542 THE AMERICAN SPECIES OF LANIUS 



we find ShrUca. The ordinary Frencli name, Pie griecJie, is 

 simply pica gncca, or Greek Pie. The name excuhitor, adopted 

 by Linn feus for one of the species, is the Latin word meaning 

 a sentinel (literally, an " outlier"). It is no less happily chosen 

 than Lanius, referring as it does to a characteristic habit 

 of the Shrikes, which is to perch in wait for their prey, like 

 sentinels. 



§ 2. — On the American Species of Lanius 



No more than two American species of this genus (one of 

 them, however, being represented by two geographical races) 

 have been satisfactorily established, though a large number 

 have been successively ascribed to this country by different 

 writers. It is the object of the present article to pass these 

 several alleged species in critical review, in chronological 

 order, and see what they amount to. 



1. Lanius bxcubitor, L. The well-known European spe- 

 cies, wrongly ascribed to North America by Forster, Wilson, 

 and others, whoso accounts are to be turned over to L. borealis 

 Yieill., to which they actually refer. 



2. Lanius ludovicianus, Briss. (See the full synonymy 

 given beyond, p. 56L) 



This name has had a checquered and rather curious history, 

 "We first find it in Brisson, ii. 1760, 162, covering an excellent 

 description of a bird, now well known as the " Loggerhead 

 Shrike", said to be from the then extensive and rather indefi- 

 nite region of "Louisiana"; and the account is accompanied by 

 a figure (pi. xv. f. 2), which we have no difficulty in recognizing, 

 after we are informed what it is meant for. This same " Pie- 

 griesche de la Louisiane" of Brisson became the Linnsean 

 Lanius ludovicianus, and all is plain sailing so far, though 

 Linnseus did not give a quite accurate diagnosis. But the 

 compilers promptly attacked the bird, and made sad havoc with 

 their operations at second-hand. Thus, in Latham's Synopsis, 

 i. 162, where Brisson and Linnseus are both correctly cited, we 

 are wrongly referred to PI. Enlumin^e, no. 397, which is not 

 a Shrike at all, but apparently a species of ThamnopMlus. 

 Gmelin naturally copies the mistake, through his habit of 

 iudisciiminate compilation, and also misquotes Brisson, citing 

 the name canade7isis,'iustea.(\ of ludovicianus, though he gives 

 the page and plate of the latter correctly. Next, in the Index 



