ON THE PROGRESS AND PRESENT STATE OF ORNITHOLOGY. 19? 



valuable contribution to our knowledge, though the series of natural affinities 

 would perhaps have been better exhibited if the ThamnophiU had been in- 

 cluded among the Myiotherince (passing, as the}' do, almost imperceptibly into 

 Formicarius), and if the so-called MyiotherincB of the East Indies had been 

 formed into a separate section. 



We owe to M. L'Herminier some interesting particulars respecting that 

 anomalous and little-known bird, the Sfeatornis of Humboldt (Ann. Sc. Nat., 

 vol. vi. p. 60, and Nouv. Ann. Mas. Hist. Nat., vol. iii.). It appears that this 

 nocturnal bird, which inhabits the caverns of Venezuela and Bogota, can only 

 be classed among the CaprimulgidcB, though it differs from all its congeners 

 in its frugivorous habits, while it approaches the Strigidcc in many points of 

 structure (as has been well insisted on by M. Des Murs, 'Rev. Zool.,' 1843). 



The same indefatigable naturalist has thrown much light on the structure 

 of the genera Sasa, Palamedea, Turnix and Rupicola, in the ' Ann. Sc. Nat.,' 

 vol. viii. p. 96, and ' Comptes Rendus,' 1837. The first of these he shows to 

 be a connecting link between the Insessores and Rasores ; the second he 

 places between the RallidcB and Ardeidce; the third he considers to have more 

 affinity to the Grallatores than to the Rasores; and the last he retains among 

 the AmpelidcB. 



M. Lesson's monographs of the Trochilidcs, entitled ' Histoire Naturelle 

 des Oiseaux Mouches,' and ' Histoire Naturelle des Colibris,' are valuable 

 works for the illustration of species, but the generic subdivisions are not car- 

 ried into sufficient detail. M. Lesson has elsewhere proposed several generic 

 groups of TrochilidcB, and M. Boie has added others ; but many of these ap- 

 pear difficult to define satisfactorily. In fact there is no family of birds whose 

 classification is more imperfect and more in want of careful elucidation than 

 the beautiful but bewildering group of Humming Birds. The two volumes 

 of ' Humming Birds ' in Sir W. Jardine's ' Naturalist's Library ' contain a syn- 

 opsis of most of the species, but without professing to form a complete mo- 

 nograph. 



Other volumes of the ' Naturalist's Library ' are devoted to particular 

 groups, but as they only contain selections, and not entire lists of the species, 

 they do not strictly constitute monographs. Such are the useful volumes by 

 Mr. Selby on the ' Pigeons and Gallinaceous Birds,' and by Mr. Swainson on 

 Muscicapidce. A more complete work is the volume by Sir W. Jardine on 

 the NectariniidcE, or rather on the genus Nectarinia, containing a very full 

 synopsis of the species of that extensive and beautiful group. 



The ' Histoire Naturelle des Oiseaux de Paradis' by M. Lesson, is a useful 

 monograph of an obscure and difficult group of birds, and is worked out with 

 more care and just criticism than is to be found in many others of M. Les- 

 son's publications. 



M. Malherbe of Metz is at present engaged on a general history of the 

 Picidce, a work much wanted on account of the many genera and species in- 

 troduced into this family since Wagler's monograph of Picus was published. 



Several attempts have been made to compile monographs of the numerous 

 family of Psittacidcs, but the subject is yet far from being exhausted. Le- 

 vaillant in 1801 had figured and described all the species then known, and 

 Kuhl in 1820 published a valuable monograph in the 'Nova Acta Acad. 

 Leop. Car.' Another and a more complete monograph of the PsittacidcB, by 

 the industrious Wagler, will be found in the ' Abhandlungen der Baierischen 

 Akademie der Wissenschaften,' 1 832. Although some of the author's generic 

 divisions have been criticised as being artificial, yet this paper has a great 

 value for its discrimination of species. Lear's ' Illustrations of the PsittacidcB^ 

 1832, is intended as supplementary to Levaillant's great work 'LesPero- 



