( b02 ) 



1 do not thiuk that there is sufficicut evidence thul two t'uruas of Homed Laiks 

 breed regularly in the same area, and I jiropose therefore to call all forms by 

 trinomials, as local forms of one species. One of the most distinct forms is telenc/iowi, 

 though Sharpe quoted it as a synonym of elivesi. Other very distinct forms are 

 Bianclii's jir^eicals/t// and kliamensU, while his i/wntaiia is more difficult to 

 recognise, and its distribution is not clear. 



The most misleading and erroneous remarks on the genns are those by 

 Seebohm in the Ibis, 1884. They only show that the anthor had not understood 

 the forms about which he wrote at length {elwesi, lomjirostris and hrandt't). 

 Dr. Sharpe {Cut. B. xiii.), while admitting them as distinct races, mixed np 

 their distrilmtiun, and united with elurxi the beantifnl tdc^icliotci. K. a. pcnicilhita, 

 balcanica and idhniula, though united by Bianchi, are separable, and 1 liave 

 explained their differences on pp. 261 and 203 of my Viig. pal. F'.ikim. 



Ou AMMOMANES SAMHARENSIS and ASSABENSIS. 



On p. 224 of my 17'//. d. pal. Fauna, in a footnote, I said that ,1. sam/iarcii.'<is 

 Shell, from Auiba in tlic mountains of Abyssinia, and A. agsabi/t.s/.s Salvad. 

 from Assab on the Abyssinian, or rather Danakil, coast, were " identical." This 

 is an absolute error, as I have seen from comparing the types of the two forms. 

 Count Salvadori has already pointed out the dift'erences in a note in the Ibis, 

 and I need not, therefore, repeat them here. 



On GALERIDA. 



My treatment of the forms of the genus (julcrida, of which I recognised 

 twenty-two as subspecies of G. ciistata and nine as subspecies of G. tkc/dae, has 

 been looked upon in various lights by various ornithologists. If it has been 

 said that my diagnoses were not very satisfactory, then I have not much to answer 

 to this. I admit that it is not always easy to diagnose very closely allied forms, 

 and I hope that others will try to give better descriptions ; if my critics conclude 

 from m\' descriptions that the forms which I luive recognised do not exist, 

 then I must object, because it is illogical to say that a form is poor because 

 my descrij)tion is poor. Let my critics spend as much time over Crested Larks 

 as I have done, and let them examine the same or more material, and they will 

 probably learn something more and criticise me more justly, with more common- 

 sense, if at all. They will then find that I have not recognised enough forms : 

 jirobably there are after all two reddish-sandy subspecies in Central Tunis, 

 and Erianger's ilnichlcri can be recognised ; but at present there is not sufficient 

 evidence. Kleinschmidt has created ^^ Galcrida .■sc/tlilteri." * Dr. Bianchi (Aves 

 Frzeiculskiaiaie, p. 347) doubts whether the forms from variously coloured soil are 

 " geographical " forms. Let us say " local " instead of " geographical " forms, and 

 we may be more correct,— but there is no evidence that the variously coloured 

 forms are entirely produced by the soil ou which they live, and that they are 

 repeated alike where the soil is similar. This is, in fact, not the case, because 

 the sandy deserts of various countries are not inhabited by entirely similar forms I 



* Oi-n. MinuitifhL'r. lltOI, p. 196. '* Stchlgenau in dcr I\Iille zwisclicn (tiikrida thckUw n-Utnifc/-it thckUui 

 1h-:l:l<tc anil thcklae hartcrti.'' Is this not a numon nu<luni / Where is the exact niitldle between 

 t r,c furms? 



