1833.] PROCEEDING OF UNITED STATES KATlONAL MUSEUM. 73 



to my mind, is a fair proof that P. palustris is specifically distinct (Yon 

 he latter two. Mr. Seebohm, in his desire to make alUhe Marsh™ 



varieties of one variable species" produced by the difference of climate 

 of such an extensive range" (Brit. B. Eggs, i, PP . 478, 476), apparently 

 overlooks this fact, for he restricts P. borealis to "Scandinavia and 

 Northwest Russia," and makes no mention whatever of the so-called 

 Atoreato f the Alps, while he gives the habitat of P. palustris as 

 'Southwestern Europe, as far north and as far east as St. Petersburg" 

 [GO N. L.] not mentioning with a single word its occurrence in Scan- 

 dinavia where it breeds at least as far north as G4° X. L. (Collett 

 Forh. Vidensl, Selsk. Chnstiania, 1872, p. 13.) This desire -leads h im 

 to another sweeping statement, which has no better foundation He 

 says (torn, cit, p. 478) : "411 these forms undoubtedly interbreed wher- 

 ever their ranges meet." Now, if he had known the facts as they are 



*\>tT, r^i ^ T° a,d UGVer haVG made SucL au as ^rtion, for, as 



Robert Collett has already stated (Nyt Mag. Naturv., xxnr, p. 24), he 



two forms are in Norway absolutely distinct without intergraiing, though 

 both are common breeding birds south of the Troudhjemsfjord. For is 

 it known that P. palustris and P. montanus interbreed habitually 



A somewhat loose expression by Mr. Seebohm (Ibis, 1879, p. 32) has 

 evidently misled Mr. A. P, Wallace into constructing his cur ous 4li„ 

 shewing the Distribution of Parus palustris^ (Island Life, Map opposite 

 P. 62) Seebohm says : « English skins are the brownest. Skins of P 

 palustris, Linn., from Italy and Asia Minor are a shade paler, and can not 

 be di mguished from Chinese skins." Xow, the facts are/that skins of 

 P. palustris from elsewheve in Europe, including Scandinavia, also are 

 a shade paler'; than British specimens (P.p. dresseri Ste.tn.), and -can 

 not be distinguished from Chinese specimens." But on Wallace's map ■ 

 two dark patches show the areas occupied by two identical varieties " 



the e T°uZh g ^r "^r ° f Italy ' thG mto Balkan P"«»-i a"d 



the Turkish portion of Asia Minor, while the other comprises a part of 



North China between Peking and the Yellow River 



It is not only in the descriptions of the northern and southern so-called 

 ^oreahs that authors differ, for, if we turn to the Scandinavian or- 

 nithologists, we will find some discrepancies in the characters assigned 

 to the birds inhabiting Sweden and Norway. Collett (he. cit.) makes 

 out quite a difference in the coloration of the back of P. palustris and 

 his P. boreahs from Norway. The former, he says, has the « back gray- 

 ish brown f the latter, on the other hand, <« grayish ash-blue." Holm 

 gren (Skand. Fogl., n, p. 183), again, on comparing Swedish examples 

 ot the same species, does not observe any difference in the color of the 

 back worth mentioning, but says that in the Swedish P. borealis « the 

 secondaries have broad whitish-gray margins, which are always consid- 



Kl Tl 1 ^^ thG C ° l0r ° f tUe baCk ' tMS bGin ^ easil * seen 



wnen the bird is flying, or when some distance off," while Collett only 



