( H(i ) 



Galerita randonii Loche of 1858 is a nom<'n nudum, tliongh we know fram his 

 later works that it is the same darker long-billed form (f/) which meanwhile, in 

 1859, had been described as G. maerorhijncha by Tristram. 



Alauda leautungensis Swinh. pertains to the North-Chinese form («)> which is 

 hardly, if at all, separable from Oalerida cristata magna. 



Galerita hrachtjura Tristr. (P. Z. S. 1864, p. 435) is a Palestine form, probably 

 somewhat closely allied to G. c. magna, but nearer to G. c. cristata. It was after- 

 wards suppressed by the describer himself. In his Flora and Fauna of Palestine 

 he did not even mention the name, and in the catalogue of his collection he placed it 

 as a synonym under G. cristata. 



Galerita arenicola Tristr. is a long-billed form. It must, therefore, be trans- 

 ferred from the synonyms of G. isahellina, where it is placed in the Cat. B., to the 

 group of G. cristata, and it is nothing else than the paler desert-like-coloured near 

 ally of G. macrorhyncha, my G. cristata arenicola (Tristr.), form e. 



G. cristata caucasica Tacz., Bull. Soc. Zool. France, 1887, p. 621 (not P. Z. S., 

 as quoted in Cat. B.), is not known to me, but, judging from the author's description, 

 peculiar. 



G. cristata coreensis Tacz., P. Z. S. 1887, p. 603 (not Bull. Soc. Zool. France), is 

 long-billed, and evidently allied to G. magna and leautungensi.-i, hnt unknown to me. 



Galerida ahyssinica Bp. (1850) is said by Bonaparte to be the Galerida 

 cristata ex Abyssinia of Ruppell. But Rvippell's Abyssinian specimens were not at 

 all "colore deserti." Therefore I have named them G. riippelli, although they 

 •would seem to be the types of G. ahyssinica Bp., but this can hardly be so, as they 

 entirely disagree with his diagnosis. 



G. isahellina is not very much better, though a little better characterised than 

 G. ahyssinica, but there is no need to deviate from the generally accepted custom of 

 using this name for the short-billed North African true desert-form, i. 



G.Jiam Brehm (A. E. Brelim, ././. 0. 1864, p. 77, dcscr. nulla— only the colour 

 vaguely mentioned ; C. L. Brehm, JS'aumannia, 1858, p. 209) is, without doubt, a 

 long-billed form, h, and not a synonym of G. isahellina. G. lutea C. L. Brehm, 

 Naumannia, 1858, p. 210, is evidently the same as G. isahellina Bp., and, in fact, 

 better and with more certainty referable to what we now call by Bonaparte's name. 

 I may here mention that it will be necessary to compare a scries from Egypt with a 

 series from Tunis and Algeria, as they may differ from each other. 



G. cristata nigricans, major, vulgaris, pagorum, tenuirostris of C. L. Brehm 

 {Naumannia, 1858, pp. 207, 208) are evidently all individual or accidental varieties 

 of 0. cristata cristata. 



G. cristata liarinthiaca and j^^'JMram id. iid. must be compared, but belong 

 probably also to G. cristata cristata. 



G. cristata pallida and gallica are doubtful. Perhaps the former belongs to 

 G. c. senegalk7m.t, and the latter may be the Coquillade of Montbeillard (v. antea), 

 G.c. angustistriaia (Spain, Greece, and Nubia !), G. c. maculata (Nubia and Spain !), 

 G. c. aitirostris (Egypt, Nubia, Spain !), and (J. c. ru/e.scem (S. Sj)aiu) must remain 

 doubtful, and cannot, from their generally jioor descriptions, be finally defined 

 without a study of the types. 



In conclusion, I will again enumerate all those forms of (Jalerida which I 

 believe can be recognised as subspecies, those specially wanted in Mr. Rothschild s 

 Museum being marked with an asterisk. 



