Viscount Walden on the Rufous-tailed Shrikes. 219 



White-cheeked Shrike, Lath., (?) Gen. Hist. ii. p. 53. no, 53 (ex 

 India) . 



Enneoctonus superciliosus (Lath.), G. R. Gray, Gen. Bds. i. 

 p. 291. no. 6. Bp., Consp. i. p. 363. no. 8 (ex Java ?). H. & 

 M., Cat. i. A pp. 1. p. 394. no. 638 (ex Malacca, Pinang). 



Otomela superciliosa (Lath.), Bp., Rev. de Zool. 1853, p. 437. 

 no. 29 (ex Java ?) . 



Two questions must be answered before the correct synonymy 

 of this species can be determined. Does it occur in Java ? Is it 

 the same, or does it differ from L.phoenicurus, Pall. ap. Schrenck ? 

 Levaillant (/. c.) first described and figured the bird, said by him 

 to have come from Java, on which Latham founded his species. 

 Levaillant's authority for its habitat is, of course, untrustworthy ; 

 and no subsequent author w^ho adopts it supports Levaillant by 

 collateral evidence. The species is not included by Horsfield in 

 his ''Catalogue of the Birds of Java^^ (Linn. Tr. xiii.). No 

 specimens from that island are contained in the British or East- 

 India Museums. Mr. Blyth, intimately acquainted with East- 

 ern ornithology, informs me that he never met with a Javan 

 specimen ; and Mr. Wallace did not observe it in Java. L. 

 hentet, Horsf., is the onlj^ Javan Shrike known to these eminent 

 naturalists ; and no other Javan species is within my own limited 

 knowledge. Yet if such a bird does inhabit Java, it will have 

 to be regarded as L. superciliosus, Lath., verus. In the Malay 

 Peninsula a species, very common in collections, exists, answering 

 in all respects to Levaillant^s account of Le Rousseau; and 

 for the present it will be convenient to regard it as having 

 supplied Levaillant with the subject of his plate and descrip- 

 tion. Its occurrence in Sumatra, not in itself improbable, rests 

 upon the sole authority of Sir S. Raffles. 



On the supposition that my Hakodadi specimen is L. phceni- 

 curus, Pall. ap. Schrenck, it is not easy to discriminate the 

 characters which separate it from Malay L. superciliosits. A 

 somewhat shorter wing, a brown, more dully coloured back, and 

 a narrower white frontal band constitute the only perceptible 

 discrepancies of the Malay specimens I have had opportunities 

 of examining. Otherwise the two are exactly similar, the 

 rufous of the head and upper tail-coverts being quite as intense, 



