67 



b. ReVIEW OF THE SPECIE8 OF THE SoTJTH AmERICAN SuB- 

 i-AMILY TlTYRIN.«. By PhILIP LuTLEY ScLATER, M. A., 



F.Z.S., F.L.S. ETC. 



The birds of the old genus Tityra of Vieillot constitute a very 

 "natūrai and well-defined group peculiar to tropical America, which 

 has been quite rightly, as I think, raised to the rank of a subfamily 

 by Mr. Gray and succeeding writers. They seem to me to form a 

 link bet\Veen the two great South American families Ttjrannidce and 

 Cotingidce — the true Tityree pointing rather tovvards the latter of 

 these groups, and the genus Pachyrhynchus to the former. In ana- 

 tomical cbaracters, hovvever, aecording to Mūller, they rather agree 

 vvith the Fruit-eaters, and for the preseut therefore, until this part of 

 the subject has been further worked out, I am inclined to think they 

 should be arranged within the confines of the family CofingiclcB. 



The great diversity of plumage which occurs in the diiferent sexes 

 and ages of these birds (another character which betrays their Cotiu- 

 gine affinities) has occasioned the creation of many nominal species ; 

 and Mr. George Gray, in his ' Genera of Birds,' where merely a list 

 of described species is given without any attempt at reduction of the 

 synonyms, notices no less than forty-six supposed members of the 

 subfamily. Dr. Cabanis, in his ' Ornithologische Notizen ' (Wieg- 

 mann's Arch. f. Nat. 1847), was the first who undertook a critical 

 examination of the subject, the res\ilt of which vvas to reduce the 

 number of species from forty-six to sixteen. With his views I am 

 •disposed for the most part to agree. I should merely observe, that 

 in one or two instances he has united species that have some claira 

 to be considered distinct, and that it is to be lamented that in so dif- 

 ficult a group he did not give scientific distinctive characters for the 

 malęs and females of every species. 



In the 'Proceedings ' of this Society for 1851 (p. 45 et seq.) are 

 some remarks by Dr. Kaup on the birds of this subfamily, which are 

 worthy of much attentiou. But of the species considered there as 

 undescribed, one at least has been already previously named, and the 

 others are such as, after examination of the type-specimens, I should 

 hardly be inclined to regard as really new. Prince Bonaparte's 

 arrangement of this group in his ' Conspectus ' is adopted from Ca- 

 banis' article. In what follows I have attempted to make a careful 

 review of the members of the subfamily TityrirKB, giving short de- 

 seriptions of the sexes of each species, when I have been successf'ul 

 in meeting vvith them, and the most necessary synonyms, particu- 

 larly where my views on this latter point differ from those of Dr. 

 Cabanis. Although no species is inserted of which I have not per- 

 sonally examined specimens, I have the satisfaction of recording the 

 existeuce of twenty-two species instead of sixteeii — the number as- 

 signed in the lašt general account published ; and I have been very 

 particular about localities, a point much too generally overlooked by 

 writers on ornithology ; so that, although my subject is not quite a 

 new one, I shall hope to have contributed some fresh Information 

 upon it. 



