yellower and the back a uniform green.

Type, Cairncross Island, Queensland.

p. 269. Lacxjstroica whitei neglecta, subsp. n.

Differs from L. w. whitei North in being more buff below and darker above.

Type, Day Dawn, West Australia.

p. 270. Certhionyx variegatxjs neglecta, subsp. n.

Differs from C. v. variegatus (Lesson) in being smaller and paler.

Type, New South Wales.

p. 275. Caloptilotis macleayana johnstoni, subsp. n. Differs from C. m. macleaya (Ramsay) in being darker. Type, Cairns, Queensland.

p. 275. Meliphaga erenata petersoni, subsp. n.

Differs from M. /. frenata Ramsay in not being so decidedly marked on the sides of the head.

Type, Peterson’s Pocket, Cairns.

p. 275. Nesoptilotis elavicollis elindersi, subsp. n.

Differs from N. /. flavicollis (Vieillot) in having the yellow throat not so pronounced.

Type, Flinders Island.

p. 288. Dyottornis paradoxus westernensis, subsp. n. Differs from D. p. paradoxus (Daudin) in being darker. Type, Western District of Tasmania, p. 306. Sphecotheres maxillaris boweri, subsp. n.

Differs from 8. m. vieilloti (Vigors and Horsfield) in having the feathers of the tail narrower, the abdomen not so white, and the grey on the lower throat more extensive.

Type, Cairns, North Queensland.

p. 315. Strepera fuliginosa colei, subsp. n.

Differs from S. /. fuliginosa in being brownish not black, and in having the white bars to the primaries hardly noticeable.

Type, King Island.

The following changes are necessary in my “ List of the Birds of Australia.”

p. xxvi. Lorius (Larius) Boddaert 1783, will replace Eclectus Wagler, not Eclectis Hubner 1826.

Lorius pectoralis

,,    ,,    pectoralis

,,    ,,    macgillivrayi.

p. 7. Ypsilophorus Mathews will replace Synoicus Gould 1843, not Synoicum Phipps 1774.

Ypsilophorus ypsilophorus

,,    ,,    ypsilophorus (synonym    Y. y.

diamenensis Gould)

,,    australis

,,    ,,    sordidus

,,    ,,    cervinus (synonym Y.    y. mel-

villensis Mathews) ,,    ,,    rogersi (synonym Y. y.    mungi



p. 12. If Ptilinopus Swainson 1825 be changed to Ptilopus, this name is preoccupied by Schönherr 1823.

Reginopus regina

„    „    regina (synonym R. swainsonii Gould)

„    ..    ewingi (synonym R. r. melvillensis


p. 50. Leucanous Mathews will replace Gygis Wagler, not Gy g es Bory de St. Vincent 1825.

Leucanous alba „    ,, alba

„    . „ royana.

p. 59. Eupodella Mathews will replace Eupoda Brandt 1845, not Eupodes Koch 1835.

Eupodella verida.

p. 60. Elsey omis Mathews will replace Elsey a Mathews (pre-occupied).

Elseyornis melanops

„    „    melanops    (synonym E. nigrifrons

(T. et L.)

russata (synonym E. m. marngli


p. 65. Heteractitis Stejneger 1884, will replace Heteroscelus Baird 1858, not Heteroscelis Latreille 1825.

Heteractitis incanus

,,    ,,    incanus

,,    „    brevipes.

p. 72. Platyrhamphus Billberg 1828 will replace Limicola ~ Koch 1816, not Limicula Vieillot 1816.

Platyrhamphus falcinellus

,,    ,,    falcinellus

.,    ..    sibirica.

p. 81. Cosmerodius Gloger 1842 will replace Herodias Boie 1822, which is a synonym of Egretta Forster.

Cosmerodius albus

,,    ,,    albus

,,    ,,    syrmataphorus (synonym C. a. neglecta


p. 89. Ctenanas Mathews will replace Leptotarsis Eyton, not Leptotarsus Guerin 1831.

Ctenanas eytoni

,,    ,, eytoni

,, munna.

p. 121. Manopsitta Mathews 1913.

Manopsitta coxeni

,, diophthalma ,,    ,,    diophthalma

,,    „    leadbeateri

,,    ,,    boweri.

p. 129. Northipsitta Mathews will replace Spathopterus North, not Spathoptera (Lath.) Serv. 1835.

Northipsitta alexandræ

,,    ,,    alexandræ.

,,    ,,    rogersi.

p. 143. Megapodargus Mathews will replace Cyphorhina Lesson 1843, not Cyphirhinus Schonherr 1826.

Megapodargus papuensis

   ,,    papuensis

,,    ,,    baileyi (synonym M. p. rogersi

„    plumifera    Mathews)

,,    ,,    plumifera

,,    ,,    neglecta.

p. 161. Austropitta Mathews will replace Coloburis Cabanis and Heine 1859, not Coloburus Dumeril 1853.

Austropitta versicolor

,,    versicolor    (synonym A. strepitans

..    intermedia    (T. et L.)

,,    ,, simillima (synonym A. hreffti


p. 175. Iredaleornis Mathews will replace Heteromyias Sharpe, not Heteromyia Say 1825.

Iredaleornis cinereifrons

,,    ,,    cinereifrons

,,    ,,    athertoni.

p. 192. Oraucalus Cuvier 1816 will replace Coracina Vieillot 1816, not Coracinus Pallas 1814.

Oraucalus novæhollandiœ








..    novæhollandiœ

..    melanops

..    westralensis

subpallida    (synonym    O. n.

didimus    Mathews)

.,    connectens

hypoleuca    -

,,    hypoleuca    (synonym O. h.    apsleyi

,,    parry i    Mathews)

,,    stalkeri



robusta mentalisvictor iœ.

p. 212. Origmella Mathews will replace Origma Gould, not ~Orygma Meigen 1830.

Origmella solitaria


p. 235. Angroyan Illiger 1816 will replace Pseudartamus Mathews.

Angroyan cyanopterus

,,    ,,    cyanopterus.

,,    ,,    perthi.

p. 262. Plectoramphus Gray will replace Plectorhyncha Gould, not Plectorhinchus Lacépède 1800.

Plectoramphus lanceolatus

,,    ,,    lanceolatus

,,    ,,    neglecta.

p. 273. Dorothina Mathews will replace Meliphaga Lewin 1808, not Melophagus Latreille 1802.

Dorothina lewini

,,    ,.    lewini

,,    ,.    nea

„    ,.    mah

„    ,.    ivi

virescens „    ,,    virescens

,,    ,,    sonora

,,    ,,    hroomei

,,    ,,    insularis

„    ,,    murchisoni

   ,,    decipiens

,,    ,,    rogersi

,, cooperi „    ,,    forresti

,,    ,,    walgetti

,,    ,,    westwoodia

,, versicolor ,,    ,,    versicolor

,,    ,,    clelandi

,, fasciogularis -,    ,,    fasciogularis

,,    ,,    hrunnescens

,,    frenata

   ,,    frenata

..    peter soni.

p. 277. Hemiptilotis Mathews will replace Tricoder e North 1912, not Tricoder es Gmelin 1843.

Hemiptilotis cockerelli.

p. 305. Amimeta Mathews will replace Mimeta V. & H. 1827, not Mimetes King 1826.

Amimeta sagittata

,,    ,,    sagittata

,,    ,,    subajfinis

,,    ,,    affinis

,,    ,,    blaauwi

,, flavocincta ,,    ,,    flavocincta

,,    ,,    parryi

,,    ,,    kingi (synonym    A. /. madaraszi


Neomimeta gen. nov. Type Mimetes flavocinctus King.

Neomimeta flavocincta

„    „    flavocincta

„    „    parry i

,,    ,,    kingi (synonym    N. /. madaraszi


p. 319. Pterodroma neglecta quintali, subsp. n.

Differs from P. n. neglecta (Schlegel) in being larger.

Type, Lord Howe Island (breeding).

p. 321. Saupopatis sanctijs adamsi, subsp. n.

Differs from S. s. vagans (Lesson) in being blue on the rump, and wings not greenish.

Type, Lord Howe Island.


Austral Avian Record


VOL. III. No. 4.


Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, England



Price Net.

WITHERBY & CO., 326 High Holborn, London, W.C. 1. July 21 at, 1917-

A <352>((oX    ||

Austral Avian Record (Voi. Ill


[Facing vage 69


Voi. III., No. 4.    July 21st, 1917.



New Subspecies and Notes on Species ..    . .    69

The Re-discovery of two lost Birds . .    . .    79

Notes on Some Extra-limital Parrot Names    . .    91

On a Collection of Birds from the Macleay

Museum, Sydney, N.S.W.    ..    ..    ..    95

Silvester Higgles, Ornithologist (With Portrait) 98


By Gregory M. Mathews.

The pages refer to my 1913 List.

p. 53. Arenaria interpres nova, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol.

III., pi. 125, p. 6.

Type, Rottnest Island, West Australia.

p. 67. Terekia cinerea australis, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. III., pi. 154, p. 226.

Type, Melville Island, Northern Territory.

p. 71. Erolia ferruginea wilsoni, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. III., pi. 162, p. 267.

- Type, Wilson’s Inlet, South-west Australia, p. 72. Limicola falcinellus rogersi, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. III., pi. 165, p. 279.

Type, Melville Island, Northern Territory, p. 74. Glareola pratincola parryi, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. III., pi. 171, p. 331.

Type, Parry’s Creek, North-west Australia, p. 107. Haliaetus australis new name.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. V., pi. 244, p. 148.

p. 109. Elanus scriptus victorianus, subsp. n.

Figured and described in my “ Birds of Australia,” Vol. V., pi. 250, p. 208.

Type, Victoria.

p. 114. Spiloglaux novaeseelandiae tasmanica, subsp. n.

Differs from S. n. clelandi in being lighter and in having a reddish tinge.

Type, Tasmania.

p. 147. Dacelo gigas watsoni, subsp. n.

Differs from D. g. mclennani North, in being darker above, -the brown markings on the tail being conspicuous : the dark marking below the eye is narrower.

Type, a male collected on the Watson River, North Queensland on the 15th of June, 1914.

p. 162. Atrichornis rufescens tweedi. subsp. n.

Differs from A. r. rufescens Ramsay in being darker below and lighter above.

Type, Tweed River, a male.

A. r. rufescens goes as far south as the Bellenger River.


Differs from P. p. personata (Gould) in having the throat patch much less pronounced.

Type, a male collected on the Watson River, North Queensland.

p. 192. Monarcha canescens claudia, subsp. n.

Differs from M. c. canescens Salvadori in being much lighter.

Type, a male collected on the Claudie River, North Queensland on the 16th of February, 1914.

p. 277. Tricodere cockerelli jardinei, subsp. n.

Differs from T. c. cockerelli (Gould) in having the ear-covert more orange, and in being lighter above.

Type, a male collected at Jardine Creek, North Queensland, on the 60th April, 1911.

p. 283. Xanthotis flaviventer watsoni, subsp. n.

Differs from X. /. filigera (Gould) in being lighter above : the yellow ear tuft is not so pronounced and the bill is thinnei.

Type, Watson River, North Queensland. Collected on the 3rd of July, 1914.

p. 304. Neopoephila personata watsoni, subsp. n.

Differs from A7, p. leucotis (Gould) in being darker on the under-surface.

Type, a male collected on the Watson River, North Queensland, on the 22nd July. 1914.

p. 312. Craspedophora magnifica clatjdia, subsp. n.

Differs from C. m. alberti (Elliot) in having the throat and upper bieast greener with the feathers rounder, not so pointed. It is also smaller, wing 173 mm.

Type, a male collected on the Claudie River, North Queensland on the 8th of October, 1913.


Female.—General colour of the upper surface brown with pale edges and sometimes white bars to the feathers ; crown of head rather paler than the back with buff edgings to the feathers ; sides of the crown, nape, and hind neck pale brown with buffy white bars and edgings to the feathers ; upper back and scapulars dark brown the feathers margined with buff ; lesser upper wing coverts dark brown with earth-brown margins to the feathers ; bastard-wing and primary coverts uniform pale brown ; primary and secondary flight-quills dark brown on the outer webs, paler on the inner ones which are white at the base the shafts of the feathers conspicuously white on the outer primaries, most of the secondaries have pale narrow edges at the tips ; lower back almost uniform ash-brown ; . rump and upper tail-coverts barred with white or smoky-white ; tail dark brown-white on the basal portion of the inner webs, the two middle feathers only slightly exceeding the lateral ones in length ; a pale eyebrow slightly indicated ; hinder face isabelline with dark narrow shaft lines to the feathers ; throat white with pale brown pear-shaped marks on the middle of the feathers, lower throat similar, but tinged with buff ; fore-neck, sides of neck, upper breast and sides of breast pale brown barred with white or buffy-white like the sides of the body and under tail-coverts ; breast, abdomen, and vent white ; under tail-coverts and axillaries pale brown barred with white ; quills below white at the base and brown on the apical portion like the lower aspect of the tail. Eyes and bill black. Tarsus pale blue black on the back. Toes and webs black. Total length 475 mm. : culmen

39 : wing 375 : tail 155 : tarsus 52. Collected at Broken Bay, New South Wales, on the 3rd of December, 1913.

This is the first authentic published record of Coprotheres in Australian waters.

This bird is larger than the male figured by me in my “ Birds of Australia.” which came from Alaska.

Stercorarius parasiticus visitori.

Female. General colour above smoke-brown with a hoary tinge ; the feathers at the base of the forehead whitish and those on the fore part of the head with pale edges, hinder crown and nape uniform brown somewhat darker than the back ; the feathers on the hind neck grey at the base and fringed with isabelline at the tips ; the feathers on the mantle margined with pale umber as also are some of the shore scapulars but rather darker ; marginal upper wing-coverts fringed with whitish or isabelline ; inner webs of the primary and secondary quills white on the basal portion, the shafts of the primaries flattened in structure and conspicuously white in colour but becoming dark at the extreme tips ; upper tail-coverts white, more or less tinged with isabelline, banded and very slightly tipped with brown ; tail white at the base— the white decreasing in extent on the outer feathers—and brown at the tip, somewhat darker on the two central feathers which are extended beyond the lateral ones and pointed in shape ; fore part of face including the eye smoke-brown ; chin dull white ; the feathers of the throat and sides of the hinder face white at the base with a pear-shaped mark of brown at the tips ; fore-neck and sides of the upper breast almost uniform brown ; remainder of the under surface white barred and fringed at the tips of the feathers with brown narrowly on the middle of the breast and sides of the abdomen, and broadly on the sides of the body, flanks and under tail-coverts ; axillaries also broadly banded and more or less isabelline as well as white ; under wing-coverts isabelline irregularly marked brown or ash-brown, some of the feathers on the margin of the wing are only fringed with white ; quill

lining white at the base and ash-brown on the apical portion ; lower aspect of tail brown becoming white towards the base. Eyes and bill black : tarsus pale blue, toes and webs black. Total length 455 mm. : culmen 33 : wing 310 : tail 169 : tarsus 45. This is the type and it was collected at. Broken Bay, New South Wales on the 11th of November, 1913.

On p. 167, for Petroica multicolor coccíneo, read Petroica multicolor boodang.

Muscícapa boodang Lesson, Journ. Aut. Globe “ Thetis,” Vol. II., p. 322, 1837, Sjnlney, New South Wales.

The following species have been added to the Australian List since Gould’s time. The quotations are where the species were added. Where only the author and date are given, look up original description.

The pages are from my 1913 List.

p. 4. Eudyptes serresianus Oustalet, Mathews, Emu, Vol. XVI., p. 184, 1917.

p. 10. Austroturnix olivii Robinson 1900. p. 12. Leucotreron alligator Collett 1898. p. 19. Petrophassa rufipennis Collett 1898. p. 33. Reinholdia reinholdi (Mathews) Salvin, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XXV., p. 381, 1896.

p. 34. Neonectris griseus (Gmelin) Salvin, ib., p. 388. p. 40. Heteroprion belcheri Mathews 1912.

p. 44. Hydrochelidon leucoptera (Temminck) Saunders, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XXV., p. 10, 1896.

p. 53. Btcrcorarius parasiticus (Linné) Campbell, Nest and Eggs Austr. Birds, p. 65, 1883.

: p. 68. Rhyacophilus glareola (Linné) Sharpe, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XXIV., p. 499, 1896.

p. 72. Limicola falcinellus (Brunnich) Mathews, Austr. Av. Record, Vol. I., p. 31, 1912.

Subspilura megala (Swinhoe) Mathews, ibp. 125.

p. 84. Butorides rogersi Mathews 1912. p. 91. Virago gibberifrons (Muller) Ramsay, Tab. List. Austr. Birds, p. 22, 1888.

p. 101. Leptophœthon lepturus (Daudin) Ramsay, Proe. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol. II., p. 203, 1878.

p. 128. Geoifroyus geoffroyi (Bechstein) Macgillivray, Emu, Vol. XIII., p. 105, 1913.    "

Lorius pectoralis (Muller) Mathews, Austral Av. Rec., Vol. II., p. 75, 1913.

p. 157. Lamprococcyx lucidus (Gmelin) Shelly, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XIX., p. 296, 1891.

p. 166. Microeca brunneicauda Campbell 1902. p. 172. Wüsonavis tenebrosa Hall 1901.

p. 177. Tregellasia leucops (Salvadori) Campbell, Nest and Eggs Austr. Birds., p. 152, 1901.

Kempiella kempi Mathews 1913.

p. 181. Mattingleya griseiceps (Gray) Ramsay 1874, Proc. Zool. Soc., p. 604 as Eopsaltria inornata. This name was put as a synonym of E. australis in Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. VIII., p. 177, 1883.

p. 190. Orphryzone lorealis De Vis 1895. p. 192. Monarcha canescens Salvadori 1875. This and Mattingleya griseiceps although added during Gould’s life were unrecorded by him.

p. 198. Samuela alisteri Mathews 1910. p. 208. Ashbyia lovensis Ashby 1911. p. 212. Eremiornis carteri North 1900.

p. 217. Acanthiza iredalei Mathews ; Zietz, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Austr., Vol. XXIV, p. 112, 1900, as A. tenuirostris. Milligania robustirostris Milligan 1903. p. 219. Geobasileus hedleyi Mathews 1912.

,, flaviventris Ashby 1910.

p. 222. Sericornis tyrannulus De Vis, 1905 p. 223. Oreoscopus gutturalis De Vis 1890. p. 233. Magnamytis woodwardi Hartert 1905.

.. housei Milligan 1902.

,,    dorotheæ Mathews 1914. .

p. 238. Colluricincla woodwardi Hartert 1905. p. 240. Bowyeria boweri Ramsay 1885.

p. 244. Bulestes mentalis (Salvadon) Campbell, Bull. No. 2, R.A.O.U., 21st February, 1911.

p. 269. Lacustroica whitei North 1910. p. 270. Macgillivrayornis da.udi Mathews 1914.

p. 273. Dorothina albilineata (or Meliphaga albilineata) H. L. White, 1917.

p. 279. Sacramela keartlandvNorth 1895. p. 300. Erythura trichroa (Kittlitz) Mathews, Austi. Av. Record, Vol. II., p. 103, 1914: p. 312. Prionodura neiotoniana De Vis 1883. p. 314. Corvus bennetti North 1901.

,, cecilæ Mathews ; Sharpe, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. III., p. 38, 1877.

(Forty-eight species total.)

The following species have occurred less than three times and can be put in a List by themselves.

3. Aptenodytes patagónica added by Hall.

13.    Globicera pacifica    „    ,,    Mathews.

24.    Crexcrex    „    ,,    North.

32.    Fregetta tropica    „    „    Mathews.

Procellaria cequinoctialis ,,    ,,    Mathews.

,,    ,,    Masters.

,,    ,,    Gould.

,,    ,,    Mathews.

p. 35. Procellaria parkinsoni

p. 37. Pterodroma melanopus ,,    • inexpectata

p. 53.

Copr other es pomarinus added by Mathews.

p. 68.

Bartramia longicauda

,, ,, Gould.

p. 70.

Pisobia subminuta

,, ,, Sharpe.

p. 91.

Querquedula querquedula

,, ,, Campbell.

p. 152.

Collocalia fuciphaga

,, ,. Mathews.

p. 163.

Hirundo rustica

,, ,, Gould.

p. 294.

Budytes flava

, ,, North.

p. 307.

Sphecotheres salvadori

„ „ Ingram.

p. 10.

Austroturnix olivii Robinson, 1900. So far this

species is

only represented by the unique type.

p. 222.

Sericornis tyrannulus De Vis 1905. The type of

this is lost, and to date it has remained indeterminable.

The following birds can be removed from the Australian List.

p. 32.

Fregettornis graliarius

p. 35.

Procellaria conspicillata

p. 41.

Diomedea epomophora

No occurrence.

p. 50.

Procelsterna cerulea Gygis alba

p. 65

Tringa ocrophus

]). 80.

Ardea cinerea

]>. 92.

Spatula clypeata

]). 106.

Butastur teesa

Data too unsatisfactorv.

]). 152.

Collocalia esculenta

}). 164.

Hypurolepis javanica

Note.—From the coloured plate in the “ Emu ” and a statement made there that the bird described was the same as some sent to me, I should say that Cinathisma cyaneoleuca Hull, is undoubtedly the same as Reinholdia reinholdi byroni Mathews. It was the receipt of these latter birds that compelled me to restrict the type locality of my bird to Five Islands, South of Woollongong (cf. Bull. B.O.C., Vol. XXXVI., p. 89, 1916),


p. 187. Mastersornis for Todus rubeculus Latham, to replace Myiagra Vigors and Horsfield, not Myagrus, Boie, Isis, 1826, heft. X col. 973 = Myiagrus.

Mastersornis rubeculus

,,    ,,    rubeculus

,,    ,,    ringwoodi

,,    ,,    yorki

,,    „    concinnus

,,    ,,    broomei

,,    cyanoleucus

,,    ,,    . cyanoleucus

,,    ,,    robinsoni

,,    i uficolhs

,,    ,,    ruficollis

,    ,,    cooperi

,,    tor memi

„    „    kempi.

p. 219. Keartlartdia for Acanthiza flavivenlris Ashby.

Keartlandia flavivenlris.


By Gregory M. Mathews.

Mr. Tom Carter, having occasion to return from England to West Australia on business, agreed with me that it was a fitting opportunity to make search for two birds collected almost one hundred years ago and of which no specimens existed. He undertook a thorough examination of the type localities of these birds and his results further enhance his great reputation as a field ornithologist, first brought under notice by his splendid notes from Point Cloates and his discovery of that peculiar endemic Australian genus Eremiornis (icarteri). Mr. Carter, who has now returned, proposes to detail his experiences in another place later, and here I give the technical history of the species with a short resume of Mr. Carter’s field notes. It is necessary to emphasize that this is one of the great items of recent ornithological progress in Australia. Macgillivray and McLennan’s discovery of the genera Lorius (= Eclectus olim) and Geoffroyus, Captain White’s re-discovery of Gould's Xerophila pectoralis, and now Mr. Carter’s collection of Malums textilis and leucopterus form three striking events in the last few years. While the first-mentioned is the most attractive the others are of even more value from the scientific viewpoint of Australian ornithology. While there may be new species still to be discovered in Australia, there is little left now that is a stumbling-block as the three last-mentioned were.

The history of the two birds re-discovered by Mr. Carter is fairly complex and until the original forms were re-determined we were faced by an unsatisfactory position. This is now for ever dispelled and Mr. Carter deserves all our thanks.

When the French Expedition in the “ Uranie ” and

Physicienne ” voyaged round the world, they called at Shark’s Bay and then Port Jackson. Most energetic collectors were attached whose names, Quoy and Gaimard, are now familiar, but mostly from the results of their later Voyage

in the “ Astrolabe.” This was due to a shipwreck on the former voyage, when their Australian birds were mostly lost as well as much other material. As one consequence only a scrappy account of the first voyage was published. They note with -pride, that in Shark’s Bay they met with new birds, two especially, the Mérion natté and the Merion leucoptère They published these two «new species and gave figures in the Atlas though only somp half-dozen birds were so treated. Before proceeding further I will give the data in connection with the publication of the work as it now proves important.

In the Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. Ser. 7, Vol. VII, April, 1901, p. 392, Sherborn and Woodward published the facts in connection with this work and from their figures, which I have verified, I get the following : The text was published in livraisons, 40-48 pages and 6 pis. in. each livraison, and at intervals (for it is the first half-dozen parts only which concern us) of about a month. These were noted in the Bibliographie Française and contents given in Eerussac’s Bulletin. From the latter (Bull. Sci. Nat. Vol. III., p. 220, 1824) : “ The following species will be figured in the next No., the descriptions occurring in this.” This is a rough idea of what was written regarding Livraison III. and in this connection was mentioned Malurus textilis. In the next volume, p. 85, 1825, about the fourth livraison, Desm(ar)est wrote : “ Cette livraison renferme les figures de sept oiseaux, dont les descriptions font partie de la précédente. Ce sont . . . Malurus textilis, Malurus leucopterus.” The third livraison was received, according to the former authority, on August 28, 1824, and the fourth on September 18, 1824.

Previous to these dates the birds had been fully described as in the XXXth Volume of the Diet. Sci. Nat. (Levrault), which was received at the same place before May 29, 1824, - Dumont published a good account of the same birds under the same names given by Quoy and Gaimard. The article “ Mérion ” was there given and as Dumont was very friendly with the above-named workers they furnished him with full particulars. Thus on p. 117, Dumont named Malurus textilis,

pi. 23, fig. 2, of the Atlas Zool. from Baie de Chiens marins, and p. 118 Malurus leucopterus, pi. 23, fig. 1, from lie Dirck Hartighs in Baie de Chiens marins. The quotation of the plates is undoubtedly from those prepared and shown to Dumont but not at that time published. Dumont mentions that the specimen of M. leucopterus had been lost in the shipwreck, but that a good painting by Arago had been preserved. If this painting were to be trusted then the bird differed greatly from Shaw’s Superb Warbler. This entry seems to have hitherto been overlcoked, but can be no longer, as it is the first introduction and the names must be cited as of Dumont.

No more particular locality than Shark’s Bay was given in the text either by Dumont or Quoy and Gaimard for Malurus textilis, but in the “ Table Explicative des Planches Oiseaux ” I find

" PI. 23, fig. 1. Merion Natte, de la presqu' lie Peron, a la baie des Chiens Marins,”

so that the type locality is Peron Peninsula, and not the Island as might be suggested. Later, this may become an important item, but as hereafter explained it does not seem of much concern at the present moment.

Though the birds had been well described and well figured, through ignorance of the importance of locality, the names were utilised for birds, not agreeing too. well, from East Australia.

Thus Gould, in his Birds of Australia, figured two New South Wales birds under the names above given, but later became doubtful regarding the accuracy of the attachment in one case but not the other. Thus in the Handbook, Vol. I., 1865, p. 330, he wrote under the heading “ Malurus leucopterus Quoy et Gaim.? ” : “I regret that I have not been able to clear up the doubt which exists in my mind, whether the present bird is or is not distinct from the one figured by Messrs. Quoy and Gaimard in the ‘ Voyage de l'Uranie,’ since, on applying at the Museum of the Jardin des Plantes for the purpose of examining the original specimen, it could not be found ; the

figure above quoted, if intended for this bird, is by no means correct, and it is, moreover, said to be from Dirk Hatich’s Island, on the western coast, a locality very distant from those in which my specimens were procured, New South Wales ; which circumstance strengthens my belief that that may be distinct ; besides which, the bird under consideration is supposed to be exclusively an inhabitant of the interior for I have never observed, it between thé mountain ranges and the coast, and it is scarcely probable, therefore, that it should inhabit an island like that of Dirk Hatich. In case they should prove to be different, I propose the name of Malums cyanotus for the bird from New South Wales.”

On p. 335, under the name Amytis textilis, Gould wrote • “ The bird figured in the c Voyage de l’Uranie ’ doubtless represents the present species. . . . The only place in which I have observed the Textile Wren was the plains bordering the Lower Namci.” He wrote this although he had described Amytis macrourus from West Australia concluding this “ Is evidently the representative of A. textilis of the eastern coast, to which it is very nearly allied, but from which ... it may at once be distinguished by its more robust form, and by the much greater length and size of its tail.” Notwithstanding the obvious discrepancies indicated above in the statements made by Gould, the compilers of 'the British Museum Catalogue of Birds continued the misusage of both names and consequently Australian authorities were unable to rectify them. It fell to the lot of an Australian ornithologist, our well-known A. J. Campbell, to indicate that the recognition of the Malurus leucopterus was quite wrong. A dark colored (black and white) Malurus was described in the Victorian Naturalist (XVII., p. 203) in April, 1901, as a new species Malurus edouardi. The specimens came from Barrow Island, Mid-West Australia.

In the Emu (October, 1901), Vol. I., p. 26, A. J. C. gave a note : “ Astray for 77 years ! Recently (April, 1901) I described a black and white Malurus (M. edouardi) in the Victorian Naturalist. Since I have been induced to refer to Quoy and Gaimard’s original figure of M. leucopterus, which

Gould queried, and substituted for the species his own blue and white figure (vol. iii., pi. 25). This transposition was apparently accepted as being correct by the “ British Museum Catalogue ” (Vol. IV., p. 290). In Quoy and Gaimard’s figure I at once recognised a generally fair drawing of edouardi. Should the black and white Wrens of Barrow Island and Dirk Hartog Island (isolated localities about 500 miles apart) eventually prove the same species, then after a lapse of 77 years the real M. leucopterus has been re-discovered, while Gould’s long-standing provisional M. cyanotus will become the proper name for the blue and white bird.”

In the next number (January, 1902), p. 65, a further note is given explaining pi. VI., which is an illustration of a mounted specimen of the Barrow Island bird (M. edouardi) for comparison with a reproduction of the original figure of Malums leucopterus from the Voy. de l’Uranie.

Simultaneously (Rec. Austr. Mus., Vol. IV., p. 209, Jan. 1910) North recognised the same facts stating that the note “ was sent last July to Melbourne for publication in the Victorian Naturalist but was temporarily withdrawn.” In the Emu, April 1902, p. 152, the editors make some caustic remarks regarding North’s action which seem quite out of place and moreover do not discuss his claim that it was due to his initiative that Campbell recognised his edouardi as being close to or identical with the original leucopterus. The matter then dropped, as no specimens were available from Dirk Hartog’s Island, so that finality could be achieved. In preparing my List I concluded the best solution was to consider them the same species, but until specimens could be actually compared leave the two as subspecifically distinct on account of the different localities. Against the Dirk Hartog form I added the note “ ? Extinct.”

Mr. Tom Carter has proved that it is not extinct.

Regarding Malurus textilis the collection of specimens brought forward the interesting fact that these birds were very local and that many subspecies could be distinguished when birds were procured. Thus Milligan described an

Amytis gigantura from Mount Magnet, West Australia, and then North differentiated the Meerenie Bluff, Central Australia, form from the New South Wales bird Gould and he recognised as M. textilis Q. & G. Then Carter described the form from Broome Hill, but later concluded this was Gould’s A. macrourus. When I drew up my Reference List I described another form from Cardinia, south-east of Coolgardie, and I named the New South Wales form as it was obvious it could not be the Shark’s Bay bird. Since then more forms have been named but the typical Malums textilis had never been seen. Thus a very important factor was still wanted and now Mr. Tom Carter has completed this by the collection of birds from the original place. The extreme value of such work cannot be overestimated.

Mr. Carter’s field notes (abridged) are here given :

Nesomalurus leucopterus. This Black and White'Wren was one of the commonest species on Dirk Hartog Island, but the full plumaged males were, almost invariably, exceedingly wild, while the females and immature males were tame, and could always be 4 chirped ’ close up, often to within a distance of three feet, and would remain there as long as one kept still. If an adult male is come upon suddenly, say by one’s going quickly round a bush, it may remain motionless for a few seconds. . . It then flies quickly and if followed it keeps taking longer flights every time it is approached and eventually is lost to sight. Once, on open ground, I came upon a full plumaged male perched on a dry stick about 3 feet off the ground. There was no cover for me to take and I had to approach it openly and it remained motionless until I got close up. It was no use to try to ‘ chirp ’ up male birds, but at times when a party of females and immatures were intently watching me and listening to my ‘ chirping,’ the male was seen lurking in the dense foliage of a neighbouring bush, but would not openly expose itself. The full-plumaged male, as a rule, is accompanied by a party of six to ten females and immature, and leads them away out of danger at high speed, necessitating running to keep them in sight. One or two of

the birds keep dropping out of sight, and eventually one finds that the whole party has vanished in the scrub. The note |(song) is a similar musical trilling to that of Mai. leuconotus, but is not uttered nearly so frequently. This species usually runs on the ground at great speed, occasionally hops ; they are very skilful in flying perpendicularly into the air, from a bush, and catching small insects on the wing. It apparently breeds in September, as a quite recently fledged young bird was noted on Oct. 9th and many of various sizes about Oct. 18. None of this species were seen or obtained by me on the mainland, where the dividing arm of the sea is barely one mile in width, but was replaced by Malums leuconotus which was fairly common.

Diaphorillas textilis carteri from Dirk Hartog Island. Apl. 29, 1916. Walked out from my camp at GovernmentWell, near north-east corner of the island, among coast sand hills. On the western slope of the last ridge, saw a bird dart out of a bush close to me, and run at great speed from bush to bush with head outstretched and tail horizontal. It looked like a rat. I squeaked with my lips and it stopped running, creeping about on the ground, below short bushes close to me, like a Ground Thrush. It kept well concealed affording only a glimpse now and then. . . . About fifty yards further along the slope of the same sandhill I caught sight of a bird, low down in a large wattle bush. I squeaked with my lips, and it rapidly climbed, like a Parrot, to about six feet above the ground, then turned, facing me, with head down, wings and tail expanded and.feathers ruffled out. Neither of the above birds uttered any noise that I could hear.

“ Oct. 17th. Saw a bird, that at first I thought was a Calamanthus fly from an open place off the ground to under the shelter of a mass of bushes. I crawled there on hands and knees, and squeaked with my lips. At once Diaphorillas textilis came in sight under a mass of bush within eight feet of me and with outspread drooping wings and feathers puffed out uttering a low scolding note, ran backwards and forwards keeping well under shelter of the bushes.

“ Oct. 22. Saw birds running at great speed with tails erect from one clump of bushes to. another. Occasionally the birds hopped, but mostly ran at speed. .

'' Nov. 4th. Twice I saw a bird run from one bush to another then it flew well.about twenty-five yards into the bottom of? a big wattle bush. Its flight was straight, not .undulating with tail slightly drooping. Later as I approached another about four feet from the ground, it dropped to ground and J disappeared.

“ Nov. 10th. Mr. Lloyd" came to station and said he saw a Grass Wren come out of the scrub and flutter along the road for some distance uttering a squeaking noise. The dogs had frightened the bird out of the scrub on to the road.

Diaphorillas textilis textilis. Jan. 2, 1917. On several occasions previous to this date, I had seen a single, and once a pair of birds, in low scrub near Denham on Peron Peninsula that I felt sure were Diaphorillas. One day I had a shot at one with No. 10 shot, but although the bird seemed to be hit, L lost it in scrub. For eight consecutive days I was hunting round the vicinity when I saw a bird moving in the bottom of the scrub. I chirped with my lips and at once it emerged from below bush, and ran away from me with wings drooping and feathers puffed out, to underneath a dense “ needle ” bush, under whose shelter it paused. I had not a very clear view of it, but shot and killed it, a male Diaphorillas textilis with testes enlarged. In measurement it is much the same as Dirk Hartog birds, but the general plumage is darker, brighter, and with bolder markings than any from Dirk Hartog Island. The Peron bird is much more wary than the others.”

The above note refers absolutely to the typical form named by Dumont and Quoy and Gaimard and figured by them.

The following is a description of the two species.

Nesomalurus leucopterus.

Adult male. Head, mantle, outer upper wing-coverts, lower back, upper tail-coverts, sides of the face, throat and entire under-surface of the body glossy blue-black with steel-

blue reflections chiefly on the head, sides of the face, and ¡sides of the body ; a tuft on the sides of the breast, inner upper wing-coverts, upper back, scapulars and long innermost secondaries silky white—the upper back and scapulars overlapped by the dark elongated feathers of the mantle ; primary and secondary quills pale brown, some of the inner ones of the latter darker and partially white, outer-webs of primaries edged with faded blue ; tail-feathers blue, the outer feathers paler at the tips, with narrow dark obsolete bars which gives a more or less waved appearance ; under wing-coverts dark brown or blackish, paler and inclining to whitish on the greater series like the basal portion of the inner quills below, remainder of the flight-quills on the undersurface hair-brown ; lower aspect of tail dark invisible blue. Bill black; eyes dark hazel ; legs brownish purple, feet darker. Total length 112 mm. ; culmen 9, wing 44, tail 55, tarsus 19. Collected on Dirk Hartog Island, West Australia, on the 30th of September, 1916.

Adult female. General colour above rusty earth-brown including the head, back and wings, the sides of the face, sides of the body, thighs and under tail-coverts similar but rather more rufous on the flanks and under tail-coverts, tail pale greenish blue, paler on the outer feathers ; some of the feathers edged with white at the tip ; primary quills edged with hoary-white on the outer-webs ; under wing-coverts buffy-white ; under-surface of flight-quills rusty brown, paler on the basal portion of the inner ones : lower aspect of tail pale greenish blue. Bill pale reddish, eyes dark hazel, legs and feet purplish flesh. Measurement, about the same, but the tail perhaps longer than in the males Collected on Dirk Hartog Island, West Australia, on the 9th of October, 1916.

Diaphorillas textilis carteri, subsp. n.

Adult male. General colour above and below earth-brown tinged with rufous and streaked with white ; the feathers on the top of the head, hind-neck, back, upper wing-coverts,

and sides of the face are disintegrated in structure, lined along the shafts with white followed on each side by black and margined by rusty earth-brown—the last colour is developed more extensively on the back and -the upper wing-coverts are inclining more to rufous ; flight-quills brown with pale outer edges and rufous-buff margins to the inner-webs: : tail-feathers brown with pale disintegrated edges and narrow dark obsolete bars which give a waved appearance ; throat, fore-neck and breast also lined with white, with rufous margins to the feathers ; middle of abdomen paler and inclining to whitish and more uniform earth-brown on the lower flanks: axillaries, under wing-coverts, and inner edges of the quills below rufous ; remainder of the under-surface of the flight- quills brown like the lower aspect of the tail. Bill bluish horn. I mouth yellow, eyes light hazel, feet and legs purplish brown. I Total length 192 mm. ; culmen 13, wing 68, tail 93, tarsus 25. ! Collected on Dirk Hartog Island, West Australia, on the 18th of May, 1916.

Adult female. Differs from the adult male in having a dark chestnut patch of feathers on the sides of the body.

I have compared a Dirk Hartog specimen of Nesomalurus leucopterus with a Barrow Island bird Nesomalurus edouardi and note the following differences : The former has a distinctly stouter bill, recalling the original figure which appears to have exaggerated that feature to call attention to it : the white markings on the scapulars extend on to the secondaries which are pure white, while in the latter they are brownish with white edgings : the wing in the Barrow Island form is • noticeably longer. As no series are available these characters may not be constant, but as Campbell emphasized, the localities are five hundred miles apart and consequently the forms must, for the present, be regarded as subspecifically separable.

For these dark Blue Wrens I proposed the new generic name Nesomalurus, but Mr. Carter suggests that as the Dirk Hartog form is replaced by the blue and white species on the

mainland.and as in habits, note, etc., it is essentially identical, it may be simply an island evolution of the blue and white :orm. Moreover, he adds that the two species of the latter I recognised in mv List, viz., Hallornis cyanotus and Hallornis leuconotus, are identical. I have alwajs been troubled about this item and am inclined to agree with Mr. Carter, but at present do not know which name has priority, although apparently the latter. In which case the species would read—

Hallornis leuconotus,

Hallornis leuconotus leuconotus.

Interior of South Australia.

Hallornis leuconotus cyanotus. Coastal New South Wales, Queensland. Victoria and South Australia and South Australia.

These seem scarcely separable.

Hallornis leuconotus exsul. West Australia.

Hallornis leuconotus per plexus is a synonym of this form.

The subject of the Dark Blue Wrens is more complex than at first appears. While it may be quite true that the Dirk Hartog and Barrow Island Wrens are simply melanistic products of Hallornis, we cannot jump to this conclusion without considering the New Guinea so-called Malurus and Todopsis. The latter genus was proposed for large birds of Malurus (cyaneus) coloration, and has since been regularly recognised even by genus lumpers. Under Malurus has been classed a New Guinea species of similar coloration to the Dirk Hartog species, but comparison shows it to have had an entirely different origin to that suggested for the latter. The New Guinea species Malurus alboscapulatus Meyer, has a much longer broader bill, recalling the formation of the bill of the New Guinea Todopsis, and quite different from the Dirk Hartog Island bird's bill, it also has a different wing formula and a noticeably shorter square tail. It is obviously not a Malurus even in a broad sense, and as I have seen no generic name yet proposed for it I introduce the new name of—


and name Meyer’s species as type Devisornis alboscapulatus. Whether it should be associated with Todopsis or not may be debated, but the close relationship of Todo'psis to Malums seems indubitable from colour values alone. In recent classifications they have been very widely divorced, but I think this is quite unnatural. If it be proven they have no close alliance then we cannot hypothetise upon the near alliance of the Dirk Hartog form and the mainland Hallornis, but must wait anatomical investigation.


One of the earliest books dealing with Indian Zoology, entitled Indische Zoologie, by J. R. Forster, appeared in 1781, the preface being dated October 12. Appended thereto was a Specimen Faunulw Indices, wherein was given a List of Indian Animals in a binomial manner. The names were accompanied in most instances by citations of figures and were generally of Linnean usage. As many were noted from other sources a binomial name was utilised for these. Under the genus Psittacus I find the following species listed :

p. 40. Psittacus eupatria Lin. PI. enl. 239.

amboinensis PI. enl. 61? 240.


borneus Lin. Edw.    173.

,,-    alexandri Li in Edw^ 292.

,,    ornatus Lin. Edw.    174.

,, cristatus Lin. Edw. 160, PI. enl. t. 14.

,,    galeatus crist. 317.

,,    niger crist. 316.

,,    erythroleucus.

,,    garrulus Lin. Edw.    172

,,    domicella Lin. Edw. 171, PI. enl. mas. 119

,,    lory Lin. Edw. 170, PI. enl. 168.    [fern.

,,    lucionensis Lin. PI. enl. 287.

,,    festivus Lin.

,,    accipitrinus Lin. Edw. 165.

„    sordidus Lin. Edw.    167.

,,    chrysopterus Lin. 293.

,,    pullarius Lin. Edw.    237,    PI. enl. 60.

„    galgulus Lin. Edw.    293,    6?

,, passerinus Lin. Edw. 235, 293 f 2.

,,    cceruleus pict nost.

novece guince pict nost et Vosmaer.

p. 40. Psittacus japonicus.

luteus macrourus

Ducissa de Portland.

amboinensis Briss 231.













iavensis crist






gutture luteo



The acceptance of this work will necessitate a few alterations in the nomenclature of the Parrots and those bearing upon Australian species I have incorporated in my Birds of Australia. I here give a few superficial notes on the extra-limital changes that appear worthy of consideration.

Thus Psittacus galeatus crist, based upon Edwards 317, is earlier than sulphureus Gmelin and there is the point whether galeatus should not be recognised : the “ crist ” is the debatable item.

I have already indicated that Forster’s Psittacus molluccensis prohibits the continuation of Cacatua moluccensis ex Psittacus moluccensis Gmelin of later date.

In the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., p. 526, 1891, Salvadori used for a species the name Loriculus indicus taken from Psittacus indicus Gmelin, p. 349, not of p. 318. This usage was incorrect and the next name was Psittacus asiaticus, provided by Latham when he recognised the double usage. However Forster proposed a Psittacus indicus prior altogether to Gmelin but again not for either of Gmelin’s forms. For the second part here dealt with

Forster had provided the name Psittacus beryllinus, so that the species must be called

Loriculus beryllinus Forster

admitting that the genus name Loriculus is valid, though Coryllis appears to be preferable. If so, Coryllis beryllinus.

The other new names proposed by Forster are mostly either synonyms or preoccupied, but should be quoted in synonymy by specialists. One other change seems necessary, however, as Forster’s Psittacus bengalensis is equivalent to Gmelin’s species of the same name, a species of " PaloeornisP Gmelin’s name was only comparatively recently displaced by onerosa, taken from Boddaert and now the better known name may be reverted to. As I have shown that Psittacula Cuvier is the correct genus name for this group, the name to be used will be

Psittacula bengalensis Forster

instead of Palceornis rosa, Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., p. 453.

Another item may be noted, viz., Psittacus varius appears to be the Trichoglossus now known as cyanogrammus Wagler. •No change is to be made as Forster’s name is later than Muller’s choice, of the same combination in 1776.

In the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XX., p. 42. 1891, appears a species Calliptilus solitarius. The species name is based on Psittacus solitarius Latham, Index Ornith. Suppl., II., p. xxxii., 1801. There is, however, an earlier usage of this combination by Suckow in the Naturg,

II. (i), p. 334, 1800, for a different species.

The next synonym is P. vaillanti Shaw, Nat. Misc., pi. 909, 1809. The date according to Allen (Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. XXXI., Art. 1, p. 13, Mch. 4, 1912) should be May 1, 1810. The name is preoccupied by Latham, Index Ornith. Suppl. II., p. xxn., 1801. The next name is given by Salvadori as Psittacus coccineus Shaw, Gen. Zool. VIII., 2, p. 472, 1811, followed by Psittacus phigy Bechstein, Kurze

Ueb, p. 81, pi. 9 f 2, 1811. I have shown in connection with Psittacus geoffroyi that this chronology is wrong, Bechstein having-priority, but here it is of little account as Shaw’s name was invalid twice over, once by Forster in the paper previously dealt with. This leaves Bechstein’s name as the valid species name.

Salvadori rejected Phigys, G. R. Gray, Handlist, II., p. 154, 1870, noting: “The term Phigys, generally attributed to Lesson (Tr. d’Orn., p. 193, 1831) was not used by him as a generic name, but as a French name for the second tribe of the sub-genus LoriusP This is quite right, but this does not invalidate G. R. Gray’s correct introduction of the name at the place cited. This was earlier than Sundevall’s proposal of Calliptilus, so that wé arrive at the name to be used as Phigys phigy Bechstein,

instead of the one given in the Catalogue of the Birds in thé British Museum.


By Gregory M. Mathews.

The name of Macleay stands for progress in the scientific investigation of Natural History in Australia. The “ Che vert ” Expedition has never been surpassed in extent though advancement in methods of collection tend to diminish the results achieved in that historical survey. The sound of the name Macleay must nevertheless cause a tingle in the blood of every Australian naturalist, and the Macleay Museum compels a visit to every worker. It was therefore with the greatest of sorrow that I saw the ruin in connection with the birdskins still conserved in that Museum. Names I had noted were represented by the specimens in bad condition and I was horrified at their uncared-for state. The collectors who brought together these specimens might claim a share in my grief, but this would not appear to have been the case as the chief collector, the late George Masters, was afterwards curator of the Museum.

As I had not the time nor the collections at hand to study the rarities there represented, I asked permission for certain specimens to be forwarded to the British Museum. This was graciously granted and the birds have been compared with the material available at this end.

I here give notes of such specimens so that a record of the comparison may be available to other workers after the specimens have vanished through decay.

A specimen labelled “ Oceanites ($) oceanica Banks, 25 miles off Port Bowen, Queensland, May 27, 1875,” is probably the only authentic Queensland record.

A specimen labelled “ Fregetta ($) melanogaster Gould. Off the East Coast of N.S.W., May 1875.” This is the only authentic Australian procured specimen known to me. The skin shows slight whitish tips to back feathers ; whitish

bases to throat feathers show as an obscure whitish patch : the belly mark distinct but ill defined : lower tail coverts have long black tips with white bases and extend to end of tail : there is a whitish patch on the inner wing coverts and a brownish outer wing covert patch. Wing 146, tail 69, tarsus 41, mid. toe 27, culmen 15 mm. Nostrils tending upward. This is my Fregetta tropica australis. Gould had not an Australian specimen of this bird or g',allarius.

A specimen labelled “ Fulmarus (¿¡;) Parlcinsoni Gray, East Coast of N.S. Wales, May 1875.” This is the only skin that I know to have been secured in Australia. The measurements are : wing 346, tarsus 55, mid. toe 61, culmen 45 mm. It is worthy of remark that the above three very rare birds were all obtained in May 1875, suggesting that severe gales occurred in that month driving many seabirds northward, these three being brought to the notice of ornithologists.

' A bird labelled “ Pterodroma ($) Lessoni Garn, Richmond River. (Blown inland during the storm of 23 and 24 June, 1879.) ” - Another authentic record of this species.

A skin labelled “ Sterna melanorhyncha, Warrior Reef, July 17, 1875,” proves to be striata in winter plumage. The reference therefore of Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., Vol, I., p. 62, 1875, based on this specimen must be transferred from the synonymy of S. d. gracilis as given'in my Birds of Australia. Vol. II., p. 358, to that of S. s. melanorhyncha, p. 366.

The skin labelled “ Sterna (<£) nigrifrons Masters, Warrior Reef, Torres Straits, July 17, 1875 (Type) ” is a specimen of S. gracilis (the Australian form of S. dougalli) in full plumage. In the dried skin the bill is black and the feet yellow. The measurements taken are : wing 224, tail 155, tarsus 22, culmen 39 mm.

The specimen labelled “ Sternula {$) inconspicua Masters, Cape York, Sept. 29, 1875,” is in winter plumage and measures : wing 181, tail 69, tarsus 18, culmen 29 mm.

The skin labelled “ Podargus (<$) Gouldii Masters, Gulf of Carpentaria, June 1875 (Type of the species).” Was collected near Normanton. .

An important skin in poor condition is labelled “ Podargus plumiferus Gould, Moreton Bay/’ The coloration is typical, and the measurements are : wing 230, tail 245, tarsus 27, culmen, length from forehead 42, width at gape 50 mm.

A skin labelled “ Zosterops (<J) flavogularis Masters, Cape Grenville, June 14, 1875,” is the type of the species and has the wing 59 mm.

Other birds I examined are :—

Atrichia (<$) clamosa Gould. K. G. Sound.”

Psophodes nigrogularis Gould. King George’s Sound.”

Geopsittacus occidentalis Gould. S. Australia.”

Euphema (<J) splendida Gould. S. Australia.”

Catarractes chrysocome Lath. Tasmania.”


By Gregory M. Mathews.

In- this Record I have previously endeavoured, to elucidate the writings of Silvester Diggles, and to a great extent, through the co-operation of many friends, have been successful. I now propose to place here the facts concerning the life-history of this little-known worker.

Silvester Diggles was born (at Liverpool, England) on January 24, 1817. He was married at Liverpool to Miss Eliza Bradley, daughter of John Bradley, Classical Tutor and Lecturer on Natural Philosophy, of Windsor, Liverpool, on May 22, 1839. Three children were born, one son and two daughters, and apparently they lived quietly in England until the year 1853. I have recovered no details concerning this time, but in June, 1853, the family emigrated to Australia. They travelled in the Barque “William Ernst,” and arrived in Sydney, New South Wales, in November; they stayed in that city for about a year and then removed to Brisbane, Queensland, where the rest of Diggles’ life was spent.

Diggles must have been interested in Natural History at an early age and it is possible his. knowledge was extended through his acquaintance with his wife and father-in-law. At any rate he was an artist born and his pencil was cleverly utilised in the delineation of Natural History objects.

I have before me a sketch-book covering the objects met with on the voyage out and certain items just after he landed. As an enumeration will lead to a better appreciation of the ability of this little-understood man, I here give some details.

The first drawing is of a Medusa “ met with in great numbers near Lisbon, June 21, 1853.” The second is a picture of “ The Deck, 1st July.” Then follows another Medusa, a Portuguese Man-of-War, a third Medusa painted in three positions and a portion of the “ Marginal Tentacle Magnified 16 Diams.” These sketches are excellent in design, coloring

and detail. Then small sketches of some more Medusae and of an Actinia “ attached to the Medusae by the footstalk. ” A good picture of Velella lata was given and a couple of small sketches of Devil’s Tower, 350 feet high, Bass Strait from the North and from the West.

A series of paintings of Petrels’ heads and feet interest us much more.

The first is “ Head of Great Black Petrel, expanse of wing 7 feet. Sept. 6, 1853 ; length of bill 4 inches. Also Nov. 3.” In ink has been added Procellaria gigantea. Details are noted on the opposite sheet. “ Taken on 1st Septr. with line baited with a piece of pork. Length from extremity of bill to extremity of tail, 1 ft. 8 in. Expanse of wings about 3 ft. 6 in. After death the reddish colour of the beak and legs faded to a dirty colour.” A note is given, see Petrel No. 2, and these items refer to it, which is a nice painting of a head of Priocella antarctica Stephens, where, however, the date is given as Sept. 25th, 1853.

The next painting is the “ head of Albatross taken 13th Sept. 1853. Expanse of wings 7 feet, length of bill 4£ inches.” This can easily be recognised as Thalassarche melanojphris. Interposed among these paintings of birds’ heads is a sketch of the cabin of the “ Wm. Ernst.”

The next is the head of T. chrysostoma imm. Called “ Lesser Albatross, 9th Oct., 1853 ; length of bill 4| inches.”

Then comes “Head of Great Albatross, Oct. 11, 1853, expanse of wings 11 feet. Beak, 6 inches long.” This shows the head of Diomedea exulans, the bird showing the brown c.ap, the meaning of which is yet undetermined, being commonly ascribed to immaturity, though breeding colonies are known. The next is the head and foot of a “ Tern taken 11th October, 1853.”

A beautiful painting of the head of an “ Albatross, 12th Oct., 1853. Beak, 4 inches long. Expanse of wing, 7 feet.” is recognisable as that of Thalassogeron chrysostoma, while a detailed painting of the “ Foot of Albatross on the preceding page, 12 Oct., 1853,” follows.

The next is a nice painting of the head and shoulders and foot of a “ Petrel, life size, 17th Oct., 1853.” On the opposite page is a long note reading, “ Petrel taken on board the William Ernst on Monday 17th Oct., 1853. Lat. -39.39. Long. 116.56. Crown of the head and upper edge of wings brownish black. Round the eyes jet black radiating off into fine points towards the throat. Forehead white speckled with black. Stripe above the eye, throat, cheeks, breast and under-surface of abdomen aiid tail pure white. Back, wings and tail bluish grey, the latter tipped with white. A portion of the grey passes nearly round the neck forming a collar. Irides nearly black. Bill black. Feet and legs blue, swimming membrane between the toes light dull pink. (Eyelids black.) Drawn while yet alive. After my arrival in Sydney I presented the skin to the Museum. Length 13i inches. Spread of wing 2 feet; from the knee to the extremity of the middle claw 3 inches. Figure size of life. S. Diggles. Is this the Procellaria cerulea of Gmelin ? ” In pencil the drawing had been determined at some later time as “ Procellaria Cookii (G. R. Gray) Zoology of Erebus and Terror,” but Digglesdescription fixes his first supposition as the correct cne, as it undoubtedly applies only to Halobama ccerulea (Gmelin).

The last Petrel head is that of “ Albatross 29th Oct., 1853, Diomedea cauta,” of which the colouring of the bill is of a yellowish green, horny at the base of the culmen ridge and blackish horn at the tip.

A series of sketches of the islets of Bass’s straits and some more Medusa paintings, in some instances accompanied by descriptions, complete the sketches made on the outward voyage.

The scope and delicacy of the drawings indicate great interest in natural science and accompanying the last drawings of the Medusae is one dated “ Jan. 13th, 1855, going to Moreton Bay,” which shows this interest was still maintained whenever Diggles was at sea.

The remainder of the sketch book consists of sketches of “ Australian Bombyces, Sydney, 1854 ” ; a sketch of “ St.

Stephens Parish Church, Aug. 1854,” “ Banks of Nepean,” ‘'North Head, Port Jackson, 1854,” ‘Watson’s Bay and Crowdy Head, Port Jackson.” Then a sketch of the “ Glass Houses, Moreton Bay,” of the “ North Brisbane Hotel,” a portrait of “ Dundalli (an aboriginal), 5th Dec., 1854,” and a sketch of Sugar Loaf Point.

Diggles later utilised this same sketch-book for the paintings of larvae of butterflies and moths, which apparently he carefully studied, and against numbers are notes, “ Sent drawing home,” while on one is “ Sent by Stevens to Guenee.” These paintings are carefully made, good notes being attached as to food plants, dates being recorded in such a manner as to stamp Diggles as a splendid observer. I hope this account of this sketch-book will impress my readers as the book itself impressed me, with the fact that in Diggles Australia had another of the field naturalists for which she has been famed. Hitherto we have been content to judge him by his unfinished Birds, which was handicapped in every way.

In the year 1857 Mrs. Diggles died and five years later his boy died. In the meantime he married again, Miss Albina Birkett, and two sons were born, one Edward Silvester who died in 1893 and the other George Silvester. George Silvester writes : “I am still living in the house at Kangaroo Point (26/3/15) in which I was born,” and where Diggles himself lived from 1857 to his death in 1880.

The ability of Diggles was bound to be recognised in a small settlement such as Brisbane then was, and as he was a born musician as well as artist and naturalist, a rare combination, he was a foundation member of the Philharmonic Society and a member of the Philosophical Society. In connection with the former he was organist and conductor, and one of the promoters of the Queensland Museum through the latter. Hence the Queensland Government selected him as naturalist to proceed to Cape Sidmouth with the Australian Eclipse Expedition in 1871. I have traced no results of that Expedition.

From a contemporary’s recollections I gather that Diggles


was enthusiastic, and the more he did the more he wanted to do. Hence he overworked himself, and an illness in 1875 was succeeded by death on March 21st, 1880, at the age of sixty-three.

Diggles’ fame will stand on his work called the “ Ornithology of Australia,” the contents of which were detailed in this place Vol. II., p. 137 et seq., Jan. 28, 1915. These items were recovered from the Zoological Record, as I had seen no copy in the original parts. My friend, Capt. S. A. White, immediately furnished me with details of the parts from his copy in that condition. These showed the matter- previously given to need correction, and these were carefully added by my friend. Since then I have acquired a copy in parts so here give the contents of the parts in the order as published.

Names on Plates.    Names in Text.

Part I. 1866.

PI. 1. Milvus affinis 11 2. Dacelo gigantea 23

Amadina castanotis


Estrelda temporalis ruficauda

3. -j    phaeton

multicolor J

4. Nectarinia australis & Q 67 _ / Psephotus pulcherrimus ) „Q

6. Megapodius tumulus 94

Part II. 1866.

PI. 1. Athene boobook 16

a f Halcyon sanctus McLeayi

q í Pachycephala gutteralis d1 & $ 1 «o pectoralis $ & $ | 0

5.    Microglossus aterrimus 75a

6.    Tadorna radjah 111


P. glaucura    „

P. melanura    „

P. falcata (no plate)

Names on Plates.

Part III. 1866.

PI. 1. Elanus axillaris 11a i Rhipidura rufifrons 2 )    albiscapa

" '    picata


R. dryas (no plate) R. isura (no plate)

0 f Plectorhyncha lanceolata I ’ \ Xanthomyza phrygia

Platycercus flaviventris ^ barnardi

5.    Ardetta flavicollis 106

6.    Porphyrio bellus 107

Part IV. 1866.

PI. 1.

Caprimulgus macrurus 19



Ptilotis plumulus ornatus fasciogularis fuscus auricomis

3.    Scythrops novaehollandise 70

4.    Nymphicus novsehollandise $ & $ 82

_ f Phaps histrionica 1

5.    -    ^    ,    , l 91

chalcoptera j

6.    Herodias plumiferus 105

Part V. 1866.

PI. 1.

Ichthyiaetus leucogaste

r 2


Eurystomus australis 22

Malurus splendens








melano tus


Calyptorhynchus leachii 74

5 <

f Scolopax australis 1 . An

[ Rhynchaea australis j




Mycteriae australis 104


it VI.


PI. 1.

Ieracidea berigora 7

i Monarcha leucotis $ &

? !






Names on Plates.

3. Ptiloris paradiseus $ & $ 68

^ f Eudromias australis 1 ^

\ Erythrogonys cinctus J

5.    Malacorhynchus membranaceus 1 ] 3

6.    Plotus novaehollandiae 121

Names in Text.

M ; ilacho rhy nchus

Part VII. PL 1.


Strix walleri 14

2 i Acanthylis caudacuta ‘ { Cypselus australis i

0 f Colluricincla harmonica I    rufigaster


f Chry so coccyx osculans j

4.    i    lucidus . I 69

basalis .    |

Í Euphema aurantia    I

5. !    elegans    l 81

I Melopsittacus undulatus J

C. parvula (no plate)

C. minutellus (no plate)


Anseranas melanoleuca 109

Part VIII. 1866.

PI. 1.

Tinnunculus cenchroides 8

f Petroica fusca

2. ^ Drymodes superciliaris ) 39 [ bnmneopygia |'


Orthonyx spinicaudus A. 2. & juv. 43


Cacatua sanguinea 72


Ptilonopus superbus 87


Xema jamesonii 118

Part IX.


PI. 1.

Falco subniger 5


Menura superba 41

* i

r Chlamydera maculata 1 ^ cerviniventris f °


f Anthochcera mellivora ( g„ carunculata /


Calyptorhynchus funereus 75

. 6.

Cereopsis novae ho llandise 108

Part X.


PI. 1.

Podargus phalaenoides 18

" Graucalus mentalis ^ ^ hypoleucus J

anthochæra C. xanthonotus (no plate)


j amesom

Names on


Names in Text.


Arses kaupi i

3. 1


Myiagra nitida J 37 plumbea $ and 9

M. concinna (no platel

. Í Platycercus palliceps 1 _

~ 1



Carpophaga magnifica 88


Phalacrocorax sulcirostris 120


Part XI.


PI. 1. 2*

Falco frontatus 6

Oreoica eristata ^ Dicrurus bracteatus

o Í

Tropidorhynchus argenticeps |

Ü> i


corniculatus j


Cacatua leadbeateri 71


(Edicnemus grallaris 96b

(E. grallarius


Nyroc a australis 116

Part XII.


PI. 1.

Circus jardinii 12


Dacelo leachii 24 | Anthus australis \


j Cincloramphus cantillans >45

Cinclo rhamphus

rufescens J

Melithreptes albogularis validirostris

C. cruralis (no plate)

^    nigrugularis    gg Melithreptus (nigro)    gularis

*    brevirostris

lunulatus melano cephalus,

. M. chloropsis (no piate)

g i Trichoglossus ch'orolepidotus 1 S(

' ^    concinnus

6. Pelicanus conspicillatus 119 Part XIII. 1867.

PI. 1. Strix castanops 13

ÌArtamus sordidus

superciliosus 128 leucopygialis )

3. Sericulus chrysocephalus and 9 53 ^ i Euphema chrysostoma '    splendida rC and 9

5. Casuarius johnsonii 96a 6. Biziura lobata 117

Names in Text.

Part XIV. 1867.

A. longirostris (no plate) Mirafra

M. lutea (no plate) M. obscura (    ..

(' Sphenœacus galactotes . j    gramineu> 40

‘    ‘ j Acrocephalus australis

[ Myrafra horsfieldii

2.    Pitta macklotii 49

Í Ptilotis flavigula ]

3. j    Aligera 158

(    chrysotis j

4.    Cacatua eos 73

- Glareola orientals Qft I    grallaria Í "

6. Threskiornis strictipennis 102

Part XV. 1867.

PI. 1. Astur novæhollandiæ 9

2.    Tanysiptera Sylvia adult and young 27

3.    Ptilono rhynchus rawnsleyi 51

i Myzantha garrula

4.    !    flavigula 66

melanophrys J

_ f Carpophaga luctuosa 1 8Q ' I    leucomela J

g Pedionomus torquatus ] g~ ' Coturnix pectoralis

Part XVI. 1868.

PI. 1. Ægotheles novæhollandiæ 17.


2. <

Pardalotus rubricatus striatus afflnis

melano cephalus uropygiahs

A. leucogaster (no plate)


O. afflnis (no plate)

o J Oriolus flavocinctus ] g4 ' ’ [    vuidiw    j

4.    Corvus coro no ides 56

5.    Pezoporus formosus 83

Geopsittacus occidefltalis (no plate)

6.    Numenius australis 101

Part XVII. 1868.

PI. 1. Haliastur leucosternus 3 f Hirundo neoxena I

2. \    _    [21    H. fretensis (no plate)

I Atticora leucosternon J    ’

Names on Plates.


Acanthiza inornata lineata pyrrho pygia chrysorrhœa regulo ides diemenensis


^ f Oreocincla lunulata * \ Cinclosoma cinnamoneus

g f Trichoglossus swainsoni I gg ’ \    rubitorquis ] 0

6. Spatula rhynchotis 112

S. clypeata (no plate)

Part XVIII. 1868.

PI. 1.


Aquila audax 1

Estrelda bella






, Entomyza cyanotis Ì r.

' i    albipennis f 0

4.    Macropygia phasianella 93

5.    Falcinellus igneus 103 ti. Bermela jubata 110

Part XIX. 1868.

PI. 1. Athene strenua 15

Cracticus nigrogularis




0. picatus (no plate)



i Eopsaltria griseo gularis australis capito leucogaster J

Acanthorhynchus tenuirostris superciliosus

Melicophila picata



g f Cyclopsitta coxeni 1 s ( * \ Lathamus discolor J

6. Limosa uropygialis 99

Part XX. 1868.

PI. 1. Falco peregrinus 4

Machærirhinchus flaviventer


" Ì Piezorhynchus nitidus $ and Ç ( Myiagra latirostris (no plate) Seizura inquieta    J ’



Names in Text.

P. nigrogularis (no plate) C. longirostris (no plate)

Names on Plates.

2 i Sphenostoma cristata | t9 ' \ Psophodes crepitans / ~ '

4. Chalcophaps chrysochlora 90

g f Synoicus australis    ] QR

‘ 1    chinensis and $ J ' “

6. Podiceps australis 122

Past XXI. 1870.

PI. 1. Buteo melanostemon 10 o / Halcyon pyrrhopygia 1 9fi '    sordidus f

i Myzomela pectoralis 'i eiythrocephala |

3. <    sanguinolenta >63


l    obscura    J

4.    Polytelis alexandrae 76 g f Geopelia cuneata j ^

‘ 1    tranquillaj

p f Dendrocygna eytoni 1 j j ( u‘ \    arcuata J

There is not a date on the parts, neither are the plates numbered. The parts were sold at 10s. each.

Parts 1 to 5 have the Prospectus printed on the back wrapper.

Parts 6 to 16 have a list of subscribers printed on the back wrappers, except Part 11 which has the back wrapper plain and the front one different from all the others.

Parts 6 to 10 have the names of 85 subscribers.

Part 12-16 have the names of 92 subscribers, this was after the Melbourne Exhibition in 1867.


ustral Avian Record


WITHEREY & CO., 326 High Holborn, London, W.C. 1.

December 28th, 1917







Vol. III., No.

December 27th, 1917.





A Mistake of Latham’s

Avian Nomenclátor jal Notes

Additions and Corrections to Mathews' List ..    127



By L. Brasil, F.M.B.O.U.

In those lines where Latham speaks of his Sea Eagle, it is stated that the species “ was also met with in Botany Island by Captain Cooke'' (Gen. Syn. Birds, Vol. I., p. 31, 1781).

Now, Latham’s Sea Eagle is, as every one knows, no other than Haliaetus albicilla, a species so narrowly confined to the northern hemisphere that the possibility of its being met with in one of the islands of the South Seas is not to be conceded. We find here, therefore, an obvious mistake which was bound to be pointed out sooner or later. Sharpe did it. When he drew up the list of the species mentioned by Latham as existing in his time at the British Museum, Sharpe found, indeed, an opportunity of incidentally expressing his opinion that the accipitrine bird met with in Botany Island by the members of

the Cook’s second expedition “ must have been an immature Haliaetus leucogaster ” (Hist. Coll. Nat. Hist. Brit. Mus., Vol.

II., p. 90, 1906). It has been more recently G. M. Mathews' opinion also (Birds of Austral., Vol. V., p. 135, 1915).

But in the area of dispersion of Haliaetus leucogaster no locality is mentioned, as far as I know, under the name of Botany Island.* Here was, therefore, a difficulty which had to be removed.

In that purpose and when he thought it right to justify his previous choice of New South Wales as the type-locality for Cuncuma leucogaster, after having quoted Latham’s passage where the latter states his ignorance of the bird’s native place, his White-bellied Eagle brought back to England in one of the last circumnavigating ships, and now in the Leverian Museum ” (Gen. Syn. Birds, Vol. I., p. 33, 1781), G. M. Mathews goes on to say—-

“ The £ circumnavigating ships ’ referred to mean those under Captain Cook, and the most probable place where these would meet with this bird, whose range is from India through the Malay States to Australia, is New South Wales. This conclusion is confirmed by the reference by Latham under Sea E(agle), p. 31, thus : ‘ was also also met with in Botany Island by Captain Cooke' The bird here signified must have been a specimen of this species, and I find that my opinion agrees with that expressed by Sharpe (Hist. Coll. Nat. Hist. B.M., Vol. II., p. 90, 1906).

The Botany Island here referred to would appear to be Botany Bay, and it is quite possible that the specimen in the Leverian Museum was the identical one noted by Captain Cook. Under these circumstances I was justified in making this selection for a type-locality, as otherwise there was absolutely no data to get hold of.

When a figure was seen in the Watling Drawings Latham did not reeognise it ” (Birds of Austral., Vol. V., p. 135, 1915).

’ ■ * Haliaetus leucogaster is met with in India, in the Malay archipelagoes, in Australia. Its presence at Tongatabu, mentioned by. Gray, is most doubtful (E. L. Layard, P.Z.S., 1876, p. 499),

There is, therefore, according to Mathews, a double mistake in Latham’s assertion, first as regards the name of the bird, secondly as regards the name of the locality.

In my opinion, things are slightly different. I believe that the name of the locality mentioned is correct, the confusion exists only in the name of the bird, but is not what Sharpe and Mathews thought. The accipitrine bird that Latham ought to have mentioned as existing in Botany Island is by no means Haliaetus leucogaster, but decidedly Pandion haliaetus; it is an Osprey, not a Sea Eagle, as I hope the following lines will undoubtedly show.

As I have lately had occasion to recall (Ibis, 1917), Botany Island is one of the names of a small islet off the southern coast of New Caledonia. Cook landed there with some of his companions, and while the ship’s carpenter was getting the wood needed for the repairs of the Resolution, some plants and animals were gathered by the naturalists and officers of the expedition. One of them shot a bird which Cook called Falco Haliaetus, and declared to be like those they found on the coasts of England.

The accuracy of that denomination is not doubtful, since the bird Cook mentioned is still frequently met with on the coasts of New Caledonia, particularly on the sandy islets which border them. It is the kind of Osprey I have thought it right to distinguish, which I did under the name of Pandion haliaetus microhaliaetus (Rev. fr. d’Omith., No. 81, p. 201, 1916).

Besides, the existence of the Osprey in the New Caledonian archipelago was not unknown to Latham’s contemporary naturalists. Gmelin, indeed, mentions its presence “ in insula quoque maris pacifici Isle of Pines” (Syst. Nat., Vol. I., p. 263, 1788). The substitution here of the name of the larger neighbouring island—the Isle of Pines (= Spruce-Tree Isle), for Botany Island allows us to trace Gmelin’s source in the present case ; it is not Cook’s own relation, but most probably Forster’s MS. where Lichtenstein took the following lines— “ Circa novam Caledoniam in insula minuta, Spruce-Tree Isle et circa eandem, observavimus : (1) Falconem

Haliaetum marem, longum 22" alis expansis 52"; (2) . . .” (J. R. Forster, Descr. Anim., p. 257, 1844).

Consequently, no doubt can remain ; the bird noticed by Cook in Botany Island is actually an Osprey ; nor it is very surprising that Latham failed to recognise the species on the Watling Drawing, which represents quite a different kind, belonging to another country—Cuncuma leucogaster.

Now, how can Latham’s mistake be accounted for ? Very likely by a lapse in his memory, particularly easy to understand owing to the analogy in the habits of the two birds mistaken; they both like the vicinity of the sea-shore, and both feed on fish.

Let us add, as a final support on behalf of our argument, that a few pages after, when he describes the Osprey and its habits of living, Latham by no means mentions the presence of the species in Oceania. Being brought close to the preceding arguments, this last one, it seems to me, succeeds in showing irrefutably the complete identity between Latham’s Sea Eagle from Botany Island and the Osprey, “Falco HalidetesF noted there by Cook and his companions.


By Gregory M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.

The publication by Dr. C. W. Richmond of his Third List of Generic Names applied to Birds has once again indicated emendations in current acceptances, and we here put forward the apparent alterations in connection with Australian, Neozelanic and British names. We take this course as we find many workers do not study Richmond’s excellent Lists, though they may accept corrections thrust before their eyes. Our friend has dealt with some problems we put forward, and which we did not feel competent to definitely determine. Nevertheless, he has left for our disposal certain names he has recorded, which we herewith discuss. We also note other items not due to Richmond’s paper, but which come under the heading given above, but are of even more general interest. We hope this article will receive better attention than our friend’s list, as we emphasize the alterations which appear necessary. As instance, Richmond in 1908 pointed out that Torgos of Kaup should replace Otogyps Gray, and that the species name tracheliotus Forster was older than duricularis Daudin. Yet in 1912 Hartert, monographing the Palaearctic birds, utilised Otogyps auricularis Daudin, without any reference to Richmond’s advice. It is quite possible that other alterations shown to be necessary by Richmond in the 1902 and 1908 papers have not been made use of, but we here deal only with those suggested to us by the 1917 paper.

We would emphasize the fact that these are simply notes that have cropped up during other investigations, and that we here propose no detailed criticism of the B.O.U. List, but as we are more or less interested in the acceptance of a uniform nomenclature we record these for consideration.


The most important item in Richmond’s paper appears to be the discovery that " an anonymous reviewer of Bech-stein’s Orn; Taschenbuch presents his views on the arrangement of certain genera of Limicolce, by means of the following key, in which several new generic names are introduced—







Tringa pugnax

Tringa calidris, arenaria, u.a.

Tringa cinclus, alpina, islándica, u.a. Tringa interpres

Tringa gambetta, ochropus . . . u.a. Knot der englischen Naturforscher.

This account appeared in the Allg. Lit.-Zeitung, 1804, Vol. 2, No. 168, June 8, 1804, col. 542, and the above names are accompanied by diagnoses which Richmond has reproduced, but which are not quoted above.

The genus name Calidris was used by Mathews in his List of the Birds of Australia, p. 69, 1913, as of Illiger, 1811. It first appears in the table in Vol. I. of Cuvier’s Lecons d’anat. comp, as the equivalent of “ Maubeches,” a division of Tringa used for the genus “ Vanneaux.” It has been decided by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, that these names are acceptable if the vernaculars are recognisable from the Tabl. elem. d’Hist. Nat., published in 1798. In this case the name is not so determinable, so that Calidris Cuvier, 1800, is an absolute nomen nudum. The present introduction prevents the continuation of Calidris Illiger, and we must fall back upon Billberg’s “ useless synonym ” Crocethia ; a. rather striking instance of the truth that a useless synonym is a very rare thing.

Calidris, 1804, is an absolute synonym of Totanus Bechstein, 1803, the same species being type in each case.

Hence Crocethia leucophaea (p. 69).

,,    ,,    leucophaea.


„    ,,    carteri,


This dates from 1804, with the same species as type of the name when it was later used in 1831. Of course, the same arguments against it can be produced, with the additional facts that one party does not recognise the generic distinction of the group, and the other does not admit the necessity of name changes which would require its acknowledgment. However, to scientific systematists it is important to have the name placed well in view.


Richmond gives as an earlier reference : “ Cettia Bonaparte, Iconogr. Faun. Italica, Vol. I., 1834 (fasc. 9), text to pi. [29]. Type, Sylvia cetti Temminck (original designation).” We have had the latter item before us for some time. Thus both Hartert and the B.O.U. List cite the species name as of Marmora, 1820, the latter explaining : “ Though both this name and that of Temminck (Sylvia sericea Man. d’Orn., I., p. 197) were published in the same year, the first name is slightly prior in date.” The facts show exactly the reverse, as at the end of Marmora’s paper Bonelli added (p. 261) : “Ce mois (Novembre,- 1820) . . . Au moment meme ou l’on corrigeait les epreuves de ce mémoire, il nous est parvenu la 2e edition du manuel d’Ornithologie de M. Temminck, dans laquelle a la page 194, nous trouvons cette espece décrite sous la nom de Bec fin Bouscarle, Sylvia cetti de la Marmora, d’apres les individus envoyés de Turin.” The date of publication of Temminck’s Manuel d’Ornithologie is given in the Bibliographie de la France as “ October 21, 1820 ” : the first two volumes received before that date. On p. 194 appears Sylvia cetti and this precedes Sylvia sericea by three pages. Consequently the species name can be retained as of Temminck.

The genera of the Warblers were not well considered in the preparation of the B.O.U. List, as in this case Cettia was easily admitted, on account of its tail structure, while the Reed and Sedge Warblers were lumped, though the differences

in every way are much greater. The genus Phylloscopus is still more heterogeneous, and the species Phylloscopus fuscatus (Blyth), p. 85, is certainly no near relation to the type of Phylloscopus. Seebohm classed it in Lusciniola, which is nearly as bad, so we propose

Ph^eorhadina gen. nov.

for Phillopneuste fuscata Blyth, 1842.;Phceorhadina fuscata.


In the B.O.U. List, p. 39, Otocorys Bonaparte, 1838, is used for Alauda alpestris Linn. On p. 359 it is explained that Eremophila Boie, 1828, is preoccupied by Eremophilus Humboldt, 1805. Phileremos Brehm, 1831, is also preoccupied.

The above name, introduced in Brehm’s Handb. Stuben. Vogel, p. 296, 1832, has six years’ priority over Otocoris, and should be used as it otherwise appears to be valid. At the same time an alternative name, Niphophilos, was also given, both being quoted as of Petenyi MS., so that one of these names must be used in preference to Otocoris. It will, of course, be amended to Chionophilus alpestris.


While recording Cygnus Bartram, which is considered as valid ex Zimmermann, 1793, Richmond writes : “ The species is the one now known as Olor cygnus (Linnaeus), type of the genus Olor Wagler, 1832. At the moment it looks as if the swans were in for a transfer of names, but it is not at all improbable that some binary author has used Cygnus before 1793, and the name may finally rest upon one of the other species.

The unreasonable and illogical acceptance of binary authors may eventually cause a lot of trouble and “ finally ” may be a long way. Considering that Sherborn had recorded all the binomial names it really seems absurd that a “ novel ” rendering of the word “ binary ” should be allowed to make confusion, without advantage. In the present case the type of the genus Cygnus, whether of the binary Zimmermann or the binomial Bechstein, is Anas cygnus L., and we therefore propose Euolor gen. nov. for Anas olor Gm.—Eulor olor.


This name is in use ex Forster, 1817, as the generic name of the Nightingale in the B.O.U. List, p. 95, and on p. 367 it is noted that Daulias Boie, 1831, was previously used. It seems that reversion must be made to the latter, as Richmond accepts Luscinia of Zimmermann, 1793, as a validly proposed genus name, and this, of course, anticipates Forster’s usage.— Daulias megarhyncha.


In this periodical, dealing with Boddaert’s Tabl. PI. Enl., we recorded the fact that Merula appeared in this work, and must be considered. Richmond has designated Turdus torquatus Linnaeus as the type, the only course we considered feasible. Consequently the name must be utilised in this connection. Merula torquatus.—We have seen it recorded that this species is not a close ally of Turdus merula L.,but is nearest Turdus viscivorus L. This statement is quite inaccurate and suggests a line of reasoning through structural features, quite opposed to the truth. The species, torquatus, seems to approach the American migratorius, but we suggest that the relationships of these “ Blackbirds ” will be traced through their plumage changes and not by means of structure. We may study these later, as we have species of “ Blackbirds ” from Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands.


This name, dating from 1804, is earlier than Machetes Cuvier, 1817 (1816), used in the B.O.U. List, p. 225, and should replace it. Of course, the makers of that List may suggest the latter be a nomen conservandum, an absurd proposition, or may dispose of Philomachus by the argument of anonymity, a still more absurd proposal considering the manner that plea was used in the List. To particularise,-they rejected the names proposed in the Vroeg Catalogue as anonymous, an inaccurate statement, while they preferred the names given in the Ornith. Brit. 1771, which they claimed to be written by Tunstall, without any - explanation. When - we pointed out that this book had no indication whatever as to its--authorship they ignored the matter. On p. 614, peculiarly enough^ Richmond has omitted the name, so it is necessary to emphasize its validity.—Philomachus pwgnax.


This name, as of Brunnich, 1771, was commonly used for the Great Auk, but in the B.O.U. List this species was regarded as congeneric with the Razor Bill, a degradation of characters which could not be defended save’ by such arguments as would make genera quite unnecessary at all. Richmond has accepted the introduction of this name by Gunnerus in 1761, when it was associated with the Little Auk, a species considered generally separable under the later name A lie Link, 1807, and it claims usage, if at all, in this connection. The generic name to be applied to the Great Auk is a perplexing problem. Bonnaterre, in the Tabl. Ency. Meth. Orn., Vol. I., pp. lxxxiii. and 28, 1791, proposed Pinguinus, with impennis as the first species, and the name was cited as a synonym of Alca and Ghenalopex by Gray, with that species as type. There is, however, a prior Penguinus of Brunnich for a very different group, and the two . words may be considered as separate names, as they certainly have a directly different source of formation, though of common origin. Thus Pinguinus is a latimzation of the French name of these birds, while Penguinus is a rendering of the English name Penguin applied to a different series, though from the same initiative. As the genus Plautus was accepted by the American Ornithologists’ Union Check List, 3rd ed., 1910, it will be interesting to see their decision. - After this name comes Ghenalopex. Richmond cites this as of Dumont (Diet. Soc. Nat., Vol. 8, 1817, p. 393), but when we worked through that publication we did not consider the name

legitimately introduced. Ill order to justify our views we quote the extract : “ Dun autre cote, Moehring a applique le nom de chenalopex, comme terme generique, au grand pingouin, alia impennis, Linn.” We still maintain the name has no validity at this point, as Moehring was a pre-Linnean writer. The name was, however, quite correctly introduced by Vieillot in the Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., Vol. I., p. 381, 1816, and Vol. XXIV., p. 132, 1818, as also given by Richmond, and can be accepted from these quotations.


This name is accepted as of Bartram, 1791, when it was used in connection with the American Ruby crest, and must •be restricted to that species, which is certainly not congeneric with the European Goldcrest. Richmond has recognised this, confirming Miller’s criticism (Auk, Vol. 32, p. 234, 1915). The latter used Gorthylis Cabanis for the American species, leaving Regulus to the European species. The latter must now be renamed, and Richmond has quoted Macgillivray’s citation of thirteen alternatives, also noting the earlier Orchilus Morris. The latter has been rejected as a nomen nudum, so that we select the first valid name mentioned by Macgillivray, viz. Regillus. This seems a very good alternative. We designate as type of Regillus the form Regulus regulus britannicus Hartert, as this was the one handled by Macgillivray though under the name Regulus auricapillus. Hence Regillus regulus and Regillus regulus britannicus.

We note, however, that Regillus was correctly introduced in another connection in 1884, so that there may be discussion regarding its validity. We therefore indicate as an apparently valid substitute the next name in Macgillivray’s list, viz. Rex, and designate as type the same form Regulus regulus britannicus Hartert, so that the names might then be Rex regulus and Rex regulus britannicus.


On p. 7 of the B.O.U. List this genus name is accredited to Vieillot, Analyse, 1816, p. 36, with type P. graculus Juinn. The

species names have been so confused that we here use the vernaculars, Cornish Chough and Alpine Chough, for easy reference. Vieillot’s name was founded on the Alpine Chough, but in the Ornith. Brit., published in 1771, of which the author is said to be Tunstall, but which carries no evidence as to its authority on the book itself, the genus name Pyrrhocorax is used for “ P. graculus, the Cornish Chough or Daw, le Coracias ou Choucas rouge.” The International Commission have decided that these names are valid, if recognisable by the vernaculars above given, as described in Pennant’s British Zoology and Brisson’s Ornithologia. In the latter place, Vol.

II., p. 3, a genus Coracia appears, the first species, and therefore, type by tautonymy, being called coracia. This species is the Cornish Chough and Brisson’s name is the oldest for the genus but has been rejected on account of the prior Coracias of Linné, 1758. Consequently Pyrrhocorax (Tunstall), 1771, may be used for the Cornish Chough. Most authorities have generically separated the Cornish Chough from the Alpine Chough, and it is admitted by all authorities that there is very good reason for the generic distinction. We unhesitatingly differentiate the two and we found that all the names commonly recorded in this connection, save Vieillot’s in 1816, were based on the Cornish Chough.

In the Zool. Anzeiger, Vol. XXVII., 1904, Poche dealt with the Moehring generic names and proposed (p. 502) as a substitute for Pyrrhocorax Vieillot, 1816, not Pyrrhocorax Moehring, 1758, the new genus name Hellmayria. Moehring’s names have now been dismissed as not recognisable under the Laws, and hence Hellmayria became a “ useless synonym.” It is, under the present facts, the correct genus name for the Alpine Chough, an unexpected conclusion.—Hellmayria graculus.

It may also be noted that Forster, in the Synopt. Cat. Brit. Birds, p. 5, 1817, introduced the genus name Cornix for two species Corvus graculus and Corvus monedula L., the former being the Cornish Chough, the latter the Jackdaw. The name does not appear to have been allotted to either species, but Richmond now includes Cornix Koelreuter, 1767, writing:

Koelreuter is binary, but not binomial, in this paper.” It seems that Koelreuter’s name will displace some later one, so ¡chat its determination should be undertaken by Palsearctic students at once.


On p. 16 of the B.O.U. List this genus name is used as of Brehm (Isis, 1828, col. 1277). The paper referred to is simply a list of names accompanied by vernaculars, and as it ostensibly pould not be legally accepted without advice, the matter Iwas referred to the International Commission on Zoological (Nomenclature and Opinion No. 48 was furnished; this Opinion laid down the rule that in the cases where the names were eased on nomina nuda only, they must be rejected. This case rails under that ban, as two species are included, M. nivalis Br. and M. glacialis Br., both nomena nuda at this time. In 1831 Brehm utilised these names in his Vogel Deutschlands, where the species were fully described and the names legally date from this place. In the meanwhile, however, Kamp, in the Skizz Entwick. Nat. Syst., p. 139, 1829, had correctly proposed Chionospina for nivalis alone, and this name must now come into use.—Chionospina nivalis.

Pyrrhula pyrrhula.

The subspecies names of the British and Mid-European forms need rectification. To avoid tautonymy Koch, Vieillot, Temminck, Macgillivray and others proposed new specific names thus : Pyrrhula rufa, P. europcea, P. vulgaris and P. pileata. The first named has priority but it is purely a substitute name for Loxia pyrrhula Linn., though Koch described thereunder Bavarian specimens, ignorant of the differences from the typical subspecies. Vieillot’s name is in the same case, as he did not separate the subspecies, though he recorded the differences. Consequently neither have any valid standing as subspecific names. Macgillivray’s name is exactly parallel, and his other equivalent names have been rejected. It is accepted in the B.O.U. List, p. 358, that “ the British form is less clearly separable, but the female of the British form

has a darker brown back and a darker and browner undersurface,” agreeing with Hartert’s conclusions. We here name this British subspecies—Pyrrhula pyrrhula nesa.


On p. 78 of the B.O.U. List Hypolais is used as of Brehm (Isis, 1828, p. 1283) for the Icterine Warbler. At that place it only occurs as a nomen nudum, where it .is. spelt Hippolais. Previous to the publication of the List we had shown (Austral Avian Record, Vol. II., p. 47,1913) that Phyllopseusta Billberg, 1828, had priority over Hypolais Kaup, 1829, but we have since noted that Hippolais was apparently used in a generic sense by Baldenstein in the Neue Alpina, Vol. IL, 1827, p. 27, when he named a species Hippolais italica. This name is given by Hartert (Vogel Palæark. P^una, Vol. I., p. 571) as a synonym of Hippolais polyglotta (Vieillot), so that if this be accepted the genus name Hippolais can be retained for the group, but it must be credited to Baldenstein, 1827. The correction, utilised in the B.O.U. List/ seems unwarranted even on the score of custom, the name being commonly spelt Hippolais by the most accurate writers.


Bechstein(on p. 177 of his Ornith. Taschenb. Deutsch, 1802) introduced a section “ Wurmfresser,” including thereunder the Redbreast, Blue-throat, Redstart, etc., etc. At the end of the book (p. 548, 1803) he proposed for this section the Latin name Helminthophaga. This name does not appear to have been disposed of, which seems a necessity, as it is earlier in date than the many generic names proposed for its constituents save the ones utilised from, Cuvier’s Tables. As the first species is S. rubecula Latham, so we here designate that as type, and thus the name becomes an absolute synonym of the earlier Erithacus Cuvier.


The reference in the B.O.U. List, p. 108, is given to Linné, 1766, whereas it should be to Brisson (Orn., Vol. II., 1760, p. 357), with the same type.

One of the peculiar idiosyncrasies of British systematic ornithologists is the continued recognition of the Spotted and Pied Flycatchers as congeneric, when the merest glance proves the contrary, and all serious students of ornithology deny their close relationship.

For the latter Ficedula Brisson (Orn., III., 1760, p. 369) is available and should be used, while Arizelomyia Oberholser should be accepted for Muscicapa latirostris Raffles, and still another genus name, probably Siphia, for Muscicapa parva Bechstein, of which the. earliest reference is “ Getreue Abbild., Heft 2, p. 26, pi. [17], fig. 2, 1793.” The species called Muscicapa collaris in the List would be placed in Ficedula as Ficedula albicollis, the species name collaris Bechstein. 1793, being preoccupied by Latham, 1790.


This name, spelt Eniconetta, was proposed by Gray as a new name for Polysticta Eyton and Stelleria Bonaparte preoccupied. The word that was considered as invalidating the former was spelt Polisticte, and curiously enough this was not accepted as equivalent in the Amer. Ornith. CheckList, 3rd ed., 1910, p. 78, though it would seem to be according to their Laws. However, if Polysticta be rejected, there seems to be no valid reason for the rejection of Stelleria, as Gray's reason, the usage of a similar name in Botany, is not now applicable.


This name was ignored by the makers of the B.O.U. List, though a footnote in the Handlist of British Birds, initialled

E. H., had drawn attention to it. A most extraordinary conclusion was there propounded, viz. that a name of uncertain date should be preferred to one of certain date, and this was apparently accepted in the B.O.U. List.

The recent elaboration of the species by Miller (Auk, 1916, p. 278) has shown two valid genera to have been confused, and that the generic names Melanitta and Oidemia can both be

preserved. As a matter of fact the genus Oedemia, as maintained by authorities who professed to accept only structural characters for separation, was purely a colorgenus. A peculiar complication is that the Surf Scoter, which shows very marked structural differences in bill formation, was lumped, on account of its coloration. Had it been differently coloured it would have been accepted as distinct, without argument, like Histrionicus.


In his 1908 List Richmond recorded this genus name as being introduced by Dzieduszycki in 1880, which was earlier than Remiza of Stejneger, 1887, quoted in the 1902 List. We here record a still earlier proposal of Remiz, viz. by Taczanowski, in the Oologia Ptakow Polskich, p. 229, 1862, for the same species, pendulinus. Remiz appears first to occur in the Oken List of names in the Isis, 1817, col. 1184, whence it does not appear to be recorded. We have not yet seen any rescission of the American Ornithologists’ Union’s inexcusable acceptance of some names from this List, and we regret the delay, as the early admission of a blunder goes a long way to rectify the error, and tends towards the stability in nomenclature which systematists desire. Procrastination has been the curse of systematics as regards British ornithologists, and we had not anticipted the same vice in American ones.


This name, proposed by Vigors in the Proc. Comm. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), pt. iv., April, 1831, p. 43, for the species psaroides, is invalidated by Ypsipetes Stephens, Syst. Cat. Brit. Insects, Vol. II., p. 138, 1829. The aspirate here is of no differential value, the names being absolutely the same. In the B.O.U. List, p. 182, is admitted Heniconetta, though Gray wrote Eniconetta.

We therefore propose the new genus name Haringtonia, in memory of our friend, the late Lt.-Col. H. H. Harington,

whose interest in this group was well known to us. We continue the species, psaroides, as type of the genus— Haringtonia psaroides.


In the Museum Heineanum (Vol. I., p. 33, 1851) Cabanis introduced Phyllobasileus as a new name on the score of purism, for Reguloides Blyth. The type of the latter by original designation was Regulus modestus Gould, when it was introduced in the Journ. As. Soc. Beng., Vol XVI., pt. I, 1847, p. 442. Consequently this species is the type of Phyllobasileus. We make this comment as the sole species catalogued by Cabanis under the genus name was Motacilla calendula Lin, while in a footnote was added “ Hierher gehort ferner: Ph. proregulus. Motacilla proregulus Pall.” Gray, in the Cat. Gen. Subgen. Birds, 1855, p. 35, correctly synonymised these names, though wrongly, citing as type “Regulus proregidus Pall.” We have carefully considered this item, as it bears upon a name accepted in Mathews’ List of Australian Birds, viz. Ptenœdus Cabanis. This name was proposed on p. 39, as a pure emendation of Cinclorhamphus Gould, but because the only species cited was Anthus rufescens Vig.-Horsf., that species was quoted as “ Type by monotypy.” This is incorrect, and Ptenœdus must be recorded as a pure synonyn of Cincloramphus Gould, as- Gray, loc. cit., made it (p. 33), and a new name given to the other group.

The following corrections of references, as given in the B.O.U. List, appear to be necessary, and are here put on record that they may be incorporated at some later date in a revised List, which seems a necessity to the succeeding generation.

Anthus Bechstein. Gemein. Naturg. Deutschl., Vol. II., pp. 247, 302, 465, 1805.

Type (by subs, design. Mathews, 1915) A. campestris Linné.

This correction is again drawn attention to, as the type above named is not the one given in the B.O.U. List, viz. A.


spinoletta Linné, as that species does not occur at the places quoted. The lumping of all the species under Anthus, in the B.O.U. List, is illogical and indefensible, especially as the Larks are divided into genera upon smaller differences. Lullula seems to be a very indeterminate genus from the viewpoint of a genus lumper, yet it is admitted by Hartert.

Motacilla nisoria Bechstein, Kurzgefasste Gemeinprütz. Naturgesch. des ln-und Austandes für Schülen, Vol. I, Abth. 1, 1792, p. 537 (fide Richmond, Proc. United States Nat. Mus., 53, p. 614, 1917).    (B.O.U. list,

p. 69.)

Squatarola Cuvier, Regne Animal, Vol. I., p. 467, 1816.

Type (by tautonymy) : Tringa squatarola Linne. At the reference given in the B.O.U. List this is a nomen nudum.


By Gregory M. Mathews.

p. 187. Add to the synonymy of Myiagra rubecula—

Muscicapa leucogastra Blyth, Journ. As. Soc. Beng., Vol. XIII.. p. 386, 1844 (1845).    “ Probably Malayan.”

I designate New South Wales.

Muscicapa rubecula Blyth, ib.    “ No locality.”

I designate New South Wales.

These two names are synonymised by Blyth himself in the Cat. Birds Mus. As. Soc., p. 204, 1852.

p. 205. Maclennania, gen. nov.1

Type Cincloramphus mathewsi Iredale.

Maclennania mathewsi.

,,    mathewsi.

,,    , subalisteri.

,,    horsfieldi.

„    vigorsi.

,,    normani.

p. 285. Meliornis niger gouldii, or Purnellornis niger


Melliphaga gouldii Schlegel, De Dierentuin, p. 125, 1872. New name for M. mystacalis Gould, West Australia. Will replace Meliornis nigra dulciei Mathews, proposed for the same purpose.

p. 316. Add to synonymy of Struthidea cinerea—

Glaucopis struthidea Schlegel, De-.Dierentuin, p. 165, 1872. New name for Struthidea cinerea Gould.

p. 121. Opopsitta coxeni tweedi, subsp. n.

Figured in my Birds of Australia, Vol. VI., pi. 280, and described on p. 67. Type Tweed River, N.S.W.

p. 9. Marianornis, gen. nov.

'Type Perdix varia Latham.

Marianornis varia.

.    ,,    varia.

..    ,,    scintillans (syn. Marianornis

varia stirlingi).

,,    ,, 'subminuta.

p. 104. Accipiter cirrocephaltjs bjesitata, subsp. n. or

Paraspizias cirrocephalus hcesitata.

Differs from P. c. cirrocephalus in being paler below and smaller : Wing, 203 mm. ; tarsus, 58.

Type, Cape York, North Queensland.

Range : North Queensland, Northern Territory, North-west Australia.

p. 105. Erythrotriorchis radiattts qtteenslandicus subsp. n.

Differs from E. r. rufotibia in lacking the white abdomen. Tjrpe : Cedar Bay, Queensland.

Range : Queensland.

I am including the coloured plate of Nesomalurus leueopterus and Diaphorillas carteri to face page 79 of this volume.

Austral Avian




VOL. III. No. 6.


Austbal Avian Museum, Faib Oak, Hants, England



Price 1/6 Net.

WITHEREY & CO., 326 High Holborn, London, W.C. 1.

June 25th, 1918

Austral Avian Record (Voi. III,).



Vol. III., No. 6.

June 25th, 1918.



Alfred John North, Ornithologist ( With Portrait) . . 129

. . 134 .. 139 . . 142 . . 151 . . 159

On Pachycephala melanura Gould . .

On Turdus maxillaris Latham    . .

A Forgotten Ornithologist . .

The Validity of Some Generic Terms Additions .... to my 1913 List .



By Gregory M. Mathews.

Plate V.

Australia lost her foremost, practically her only professional, ornithologist when A. J. North passed away on May 6, 1917. He was born on June 11, 1855, at North Melbourne, Victoria ; and it is a somewhat remarkable item that Victorian ornithologists somehow antagonised him. Whose was the fault T cannot say, but he rarely alluded to the work of Victorians in words of praise, though himself a Victorian.

He was the second son of Henry and Mary North, of Moonee Ponds, Victoria, his elder brother being H. Y. North, now of Bendigo. Educated at the Public School and Grammar School, Melbourne, North was apprenticed to the jewellery trade under Henry Young, then in Little Collins Street,

Melbourne. Love of ornithology must have been implanted in his nature, as in 1878 he was in correspondence with Dr. E. P. Ramsay, Curator of the Australian Museum, Sydney. The Doctor was impressed with his enthusiasm, for in November,

1886,    he came under engagement to the Museum. In February,

1887,    he was given the task of writing Catalogue No. 12 of the Australian Museum “ Descriptive Catalogue of the Nests and Eggs of Birds found breeding in Australia and Tasmania,” and herein is shown for the first time his conscientiousness in his work. This book was finished and the title-page printed in 1889, when an accession of material provided him with an Appendix, and at the same time he incorporated items in the body of the work. This delayed the publication of the work until 1890, but the old title-page was utilised, to the misleading of bibliographers.

In 1891 Ramsay’s Catalogue of the Psittaci in the Australian Museum was published. The introduction concludes: “I have much pleasure in acknowledging the assiduity and diligence of my assistant, Mr. A. J. North, in the preparation of this work.” Ramsay’s Acciptres and Striges were revised in their Second Edition by North, and his carefulness is always seen by his accurate quotations of Ramsay as authority for all doubtful inclusions. This care was a great drawback to one situated as he was—a pioneer to a great extent, and successor to two famous workers such as Gould and Ramsay. Thus he appears to have been overawed by the authority of the British Museum “ Authorities ” upon subjects he was more competent to deal with. When he did attempt original work he found himself handicapped by lack of necessary literature, and he was able enough to understand what the lack meant; as one consequence, whenever he found himself blocked by such means he dropped the matter, and the result was just as bad as if he had followed the matter up incompletely. As a matter of fact it was worse, for when he did continue and publish his results, though imperfect, they served to the correction of errors. North will be remembered by his great work, the second edition of Catalogue No. 12, which appeared

as a Special Catalogue No. 1, in quarto (the original being octavo), illustrated with plates of eggs and photo-blocks of birds, nesting-sites, and nests. This was commenced in June, 1901, and was not completed until December, 1914. The criticisms of this work are all of the same nature, lack of appreciation of fellow-workers. This is the chief fault in this work, and it is a small one in comparison with the work accomplished. In most cases the birds are described, good notes are given of the nesting habits, in some cases of other habits as well, and nests, eggs and young described. The work was carried out under difficulties, as North appears to have been ailing, more or less, much of the time. It is for its kind a very fine work, and as a systematist I have often wished that he had used his ability in connection with the birds more than with the nests and eggs. In many cases he criticised the subspecies and forms of birds, and his observations are regularly found to be reliable. He noted the geographic differences in many species, but continually regarded these as negligible, though sometimes differentiating a subspecific form. Latterly he made complaint against the use of trinomials, though in his earlier, more energetic, days he even utilised the trinomial system for the nomination of a subspecies. As above noted, there was some antagonism between him and the Victorian ornithologists which did harm to the cause of ornithology in Australia. Where he should have been a tower of strength, his assistance was not given, even if sought. Yet he had better opportunity than his more southern friends to adjust the indicated errors, and he felt that they were to blame, as in a letter to me, dated September 7, 1908, he deplored the attacks on him by Victorians. This indicates that his nature was sensitive to a great degree, as such remarks as were published need not have dismayed a professional, who is open to petty jibes through his more important office. As a consequence, he ignored the work of the Victorians, and this militated against the completeness of his own labours. It is to be regretted that some workers imagine that petty bickering is necessary in the pursuit of a common study, and waste both

time and paper with ill-thought remarks North resented this, but his work shows that the critics would have been better treated had he dealt with their quibbles at first hand. This early work shows that it was unnecessary for him to take too seriously the little pinpricks which annoyed him.

While preparing the Special Catalogue No. 1 he contributed short notes to the Ibis, Linnean Society of New South Wales., Victorian Naturalist, Records of the Australian Museum, Royal Society of South Australia, etc. He also wrote up the birds collected by the Horn Scientific Expedition, published in 1896, and prepared the Birds of the County of Cumberland for the use of the members of the Australian Association for the Advancement of Science, January, 1898.

He was appointed Ornithologist to the Australian Museum on August 4, 1891, was elected a Corresponding Fellow of the American Ornithologists’ Union in 1902, and a Colonial Member of the British Ornithologists’ Union in 1903. He was also a Colonial Member of the Zoological Society of London.

I met him at my hotel in Sydney at the end of May, 1914, when he explained how ill he had been, and that he was still suffering.

North was no species maker nor did he indulge much in the naming of subspecies, but he had a good eye and constantly discriminated the racial forms.

A few genera were distinguished by him as Spathopterus, Trichodere, Woodfordia, a few species and a few subspecies only being named. As a general rule his names have remained valid, though in some cases he was anticipated in the naming of a subspecies. This is the more unexpected, as he had so much material to choose from. Again, he was unfortunate when he did publish original research in connection with overlooked names, as regards the Fan-tailed Cuckoo, for instance. His publications, however, stamped him as a careful, enthusiastic and conservative worker: had he been more progressive, Australian -ornithology would certainly have benefited more, but in any case he was handicapped by the lack of a complete library, and his series of birds was never extensive. In a

few cases he had fair material, and then his work bears comparison with that of better situated workers.

He held the post of Ornithologist at the Australian Museum, Sydney, at the time of his death, and it is understood that the post will not be filled until after the war, when I hope the young Australian who will be selected as his successor will read these remarks, and consider that the first duty of a professional is to encourage the amateur, even should the latter show jealousy, and co-operate with him to secure the best results even at the hurt of his own feelings. In the study of ornithology we help ourselves by assisting others and together make progress in the common cause, the Advancement of Knowledge.

The genera Northiella and Northipsitta have been named in honour of North, and a subspecies he described without naming was called Calyptorhynchus banksi northi, to indicate that he first noted the significant features of the race.


By Gregory M. Mathews.

Gould wrote: “ The Pachycephala melanura is a native of the northern coasts of Australia, where it was procured by B. Bynoe, Esq., during the surveying voyage of H.M.S. the Beagle. It may be readily distinguished from the P. gutturalis and P. glaucura. by the jet-black colouring of the tail (which organ is also shorter and more square than that of any other species), by its much longer bill, and by the colouring of the back of the neck and the under-surface being richer than that of either of those above named. I have not yet seen a female of this fine species. Whenever this sex is collected, it will be found to bear a very general resemblance to the females of P. gutturalis and P. glaucura.”

Campbell described a bird as Eopsaltria hilli from Hecla Island, Parry Harbour, North-west Australia. I concluded this was the female of Gould’s Pachyce'phala melanura and this decision was accepted by Campbell. The exact locality of Bynoe’s bird being unknown, I designated Derby, as the males from there agreed accurately with the specimen figured as well as described by Gould.

Consideration of the forms for the purpose of figuring specimens for my Birds of Australia has shown that a reconsideration of values is necessary. In my List I associated all the forms under the name Pachycephala pectoralis (Latham), twelve subspecies being recognised, the differences in the males being considered of small value, while the females were not fully criticised owing to lack of material from northern localities.

The prevalent idea had been voiced by Campbell: “ The general or common species (P. gutturalis) ranges from Rockingham Bay district, Queensland, round to South Australia, grading into the Black-tailed Thickhead (P. melanura) on the one hand at Cape York and Northern Territory, and on the other hand into the Western Thickhead (P. occidentalis) of West Australin forests ; while an insular form, the Grey-tailed (P. glaucura) takes possession of Tasmania and some of the intermediate islands in Bass Strait.”

Such gradation would necessitate the acceptance of all the forms as subspecific ; but while, apparently, this has been observed as to the males, it is negatived by examination of the females. As the result, I find three representative species occurring in Australia which are easily separable by the coloration of the females, which noticeably differs. Subspecies can be separated by the variation of the coloration of the tails of the males as well as the underparts of the females.

These three species occur on the west coast of Australia, while all the eastern up to Cape York are referable to one species.

Masters described a female from Cape York as Pachycephala robusta, which Ramsay, admitting, noted: “ A doubtful species, being founded on a single specimen only, a female ; must be compared with female of P. melanura, which varies much in size.”

As this form, robusta, occurs outside Australia it may be necessary to alter the specific name when I monograph the species for my Birds of Australia, but this preliminary note serves to draw attention to the dangers of lumping, as undoubtedly three species have been confused. In the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum two species were admitted, but as species and subspecies were there confused no criticism of that work is necessary. The name melanura was used for the group here called robusta, but its limits have been enlarged, incorrectly it appears, until Rothschild and Hartert wrote (Nov. Zool., Vol. XV., p. 364, 1908) : “ We are convinced that all the Pachycephala of the melanura-astrolabo group are subspecies of a single species.”

The male of melanura agrees with Gould’s description in being a smaller bird with shorter wing, shorter black tail, longer bill and brighter coloration, the secondaries and primaries edged with grey. Gould compared this bird with south-western birds, which he considered were the same as the eastern form. But the typical form has a blackish tail.

The female from Derby does not appear to have yet been described. It is greyish above, the primaries and secondaries brown, their outer edges grey. The tail is green above, the inner-webs pale brown. The under-surface whitish, a very pale buffish band on lower throat, paler on lower abdomen, vent and under tail-coverts pale lemon-yellow ; the lower aspect of tail pale brown, wing lining white, inner edge of primaries and secondaries white. Bill black.

At Port Hedland, the male differs in having the tail with a distinct wash of green towards the base of the inner-webs, the outer basal edges also tinged with green, the wing being longer, measuring 85 mm., while typical specimens measure 80 mm. This subspecies -I will call PachycepTiala melanura bynoei nov., the type being procured on the 22nd October, 1914.

It is as well to note that the nearest geographical relative to the south is Pachyce'phala 'pectoralis occidentalis Ramsay, which is as to the male, a larger bird with a longer tail and wing and shorter bill, a green wash on the outer edges of primaries and secondaries, and the tail with the base grey and the tips black. The female is quite different, being deep rufous below, with no yellow on the vent or under tail-coverts, the upper coloration also differing, the tail being greyish, etc., etc. This is the coloration of the females of the eastern forms, which range up to Cairns, but do not appear to inhabit Cape York.

From Hecla Island round to Cape York occurs the third species, whose males agree very well with that of P. melanura, but whose females disagree in being greyer above, the rump green, the tail black with the base more or less green only, the threat white, flecked with grey, remainder of under-surface pale lemon-yellow. The earliest name appears to be robusta Masters, but it is possible, as this species appears to be extralimi tal that an older name may exist.

One feature of interest may be here recorded : P. melanura and P. robusta only occur in the mangroves as far as records

go, while P. pectoralis is cited as a scrub or forest-loving bird. The three species may be divided thus :

Pachycephala melanura bynoei (Mathews).

Port Hedland, Mid-west Australia. Pachycephala melanura melanura (Gould).

Derby, North-west Australia.

Pachycephala robusta hilli (Campbell).

Hecla Island, Parry Harbour, North-west Australia.

Pachycephala robusta violetce (Mathews).

Daly River, Interior Western Northern Territory.

Pachycephala robusta consobrina (Mathews).

Buchanan Island, Melville Island. Pachycephala robusta borroloola (Mathews).

McArthur River, Eastern Northern Territory to Normanton. Differs from P. r. consobrina in being more orange-yellow below.

Pachycephala robusta robusta (Masters).

Cape York, North Queensland.

Pachycephala pectoralis queenslandica (Reichenow).

North Queensland.

Pachycephala pectoralis ashbyi (Mathews).

South Queensland.

Pachycephala pectoralis pectoralis (Latham).

New South Wales.

Pachycephala pectoralis youngi (Mathews).


Pachycephala pectoralis glaucura (Gould).


Pachycephala pectoralis fulginosa (Vigors and Horsfield). South Australia.

Pachycephala pectoralis occidentalis (Ramsay).

South-west Australia.

Here is a good example of the discrimination necessary between representative species and subspecies, as here are seen three species which are nor yet known to inhabit the same districts, but cover the whole of Australian coastal districts, as they are not birds of the interior.

Birds from Coomooboolaroo, Queensland, were considered to belong to melanura by Campbell, but the females in my possession prove them to belong to the form of pectoralis I have called ashbyi.

The Kangaroo Island bird is now regarded as inseparable from the mainland South Australian form.

This short note is not intended to be exhaustive, as I will so treat the species in my big work.

While looking up the above matter I noticed that Gould determined his own Pachycephala inornata as the immature of P. gilberiii. As it had priority and was being used in a different sense, I re-examined specimens in conjunction with the descriptions, and must agree with Gould’s conclusion. Consequently the species name must be altered, and we will have

Gilbertornis inornatus inornatus (Gould).

South Australia.

Gilbertornis inornatus gilbertii (Gould).

West Australia.


[Facing par/g 139


By Gregory M. Mathews.

Plate VI.

Tn the Index Ornithologicus, Supplement, p. XLIII., 1801, Latham gave the Latin designation T(urdus) maxillaris to the Maxillary Thr(ush), which he described in the General Synopsis of Birds, Second Supplement, p. 186, as follows :

“ Size of the last (= Song Thrush) : crown of the head black, passing between the bill and eye on each side, and ending in a large patch below the jaw ; hind part of the neck dull blue ; back, wings and tail brown, with a tinge of greenish bronze on the shoulders, mixed with black and green ; all the underparts of the body pale blueish white ; tail even at the end ; the tips of all the feathers of it white ; the bill has both mandibles slightly curved, and brown ; irides orange ; legs yellow.

Met with at Port Jackson, in New Holland.”

The description did not easily fit any Australian bird, and the name was more or less ignored until 1843 wrhen the drawings in the possession of the Earl of Derby were examined by G. R. Gray, H. Strickland, and el. Gould. The first report was written by the former, who accurately determined a number and did not guess at the remainder. Strickland then gave additional notes on those which had been omitted, and this was one of them. He credited Gould with assistance, and consequently in his Handbook Gould made use of the name, being a strict prioritarian.

He used it for a species of Sphecotheres without any explanation, and since then it has been continually in use, no one questioning the association. When Sharpe recorded the acquisition and identification of the Watling drawings he passed over this species without comment, writing : “ No. 151 . . . Sphecotheres maxillaris (Lath.),” adding Watling’s note: “ The natural size of the bird the drawing was taken from. December.”

When I reviewed these drawings, on account of the errors that had persisted I passed over this picture as probably representing the species with which it was associated, but continued thought has confirmed me in the necessity of rejecting it.

In order to justify this step, I give herewith an exact reproduction of the Watling drawing, the basis of the name. The coloration of the underparts is so strikingly different that I can no longer accept the name. Latham wrote : “ All the underparts of the body pale blueish white ” : this does not agree at all with the present species, which has those parts yellowish green with the vent white. The coloration of the soft parts also disagrees as follows : Bill brown (black): irides orange (red or dark brown): legs yellow (flesh). Consequently, I transfer Turdus maxillaris Latham to the indeterminable (at present) List and make use of the earliest undeniable specific name for the Sphecotheres. This appears to be vieilloti, given bjr Vigors and Horsfield to a bird collected at Keppel Bay, Queensland, and it seems possible that all the names are referable to the South Queensland form, as Gould observed that it w'as abundant at Moreton Bay, while its southern limit appears to be north of Sydney, so much so that it is improbable that the birds which reached Europe in the early days would be procured in what we now know as New South Wales.

Gould also stated: “ that it enjoys a wide range is proved by Mr. Bynoe having procured an adult male on the north coast.” This species does not appear to have been met with on the north coast since that time.

Other items may be here noted. First, the systematic position of the genus : in my List, following the traditional location, it was included in the Family Oriolidce, but this does not seem to be at all correct. Superficially, a separation seemed necessary, and I had been looking for a suitable alternative when I came across the following account by Pycraft in the Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1907, p. 376: “I have been much puzzled as to the systematic position of the genus Sphecotheres. Generally regarded as one of the Oriolidce, it seems to me much more nearly allied to the Campophagidce,

and should, indeed, be included in this Family. The skull bears a general resemblance to that of Graucalus. It is certainly not an Oriole, at any rate, if the skulls in the Museum Collection are rightly labelled, and there seems to be no reason to doubt this. The fact that Sphecotheres has not developed the peculiar spiny rump feathers so characteristic of the Campophagidce may be urged, by some, as an objection to the introduction of this genus to the Family Campophagidce. This, however, does not seem a very weighty objection, for the feathers in question vary in the degree of their spininess very considerably, in some genera it is hardly noticeable.”

Onp. 96, Supplement, Vol. XII., of the Emu, 1913, a footnote reads : “ *714-715, Mr. Milligan claims that, as a result of field and cabinet observation, this genus should be included in the Campophagidce.” I have seen no further explanation given by Mihigan, but if his observations were made, ignorant of Pycraft’s conclusions, the transference of the genus to the neighbourhood of the Campophagidce is certain. I will therefore accept this location as the best at the present time.

Secondly. The status of Sphecotheres stalkeri Ingram. This species was based on two birds shot, out of a flock of six or eight, at “ Mount Elliot, North Queensland.” The species has not since been met with, and as the species of this genus are familiar birds, this raised doubt in my mind as to the correctness of the locality. Unfortunately Stalker, the collector, died while collecting in New Guinea, so that no recourse is possible, but at the present time I am inclined to believe that Stalker collected these birds in New Guinea, and labelled them, by accident, when he was at Townsville. Had he lived he might have explained, as similar accidents have occurred before, with a simple explanation. Upon comparison with New Guinea skins, the differences indicated by Ingram are seen to depend upon individual variation, which series might either emphasise or reduce. They are not distinctive of racial differentiation without confirmation of series from the locality named : this in itself is a factor in my conclusion, as the congener S. flaviventris shows well-marked geographical racial forms.


By Gregory M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.

Mr. C. Davies Sherborh, in the continuation of his Index Animalium, recently incorporated the names given in a work which appears to have escaped previous notice by ornithological writers. The immensity of Mr. Sherborn’s task similarly escapes the recognition of current workers, save in a few exceptions, and it will probably fall to the lot of the succeeding generation adequately to review the wonderful results of his unequalled energy. As publication is still far distant Mr. Sherborn, with unparalleled generosity, has allowed us to put on record the results of his compilation of the names of interest to ornithologists in the work hereafter named.

The title-page reads : “ Zoologiia/czyli/zwierzetopismo ogolne/ podlug/naynowszego systematu/utozone/przez/Felixa Pawla Jarockiego,/Nauk Wyzwolonych i Filozofii Doktora/Professora Zoologii w Krolewsko Warsawskim Uniwersytecie, Czlon-/ ka Towarzystwa Mineralogicznego w Jenie, etc./Tom Drugi./ z dwiema rycinami/Ptaki/w Warszawie/w Drukarni Latkiewicza przy Ulicy Senatorskiey Nio 467./1821.”

This means that the book is the second volume of a series entitled “ Zoologiia,” the one dealing with Birds. Only six volumes were issued, the work being too big for completion though perhaps other events, such as war, interfered with the project.

However, F. P. Jarocki must have been a good ornithologist, as this volume has been prepared in a very careful manner, and is of a high standard for the time. It is entirely in the Polish language, the generic names and examples only being given in Latin. These, however, make it important to the systematist as the author had carefully studied the works of Gmelin, Latham, Le Vaillant, Illiger and Cuvier, and had access to many birds themselves. He proposes new Orders,

Families and Genera in a perfectly legitimate manner, and his generic names call for the following account.

He gives diagnostic tables for the Orders, Families and Genera which recall the style of Dumeril. It is possible that he based these onDumeril’s plan as, though he does not mention Dumeril in this volume, we note Dumeril’s division of the Owls in the text. We note there are fifty-one of these tables, and that the genera admitted are exactly two hundred in number. After these tables the genera are completely described, an example named, and then details of the bird as to its history, etc., given. The first genus for example reads thus :

“ Rodzay I. Ziewacz. Chseneirhynchus.

Oiseau-a-trompe, albo Ara-a-trompe. Tran. Gahnschnabel.


Description follows. Example: “ Psittacus aterrimus GL.”

Then further matter referring to Le Vaillant, etc. For this new genus a large and excellent figure of the head is given. Ten new genera are claimed, and a few other names are introduced ex Brisson, Cuvier, etc., with acknowledgment, but here used systematically and legitimately for the first time.


new names are—


Type Mono.



Psittacus aterrimus GL. = Gmelin.



Bucco calcaratus Lath.



Cuculus vetula GL.



Cuculus afer GL.



Pipra albifrons GL.



Upupa erythrorhynchos Lath.



Gracula tristis Lath.



Podarge Bulock de la Nouvelle Hollande.”



Phasianus africanus Lath.



Aptenodytes chilensis GL.

for Budytes, and p. 186 Ponolope, error for Penelope.

The other newly-used names are—



Psittaca ex Briss.

Psittacus iabuensis GL.


Malcoha ex Vaili, vern.

Cuculus pyrrocephalus Lath.


Vestiaria ex “ Sh.”

Certhia coccinea GL.


Toenia ex Vaili, vern.

Corvus varians Lath.


Remiz ex Cuv. vern.

Par us pendulinus GL.


Cardinalis ex Cuv. vern.

Tanagra rubra GL.

Loriottjs ex Cuv. vern.

Tanagra cristata GL.

Etjphone ex Cuv. vern.

Tanagra tricolor GL.


Eider ex Cuv. vern.

Anas mollissima GL.


Psittactjla ex Pall.

Alca psittacula GL.


misspellings may be here

noted, p. 115 Bodytes, error

Before proceeding further, it may be observed that the work is more or less based upon Cuvier, and that Jarocki did not know of the very rare little Analyse published by Vieillot on April 20th, 1816. As one consequence, Jarocki’s names are often anticipated by those of Vieillot, as both described the same generic forms. Though Vieillot’s work has been justly highly esteemed, it must be conceded that Jarocki’s book is a finer effort in every way. Temminck accused Vieillot of plagiarism upon his work and non-acceptance, but renomination, of Illiger’s groups. In the present case Jarocki undoubtedly was quite independent of Vieillot, and closely followed Cuvier, but was no simple translator, as he mentions the specimens he has examined in the Museum, so that we conclude he drew up his descriptions from specimens. In some cases he cites Cuvier’s subdivisions as such, and in every case gives full credit to other workers.

. The names that fall into synonymy are :—

Chceneirhynchus—Probosciger Kuhl 1820.

Barbaculus    Monasa Vieillot 1816.

Vetula    Saurothera Vieillot 1816.

Crornba    Leptosomus Vieillot 1816.




Manikup Desmarest 1805. Acridotheres Vieillot 1816. Podargus Vieillot 1818.





Phœnicophaus Vieillot 1816,

Crypsirhina Vieillot 1816. Tachyphonus Vieillot 1816. Somateria Leach 1819.




Not Psittacula Cuvier 1800.

Euphonia Desmarest 1805. Not Psittacus Linné 1758.

This leaves for discussion Phceniculus, Crinifer, Molincea, Vestiaria, Eemiz, Cardinalis, with some notes of interest in connection with the other names. The most important may be first dealt with.


This name is legitimately proposed for the Cardinal Tanagers of Cuvier, the example above given being Tanagra rubra GL. Thus Cardinalis falls as a synonym of Piranga Vieillot 1807, but it becomes fatal to Cardinalis now in use for the Cardinal Finch. Bonaparte utilised this name from Brisson, but the latter only used it in a specific sense. It is accepted in the Amer. Ornith. Union’s 3 Ed. of their Check List, 1910, p. 282, for one species alone. Ridgway gives no generic synonymy, nor does such appear in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum. We have searched through Richmond’s Lists and have failed to find any synonym, consequently we are compelled to conclude this particular species has escaped the common fate of most attractive birds. It is a perilous step, but we will attempt to rectify this matter by introducing the novel genus name


naming Loxia cardinalis Linné as type as Richmondena cardinalis. We sincerely hope that this name will remain

valid, as it is our small meed of recognition of the immense work, so invaluable as to be almost incalculable, performed by our friend Dr. C. W. Richmond, and the association of the name of our brilliant co-worker in the least showy side of ornithology with the brilliant Cardinal seems a pleasing item.


This name anticipates and will replace Ghizcerhis Wagler 1827. We have already indicated that the species name of the type species had to be changed in this Journal (Vol. III., p. 44, 1915), and it is a quaint coincidence that the task of recording the generic alteration should have fallen to our lot. At the present time we note that the name to be used for Schizorhis africana of the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XIX., p. 450, should read

Crinifer, piscator (Boddaert).


This name will probably become the best known, as it was introduced by Jarocki for the Upupa erythrorhynchos Lath., which later was the basis of the genus Irrisor Lesson. The latter name must now be discarded in favour of Jarocki’s selection. In connection with this genus Jarocki describes two new species, the only case in the book where new species are introduced. These were named Phoeniculus unimaculatus and Phoeniculus notatus. Whether these specific names will come into use or not we cannot judge, but record them here for the benefit of workers on African birds. We may also note that Iridoptilus Fitzinger, Sitz Math. Nat. Class K. Akad. Wissensch., Wien, B. XLVI., 1863, p. 226, Type Promerop^ pusillus Sw. should be added to synonymy of Scoptelus Cabanis and Heine 1860 as used in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XVI., 1892, p. 21. It is possible that some names from this essay by Fitzinger may cause trouble through their omission from the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum.


Jarocki separated four genera of Penguins, but got the types confused, thus Spheniscus was used for patachonicus GL., Aptenodytes for demersus GL., Catarrhactes for chrysocome GL., and the new name Molincea for Aptenodytes chilensis GL. It is probable that this name will later come into use, though at the present time it is a doubtful number. Gmelin’s species was simply that of Molina, and this was classed by Ogilvie-Grant in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XXVI., p. 625, note, 1895, as a doubtful species, with the explanation that Coues had determined it as the description of the young of demersus, but that it might have referred to humboldti, both of which were classed under Spheniscus Brisson. It is possible that the South American “ Spheniscus ” are separable from the South African form which is typical, in which case Molincea would need consideration.


This name was proposed by Fleming, Phil. Zool., Vol. II., p. 246, 1822, for the same species as it was used by Jarocki. It is recognised in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, Vol. X., p. 6, 1885, and the only alteration is that of the authority, as Jarocki’s name is a year earlier than Fleming’s usage. In this Journal, Vol. III., p. 123, 1917, we mentioned under Melanitta Boie, a matter of chronology which was unsettled. We here record a further item in our search for exactitude and accuracy in this connection, viz. : in Froriep’s Notizen, No. 43 (No. 21 of Vol. II.), p. 335, for July, 1822, the Philosophy of Zoology by J. Fleming is noticed. Until we get definite evidence of its publication before May, Boie’s name must claim precedence.


In this Journal, Vol. III., p. 124, 1917, we recorded that Taczanowski in 1862 used this name. Our conclusion is that he used it as of Jarocki without explanation, as this name is introduced as new by our author. This gives Remiz valid standing as of 1821 and makes it the oldest name for the pendulinus group : Hartert in the Vogel Palaark. Fauna used Anthoscopus Cabanis 1850, considering the type species of that group as congeneric with pendulinus.


We construe this as equivalent to Euphonia used by Des-marest in 1805 for the group known in the vernacular as Euphone. The nomination of the Tanagroid species has been involved and still is by the complex nature of vernacular and other matters. Thus Tanagra and Tangara have been regarded as different by some workers, as the same by others. Euphone was latinised as Euphonia by Desmarest, but used unaltered by Cuvier and Jarocki. A further complex has been produced by Boie’s nomination of a group by the name Calliste. This name has been rejected on account of the earlier Callista of Poli. But Poli’s “ generic ” names should not be regarded as valid, as Poli was not a binomial writer, nor was he even “ binary ” as that word is interpreted in the American sense, and which has been, in our view incorrectly, accepted by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Poli’s Callista cannot be utilised for the rejection of Calliste Boie, but it is possible that some writer may have used it earlier than 1826. Euphone, if it be not considered as equivalent to Euphonia, has for type the same species as Calliste Boie and is earlier.

We referred to Desmarest’s Hist. Nat. Tangaras where we found Euphonia, Ramphocelus and Manikup correctly proposed and used as valid names. We note this, as Richmond (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., Vol. XXIV., 1902, p. 694) recorded Manikup, and some recent worker has declared that it only occurs as a vernacular at the place given by Richmond. In the copy referred to, it is correctly introduced and is undoubtedly legitimately proposed.

To those who accept names differing only in the termination, Jarocki’s use of Psittaca ex Brisson will give trouble, as this

seems the earliest valid introduction, and it is in connection with a species which has no earlier generic name. We reject Psittaca Jarocki as preoccupied by Psittacus Linné.


This name also first appeared in the Oken List, Isis, 1817, 1183, but was not used in the Amer. Ornith. Union’s Check List, 3rd Edition, 1910, p. 79, though Marila, Clangula and Querquedula were, although all were equally valid or invalid. There is not the least excuse for picking and choosing, and we have commented more than once upon the unconsidered action of American ornithologists in their recognition of some of the Oken names. We would be pleased to see the Union revoke their decision, or else justify their action by the recognition of such names as Eider, Moustache, Souchet and Macreuse. In the present case Jarocki absolutely used Eider as a valid name, and it must be considered as of his entry. It then falls as a synonym of Somateria Leach 1819. The reference given in the Amer. Ornith. Union’s Check List for this genus name (p. 79) is the same as the one accepted by the British Ornithologists’ Union, and appears to be the earliest valid proposal. We note this, as one writer claimed that the name should be quoted from the Annals Philos. (Thomson), 1st Ser., Vol. XIII., p. 61, Jan. 1819, where “Somateria mollissima Cuthbert’s Eider” was recorded. This is certainly only a nomen nudum, and an earlier note occurs in the Journ. de Physique (Paris), Vol. LXXXVIL, p. 472, Dec. 1818, where Leach listed Somateria mollissima.

The sequence of publication appears to be as follows : Leach drew up a list of specimens collected on Ross’ Voyage, but there was some trouble in the matter. Sabine undertook the nomination of the Gull, while Leach included it in his List. The List was sent to Paris, and appeared first in Dec. 1818 in the Journ. de Physique as given above, L. sabini being included as a pure nomen nudum. The same article was sent to the Annals Philosophy (Thomson), and appeared on pp. 60/61, Jan. 1819, still only as nomina nuda, the Gull being

here given as “ (Laras)—'V Sabini. A paper on this bird (which forms an intermediate genus between Larus and Sterna) has been read to the Linnean Society by Joseph Sabine, Esq., who named it Larus Sabini, after his brother who first killed it. See Linnean Society report, p. 68.” On p. 68 the report reads : “ Dec. 15. A paper by Joseph Sabine, Esq., F.R.S. and F.L.S. was read, containing an account and description of a new species of Gull (Larus sabini), lately discovered on the west coast of Greenland, and which is characterised by having a furcate tail, like the Tern.” In March or April the first edition of Ross’ Voy. Baffin’s Bay was published, including Leach’s genus Xema for this species. The Transactions of the Linnean Society including Sabine’s paper did not appear until long after, as the Gull is named on p. 522 andp. 523/4 contains the date Apl. 6, 1819. A second edition of Ross’ Voyage was published in June, and details from this edition are given in the Annals Philosophy (Thomson), Vol. XIV., p. 201 et seq., Sept. 1819. We place these facts before students of Palsearctic Ornithology, the only complication being whether Sabine’s description as given in the Annals paper will carry his name ; otherwise, the next in chronology is Leach in the first edition of Ross’ Voyage.

Our consideration of the book leads to the conclusion that the author, Jarocki, was no mean ornithologist, and four names must be used as of his introduction, a fifth perhaps later coming into use. These are—

Phoeniculus Jarocki will replace Irrisor Lesson. Crinifer    ,,    ,,    ,,    Chizcerhis Wagler.

Vestiaria    ,,    ,,    ,,    Vestiaria Fleming.

Remiz    ,,    ,,    ,,    Anthoscopus (Cab.)


The doubtful one being Molincea.

Cardinalis Jarocki preoccupies Cardinalis Bonaparte, which we have re-named Richmondena.

We might observe that the Nomenclators list Vestiarius Rafinesque 1815, but that is a nomen nudum, as are also Vetula Rafinesque 1815 and Tamatia Rafinesque 1815.


By Gregory M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.

A matter for urgent consideration is the determination of generic names diagnosed but without nomination of species. Such names have been submitted for Opinion to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, and in Opinion No. 46 their conclusions are embodied thus : “In genera published without mention, by name, of any species, no species is available as genotype unless it can be recognised from the original generic publication ; if only one species is involved the generic description is equivalent to the publication of ‘ X-us albus, n.g., n.sp. ; if several species are referred to but not mentioned by name, one of these species must be taken as type ; if (as in Aclastus, Foerster 1868) it is not evident from the original publication how many or what species are involved, the genus contains all of the species of the world which would come under the generic description as originally published, and the first species in connection with the genus (as Aclastus rufipes Ashmead 1902) becomes ipso facto the type.”

This decision does not deal with generic names where the diagnosis is insufficient or so incomplete as to defy recognition. Thus, “ no species is available as genotype unless it can be recognised from the original generic publication ” is the reading ; but what is the status of the name if no species answers to the diagnosis ? Can it be considered a nomen nudum, or must it be regarded as an indeterminable name, and, though invalid itself, prohibit its usage in scientific work in any connection ?

We have had under consideration for many years the names proposed by Lacepede in 1799, and we have recently shown that these demand careful consideration as a whole, and also individually. So little seems to be generally known that we

rjMAITO BWVERsmr u»raet

here give details of the publication and history of these names. They were long known from their publication in the Mémoires of the Natural History Society of Paris, which appeared in 1801. As, however, Daudin quoted them in detail in his Traité d’Orn., which came out in 1800, an earlier record was desirable. When Sherborn arrived at these names during the preparation of the Index Animalium, he undertook the task of tracing them to their source. In this, as in every other important matter he has undertaken, he succeeded, and proved that the article, just as it appeared in the Mémoires, and in Daudin, had been separately published in 1799. He has given details of the trouble elsewhere, and it is unnecessary to recount those here. Our fact is that Lacepède’s names were published in 1799, and the question to our mind is whether they should date from this, or whether at this place they can be regarded as nomina nuda, as it is obvious, as a general rule, that the species cannot be recognised from the original generic publication. By tradition or custom certain species can be allotted to the generic names, but decidedly not from the original generic publication.

We initiated the inquiry into this matter in the Ibis, 1913, p. 236, where we used Pachyptila Illiger 1811 in preference to Prion Lacepède 1799, writing: “Prion Lacepède, Tableau Oiseaux, 1799, p. 14, is indeterminable.” The diagnosis of Prion is too vague for usage- and we cannot recognise it. The point, then, at issue is : Does Lesson’s attachment of species in 1828 validate Prion at 1799 or Lesson at 1828? This is an important point, and it should be arbitrarily decided one way or the other. The laisser faire ornithologists wish for a give-and-take solution, whereby custom will sanction the name and reject another without consideration of the facts. We cannot see any reason in such a procedure, as it would prejudice the work of careless authors by the sanction of custom, as has been done in the case of the Brissonian genera. The clause .in Opinion 46 covering this points reads : “ If it is not evident from the original publication how many or what species are involved, the genus contains all of the species of

the world which would come under the generic description as originally published.”

It seems imperative that this question should be authoritatively answered, as a number of names, such as Prion, Pelecan-oides, Fregata, Circus, Buteo, Astur, Milvus, are in use from such introductions. There are few complications, as Daudin in 1802 used the majority of these names in the traditional interpretation; but are we to credit them to Daudin or Lacepéde ? What is the status of a name correctly proposed in the interim between the proposal and the attachment of species ? As Prion was not recognisable from the original generic description should not Pachyptiia be accepted ? The International Commission appear to have no definite ideas on the subject and leave it to individual workers to decide. The only clean method of dealing with such problems seems to be their adjustment by means of sub-committees upon various subjects such as have been called into existence, and we suggest that this point be adjudicated upon without prejudice, as we note that this is the main check upon securing uniformity. When we look at the results of the B.O.U. and A.O.U. Check Lists and the general concordance, it should be quite an easy matter to arrive at an absolutely uniform nomenclature as regards Europe, America, Australia, without much change. There appears to be work to be done in connection with extra-Palaearctic birds in Asia and Africa before they are raised to the level of the preceding, but when that is done a workable nomenclature of the birds of the world will be achieved.

Synonymic Catalogues, on the plan of Mathews’ List of the Birds of Australia, would then dismiss nomenclatural problems into obscurity. Rectification of details would continually go on, but we should have more time to display ornithological problems and deal with the higher lights of our science—the field naturalist and the anatomist both in security as regards names, and the systematist assured of the results of the studies of his co-workers in the field and laboratory.

We here correlate Lacepéde’s system with that given by

Cuvier in the Table II. in the Leçons Comp. Anat., Vol. I., published in 1800.*


Psittacus Ramphastos Trogon Touraco Musophaga Bucco Galbula Picus Yunx Cuculus Crotophaga Vultur Gypcètos Aquila Astur Nisus Buteo Circus Milvus Falco Strix

Phytotoma Lanius Tyrannus Muscicapa Muscivora Turdus    6

Myrmecophaga Oriolus    16

Ampelis    7

Tanagra    8

Cacicus Icterus Xanthornus




Cuvier Psittacus divided into Kaìcatoe, Psittacus, Ara and Psittacula.

Cuvier had six subdivisions of Falco: GypcetoSi Aquila, Nisus, Buteo, Milvus and Falco; the divisions named Astur and Circus by Lacepede being absent.

Divided into two : Strix and Otus.

These three were regarded as sections only of one genus by Cuvier, which was called Muscicapa.


See below.


These three were regarded as sections of Oriolus by Cuvier

* The numbers refer to the position of the genera in Cuvier’s Table



Loxia j


These two lumped and divided into five :

Pyrrhula j

Loxia, Crucirostra, Chloris, Pyrrhula and Colius.



Divided into four: Codebs) Fringilla, Car-

duelis and Vidua.






















\ 23

Divided into five : Silvia, Erithacus, Fice-



dula, Regulus and Motacilla.



Two sections: Hirundo and Apus.





Trochilus | OrthorhynchusJ




| 28


Regarded as sections.


















1 45

Divided into three : Tetrao, Perdrix and






Tridactylus    Missing.




Divided into two :



























Urinator \


As sections only.

Cotymbus J Uria »

Alca v Pingouin 7


As sections only.









Fregata 1 CarboSula )


As three sections

and Sula of Pei

See above.














76 74 59 58





Under name Ardea, with five sections: Ardea, Hians, Ciconia, Grus and Scopus.




See 61 above.









Two sections: Scolopax and Numenius.










I 72

Two sections: Fulica and Gallinula.










66, 67

Cuvier added Tringa, with three sections Tringa, Totanus and Calidris.











This table provided by Cuvier was given as a Key to his Tabl. Elem. de l’Hist. Nat. Anim., published in January, 1798. The close concordance between the two suggest that Lacepède, in all probability with Cuvier’s assent, prepared his scheme from Cuvier’s work. This seems justified by Cuvier’s acceptance of the names, first published by Lacepède, in his later work, and his further usage of others in his Règne Animal. DaudinintheHist. Nat. (Buffon) Ed. Didot (Quadr., Vol. XIV.), 1801-2, gave a list of the birds figured in that work, using Lacepède’s system in its entirety. As, however, no figure of the species of Prion or Pelecanoides occurred in that work, these have no place in this volume.

Though this is one of the most important papers showing generic diagnoses without citation of species, the decision of the Committee should be of a general character so that it could be applied without reconsideration to parallel cases should they recur. Thus, British workers with access to material, literature and authorities, and special facilities for the discussion of such items, would fain deal with each item on its customary acceptance. This is a useless method, which is annoying to the extra-limital worker, as it makes him insecure in all his work. Thus the “ n.c.” idea of British ornithologists has done more harm than good, as extra-limital ornithologists can trace, through the exceptions, lack of reason and stupidity of performance. Had the “ isr.c.” names been excepted on reasonable grounds, there would have been some means of suggesting other names, but at the present time there are none.

Thus, the inclusion of Nyctala, Grus and (Estrelata have no just cause, as these are rare or uncommon birds on the British List, and, therefore, could not come under any of the suggested reasons for “ sr.c.” names. They have not been familiar for a hundred years, nor are they used in medical circles as exemplars. These prove how unnecessary the “ n.c.” names are, and we hope that such will soon be dispensed with. When a real case of hardship occurs it could easily be met, but the only serious case we know of is the Turdus musicus one, and it is capable of easy solution.


By Gregory M. Mathews.

p. 49. Anous stolidus antelius, subsp. n.

Differs from A. s. gilberti in being browner above and below ; the head lighter and the wing longer, viz., 274 mm. : the wing of gilberti being 262.

Type from Cooktown, North Queensland. A male collected on the 4th October, 1897.

p. 106. I designate as type locality of Hieraaetus pennatus, Gmelin, Syst. Nat., p. 272, 1788, Southern France.


Differs from P. c. chrysopterygius (Gould) in lacking the yellow over the eye and in having a brown band coimecting the black of the head with the brown of the back.

Type, Watson River, Gulf of Carpentaria, North Queensland.

p. 179. Lewinornis rufiventris didimus, subsp. n.

Differs from L. r. rufiventris in being darker above and below:

Type South-west Australia.

p. 232. Diaphorillas textilis purnelli Mathews.

Is a species and should read Diaphorillas purnelli (Mathews).

p. 303. Alisteranus cinctus maclennani subsp. nov.

Differs from A. c. atropygialis (Diggles) in its darker coloration above and below, and measurements probably larger. Wing 61 mm. ; typical birds are 58 mm.

Type from Watson River, North Queensland. A male collected by Mr. Maclennan, on the 18th June, 1914.

p. 43. For Diomedella cauta rohui Mathews, Austral Avian Record, Vol. III., p. 55, 1916, read Diomedella cauta wallaca, new name.

p. 45. The type of Sylochelidon strenuus Gould, 1846, is from Tasmania, not New South Wales. Type examined 6th .July, 1914.

p. 58. The type of Hiaticula inornata Gould, 1846, -is the Mongolian Sand-Dotterel, and so becomes a. synonym of Cirrepidesmus mongolus (Pallas). Type examined 6th July, 1914.

p; 264, The type of Myzomela nigra Gould is Interior of New South Wales, not West Australia.

In this Volume make the following corrections.

Page 6, line 21, for “ this ” read “ the second.”

,, '    36,    ,,    20,    for    “ sulva ”    read “fulva”    and delete

“ err. pro fulva”

,,    46,    ,,    20,    for    " nigri”    read “nigra” and delete

next line “ note the typographical error again.”

,,    „    ,,    3,    from bottom    for “ Tanara    sulva ” read

Tangara fulva ” and delete “ recte fulva ”

„    93,    „    26,    for    xxxn. read xxn., and,    as Suckow’s

bird is the same as Latham’s, read p. 94, “ Phigys solitarius ” Suckow.

.,    102, on the bottom right hand side put “ no plate”

up two lines.

,,    121, line 18. for “ Kamp ” read Kaup.”

126, lines 7 and 8, read “ Gemeinnutz ” Auslandes ”

.    and Schulen.


Austral A via a



VOL. III. No. 7.


Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, England



Subscription per Volume 12/- Net.

WITHEREY & CO., 326 High Holborn, London, W.C. 1.

December 3rd, 1919.


Vol III , No. 7.    December 3rd, 1919



Australian Ornithologists    16]

Samuel Albert White (With Portrait)    162

Thomas Carter {With Portrait) . .    .    . .    .    167

William David Kerr Macgillivray {With Portrait)..    175


In this periodical I have written about Diggles, one of the least known of Australian ornithologists, and it is my intention to get together information about all those who have assisted in the advancement of the study of ornithology in Australia. Most of the earlier workers have been dealt with in other places, but I should like to give some account of those of the present day.

Three men, in the last thirty years, stand out most prominently among amateurs as workers, men who through their own exertions have made collecting trips into dangerous and difficult country purely for the love of the science, and have assisted in the clearing up of points hitherto doubtful. They are Samuel Albert White, Thomas Carter and William David Kerr Macgillivray.

/Vs53lbX U


Samuel Albert White was a born ornithologist, his father being Samuel White, who practically sacrificed his life in his pursuit of ornithology and whose talents were never recognised by Gould. I want it to be understood now that I fully appreciate the assistance the son has given to me, as it is owing to his labours that so much is now known regarding Central Australian birds. It will be realised later that to S. A. White must be given the sole credit for the ornithological exploration of Central Australia. It is remarkable that to his wife Samuel White the elder owed much of his success, and to his wife Samuel Albert White the younger is largely indebted for his achievements. It is a great tribute to the men that they were able to select such helpmeets, and all honour is due to the women who gave such magnificent examples of true comradeship. I met Mrs. White the elder when in Australia in 1914, and was charmed with the beautiful and stately Victorian dame, the worthy wife of so fine an ornithologist, and a worthy mother of an almost better ornithologist.

Samuel White’s life has been told by his son in the South Australian Ornithologist, Vol. I.,-so that it is now known what an excellent ornithologist he was.

Samuel Albert White was born in Adelaide on December 20, 1870, his mother being in the city while his father was away upon an ornithological trip. Their home was at the Reedbeds (now called Fulham), five miles north of the town. He learned to make bird skins at his father’s knee at a very tender age, travelling with his father and mother in their yacht all round the coast after birds, so that he can truly be said to have been born in the science. Yet not every one in like circumstances develops the love which manifested itself in this case. His father died in 1880, and the boy had to go to school, first at the Christian Brothers’ College, and later at St. Peter’s

Austral Avian Recor-d íVol III )


College as a boarder, finishing at the former. He felt like a bird in a cage, and during long vacations he undertook many trips into the bush collecting and observing, and in 1887 at the early age of seventeen he organised his first big trip, working the Murray River from Morgan to Paringa, and making a good collection. The following year he went further afield to Western Australia, and after collecting round Perth for a few weeks, organised an expedition into the interior. Through lack of previous experience he picked unsuitable men, and the whole party nearly lost their lives. After three months of severe privation for a lad in his teens he returned to Perth, much travel-worn and experienced, with a good collection of skins. He had to do all the work as well as lead his party into a then unknown country. He returned home in 1889, and in the latter part of the year worked the Koppie Range in Eyre’s Peninsula, and many shorter trips were undertaken in the south-east of South Australia and on the River Murray. In 1891 he went to Queensland, and after collecting round Brisbane, went up to Cooktown and collected there. Such work marked the ornithologist as perhaps the foremost in Australia ; but fate intervened, and for the next ten years no ornithological work was done. In 1900 he joined the colours as a Lieutenant and went to South Africa, and there his fearlessness brought him promotion on the field, a rapid achievement at that time. The war recalled him to his undoubted study, and after acting as Administrator of No. 12 Area until the cessation of hostilities he left for Central and East Coast of Africa for big game shooting, and also made a big collection of birds in the Central districts. Upon his return to Australia in 1903 he began to take a prominent part in the South Australian Ornithologists’ Association. On April 19, 1906, he married Ethel Rosina Toms, who became her husband’s partner in his many future ornithological expeditions into the interior, and who achieved the world’s record trip for a woman,

i.e. sixteen hundred miles on camels through an almost waterless district. From 1906-1916 the pair were inseparable, making numerous expeditions into the interior with great success. They attended the Australian Ornithologists’ Union session

at Hobart, November 23, 1906, made a few trips during 1907, attended the Sydney session of 1908, collecting birds at the Tweed River Camp-out, then down the Murray River, and then to the Melbourne session of 1908. In 1909 Eyre’s Peninsula was worked, a site for the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union 1909 Camp-out being desired, and Warunda Creek was selected. The session took place, and another large collection was made. Expedition succeeded expedition, as from the Brisbane session of 1910 they travelled to the Capricorn Camp-out (Captain White being leader of No. 1 party and co-author of the results published); afterwards they visited Tambourine Mountain, and on the return trip visited the Riverina, still making collections and amassing notes. About this time Captain White began a series of ornithological articles for the South Australian Register, which have been continued ever since. On April 1, 1911, Captain White was elected President of the South Australian Ornithologists’ Association, and on the 14th he and Mrs. White left for York Peninsula, working the entire district. In August they revisited Eyre’s Peninsula and the West Coast, where they had a very rough trip, but made good collections, working a large tract of country. Next they went to Port Augusta and worked the plains to the west, and also to the east into the Flinders Range. In November we find them in the Mallee, east of the River Murray, where they re-discovered Gould’s Pachyce'phala rufogularis. Immediately afterwards they visited Kangaroo Island, following this by a visit to the Lakes to investigate the water birds ; then to Myponga, towards Cape Jervis, and back to Kangaroo Island. As soon as they returned from this trip they set oh for the Gawler Ranges, before going to the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ session at Launceston on November 20, 1912. They attended in order to oppose the Official Check List, moving that it be referred back for further consideration, but received no support. Their judgment was good, as the ill-fated Official Check List was practically still born, being severely criticised upon its appearance in the official organs of both the British Ornithologists’ Union, the Ibis, and the American Ornithologists’ Union, the Auk.

Captain and Mrs. White attended the Camp-out at Flinders Island and made good collections. After exploring the Mangrove Coast north of Port Adelaide, they organised their great expedition into Central Australia, and starting on July 30,

1913,    successfully carried out the project. This must stand as a wonderful feat in every way, as Mrs. White travelled sixteen hundred miles on camels through waterless country, and the results obtained surpassed those of the famous Horn Expedition. The latter was fully equipped with a large staff of trained scientists and a taxidermist, while Captain and Mrs. White made the trip on their own account and brought back more specimens. They attended the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union trip on the Murray River in 1913, and in June,

1914,    Captain White alone went with the Government Expedition to explore the north-west corner of South Australia, and there re-discovered Gould’s Banded Whiteface. This was almost the first time that Mrs. White had not accompanied him on the trip. In November, 1914, Captain White was elected President of the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union and retained office for two years, during which time he and Mrs. White attended the Camp-out in 1914, the only one held during the war.

In October, 1915, as President of the Field Naturalists’ Section, Captain White led a party into the northern end of the Flinders Range, and in the following March worked the Coorong for “ Bristle birds.” Several trips among the islands in Spencer’s and St. Vincent’s Gulfs were then undertaken, and seabirds studied.

In September, 1916, Captain White accompanied the South Australian Museum Expedition to Cooper’s Creek, and in September, 1917, he worked Lake Victoria, River Murray, afterwards going to the Nullarbor Plains.

The above will show that the ornithological survey of South Australia has been fairly completed to the furthest detail, a fact that is inapplicable to any other State, and, moreover, the survey has been carried out by one man, Captain White, and his wife. This achievement places their work quite at the head of ornithological enterprise, and is one almost impossible to surpass.

The majority of the novelties procured by Captain and Mrs. White were presented to me for use in the preparation of my work, and very manp/iomns have been named from his discoveries. Though primarily an ornithologist, Captain White always collected in every branch of natural history, and so did Mrs. White, so that outside ornithology many species have been named in their honour, both in the animal and vegetable world.

Captain White has contributed many articles to the Emu, and has also published several booklets dealing with his expeditions, as “ Ornithologists at Warunda Creek,” “ Into the Dead Heart,” “ Into the Par North-West, ” “ The Cruise of the Avocet,” “ In the Par North-East,” “ Ooldea, on the East-West Railway,” etc., etc. ; while a series of papers have appeared in the Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia, and in the South Australian Ornithologist.

Captain White has sent me numerous excellent field notes for incorporation in my work, many of which have already appeared.

Austral Avian Record ;Vol. 111.)



The name of Tom Carter will always be associated in the history of Australian ornithology with his exploration of the country round the North-West Cape, a virgin and inaccessible locality, which by his pioneer work he developed into a habitable and well-favoured land. It is necessary to remember this, as his ornithological studies were all carried out under the extreme disadvantage of living in a dangerous and distant land, inhabited by treacherous and even cannibal aborigines. Such conditions do not tend to the advancement of natural scientific research (so that the results achieved by such a worker must compare very favourably with the greater number of records made by the ornithological student in the more civilised state). The quantity as well as the quality of Carter’s work stands out prominently in Australian bird study.

Thomas Carter was born at Masham, in Yorkshire, on April 6, 1863. His father was James Carter, of an old Yorkshire family of that district, and it is from him that Tom Carter inherited his intense love of natural history, a feature shared by all the members of the family, six in number, three sons and three daughters. His father helped him to begin egg collecting at the early age of five, a hobby which has survived to this day through all his varied experiences. Not only birds and eggs, but every branch of natural science interested the boy, and at the age of eleven he began to keep a systematic diary devoted to natural history, recording the arrival and departure of migratory birds, breeding and egg-finding notes, interspersed with notes on insect life, botany, and general items in the plant and animal world. This diary was kept for twelve years in England, and more or less ever since wherever Carter has travelled.

He was educated at Sedbergh School, at which school Edward John Eyre, the famous Australian explorer, had been some time previously.

While at school Carter suffered from trouble in his left eye, which has been more or less useless all his life. In view of this, his collecting ability is remarkable, and says much for the enthusiasm of the man. This enthusiasm showed itself early in life, as many most difficult trips were undertaken by the boy, and his tenacity then enabled him to overcome obstacles considered insuperable by other boys. As an instance may be cited his method of exploring a marshy mere. The reeds being inaccessible by swimming or wading, he attempted to drag a boat more than one mile overland. This plan did not succeed, so he borrowed the kitchen table and turning it upside down he paddled this strange “ boat ” among the reeds, successfully achieving his object. This success led to further efforts, and he built himself a light punt, which he used until he was able to buy a real canoe with which he explored the neighbouring rivers for long distances.

In 1884 he visited Filey and climbed the cliffs, collecting his own specimens, and afterwards wrote an account of this trip, which was published in the Zoologist for 1884. About this time he met (Dr.) Eagle Clarke, then at the Leeds Museum, and sent him many notes for his Birds of Yorkshire, afterwards completed by Nelson. Notes were also forwarded to the Zoologist and Naturalist, and to Seebohm for his British Birds. In 1885 he met the Rev. H. H. Slater, who showed him the necessity of preserving bird skins for his ornithological work, and also took him on a collecting trip with him to Iceland, where they found a nest and eggs which they were convinced belonged to the Sanderling, though they could not secure the sitting bird. These eggs were regarded as authentic by Professor Newton, a most careful ornithologist, and this should be the first recorded occurrence of the breeding of this bird in Europe. An account of the trip appeared in the Ibis, January, 1886, and Zoologist, April, 1886. At the end of 1885 Carter, who was engaged in his father’s business, came to London with his brother to open a branch there. This was one of the turning points of his life, as in London he met Seebohm, who introduced him to Bowdler Sharpe, who took him to the scientific meetings which increased his desire for a

naturalist’s life. He made arrangements to go to New Zealand to join his father’s cousin ; but that project fell through, and he turned his attention to West Australia, the attractions of which had been told to him by London friends.

On November 1, 1886, Carter sailed in the s.s. “Australind” for West Australia, and after meeting with a few mishaps, such as grounding on the Geographe Shoals, the ship arrived off Carnarvon on February 6, 1887. One of the leading squatters came on board, and Carter agreed with him to learn station work as a “ new chum ” for lodging and “ tucker ” only. Carter’s natural ability for strenuous work enabled him successfully to overcome the novelties of this hard life, and while so doing he was taking ornithological notes, so that we find a paper in the Zoologist for September the same year dealing with the local bird life. Another paper appeared in the January number and still another in May, 1888. This is worthy of attention, because the “ new chum’s ” life is not an easy one, and the hardships are apt to narrow one’s outlook on natural science. Carter, however, undertook 200-mile trips, and collected birds and made skins on the journeys, carefully making notes all the time. Water was scarce, and natives numerous and dangerous, white men having been speared shortly before. Moreover, these natives still indulged in cannibalism from choice.

Carter later took a couple of thousand wethers to Perth, a distance of seven hundred miles, and he has told me how his last camp was at a “paper bark” swamp north of the city, which is now an artificial lake in a park inside the city boundaries.

He went to stay at Busselton and there, busy as always, he assisted with his host’s farm, learning about the business in many ways. He returned to Carnarvon and took a “ job ” as a full-blown station hand on a station on the Minilya River, where he worked for another year. Having now satisfied himself as to his own capabilities, he made a prospecting trip inland in search of suitable country to take up ; but all the places were too far inland, so he drove a small flock of sheep to Carnarvon and came back with a waggon full of stores, and getting it deeply bogged within sight of his destination the owner paid him off, much to Carter’s satisfaction.

Carter now determined to return home to see his mother, as he had promised he would do, and this seemed a suitable opportunity before settling down. On his way down to Carnarvon he stopped at a station for the night, and the owner asked him to cut a set of stencils for him. Carter, who was good at this, agreed, and this was the second turning point in his life. The owner told him of the wonderful Point Cloates district, which he had just been prospecting, having gone up to see about some wreckage which was strewing the beach. Carter pondered over this subject the next day, while stencil cutting, and in the evening again approached it, getting the offer of the leases, etc., if his prospect turned out favourable. Carter inspected the country himself, and was so pleased with it that he closed with the offer, and his proposed trip to England fell through. Six months had to elapse before he could take it over, so this time was employed in mail carrying and sailing the port lighters, all such work more surely fitting him for his self-selected task of pioneer.

On November 1, 1889, he took delivery of his purchase of stock at the Lyndon River and set out for Point Cloates, which afterwards became ornithologically famous in connection with its first owner. The next few months were engaged in sinking wells, fixing up sheds, etc. When on his prospecting trip he had noted a stranded steamer in good condition, he purchased this and it served him well for fittings for his future home.

For thirteen years he lived at'Point Cloates, developing the country, and all the while systematically collecting and recording the bird life of this hitherto unexplored locality. He had one white assistant at first, and a second soon came, but was treacherously killed by the natives almost immediately. Such a beginning was not encouraging, but the Yorkshire habit of “ sticking it ” enabled Carter to overcome all difficulties, such as the continual absconding of his black labourers in the middle of the busy season and consequent loss of labour while searching for them. Carter was continually exploring the back country, partly from choice and partly from necessity, as the drought made the lowlands unsuitable for the stock and it was necessary to find better wacered places.

On each trip, of course, birds were collected and notes taken, whatever the business might be. On one trip he discovered the long lost Jacob Remessens River of the early Dutch explorers, which was mentioned by Pelsart, who was wrecked on the Abrolhos Islands in 1629. We do not yet know who Jacob Remessens was. This river is called by the natives the Yardie, so it will appear on the later maps as the Yardie Creek.

After selling out at Point Cloates, Carter stayed for some time in South-west Australia, then travelled east and met the eastern ornithologists with whom he had corresponded. He then sailed for England via Japan (where he fell ill with malaria and stayed some six weeks) and America, and arrived at Masham on May 16, 1903, after an absence of seventeen years. Four months later he was married to the lady of his early choice, Miss Annie Ward, who had corresponded with him all the time. He had met his future wife while she was visiting an aunt of his and had determined to marry her, but “ Point Cloates was not the place to take an English girl. ” However, Carter’s health necessitated his leaving England again, so the couple sailed and reached Western Australia before Christmas, 1903. For twelve months they stayed in Perth, and later had almost decided to go to British Columbia when he heard of a place at Broome Hill in the south-west, one hundred miles north of Albany. He settled there in April, 1905, but his health did not improve very much, so in December, 1908, he removed to Albany engaging a manager for the station. With his wife and family he sailed for the East on January 23, 1909; staying a few days at each of the following places : Adelaide, Melbourne, Launceston, Hobart and Sydney, and then back to England, arriving May 16, 1909. He consulted a specialist who told him that he was completely worn down by his strenuous life, but not worn out, and advised him to take care for the future.

At this date he met the writer, with whom he had previously corresponded and to whom he had sent his field notes.

As the vinter approached, Carter again left for Western Australia, arriving with his wife and familyon December 28,1909. After staying at Albany three months they returned to Broome

Hill, whence he made collecting trips in the south-west, and also attempted to revisit Point Cloates, but the drought prevented his proceeding farther than Maud’s Landing.

In August, 1913, he succeeded in reaching Point Cloates, and was gratified at the result of his early work, as he found his old station divided into four prosperous ones. A fine lighthouse had been built near his old house at Point Cloates, and another one near the N.W. Cape, and one of the largest whaling companies in the world, employing about two hundred and fifty hands with a fleet of two large factor ships and six powerful tugs, was operating a few miles north of the homestead, and obtaining their supply of water from a well that Carter had made with his own hands.

On this trip Carter travelled from Carnarvon to the Minilya in a mail coach drawn by six camels, the same route he had worked with a single pack horse in 1887. He now realised that his possibilities had become realities, and that his pioneer work had successfully fructified in his own lifetime.

The strenuous life he had led was, however, now taking its toll, and he reluctantly agreed to lease his station at Broome Hill and return to England with his wife and family. They arrived in England in April, 1914, and after staying a while at Masham, he settled down at Sutton, Surrey, where his wife’s family lived. Settled is the wrong word to use in connection with Carter, as in November, 1915* he again sailed for West Australia, partly on account of bronchial trouble and partly in connection with business at Broome Hill. The writer impressed on him the value of exploring Dirk Hartog Island, and it can be easily understood there was little need for persuasion. He now became a pioneer in another sense, a searcher for a lost species. To one of his ability this was a simple task, and two birds which had eluded the vigilance of collectors for ninety-eight years were re-discovered without much trouble, Nesomalurus leucopterus and Diaphorillas textilis.

He returned to England in April, 1917, but his stay was a brief one and Christmas, 1918, saw him in West Australia again. At present (September, 1919) he is once more in England. It is difficult in a short sketch like the preceding to show his peculiar tenacity of purpose and his resourcefulness in every case of difficulty. Both as a pioneer and as an ornithologist he must rank high.

Ornithological Papers by Thomas Carter.

To The Field, February 23/84, p. 276 ; April 12/84, p. 499 ; April 19/84, p. 560 : April 26/84, p. 566 ; May 3/84, p. 597 ; May 10/84, p. 651.

The Naturalist (Journal of the Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union).

February 1884, p. 117. October 1884, p. 58.

“ Record of 1883 Nesting Season at Masham, Yorks.”

“ Occurrence of Green Sandpiper at Masham.”

November 1884, p. 91.    “ Breeding of Hawfinch in N. Yorks.


June    1886, p. 182

August    1886, p. 231

" The Weather and the Swallows.” “ Marfield Pond, Masham, and its Bird Life.”

February 1887, p. 45.    “ Occurrence of Gannet at Masham.”

The Zoologist.

February 1884, p. 72.    “ Breeding of Redshank at Masham.”

October 1884, p. 431.    “ Green Sandpiper in N. Yorkshire.”

November 1884, pp. 438-448.    “ Egging on the Coast of


December 1884, p. 487.    ‘ Breeding of the Hawfinch in North


January 1885, p. 25. February 1885, p. 67.

September 1885, p. 346.

March 1886, p. 107.

April 1886, p. 1.

July 1886, p. 297.

‘ Nesting of the Dipper.”

‘ Breeding of Lesser Black-backed Gull on Yorks. Coast.”

‘ Breeding of Lesser Black-backed Gull on Yorks. Coast.”

‘ Movements of Grouse in Hard Weather.”

‘ Field Notes from North Iceland.” (Slater & Carter.)

‘ Notes from North Yorks.” September 1887, p. 352.    “ Notes from West Australia.”

January 1888, p. 28.    “ Notes from West Australia.” “ Notes from West Australia.’’

May    1888,    p.    191.

July    1889,    p.    267.

June    1895,    p. 236.

March    1899,    p. 139.

September 1900,    p. 416.

July    1901,    p.    255.

The Emu.

“ Notes from West Australia.”

“ The Sanderling in Australia.”

“ Notes from Point Cloates, West Australia.”

“ Notes from Point Cloates.”

“ Notes from Point Cloates.”

Vol. I. “ North-Western Notes,” pp. 26, 56, 126.

Vol. II. “ Exploration of the North-West Cape,” pp. 77-84.

“ Notes from Point Cloates,” p. 104.

Vol. III. “ Some South-Western Notes,” p. 38.

“ Birds Occurring in the Region of N.W. Cape,” pp. 30-38, 89-96, 171-177, 207-213.

Vol. IV. “ Birds of the Wongan Hills,” p. 69.

Vol. VII. “ Birds Occurring in Areas 8 and 9,” p. 99.

“ Galdens alias Gauldings,” pp. 101, 170.

Vol. VIII.“ Nest and Eggs of Calamanthus montanellus.” p. 97.

“ Notes on Amytornis varia,” p. 103.

Vol. IX. “ Amytis macrura re-discovered,” p. 163.

“ Doctor Bowdler Sharpe,” p. 264.

Vol. X. “ Eield Notes from Broome Hill,” p. 294.

“ The Carter Albatross,” p. 301.

“ Noisy Scrub Bird,” p. 304.

Vol. XII. “ Murder-bird,” p. 201.

Procellaria cequinoctialis mixta,” p. 192.

Victorian Naturalist.

Vol. XXV., p. 86, 1908.    “ Description of a Supposed new


The Ibis.

1886, p. 45.    “ Notes from Northern Iceland.”

(Slater and Carter.)

October 1910, p. 647. “ Remarks on some Birds of Western


October 1912, p. 627 “ Notes on Licmetis pasiinator October 1917, p. 564. “ The Birds of Dirk Hartog Island and

Peron Peninsula.” (Carter and Mathews.)

Austral Avian Record (Voi. III.).



Many years ago a man named Macgillivray worked steadily at the study of ornithology in Scotland, and published a History of British Birds, which did not meet with a good reception by the English authorities. Nevertheless, as the author pointed out, his treatment of the subject was novel and original and the field notes were first hand. No better ornithologist has yet been produced in the British Islands. One son, John, became naturalist on the British surveying ships, and was a true son of his father—a keen, thorough collector and observer. Fate willed that he should visit Australia, at that time little known, and he collected many new birds, which he sent to Gould, who described and figured them in his Supplement, publishing Macgillivray’s field notes in connection with them.

Fifty years afterwards another Macgillivray of the same clan became nearly as famous, strangely enough through discoveries in almost the same district that the former Macgillivray had visited.

In 1852 George Macgillivray, third son of Alistair Macgillivray, lineal chief of the Benchallader branch of the Macgillivray clan, who had been born at Glenbervie, Aberdeenshire, landed in Australia. In the same year, William Macgillivray the elder, also an Aberdeen man, completed his History of British Birds. William David Kerr Macgillivray, the subject of these notes, was the third son of George Macgillivray and his wife Janet Haxton, of Milnathort, Fifeshire, Scotland. He was born at Kallara Station, River Darling, New South Wales, on November 27, 1867, but in 1870 the family removed to the 44 Gulf country/’ Queensland, a station being taken up on Eastern Creek, a tributary of the Flinders. This country was in an absolutely primeval state, unfenced and open, with savage and treacherous natives around and the nearest station forty miles away. Macgillivray’s two elder brothers were unable to play with him, the eldest working on the station, and the other being invalided with malaria. As a consequence, he made friends with the small black piccaninnies of his own age, and went out with them learning all their ways and methods of hunting for food, etc. The difference between the civilised product and the aborigine soon showed itself, as the former began collecting and preserving all the peculiar specimens of natural history he found, whereas the latter never did such a thing. A recess at the end of the house became the “ Museum,” and butterflies and beetles were pinned over the walls, and stones and fossils were stored there. Eggs and the young of lizards were brought in: the former were hatched and the latter reared. In like manner to the blacks, young Macgillivray became an expert at collecting birds and animals by means of sticks and stones. One day, when with his eldest brother and the small blacks, a Grallina was flushed from its nest and his brother suggested that the younger should start an egg collection, giving him two eggs out of the nest, leaving the other two for the bird. Then began an egg collection which must at that time have contained many eggs not taken by any other collector.

Mr. William Armit, whose name is preserved in connection with Poephila armitiana Ramsay, passed the station and became interested in the boy’s collection, and when he returned to Brisbane sent him some sheet cork, pins, and a copy of Balfour’s Elements of Botany. The latter helped in defining groups of plants and was soon learned by heart. The only bird books were those of British birds with pictures, which, however, enabled the young ornithologist to group the local birds into such classes as Hawks, Owls, Finches, Parrots, Kingfishers, etc. At this time Macgillivray many times witnessed the marvellous flights of the harlequin Bronzewings, a bird which in those days inhabited the Mitchell grass plains in countless flocks, but which is now nearly, if not quite, extinct. Galah’s and Bare-eyed Cockatoos were also numerous, but these have held their own with the settlement of the country; and recently Macgillivray again saw an irruption of thousands of Budgerigars nesting all along the creeks a little more south than his boyhood’s station.

Once an irruption of plain rats occurred, and a network of beaten tracks in every direction connecting their warrens could be seen and their squealing heard all night on every side. Hawks and Owls congregated to feast upon them, and dingoes, snakes and goannas filled themselves to repletion every day. The Plain Owl and Delicate Owl were particularly numerous, and on moonlight nights they often lined the ridge of the house roof, and occupied every post and point of vantage roundabout.

It was now time for Macgillivray to go to school, and he and his elder brother journeyed with his parents to Townsville at the end of 1877. Macgillivray took his precious collection of eggs, but they were not securely packed, and on arrival at Townsville were in such a sad condition that he was persuaded reluctantly to abandon the rubbish.

Macgillivray had experienced during this earliest ten years of his life attacks by the wild blacks on the station. These usually took place at night, and were frustrated by the watch dogs’ warning; but armed conflict once occurred in daylight, when Macgillivray and his sister melted the tea-chest lead and moulded bullets for his eldest brother and the stockman to use in muzzle-loading double-barrelled guns to repel the blacks’ attacks.

From Townsville the family travelled to Melbourne, where Macgillivray went to Hofwyl School under a Mr. Alexander Gillespie, who opened St. Kilda Scotch College a year later, and from which Macgillivray matriculated in 1885. During his school days Macgillivray made collecting trips towards Caulfield, Brighton, up the Yarra, and the Mern Creek, and all round Coburg and Preston, and renewed his egg collection. Many holidays were spent at the Koo-wee-rup Swamp, then in its primitive state, and at Sunday Creek, four miles inland from Wandong, where many interesting forms of bird life were met with. In 1886 Macgillivray began his medical studies in Melbourne University, after an interesting holiday spent in the Blue Mountains, New South Wales. He was fortunate in having a year’s course of biology under Professor Baldwin Spencer. During his medical course he met (Dr.) Ernest D’Ombrain and kindred spirits, and they made many excursions together during week-ends and holidays. They also spent some weeks at different times with Mr. John McGregor at the Koo-wee-rup Swamp. D’Ombrain showed Macgillivray how to skin and mount birds, and the latter then began his collection of bird skins. Macgillivray became a member of the Field Naturalists’ Club of Victoria while still at school, and when at the University was elected a member of the Committee.

In 1891 Macgillivray acted as locum tenens at Kanwa in the western Wimmera and made a collection of Mallee forms not found near Melbourne. Then a year at Bendigo, travelling as medical referee, gave him ample opportunity for observation, as most of the travelling was done by buggy or gig with frequent stoppages. Next, he was a few months at Launceston, where observation of bird life was possible ; but then followed two years in Melbourne when no bird work could be undertaken.

In 1895 Macgillivray married the third daughter of Dr. J. H. Eccles, of Newstead, and began to practise at Coleraine in western Victoria. The practice was a large one and took him to all parts of the surrounding district, and birds were observed all the time. D’Ombrain then began work in the neighbouring town of Casterton and they often had the opportunity of . comparing notes. After two and a half years Macgillivray moved to the larger town of Hamilton, twenty miles farther east, where he made both business and pleasure trips into the adjoining country and became very familiar with the bird life.

In February, 1901, Macgillivray left Hamilton for Broken Hill, in New South Wales. Here his busy city and country practice allowed him little leisure, but he managed to make excursions in every direction. Macgillivray used to take his son out, and from six years of age the boy accompanied him on almost every occasion.

About this time Mr. W. Maclennan arrived at Broken Hill from Casterton, and brought a letter of introduction from D’Ombrain, who described him as a keen observer and enthusiastic bird lover. He accompanied Macgillivray on his weekend trips, whenever able to get away from his employment. Each year Macgillivray, his son and Maclennan made a month’s excursion into the surrounding country after birds, at the same

time collecting and studying all animal and plant life, and even minerals, fossils and ethnographical objects were acquired. Animal and insect tracks were studied, and Macgillivray’s early training in the Gulf country enabled him to pick these up very quickly, and his bushcraft then learnt was invaluable in later expeditions.

In 1903 Macgillivray’s wife, who had been ill for more than two years, died, and in 1904 he married her younger sister.

When motors began to replace horses Macgillivray extended his trips, travelling with his son and Maclennan and finding out the bird life to the north-west.

He commissioned Maclennan to go to Queensland to search the Gulf country for new and little-known birds and their eggs, as he was, and still is, primarily an oologist and a scientific one. After going to the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union meeting at Brisbane with Dr. Dobbyn, of Broken Hill, Macgillivray sailed for Cooktown to pick up Maclennan, but missed him, and after collecting for a week, he commissioned a cutter and sailed the Barrier Reef to Raine’s Island and then to Somerset, Cape York, where he met Maclennan, and a few days were spent under Maclennan’s guidance in the scrubs there. Macgillivray returned to Broken Hill, but Maclennan remained behind ; the former then made his excursions with his son alone. Although these excursions became fewer, owing to stress of work, notes were continually being made.

Soon Maclennan wrote from Cape York that a new Parrot of large size was said to live in the scrub at Pascoe River, and asked if he should go in search of it. Macgillivray replied in the affirmative, and Maclennan sent him not only the Parrot, which was an Eclectus, but also another which proved to be Geoffroyus, a new genus of Honey-eater, and a new genus of Finch, in all four genera new to Australia. Maclennan urged Macgillivray to come and see the country for himself, and this he did, together with Mr. Kershaw from the Melbourne Museum, and his own son. On this trip Raine’s Island was thoroughly explored. When he returned to Broken Hill I met the second of those Macgillivrays whose names were so familiar.

Maclennan in January, 1917, returned to Broken Hill after a serious illness contracted in the Northern Territory, and another long trip to the Cooper was undertaken. On this trip they had much trouble with their motor, but the delay caused enabled many more notes to be taken.

Upon their return Macgillivray received his commission in the A. M.C., and Maclennan also joined the Forces. Macgillivray arrived in England in July, 1916. Both visited me while here, and the bulk of the preceding narrative was secured at that time.

I have noted the work of S. A. White and Tom Carter, and now W. D. K. Macgillivray. It is interesting to compare their work and see how successful each has been.

Macgillivray’s active life as a doctor did not prevent him from seizing every opportunity of bird observation and also of exploration. The results are magnificent, the discovery of the two large Parrots being the most extraordinary item. Of course, as I will mention shortly in writing of Maclennan, the latter has the direct right of discovery, but there can be no doubt that the enthusiasm of Macgillivray greatly assisted him. It is noteworthy how, in his published accounts of their joint trips, Macgillivray always emphasises the value of Maclennan’s work.

In conclusion, these three men have set a very high standard for the future Australian ornithologist, and I doubt whether their records will be surpassed. Carter proposes to publish an account of his life-work in the North-west, and Macgillivray has a superfluity of notes which should be published by the compiler for the use of students.

His published writings are few as yet, but of great value.


Austral Avian Record


VOL. III. No. 8.


Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, England



Subscription per Volume 12/- Net.

WITHEREY & CO., 326 High Holborn, London, W.C. 1. February 13 th, 1920.



A S53lbX l/


abyssinicus, Buceros, 36. abyssinus, Coracias, 35.

Acanthiza chrysorrhoea, 107.

-diemenensis, 107.

— flaviventris, 61, 78.

-inornata, 107.

-- iredalei, 75.

-lineata, 107.

-magna, 61.

--pyrrhopygia, 107.

reguloides, 107. tenuirostris, 75.

Acanthorhynchus superciliosus, 107.

--tenuirostris, 107.

Acanthornis gouldi, 61.

Acanthylis caudacuta, 104.

Accipiter cirrocephalus hsesitata, 128. accipitrinus, Psittacus, 91. Acridotheres, 43.

Aerocephalus australis, 106.

---longirostris, 106.

adamsi, Sauropatis sanctus, 68. ¿Egotheles leucogaster, 106.

novae hollandise, 106. iegyptius, Pluvianus, 50. aeneus, Ceuthmochares, 48.

-. Cuculus, 35, 48.

aequinoctialis, Procellaria, 76. aeratus, Ceuthmochares, 48. aereus, Cuculus, 48. xBstrelata lessonii australis, 54.

--leucocephala, 54.

afer, Cuculus, 143.

affinis, Amimeta sagittata, 68.

, Milvus, 102.

Oriolus, 106.

-, Pardalotus, 106.

afra, Turtur, 34, 38. africana, Alauda, 47.

, Certhilauda, 47.

-, Parra, 14.

, Schizorhis, 44, 146.

--, Phasianus, 44, 143, 147.

aguimp, Motacilla, 14, 20.

Ahea, 37.

Alauda, 155.

-- africana, 47.

capensis, 47. matutina, 35.

-nigra, 35, 160.

nigri, 46. rufa, 46.

alba, Fúlica, 22.

, Gygis, 77.

, Herodias, 50.

, Leucanous, 64.

. Motacilla, 50.

alberti, Craspedophora magnifica, 72.

, Harriwhitea alberti, 58. albicilla, Haliaetus, 109. albicollis, Ficedula, 123. albifrons, Pipra, 143. albigularis, Tregellasia leucops, 59. albilineata, Dorothina, 76.

Meliphaga, 76. albipennis, Entomyza, 107. albiscapa, Rhipidura, 103. albiventer, Hirundo, 35. albiventris, Cypselus, 16.

. Zosterops albiventris, 62. albogularis, Melithreptes, 105. alboscapulatus, Devisornis, 90.

, Malurus, 89. albus, Cosmerodius, 65.

, Trochilus, 42.

Alca, 37, 118, 156.

--psittacula, 144.

Alcedo, 155.

cancrophagus, 34, 48. ceyx purpurata, 16. chloris, 36.

--j avana, 36.

alexanderi, Chenonetta jubata, 56.

-, Thalassogeron chrysostoma, 55. , Virago castanea, 56. alexandrse, Northipsitta alexandrse, 65. , Polytelis, 108.

--, Spathopterus alexandrse, 57.

alexandri, Psittacus, 91 Alia, 37.

Alisteranus cinctus atropygialis, 159.

--maclennani, 159.

alisteri, Samuela, 75.

Alle, 118.

alligator, Leucotreron, 74. alpestris, Chionophilos, 116.

-, Octocorys, 116.

alpina, Tringa, 114.

Amadina castanotis, 102.

-lathami, 102.

amboinensis, Psittacus, 91, 92. americanus, Garrulus, 15. amethystina, Calliphlox, 42. amethystinus, Trochilus, 35, 42. Amimeta, 68.

-flavocincta, 68.

--flavocincta, 68.

--kingi, 68.

--madaraszi, 68.

---parryi, 68.

-sagittata, 68.

----affinis, 68.

---blaauwi, 68.

--sagittata, 68.

--subaffinis, 68.

Ampelis, 154.

-carnobarba, 11.

--grisea, 36, 50.

-nivea, 36.

-variegata, 11.

Amytis gigantura, 84.

-macrourus, 82, 84.

-macrura, 174.

Amytornis varia, 174.

Anas, 156.

-cygnus, 117.

-javana, 37.

-mollissima, 144.

Angroyan cyanopterus, 67.

--cyanopterus, 67.

--perthi, 67.

annulosa, Estrelda, 107.

Anous stolidus antelius, 159.

---gilberti, 159.

Anseranus melanoleuca, 104. antárctica, Priocella, 99. antarcticus, Lopholaimus, 3. antelius, Anous stolidus, 159. Anthochœra carunculata, 104.

-mellivora, 104.

Anthoscopus pendulinus, 148, 150. Anthus australis, 105.

--campestris, 125.

-rufescens, 1.25.

-spinoletta, 126.

apsleyi, Graucalus hypoleuca, 68. Aptenodytes, 156.

Aptenodytes chilensis, 143, 147.

--demersus, 147.

-patagonica, 76.

Apus, 155.

apus, Hirundo, 16.

aquaticus, Rallus, 14.

Aquila, 154.

-audax, 107.

----- fusca, 9.

Ara, 154.

arcuata, Dendrocygna, 108.

Ardea, 156.

--cinerea, 77.

--garzette major, 37, 50.

--leucogaster, 34.

---major, 50.

-naevia, 37.

--nycticorax cayanensis, 36, 50.

ardens, Fringilla, 35, 49.

Ardetta flavicollis, 103.

Arenaria, 114.

--interpres nova, 69.

arenaria. Tringa, 114. argenticeps, Tropidorhynchus, 105. Argya caudata, 16.

Arizelomyia, 123.

--- latirostris, 123.

armitiana, Poephila, 176.

Arses kaupi, 105.

Artamus leucopygialis, 105.

--sordi dus, 105.

--superciliosus, 105.

ashbyi, Geobasileus, 61.

--, Pachycephala pectoralis, 137.

Ashbyia lovensis, 75. asiaticus, Psittacus, 92.

Astur, 153, 154.

-novsehollandiae, 106.

ater, Oriolus, 35. aterrimus, Microglossus, 102.

-, Psittacus, 143.

Athene boobook, 102.

--strenua, 107.

athertoni, Iredaleornis cinereifrons, 66, atricapilla, Certhia, 25, 26, 28.

--, Meliphaga, 26, 27.

--, Melithreptus, 29.

--, Turdus, merula, 34, 40.

atricapillus, Lanio, 46.

-, Melithreptes, 27, 29.

-, Turdus, 40.

Atrichia clamosa, 58, 97.

Atrichornis, 58.

-rufescens rufescens, 71.

---tweedi, 71.

atropygialis, Alisteranus cinctus, 159. Atticora leucosternon, 106.

audax, Aquila, 107. aurantia, Euphema, 104.

. Motacilla, 33. aurantias, Picus, 36. aureus, Oriolus, 15. auricapillus, Regulus, 119. auricomis, Ptilotis, 103. auricularis, Otogyps, 113. aurora, Muscicapa, 35. austini, Paragraucalus lineatus, 60. australis, Acrocephalus, 106.

—, ^Estrelata lessonii, 54.

, Anthus, 105.

, Cypselus, 104.

--, Eopsaltria, 75, 107.

, Eudromias, 104.

, Eurystomus, 103.

, Mycteriae, 103.

. Fregetta tropica, 96.

, Haliaetus, 70.

, Nectarinia, 102.

, Numenius, 106.

, Nyroca, 105.

, Podiceps, 108.

, Regulus, 19.

. Rhynchoea, 103.

, Scolopax, 103.

, Sphecotheres, 102.

, Synoicus, 108.

, Terekia cinerea, 69.

, Ypsilophorus, 63.

Austropitta kreffti, 66. strepitans, 66. versicolor, 66.

intermedia, 66. simillima, 66. versicolor, 66.

Austrotis australis derbyi, 51.

-    melvillensis,    51.

Austroturnix olivii, 74, 77.

pyrrhothorax berneyi, 53.

- intermedia, 53.

Avocetta recurvirostra, 34. axillaris, Eianus, 103.

baileyi, Megopodargus papuensis, 65. bandensis, Psittacus, 92.

Barbaculus, 143, 144. barnardi, Platycercus, 103. barroni, Tregellasia capito, 59. basalis, Chrysococcyx, 104. Bartramia longicauda, 77.

Baza leuphotes, 20. lophotes, 20.

bebba, Pomatostomus ruficeps, 60. Belchera rosea queenslandica, 59. -- rosea, 59.

belcheri, Heteroprion, 74. bella, Estrelda, 107. belli, Hydrochelidon leucoptera, 55. bellus, Porphyrio, 103. bengalensis, Cuculus, 12.

--, Fringilla, 18.

. Psittacus, 92, 93.

--, Thalasseus bengalensis, 55.

begalus, Fringilla, 51. bennetti, Corvus, 76. berigora, Ieracidea, 103. berneyi, Austroturnix pyrrhothorax, 53.

Bernicla j ubata, 107. beryllinus, Coryllis, 93.

, Psittacus, 92, 93.

Bessonornis, 43. dichrous, 43.

bichenovii, Estrelda, 107. bicolor, Cossypha, 43.

. Merops, 34.

, Muscicapa, 43.

Biziura lobata, 105.

blaauwi, Amimeta sagittata, 68.

Bodytes, 144.

Bombycilla, 15.

cedrorum, 15.

Bombycivora, 15.

garrula, 15. boobook, Athene, 102. boodang, Muscicapa, 74.

. Petroica multicolor, 74. borneus, Psittacus, 91. borroloola, Pachycephala robusta, 137. bourkii, Neopsephotus bourkii, 57. boweri, Bowyeria, 76.

,    boweri, 61.

, Manopsitta diophthalma, 65.

, Oreoscopus gutturalis, 61.

---, Sphecotheres maxillaris, 63.

Bowyeria boweri, 76.

boweri, 61.

— kurandi, 61.

brachyptera, Sphenura brachyptera, 61.

brachyurus, Merula (Corvus), 34, 39. bracteatus, Dicrurus, 105. brasiliensis, Buceo, 10. brevicaudus, Lestris, 15. brevipes, Heteractitis incanus, 64. brevirostris, Meliphaga, 27.

, Melithreptes, 105.

, Melithreptus, 27, 28, 29. britannicus, Regillus regulus, 119.

Regulus regulus, 119. britannicus, Rex regulus, 119. broomei, Dorothina virescens, 67.

brunneicauda, Microeca, 75.

•--brunneicauda, 58.

brunneopygia, Drymodes, 104. brunnescens, Dorothina fasciogularis, 67.

Buceo, 10, 154.

-brasiliensis, 10.

-calcaratus, 143.

-erythrocephalus, 34.

-flavigula, 34.

—-— striatus, 10.

-tamatia, 10.

-torquatus, 10.

-variegatus, 10.

-virens, 36.

-- viridis, 36.

Buceros, 155.

-abyssinicus, 36.

-manillse, 36.

-scutata, 37.

Buchanga cineraceus, 12.

-insularis, 12.

Budytes, 144.

-flava, 77.

Bulestes mentalis, 76.

Buphaga, 155.

Butastur teesa, 77.

Buteo, 153, 154.

-melanosternon, 108.

-plumipes, 11.

Butorides rogersi, 75.

bynoei, Pachycephala melanura, 136.

byroni, Reinholdia reinholdi, 77.

Cacatúa eos, 106.

-leadbeateri, 105.

-moluccensis, 92.

-sanguinea, 104.

Cacicus, 154.

-persicus, 11.

-yapou, 11.

Cacomantis pallidus, 2. caerulea, Halobsena caerulea, 54. cairncrossi, Zosterops albiventris, 62. Calamanthus montanellus, 174. calcaratus, Buceo, 143. caléndula, Motacilla, 125.

Calidris, 114, 157. calidris, Tringa, 114.

Calliphlox amethystina, 42.

Calliptilus solitarius, 93.

Callista, 148.

Calliste, 148.

Caloptilotis macleayana johnstoni, 62.

--macleayana, 62.

Calyptorhynchus banksi northi, 133. -funereus, 104.

Calyptorhynchus leachii, 103.

---xanthonotus, 104.

Campbellornis superciliosus pallida, 61

--superciliosus, 61.

campestris, Anthus, 125. canadensis, Fringilla, 34, 41.

-, Motacilla, 33.

-, Spizella, 41.

canaria, Fringilla, 15. canariensis, Carduelis, 15.

Cancroma, 159. cancrophagus, Alcedo, 34, 48. canescens, Monarcha, 75.

-, Monarcha canescens, 71.

cantillans, Cincloramphus, 105. Canutus, 114, 115. capensis, Alauda, 47.

-, Certhilauda, 47.

-, Fringilla, 37.

-, Fringilla carduelis, 33, 37.

capito, Eopsaltria, 107.

Caprimulgus, 155.

-macrurus, 103.

caprius, Cuculus, 37.

Carbo, 156.

Cardinalis, 144, 145, 150. cardinalis, Eclectus, 46.

-, Eos, 46.

-, Lorius, 46.

-, Loxia, 145.

-, Psittacus, 35.

-, Richmondena, 145.

Carduelis, 37, 155.

-canariensis, 15.

-communis, 15.

carduelis capensis, Fringilla, 33, 37

-. Fringilla, 15, 37.

carinata, Monarcha, 103. carnobarba, Ampelis, 11.

-, Procnias, 11.

carolinensis, Muscicapa, 35, 51. Carpophaga leucomela, 106.

-luctuosa, 106.

-magnifica, 105.

carteri, Crocethia, 114.

-, Diaphorillas, 128.

-.- textilis, 85, 87.

-, Eremiornis, 75, 79.

carthagena, Gallinula, 14. carunculata, Anthochoera, 104. castanea, Virago castanea, 56. castanops, Strix, 105. castanotis, Amadina, 102.

Casuarius johnsonii, 105.

Catarractes chrysocome, 97. Catarrhactes chrysocome, 147. caudacuta, Acanthylis, 104.

caudata, Argya, 1G. caudatus, Cossyphus, 16. cauta, Diomedea, 100.

-, Diomedella cauta, 55.

cayanensis, Ardea nycticorax, 36, 50.

-, Formicarius, 36.

cayanus, Coracias, 35, 40.

-, Saltator, 41.

cayneus, Malurus, 103. cecila1, Corvus, 76. ceclanensis, Psittacus (Larius), 45. cedrorum, Bombycilla, 15.

Celeus undatus, 49.

Celuro, 142, 145. cenchroides, Tinnunculus, 104. Centrites niger, 46.

Centropus ferrugineus, 12.

--javanensis, 12.

Ceophloeus, 18.

Cereopsis novahollandia, 104. Certhia, 155.

- atricapilla, 25, 26, 28.

-coccínea, 144.

lunulata, 26. viridis, 51.

Certhilauda africana, 47.

-capensis, 47.

Certhionyx variegatus neglecta, 62.

--variegatus, 62.

cerulea, Procellaria, 100.

, Procelstema, 77 cerviniventris, Chlamydera, 104. cervinus, Ypsilophorus, 63. cetti, Sylvia, 115.

Cettia, 115.

Ceuthmochares seneus, 48.

-aeratus, 48.

Ceyx, 155.

ceyx purpurata, Alcedo, 16. Chseneirhynchus, 143, 144. Chalcophaps chrysochlora, 108.

- longirostris, 108. chalcoptera, Phaps, 103.

Charadrius, 157.

niger, 37, 50.

Chenalopex, 118.

Cheniscus coromandelianus mac-kayi, 56.

— pulchellus rogersi, 56. Chenonetta jubata alexanderi, 56.

- jubata, 56.

chilensis, Aptenodytes, 143.

, Molinada, 147. chinensis, Coracias, 35.

, Synoicus, 108.

Chionophilos, 116.

-alpestris, 116.

Chinospina nivalis, 121.

Chizaerhis, 146, 150. piscator, 44.

Chlamydera cerviniventris, 104.

maculata, 104.

Chloris, 155. chloris, Alcedo, 36. chlorolepidota, Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota, 57. chlorolepidotus, Trichoglossus, 105. chloropsis, Melithreptes, 105. chrysocephalus, Sericulus, 105. chrysochlora, Chalcophaps, 108. Chrysococcyx basalis, 104. lucidus, 104.

--minutellus, 104.

osculanis, 104.

chrysocome, Catarractes, 97.

, Catarrhactes, 147. chrysopterus, Psittacus, 91. chrysopterygius, Psophotellus chrysopterygius, 159. chrysorrhoea, Acanthiza, 107. chrysostoma, Euphema, 105.

, Thalassarche. 99.

, Thalassogeron, 99. chrysotis, Ptilotis, 106. eia, Emberiza, 48.

Ciconia, 156.

Cinathisma cyaneoleuca, 77. Cincloramphus cantillans, 105. cruralis, 105.

-rufescens, 105.

Cinclorhamphus, 125. mathewsi, 127.

Cinclosoma cinnamoneus, 107. Cinclus, 114. cinclus, Tringa, 114. cinctus,. Erythrogonys, 104.

, Parus, 36.

cineraceus, Buchanga, 12. cinerea, Ardea, 77.

, Motacilla, 35, 50.

, Procellaria, 54.

, Struthidea, 127. cinereifrons, Iredaleornis, 66. cinnamomea, Parra, 14.

-, Samuelia cinnamomea, 60. cinnamomeus, Cinclosoma, 107 Circus, 153, 154. jardinii, 105.

Cirrepidesmus mongolus, 160. cirrocephalus, Paraspizias cirro-cephalus, 128. citrea, Motacilla, 36. citrina, Muscicapa, 35, 37, 51.

-, Wilsonia, 51.

clamosa, Atrichia, 58, 97.

-, Rahcinta, 58.

Clangula, 149.

claudi, Macgillivrayornis, 76. claudia, Craspedophora magnifica,


-, Monarcha canescens, 71.

clelandi, Dorothina versicolor, 67.

-, Spiloglaux novæ seelandiæ, 70.

clypeata, Spatula, 77, 107.

Clytolæma rubinea. 41.

--rubricauda, 41.

coccinea, Certhia, 144.

—•—, Petroica multicolor, 74. coccineus, Psittacus, 92, 93. cockerelli, Hemiptilotis, 68.

-, Tricodere cockerelli, 71.

Cœlebs, 155.

ecerulea, Halobæna, 100.

cœruleus Psittacus, 91.

Colcloughia melanogaster goweri, 53.

-melanogaster melanogaster, 53.

colei, Streperà fuliginosa, 63.

Colius, 155.

-erythromelon, 11.

•-quiriva, 11.

-quiriwa, 11.

-senegai ensis, 11.

collaria, Loxia, 38. collaris, Loxia, 38.

—-—, Muscicapa, 123.

-, Sporophila, 38.

-. Trogon, 12.

Collocalia esculenta, 77.

-fuciphaga, 77.

Colluricincla harmonica, 104.

-parvula, 104.

-woodwardi, 7 6.

Columba, 155.

-cy ano virens, 19.

-oceanica, 19.

-pallida, 1, 21.

-zoeæ, 19.

Colymbus, 156. communis, Carduelis, 15. concinna, Myiagra, 105. concinnus, Trichoglossus, 105 connectens, Graucalus novæhollandiæ, 66.

consobrina, Pachycephala robusta, 137. conspicillata, Procellaria, 77. conspicillatus, Pelicanus, 105. cooperi, Dorothina virescens, 67. Coprotheres pomarinus, 77.

--nutchceri, 72.

Coracia, 120.

-coracia, 120.

Coracias, 120, 155.

-abyssinus, 35.

-cayanus, 35, 40.

---chinensis, 35.

Coracina, 66.

-robusta robusta,    60.

--victoriæ, 60.

corniculatus, Tropidorhynchus, 105. Cornix, 120.

coronoides, Corvus, 106.

Corthylis, 118.

Corvus, 155.

-brachyurus, 34, 39.

—-—    bennetti, 76.

Corvus cecilæ, 76.

-coronoides, 106.

-graculus, 120.

-monedula, 120.

-nudicollis, 35.

-varians, 144

Coryllis beryllinus, 93.

Cosmerodius albus, 65.

---albus, 65

--—    neglecta,    65.

--syrmataphorus,    65.

Cossypha bicolor, 43.

Cossyphus caudatus, 16.

-ininutus, 16.

-olivaceus, 43.

-- striatus, 16.

Cotinga, 50.

Coturnix, 155.

--pectoralis, 106.

Coua gigas, 48. coxeni, Cyclopsitta, 107.

-, Manopsitta, 65.

Cracticus destructor, 107.

-nigrogularis, 107.

-picatus, 107.

Craspedophora magnifica alberti, 72.

---claudia, 72.

Crax, 156.

crepitans, Psophodes, 108.

Crex crex, 76.

Crinifer, 143, 145, 146, 150.

-piscator, 146.

cris tata, Ficophaga, 14.

-, Fringilla dominicana, 34, 38.

-. Oreoica, 105.

-. Paroaria, 38.

-, Sphenostoma, 108.

-, Tanagra, 144.

cristatus, Oriolus, 34.

--, Ploceus, 14.

-, Psittacus, 91.

crocea, Ephthianura, 60.

Croce thia, 114.

Crocethia leucophgea, 114. carteri, 114. leucophtca, 114. tridactyla, 114. crocro, Upupa, 14.

Cromba, 143, 144. crombus Leptosomus, 20.

Crotophaga, 154.

Crucir ostra, 155.

cruralis, Cincloramphus, 105.

Crypsirhina, 145.

Cryptura tetrao, 47.

Ctenanas eytoni, 65.

eytoni, 65. munna, 65. cucullata, Loxia, 38.

, Par oaria, 38.

Cuculus, 154.

seneus, 35, 48. sereus, 48.

--afer, 143.

bengalensis, 12. caprius, 37. cupreus, 37.

-gigas, 36, 48, 49.

inornatus, 1.

-jacobinus, 36.

javanicus, 12.

- pusillus, 11, 12. pyrrocephalus, 144. variegatus, 2. vetula, 143.

culminatus, Thalassogeron chryso-stoma, 55.

Cuncuma leucogaster, 111, 112. cuneata, Geopelia, 108. cupreus, Cuculus, 37. cyaneus, Malurus, 103. cyanifrons, Hydrogallina, 14, cyanocephalus, Psittacus, 91. cyanogrammus, Trichoglossus, 93. cyanoleuca, Cinathisma, 77. cyanopterus, Angroyan cvanopterus, 67.

-. Psittacus, 34.

cyanotis, Entomyza, 107. cyanotus, Hallornis leuconotus, 89.

—■—, Malurus, 82, 83. cyanovirens, Columba, 19. cyanurus, Turdus, 34.

Cyclopsitta coxeni, 107.

Cygnus, 116.

-olor, 116.

cygnus, Anas, 117.

Cymindis, 10.

Cyphorhina, 65.

-plumífera neglccta, 57.

Cyphorhina, plumífera plumífera, 57. Cyphorinus, 65.

Cypselus albiventris, 16. australis, 104. niger, 16. vulgaris, 16.

Dacelo gaudichaud, 16.

-gigantea, 102.

-gigas mclennani, 70.

---watsoni, 70.

--leachii, 105.

Daulias, 17.

--megarhyncha, 117.

decipiens, Dorothina virescens, 67. demersus, Aptenodytes, 147. Dendrocygna arcuata, 108.

-eytoni, 108.

derbyi, Austrotis australis, 51.

--Licmetis tenuirostris, 57.

Dessonornis, 43. destructor, Cracticus, 107.

Devisornis, 90.

alboscapulatus, 90. diamenensis, Ypsilophorus, 63. Diaphorillas carteri, 128. purnelli, 159. textilis, 172.

carteri, 85, 87. purnelli, 159. textilis, 86.

dichroa, Muscícapa, 43. dichrous, Bessonornis, 43.

Dicrurus bracteatus, 105. leucophaeus, 13. mystaceus, 13.

didimus, Graucalus novaehollandise, 66.

-----. Lewinornis rufiventris, 159.

Didus, 157.

diemenensis, Acanthiza, 107.

Diomedea cauta, 100. epomophora, 77. exulans, 99.

Diomedella cauta cauta, 55.

rohui, 55, 160. wallaca, 160.

Diomedia, 156. diophthalma, Manopsitta, 65.

, diophthalma, 65. discolor, Lathamus, 107.

Leptosomus, 49.

Domicella, 46.

Psittacus, 91.

dominicana, cristata, Fringilla, 34, 38. dominicanus fulvus, Pluvialis, 52. dorotheae, Magnamytis, 76.

Dorothina albilineata, 76.

Dorothina fasciogularis, 67.

--brunnescens,    67.

---fasciogularis,    67.

-frenata, 67.

---frenata, 67.

--petersoni, 67.

-lewini, 67.

--ivi, 67.

--lewini, 67.

--mab, 67.

---nea, 67.

-versicolor, 67.

--clelandi, 67.

---versicolor, 67.

--virescens, 67.

--broomei, 87.

--cooperi, 67.

----decipiens, 67.

---forresti, 67.

---insularis, 67.

--murchisoni, 67.

--rogersi, 67.

--sonora, 67.

--virescens, 67.

--walgetti, 67.

----westwoodia, 67.

dovei, Macronectes giganteus, 54. dryas, Rhipidura, 103.

Drymodes brunneopygia, 104.

-superciliaris, 104.

dubuis, Ixobrychus minutus, 24. dulcei, Meliornis nigra, 127. duperryi, Megapodius, 18, 20. dydimus, Priofinus cinereus, 54.

-, Uralcyon sylvia, 58.

Dyottornis paradoxus paradoxus, 63. --westernensis, 63.

Eagle, Sea, 109.

Eclectus, 63, 79, 179.

--roratus, 45.

Edolius leucophseus, 12.

-mystaceus, 12.

edouardi, Malurus, 82, 83.

-Nesomalurus, 88.

Egretta, 65.

--garzetta immaculata, 56.

--kempi, 56.

--, Herodias, 50.

Eider, 144, 145, 149.

Elanus axillaris, 103.

--scriptus victorianus, 70.

elegans, Euphema, 104.

--, Leggeornis elegans, 61.

——, Malurus, 103.

Elseyornis melanops, 64.

---marngli, 64.

Elseyornis melanops melanops, 64.

--russata, 64.

-nigrifrons, 64.

Emberiza, 155.

-eia, 48.

--- flav., 35.

-migrans, 34, 48.

Empidias fuscus, 51.

Eniconetta, 123, 124.

Entomyza albipennis, 107.

--cyanotis, 107.

Eopsaltria australis, 75, 107.

--capito, 107.

--griseo gularis, 107.

-hilli, 134.

-in ornata, 75.

-leucogaster, 107.

Eos cardinalis, 46.

-grayi, 46.

eos, Cacatua, 106.

Ephthianura crocea, 60. epomophora, Diomedea, 77. eques, Motacilla, 50.

--, Muscicapa, 36.

Eremiornis carteri, 75, 79. Eremophila, 116.

Eremophilus, 116.

Erithacus, 122, 155.

Erolia ferruginea wilsoni, 70. erythrocephala, Myzomela, 108. erythrocephalus, Bucco, 34.

--, Psittacus, 92.

Erythrogonys cinctus, 104. erythroleucus, Psittacus, 91. erythromelon, Colius, 11. erythropis, Picus, 18. erythrops, Picus, 18. erythrorhynchos, Upupa, 143, 146. Erythrotriorchis radiatus katherinse,


----- queenslandicus, 128.

----rufotibia, 128.

Erythrura trichroa, 76. esculenta, Coliocalia, 77.

Estrelda annulosa, 107.

--bella, 107.

--bichenovii, 107.

-modesta, 107.

--oculea, 107.

-phaeton, 102.

-ruficauda, 102.

--temporalis, 102.

Ethelornis magnirostris whitlocki, 24. Eudromias australis, 104.

Eudyptes serresianus, 74.

Eulor, 117.

--olor, 117.

eupatria, Psittacus, 91.

Euphema aurantia, 104. chrysostoma, 105.

-elegans, 104.

-splendida, 97, 105.

Euphone, 144, 145, 148.

Euphonia, 145, 148.

Eupoda, 64.

Eupodella virida, 64. europaea, Pyrrhula, 121. europaeus, Garrulus, 15.

Eurostopodus mystacalis mystacalis,


----victoriae, 58.

Eurystomus australis, 103.

Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota chloro-lepidota, 57. minor, 57.

exsul, Hallornis leuconotus, 89. exulans, Diomedea, 99. eytoni, Ctenanas, 65.

, Dendrocygna, 108.

falcata, Pachycephala, 102.

Falcinellus igneus, 107. falcinellus, Limicola, 74.

, Platyrhamphus, 64.

Falco, 154.

--frontatus, 105.

fulvus, 9. haliaetes, 112. haliaetus, 111.

-harpyia, 32.

-leuphotes, 13.

-lophotes, 14.

pennatus, 11.

-peregrinus, 107.

-    piscator, 34, 44.

-    ruficeps, 13. subniger, 104.

farinosus, Psittacus, 36. fasciatus, Turdus macrourus, 34. fasciogularis, Dorothina faciogularis, 67.

-, Ptilotis, 103.

ferrugineus, Centropus, 12. festivus, Psittacus, 91.

Ficedula, 122, 155.

albicollis, 123.

Ficophaga cristata, 14.

Aligera, Ptilotis, 106.

--, Xanthotis flaviventer, 71.

flav., Emberiza, 35. flava, Budytes, 77. flaveolus, Platycercus, 105. flavicollis, Ardetta, 103.

-, Nesoptilotis flavicollis, 62.

flavida, Pseudogerygone personata, 59. flavigula, Buceo, 34.

, Myzantha, 106.

--, Picus, 36.

, Psittacus, 34.

, Ptilotis, 106.

flaviventer, Machaerirhinchus, 107. flaviventris, Acanthiza, 61, 78.

, Geobasileus, 75.

--, Keartlandia, 78.

-, Platycercus, 103.

, Sphecotheres, 102, 144. flavocincta, Amimeta flavocincta, 68.

—, Neomimeta flavocincta, 68. flavocinctus, Mimetes, 68.

-, Oriolus, 106.

flavogularis, Zosterops, 97. flindersi, Nesoptilotis flavicollis, 62. Formicarius cayanensis, 36. formosus, Pezoporus, 106. forresti, Dorothina virescens, 67. Fregata, 153, 156,

Fregetta melanogaster, 95.

■ tropica, 76.

--australis, 96.

Fregettornis grallarius, 77. frenata, Dorothina frenata, 67.

-, Meliphaga frenata, 62. fretensis, Hirundo, 106. freycinet, Megapodius, 16, 17. Fringilla, 155.

-ardens, 35, 49.

-bengalensis, 18.

-bengalus, 51.

-canadensis, 34, 41.

-canaria, 15.

-capensis, 37.

— carduelis, 15, 33, 57.

-dominicana cristata, 34, 38.

-fusca, 51.

- — larvata, 33.

-rosea, 34, 48.

Carduelis capensis, 33, 37. frontatus, Falco, 105. fuciphaga, Collocalia, 77.

Fúlica, 157.

-alba, 22.

-major, 34.

- parva, 36.

, White, 22.

fuliginosa, Pachycephala pectoralis, 137.

, Streperà fuliginosa, 63. Fulmarus parkinsoni, 96. fulva, Tañara, 46.

-, Tangara, 36, 160.

fulvus, Falco, 9.

fulvus, Lanío, 47.

-, Pluvialis dominicus, 52.

funereus, Calyptorhynchus, 104. fusca, Aquila, 9.

-, Fringilla, 51.

-, Muscicapa, 35, 51.

-, Petroica, 104.

fuscata, Phseorhadina, 116.

-, Phillopneuste, 116.

fuscatus, Phylloscopus, 116. fusciventer, Loxia, 34. fusco-fulvus, Picus, 35. fuscus, Empidias, 51.

-. Ptilotis, 103.

Gabianus pacificus kingi, 56.

—■— --- pacificus, 56.

galactodes, Sphenceacus, 106. Gálbula, 154. galeata, Muscicapa, 34. galeatus crist, Psittacus, 91, 92. galgulus, Psittacus, 91. gallinacea, Scolopax, 10.

Gallínula, 157.

-carthagena, 14.

Gallinule, White, 22.

Gallus, 156. gambetta, Tringa, 114. garrula, Bombycivora, 15.

-. Myzantha, 106.

Garrulus, 15.

-americanus, 15.

-europseus, 15.

--glandarius, 15.

---minor, 20.

--- —• oenops, 20.

--major, 15.

-minor, 15.

-oenops, 15.

garrulus, Psittacus, 91. garzette major, Ardea, 37. 50. gaudichaud, Dacelo, 16.

Geobasileus ashbyi, 61.

-flaviventris, 75.

-healeyi, 75.

geoffroyi, Geoffroyus, 75.

--. Psittacus, 93.

Geoffroyus, 79. 179.

-geoffroyi, 75.

Geopelia cuneata, 108.

- tranquilla, 108.

Geopsittacus occidentalis, 97, 106. georgianus, Quoyornis georgianus, 59. gibberifrons, Virago, 75. gigantea, Dacelo, "102.

--, Procellaria, 99.

giganteus, Macronectes giganteus, 54.

gigantura, Amytis, 84. gigas, Coua, 48.

-, Cuculus, 36, 48, 49.

gilberti, Anous stolidus, 159.

--, Gilbertornis inornatus, 138.

gilbertii, Pachycephala, 138. Gilbertornis inornatus gilbertii, 138.

--inornatus, 138.

—■—• -rufogularis rufogularis, 59

--zanda, 59.

glacialis, Montifringilla, 121 glandarius, Garrulus, 15.

-minor, Garrulus, 20

-oenops, Garrulus, 20.

Glareola, 156.

-grallaria, 106.

-orientalis, 106.

-pratíncola parryi, 70.

glareola, Rhyacophilus, 74. Glaucopis, 155.

-struthidea, 127.

glaucura, Pachycephala, 102, 134.

-----pectoralis, 137.

Globicera pacifica, 76. godmange, Raperia, 21-24.

Gouan, 156.

goulburni, Pedionomus torquatus, 53. gouldi, Acanthornis, 61.

——, Podargus, 96.

-, Symposiachrus trivirgatus, 59.

-. Zosterops gouldi, 62.

gouldii, Meliornis niger, 127.

-. Melliphaga, 127.

--, Purnellornis niger, 127.

goweri, Colcloughia melanogaster, 53. gracilis, Sterna, 96.

-.--d., 96.

Gracula, 43, 155.

-tristis, 143.

Graculaea, 143, 145. graculus, Corvus, 120.

-, Hellmayria, 120.

--, Pyrrhocorax,. 119, 120.

grallaria, Glareola, 106. grallarius, Fregettornis, 77.

--, QEdicnemus, 105.

Grallina, 176. gramineus, Lampornis, 41.

-. Sphenceacus, 106.

-, Trochilus, 42.

Graucalus hypoleuca apsleyi, 66*

--hypoleuca, 66.

--parryi, 66.

---stalkeri, 66.

--hypoleucus, i04.

--mentalis, 104.

--novsehollandise, 66.

Graucalus novæhollandiæ connectens,


didimus, 66. melanops, 66. novæhollandiæ, 66. subpallida, 66. westralensis, 66. robusta, 66.

— mentalis, 66.

-robusta, 66.

--victoriæ, 66.

grayi, Eos, 46. grisea, Ampelis, 36, 50.

--, Tanagra, 36, 51.

griseiceps, Mattingleya, 75. griseo-cephalus, Pious, 36.

gularis, Eopsaltria, 107 griseus, Neonectris, 74.

-. Vireo, 51.

Grus, 156, 158. guttatus, Psittacus, 34. gutteralis, Pachyoephala, 102.

-, Oreoscopus, 76.

gutturalis, Oreoscopus gutturalis, 61.

--, Pachyoephala, 134.

gutture luteo, Psittacus, 92.

Gygis, 64.

-alba, 77.

Gymnophrys torquatus, 26.

Gypætos, 154.

Hadrostomus, 50.

Hæmatopus, 157.

hæsitata, Accipiter cirrocephalus, 128.

-, Paraspizias cirrocephalus, 128.

Halcyon mcLeayi, 102. pvrrhopygia, 108. sanctus, 102. senegalensis, 48. sordidus, 108. baliaetes, Falco, 112.

Haliaetus albicilla, 109.

australis, 70.

■—■— leucogaster, 111. haliaetus, Falco, 111.

, Pandion, 111.

Haliastur leucosternus, 106. halli, Neophema splendida, 57. Hallornis leuconotus, 89.

cyanotus, 89.

-exsul, 89.

leuconotus, 89.

-- perplexus, 89.

Halobæna cœrulea, 100.

- cœrulea, 54. victoriæ, 54.

Haringtonia, 124.

Haringtonia, psaroides, 125. harmonica, Colluricincla, 101. harpyia, Falco, 32.

Harriwhitea alberti alborti, 58.

--rufa, 58.

hedleyi, Geobasileus, 75.

Hellmayria, 120.

graculus, 120.

Helminthophaga, 122.

rubecula, 122.

Hemiphaga, 23.

Hemiptilotis cockerelli, 68. Heniconetta, 123, 124.

Herodias, 65. alba, 50. egretta, 50. plumiferus, 103.

Heteractitis incanus, 64.

brevipes, 64. incanus, 64.

Heteromyia, 66.

Heteromvias, 66.

Heteroprion belcheri, 74.

Heteroscenes, 2.

pailidus pallidus, 58. tasmanicus, 58.

Hians, 156.

Hiaticula inornata, 160.

Hieraaetus pennatus, 159. hilli, Eopsaltria, 134.

, Pachycephala robusta, 137. Hippolais. 122

-italica, 122.

--polyglotta, 122.

Hirundo albiventer, 35.

-apus, 16.

fretensis, 106. melba, 16

--- neoxena, 106.

rustica, 77.

histrionica, Phaps, 103.

Histrionicus, 124.

horsfieldi, Maclennania mathewsi, 127.

-, Myrafra, 106.

housei, Magnamytis, 76.

humei, Phvlloscopus superciliosa, 44. 45

-præmium, Reguloides, 45.

Hydrochelidon leucoptera, 74.

----belli, 55.

----leucoptera, 55.

Hydrogallina, 157.

-cyanifrons, 14.

Hypolais, 122.

hypoleuca, Graucalus hypoleuca, 66. hypoleucus, Graucalus, 104. Hypsipetes, 124.

-psaroides, 124.

Hypurolepis javanica, 77.

iavensis crist, Psittacus, 92 Ibis, 157.

Ichthyiaetus leucogaster, 103.

Icterus, 154.

Ieracidea berigora, 103. igneus, Falcinellus, 107. immaculata, Egretta garzetta, 56. impennis, Pinguinus, 118. incanus, Heteractitis, 64. inconspicua, Sternula, 96. indica, Tringa, 36. indicus, Loriculus, 92.

-, Psittacus, 92.

inexpectata, Pterodroma, 76. inornata, Acanthiza, 107.

--, Eopsaltria, 75.

--. Iliaticula, 160.

-, Pachycephala, 138.

inornatus, Cuculus, 1.

--, Gilbertornis inornatus, 138

inquieta, Seizura, 107. insularis, Buohanga, 12.

----. Dorothina virescens, 67.

intermedia, Austropitta versicolor, 66.

-, Austroturnix pyrrhothorax, 53.

-, Menura novsehollandise, 58.

interpres, Tringa, 114. iredalei, Acanthiza, 75.

Iredaleornis cinereifrons, 66.

--athertoni, 66.

--cinereifrons, 66.

Iridoptilus, 146.

Irrisor, 146, 150. isidorei, Pomatorhinus, 20. islándica, Tringa, 114. isura, Rhipidura, 103. itálica, Hippolais, 122. ivi, Dorothina lewini, 67.

Ixobrychus minutus dubuis, 24. ---victoria. 24.

Jacamaralcion, 14.

Jacamerops, 14.

Jacana, 157. jacobinus, Cuculus, 36. jala, Turdus, 35. jamesonii, Xema, 104. japonicus, Psittacus, 92. jardmei, Tricodere cockerelli, 71. jardinii, Circus, 105. javana, Alcedo, 36.

-, Anas, 37.

javanensis, Centropus, 12. javanica, Hypurolepis, 77. javanicus, Cuculus, 12.

johnsonii, Casuarius, 105. johnstoni. Caloptilotis macleayana, 62.

-, Pseudogerygone personata, 59.

jubata, Bermela, 107. jubata, Chenonetta jubata, 56. juidse, Turdus, 35.

Kakatoe, 154.

katherinse, Erythrotriorchis radiatus, 57.

katraca, Phasianus, 34. kaupi, Arses, 105. keartlandi, Sacramela, 76. Keartlandia, 78.

-flaviventris, 78.

kempi, Egretta garzetta, 56.

-, Kempiella, 75.

Kempiella kempi, 75.

kermadeci, Megalopterus minutus, 55.

-, Onychoprion fuscatus, 55,

-, Procelsterna cerulea, 55.

kingi, Amimeta flavocincta, 68.

-, Gabianus paciflcus, 56.

-, Neomimeta flavocincta, 68.

kinki, Muscicapa, 35.

Knot, 114.

kreffti, Austropitta, 66. kurandi, Bowyeria boweri, 61.

Lacustroica whitei, 76.

---neglecta, 62.

--whitei, 62.

lamberti, Malurus, 103.

Lampornis gramineus, 4L

-violicauda, 42.

-viridigula, 42.

Lamprococcyx lucidus, 75. lanceolata, Plectorhyncha, 103. lanceolatus, Plectorhamphus lanceolatus, 67.

Lanio atricapillus, 46.

-fulvus, 47.

Lanius, 154.

-melanoleucos, 18.

-melanotis, 18.

-violaceus, 33.

-vittatus, 18.    .

lapponica, Scolopax, 10.

Larius, 45, 63.

Larus, 156.

-sabini, 149, 150.

larvata, Fringilla, 33. lathami, Amadina, 102.

Lathamus discolor, 107. latirostris, Arizelomyia, 123.

----, Muscicapa, 123.

-, Myiagra, 107.

Leachena, 60.

--crocea, 60.

crocea, 60.

— tunneyi, 60.

leachi, Calyptorhynchus, 103. leachii, Dacelo, 105. leadbeateri, Cacatua, 105.

, Manopsitta diophthalma, 65. Leggeornis elegans elegans, 61. Leptophoethon lepturus, 75. Leptosomus, 144.

--crombus, 20.

discolor, 49.

-vourougariou, 12.

Leptotarsis, 65.

lepturus, Leptophoethon, 75.

lessoni, Pterodroma, 96.

Lessonia niger, 46.

-rufa, 46.

Lestris brevicaudus, 15.

---longicaudus, 15.

--pomarinus, 15.

Leucanous alba, 64.

---alba, 64.

---royana, 64.

leucocephala, jEstrelata lessonii, 54. leucocephalus, Oriolus, 49. leucogaster, ^Egotheles, 106.

-, Ardea, 34.

--, Cuncuma, 111, 112.

--, Eopsaltria, 107.

--, Haliaetus, 111.

---, Ichthyiaetus, 103.

ieucogastra, Muscicapa, 127. leucomela, Carpophaga, 106. Leucomelaena norfolciensis nor-folciensis, 54.

---queenslandica, 54.

leuconotus, Hallornis, 89.

, Malurus, 85. leucoph;ea, Crocethia, 114. leucophfeus, Dicrurus, 13.

-, Edolius, 12.

leucops, Tregellasia, 75. leucoptera, Hydroehelidon, 74.

--leucoptera, 55.

-, Neositta leucoptera, 61.

leucopterus, Malurus, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83.

-, Nesomalurus, 84, 86, 128, 172.

leucopygialis, Artamus, 105.

, Pardalotus, 106.

Leucosareia melanoleuca melanoleuca, 54.

minor, 54.

leucosternon, Atticora, 106. leucosternus, Haliastur, 106. leucotis, Monarcha, 103.

leucotis, Neopoephila personata, 71. Leucotreron alligator, 74. leuphotes, Baza, 20.

-, Falco, 13.

lewini, Dorothina lewini, 67. Lewinornis rufiventris didimus, 159.

- rufiventris, 159.

liberia, Milligania robustirostris, 61. Licmetis pastinator, 174.

tenuirostris derbyi, 57. pastinator, 57.

Limicola falcinellus, 74.

---rogersi, 70.

Limosa rufa, 10.

uropygialis, 107.

--varia, 10.

vulgaris, 10. limosa, Scopolax, 10. lineatus, Paragraucalus lineatus, 60. lobata, Biziura, 105. longicauda, Bartramia, 77.

, Psittacus, 36. longicaudus, Lestris, 15.

, Malurus, 103.

longirostris, Acrocephalus, 106.

, Chalcophaps, 108.

, Rallus, 36.

Lopholaimus antarcticus, 3. lophotes, Baza, 20.

-. Falco, 14.

lorealis, Orphryzone, 75.

Loriculus indicus, 92.

Loriotus, 144, 145.

Lorius, 45, 63, 79. cardinalis, 46. pectoralis, 63, 75.

-pectoralis, 63.

macgillivrayi, 63. lory, Psittacus, 91. lovensis, Ashbyia, 75.

Loxia, 155.

-cardinalis, 145.

collaria, 38. collaris, 38.

-cuculiata, 38.

fusciventer, 34. nigro-aurantia, 34.

-pyrrhula, 121.

lucidus, Chrysococcyx, 104.

--, Lamprococcyx, 75.

lucionensis, Psittacus, 91. luctuosa, Carpophaga, 106. ludovicianus, Oriolus, 49.

Lullula, 126.

lumholtzi, Neositta leucoptera, 61. Lunda, 37. lunulata, Certhia, 26

lunulata, Meliphaga, 26.

--, Oreocincla, 107.

lunulatus, Melithreptus, 28, 29, 30.

--, Melithreptes, 105.

Luscinia, 117.

lutea, Myzantha, 106.

luteus macrourus, Psittacus, 92.

luteus, Psittacus, 33.

mab, Dorothina lewini, 67. macgillivrayi, Lorius pectoralis, 63. Macgillivrayornis Claudi, 76. Machærirhinchus flaviventer, 107. Machetes, 117.

mackayi, Cheniscus coromandelianus, 56.

macklotii, Pitta, 106. macleayana. Caloptilotis mackayana, 62.

Maclennani, Alisteranus cinctus, 159. Maclennania, 127.

-mathewsi, 127.

■---horsfieldi, 127.

--mathewsi, 127.

—-— ■--normani, 127.

■— ----— subalisteri, 127.

• ----vigorsi, 127.

Macreuse, 149.

Macronectes giganteus dovei, 54

--giganteus, 54.

Macropygia phasianella, 107. macrourus, Amytis, 82, 84.

--fasciatus, Turdus, 34.

macrura, Amytis, 174. macrurus, Caprimulgus, 103. maculata, Chlamydera, 104. madagascariensis, Turdus, 35. madaraszi, Amimeta flavocincta, 68.

-Neomimeta flavocincta, 68.

magnifica, Carpophaga, 105. magnirostris whitlocki, Ethelornis, 24. magna, Acanthiza, 61.

Magnamytis dorotheæ, 76.

-housei, 76.

-woodwardi, 76.

magnus, Saltator, 40. major, Ardea, 50.

--garzetta, 37, 50.

-, Fúlica, 34.

--, Garrulus, 15.

--. Scolopax, 10.

• ---, Tangara, 34, 40.

malaccensis, Psittacus, 92,

Malcoha, 144, 145.

Malacoptila striata, 20.

-torquata, 10, 20.

Malacorhynchus membranaceus, 104.

Malurus alboscapulatus, 89.

—— cayneus, 103.

-cyaneus, 103.

-cyanotus, 82, 83.

-edouardi, 82, 83.

--elegans, 103.

--lamberti, 103.

--leuconotus, 85.

—-— leucopterus, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83.

-longicaudus, 103.

--melanotus, 103.

--splendens, 103.

--textilis, 79, 80, 84.

mandellii, Phylloscopus superciliosa, 44.

Manikup, 145, 148. manilla, Turdus, 35. manillæ, Bu ceros, 36.

Manopsitta coxeni, 63.

--diophthalma, 65.

---boweri, 65.

---diophthalma, 65.

----leadbeateri, 65.

Manorine, 43.

Marianornis, 128.

-varia, 128.

---scintillans, 128.

--stirlingi, 128.

--subminuta, 128.

---varia, 128.

Marila, 149. mariposa, Pyrgita, 18. marngli, Elseyornis melanops, 64. Mastersornis, 78,

-cyanoleucus, 78.

---cyanoleucus, 78.

---robinsoni, 78.

-rubeculus, 78.

--broomei, 78.

--concinnus, 78.

-----ringwoodi, 78.

----rubeculus, 78.

-    - ruficollis, 78.

----cooperi, 78.

----kempi, 78.

----ruficollis, 78.

----tormenti, 78

mathewsi, Cinclorhamphus, 127.

--, Maclennania, 127.

Mattingleya griseiceps, 75. matutina, Alauda, 35. maxillaris, Sphecotheres, 139.

-, Turdus, 139, 140.

maxima, Sterna, 37. maximus, Saltator, 40, 41. meleayi, Halcyon, 102. mclennani, Dacelo gigas, 70.

megala, Subspilura, 74.

Megalopterus minutus kermadeci, 55. Megapodargus, 65. papuensis, 65. baileyi, 65. papuensis, 65. rogersi, 65. piumifera, 65.

neglecta, 65.

--piumifera, 65.

Megapodius duperryi, 18, 20.

--freycinet, 16, 17.

---La Perouse, 17.

reinwardt, 17, 18, 20.

---reinwardtii, 17, 18.

rubripes, 17, 18. tumulus, 102.

megarhyncha, Daulias, 117.

Melanitta, 123, 147.

Melanobucco, 10. melanocephalus, Meliphaga, 27.

---, Melithreptes, 105.

. Pardalotus, 106.

melanogaster, Colcloughia melano-gaster, 53.

, Fregetta, 95.

melanoleuca, Anseranus, 104.

, Leucosareia melanoleuca, 54. melanoleucos, Lanius, 18.

, Urolestes, 19.

melanophris, Thalassarche, 99. melanophrys, Myzantha, 106. melanops, Elseyornis melanops, 64.

--, Graucalus novæhollandiæ, 66.

melanopsis, Monarcha melanopsis, 60. melanopus, Pterodroma, 76. melanorhyncha, Sterna, 96. melanosternon, Buteo, 108. melanotis, Lanius, 18. melanotus, Malurus, 103. melanura, Pachycephala, 102, 134, 135. melba, Hirundo, 16.

Meleagris, 156.

Melicophila picata, 107.

Meliornis nigra dulcei, 127 niger gouldii, 127 Meliphaga, 67.

albilineata, 76.

--atricapilla, 26, 27.

brevirostris, 27.

-frenata frenata, 62.

petersoni, 62. lunulata, 26. melanocephalus, 27.

Melithreptes atricapillus, 27, 29. Melithreptus albogularis, 105.

-atricapilla, 29.

Melithreptus brevirostris, 27, 28, 29 105.

chloropsis, 105. lunulatus, 28, 29, 30, 105.

--melanocephalus, 28, 105.

nigrogularis, 105.

-validirostris, 105.

Melliphaga gouldii, 127.

mystacalis, 127. mellivora, Anthochœra, 104. Melophagus, 67.

Melopsittacus undulatus, 104. melvillensis, Austrotis australis, 51.

, Reginopus regina, 63. Ypsilophorus, 63.

membranaceus, Malacorhynchus, 104 mentalis, Bulestes, 76.

, Graucalus, 104.

---- robusta, 66.

Menura novæhollandiæ intermedia, 58. novæhollandiæ, 58. superba, 104.

Mergus, 156.

Mérion leucoptere, 80.

natté, 80.

Merops, 155.

bicolor, 34.

Merula, 39.

Merula montana, 34, 39. torquatus, 117.

--(Corvus) brachyurus, 34, 39.

merula atricapilla, Turdus, 34, 40. Turdus, 117.

Microeca brunneicauda, 75.

brunneicauda, 58. tormenti, 58.

Microglossus aterrimus, 102. Microtarsus, 157. migrans, Emberiza, 34, 48. migratorius, Turdus, 117. miles, Tringa, 36.

Milligania robustirostris, 75. liberia, 61.

- robustirostris, 61.

Milvus, 153, 154.

añinis, 102.

Mimete, 68.

Mimetes, 68.

flavocinctus, 68. minimus, Nisus, 13. minor, Eutelipsitta chlorolepidota, 57.

--, Garrulus, 15.

,    glandarius, 20.

-, Leucosareia melanoleuca, 54.

minutellus, Chrysococcyx, 104. minutus, Cossyphus, 16.

, Sparvius, 13.

minutus dubuis, Ixobrychus, 24.

--victoria, Ixobrychus, 24.

mixta, Procellaria æquinoctialis, 174. modesta, Estrelda, 107.

-, Regulus, 125.

modestus, Phyllobasileus, 125. Molinæa, 143, 145, 147, 150.

-chilensis, 147.

mollissima, Anas, 144. moluccensis, Psittacus, 92.

Momotus, 155. monachus, Psittacus, 36.

Monacula, 143, 145.

Monarcha canescens, 75.

----canescens, 71.

----claudia, 71.

--carinata, 103.

--leucotis, 103.

--melanopsis melanopsis, 60.

---pallida, 60.

--trivirgata, 103.

Monasa, 144. monedula, Corvus, 120. mongolus, Cirrepidesmus, 160. montana, Merula, 34, 39. montanellus, Calamanthus, 174. montícola, Spizella, 41.

Montif ringhia, 121.

----glacialis, 121.

--nivalis, 121.

Morphnus, 10.

Motacilla, 155.

--alba, 50.

--agiump, 14, 20.

--aurantia, 33.

----calendula, 125.

--canadensis, 33,

--cinerea, 35, 50.

--citrea, 36.

--eques, 50.

--nævia, 35.

--nigra, 34, 49.

-nisoria, 126.

--proregulus, 125.

--senegalensis, 51.

-superciliosa, 36, 44, 45.

--undata, 35.

--vidua, 20.

motacilloides, Rhipidura, 103. Moustache, 149. multicolor, Psephotus, 102. mungi, Ypsilophorus, 63. munna, Ctenanas eytoni, 65. murchisoni, Dorothina virescens, 67. Muscicapa, 122, 154.

--aurora, 35.

---bicolor, 43.

Muscícapa boodang, 74.

--carohnensis, 35, 51.

--citrina, 35, 37, 51.

----collar is, 123.

--dichroa, 43.

--eques, 36.

--fusca, 35, 51.

-    - - galeata, 34.

-    lsinki, 35.

--latirostris, 123.

--leucogastra, 127.

--oliva, 35.

---parva, 123.

--pica, 35.

--rubecula, 127.

--rubinus, 35.

Muscívora, 154. musicus, Turdus, 158.

Musophaga, 154.

Mycteria, 157.

Mycterise australis, 10.

Myiagra, 78.

--concinna, 105.

•--latirostris, 107.

--nítida, 105.

--plúmbea, 105.

---rubecula, 127.

Myiagrus, 78.

Myrafra horsfieldi, 106. Myrmcophaga, 154. mystacalis, Eurostopodus mystacalis, 58.

--, Melliphaga, 127.

mystaceus, Dicrurus, 13.

--, Edolius, 12.

Myzantha flavigula, 106.

--gárrula, 106.

——- lútea, 106.

--melanophrys, 106.

--obscura, 106.

Myzomela erythrocephala, 108.

--nigra, 108, 160.

--obscura, 108.

--pectoralis, 108.

--sanguinolenta, 108.

nsevia, Ardea, 37.

-, Motacilla, 35.

nana, Tregellasia capito, 59. nea, Dorothina lewini, 67.

Nectarinia australis, 102. neglecta, Certhionyx variegatus, 62.

-. Cosmerodius albus, 65.

-, Cyphorhina plumífera, 57.

-, Lacustroica whitei, 62.

-, Megapodargus plumífera, 65.

-, Plectorhamphus lanceolatus, 67.

neglecta, Pterodroma neglecta, 68. Neochalcites, 12.

Neomimeta, 68.

flavocincta, 68.

flavocincta, 68. kingi, 68. maradaszi, 68. parryi, 68.

Neonectris griseus, 74.

nutcheri, 54.

Neophema splendida halli, 57. splendida, 57.

Neopoephila personata leucotis, 71. watsoni, 71.

Neopsephotus bourkii bourkii, 57. pallida, 57.

Neositta leucoptera leucoptera, 61.

lumholtzi, 61. neoxena, Hirundo, 106. nesa, Pyrrhula pyrrhula, 121. Nesomalurus edouardi, 88.

-leucopterus, 84, 86, 128, 172.

Nesoptilotis flavicollis flavicollis, 62. flindersi, 62.

newtoniana, Prionodura, 76. niger, Centrites, 46.

, Charadrius, 37, 50. crist, Psittacus, 91.

, Cypselus, 16.

, Lessonia, 46. nigra, Alauda, 35, 160.

, Motacilla, 34, 49.

, Myzomela, 108, 160. nigri, Alauda, 46. nigricollis, Trochilus, 42. nigrifrons, Elseyornis, 64.

, Sterna. 96. nigrigula, Tanagra, 36. nigrigularis, Melithreptes, 105. nigro-aurantia, Loxia, 34. nigrogularis, Cracticus, 107.

, Psophodes, 97, 108.

, nigrogularis, 60. nisoria, Motacilla, 126.

Nisus, 154.

-minimus, 13.

strepsirynchos, 13. nitida, Myiagra, 105. nitidus, Piezorhynchus, 107.

-, Trochilus, 42.

nivalis, Chinospina, 121.

-, Montif ringhia, 121.

nivea, Ampelis, 36 norfolciensis, Leueomelaena nor-folciensis, 54.

Norfolk Island Pigeon, 23. normani, Maclennania mathewsi, 127.

northi, Calyptorhynchus banksi, 133. Northiella, 133.

Northipsitta, 133.

-alexandræ, 65.

alexandræ, 65.

--rogersi, 65.

notatus, Phœniculus, 146. nova, Arenaria interpres, 69.

--, Pseudoprion turtur, 55.

-, Psophotellus chrysopterygius,


novæhollandiæ, Ægotheles, 106.

, Astur, 106.

, Cereopsis, 104.

, Graucalus novæhollandiæ, 66.

, Menura novæhollandiæ, 58.

-, Plotus, 104.

-, Scythrops, 103.

noveæ guinæ, Psittacus, 91. nudicollis, Corvus, 35.

Numenius, 157.

-australis, 106.

Numida, 156.

nutcheri, Coprotheres pomarinus, 72.

—. Neonectris griseus, 54.

Nyctala, 158.

nycticorax cayanensis, Ardea, 36, 50. Nycticorax violaceus, 50.

Nyroca australis, 105.

obscura, Myzantha, 106.

—■—, Myzomela, 108. occidentalis, Geopsittacus, 97, 103.

, Pachycephala, 135.

, -pectoralis, 137.

oceanica, Columba, 19.

-, Oceanites. 95.

Oceanites oceanica, 95. ochropus, Tringa, 77, 114. oculea, Estrelda, 107.

(Edemiaj 124.

Œdicnemus grallarius, 105. oenops, Garrulus, 15.

-,    - glandarius, 20.

Œstrelata, 158.

Oidemia, 123. oliva, Muscicapa, 35. olivaceus, Cossyphus, 43. olivii, Austroturnix, 74, 77.

Olor, 116.

-cygnus, 116.

olor, Eulor, 117.

Onychoprion fuscatus kermadeci, 55. — serrata, 55.

Opopsitta coxeni tweedi, 128. Orchilus, 118.

Oreocincla lunulata, 107.

Oreoica cristata, 105.

Oreoscopus gutturalis, 76.

--boweri, 61.

--gutturalis, 61.

orientalis, Glareola, 106.

Origma, 66.

-solitaria pallida, 60.

--solitaria, 60.

Origmella solitaria,.'66.

■--pallida, 66.

--solitaria, 66.

Oriolus, 154.

--affinis, 106.

-ater, 35.

-aureus, 15.

-cristatus, 34.

-flavocinctus, 106.

-leucocephalus, 49.

-ludovicianus, 49.

-paradiseus, 15.

--violaceus, 35, 49.

-viridis, 34, 106.

ornatus, Psittacus, 91.

--, Ptilotis, 103.

Orphryzone lorealis, 75.

Orthonyx spinicaudus, 104. Orthorhynchus, 155. oryx, Pyromelana, 37. osculans, Chrysococcyx, 104.

Otis, 157.

Otocoris, 116.

Otocorys alpestris, 116.

Otogyps, 113.

-auricularis, 113.

-tracheliotus, 113.

Otus, 154.

Pachycephala falcata, 102.

-gilbertii, 138.

-glaucura, 102, 134.

-gutteralis, 102.

-gutturalis, 134.

--inornata, 138.

-melanura, 102, 134, 135, 138.

-melanura bynoei, 136, 137.

--melanura, 136, 137.

-occidentalis, 135.

-pectoralis, 102, 134, 138.

---ashbyi, 137, 138.

--fuliginosa, 137.

--glaucura, 137.

---—- occidentalis, 137.

--pectoralis, 137.

--queenslandica, 137.

--youngi, 137.

-robusta, 135.

-----borroloola, 137.

Pachycephala robusta consobrina, 137

--hilli, 137.

--robusta, 137.

----violetse, 137.

—— rufogularis, 164.

Pachyptila, 152, 153. pacifica, Globicera, 76. pacificus, Gabianus pacifìcus, 56. paira, Tregellasia leucops, 59. Palseornis rosa, 93.

Palamadea, 156. palliceps, Platycercus, 105. pallida, Campbellornis superciliosus, 61.

-. Columba, 1, 2.

-, Monarcha melanopsis, 60.

--, Neopsephotus bourki, 57.

---, Origma solitaria, 60.

-, Origmella solitaria, 66.

-, Psophodes nigrogularis, 60.

pallidus, Cacomantis, 2.

-, Heteroscenes pallidus, 58.

Pandion haliaetus, 111.

--microhaliaetus, 111.

papuensis, Megopodargus, 65.

-,-papuensis, 65.

Paradisea, 155. paradiseus, Oriolus, 15.

-, Ptiloris, 104.

paradoxus, Dyottornis paradoxus, 63. Paragraucalus lineatus austini, 60.

--lineatus, 60.

parasiticus, Stercorarius, 74. Paraspizias cirrocephalus hsesitata, 128.

Pardalotus affinis, 106.

-leucopygialis, 106.

-— melanocephalus, 106.

---rubricatus, 106.

-striatus, 106.

parkinsoni, Fulmarus, 96.

--, Procellaria, 76.

Paroaria cristata, 38.

•    cuculiata, 38.

Parra, 157.

-africana, 14.

-cinnamomea, 14.

parryi, Amimeta flavocincta, 68.

-, Glareola pratincola, 70.

-, Graucalus hypoleuca, 66,

--, Neomimeta flavocincta, 68.

Parus, 155.

-cinctus, 36.

• -pendulinus, 144.

parva, Fulica, 36.

--, Muscicapa, 123.

parvua, Psittacus, 34.

párvula, Colluricinda, 104. passerinus, Psittacus, 91. pastinator, Licmetis, 174.

-,-tenuirostris, 57.

patachonicus, Spheniscus, 147. patagónica, Aptenodytes, 76.

Pavo, 155.

pectoralis, Coturnix, 106.

-, Lorius, 63, 75.

-,-pectoralis, 63.

-, Myzomela, 108.

-, Pachycephala, 102, 134, 138.

-,---pectoralis, 137.

- Xerophila, 79.

Pedionomus torquatus, 106.

--goulburni, 53.

--torquatus, 53.

Pelecanoides, 153, 156, 157.

Pelecanus, 156.

— conspicillatus, 105. pendulinus, Anthoscopus, 148, 150.

, Parus, 144.

-, Remiz, 148.

, Remiza, 124.

Penelope, 144, 156. pennatus, Falco, 11.

-, Hicraaetus, 159.

Perdix varia, 128.

Perdrix, 155.

-tetrao, 36, 47.

peregrinus, Falco, 107. pérouse, Megapodius La, 17. perplexus, Hallornis leuconotus, 89. persicus, Cacicus, 11. personata, Pseudogerygone personata, 71.    ‘

perthi, Angroyan cyanopterus, 67. petersoni, Dorothina frenata, 67.

--, Meliphaga frenata, 62.

Petroica fusca, 104.

-multicolor boodang, 74.

--coccinea, 74.

Petrophassa rufipennis, 74.

Pezoporus formosus, 106. Phapnicophaus suporciliosus, 16 . Phacorhadina, 116.

--fuscata, 116.

Phícton, 156. phíeton, Estrelda, 102.

Phalacrocorax sulcirostris, 105. phalenoides, Podargus, 104. Phalaropus, 157.

Phaps chalcoptera, 103.

histrionica, 103. phasianella, Macropygia, 107. phasianinus, Polophilusphasianinus, 58. Phasianus, 156.

I -africanus, 44, 143.

--katraca, 34.

Phelacrocorax, 156. phigy, Phygis, 94.

--, Psittacus, 93.

Phigys phigy, 94.

-solitarius, 160.

Phileremos, 116. philippensis, Turdus, 34. Phillopneuste fuscata, 116. Philomachus, 114, 117.

-pugnax, 118.

phoebe, Sayornis, 51. Phoenicophaus, 145. Phcenicopterus, 156. Phoeniculus, 143, 145, 146, 150. -notatus, 146.

—    unimaculatus, 146. Phoenorhina, 23. phrygia, Xanthomyza, 103. Phyllobasileus, 125.

—    modestus, 125. Phyllopseusta, 122. Phylloscopus fuscatus, 116.

- superciliosa humei, 44, 45

---mandellii, 44.

--superciliosa, 44, 45.

Phytotoma, 154.

pica, Muscicapa, 35. picata, Melicophila, 107.

, Rhipidura, 103. picatus, Cracticus, 107. Picoides, 155.

Picus, 154.

aurantias, 36. erythropis, 18. erythrops, 18. flavigula, 36. fusco-fulvus, 35. griseo-cephalus, 36. punctigula, 35. rufus, 36, 49. striatus, 34. undatus, 49.

Piezorhynchus nitidus, 101. Pigeon, Norfolk Island, 23. pileata, Pyrrhula, 121.

, Tanagra, 36. pileatus, Tetrao, 36.

Pingouin, 156.

Pinguinus impennis, 118.

Pipra, 155.

albifrons, 143.

Piranza, 145. piscator, Chizserhis, 44.

i -, Conifer, 146.

| -, Falco, 34, 44.


Pisobia subminuta, 77.

Pitta, 39.

-macklotii, 106.

Planesticus, 38.

Platalea, 157.

Platycercus barnardi, 103.

-flaveolus, 105.

-ílaviventris, 103.

-palliceps, 105.

Platyrhamphus falcinellus, 64.

--falcinellus, 64.

--sibirica, 64.

Plautus, 118.

Plectoramphus lanceolatus, 67.

---lanceolatus, 67.

--neglecta, 67.

Plectorhinchus, 67.

Plectorhyncha, 67.

-lanceolata, 103.

Plegadis falcinellus rogersi, 56.

Ploceus cristatus, 14.

Plotus, 156.

-no vse hollandise, 104.

plúmbea, Myiagra, 105. plumífera, Cyphorhina plumífera, 57.

-, Megapodargus, 65.

-.-plumífera, 65.

-, Podargus, 97.

plumíferas, Herodias, 103. plumipes, Buteo, 11. plumulus, Ptilotis, 103.

Pluvianus segyptius, 50.

Pluvialis dominicus fulvus, 52. Podargus, 145.

-gouldi, 96.

-phalsenoides, 104.

--plumífera, 97.

Podiceps australis, 108.

Poephila armitiana, 176.

Polisticte, 123.

Polophilus phasianinus phasianinus, 58.

--yorki, 58.

polyglotta, Hippolais, 122.

Polysticta, 123.

Polytelis alexandrse, 108.

■--swainsoni swainsoni. 57

--whitei, 57.

pomarinus, Coprotheres, 77.

-, Lestris, 15.

Pomatorhinus isidorei, 20. Pomatostomus ruficeps bebba, 60.

--ruficeps, 60.

Ponolope, 144.    "

Porphyrio bellus, 103. prsemium, Reguloides humei, 45. Priocella antárctica, 99.

Priofinus cinereus dydimus, 54.

Prion, 152, 153, 156, 157.

Prionodura newtoniana, 76. Probosciger, 144.

Procellaria, 156.

-sequinoctialis, 76.

--mixta, 174.

-cerulea, 100.

-cinerea, 54.

-conspicillata, 77.

--gigantea, 99.

-parkinsoni, 76.

Procelsterna cerulea, 77.

--kermadeci, 55.

Procmas carnobarba, 11.

Promerops pusillus, 146. proregulus, Motacilla, 125.

-, Regulus, 125,

psaroides, Haringtonia, 125.

-. Hypsipetes, 124.

Psephotellus chrysopterygius nova, 159.

Psephotus multicolor, 102.

-pulcherrimus, 102.

Pseudartamus, 67.

Pseudogerygone personata flavida, 59.

--johnstoni, 59.

--personate, 71.

--watsoni, 71.

Pseudoprion turtur nova, 55. pseutes, Turnix maculosa, 53. Psittacula, 144, 145, 154.

--, Alca, 144.

Psittacus, 145, 148, 154.

-accipitrinus, 91.

-alexandri, 91.

-amboinensis, 91, 92.

—— asiaticus, 92.

-aterrimus, 143.

-bandensis, 92.

---bengalensis, 92.

--beryllinus, 92, 93.

-borneus, 92.

-cardinalis, 35, 46.

--chrysopterus, 92.

-coccineus, 92, 93.

-coeruleus, 91.

-cristatus, 91.

-cyanocephalus, 91.

-cyanopterus, 34.

-domicella, 91.

-erythrocephalus, 92.

-erythroleucus, 91.

-eupatria, 9-1.

-farinosus, 36.

-festivus, 91.

--flavigula, 34.

Psittacus galeatus crist, 91. galgulus, 91.

—    garrulus, 91.

—    geoft'royi, 94.

-guttatus, 34.

-gutteri lúteo, 92.

-iavensis crist, 92.

-indicus, 92.

-japonicus, 92.

-longicauda, 36.

-lory, 91.

-lucionensis, 91.

-luteus, 33.

--macrourus, 92.

—    malaccensis, 92.

—    monachus, 36.

-niger, 91.

nóvese guinse, 91. ornatus, 91.

-parvua, 34.

—    passerinus, 91. phigy, 93. pullarius, 91.

-rosa, 93.

solitarius, 93.

-sordidus, 91.

-sulphureus, 92.

-tabuensis, 144.

-torquatus, 35.

—    vaillanti, 93.

-varius, 91, 93.

vibrissa, 34.

—    (Larius) ceclanensis, 45. Psophodes crepitans, 108.

nigrogularis, 97, 108.

--pallida, 60.

Psophotellus chrysoptergyius chrysop-terygius, 159.

Ptenoedus, 125.

Pterodroma inexpectata, 76.

-lessoni, 96.

-melanopus, 76.

neglecta neglecta, 68.

--quintali, 68.

Ptilonopus, 64.

---superbus, 104.

Ptilonorhynchus rawnsleyi, 106. Ptilopus, 64.

Ptiloris paradiseus, 104.

Ptilotis auricornis, 103. chrysotis, 106. fasciogularis, 103. filigera, 106. flavigula, 106. fuscus, 103. ornatus, 103.

-plumulus, 103.

pugnax, Philomachus, 118.

—, Tringa, 114. pulcherrimus, Psephotus, 102. pullarius, Psittacus, 91. punctigula, Picus, 35. purnelli, Diaphorillas, 159.

-,-textilis, 159.

Purnellornis niger gouldii, 127. purpurata, Alcedo ceyx, 16. purpureus, Quiscalus, 49. pusillus, Cuculus, 11, 12.

-, Promerops, 146.

Pyrgita mariposa, 18.

Pyromelana oryx, 37,

Pyrrhocorax, 119, 120.

— graculus, 119, 120. pyrrhopygia, Acanthiza, 107.

, Halycon, 108.

Pyrrhula, 155.

— europaea, 121.

-pileata, 121.

pyrrhula, 121.

nesa, 121. rufa, 121. vulgaris, 121. pyrrhula, Loxia, 121. pyrrocephalus, Cuculus, 144.

queenslandica, Belchera rosea, 59.

, Leucomelaena norfolciensis, 54. , Pachycephala pectoralis, 137. queenslandicus, Erythrotriorchis radiatus, 128.

-. Ypsilophorus, 63.

Querquedula, 149.

querquedula, 77.

quintali, Pterodroma neglecta, 68. quirxva, Colius, 11. quiriwa, Colius, 11.

Quiscalus, purpureus, 49. quiscula, 49. versicolor, 49. quiscula, Quiscalus, 49.

Quoyornis georgianus georgianus, 59. --warreni, 59.

radjah, Tadorna, 102.

Rahcinta, 58.

clamosa, 58.

Rallus, 157.

aquaticus, 14. longirostris, 36.

Ramphastos, 154.

Ramphocelus, 148.

Raperia godmanse, 21-24. rawnsleyi, Ptilonorhynchus, 106. Recurvirostra, 156.

recurvirostra, Avocetta, 34. Regillus, 118.

-regulus britannicus, 118.

Reginopus regina, 64.

----melvillensis, 64.

--reginus, 64.

--ewingi, 64.

-swainsoni, 64.

Reguloides, 125.

-humei prsemium, 45.

reguloides, Acanthiza, 107. Regulus, 118, 155.

-auricapillus, 119.

-australis, 19.

—— modesta, 125.

-proregulus, 125.

■-regulus britannicus., 118.

regulus, Rex, 119. reinholdi, Reinholdia, 74. Reinholdia reinholdi, 74.

--byroni, 77.

reinwardt, Megapodius, 17, 18, 20. reinwardtii, Megapodius, 17, 18. Remiz, 124, 144, 145, 147, 150.

-pendulinus, 148.

Remiza, 124.

-pendulinus, 124.

Rex, 119.

-regulus, 119.

--britannicus, 119.

Rhea, 157.

Rhipidura aibiscapa, 103.

—-dryas, 103.

-isura, 103.

-motacilloides, 103.

--picata, 103.

-— rufifrons, 103.

Rhyacophilus glareola, 74. Rhynchsea australis, 103. Rhynchops, 156. rhynchotis, Spatula, 107.

--rhynchotis, 56.

Richmondena, 145, 150.

-cardinalis, 145.

robini, Thalasseus bengalensis, 55. robusta, Coracina robusta, 60.

-. Graucalus robusta, 66.

-, Pachycephala, 135.

-, Pachycephala robust®, 137.

robustirostris, Milligania, 75.

-.-robustirostris, 61.

rogersi, Butorides, 75.

-. Cheniscus pulchellus, 56.

-, Dorothina virescens, 67.

-, Limicola falcinellus, 70.

-, Megapodargus papuensis, 65.

-, Northipsitta, alexandrae, 65.

rogersi, Plegadis falcinellus, 56.

-, Spathopterus alexandrse, 57.

rohui, Diomedella cauta, 55, 160. Roitelet. 19. roratus, Eclectus, 45. rosa, Palseornis, 93.

--, Psittacus, 93.

rosalba, Trogon, 12. rosea, Belchera rosea, 59.

-, Fringilla, 34, 48.

royana, Leucanous alba, 64. rubecula, Helminthophaga, 122.

-, Muscicapa, 127.

-, Myiagra, 127.

rubeculus, Todus, 78. rubinea, Clytolsema, 4L rubinus, Muscicapa, 35. rubra, Tanagra, 144, 145. rubricatus, Pardalotus, 106. rubricauda, Cly tolge ma, 4L

-, Trochilus, 34, 41.

rubripes, Megapodius, 17, 18. rubritorquis, Trichoglossus, 107. rufa, Alauda, 46.

-, Harriwhitea alberti, 58.

-, Limosa, 10.

-, Lessonia, 46.

-, Pyrrhula, 121.

-, Tangara, 36.

rufescens, Anthus, 125.

-, Atrichornis rufescens, 71.

-. Cincloramphus, 105.

rufìcauda, Estrelda, 102. rufìceps, Falco, 13.

-, Pomatostomus rufìceps, 60.

rufifrons, Rhipidura, 103. rufipennis, Petrophassa, 74. rufìventris, Lewinornis rufìventris, 159. rufogularis, Gilbertornis rufogularis, 59.

-, Pachycephala, 164.

rufotibia, Erythrotriorchis radiatus, 128.

rufus, Picus, 36, 49.

-, Turdus, 35.

russata, Elseyornis melanops, 64. rustica, Hirundo, 77. sabini, Larus, 149, 150.

Sacramela keartlandi, 76. sagittata, Amimeta sagittata, 68. Saltator cayanus, 41.

-magnus, 40.

-maximus, 40, 4L

salvadori, Sphecotheres, 77.

Samuela alisteri, 75.

-cinnamomea cinnamomea, 60.

--samueli, 60.

samueli, Samuelia cinnamomea, 60.

sanctus, Halcyon, 102. sanguinea, Cacatua, 104. sanguinolenta, Myzomela, 108. Sauropatis sanctus adamsi, 68.

----vagans, 68.

Saurothera, 144.

Sayornis phoebe, 51.

Schizorhis africana, 44, 146. scintillans, Marianornis varia, 128 Scolopax, 157.

-australis, 103.

gallinacea, 10. lapponica, 10. limosa, 10. major, 10.

Scoptilus, 146.

Scopus, 156, 157. scutata, Buceros, 37.

Scythrops novsehollandiae, 103. Sea-Eagle, 109.

Seizura inquieta, 107. senegalensis, Colius, 11.

, Halcyon, 48.

, Motacilla, 51. sericea, Sylvia, 115.

Sericornis tyrannulus, 76, 77.

Sericulus chrysocephalus, 105. Serpentarius, 156. serrata, Onychoprion fuscatus, 55. serresianus, Eudyptes, 74.

Setophaga ruticilla, 49.

sibirica, Platyrhamphus falcinellus, 64.

Silvia, 155.

simillima, Austropitta versicolor, 66. Siphia parva, 123.

Sitta, 155.

solitaria, Origma solitaria, 60.

Origmella solitaria, 66. solitarius, Calliptilus, 93.

-, Phigys, 160.

, Psittacus, 93.

Somateria, 145, 149. mollissima, 149.

sonora, Dorothina virescens, 67.

Sophia, 156.

sordidus, Artamus, 105.

, Halcyon, 108.

, Psittacus, 91.

--, Ypsilophorus, 63.

Souchet, 149.

Sparvius minutus, 13.

Spathoptera, 65.

Spathopterus, 65, 132.

alexandrse alexandrae, 57.

—    rogersi, 57.

Spatula clypeata, 77, 107.

-rhynchotis, 107.

Spatula rhynchotis dydimus, 56.

rhynchotis, 56. speccosa, Upupa, 35.

Sphecotheres australis, 102. flavirostris, 102, 141. maxillaris, 139. boweri, 63 vieilloti, 63. salvadori, 77. stalkeri, 141. vieilloti, 140.

Spheniscus patachonicus, 147. Sphenoeacus galactodes, 106.

gramineus, 106.

Sphenostoma cristata, 108.

Sphenura brachytera brachyptera, 61. - victoriae, 61.

Spiloglaux novseseelandiae clelandi, 70.

tasmanica, 70. spinicaudus, Orthonyx, 104. spinoletta, Anthus, 126.

Spizella canadensis, 41.

monticola, 41. splendens, Malurus, 103. splendida, Euphema, 97, 105.

, Neophema splendida, 57. Sporophila collaris, 38.

Squatarola squatarola, 126. squatarola, Tringa, 126. stalkeri, Graucalus hypoleuca, 66.

, Sphecotheres, 141.

, Symposiachrus trivirgatus, 59. Stellaria, 123.

Stercorarius parasiticus, 74. visitori, 73.

sterlingi, Marianornis varia, 128. Sterna, 156.

d gracilis, 96. gracilis, 96.

--maxima, 37.

meianorhyncba, 96.

-nigrifrons, 96.

striata, 96.

Sternula inconspicua, 96. strenua, Athene, 107. strenuus, Sylochelidon, 160.

Streperà fuliginosa colei, 63.

--fuliginosa, 63.

strepitans, Austropitta, 66. strepsirynchos, Nisus, 13. striata, Malacoptila, 20.

--, Sterna, 96.

striatus, Bucco, 10.

--, Cossyphus, 16.

, Pardalotus, 106.

--, Picus, 34.

strictipennis, Threskiornis, 106.

Strix, 154.

-castanops, 105.

-walleri, 104.

Struthidea cinerea, 127. struthidea, Glaucopis, 127.

Struthio, 157.

Sturnus, 155.

subaffinis, Amimeta sagittata, 68. subalisteri, Maclennania mathewsi, 127. subminuta, Marianornis varia, 128.

-------, Pisobia, 77.

subniger, Falco, 104. subpallida, Graucalus novsehollandise, 66.

Subspilura megala, 74.

Sula, 156.

sulcirostris, Phalacrocorax, 105. sulphureus, Psittacus, 92. sulva, Tanara, 46.

-, Tangara, 36.

superba, Menura, 104. superbus, Ptilonopus, 104. superciliaris, Drymodes, 104. superciliosa, Motacilla, 36, 44, 45.

--, Phylloscopus superciliosa, 44,


-humei, Phylloscopus, 44, 45.

•-mandellii, Phylloscopus, 44.

superciliosus, Acanthoryhnchus, 107.

-, Artamus, 105.

-, Campbellornis superciliosus, 61.

-, Phsenicophaus, 16.

swainsoni, Polytelis swainsoni, 57.

-, Reginopus, 64.

--, Trichoglossus, 107.

Sylochelidon strenuus, 160.

Sylvia, 155.

-cetti, 115.

-sericea, 115.

--, Tanysiptera, 106.

--, Uralcyon sylvia, 58.

Symposiachrus trivirgatus gouldi, 59.

--stalkeri, 59.

Synoicus australis, 108.

-chinensis, 108.

syrmatophorus, Cosmerodius albus, 65.

tabuensis, Psittacus, 144.

Tachyphonus, 145.

Tadorna radjah, 102.

Tamatia, 150. tamatià, Bucco, 10.

Tanagra, 148, 154.

-cristata, 144.

-grisea, 36, 51.

--nigrigula, 36.

-pileata, 36.

Tanagra rubra, 144, 145.

--tricolor, 144.

Tanara fulva, 46.

--sulva, 46.

Tangara, 148.

--fulva, 36, 160.

-major, 34, 40.

-rufa, 36.

-sulva, 36.

Tantalus, 157.

Tanysiptera sylvia, 106. tasmanica, Spiloglaux novseseelandise, 70.

tasmanicus, Heteroscenes pallidus, 58. teesa, Butastur, 77. temporalis, Estrelda, 102. tenebrosa, Wilsonavis, 75. tenuirostris, Acanthiza, 75.

-, Acanthorhynchus, 107.

terat, Turdus, 34.

Terekia cinerea australis, 69.

Tetrao, 155.

-pileatus, 36.

-variegatus, 47.

tetrao, Crypturus, 47.

-, Perdrix, 36, 47.

textilis, Diaphorillas, 172.

--textilis, 86.

-, Malurus, 79, 80, 84.

Thalassarche chrysostoma, 99.

-melanophris, 99.

Thalasseus bengalensis bengalensis, 55.

--robini, 55.

Thalassogeron chrysostoma, 99.

--alexanderi, 55.

---culminatus, 55.

Threskiornis strictipennis, 106. Tinamou, 155.

Tinnunculus cenchroides, 104.

Todopsis, 89, 90.

Todus, 155.

—— rubeculus, 78.

Toenia, 144, 145.

Torgos, 113.

tormenti, Microeca brunneicauda, 58. torquata, Malacoptila, 10, 20. torquatus, Bucco, 10.

-, Gymnophrys, 26.

-. Merula, 117.

-, Pedionomus, 106.

----torquatus, 53.

-, Psittacus, 35.

-, Turdus, 39, 117.

Totanus, 157.

Touraco, 154.

Touyou, 157.

tracheliotus, Otogyps, 113.

tranquilla, Geopelia, 108. Tregellasia capito barroni, 59.

- nana, 59.

leucops, 75.

albigularis, 59. paira, 59.

Trichodere, 68, 132.

Trichoglossus chlorolepidotus, 105.

--concinnus, 105.

--cyanogrammus, 93

--rubritorquis, 107.

--swainsoni, 107.

trichroa, Erythrura, 76.

Tricodere cockerelli cockerelli, 71.

--jardinei, 71.

Tricoderes, 68. tricolor, Tanagra, 144. tridactyla, Crocethia, 114. Tridactylus, 155.

Tringa, 114, 157.

-alpina, 114.

--arenaria, 114.

-calidris. 114.

--cinclus, 114.

--gambetta, 114.

--indica, 36.

--interpres, 114.

-islándica, 114.

--miles, 36.

-ochropus, 114.

---ocrophus, 77.

--pugnax, 114.

-squatarola, 126.

tristis, Gracula, 143. trivirgata, Monarcha, 103. Trochilus, 155.

-albus, 42.

-amethystinus, 35, 42.

-gramineus, 42.

nigrieollis, 42. nitidus, 42.

-rubricauda, 34, 41.

--violicauda. 35, 42.

--viridigula. 35, 41.

Trogon, 154.

--collaris, 12.

— rosalba, 12. trópica, Fregetta, 76. Tropidorhynchus argenticeps, 105.

---cornicuJatus, 105.

tumulus, Megapodius, 102.

Turdus, 154.

- atricapillus, 40.

-cyanurus, 34.

-jala, 35.

-juidao, 35.

-macrourus fasciatus, 34.

Turdus madagascariensis, 35.

--manilla, 35.

--maxillaris, 139, 140.

--merula, 117.

--atricapilla, 34, 40.

migratorius, 117.

---musicus, 158.

philippensis, 34.

--rufus, 35.

--terat, 34.

—-— torquatus, 39, 117.

—•— virens, 34, 48.

--viscivorus, 117.

Turnix maculosa pseutes, 53.

----yorki, 53.

Turtur afra, 34, 38.

tweedi, Atrichornis rufescens, 71.

, Opopsitta coxeni, 128. tyrannulus, Sericornis, 76, 77. Tyrannus, 154.

— tyrannus, 51.

undata, Motacilla, 35. undatus, Celeus, 49.

, Picus, 49.

undulatus, Melopsittacus, 104. unimaculatus, Phoeniculus, 146. Upupa, 155.

-crocro, 14.

-erythrorhynchos, 143, 146.

- speccosa, 35.

-varia, 36.

Uralcyon sylvia dydimus, 58. sylvia, 58.

Uria, 156.

Urinator, 156.

Urolestes melanoleucos, 19. uropygialis, Limosa, 107.

vagans, Sauropatis sanctus, 68. Vaginalis, Í56. vaiolanti, Psittacus, 93. validirostris, Melithreptes, 105. varia, Amytornis, 174.

-, Limosa, 10.

-, Marianornis, 128.

-, Perdix, 128.

-, Upupa, 36.

varians, Corvus, 144.

! variegata, Ampelis, 11. variegatus, Buceo, 10.

--, Certhionyx variegatus, 62.

-, Cuculus, 2.

variegatus, Tetrao, 47.

varius, Psittacus, 92.

verida, Eupodella, 64.

versicolor, Austropitta versicolor, 66.

versicolor, Dorothina versicolor, 67.

-. Quiscalus, 49.

Vestiaria, 144, 145, 147, 150.

Vetula, 143, 144, 150. vetula, Cuculus, 143. vibrissa, Psittacus, 34. victoria, Ixobrychus minutus, 24. victoriae, Coracina robusta, 60.

-, Eurostopodus mystacalis, 58.

-, Graucalus robusta, 66.

--, Halobaena caerulea, 54.

-, Sphenura brachyptera, 61.

victorianus, Elanus scriptus, 70. Vidua, 155.

-, Motacilla, 20.

vieilloti, Sphecotheres, 140.

-, --maxillaris, 63.

vigorsi, Maclennania, Mathewsi, 127. violaceus, Lanius, 33.

-, Nycticorax, 50.

-, Oriolus, 35, 49.

violetae, Pachycephala robusta, 137. violicauda, Lampornis, 42.

--, Trochilus. 35, 42.

Virago castanea alexanderi, 56.

---castanea, 56.

-gibberifrons, 75.

virens, Buceo, 36.

-, Turdus, 34, 48.

Vireo griseus, 51.

virescens, Dorothina virescens, 67.

viridigula, Lampornis, 42.

-, Trochilus, 35, 41.

viridis, Buceo, 36.

-Certhia, 51.

-, Oriolus, 34, 106.

viscivorus, Turdus, 117. visitori, Stercorarius parasiticus, 73. vittatus, Lanius, 18. vourougdriou, Leptosomus, 12. vulgaris, Cypselus, 16.

---. Limosa, 10.

---. Pyrrhula, 121.

Vultur, 154.

walgetti, Dorothina virescens, 67. wallaca, Diomedella cauta, 160. walleri, Strix, 104. warreni, Leggeornis elegans, 61.

--, Quoyornis georgianus, 59.

-, Zoster ops gouldi, 62.

watsoni, Dacelo gigas, 70.

watsoni, Neopoephila personata, 71.

-, Pseudogerygone personata, 71.

--, Xanthotis flaviventer, 71.

westerensis, Dyottornis paradoxus, 63. westralensis, Graucalus novsehollandiae. 66.

westwoodia, Dorothina virescens, 67. White Fulica, 22.

--Gallinule, 22.

whitei, Lacustroica, 76.

--,-whitei, 62.

-, Polytelis swainsoni, 57.

whitlocki, Ethelornis magnirostris, 24. Wilsonavis tenebrosa, 75. wilsoni, Erolia ferruginea, 70.

Wilsonia citrina, 51.

Woodfordia, 132. woodwardi, Colluricincla, 76.

-, Magnamytis, 76.

Xanthomyza phrygia, 103. xanthonotus, Calyptorhynchus, 104. “ Xanthornus, 154.

Xanthotis flaviventer filigera, 71.

--watsoni, 71.

Xema jamesonii, 104.

Xerophila pectoralis, 79.

yapou, Cacicus, 11.

yorki, Polophilus phasianinus, 58.

-, Turnix maculosa, 53.

youngi. Pachycephala pectoralis, 137. Ypsilophorus ypsilophorus, 63.

--australis, 63.

--cervinus, 63.

---diamenensis, 63.

--melvillensis, 63.

-^--mungi, 63.

--queenslandicus, 63.

----rogersi, 63.

---sordidus, 63.

--ypsilophorus, 63.

Ypsipetes, 124.

Yunx, 154.

zanda, Gilbertornis rufogularis, 59. zoeae, Columba, 19.

Zosterops, albiventris albiventris, 62.

--cairncrossi, 62.

-flavogularis, 97.

--gouldi, gouldi, 62.

----warreni, 62.




May 1920—March 1922.


Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, England.

Edited by


London :

H. F. & G. WITHERBY 32G High Holborn.

pensas urr/ERsrrr utfcAtt






Dates of Ornithological Works . .    . .    .    .    . .    .    .    1

Avian Taxonomy    . .    .    .    . .    .    .    . .    .    .    29

A Name-List of the Birds of    New Zealand    . .    ..    .    .    49

A Name-List of the Birds of    Australia    . .    . .    .    .    65

A Name-List of the Birds of    Australia (concluded)    . .    ..    73

Forgotten Bird-Artists and an Old-Time Ornithologist . .    114

Snipe and Sandpipers : A Re-arrangement . .    . .    . .    123

Sherborn and the Systematist . .    . .    .    .    . .    .    .    130

Sherborn and the Systematist (concluded)    . .    . .    ..    133

Additions and Corrections to my List of the Birds of Australia,

1913, and Check List, Part I., 192(1    ...... 135

Notes of InterestLichtenstein's Sale Catalogues, Berthold's Edition of Latreille, Encyclopedia londinensis, Turdus varius, Miller’s Illustrations, Blyth’s Catalogue, Fort Pitt, Chatham, Bird Collection, Haldemann s Zoological Contributions, Anthus qrayi Bp., Hirundolaniiis, Cranellns, Reichenbach Again, Boddaert’s Hidden Names, Biitish Bird Names, Another Overlooked Bird

List ..    ..    . .    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..    139

Amoropelici gen. nov. ..    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..    164

Additions and Corrections to my Check List, 1920 . .    . .    165

An Extraordinary Bird Book    . .    . .    . .    ..    . .    172

Captain Thomas Brown, Ornithologist    . .    . .    . .    176

.■¿.A t


Austral Avian Record


VOL. IV. No. 1.


Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, England



Subscription per Volume 12/- Net.

WITHERBY & CO., 32G High Holborn, London, W.C. 1. May 21th, 1920.


■M ;>.

A8531>* ¿


M3    'íw



Vol. IV., No. 1.

May 27th, 1920.



Dates of Ornithological Works ..    ..    . .    1


By Gregory M. Mathews.

As Appendix B. in Part V. of Volume VII. of my Birds of Australia, which was published on July 10, 1919, I included the results of an attempt to provide exact dates for Ornithological Works quoted in that work. This was a novel effort, and of course contains many imperfections, but my reviewers have kindly suggested that it was important enough to be reprinted in a more accessible place, and indicated the present vehicle. I have great pleasure in acceding to these desires and am thankful for the appreciation, and have also taken the opportunity of revising some items and adding additional information, so that this list is more complete and accurate than the preceding one ; but I have condensed it so that it gives references to the details, not all the details themselves. It must also be remembered that I only deal with the books referred to in connection With the Australian Avifauna.

Annals and Magazine of Natural History. The first Magazine of Natural History was edited by Loudon, the first part being published on May 1st, 1828, and appeared every two months. Nine volumes were completed, each volume containing six parts, when Charlesworth continued it as editor, but only four volumes had appeared before it succumbed to

A £53 O-* A

the opposition of the Magazine of Zoology and Botany, which was brought out under the direction of Jardine and Selby, and of which two volumes were published, each containing six numbers, which had come out every two months from June 1836 to February 1838, two numbers appearing together in August 1837. Then on March 1st, 1838, appeared the Annals of Natural History, a monthly journal under Jardine’s editorship, . and soon entitled the Annals and Magazine of Natural History is continued to this day, six months constituting a volume, and twenty volumes (i.e., ten years) form a series.

Annales Paris Museum. Sherborn has collated this and the Mémoires in the Annals Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 8, Vol. XIII., p. 365, March h914.

Annales Soi. Nat. Paris. Dates as given have been accepted, but a collation seems necessary, as citations in the text sometimes contradict the ostensible dates of publication.

Auk. The quarterly Journal of the American Ornithologists’ Union, which has appeared regularly January, April, July and October ; first so called in 1883, succeeding the Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club, founded in 1875.

Austral Avian Record. Issued irregularly and dates given in the Birds Austr., Vol. VII., pt. 5, p. 444, July 10, 1919.

Austr. Mus. Catalogues. Catalogue No. 4, pt. i., Accipitres, by E. P. Ramsay, 1876 ; pt. H., Striges, by Ramsay, 1890 ; pt. hi., Psittaci, by Ramsay, 1891 ; and pt. iv., Picariæ, by Ramsay, 1894. A second edition, edited and corrected by A. J. North, of parts i. and n. was issued in 1898. Catalogue No. 12 of Nests and Eggs of Birds Breeding in Australia, prepared by North, has title page 1889, but was not published until late in 1890, being acknowledged in the Ibis, January 1891, and refers in text to May 25, 1890.

Bartram. Travels in Carolina, 1791. German translation, with additions by Zimmermann in 1793. See Auk, XXXI., pp.' 86-91, January 1914.

Bechstein. Ornith. Taschenb,. Vol. I., 1802 (pref. July 11th); Vol. II., 1803; Vol. III. by Leisler, 1812 (pref. June 1811),

Billberg. Synops. Faunce Scand., 1828. See Austral Av. Rec., Vol. II., pp. 33-48, 1913.

Bloxham. Voy.BlondeSandwich Islands, “ 1826.” published February 20, 1827. Refer Literary Gazette, p. 112, February 17th, 1827, and February 24th, p. 125, 1827.

Blyth. Cat. Birds Mus. Asiatic Society. Title page dated 1849, but was not published until after June 20, 1852, the date of preface. Author of series of articles in the Journal As. Soc., Bengal, which must be referred to in connection with Falconiform birds, and he also named genera and species of Australian birds in same Journal.

Boddaert. Tabl. des Planch. Enlum. The preface is dated December 1, 1783. See Austral Av. Rec., Vol. III., pp. 31-51, 1915.

Boie. Two important articles in the Isis (Oken), the first in Heft 5, presumably for May 1822, the other in Heft 10, presumably for October 1826.

Bonaparte. Papers on North American Birds in the Annals Lyceum Nat. Hist., New York, 1828. Series of papers popularly known by indefinite abbreviations and pages quoted from reprints ; also papers published in the Comptes Rendus Acad. Sci. Paris, were reprinted with additions, and these have also been cited.

Saggio = Saggio distrib. Metod. Anim. verteb., published in parts in the Giornale Arcadico di Scienze Roma. I have not exact dates of publication, but Vol. LIT, p. 208, though usually quoted 1831, was not published until well on in the year 1832.

Icongr. Fauna Italica. Issued in fascicules, so that date on title of completed work is misleading.

Comp. List Birds Europe and America. Advertised in the Athenaeum and in Lit. Gazette for April 14th, 1838, but reviewed in Charles worth’s Mag. Nat. Hist., Vol. II., for April 1838, No. 16, p. 237, where it is written: “We are much gratified at the appearing of this volume,” having drawn attention to its preparation two months earlier, No. 14, p. 109, so apparently January given by me previously is incorrect.

Consp. Gen. Av. Pt. i., probably pp. 1-272, received before

June 24, 1850, by the Paris Academy. Pt. n. acknowledged same place February 3, 1851. These constitute Vol. I. Vol. II. was issued in parts, due to illness of author, which culminated in his death, and last part was issued afterward. Thus pp. 1-159 were issued in 1855 after April 15, pp. 161-184 some time in 1856, and pp. 185 to end after October 1, 1857.

C.S.O. This indicates the Consp. Syst. Ornith. published in the Ann. Sci. Nat. Paris, Ser. 4, Vol. I., Nos. 2 and 3, pp. 105-152, received at the Paris Academy, May 15 and June 26, 1854.

C.V.Z. Consp. Vol. Zygod., published in the Ateneo Italiano, Vol. 2, No. 8, May (15), 1854, pp. 116-129; received Paris before June 5, 1854.

C.V.A. Consp. Vol. Aniso., published ibid No. 11, August (15), 1854, pp. 311-321 : received Paris before August 28, 1854. No. 12, September (15), 1854, pp. 377-382.

Bonnaterre. See Ency. Meth.

Brandt. Descr. Icon. Anim. Russ. Nov. Aves., fasc. I., 1836. All published; refer to Finsch, Abh. Nat. Ver. Bremen, Vol. III., pp. 19-21. See under Tchihatcheff.

Brehm. Beitr. VogelJcunde. Vol. I., 1820, preface July 1820 : Vol. II., 1822, pref. November 14, 1821 ; Vol. III., 1822, pref. May 1822.

Lehrb. Naturg. 1823, preface July 1823.

Vogel' Deutschl. 1831, preface July 1831.    .

Vogelfang. 1855, preface November 8, 1854.

Brisson. Ornithologia. 6 volumes at one date, 1760.

Brown, Capt. Thomas. Illustr. Genera Birds, published in monthly parts, each 4 plates, 1st part April 1, 1845, and ninth part December 1845, with 8 pages text, and in October number an additional plain plate. Was never completed. See Miscellany Nat. Hist.

Brunnich. Orn. Boreal. Preface dated February 20, 1764.

Buller.. Essay New Zealand Orn. Pref. dated February 1, 1865.

The Essay on New Zealand Ornithology was reprinted in the Trans. New Zealand Inst., Vol. I., 1869, which was itself

later reprinted. In the first edition the Essay is separately paged : in the reprint the Essay is paged consecutively with the Transactions.

Hist. New Zeal. Birds, in 5 parts : pt. i., March 1872 ; pt. ii., June 1872 ; pts. hi. & iv., December 1872 ; andpt. v., April 1873.

2nd Edition in 13 parts : pt. i., July 1887 ; pt. n., October 1887 ; pt. hi., January 1888 ; pts. iv., v. & vi., March 1888 ; pt. vii., May 1888; pts. viii. & ix., August 1888; pts. x. & xi., November 1888 ; and pts. xn. & xm., December 1888.

Supplement. Vol. I before August 5, 1905 ; Vol. II. before July 1906. These dates need revision.

Bulletin Brit. Orn. Club. Published with a short account of the meetings of the Brit. Orn. Club held monthly during the months from October to June inclusive, and each Bulletin bears the date of issue, but in some cases this is not exactly correct.

Bulletin Sci. Nat. (Ferussac). This Bulletin was devoted to reviews of current literature, but original articles were also accepted. Exact dates have not yet been secured, those given on the parts being accepted. It is a very valuable record by which publication of other scientific works may be traced, contents of parts of serial works being detailed.

Cabanis. Mus. Heineanum. Vol. I., 1851, after October 23 ; Vol. II., 1860, after January 20 ; Vol. III., 1860, after November 1 ; Vol. IV., 1864, after December 30, 1863. All after Vol. I. are by Cabanis and Heine.

Campbell. Nests and Eggs Austr. Birds, published in 2 vols. in 1901, acknowledged in Melbourne Viet. Nat., Vol. XVII., p. 206, April 4, 1901.

Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. In the Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 448, 1919, I gave details of volumes and dates of preface which were intended as dates of publication, but Richmond has suggested that these are not correct. I have so far been unable to get definite dates, but will furnish them at the first opportunity.

Comptes Rendus. Reports of the meetings of the Academy of Sciences of Paris, which were published weekly, and

Bonaparte contributed many most important papers to the Academy.

Coquille. In the Austral Av. Rec., Vol. II., pts. 2-3, October 23, 1913, I gave details of publication of plates and text, based on the work done by Sherborn and Woodward in the Annals Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. VII., Vol. 7, p. 391, 1901.

Coues. Probably the most brilliant all-round ornithologist that has yet lived. Better known in connection with American works, such as his Key and Check List of North American birds, but must be noted here in connection with his Monographs, which appeared in the Proceedings Academy Natural Sciences Philadelphia.

A Monograph of the Tringeæ of North America ; 1861, pp. 170-205, sign. July-August.

A Review of the Terns of North America ; 1862, pp. 535-559, sign. December.

A Critical Review of the Family Procellariidæ :

Part i.,    1864,    pp.    72-91,    sign.    March-April.

Part ii.,    1864,    pp.    116-141,    sign.    April.

Part hi.,    1866,    pp.    25-33,    sign.    March.

Part iv.,    1866,    pp.    134-172,    sign.    May.

Part v.,    1866,    pp.    172-197,    sign.    May.

As an Appendix to an essay on the Birds of the Colorado Valley Coues published a Bibliography of American Ornithology (U.S. Geol. Surv. Territ. Mise. Publ., No. 11, pp. 568-784, after October 31), 1878, following with a second and third instalment, Bulletin No. 2 (September 6), 1879, and Bulletin No. 4 (September 30), 1880. A fourth instalment (on British Birds) occurs in Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., Vol. II., 1880, pp. 359482.

Cuvier. Tabl. EUm. 179$. In Journ. Typogr., December 24, 1797.

Leçons T Anat. Comp., Vols. I. and II. ibid. April 19, 1800.

Le Règne Animal, titles 1817, 4 Vols. B.F., December 7, 1816. 2nd Edition, B.F., Vols. L, IL, IV., and V., April 11, 1829; Vol.

III., March 27, 1830. See Griffith and Pidgeon.

Daudin. Traite d’Orn., Vol. I., January 1800. Vol. II., May 14, 1800, See Richmond, Auk, October 1899, p. 325 notç.

The XIVth Volume of the Didot ed. Hist. Nat. (Buffon), in which Daudin gave specific names, was published in October 1802. See Sherborn, Natural Science, December 1899, p. 406.

Dict. Sci. Nat. (Levrault). Details of publication in the Austral Av. Rec,, Vol. III., pt. 1., June 30, 1915.

Dieffenbach. Travels in Neiv Zealand. Pref. November, 1842. Published middle of January 1843.

Diggles. Ornith. Australia. See Austral Av. Rec., Vol. I., pp. 68-72, 1912, Vol. II., pp. 137-153, 1915, and Vol. III., pp. 98-108, 1917, where full details of all this writer’s work and sketch of his life appear.

Dresser. Author of Birds of Europe, Monograph of Bee Eaters, and Monograph of the Rollers.

Dumeril. Zool. Anal., title 1806, but reviewed in detail in Journ. Typogr. for December 6, 1805. Translation by Froriep, 1806, preface dated September 17, 1806.

Dumont. Author of Articles in the Dict. Sci. Nat. (Levrault).

Elliot. Monograph of Pittidce. Pref. November 1862, published as one item in 1863. Copy in Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist, has a title page dated 1867 ! Second edition was issued in five parts, 1893-1895. Pt. 1, April 1893 ; pt. 2, December 1893 ; pt. 3, February 1894 ; pt. 4, September 1894 ; pt. 5, January 1895. Author of other important works which do not concern Australian ornithologists.

Emu. A quarterly publication, the organ of the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union, Vols. including July, October and January April, numbers. Bulletins apparently have no scientific standing. See Emu, Vol. XV., p. 163, 1916.

Ency. Meth. See Sherborn and Woodward, Annals Mag. Nat. Hist., Vol. XVII., Ser. 7, p. 577, 1906, where full details are given.

Erebus & Terror. See Gray.

Eyton. Hist. Rarer Brit. Birds, 1836, in 3 parts. Pt. 1, Jan. 1836 ; pt. 2 (February) 1836 ; pt. 3 (March) 1836. Reviewed in May 1836.

Monograph Anatidce, published in June 1838.

Fleming. Philos Zool., published in June 1822.

History Brit. Animals, published in March 1828.

Finsch. Neu Guinea, 1865 (pref. August 1864).

Die Papageien, Vol. I., 1867 ; reviewed August : Vol. II. in 2 parts. Pref. August 8, 1868.

Forster, G. Voyage Round the World, 1777, prefaceMarch 1.

Forster, J. R. Monograph on Penguins appeared in the Comment. Gottingen, the preface dated “ Kal. Mai, 1781.”

Indische Zool., 1781 : preface October 12, 1781.

Enchiridion, 1788 : noticed Gotting. Anzeiger, March 27, 1788, p. 489.    *

Descr. Anim., posthumously edited by Lichtenstein and published in 1844, the preface being dated January. Some of the species had been previously published by Wagler, from Forster’s MSS., in his Syst. Av., 1827, and Isis, 1829.

Forster, T. Synopt. Cat. Brit. Birds, published December 1817.

Froriep, edited a Journal entitled “ Notizen,” which is a work of reference whence dates may sometimes be approximately gauged : also edited a translation of Dumeril’s Zool. Anal.

Gadow prepared Vols. 8 and 9 of Cat. Birds Brit. Mus.

Galerie des Oiseaux. See Austral Av. Rec., Vol. II., pt. 7, January 28, 1915, for details as far as yet known.

Garnot. See Coquille.    ■

Gistel. Naturg. Thierr. Title 1848: preface Easter 1847. Second edition, title page 1850 : no other difference in my Library.

Gloger. Hand- und Hilfsb., published in seven parts, the first five, each 80 pages, appearing in 1841 : part vi., pp. 401480 ? and Part vn., 477*-496, and pp. i-xxxxiv., including preface dated October 17, 1841, perhaps early in 1842, as that date appears on title page. Part VI. must have appeared in 1841, and VII. in 1842.

Gmelin, J. F. Syst. Nat. See Hopkinson, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1907, p. 1037. Pt. i., pp. 1-500, July 25, 1788 ; pt.

ii., pp. 501-1032, April 20, 1789 ; pt. hi., Nov. 20th, 1789.

Godman, F. D. Famous specialist on neotropical birds,

who published a Monograph of Petrels, initiated by his colleague Salvin, the authority on this subject, who died before beginning it.

Gould. Author of many illustrated works on Birds of Europe, Asia and Australia, etc.

Synopsis Birds Austr. in 4 pts., Pt. I., January 1837 ; pt. n., April 1837 ; pts. hi. and iv., April 1838.

Birds Austr. and Adj. I si.    Pt. i., August, 1837 ; pt. il,

February 1838. All published.

Birds Australia in 36 parts, regularly dated March 1st, June 1st, September 1st, December 1st, the 1st part December 1st, 1840, and pts. 33, 34, 35 and 36 all dated December 1st, 1848. His Introduction was published in octavo form, so that it might be corrected before appearing in the folio edition, and was published August 1st 1848. A Supplement was then issued at long intervals: Pt. i., dated March 15, 1851; pt. n., September 1, 1855; pt. hi., September 1, 1859; pt. iv., December 1, 1867 ; and pt. v., August 1, 1869.

Handbook Birds Australia, 1865. Apparently in 2 Vols. in December 1865. Richmond has note of Vol. I. advertised in September 1865, but I have been unable to find any confirmation yet.

Birds of New Guinea issued in parts. Begun by Gould and completed by Sharpe. Contains figures of previously unfigured Australian birds as Ailurcedus maculosus, Vol. I., pi. 38 (pt. i.), Dec. 1st, 1875 ; Scenopceus dentirostris, Vol. I., pi. 43 (pt. x.), Sept. 1st, 1879 ; Cblamydodera orientalis, Vol. I., pi. 44 (pt. xi.), Feb. 1st, 1880 ; Cblamydodera occipitalis, Vol. I., pi. 45 (pt. x.), Sept. 1st, 1879 ; Microeca assimilis. Vol. II., pi. 10 (pt. xi.), Feb. 1st, 1880 ; Heteromyias cinereifrons, Vol. II., pi. 15 (pt. X.), Sept. 1st, 1879 ; Pcecihxhyas albifacies, Vol. II., pi. 18 (pt. xm.), 1882 (month ?) ; Rhipidura dryas, Vol. II., pi. 32 (pt. n.), Jan. 1st, 1876 ; Sericornis minimus, Vol. III., pi. 7 (pt. i.), Dec. 1st, 1875 ; Amytis goyderi, Vol. III., pi. 8 (pt. n.), Jan. 1st, 1876 ; Ephthianura crocea, Vol. III., pi. 14 (pt. xxiv.), 1888 (month ?) ; Cracticus rufescens, Vol. III., pi. 16 (pt. xxiii.), 1887 (month ?) ; Xerophila pectoralis, Vol. III., pi. 27 (pt. i.),

Dec. 1st, 1875; Sittella albata, Vol. III., pi. 28 (pt. xi.), Feb. 1st, 1880 ; Melithreptus,lsetior, Vol. III., pi. 40 (pt. n.), Jan. 1st, 1876 ; Glyciphila snbfasciata, Vol. III., pi. 46 (pt. hi.), May 1st, 1876 ; Ptilotis frenata, Vol. III., pi. 49 (pt. n)., Jan. 1st, 1876 ; Ptilotis flavostriata, Vol. III., pi. 50 (pt. n.), Jan. 1st, 1876 ■ Collocalia terrsereginse, Vol. IV., pi. 38 (pt. i.), Dec. 1st, 1875 ; Cyclopsitta macco3d, Vol. V., pi. 7 (pt. i.), Dec. 1st, 1875; Sternnla placens, Vol. V., pi. 72 (pt. hi.), May 1st, 1876 ; Cacatna gymnopis, Vol. V., pi. 46 (pt. xix.), 1885 (month ?).

Gray, G. R. List Genera Birds. 1st ed., April 1840; 2nd ed., September 1841.

Appendix on sale April 1st, 1842.

Genera Birds, see Richmond, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus-., Vol. 53, p. 596, note 1917.

Cat. Gen. Subgen. Birds. Although Introd. dated April 6th, 1855, it does not seem to have been published before October 1855, but may have been a little earlier.

Handlist Gen. Sp. Birds. Pt. i., pref. dated May 10th, 1869 ; pt. ii., pref. Nov. 9th, 1870 ; pt. hi.,pref. July 8th, 1871.

Erebus and Terror. Issued in parts with plates and text; in pt. 3, for instance, 8 plates and 4 pages text. Pages 1-8 appeared in 1844 ; p. 9 (apparently in pt. ix.) according to Newton in June 1845; p. 20, according to Pucheran in October 1845.

Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. A number of small books, entitled Lists of Specimens of Birds in Brit Mus. were issued, and in view of the case of the Cat. Gen. Subgen. Birds the preface dates must be verified before acceptance as dates of publication, though it was the rule in this Institution to date the prefaces for publishing date.

Gray, J. E. Zool. Miscell. Pt. i., pp. 1-40, Nov. 5th, 1831; pt. ii., pp. 41-48, signature March 1842 ; pt. hi., pp. 49-56, April 1842 ; pt. iv., pp. 57-72, May 1842 ; pt. v., pp. 73-80, June 1842 ; pt. vi., pp. 81-86, after June 29, 1844. Plates were prepared'and in some cases never issued, but proofs may be met with as well as additional paged proofs of matter.

Griffith. Edited an^ English translation of Cuvier’s

Animal Kingdom, which appeared in parts. The title pages bear the date 1829, but the plates are dated from November 1827, to January 1830. About nine parts bound in three volumes, which are listed on January 23rd, 1830. Pt. 14 (1st of birds) December 1st, 1827 ; pt. 15, March 31st, 1828 ; pt. 16, August 6th, 1828, with 18 plates; pt. 19, May 21st, 1829; pt. 20 with 16plates, August 15th, 1829; pt. 21, with 21 plates, October 31st, 1829. Further dates and contents of parts still desired.

Gunnerus. See Leem.

Hartert has written a couple of papers on Australian Birds, and many on New Guinea Birds in conjunction with Lord Rothschild in the Novitates Zoologies, which see. Monographed Swifts, etc., in the Cat. Birds. Brit. Mus. and also in Das Thierreich.

Vogel der Palaarlctischen Fauna does not need collation here.

Katalog Vogelsamml. Mus. Senckenb. Middle of January 1891.

Heine. See Cabanis and Reichenow.

Hemprich & Eiirenberg. Symbol. Phys. Title 1832, but issued in 1833.

Horsfiei.d Zoological Researches in Java. Published in eight parts. Pt. 1, 9 pis. and text, July 1821 ; pt. 2, November 1821 ; pt. 3, February 1822 ; pt. 4, June 1822 ; pt. 5, October 1822; pt. 6, April 1823; pt. 7, October 1823; pt. 8, April 1824. Contents of parts given in instructions to binders at end of preface.

Ibis. Journal of British Ornithologists’ Union, published quarterly in January, April, July and October, fairly regularly.

Illiger. Prodr. Mamm. et Avium, 1811, preface dated April.

Illustr. Ornith. See Jardine and Selby.

Illustr. Zool. See Lesson, Swainson and Wilson.

Isis. A German periodical, edited by Oken, which appeared monthly, though often late.

Jardine. Editor of the Naturalists’ Library, and Contributions to Ornithology, which appeared irregularly and no accurate collation has yet been made of the latter. Collaborated with Selby in the Illustr. Ornith., details of which are given by

Sherborn in the Ibis, April, 1894, and corrected in the Ibis, 1899, p. 483. For the second series the dates as now known read: pt.    1, Feb.    11,    1837; pt.    2,    May    27,    1837; pt. 3,

December    1, 1837 ;    pt.    4, June 30,    1838 ;    pt.    5, March 23,

1838 ; pt.    6, Feb.    22,    1840 ; pt.    7,    July    25,    1840 ; pt. 8,

unknown;    pt. 9, June    15, 1843.    Each part should contain

six plates.

Jarocki. Zoologiia. See Austral Av. Rec., Vol. III.,pt. 6, p. 142, et. seq., 1918.

Journal fur Ornithologie. Begun by Cabanis, and six hefts appeared the first year, but soon became behind and no reliance can be placed upon ostensible dates of publication.

Kaup. Skizz. Entwick. Naturl. Syst., 1829, preface dated April.

Class. Saugeth. u. Vogel. Published March 15, 1844. Author of’many articles in the Isis, Jardine’s Contr. Ornith., Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.) ; etc.

Kerr. Animal Kingdom, 1792, preface dated February.

Keyserling & Blasius. Ornith. Europa, 1840, preface dated October 1839. Reviewed in Isis, April 1840, where reviews were not up-to-date.

King. Survey Intertrop. Coasts Austr. Title 1827 (!) but actually issued April 26, 1826; reviewed in Dublin Philos. Journ. for May 1826.

Koch. Syst. baier. Zool., 1816, published before July.

Kuhl. Conspectus Psittacorum, issued in Nov. Act. Phys. Acad. Leop. Carol., Vol. X., 1820, pref. October ; Monograph of Petrels in the Beitr. Vergl. Anat., 1820, pref. dated April 7th.

Lacepede. Tabl. Oiseaux, 1799. Reviewed in paper for end December. See Richmond, Auk, 1899, p. 325, and Sherborn, Natural Science, 1899, p. 406.

Latham. Suppl. Cen. Synops., 1787; preface dated May 1st.

Index Ornith., 1790, acknowledged by Philos. Som London, December 9, 1790.

Second Suppl. Cen. Synops. has plates dated May 30, 1801, and the Suppl. Index Ornith. was- simultaneously published.

Leaciu Zool. Miscellany appeared in parts, 1st part on

Jan. 1st, 1814. Vol. I. having title page 1814 ; Vol. II., 1815 ; Vol. III. appeared as one item, January 1, 1817. Five plates and about one signature of text in each part. Cf. Isis, 1817,

p. 260.

Syst. Calai. Brit. Birds, 1816, pref. October 30.

Lear. Illustr. Psittacidœ. See Austral Av. Rec., Vol. I., p. 23, 1912.

Leem [Knud.] Beskrivelse over Finmarkens Lapper, 1767 ; pref. drde. January 29.

Lesson. Manuel d’Ornith. Acknowledged* B.F., June 28, 1828.

Traite d’Ornith. February 13, 1830-June 11, 1831. For details of this and Illustr. Zool. and Centurie de Zool. see Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII, pp. 12-14, 1911.

Echo du Monde Savant. Articles by Lesson which appeared in this periodical have lately been reprinted by Menegaux.

Descr. Mamm. et Ois., published in April 1847.

Compl. de Buffon. Exact dates not known to me. See also under Coquille.

Levaillant. Hist. Nat. Perroquets. Vol. I., An. IX. = 1801 ; Vol. II., An. XIII. — 1805 ; Vol. III. by Bourjot St. Hilaire said to have been begun in March 1837, but Athenæum, January 23rd, 1836, p. 73, saj^s Pt. 1 has appeared. Another source gives Livr. 15-24 as 1836 ; 25-26 as 1837. Another says completed in 29 parts and 110 plates. A Collection des Perroquetes (possibly this work) is referred to in Wiegm. Archiv. and the following data given : Livr. i.-iv., 1835 ; Livr. xii.-xxiv, 1835, each part with 4 plates.

Lewin. Birds of New Holland, 1808, probably before September. Other editions of little technical importance, 1813, 1822 and 1835.

Lichtenstein. Cat. Berlin Museum. 1st ed. 1816; 2nd ed. 1818, before August. (Isis, 1818, col. 1103, Litt. Anz.) Enlarged edition 1823, preface September. Important one published in 1854, prefaced January 10, and others were issued at various dates between 1819-1842 or later, one of which was reprinted in Journal fur Orn., 1863, pp. 54-60.

See Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 457.

Linne. Fauna Suecica. 1st ed. prefaced February 25, 1746. Syst. Nat. 10th Edition, date accepted, January 1, 1758. Fauna Suecica, 2nd ed. prefaced July 28, 1761. Syst. Nat. 12th ed. prefaced May 24, 1766.

Littler. Handbook Birds Tasm., 1910. Reviewed Emu July 1st 1910, London, December 10.

Macgillivray. Hist. Brit. Birds, Vol. I., prefaced May 1, 1837 ; Vol. II., prefaced June 1, 1839 ; Vol. III., prefaced June 1, 1840. On sale July 1, 1840. Vol. IV., prefaced March 20, 1852 ; and Vol. V., prefaced July 31, 1852.

Rapacious Birds Great Britain. Published January 16, 1836.

Manual Land Birds. Published November 28, 1840.

Manual Water Birds. Published May 28, 1842.

Mag. de Zool. Plates and text issued irregularly, and sometimes text dated, but these are dates of manuscript only, not of publication. No exact collation yet known.

Mathews. Birds Austr. Details given in Vol. VII, p. 458, 1919.

Handl. Birds Australasia. January 1908 as Supplement to Emu, Vol. VII.

List Birds Australia. December 1913.

Reference List to the Birds of Australia was published in the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., pp. 171-656, January 31, 1912, following two important papers on nomenclature in the same Journal, containing details of dates of publication, Vol. XVII. , pp. 492-503, December 15, 1910, and Vol. XVIII., pp. 1-22, June 17, 1911. Has also published many papers in the Ibis, Emu, Auk, South Australian Ornithologist, etc., as well as majority in the Austral Avian Record.

Mathews & Iredale. Reference List of the Birds of New Zealand appeared in Ibis, 1913, pp. 201-263, April 2, pp. 40245, July 1.

Meyer & Wiglesworth. Birds of Celebes. A most important work to students of Australasian birds. Two volumes 1898 issued together and received at British Museum, June 25, 1898. Dates are used as signatures, appearing continuously throughout the work, but are dates of printing of sheets, not of publication, the first being October 4, 1897, and last (contents) May 30, 1898, the preface being dated April 30, 1898.

Meyer & Wolf. Taschenb. deutsche Vogel, 1810. Pt. i., pp. 1-310, preface dated August 20, 1809 ; pt. n., pp. 311-614, preface dated March 1810. Zusatze und Bericht. by Meyer 1822, preface dated April.

Miscellany Nat. Hist. Vol. I., Parrots by Lauder and Brown, 1833. Advt. states that “ On November 16 will be published another work.”

Miller, J. F. Var. Subj. Nat. Hist., plates only bearing dates. See Riley, Auk, 1908, p. 269. Republished with text by Shaw in 1798 under the title Cimelia Physica.

Muller, P. L. S. Suppl. Natursyst., preface dated January 4, 1776. See Cassin, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philad., 1864, pp. 234-257.

Muller, S. Verhandl. Nat. Gesch. Land- en Volkenk. See Austral Av. Rec., Vol. I., p. 24, 1912.

Mus. Carlsonianum. See Sparrman.

Mus. Heineanum. See Heine, and Reichenow.

Mus Leverianum. See Shaw.

Mus. des Pays-Bas. Under this title Schlegel published a series of Monographs of Birds which have not yet been accurately collated with dates of publication. See Birds Austr., Vol. VII., pp. 464 and 476, 1919.

Mus. Senckenberg. In three volumes issued in parts. The preface to Vol. I. is dated October 1834, which appears to be the date of issue of the 3rd. part. In the British Museum, Natural History, the copy is bound with the wrappers preserved^ and from these I have secured the following information :

I. heft

1 pp.

1-96 pis.

I.—V. End Sept.




VI.—IX. & XI.






II. heft













III. heft













Katalog Vogelsamml. Mus. Senckenb., prepared by Hartert, was published after middle of January 1891.

Nahmannta. Published quarterly but at first of quite irregular occurrence, and towards the end apparently also failed. Exact dates have not been ascertained, so I put forward the following details :

Vol. I. in 4 pts. The Vorwort dated September 1849 ; pt. 2 dated in text February 1850 ; pt. 3, October 1850 ; and pt. 4, April 10, 1851.

Vol. II. apparently 3 parts only. Pt. 1 dated in text September 9, 1851 ; pt. 2 November 1852 ; and pt. 3, 1852, only probably early in 1853.

Vol. III. quarterly. Pref. 1853 February. Latest date November 8, 1853.

Vol. IV. quarterly. Latest date November 1854..

V. Do. Latest date October 1855 ; contains advertisement of sale of birds’ eggs to take place at Stevens in February 1856.

Vol. VI. quarterly. Latest date October 1856.

VII. Do.    November 1857.

VIII. for 1858 includes date May 1859.

Newton. Famous British ornithologist, whose publications are few, but the Dictionary, of Birds, in which he was assisted by Gadow, Shufeldt, etc., contains a synoptic résume of ornithological writers, which is peculiarly valuable, as in that study Newton has never been surpassed.

Nitzsch. Observ., pref. dated Ides September 1829.

Pterylographie, pref. dated May 20, 1840.

North. Austr. Mus. Special Catalogue No. 1 was published in parts, details of which are given Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 460, 1919.

Rep. Horn. Sci. Exped., pt. n., Zool. Aves by North, published in February 1896.

Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat., nouv. ed. See Nov. Zool., Vol. XVIII., p. 18, 1911. Two prints exist with very little alteration.

Nov. Zool. A periodical issued in connection with the Tring Museum at irregular intervals, parts being dated.

Oken. Editor of the Isis.

Lehrb. der Naturg . 1816. Allg. Naturg., Vol. VII., pt. i. (Thierreich, Vol. IV., pt. i.), 1837, not 1841 as given in my previous paper.

Ornith. Monatsbericht. A monthly record of ornithology.

Pallas. Spicilegia Zool. Vol. I. in ten fascicules : pref. dated Kalend Mai 1767: fascicules dated, 10th, 1774; 11th, 1776 ; and 14th and last, 1800.

Reise Russ. Reichs, Vol. I., 1771, pref. April 28, O.S. 1770 ; Vol. II., 1773, pref. April 19, O.S. 1772; Vol. III.. 1776, pref. February 10, O.S. 1776.

Zoogr. Rosso-Asiat. Though copies exist with titles dated 1811 and 1831, date of publication is now accepted as 1827. See Vroeg.

Peale. See U.S. Expl. Exped.

Perry. Arcana, issued in 21 monthly parts each, 4 plates, beginning January 1, 1810. See Victorian Naturalise, Vol. XXIX., p. 7 et seq., May 1912.

Phillip. Voyage to Botany Bay, 1789. Pref. dated November 2 1789, but last plate November 26, 1789.

Pole Sud. Plates of Birds only bear vernacular names, save those of Petrel bills, where Latin names are given. These plates were issued between 1843 and 1846. The text, by Pucheran, was not issued until 1853; later copies ascribe the text to Jacquinot and Pucheran.

Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales. Dates of early parts given in Vol. X. of the second series, p. 533, and refer also Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 462, 1919.

Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.). Dates given in the July 1893 number.

Pucheran. Contributed a series of important papers on the types of Cuvier, Lesson and Vieillot, which were indexed by Hartlaub, Journ. fur Ornith., 1855, p. 417.

* Quoy & Gaimard. Authors of Birds in Voyages Uranie and Physicienne and of Astrolabe. Full detail have been published by Sherborn and Woodward in the Annals Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 7, Vol. VII., April 1901, p. 392, and Vol. VIII., October 1901, p. 333.

Rafinesque. Analyse de la Nature, 1815. See Auk, 1909, pp. 42-55.

Ramsay, E. P. Tab. List Austr. Birds. 1st edition received in London, December 8, 1888 ; 2nd edition published after July 1891.

Ranzani. Elem. di Zool. Vol. III., pt. n., published October 7, 1821, the date: is given at end of volume. Cf. Bull. Sci. Nat. (Ferussac), Vol. I., pp. 163-165, 1824 ; Vol. VII., p. 339, 1826.

Reichenbach. Author of numerous ornithological works, whose dates of exact publication are at present uncertain. Meyer, in his Index zu L. Reichenbach’s Ornith. Werken, 1879, does not deal with this, simply citing dates on titles which are not correct in detail. Refer to Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 463, 1919.

Reichenbach, as the second volume of the Vollstand. Naturg. Vogel, issued Die neuentdeckten Vogel Neuhollands, simply a translation of the text of Gould’s Birds of Australia. Pt. i., pp. 1-248, appeared in 1845, pt. n., pp. 1-172, in 1847, and pt. hi., pp. 173-368, 1850. A few emendations and errors occur.

I reject the names in the Avium Syst. Nat. based on figures of heads, wings and feet as indeterminable, and in some cases, composite.

Reichenow. Vogel Zool. Garten, pt. i., 1882, pp. 1-278, pref. May • pt. 2, pp. 279-456, i.-xix., 1884. In this unexpected place the author proposes a novel classification of birds.

Author of Vogel Afrikas ; and part author of the Nomend. Mus. Heine with pages dated 1882-1890, title page by Heine and Reichenow, and preface by Reichenow dated September 1890, and issued in one item after that date.

Revije Mag. de Zool. Soc. Cijv. Appeared monthly, the June number appearing in the first fortnight of July and so on, though at times publication was several months late.

Richmond.. Avian Name Recorder. Has published three Lists of generiFnames of birds supplementary to Waterhouse’s Index Generum Avium, determining exact dates of publication.

Ridgway. Water Birds of North America in the Mem. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard, Vol. NHL, Introd. dated March 31, 1884. Author of the Birds of North and Middle America issued as Bulletin of the U.S. National Museum of which 8 parts have now been issued, the last just recently in 1919 dealing with the Charadriiformes.

(1) Proc.

U.S. Nat. Mus., Vol. 24,

pp. 663-729, May 2, 1902.




583-655, December






565-636, August


= ) 25th, 1917.

These are the most important aids to the ornithologist yet published.

Rothschild. Avifauna of Laysan. Pt. 1, pp. 1-58, August 1893; pt. 2, pp. 59-126, November 1893; pt. 3, pp. 127 to end, December 1900.

Extinct Birds, published in one volume, 1907.

Co-editor of Nov. Zool., his own Journal. Monographed the family Paradiseidse in Das Tierreich.

Salvadori. Omit. Papuasia e Moluche. I have given details in the Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 463, 1919, but find that the first volume was first published in the Mem. real Accad. Sci. Torino, Ser. II., Vol. XXXIII., and though the preface is dated June 15, 1879, the title page is dated 1881 and it was received at the Brit. Mus. in August 1881, yet separate copies bear date 1880. The second and third volumes were issued separately, the Aggiunte then again being issued in parts in the Mem. Torino, for details of which see Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 464, 1919. Also wrote monographs on Parrots, Pigeons, Ducks, etc., in the Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. •

Salvin. Famous specialist on neotropical birds, but wrote the monograph on the Petrels in the Cat. Birds Brit. Mus.

Saunders. Authority on British Birds, but wrote the monograph on Gulls and Terns in the Cat. Birds Brit. Mus.

Savigny. Descr. de VEgypte. Published in 1809. See Sherborn, Proc. Zool. Soc. (Bond.), 1897, p. 285. Explanation to plates not issued until 1826, when they were edited by Audouin.

Schlegel. De Dierentuim. 'Title page dated 1872, but issued in fifteen parts of 40 pp. each. The copy in my library has the covers bound in, but no dates appear on these. Schlegel edited Mus. des Pays-Bas, but accurate dates not yet determined.

Schranck. Fauna Boica, Vol. I., 1798, pref. July 20, 1797 ; Vol. II., 1801, pref. March 12, 1801 ; Vol. III., 1803 ; pref. November 8, 1802.

Scopoli. Annus. Hist. Nat., I., 1769; II., 1769; III., 1769 ; IV., 1770 ; V., 1772.

Introd. Hist. Nat., 1777.

Delic. Florae, et Faun. Insubr., 1786-88.

Selby. Author of works on British Birds, who collaborated with Jardine in the Illustrations of Ornithology, which see. Wrote the volume in the Naturalists’ Library (Jardine) dealing with Pigeons, which was published between May and August 1835, date at issue.

Seebohm. Famous worker on British Birds, who wrote monograph on Warblers and Thrushes in Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. and a separate monograph on Thrushes and Geog. Distribution of Charadriiformes, which appeared in parts, but which I have not traced; and, though important, dates of publication are,not technically valuable.

Sharpe, R. B. Head of Bird Department of British Museum for many years. Wrote Monograph of Kingfishers, which appeared in 15 parts, pt. l. July 1, 1868 and xiv. and xv., January 1, 1871. Dates and contents of parts given in preface. Initiated the Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., of which he wrote about half the monographs. Completed a Handlist Genera Species Birds Brit. Mus., in which no references are given, and consequently it is only a very incomplete guide to known species of birds. Sharpe published many papers in the Ibis, etc., and also important monographs; the birds in th qZooI. Coll. Alert, 1884 (pref. June 20), are important to Australians, and especially the articles in the Hist. Coll. Nat. Hist. Brit. Mus., Vol. II., 1906, where Sharpe reviewed the paintings made by Forster, Ellis and Watling dealing with Australian birds. Attention is again drawn to it, as it was not included in the Zoological Record for 1906, though it is a very important article. Sharpe also completed Gould’s Birds of New Guinea wherein are figured Australian Birds.

Sharpe & Wyatt. Monograph of the Hirundinidce, bound up in two volumes dated 1885-1894, was published in 20 parts most irregularly as follows : Pt. i., September 1885 ; pt. ii., December 1885 ; pts. hi. and iv., July 1886 ; pts. v. and vi., June 1887 ; pts. vn. and viii., May 1888 ; pts. ix. and x., March 1889; pts. xi. and xil, December 1889; pts. xiii. and xiv., December 1890 ; pt. xv., August 1892 ; pts. xvi. and xvii., December 1893 ; and pts. xviii., xix. and xx., October 1894.

Shaw. Director of Zoology at the British Museum. Wrote Mus. Leverianum, published in parts ; No. 1 presented to Roy. Soc., January 12, 1792 ; for details of which see Birds Austr., Vol. VII., pp. 466 and 476, 1919.

Zool. New Holland. See Emu, Vol. XI., pt. i., p. 255, April 1, 1912.

Cimelia Physica, 1796. Miller’s plates with text by Shaw.

Naturalists’ Miscellany. A most important scientific work of which 287 parts appeared between August 1, 1789, and August 1813, the date of Shaw’s death. These are bound in twenty-four volumes. For dates refer to Sherborn in the Annals Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 6, Vol. XV., April 1895, p. 375, and J. A. Allen in the Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. XXXI., p. 11, March 4, 1912. Began a General Zoology, concluded by Stephens, which see.

Shelley. Author of Birds of Africa, who wrote monograph of Cuckoos in Cat. Birds Brit. Mus.

Sherborn. Compiler of the Index Animalium, the most important aid to the systematist yet published. A large number of notes in the present essay are due to his initiative and assistance, and thanks are here once again tendered for his generosity in allowing me publication of some of his most interesting notes.

Shufeldt. Famous American osteologist who has contributed papers on the Osteology of Australian Birds to the Emu, etc.

Smith. Illus. Zool. South Africa. For details see Birds

Austr., Vol- VII., p. 466, 1919, and Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1880, p. 489.

Sparrman. Mus. Carlson. Fasc. I., pis. i-xxv., 1786 ; fasc. II., pis. xxvi.-L., 1787; fasc. III., pis. li.-lxxv., 1788; and fasc. IV., pis. lxxvi.-c., 1789.

South Australian Ornithologist. See Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 467, 1919.

Stejneger. Famous American ornithologist who, with Barrows, Elliot and the editor Kingsley, wrote up the Birds, Vol. IV., of the Standard Natural History 1885, wherein Stejneger proposed a very valuable and novel bird classification. Issued late in 1885, refers to April in tent.

Stephens. Continued the General Zoology after Shaw’s death.

Vol. IX. in two parts was published August 1816

X.    ,,    ,,    September 1817

XI.    ,,    ,,    August 1819

XII.    ,,    ,,    Late in 1824

XIII.    „    „    Feb. 18th, 1826

XIV.    ,,    ,,    Late in 1826;

(Acknowledged) Linn. Sod., February 6, 1827

Stone, Witmer. Famous American ornithologist who contributed to the Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philad., pp. 5-62, April 17, 1899, a study of type specimens in the Philadelphia collection dealing with those of Peale and Cassin. He completed his task with a list of Gould’s Australian Birds in the Austral Av. Rec., Vol. I., pts. 6 and 7, February 28, 1913, an invaluable assistance to systematic ornithologists.

Strickland. Editor of Nomenclatural Rules, commonly known as the Stricklandian Code. Accidentally killed. Under the title Ornithological Synonyms a portion of his MS. dealing with the synonymy of the Hawks and Owls was published in 1855 under the editorship of Mrs. Strickland and Sir W. Jardine, the preface being dated September 1, 1855. Nearly thirty years later a Catalogue of the Strickland Collection of Birds was published, edited by 0. Salvin, an inset being dated June 4, 1882, so that it must have appeared after that date. During his lifetime probably his most important publications were his criticisms of Gray’s Lists of Genera of Birds which appeared in the Annals Mag. Nat. Hist., VI., p. 410, 1840 ; VII., p. 26, 1841, 159, 1841.

Sundevall. Tentamen. Parti. Introd., pp. i.-xlviii., and 1-72, issued August 1872. Part n. Introd., pp. xlix. to end, and pp. 73 to end before June 12th, 1873. An English translation by F. Nicholson issued in 1889 (preface August 1).

Swainson Fauna Boreal. Americani. Vol. II., title page 1831, but date of issue, according to Richmond, February 1832.

Classif. Birds. Pt.i., October 1, 1836 ; pt. n.,July 1, 1837.

Birds of West Africa. Vol. I., March 8, 1837 ; Vol. II., September 23, 1837.

Anim. in Menag. December 31, 1837.

Family Flycatchers (in Naturalists’ Library). May 19, 1838.

Zoological Illustrations. As far as has been ascertained by C. Davies Sherborn, the following are the particulars of issue of this complex work. The first part of the first series appeared on October 1, 1820, with 6 plates and this was succeeded monthly with similar parts for eleven months, the twelfth part having no plates but only preface, indices, etc., the preface to Vol. I. being dated September 15, 1821. The second Volume had only four plates to a part, but came out regularly, but apparently five plates were issued with the September 1821 number, which are included in this volume. Then the third Volume, begun in October 1822, had five plates to each number except the last in October 1823, which apparently had only three plates, title, prefaces, etc.

The second series was much more erratic in appearance, and the data are very incomplete ; it w as announced to begin on February 29, 1829, and five plates to a part ; three parts were reviewed as early as April 1829, but only six seem to have been published during 1829, being reviewed in February 1830. Again only four parts, three with five plates each, and one with indices, etc., can be traced as coming out in 1830. Then regularly for the first eight months in 1831, though double numbers may have been issued if behindhand. Then a period elapsed about which we know- very little, and then the preface to the final volume

(III.) is dated March 4, 1833, and this includes 40 plates, or eight parts each with five plates.

Tchihatcheff. Voy. Sci. d’Altai Or. Pt. i., acknowledged B.F., September 21, 1841 ; pt. ii., containing a catalogue of Birds by Brandt with new generic names in it, B.F., May 3, 1845.

Temminck & Laijgier. Planch. Color. d’Ois. See Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 468 and 477. I can now add that there is a postscript dated August 30, 1836, which reads, “ In completing this 101st livraison.”

Temminck & Schlegel. The Ayes in Siebold’s Fauna Japonica were written up by these authors. This appeared in twelve parts as recorded by Sherborn in the Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1895, p. 149. Additional dates are pt. hi., August 1847 ; pt. iy., January 1848 ; pt. v., March 1848 ; pt. xn., April 1850.

Temminck, C. J. Cat. Syst. Cab. Ornith., 1807.

Manuel. 1st edition 1815, preface dated 1814. Dr. J. Dwight, New York, has a copy with two title pages, one “ 1814,” the other “ 1815.”

Manuel. 2nd edition. Vols. I. and II. acknowledged B.F. October 21, 1820. Vol. III., April 18, 1835, and Vol. IV., December 7, 1839. Title pages of Vol. I. sometimes October 1820, and Vol. III., April 1835, but others simply 1820-1840. There seems to have been a re-issue of Vols. III. and IV., and these are again recorded in the B.F. for December 19, 1840.

In the text, p. 2, to Eurylaimus in the 22nd livraison of the Planch. Color, which appeared in May 1822, Temminck, in a footnote, stated that the third volume should appear in the beginning of 1823, and would include a second edition of his Analyse. The third volume as above was delayed until 1835, and I have never heard of the publication of the second edition of the Analyse.

Les Pigeons, by Knip, “ dated on title page 1811, appeared in 15 livraisons, from 1807 to 1811.” Research by Sherborn has revealed the following confirming Coues’ data, Orn. Bibl., pt. 3, pp. 794-797 (Bull. U.S. Geol. and Geogr. Surv. Territ., No. 4 (September 30), 1880), to which reference should be

made. As far as is known no livraison appeared earlier than 1809 in which year five were issued, covering Les Colombars, pis. i.-xi., pp. 23-41, and Les Colombes, pis. i.-xvm., pp. 1-49. In 1810 three livraisons with pis. xix.-xxxvi. and corresponding text with the succeeding plates of Les Colombes xxxvii.-lix. and Les Colombi-gallines, pis. i.-xvi. and pp. 1-30 all in 1811. In the copy in the Tweeddale Library, Natural History Department of the British Museum, pp. 23-41 as given above appear, but the signatures are erratic, 7, 8, 9, 33, 24, but in my own copy they were 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. In the Zoological Library 'in the same place a copy contains pp. 23-28 only, but there is a 2nd edition with pp. 23-34—129-135, and these latter are the pages correctly numbered, 35-41 in the Tweeddale copy and have the same signatures 33-24. This amplifies the history of the elimination of certain pages, etc., by Madame Knip as detailed by Coues, and the numeration of those pages 129-135 follows that of Les Colombes, which runs from 1-128, and suggests they came out at the end of that group in error.

Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.). Dates are given in the Birds Austr., Vol. VII., pp. 471, 477, 1919. The one that concerns Australian ornithologists intimately is that of Vol. XV., pt. i., which contains Vigors and Horsfield’s historic essay, and which proves to have been issued on February 17, 1827, though until quite recently quoted as 1826.

Vol. I. Pres. Roy. Soc. Nov. 24, 1791

IV.    „    „    „    May 24, 1798

. V. „    „    „ Feb. 20, 1800

VI.    „    „    ,,    June 5, 1802

XII. pt. 2 about July, 1819.

[Tunstall]. Ornith. Britannica, dated 1771. Published anonymously, yet commonly accepted by workers who pretend to reject anonymous works.

United States Exploring Expedition. The results of this Expedition under Wilkes were published, and the birds reported upon by Titian Peale, the artist of the expedition, whose work was published in 1848. After a few copies were distributed in a legitimate manner the stock was accidentally


destroyed by fire. A second edition was prepared by John Cassin, a professed ornithologist, who rejected most of Peale’s names as synonyms, though they have since been recognised. The preface is dated May 10, 1858.

Vieillot. Analyse nouv. Ornith., acknowledged B.F. April 14, 1816. Author of monographs in Nouv. Diet. d’Hist. Nat., nouv. ed., Ency. Method., Galerie des Oiseaux, which see.

Vigors. Editor of Zool. Journal. Co-author with Horsfield of Essay on Australian birds which appeared in Trans. Linn. Soc. (Lond.), Vol. XV.. pt. n.

Vroeg. A well-known name since first attention was drawn to it by Sherborn and Richmond in the Smithsonian Miscell. Coll. (Quarterly Issue), Vol. 47, January 31, 1905, pp. 332-347. Papers have been written by Hartert, Van Oort, Witmer Stone and myself, and the last word has rot yet been said. The sale of the collection was to be September 22, 1764, so that' the pamphlet must have been published before that date. The Latin Adumbratiuncula was prepared by Pallas, from external evidence; but the author is anonymous, while the text of the Catalogue may be credited to Vroeg. Two years after Vroeg’s Cat. was published, Linné (Syst. Nat., ed. 12, p. 298, 1766) quotes Turdus puniceus Pallas, adumbr. 99. (This is No 99, p. 2, Vroeg’s Cat., 1764).

Pallas, Zoogr., Vol. II., p. 199, 1827, says he described Trynga alba in Catal. Vroegiani append, adumbr. and this is No. 320, p. 7, in Vroeg’s Cat.

Wagler. Syst. Avium was reviewed in Isis, October 1827, col. 864. The monograph of Parrots appeared in the Abhandl. Ak. Wissen. München, Vol. I., 1832, whose preface is dated December 1832, and separates are dated 1835.

Waterhouse. Index Generum Avium. Preface dated August 1, 1889. A valuable list, but no accuracy as regards dates of publication. Waterhouse’s work must be supplemented by Richmond’s, which see.

White. Journ. Voy. N.S.W. Title 1790, latest date on plates December 29, 1789. Reviewed in Gent’s. Mag. for

August 1790, but this may even refer to second print, for which see Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 472, 1919.

Wilson. Illus. Zool. In nine parts, 1827-1831. Pref. April 25, 1827. Pt. i. reviewed April-July No. ; pt. 2 July-September No. ; pt. 3 January-March, 1828, No. of Edinb. Philos. Journ. Four parts only by June 1828 ; the seventh before November 1829, and 8th and 9th before May 1831. No. 6, 1829, includes Larus jamesoni.

Zool. Journ. First two volumes issued in parts according to titles, last three more or less erratically, the last part December 5, 1835, the preceding one in July 1832. See Birds Austr., Vol. VII., p. 473, 1919.

Zool. Miscellany. See Leach and Gray.


Austral Avian




Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, England



Subscription per Volume 12/- Net.

WITHERBY & CO., 326 High Holborn, London, W.C. 1.

July 28th, 1920.


July 28th, 1920.

Vol IV., Nos. 2 and 3-


Avian Taxonomy ....    ..    ..    ..    ..    29

A Name-List of the Birds of New Zealand    . .    49

A Name-List of the Birds of Australia ..    ..    65


By Gregory M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.

Recent taxonomists have failed to provide a scheme to meet with any general approval, the best known being far from faultless. American ornithologists have deferred the consideration of the higher avian systematics on the grounds of convenience—a plea unexpected from progressives, but one continually urged by conservative ornithologists.

It has always seemed to us that a knowledge of the relationships of the higher groups is of much more importance than the study of geographical variations of species. It is admitted that much more careful study is necessary in connection with the former than with the latter, but in our opinion the difficulties only make the subject more interesting. A complication has been present in the peculiar usurpation of recent taxonomies by individuals ignorant of avian forms. We have been quite unable to appreciate the reasons for acquiescence in the unmerited dogmatism of such writers, whose inability to understand avian evolution has been disguised by the usage of barbaric terms.

Really only three taxonomists have dealt with bird classification in a scientific manner, viz., Stejneger, Sharpe


and Shufeldt, and these were more or less confused by the peculiarities proposed by their predecessors, and could not deal clearly with the matters in view. Each, however, endeavoured to improve the subject, and, as a matter of fact, the classification suggested by the last named is worthy of much consideration. The present essay is an attempt to deal broadly with the subject from the knowledge of the birds themselves, due consideration being given to the anatomy and osteology, but without deference to the views of incompetent writers, some of whom without reason have endeavoured to dominate avian taxonomy.

As Sharpe pointed out, it is impossible adequately to express a scheme of avian classification in linear sequence. We agree to this, and consequently the most difficult task is to arrange the forms without too much disagreement. Since Sharpe’s Review of recent attempts to classify Birds, schemes by Gadow. Beddard, Shufeldt, Reichenow and Sharpe himself have been published, and, as Shufeldt remarked when he published his own, the differences are extraordinary. Shufeldt laid down laws which are worthy of repetition, and which we have always maintained, thus : “ In our efforts, too, to seek out the true relationship of birds in order to arrive at a natural classification we must take into consideration, in the broadest possible sense, their embryology, their oology and nidology ; their habits and comparative longevity, and even their various notes and songs must be given due weight . . . indeed ptilosis, pterylography and osteology stand among the most important factors at our command. . . . Their geographical distribution, a very important factor to be studied in their taxonomy, is to be considered not only from the view-point of the present distribution of the species of the class over the earth’s surface, but likewise a comprehension, as far as possible, of the question as to how that distribution came about. . . It is extremely unsafe and dangerous to the science of this subject, however, to thus employ the osseous system alone. ... A comparative study of the beaks and feet; the various characters presented on the parts of the plumage, especially as to colour, structure and style, often constitute admirable checks on a classificatory scheme of the class based on osteological data.” Such conclusions achieved by a professional osteologist are extremely valuable, and justify the proposition of a scheme formulated . from a study of the factors suggested by Shufeldt, and confirmed by anatomical and osteological data. Regarding these latter, it is worthy of emphasis that Beddard concluded that very little reliance could be placed upon any internal features on account of the variation, and that, accurately speaking, there were no characters upon which special stress could be laid with any security.

Probably the most scathing condemnation of the worker who is responsible for so much confusion in bird classification proceeded from one of his mentors : “ Common sense revolts at the acceptance of any scheme which involves so many incongruities” ; and again : “ This view was virtually abandoned by him (the author of these incongruous ideas) within little more than twelve months ; but that fact has not hindered some writers from continuing to use these terms as if they had any taxonomic signification.”

We had written before seeing that note : “It is displeasing to record that avian systematists have continued the acceptance without criticism of the incongruous items, many of which were almost immediately abandoned by their introducer.”

Why avian systematics should be considered incapable of comprehension by the normal student we are unable to understand. It is admitted that the morphology of birds must be considered in connection with their classification, but we want to emphasise the fact that it is absolutely impossible to frame a scheme upon morphological characters alone, and that only a full consideration of superficial features complemented by anatomical details will prove successful. There is as much, or even more, convergence in the latter as in the former. The serious student will note that only in the cases which have puzzled him has anatomy been successful in assistance, but when the puzzle was very complete anatomy has failed just as absolutely. Ornithologists have as much valid material to deal with as ornithotomists. Thus the division of birds into Carinatce and Eatitce is indefensible, from any point of view,

while Neognathce and Palceognathce are just as futile terms. Consideration of the living forms has led us to accept three divisions, viz., Dromceornithes, Impennes and Euornithes, as being a reasonable compromise, though we anticipate the absolute rejection of the first named and their dispersal among the Euornithes at a later stage; but we cannot see where the Impennes can be placed with any degree of satisfaction, as they differ in toto from all other existing birds.

Before proceeding further we must state that we are omitting from this classification the fossil forms, as we are quite unable to place them with any degree of accuracy in connection with living species. We absolutely disagree with those who would not study them at all in conjunction with recent forms, but we cannot see enough data to determine any near relationships. Probably each fossil represents an order, as these are used to-day, while the characters of such fossils as are well known are least useful. We recognise that an Avian “ Order ” is a group of little value in comparison with a Mammalian or Reptilian “ Order,” but the elimination of order and supersession by supersuborder does not attract us. Neither does suborder and superfamily avail us much if these be used in the same manner. We here propose a series of Orders, few in number, but divided into many suborders (these being what have been sometimes termed Orders) and in a few cases superfamilies are noted. As a matter of fact to the specialist the more divisions the easier the work, and the more exact the application thereof.

Thus in the subclass Dromseornithes the generally ranked Orders Struthiones, Rhese and Casuarii are retained by us, the last named being divided into two families, the Casuariidse and Dromiceiidse.

The subclass Impennes covers one Order, Sphenisci, which may be divided into two families, the Spheniscidse and Aptenodytidae. We regard this series as ranging from Eudyptula through Spheniscus in one direction and by means of Eudyptes into Megadyptes in the other. In the other family we place Pygoscelis below Aptenodytes, and in so doing find we are in agreement with both ornithotomists and ornithologists.

We have instanced this case in detail, but do not propose to go into such in connection with the succeeding orders.

In the Euornithes we begin with the Procellarii or Tubinares and admit only one suborder, Procellariiformes, divisible into four families, Thalassidromidse, Procellariidse, Pelecanoididse and Diomedeidae. It would be a good system to amalgamate the three first named into a superfamily, Procellarioidea, and contrast the latter as a superfamily, Diomedeoidea. The latter better represents the value of the divisions, as we cannot yet give them subordinal distinction.

As a distinct Order we must separate the Fregati, and we place these next, as they show structural characters recalling those of the previous family, and, moreover, these are confirmed by internal features, and all investigators are agreed as to the anomalous position these held when included in the Steganopodes. We restrict the latter to those members left when the Fregati and Phaethonti are removed ; and, admitting that only one suborder is necessary, would still differentiate the groups as being above family rank, and therefore recognise three superfamilies, Phalacrocoracoidea, Pelecanoidea and Suloidea. Two families are included in the first named, the Phalacrocoracidse and Anhingidae, while the others cover but one each.

The Order now following, the Lari or Limicolae, is an amalgamation of several suborders, Phaethontiformes, Lariformes, Alciformes, Colymbiformes, Chionidiformes, Charadriiformes and Otidiformes. The first named is, according to our judgment, more closely related to the Lariformes and seems a derivative from the ancestors of the Sternidae series. On account of its “ steganopod ” character we place it at the foot of the Lariform group, succeeding with the Lariformes s. str., with their usual four families, Sternidae, Rynchopidae, Laridae and Stercorariidae. The difficulty of arrangement is felt throughout the whole of this series as we trace the evolution of many groups in different directions ; as here we can follow the Sternidse into the Rynchopidse, which must be recognised as highly specialised, yet from their peculiar distribution, a very old form. Again, from their structure, the Stercorariidse

must have departed early from the Larine stem, but since then peculiar forms have developed, while the extraordinary Arctic-Antarctic distribution, agreeing with other Lariform groups, is not otherwise met with.

The Alciformes naturally follow the Lariformes, but hitherto the Colymbiformes have not been added, though a few taxonomists have noted their Alciform relationship. There can be little argument as to the reality of this alliance, but the Podicipes have no place here. There seems no real reason for the common association of the Colymbi and Podicipes, their morphology denying any near phylogenetic relation. To follow the Colymbiformes we place■;the anomalous Chionidi-formes, including therein the Dromadidae and Chionididae. Their Lari-Charadriiform character is fully proved by the osteological and other features, which have been so fully described recently.

The suborder Charadriiformes we have divided into six superfamilies, the first being the Burhinoidea, for the family Burhinidae alone. This group recalls in many ways the Lariform series, while it differs morphologically from the Charadriiform s. str. series though not to such a degree as some workers decide, the differential features being exaggerated and misunderstood.

The superfamily Scolopacoidea covers three families, Scolo-pacidae, Phalaropidae and Recurvirostridae. The first named is certainly divisible into subfamilies, probably more than three in number, and their interrelation is not yet determined. The Phalaropidae seem to us to have developed independently from three Scolopacoid forms, while the Recurvirostridae just as surely appear to have arisen from the same basis through specialisation in another manner. Arriving at the superfamily Charadrioidea, we admit four families, Haematopodidae, Arenariidae, Charadriidae and Vanellidae. The two first families consist of small isolated groups, not very closely related to each other or to the succeeding family, the Charadriidae, which- includes the bulk of the superfamily. More than one subfamily will be recognised later in the'Charadriidae, and from one section we can trace the Vanellidae, which is

one of the best marked families of birds. Osteologically, the members of the latter show a nearer approach to the Lariform series than to their nearer allies in this system. By specialisation in two very opposite directions from the Vanelloid root the superfamilies Jacanoidea and Glareoloidea have evolved, and these complete the recent Charadriiformes. We include as the last suborder the Otidiformes, but some systematists have concluded these would be better placed in the Gruiform assemblage. This is an item which requires great judgment, and in this essay we follow immediately with the Order Psophii or Grues, so that its location is agreeable to either view.

The Order Psophii is subdivided into three suborders, Cariamiformes, Psophiiformes and Eurypygiformes, an association which is probably the least natural of all the groupings utilised. This is a good example of the failure of the ornithotomist to supply any solution when the superficial student desires assistance. Probably a much more natural sequence will be provided by a more thorough study of the superficies of the birds, using the term in its widest sense.

As an order we admit Ralli, comprising three suborders, Ralliformes, Heliornithiformes and Podicipiformes. The Ralline character of the last named is evident.from the fact that ornithotomists have declared a difficulty in distinguishing the skeletal features as regards the skulls of the smaller species. As many morphological workers have combined the Grues and Ralli into one group, our classification cannot be much discussed, the association here allowed differing very little from most other results—the introduction of the Podicipiformes, which we have separated entirely from the Colymbiformes, being the only novel item. We follow with the Order Apteryges,a very distinct group which we consider is certainly of Ralline affinity, and cannot be placed near the “ Ratitse ” for any reason. A consideration of their morphology denies any “Rathe” relationship, while admitting the heterogeneous nature of that group. The Order Tinami succeeds, leading to the Galli, the Tinami showing to us undoubted Galline and Ralline relations, no “ Ratite ” alliance being indicated. As members of the Order Galli we indicate five suborders,

Opisthocomiform.es, Craciformes, Galliformes, Turniciformes and Attagidiformes. Here, again,, morphological study has complicated the classification through the incompetence of the workers to comprehend osteological and anatomical variation. Thus Opisthocomus is purely an old associate of the Craciformes, and in any scheme whatever it must be placed alongside. Similarly, the Turniciformes and Attagidiformes are near relations of the Galliformes, having developed a little in different directions, but certainly neither have the former any close Ralline affinity nor the latter a Charadriine relationship. To place the Attagidiformes with the Chionidiform.es among the Lari is a peculiarly unscientific proceeding, and every morphological item denies this association. The suborder Galliformes we have separated into two subfamilies, the Megapodioidea and the Phasianoidea, the former with one family only, the latter divisible into six families. Between the Galli and the Columbse as usual appear the Syrrhaptes, and the Columbse include the Columbiformes and Raphiformes. At this point there is a hiatus just as in every other system, and we have been unable to bridge it, as next come the Anates, which covers the Anatiformes and the Anhimiform.es, a combination which has been accepted for over fifty years without question ; but still it may not be incontrovertible.

The Phcenicopteri must be regarded as of ordinal value, as they combine a generalised Ana tine form with many features of Ardeine affinity. They constitute one of the best marked groups, superficially and internally, and their relegation to any other group in a subordinate degree would imply complete ignorance of avian evolution. Their fossil remains confirm their early divergence from the forms named. The next order, Herodiones, has given trouble on account of the generalised nature of the few species, and though we have simply recognised six families, these have been given various rank up to ordinal, and the chief trouble is that we know too much about their morphology, and the characters vary in each form, so that “ preconceived ideas ” as to the value of the items have been destroyed. The succeeding order, Falcones, is a more troublesome one still, as here again specialisation has taken place on

similar lines, and superficial likenesses are supposed to cover divergent morphological structures. So far, anatomists have been quite unable to determine the .relationships of the groups, and all classications are debatable. We admit two suborders, Vulturiformes and Falconiformes, the latter divisible into two superfamilies, Sagittarioidea and Falconoidea. Seven families comprise the latter, but probably three divisions are here represented. The relationship of the Striges to the Fa leones has been much disputed by the morphologist, who would interpose the Psittaci, but as he would also amalgamate the Cuculi with the Psittaci, we are not accepting that scheme. We therefore add the Order Striges after the Falcones, admitting the three families, Strigidge, Phodilidse and Tytonidse, and then come to the Order Psittaci. This order is in a similar state to the Falcones, all the forms entering one suborder with six superfamilies, Strigopoidea,Psittacoidea, etc.; the suborder being represented by sixteen families. As a separate order we recognise the Cuculi, two superfamilies being admitted, the true Cuculoidea covering four families, Cuculidse, Eudy-namytidse, Scythropidae and Polophilidae. It is probable that other families can be distinguished, as these are well marked and just as easily characterised morphologically as they can be superficially determined.

The disposition of the “ Coraciine ” birds is a problem which dismays every taxonomist, though the sequence of the groups is not much disputed. The value of the observed differences, internal as well as external, cannot be correctly estimated in terms of the preceding groupings. The Pico-Passeriformes are together scarcely equal in value to one of the preceding orders, but the number of species demands detailed segregation, and we have no names for the groups to be distinguished. Consequently we now appreciate a family to the equivalent of an order, and the subdivisions are termed with the same names downwards, but it must be borne in mind that these are not equivalent. Remembering this all the time, we can divide the Pico-Passerines ” into seven “ orders.” The Coracise comprises three superfamilies, the Podargoidea, Coracioidea and Colioidea ; the former contains three families, the Steatornithidse, Podargidse and iEgothelidse. The next order, the Halcyones, is divided into six snperfamilies, Mero-poidea, Todoidea, Momotoidea, Alcedinoidea, Bucerotoidea and Upnpoidea, the last named and the Alcedinoidea having two families, and the remaining with only one. The order Pici includes four superfamilies, Bucconoidea, Ramphastoidea, Capitonoidea and Picoidea. As a separate order we allow the Trogoni, while into the order Macrochires three suborders, Caprimulgiformes, Micropodiformes and Trochiliformes are amalgamated. We are inclined to agree that the last named are not accurately located, but are unable to provide a better disposition at present.

The order Menurse here intervenes, and this we are convinced is not its proper place, and would indicate this location as one of the ornithotomists’ worst blunders. We hope to amend this particular error at some later period.

The last order, Passeres, is the most compact, but nevertheless the most numerous in species, and consequently desiring the most subdivision. As pointed out above, this “ order ” is practically the equivalent of a family, as that degree is used, until we arrive at this complex, and that is the value given it by ornithotomists attempting logically to subdivide the Aves into groups of equal value.

In deference to the ornithotomists six superfamilies are admitted, Eurylsemoidea, Cotingoidea, Formicarioidea, Pitt-oidea, Atrichornithoidea and Passeroidea, but a more artificial and unnatural grouping could not have been devised by any ornithologist, as the basis of these superfamilies is unsound. The association of a series of dissimilar birds on account of the degradation of a single internal organ, especially as it is accompanied by geographical circumscription, is just as unscientific as the conjunction of species, having discontinuous range and distinctly different facies, also for reason of one disused internal feature.

The superfamily Passeroidea has always been productive of subdivision and the chief tendency at present is to separate further. Without attempting to rectify or add much at this time, we total nearly sixty families. It is very difficult to regroup these into a less number, though this is necessary, and we conclude that only by means of utilising coloration can this succeed. Again, coloration cannot be considered without study of plumage changes, and recognition of variation in connection with the evolution of coloration in different groups. This has already been suggested in connection with the Turdidæ, but only in a preliminary and vague manner. The pterylosis and development of the feathering in the nestling of Passerines must be studied, especial attention being given to convergence. It is possible that b y this means we could determine a more or less acceptable linear sequence, which at present is nonexistent. Thus, the sequence given hereafter is based upon the fact that the Corvidæ represent the highest degree, a very debatable item. It may be suggested here that there can be no family deserving of such distinction, as several families may have developed equally, as in other groups, in different manners, each of which would be equally representative of a high state of development. Thus, one factor that has been put forward is the uniform coloration of nestling and adult of both sexes ; this can be seen evolving in one family alone, in which the nestling to the male shows four plumage changes in one species, and in another the intervening changes have lapsed and the nestling takes on that of the adult almost in the first plumage. Similarly, species with booted tarsi in the adult show a scutellate acrotarsium in the nestling, and so forth.

In the preparation of this scheme we have provided our own conclusions without deference to any previous authorities. Upon completion we contrasted it in detail with the better known propositions and have been surprised to see that the bulk of the groups coincide, and consequently very little objection can be made to the majority.

As to the fossil forms, we have not attempted to incorporate these in this system, as the majority of them cannot be determined, and it is probable that most should be classed on a distinct plane, as has been already suggested. To quote even their names and the location suggested by systematists would occupy a lot of space without much benefit. It will be noted that in this preliminary survey we have not introduced a mass

of technical terms relative to the morphology, the majority of which are little understood even by the specialist, and the comparative value of the ones utilised has never been calculated.

To diagnose groups by means of such variable items as the muscle formula, the presence or absence of basi-pterygoid processes, the oil gland and the nature of the syrinx implies the absence of any “ deep-seated ” characters, at least of any stability. It is not our intention to disparage morphological items, but to assert that such are not yet sufficiently understood to be relied upon for the differentiation of groups, except in a confirmatory manner. The external features, especially the growth stages, must be fully appraised, and in doubtful cases reference made to anatomical features.

As above noted, this is our first attempt at providing a workable classification of avine forms, and we hope that later we may, utilising this as a basis, prepare a diagnostic complement, as such is non-existent at the present time, and we have been compelled to refer to much scattered (and contradictory) literature, while little has been done in many directions.

Class AVES Subclass Dromseornithes

Order Struthiones

Suborder Struthioniformes

Family Struthionidse

Order Rhese

Suborder Rheiformes

Family Rheidse Order Casuarii

Suborder Casuariiformes

Family Dromiceiidse Casuariidse

Subclass Impennes

Order Sphenisci

Suborder Sphenisciformes

Family Spheniscidse Aptenodytidse

Subclass Euornithes Order Procellarise or Tubinares Suborder Procellariiformes

Superfamily Procellarioidea Family Thalassidromidse Procellariidse Pelecanoididse Superfamily Diomedeoidea Family Diomedeidse Order Fregati

Suborder Fregatiformes

Family Fregatidse Order Pelecani or Steganopodes Suborder Pelecaniformes

Superfamily Phalacrocoracoidea Family Phalacrocoracidse

Anhingidse (=Ploticl8e olim) Superfamily Pelecanoidea Family Pelecanidse Superfamily Suloidea Family Sulidse Order Lari or Limicolse

Suborder Phaethontiformes

Family Phae hontidse Suborder Lariformes

Family Sternidse

Rynchopidse Laridse Stercorariidse Suborder Alciformes

Family Alcidse Suborder Colymbiformes

Family Colymbidse Suborder Chionidiformes

Family Dromadidse Chionididse

Suborder Charadriiformes

Superfamily Burhinoidea

Family Burhinidse ( = (Edicnemidse olim)

Superfamily Scolopacoidea Family Rostratulidse Scolopacidse Phalaropidse Recurvirostridse Superfamily Charadrioidea . Family Hsematopodidse Arenariidse Charadriidse Vanellidse

Superfamily Jacanoidea •

Family Jacanidse (=Parrid9e olim) Superfamily Glareoloidea Family Glareolidse Suborder Otidiformes

Family Otidida*

Order Psopbii or Grues

Suborder Cariamiformes

Family Cariamidse Suborder Psophiiformes

Family Psophiidse

Balearicidse (=Gruidse olim) Suborder Eurypygiformes

Superfamily Eurypygoidea Family Eurypygidse Superfamily Rhinocbetoidea Family Rhinochetidse Superfamily Mesitoidea Family Mesitidse

Order Ralli

Suborder Ralliformes

Family Rallidse



Suborder Heliornitbiformes

Family Heliornithidse Suborder Podicipiformes

Family Podicipidse

Order Apteryges

Suborder Apterygiformes

Family Apterygidse

Order Tinami

Suborder Tinamiformes

Family Tinamidse

Order Galli

Suborder Opisthocomiformes

Family Opisthocomidse Suborder Craciformes

Family Cracidse Suborder Galliformes

Superfamily Megapodioidea Family Megapodiidse Superfamily Phasianoidea Family Meleagrididse Numididse Tetraomdse Phasianidse Perdicidse Odontophoridse Suborder Turniciformes

Family Turnicidse

Pedionomidse Suborder Attagidiformes Family Attagidse


Order Syrrhaptes

Suborder Syrrhaptiformes

Family Syrrhaptidse

Order Columbse

Suborder Columbiformes

Family Columbidse

Turturidse (=Peristeridse olim)





Suborder Raphiformes

Family Raphidse Order Anates or Chenomorphse Suborder Anatiformes

Family Cereopsidse




Suborder Anhimiformes

Family Anhimidse (=Palamedeidse olim) Order Phcenicopteri or Amphimorphse Suborder Phcenicopteriformes

Family Phoenicopteridse Order Herodiones

Suborder -Ardeiformes

Family Ardeidse Scopidse Ciconidse Balsenicipitida?

Plegadidse (=Ibidid3e olim) Plataleidse ■

Order Falcones

Suborder Vulturiformes

Family Vulturidse ( = Cathartidse olim) Suborder Falconiformes

Superfamily Sagittarioidea

Family Sagittariidse (= Serpentariidse olim) Superfamily Falconoidea Family Polyboridse

Herpetotheridse Micrasturidse . iEgypiidse (=Vulturidse olim) Falconidse

Aquilidse (=Buteonidse. olim) Pandionidse

Order Striges

Suborder Strigiformes

Family Strigidse (=Bubonidse olim)

Family Phodilidae

Tytonidae ( = Strigidae olim)

Order Psittaci

Suborder Psittaciformes

Superfamily Strigopoidea Family Strigopidae Superfamily Psittaculoidea Family Pezoporidae Platycercidae Polytelitidae

Psittaculidae (=Palaeornithidae olim) Leptolophidae Superfamily Psittacoidea Family Psittacidae Loriidae Nestoridae Amazonidie Superfamily Aroidea Family Aridae Superfamily Kakatoeoidea Family Kakatoeidae


Superfamily Trichoglossoidea Family Nasiternidae Opopsittidae Trichoglossidae

Order Cuculi

Suborder Cuculiformes

Superfamily Cuculoidea Family Cuculidae




Superfamily Musophagoidea Family Musophagidae

Order Coraciae

Suborder Coraciiformes

Superfamily Podargoidea

Family Steatornithidae Podargidae iEgothelidae Superfamily Coracioidea Family Coraciidae

Leptosomatidae Superfamily Colioidea Family Coliidae Order Halcyones

Suborder Alcediniformes

Superfamily Meropoidea Family Meropidae Superfamily Todoidea Family Todidae Superfamily Momotoidea Family Momotidae Superfamily Alcedinoidea Family Alcedinidae Dacelonidae

Superfamily Bucerotoidea Family Bucerotidae Superfamily Upupoidea Family Upupidae

Phoeniculidae =Irrisoridae olim

Order Pici

Suborder Piciformes

Superfamily Bucconoidea Family Bucconidae Galbulidae

Superfamily Ramphastoidea Family Ramphastidae Superfamily Capitonoidea Family Capitonidae Indicatoridae Superfamily Picoidea Family Picidae lyngidae

Order Trogoni

Suborder Trogoniformes

Family Trogonidae Order Macrochires

Suborder Caprimulgiformes

Family Caprimulgidae Chordeilidae Nyctibiidae

Suborder Micropodiformes

Family Micropodidse Hemiprocnidae Suborder Trochiliformes

Family Trochilidae Order Menurae

Suborder Menuriformes

Family Menuridae Order Passeres

Suborder Passeriformes

Superfamily Eurylsemoidea Family Eurylaemidae Superfamily Cotingoidea Family Cotingidae





Superfamily Formicarioidea Family Formicariidse Furnariidae Xenopidae Dendrocolaptidae Synallaxidae Pteroptochidae Conopophagidae Superfamily Pittoidea Family Pittidae




Superfamily Atrichornithoidea Family At rich orni thidae Superfamily Passeroidea

Family Hirundinidae,    Muscicapidae, Campo-

phagidae, Sphecotheridae, Turna gridae, Pycnonotidae,    Irenidae, Turdoididae,

Orthonycidae ( = Timeliidae olim pt.), Bowdleriidae, Troglodytidae, Cinclidae, Mimidae, Zeledoniidae, Turdidae, Sylviidae (ine. Regulidae), Vireonidae, Ptilogonatidae, Dulidae, Bombycillidae = Ampelidae olim, Artamidae, Vangidae, Prionopidae, Aero-charidae, Cracticidae, Falcunculidae, Lani-idae, Tylidae, Paridae, Chamaeidae, Spheno-stomidae, Sittidae, Certhiidae, Zosterop-idae, Pardalotidae, Dicaeidae, Nectariniidae, Promeropidae, Meliphagidae, Mniotiltidae, ( = Compsotlilypidae Oberholser) Drep-anidae, Motacillidae, Alaudidae, Catambly-rhynchidae, Fringillidae, Coerebidae, Tersidae — Procniatidae olim, Tangaridae — Tanagridae olim, Ploceidae, Icteridae, Heteralochidae, Creadiontidae, Sturnidae, Graculidae = Eulabetidae olim, Paramy-thiidae, Buphagidae, Oriolidae, Dicruridae, Paradiseidae, Ptilonorhynchidae, Callaea-didae, Corvidae



By Gregory M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.

We provided in the Ibis for 1913 a Reference List, and in that List we rejected the Brissonian genera ; those genera have since been recognised as valid by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. We utilise them here, though pointing out that their recognition has recently been again questioned. In that List also the classification was arranged according to Sharpe’s Hand List, and we now take the opportunity of correcting the former effort, while rearranging the groups in accordance with our preceding essay.

We have included all the visiting species, as there is a lot of work to be done in this connection, and place against those which have only occurred three times or less an asterisk to attract attention, but we have not starred any Petrels.

We are preparing a Handbook, dealing systematically with all the species, and we will include details of the higher groups in plain language, accompanied by good figures elucidating the differential points. Upon calculation we find that 211 species names are included in the List, and of these no fewer than thirty-six have only occurred three times or less. In addition, a minority, but still an appreciable number, only breed on the subtropical and sub-antarctic outliers of the Dominion, while again only thirty-two Passeriform species are included, of which four are island forms. These figures are given simply to show the extraordinary lack of bird-life, which has for its only compensation the peculiar nature of the existing forms.

Class AVES Subclass Impennes Order Sphenisci Suborder Sphenisciformes Family Spheniscidse. Thick-billed Penguins Eudyptula minor (Forster 1781, Aptenodytes)

Little Blue Penguin Eudyptula albosignata Finsch, 1874 Silver Penguin

Eudyptes pachyrhynchus Gray 1845 Victoria Penguin Eudyptes sclateri Buller 1888

Big-crested Penguin

Eudyptes serresianus (Oustalet 1878, Eudyptula)

Tufted Penguin Eudyptes schlegeli Einsch 1876 Macaroni Penguin

Megadyptes antipodes (Hombron & Jacquinot 1841, Catarrhactes) Yellow-crowned Penguin Family Aptenodytidse. Thin-billed Penguins Pygoscelis papua (Forster 1781, Aptenodytes)


Aptenodytes patagonica Miller 1778 King Penguin

.Subclass Euornithes Order Procellaria or Tubinares Suborder Procellariiformes Superfamily Procellarioidea Family Thalassidromidse. Storm-Petrels Oceanites oceanicus (Kuhl 1820, Procellaria)    ..

Yellow-webbed Storm-Petrel Garrodia nereis (Gould 1841, Thalassidroma)

Grey-backed Storm-Petrel Pealea lineata (Peale 1848, Thalassidroma)

Samoan Storm-Petrel

Pelagodroma marina (Latham 1790, Procellaria)

White-faced Storm-Petrel Fregetta tropica (Gould 1844, Thalassidroma)

Black-bellied Storm-Petrel Family Procellariidse. Shearwaters and Petrels Pu-ffinus assimilis Gould 1838 Allied Shearwater

Reinholdia reinholdi (Mathews 1912, Puffinus)

Brown-backed Shearwater Thyellodroma butteri (Salvin 1888, Puffinus)

Ashy-backed Shearwater

Thyellodroma pacifica (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Wedge-tailed Shearwater

Neonectris griseus (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Sooty Shearwater or Mutton Bird

Neonectris tenuirostris (Temm. & Laug. 1835, Procellaria) Short-tailed Shearwater

Hemipuffinus carneipes (Gould 1844, Puffinus) Fleshy-footed Shearwater

Procellaria parkinsoni Gray 1862 Black Petrel

Procellaria cequinoctialis Linne 1758 White-chinned Petrel

Adamastor cinereus (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Brown Petrel

Priocella antarctica (Stephens 1826, Fulmarus) Silver-Grey Petrel

Pterodroma macroptera (Smith 1840, Procellaria) Grey-faced Petrel

Pterodroma neglecta (Schlegel 1863, Procellaria)

Kermadec Petrel

Pterodroma externa (Salvin 1875, Oestrelata)

Sunday Island Petrel

Pterodroma inexpectata (Forster 1844, Procellaria) Mottled Petrel

Pterodroma oliveri (Mathews and Iredale 1914, ¿Estrelata) Small-billed Petrel

Mstrelata lessonii (Garnot 1826, Procellaria) White-headed Petrel

Cookilaria cookii (Gray 1843, Procellaria)

White-winged Petrel

Petrella capensis (Linne 1758, Procellaria)

Spotted Petrel

Thalassoica antarctica (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria) Antarctic Petrel

Halobcena ccerulea (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Blue Petrel

Heteroprion belcheri Mathews 1912.

Thin-billed Prion

peAfSN university library

Heteroprion desolatus (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Dove Prion

Pseudoprion turtur (Kuhl 1820, Procellaria)

Dairy Prion

Pachyptila vittata (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Broad-billed Prion

Macronectes giganteus (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Giant Petrel

Family Pelecanoididse. Diving Petrels Pelecanoides urinatrix (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Diving Petrel

Snperfamily Diomedeoidea Family Diomedeidse. Albatrosses Phcebetria fusca (Hilsenberg 1822, Diomedea)

Sooty Albatross

Phoebetria palpebrata (Forster 1785, Diomedea) Light-mantled Sooty Albatross Thalassarche melanophris (Temm. & Lang. 1828, Diomedea) Black-browed Mollymawk Thalassdrche bulleri (Rothschild 1893, Diomedea)

Snares Island Mollymawk

Thalassarche chrysostoma (Forster 1785, Diomedea) Flat-billed Mollymawk

Thalassarche chlororhynchus (Gmelin 1789, Diomedea)

Yellow-nosed Molly ma w k Diomedella cauta (Gould 1841, Diomedea)

Bounty Island Mollymawk Diomedea exulans Linné 1758

Wandering Albatross Diomedea epomophora Lesson 1825 Royal Albatross

Diomedea chionoptera Salvin 1896 Snowy Albatross

Order Fregati - Suborder Fregatiformes Family Fregatidse. Frigate Birds * Fregata minor (Gmelin 1789, Pelecanus)

Frigate Bird

*Fregata arid (Gray 1845, Atagen)

Lesser Frigate Bird

Order Pelecani Suborder Pelecaniformes Superfamily Phalacrocoracoidea Family Phalacrocoracidse. Cormorants or Shags

Hypoleucus varius (Gmelin 1789, Pelecanus)

Pied Shag

Hypoleucus carunculatus (Gmelin 1789, Pelecanus) Rough-faced Shag

Hypoleucus campbelli (Filhol 1878, Urile)

Campbell Island Shag

Hypoleucus chalconotus (Gray 1845, Graculus)

Bronze Shag

Stictocarbo punctatus (Sparrman 1786, Pelecanus)

Spotted Shag

Stictocarbo featherstoni (Buller 1873, Phalacrocorax)

Chatham Islands Shag

Mesocarbo ater (Lesson 1831, Garbo)

Little Black Shag

Microcarbo brevirostris (Gould 1837, Phalacrocorax) White-throated Shag

Phalacrocorax carbo (Linne 1758, Pelecanus)

Black Shag

Family Anhingidse. Darters

*Anhinga novcehollandice (Gould 1847, Plotus)

Australian Darter

Superfamily Pelecanoidea Family Pelecanidse. Pelicans

*Catoptropelicanus conspicillatus (Temm. & Laug. 1824, Pelecanus)

Australian Pelican

Superfamily Suloidea Family Sulidse. Gannets

*Sula leucogaster (Boddaert 1783, Pelecanus)

Brown Gannet

Parasula dactylatra (Lesson 1831, Sula)

Masked Gannet

Sulita serrator (Gray 1845, Sula)


Order Lari

Suborder Phaëthontiformes Family Phaethontidæ. Tropic Birds Scæophaethon rubricauda (Boddaert 1783, Phaeton) Red-tailed Tropic Bird

Suborder Lariformes Family Sternidæ. Terns and Noddies *Chlidonias leucoptera (Temminck 1815, Sterna) White-winged Tern

Chlidonias albistriata (Gray 1845, Hydrochelidon) Black-fronted Tern Sterna striata Gmelin 1789

White-fronted Tern Sterna' vittata Gmelin 1789

Sub-antarctic Tern Sternula nereis Gould 1843 Fairy Tern

*Thalasseus bergii (Lichtenstein 1823, Sterna) Crested Tern

Hydroprogne caspia (Pallas 1770, Sterna)

Caspian Tern

Onychoprion fuscatus (Linné 1766, Sterna)

Sooty Tern

Procelsterna cerulea (Bennett 1840, Sterna)

Little Grey Noddy

Megalopterus minutus (Boie 1844, Anous) White-capped Noddy * Anous stolidus (Linné 1758, Sterna)


Leucanous albus (Sparrman 1786, Sterna)

White Tern

Family Laridæ. Gulls Larus dominicanus Lichtenstein 1823 Black-backed Gull

Bruchigavia novœhollandiœ (Stephens 1826, Larus) Red-billed Gull

Bruchigavid melanorhyncha Buller 1869 Black-billed Gull Family Stero ora riidse. Skuas Catharacta lonnbergi Mathews 1912 Great Skua

*Cathardcta maccormicki (Saunders 1893, Stercorarius) South Polar Skua

*    Stercorarius parasiticus (Linné 1758, Larus)

Arctic Skua

Suborder Charadriiformes Superfamily Scolopacoidea Family Scolopacidse. Snipe, Sandpipers, etc. Ccenocorypha aucklandica (Gray 1845, Gallinago) Semi-W oodcock

*Ditelmatias hardwickii (Gray 1831, Scolopax) Australian Snipe

Canutus canutus (Linné 1758, Tringa)


*Erolia ferruginea (Brunnich 1764, Tringa)

Curlew Sandpiper

Limnocinclus acuminatus (Horsfield 1821, Totanus) Sharp-tailed Stint

*Pisobia ruficollis (Pallas 1776, Trynga)

Red-necked Stint

*Glottis nebularius (Gunnerus 1767, Scolopax) Greenshank

*Heteractitis incanus (Gmelin 1789, Scolopax)

Grey Sandpiper

Vetola lapponica (Linne 1758, Scolopax)


*    Vetola hcemastica (Linne 1758, Scolopax)

American Godwit

*Mesoscolopax minutus (Gould 1841, Numenius)

Little Whimbrel

*Phceopus phoeopus (Linne 1758, Scolopax)

Australian Whimbrel

Numenius cyanopus Vieillot 1817 Australian Curlew Family Phalaropidæ. Phalaropes

*Phalaropus fulicarius (Linné 1758, Tringa)

Grey Phalarope

Family Recurvirostridæ. Avocets and Stilts

Himantopus leucocephalus Gould 1837.


Himantopus novœzealandiœ Gould 1841 Black Stilt

*Recurvirostra novæhollandiæ Vieillot 1816 Red-necked Avocet

^ Superfamily Charadrioidea-Family Hæmatopodidæ. Oyster catchers

Hæmatopus ostralegus Linné 1758 Oystercatcher

Hæmatopus unicolor Forster 1844 Black Oystercatcher Family Arenariidæ. Turnstones

Arenaria interpres (Linné 1758, Tringa)


Family Charadriidæ. Plovers

Pluvialis dominions (Müller 1776, Charadrius)

Lesser Golden Plover

Pluviorhynchus obscurus (Gmelin 1789, Charadrius) Dotterel

Cirrepidesmus bicinctus (Jardine & Selby 1827, Charadrius) Double-banded Dotterel

*Leucopolius ruficapillus (Temm. & Laug. 1821, Charadrius) Red-capped Dotterel

Anarhynchus frontalis Quoy and Gaimard 1830 Wry-billed Plover

*Eupodella vereda (Gould 1848, Charadrius)

Oriental Dotterel

Thinornis novæseelandiæ (Gmelin 1789, Charadrius)

Shore Plover

Family Vanellidæ. Wattled Plovers

*Lobibyx novcehollandice (Stephens 1819, Vanellus) Spur-winged Plover

Superfamily Glareoloidea Family Glareolidse. Pratincoles and Coursers *Stiltia isabella (Vieillot 1816, Glareola)

Australian Pratincole

Order Ralli.

Suborder Ralliformes Family Rallidse. Rails Rallus muelleri Rothschild 1893

* Auckland Islands Rail Cabalus modestus (Hutton 1872, Rallus)

Little Chatham Islands Rail Hypotcenidia philippensis (Linné 1766, Rallus) Buff-banded Rail

Nesolimnas dieffenbachii (Gray 1843, Rallus)

Chatham Islands Rail

Gallirallus australis (Sparrman 1786, Rallus)

Brown Woodhen

Gallirallus brachypterus Lafresnaye 1841 Black Woodhen

Gallirallus hectori (Hutton 1874, Ocydromus)

Woodhen or Weka *Crex crex (Linne 1758, Rallus)


Zapornia pusilla (Pallas 1776, Rallus)

Marsh Rail.

Porzanoidea plumbea (Griffith and Pidgeon “ 1829,” Crex) Swamp Rail

Family Gallinulidae. Gallinules Porphyrio melanotus Temminck 1820 Swamp Hen

Mantellornis hochstetteri (Meyer 1883, Notornis)


Family Fulicidse. Coots *Fulica atra Linné 1758 Coot

Suborder Podicipiformes Family Podicipidæ. Grebes Podiceps cristatus (Linné 1758, Golymbus)

Great Crested Grebe

Poliocephalus rufopectus (Gray 1843, Podiceps)


Order Apteryges Suborder Apterygiformes Family Apterygidæ. Kiwis Apteryx australis Shaw and Nodder 1813 Kiwi

Apteryx owenii Gould 1847

Little Grey Kiwi Apteryx haastii Potts 1872

Great Grey Kiwi

Order Galli Suborder Galliformes Superfamily Phasianoidea Family Perdicidæ. Partridges and Quails Coturnix novæzealandiæ Quoy and Gaimard 1830 Quail

Order Columbi Suborder Columbiformes Family Treronidæ. Fruit Pigeons Hemiphaga novæseelandiœ (Gmelin 1789, Golumba)

, Pigeon

Hemiphaga chathamensis (Rothschild 1891, Carpophaga) Chatham Islands Pigeon

Order Anates Suborder Anatiformes Family Anatidæ. Ducks and Geese Ctenanas eytoni (Eyton 1838, Leptotarsis)

Whistling Duck

. Casarca variegata (Gmelin 1789, Anas)

Paradise Duck

Anas superciliosa Gmelin 1789 Grey Duck

Virago gibberifrons (Muller 1842, Anas)

Grey Teal

Virago castanea (Eyton 1838, Mareca)

Green-headed Teal

Elasmonetta chlorotis (Gray 1845, Anas)

Brown Duck

Nesonetta aucklandica Gray 1844

Auckland Islands Duck

Spatula rhynchotis (Latham 1801, Anas)


Hymenolaimus malacorhynchus (Gmelin 1789, Anas) Mountain Duck

Nyroca australis Eyton 1838

White-eyed Duck

Fuligula novceseelandice (Gmelin 1789, Anas)


Promergus australis (Hombron & Jacquinot 1841, Mergus) Auckland Islands Merganser

Order Herodiones Suborder Ardeiformes Family Ardeidse. Herons and Bitterns

*Ardea cinerea Linné 1758 Grey Heron

Notophoyx novcehollandice (Latham 1790, Ardea)

White-fronted Heron

Casmerodius albus (Linne 1758, Ardea)

Great White Heron

Demigretta matook (Vieillot 1817, Ardea)

Blue Heron

*Nycticorax caledonicus (Gmelin 1789, Ardea)

Night Heron

Ixobrychus minutus (Linne 1766, Ardea)

Little Bittern

Botaurus poiciloptilus (Wagler 1827, Ardea)

Black-backed Bittern

Family Plegadidse. Ibises

*Plegadis falcinellus (Linné 1766, Tantalus)

Glossy Ibis

Family Plataleidæ. Spoonbills *Spatherodia regia (Gould 1838, Platalea)

Royal Spoonbill

Order Falcones Suborder Falconiformes Superfamily Falconoidea Family Falconidæ. Falcons Nesierax novœhollandiœ (Gmelin 1788, Falco)

Quail Hawk

Nesierax pottsi Mathews and Iredale 1913 Bush Hawk

*Cerchneis cenchroides (Vigors and Horsfield 1827, Falco) Nankeen Kestrel

Family Aquilidæ. Eagles, Harriers, etc. Circus approximans Peale 1848 Harrier

Order Striges Suborder Strigiformes Family Strigidæ. Wood-Owls, etc. Spiloglaux novœseelandiœ (Gmelin 1788, Strix)


Sceloglaux albifacies (Gray 1844, Athene)

Laughing Owl

Order Psittaci Suborder Psittaciformes Superfamily Strigopoidea Family Strigopidæ. Owl-Parrots Strigops habroptilus Gray 1845 Kakapo

Superfamily Psittaculoidea Family Platycercidæ. Broad-tailed Parrakeets Cyanoramphus novœzélandiœ (Sparrman 1787, Psittacus) Red-fronted Parrakeet

Cyanoramphus unicolor (Lear 1831, Platycercus) Antipodes Island Parrakeet Cyanoramphus auriceps (Knhl 1820, Psittacus) Yellow-fronted Parrakeet Cyanoramphus malherbi Souance 1857 Orange-fronted Parrakeet Snperfamily Psittacoidea Family Nestoridse. Kakas and Keas Nestor meridionalis (Gmelin 1788, Psittacus)


Nestor notabilis Gonld 1856 Kea

Order Cuculi Suborder Cuculiformes Superfamily Cuculoidea Family Cuculidæ. Cuckoos *Cuculus optatus Gould

Oriental Cuckoo

Lamprococcyx lucidus (Gmelin 1788, Cuculus) Shining Cuckoo

Family Eudynamytidæ. Koels Urodynamis taitensis (Sparrman 1787, Cuculus) Long-tailed Cuckoo

Order Coraciæ Suborder Coraciiformes Superfamily Coracoidea Family Coraciidæ. Rollers. Eurystomus orientalis (Linné 1766, Coracias) Roller

Order Halcyones Suborder Alcediniformes Superfamily Alcedinoidea Family Dacelonidge. Wood-Kingfishers. Sauropatis sanctus (Vigors and Horsfield 1827, Halcyon) Kingfisher

Order Macrochires Suborder Micropodiformes Family Micropodidse. Swifts * Micropus pacificus (Latham 1801, Hirundo)

White-rumped Swift

*Hirundapus caudacutus (Latham 1801, Hirundo)

Spine-tailed Swift

Order Passeres Suborder Passeriformes Superfamily Pittoidea Family Acanthisittidse. Rifleman Acanthisitta chloris (Sparrman 1787, Sitta)


Family Xenicidae. Island Wrens Traversia lyalli Rothschild 1894

Stephens Island Wren Xenicus longipes (Gmelin 1789, Motacilla)

Bush Wren

Xenicus gilviventris Pelzeln 1867 Rock Wren

Superfamily Passeroidea Family Hirundinidse. Swallows Hylochelidon nigricans (Vieillot 1817, Hirundo)

Australian Tree-Swallow Family Muscicapidae. Flycatchers, etc. Myiomoira macrocephala (Gmelin 1789, Parus)

South Island Tomtit    ;    ,

Myiomoira toitoi (Lesson 1828, Muscicapa)

North Island Tomtit Nesomiro tr aver si (Buller 1872, Mir 6)

Black Robin

Nesomiro dannefcerdi (Rothschild 1894, Miro)

Snares Island Black Robin.

Miro australis (Sparrman 1788, Turdus)


Maorigerygone igata (Quoy and Gaimard, 1830, Curruca)

Grey Warbler

Hapolorhynchus albofrontatus (Gray 1844, Gerygone ?)

Chatham Islands Warbler Rhipidura flabellifera (Gmelin 1789, Muscicapa)

Pied Fantail

Rhipidura fuliginosa (Sparrman 1787, Muscicapa)

Black Fantail

Family Campophagidse. Cuckoo-Shrikes *Graucalus robustus (Latham 1801, Lanius)

Little Cuckoo-Shrike Family Turnagridse. Island Thrushes Turnagra tanagra (Schlegel 1865, Otagon)

North Island Thrush

Turnagra capensis (Sparrman 1787, Tanagra)

South Island Thrush Family Bowdleriidse. Fern Birds Rowdieria punctata (Quoy and Gaimard 1830, Synallaxis) Fern Bird

Bowdleria rufescens (Buller 1869, Sphenceacus) Chatham Islands Fern Bird Family Paridse. Tits, etc.

Mohoua ochrocephala (Gmelin 1789, Muscicapa) Yellowhead

Cerihiparus albicilla (Lesson 1830, Fringilla)


Finschia novceseelandice (Gmelin, 1789, Parus)


Family Zosteropidse. White-eyes Zosterops lateralis (Latham 1801)

Silver Eye

Family Meliphagidse. Honey-eaters Anthornis melanura (Sparrman 1786, Certhia)

Beh Bird

Notiomystis cincta (Du Bus 1839, Meliphaqa)

Stitch Bird

Prosthemadera novceseelandice (Gmelin 1788, Merops)


*Coleia carunculata (Latham 1790, Mcrops)

Yellow Wattle-Bird

Family Motacillidse. Wagtails and Pipits Austranthus novceseelandice (Gmelin 1789, Alauda) Ground Lark

Family Heteralochidse. Huias Heteralocha acutirostris (Gould 1837, Neomorpha) Huia

Family Creadiontidae. Saddle Backs Creadion carunculatus (Gmelin 1789, Sturnus)

Saddle Back

Family Callseadidse. Wattled Crows Callceas drier ea (Gmelin 1789, Glaucopis) Orange-wattled Crow

Callceas wilsoni (Bonaparte 1851, Qlaucopis) Blue-wattled Crow


By Gregory M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.

In view of the preparation of a Manual of Australian Birds, we have reconsidered the higher classification of birds, and have put forth, in the preceding essay, our first attempt to improve upon the existing schemes as a basis for future work. We hope to make emendations as our knowledge advances, and once again state that we have no prejudices nor preconceived notions to obscure our judgment. At the present time, through the elimination of a majority of nomenclatural questions, we are able to ascend to the study of the higher groupings, and we suggest this is a most important matter to the younger school of Australian ornithologists. In every single order there are anomalous forms demanding investigation, and in the Passeriform birds nearly every genus presents some peculiar aspect suggesting critical examination.

This List has been prepared as a simple guide to the species of Australian birds, with their technical names, according to the latest determinations. The date of description follows the author’s name, and the original genus in which the species was placed by the describer is given, thus providing an easy clue to the original description.

In the Check List of the Birds of Australia recently published in connection with the Birds of Australia by Mathews a complete and original synonymy, generic and specific, has been displayed, such as exists for students in no other, country save Australia. We refer students to this for any additional information.

We have included in this List the stragglers of which less than three occurrences are on record, but have marked these with an asterisk. It is not necessary to emphasise the fact that a good look-out should be kept for strangers, as it is possible that these items simply indicate the fact that these occur perhaps irregularly, perhaps regularly, in out of the way places.

Class AVES Subclass Dromæornithes Order Casuarii or Megistanes Suborder Casuariiformes Family Dromiceiidæ. Emus Dromiceius novœhollandiœ (Latham 1790, Casuarius)


Peronista peroni (Rothschild 1907, Dromaius)

Dwarf Emu

Family Casuariidæ. Cassowaries Casuarius casuarius (Linné 1758, Struthio)


Subclass Impennes Order Sphenisci Suborder Sphenisciformes Family Spheniscidæ. Thick-billed Penguins Eudyptula minor (Forster 1781, Aptenodytes)

Fairy Penguin

Eudyptes pachyrhynchus Gray 1845 Big-crested Penguin

Eudyptes serresianus (Oustalet 1878, Eudyptula)

Family Aptenodytidæ. Thin-billed Penguins Eudyptes schlegeli Finch 1876 Macaroni Penguin * Aptenodytes patagonica Miller 1778 King Penguin

- Subclass Euornithes Order Procellariæ or Tubinares Suborder Procellariiformes Superfamily Procellarioidea Family Thalassidromidæ. Storm-Petrels Oceanites océaniens (Kuhl 1820, Procellaria)

Yellow-webbed Storm-Petrel Garrodia nereis-(Gould 1841, Thalassidroma)

Grey-backed Storm-Petrel Pelagodroma marina (Latham 1790, Procellaria) White-faced Storm-Petrel

*Fregetta tropica (Gould 1844, Thalassidroma)

Black-bellied Storm-Petrel *Fregetta tubulata Mathews 1912

White-bellied Storm-Petrel Family Procellariidse. Shearwaters and Fulmars Puffinus assimilis Gould 1838 Allied Shearwater

Reinholdia reinholdi (Mathews 1912, Puffinus)

Fluttering Shearwater

Thyellodroma pacifica (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria) Wedge-tailed Shearwater Neonectris griseus (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Sombre Shearwater

Neonectris tenuirostris (Temm. & Laug. 1835, Procellaria) Short-tailed Shearwater Hemipuffinus carneipes (Gould 1844, Puffinus) Fleshy-footed Shearwater

*    Procellaria parlcinsoni Gray 1862

Black Petrel

*Adamastor cinereus (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Brown Petrel

Priocella antarctica (Stephens 1826, Fulmarus)

Silver-Grey Petrel

Pterodroma macroptera (Smith 1840, Procellaria)

Grey-faced Petrel

*Pterodroma melanopus (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria) Brown-headed Petrel

*    Pterodroma inexpectata (Forster 1844, Procellaria)

Mottled Petrel

*    Pterodroma mollis (Gould 1844, Procellaria)

Soft-plumaged Petrel

¿Estrelata lessonii (Garnot 1826, Procellaria)

White-headed Petrel Cookilaria cookii (Gray 1843, Procellaria)

White-winged Petrel

Petrella capensis (Linne 1758, Procellaria)

Spotted Petrel

Halobmna ccerulea (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Blue Petrel

Heteroprion belcheri Mathews 1912 Thin-billed Prion

Heteroprion desolatus (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Dove Prion

Pseudoprion turtur (Kuhl 1820, Procellaria)

Fairy Prion

Pachyptila vittata (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Broad-billed Prion

Macronectes giganteus (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Giant Petrel

Family Pelecanoididse. Diving Petrels Pelecanoides urinatrix (Gmelin 1789, Procellaria)

Diving Petrel

Superfamily Diomedeoidea Family Diomedeidse. Albatrosses *Phoebetria fusca (Hilsenberg 1822, Diomedea)

Sooty Albatross

Thalassarche melanophrys (Temm. & Laug. 1828, Diomedea) Black-browed Mollymawk *Thalassarche chrysostoma (Forster 1785, Diomedea) Grey-headed Mollymawk

Thalassarche chlororhynchus (Gmelin 1789, Diomedea) Yellow-nosed Mollymawk Diomedella cauta (Gould 1841, Diomedea)

White-capped Albatross Diomedea exulans Linné 1758

Wandering Albatross * Diomedea chionoptera Salvin 1896 Snowy Albatross

Order Fregati Suborder Fregatiform.es Family Fregatidse. Frigate Birds *Fregata minor-(Gmelin 1789, Pelecanus)

Frigate Bird

Pregata ariel (Gray 1845, Atagen)

Lesser Frigate Bird

Order Pelecani Suborder Pelecaniformes Superfamily Phalacrocoracoidea Family Pbalacrocoracidæ. Cormorants or Shags Hypoleucus perthi Mathews

Pied Cormorant

Hypoleucus fuscescens (Vieillot 1817, Hydrocorax) Black-faced Cormorant Mesocarbo ater (Lesson 1831, Carbo)

Little Black Cormorant

Microcarbo melanoleucus (Vieillot 1817, Hydrocorax) Little Cormorant

Phalacrocorax carbo (Linné 1758, Pelecanus)

Black Cormorant Family Anhingidæ. Darters Anhinga novœhollandiœ (Gould 1847, Plotus)


Superfamily Pelecanoidea Family Pelecanidæ. Pelicans Catoptropelicanus conspicillatus (Temm. & Laug. 1824.



Superfamily Suloidea

Family Sulidæ. Gannets Sula leucogaster (Boddaert 1783, Pelecanus)

Brown Gannet (Booby)

Piscatrix sula (Linné 1766, Pelecanus)

Red-legged Gannet

Parasula dactylatra (Lesson 1831, Sula)

Masked Gannet

Sulita serrator (Gray 1845, Sula)


Order Lari

Suborder Phaethontiformes Family Phaethontidæ. Tropic Birds Leptophaethon lepturus (Daudin 1802, Phaeton)

White-tailed Tropic Bird

Scœophaèthon rubricauda (Boddaert 1783, Phaeton) Red-tailed Tropic Bird

Suborder Lariformes Family Sternidæ. Terns and Noddies

Chlidonias leucopareia (Temminck 1820, Sterna) Whiskered Tern

Chlidonias leucoptera (Temminck 1815, Sterna) White-winged Tern

Sterna striata Gmelin 1789

White-fronted Tern

Sterna dougallii Montagu 1813 Roseate Tern

Cygisterna sumatrana (Raffles 1822, Sterna)

Black-naped Tern

Sternula albifrons (Vroeg 1764, Sterna)

White-shafted Ternlet

Sternula nereis Gould 1843

White-faced Ternlet

Thalasseus bergii (Lichtenstein 1823, Sterna)

Crested Tern

Thalasseus bengalensis (Lesson 1831, Sterna)

Lesser Crested Tern

Oelochelidon nilotica (Gmelin 1789, Sterna)

Gull-billed Tern

Hydroprogne caspia (Pallas 1770, Sterna)

Caspian Tern

Melanosterna anœihetus (Scopoli 1786, Sterna)

Bridled Tern

Onychoprion fuscatus (Linné 1766, Sterna)

Sooty Tern

Megalopterus. minutus (Boie 1844, Anous)

White-capped Noddy

Megalopterus tenuirostris (Temm. & Laug. 1823, Sterna) Lesser Noddy

Anous stolidus (Linné 1758, Sterna)


Family Laridæ. Gulls

Bruchigavia novæhollandiæ (Stephens 1826, Larus) Silver Gull

Gabianus pacificus (Latham 1801, Larus)

Pacific Gull

Family Stèreorariidæ. Skuas

Catharacta lonnbergi Mathews 1912 Antarctic Skua

*Coprotheres pomarinus (Temminck 1815, Lestris) Pomarine Skua

Stercorarius parasiticus (Linné 1758, Larus)

Arctic Skua

Suborder Charadriiformes Superfamily Burhinoidea Family Burhinidæ. Stone Plovers

Burhinus magnirostris (Latham 1801, Charadrius) Stone Plover

Orthorhamphus magnirostris (Vieillot 1818, Œdicnemus) Long-billed Stone Plover

Superfamily Scolopacoidea Family Rostratulidæ. Painted Snipe

Rostratula australis (Gould 1838, Bhynchœa)

Painted Snipe

Family Scolopacidæ. Snipe, Sandpipers, etc.

Ditelmatias hardwickii (Gray 1831, Scolopax)


Subspilura megala (Swinhoe 1861, Gallinago)

Pin-tailed Snipe

Canutus canutus (Linne 1758, Tringa)


Anteliotringa tenuirostris (Horsfield 1821, Totanus) Great Knot

Platyrhamphus falcinellus (Briinnich 1764, Scolopax) Broad-billed Sandpiper

Erolia ferruginea (Briinnich 1764, Tringa)

Curlew Sandpiper

Limnocinclus acuminatus (Horsfield 1821, Totanus) Sharp-tailed Stint

Pisobia ruficollis (Pallas 1776, Trynga) Red-necked Stint

*Pisobia subminuta (Middendorfï 1851, Tringa) Long-toed Stint

Crocethia leucophæa (Vroeg 1764, Trynga) Sanderling

Glottis nebularius (Gnnnerns 1767¡Scolopax) Greenshank

Iliornis stagnatilis (Bechstein 1803, Totanus)

Little Greenshank

Bhyacophilus glareola (Linné 1758, Tringa)

Wood Sandpiper

Actitis hypoleucus (Linné 1758, Tringa)

Common Sandpiper

Terekia cinerea (Gneldenstadt 1774, Scolopax) Terek Sandpiper

Heteractitis incanus (Gmelin 1789, Scolopax) Wandering Tattler

Heteractitis brevipes (Vieillot 1816. Totanus) Grey-rnmped Sandpiper

*Bartramia longicauda (Bechstein 1811, Tringa) Long-tailed Sandpiper

Vetóla lapponica (Linné 1758, Scolopax) Barred-rnmped Godwit

(To be continued.)






Austral Avian Museum, Fair Oak, Hants, England



Subscription per Volume 12/- Net.

H. F. & G. WITHERBY, 326 High Holborn, London, W.C.l.

December itith, 1920.


Vol. IV., Nos. 4 and 5

December 16th, 1920.


A Name-List of the Birds of Australia ..    . .    73

Forgotten Bied-Artists and an Old-Time Ornithologist ..    ..    ..    ..    ..    ..    114

Snipe and Sandpipers : A Rearrangement ..    ..    123

Sherborn and the Systematist ..    . .    ..    130


By Gregory M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.


Limosa limosa (Linné 1758, Scolopax)

Black-tailed Godwit

Mesoscolopax minutus (Gould 1841, Numenius)

Little Whimbrel

Phœopus phæopus (Linné 1758, Scolopax)


Numenius cyanopus Vieillot 1817 Curlew

Family Recurvirostridse. Avocets and Stilts Himantopus leucocephalus Gould 1837 White-headed Stilt Cladorhynchus leucocephalus (Vieillot 1816, Recurvirostra) Banded Stilt

Recurvirostra novcehollandice Vieillot 1816 Red-necked Avocet

Superfamily Charadrioidea Family Hæmatopodidæ. Oystercatchers Hœmatopus ostralegus Linné 1758 Pied Oystercatcher Hœmatopus unicolor Forster 1844 Black Oystercatcher

Family Arenariidæ. Turnstones Arenaria interpres (Linné 1758, Tringa)


Family Charadriidæ. Plovers Squatarola squatarola (Linné 1758, Tringa)

Grey Plover

Pluvialis dominions (Müller 1776, Charadrius)

Lesser Golden Plover

Cirrepidesmus mongolus (Pallas 1776, Charadrius)

Mongolian Sand Dotterel

Nesoceryx bicinctus (Jardine and Selby 1827, Charadrius) Double-banded Dotterel Pagoa leschenaultii (Lesson 1826, Charadrius)

Large Sand Dotterel

Leucopolius ruficapillus (Temm. & Laug. 1821, Charadrius) Bed-capped Dotterel Charadrius cucullatus Vieillot 1818 Hooded Dotterel

Eupodella vereda (Gould 1848, Charadrius)

Oriental Dotterel

Elseyornis melanops (Vieillot 1818, Charadrius)

Black-fronted Dotterel

Family Vanellidæ. Wattled Plovers Lobibyx miles (Boddaert 1783, Tringa)

Lesser Masked Plover

Lobibyx novœhollandiœ (Stephens 1819, Vanellus)

Spur-winged Plover

Zonifer tricolor (Vieillot 1818, Charadrius)

Black-breasted Plover

Erythrogonys cinctus Gould 1838 Red-kneed Dotterel

Superfamily Jacanoidea Family Jacanidae. Jacanas

Irediparra gallinacea (Temm. & Laug. 1828, Parra) Lotus Bird

Superfamily Glareoloidea Family Glareolidae. Pratincoles and Coursers

Glareola maldivarum Forster 1795 Oriental Pratincole Stiltia isabella (Vieillot 1816, Glareola)


Peltohyas australis (Gould 1841, Eudromius)


Suborder Otidiformes

Family Otididae. Bustards Austrotis australis (Griffith and Pidgeon “ 1829, Otis) Bustard

Order Psophii or Grues

Suborder Psophiiformes Family Balearicidae. Cranes Matheivsena rubicunda (Perry 1810, Ardea)

Brolga or Native Companion

Order Ralli Suborder Ralliformes

Family Rallidae. Rails Rallus pectoralis Temm. & Laugier 1831 Slate-breasted Rail Tomirdus tricolor (Gray 1858, Rallina)

Red-necked Rail

Hypotcenidia philippensis (Linne 1766, Rallus)

Buff-banded Rail

Eulabeornis castaneoventris Gould 1844 Chestnut-bellied Rail

*Crex crex (Linné 1758, Rallus)

Land Rail

Porzana fluminea Gould 1843 Spotted Crake

Zapornia pusilla (Pallas 1776, Rallus)

Little Crake

Porzanoidea plumbea (Griffith and Pidgeon “ 1829,” Crex) Spotless Crake

Poliolimnas cinereus (Vieillot 1819, Porphyrio)

White-browed Crake Family Gallinulidæ. Gallinules

Amaurornis moluccanus (Wallace 1865, Porzana)

Rufous-tailed Moorhen

Gallinula tenebrosa Gould 1846 Black Moorhen

Microtribonyx ventralis (Gould 1837, Gallinula)

Black-tailed Water Hen

Tribonyx mortierii Du Bus 1840 Native Hen

Porphyrio melanotus Temminck 1820 Bald Coot

Porphyrio bellus Gould 1841 Blue Bald Coot

Family Fulicidæ. Coots

Fulica atra Linné 1758 Coot

Suborder Podicipiformes Family Podicipidæ. Grebes

Podiceps cristatus (Linne 1758, Colymbus)

Tippet Grebe

Tachybaptus ruficollis (Vroeg 1764, Colymbus)

Black-throated Grebe

Tachybaptus poliocephalus (Jardine and Selby 1827, Podiceps) Hoary-headed Grebe

Order Galli Suborder Galliformes Superfamily Megapodioidea Family Megapodiidse. Megapodes

Megapodius reinwardt Dumont 1823 Scrub Fowl

Leipoa ocellata Gould 1840 Mallee Fowl

Alectura lathami Gray 1831 Brush-Turkey

Superfamily Phasianoidea Family Perdicidse. Partridges and Quails

Coturnix pectoralis Gould 1837 Stubble-Quail

Ypsilophorus ypsilophorus (Bose 1792, Coturnix) Brown Quail

Excalfactoria chinensis (Linne 1766, Tetrao)


Suborder Turniciformes Family Turnicidse. Hemipodes

Turnix maculosa (Temminck 1815, Hemipodius) Black-backed Quail

Marianornis varius (Latham 1801, Perdix)

Painted Quail

Austroturnix olivii (Robinson 1900, Turnix)

Allied Quail

Austroturnix castanota (Gould 1840, Hemipodius) Chestnut-backed Quail

Alphaturnia velox (Gould 1841, Hemipodius)

Little Quail

Alphaturnia pyrrhothorax (Gould 1841, Hemipodius) Red-chested Quail

Colcloughia melanogaster (Gould 1837, Hemipodius) Black-breasted Quail

Family Pedionomidse. Plain-Wanderer Pedionomus torquatus Gould 1840 Plain-W anderer

Order Columbse

Suborder Columbiformes ; Family Columbidse. Pigeons Leucomeloena norfolciensis (Latham 1801, Columba) White-headed Pigeon

Macropygia phasianella (Temminck 1821, Columba) Pheasant Pigeon


Family Turturidse. Doves Chrysauchoena humeralis (Temminck 1821, Columba) Barred-shouldered Dove Geopelia placida Gould 1844 Ground-Dove

Stictopeleia cuneata (Latham 1801, Columba) Spotted-shouldered Dove Chalcophaps chrysochlora (Wagler 1827, Columba)

Little Green Dove

Phaps chalcoptera (Latham 1790, Columba)


Cosmopelia elegans (Temminck and Knip 1810, Columba) Brush Bronze-Wing

Histriophaps histrionica (Gould 1841, Columba) Flock-Pigeon

Petrophassa albipennis Gould 1841

White-quilled Rock Pigeon Petrophassa rufipennis Collett 1898

Chestnut-quilled Rock Pigeon Geophaps scripta (Temminck 1821, Columba)

Partridge Pigeon

Geophaps smithii (Jardine and Selby 1830, Columba) Naked-eyed Partridge Pigeon Lophophaps plumifera (Gould 1842, Geophaps)

Plumed Pigeon

Lophophaps ferruginea Gould 1865 Red-plumed Pigeon

Ocyphaps lophotes (Temm. and Laugier 1822, Columba) Crested Pigeon

Leucosarcia melanoleuca (Latham 1801, Columba) Wonga-wonga

Family Treronidse. Fruit Pigeons Ptilinopus regina Swainson 1825

Red-crowned Fruit Pigeon


Ptilinopus superba (Temm. and Knip 1810, Columba) Purple-crowned Fruit Pigeon Megaloprepia magnifica (Temminck 1821, Columba) Purple-breasted Fruit Pigeon Leucotreron alligator (Collett 1898, Ptilopus) Black-banded Fruit Pigeon Myristicivora bicolor (Scopoli 1786; Columba)

Nutmeg Pigeon

*Globicera pacifica (Gmelin 1789, Columba) Grey-headed Pigeon *Globicera rubricera Bonaparte 1854 Red-cered Pigeon

Lopholaimus antarcticus (Shaw 1793, Columba) Top-knot Pigeon

Order Anates Suborder Anatiformes

Family Cereopsidse. Cape Barren Goose Cereopsis novcehollandice Latham 1801 Cape Barren Goose Family Anseranatidae. Pied Geese Anseranas semipalmata (Latham 1801, Anas)

Pied Goose

Family Anatidse. Swans, Geese and Ducks Cheniscus coromandelianus (Gmelin 1789, Anas) White-quilled Goose Teal Cheniscus pulchellus (Gould 1842, Nettapus)

Green Goose Teal

Chenonetta jubata (Latham 1801, Anas)

Wood Duck

Chenopis atrata (Latham 1790, Anas)

Black Swan

Dendrocygna javanica (Horsfield 1821, Anas) Whistling Duck

Ctenanas eytoni (Eyton 1838, Leptotarsis)

Plumed Whistling Duck

Radjah radjah (Garnot 1828, Anas)

White-headed Sheld-Drake

Casarca tadornoides (Jardine and Selby 1828, Anas) Mountain Duck

Anas superciliosa Gmelin 1789 Black Duck

*Querquedula querquedula (Linné 1758, Anas) Garganey Teai

Virago gibberifrons (Müller 1842, Anas)

Grey Teal

Virago castanea (Eyton 1838, Mareca)

Green-headed Teal