Viscount Walden on the Rufous-tailed Shrikes. 217 



which, with the rump, intensely rufous. Schreuck (/. c.) has 

 given under Pallas's name an elaborate description of a Rufous- 

 tailed Shrike, many specimens of which, male and female, he 

 obtained at Udskoi-Ostrog, along the course of the Amoor river 

 and in northern China. These differ from the description given 

 by Pallas by having the entire upper plumage of a rust- brown 

 colour, and the forehead and superciliary streak pure white. 

 The upper plumage of both sexes is described as alike, the 

 females being chiefly distinguished from the males by having 

 the white forehead and superciliary streak less strongly marked 

 and less pure, by the occular band being brown instead of black, 

 and by the sides of the neck, the lower throat, the breast, and 

 flanks being finely and darkly lineated, these parts in the male 

 being immaculate. The discrepancy in the two descriptions 

 raises the doubt whether the two authors refer to the same bird. 

 Pallas^s description applies with equal truth to L. lucionensis, 

 Linn. The long tail and intensely rufous uropygium and tail are 

 not sufficient characters to distinguish it; for, as regards the 

 intensity of colour, specimens of the Philippine species in full 

 breeding-plumage have yet to be procured and described. The 

 rufescent-grey upper plumage is characteristic of L. lucionensis, 

 Linn. ; and we know that that species travels high into northern 

 China in the early spring to breed. Nor may we presume that 

 Pallas^s specimen was in a sexual or seasonal phase of plumage 

 or in that of nonage ; for Schrenck has told us that the upper 

 plumage of the sexes does not differ, and he has further described 

 the nestling bird as having the entire upper plumage of a rust- 

 brown colour lineated across with black *. From Hakodadi, 

 killed there in June, I have received a specimen (PI. V.fig. 2) which, 

 in all respects, agrees with Schrenck's description of his Siberian 

 and North China individuals, and which differs widely from Phi- 

 lippine and China examples of L. lucionensis, Linn. For the 

 reasons above given, I entertain great doubts as to the identity of 

 Schrenck's specimens with Pallas's species. Should they prove 

 distinct, Schrenck's bird will require a new title. But before 



* It is to be regretted that, in his admirable article on Z. pJiosmcurus, 

 Schrenck has not commented on the discrepancies between his specimens 

 and Pallas's description. 



