362 NOVITATES ZOOLOGICAE XXV. 1918. 



my book, I came to the conclusion that it was doubtful, and so far Lonnberg 

 has not been followed, except bj^ Hellmaj'r and Laubmann, Nomencl. Vog. 

 Bayerns, p. 9, 1916. This change is, however, unnecessary, and we can stick 

 to the name striata. Lmnaeus's diagnosis : " Motacilla subfusca, subtus alba, 

 pectore cinereo maculata," might well apply to the Spotted Flycatcher, but 

 it is too vague to make this absolutely certain, since under the name of Motacilla 

 Linne united nearly all smaller insect-eating birds, and no descriptions of the 

 bill, size, etc., are given, and we must therefore examme his references. The 

 first reference is to the Fauna Svecica, No. 231. There is the same diagnosis 

 as in the Syst. Nat. ed. x., and at the bottom is added : " Color supra totus e 

 fusco castaneus, subbus alba aut albo-cinerascens." This does not help us a 

 bit, but I do not consider '' e fusco castaneus " a correct description of the upper- 

 side of a Spotted Flycatcher, and " alba aut albo-cinerascens " suggests that 

 Linne had different birds in mind, as the underside in the Spotted Flycatcher 

 does not vary much. 



The next quotation is " Ficedula cannabina " Willoughby, Orn. p. 163. This 

 is incorrect, but Fauna Svecica, No. 231, is the correct quotation : " Ficedula 

 quarta." Under the heading Ficedula quarta Aldrov., Willoughby described a 

 bird of which, among other descriptions, he says that in the male the wings 

 have some white, while in t'le female they turn into chestnut, as also does the 

 tail, which is black in the male. He further identifies with this bird the " Cyprus- 

 bird " and Beccafigo, ^''Ficedula" bemg the Latin translation of Fig-bird, but 

 the Beccafigos are various kinds of Sylvia, and not Flycatchers, the buds which 

 are (still) exported from Cyprus being all sorts of small bhds, but chiefly Blackcaps 

 and other Sylviae. There is thus nothing in Willoughby's descrijjtion to prove 

 that the " Ficedula quarta " is anything like the Spotted Flycatcher, but hi 

 fact it is a mixture of various birds. 



The next quotation is Rajus, av. 81, n. 12. This is word for word the same 

 as in Willoughbj', the Latin edition of « hich was, lOce the English translation, 

 edited by Rajus. 



Then comes : Albm, Aves, iii. p. 25, pi. 26. That bird resembles the Spotted 

 Flycatcher only in the breast being spotted. It is, however, described as havuig 

 a " slender " bill of a dark reddish colour, the top of the head, back, and tail 

 " dusky red, cinereous and yellow mixture," on the throat a large spot of white, 

 the breast yellow, spotted with black, legs pale reddish. In the figure bill and 

 feet are blood-red. No locality is given, and the bird Ls called the Fig-Eater, 

 Ficedula cannabina. I fail to understand how one can see a Flycatcher in 

 this bhd ! In the Fauna Svecica., p. 86, we find further quotations : " List, 

 apic. l^f). Ficedula," v.hioh I do not know and cannot understand. 



Fui-ther : " Charl. onom. 81. t. 81. Ficedula." That is Charleton's 

 OnornasHcon Zoicon, llJGS. On p. 81 is no description of the " Ficedula," and 

 the bird figured has a curved bill, spotted crown and wmgs, and is probably the 

 r.-jiresentation of a Sa.-icola, rubetra. I fail to see how on these premises — 

 none of the quotations litting the Sjiotted Flycatcher — we can be so sure of 

 Linne's Motacilla Ficedula that we make it to supersede a certain and unim- 

 peachable name. Evidently Linne was not acquamted with the Spotted Fly- 

 catcher, or he could not have quoted five authors, none of which described the 

 latter, while the diagnosis is too vague and too short to make it a certainty. 



