- 137 — 



as a new one. We may possibly have here a similar case to 

 that which B o n h o t e (Bull. Brit. Orn. Club., vol. XL, 1920 p. 90) 

 mentions concerning the Mourning Chat. In that race the male 

 of the eastern (Egyptian) form — Oenanthe lugens — is like the 

 female, while in the western form — Oe. lugens halophila — 

 the sexes are very distinct. But Escarpment (from where 

 Hartert's birds were described) is not very far from Elgon 

 (about 150 miles) and if this sexual dimorphism is present be- 

 tween birds of the different localities, and if, like Bon bote, 

 we look upon this dimorphism as an essential character of birds 

 from different regions, which are nevertheless closely allied, we 

 might perhaps have a certain right in looking upon the Elgon 

 bird and the Escarpment bird as diflerent races, just as Bon- 

 h t e considers the above-mentioned Oenanthe to be different 

 species and not subspecies. 



Irides dark-brown; bill black; legs lead grey. 



Laniarius aethiopicus amhiguus Madarasz. — Rchw. III. p. 834. 



2 ^(5 ad. 14. and 18. 4. Kiambu. — 1 Q ad. 10. 4. Nairobi. — 2 QQ ad. 14. 

 and 18. 5. Kiambu. 1 Q ad. 11. 4. Ngong. 



Opinions are very divided with reference to this race. 

 L on n berg (Birds coll. by Sw. Zool. Exp. B. E. A., 1911, 

 p. 91 and Arkiv. for Zool. Band 9, No 14, 1915) and Zedlitz 

 (J. f. 0. 1915, pp. 59—60) consider it only as a colour variety 

 of L. aeth. aethiopicus while Reichenow (op. cit.), S c 1 a t e r 

 and i\I ack w or t h-Prae d (Ibis 1918, p. 634) and others 

 look upon it as a good sub-species. According to the latter in- 

 vestigators L. ae. aethiopicus should he represented in Abyssinia, 

 north to Kassala jind f^ritrea, south to Shoa and Somaliland ; 

 Zedlitz (J. f. 0. 1916, p. 115), ou the other hand, fixes the 

 distribution to N. 0. and Brit. East Africa but that of L. ae. 

 amhiguus to East Africa between the coast-belt and the Rift-valley. 

 Here L. ae. major commences and is met with in the remainder 

 of East Africa, Uganda and West Africa south to Cameroon. 



It seems to measifSclater& Mackworth-Praed 

 are right in their description of the distribution of the aethio- 

 picus forms. I also agree with them that L. ae. amhiguus is 

 smaller than L. ae. major. The wing-measurement, however, 

 "about 90 ram.", seems to me to be on the whole somewhat too 

 small, as also that of "about 100 mm." for L. ae. major. The 

 authors do not give any measurements for L. ae. aethiopicus. 



It is possible — and perhaps probable — that amhiguus 

 is only a colour variety oi aethiopicus and in that case Zedlitz's 

 and Lonnberg's opinion of the distribution of this race will 

 be the correct one. Mackworth-Praed (Ibis, 1917, p. 378) 

 names the bird procured at Thika, L. aethiopicus, thus accepting 



