68 ox THE GENUS EUDTNAMIS. [1869. 



E.picatus, Miillcr, Ycih. Nat. Gesch. Ned. Overz. Bez. Land- eu Volkenk. p. 176, "Amboyna," 

 d adolesc. plum. mut. (Jide Schlcgel, Mus. P.-Bas, Cuculi, p. 19). 

 Ibis, 18G9, E. picata, Cab. & Heine, t. c. p. 55, note. 



The correct title for the Aniboyna Emhjnamis involves a problem in nomenclature most 

 difficult to solve. Its satisfactory solution depends first upon the specific identity or otherwise of 

 the Ambo}'na and Ceram birds, and next, if they be distinct, upon which of the two islands it 

 was that supplied Brisson's types. MiiUer {Jidc Schlegel, tit supr.) gives from Amboyna 

 E. orientulis (L.), E. jnoictata (L.), and E. incata, Miill. The old male he identified with the 

 first title, the female with the second ; and he described as distinct a young male passing into 

 adult plumage under the third title. Prince Bonaparte (Consp. Av. i. p. 101) not only gives 

 E. picata, Miiller, from Amboyna, in which he is right, but also, as a separate species, E. punctata 

 (L.), from that island and New Guinea. His having added this last locality renders it doubtful 

 •whether the specimen he had before him was from Amboyna or from New Guinea. And yet upon 

 this turns the validity of the characters by which he distinguishes the Ceram species. For he defines 

 E. punctata as "sj»«7/a prcecedenti" {E. ransomi, from Ceram) "se^Z minor (Long. 14 poll.)," 

 etc. \Ve know that the New-Guinea Eudynamis is smaller than that of Ceram ; but it is not 

 demonstrated yet that the Amboyna Koel also is smaller* Dr. Cabanis insists {I. c.) that Reaumur's 

 specimen must have come from Ceram, chiefly for the reason that Brisson's dimensions are too 

 lar^e for the Amboyna race. But Dr. Cabanis is assuming that Bonaparte's " klcuie ^•ierzehn- 

 zollige Art" is the true Amboyna species. The Ceram bird was considered distinct from the 

 Amboyna bird by Forsten ; for he entitled it Cuculus punctatus, var. ceramensis. Prince 

 Bonaparte {I. c.) described the female bird from Ceram, Forsten's specimen, under the title of 

 E. ransomi. Dr. Cabanis, as we have seen, regards the two birds as distinct species ; but he 

 does not appear to have seen Amboyna individuals. Professor Schlegel, of course, refuses to 

 admit the specific distinction. I have failed in seeing an Amboyna specimen, and can oti'er no 

 opinion. But it is a matter which must be decided before we can determine the title of 

 the two birds. If we adopt Professor Schlegel's view, both birds will stand as E. orientalis. 

 Ibis, 1S09, The dimensions given by Professor Schlegel of examples from the two localities do not strikingly 

 ^' ' differ: — Ceram, wing 7 inches 10 lines to 8 inches 4 lines; Amboyna, wing 8 inches 1 line. 



It may be that the Amboyna Koel and the one known to inhabit a part of New Guinea 

 are identical ; but I am induced to decide that the Amboyna and Ceram Koel difi'er, solely 

 because Forsten considered them to be different. He is the only ornithologist, besides Professor 

 Schlegel, who, we know for certain, actually compared specimens from both islands ; and, what 

 is more, he procured the specimens himself 



Our only knowledge of the comparative size of the two species is confined to the 

 dimensions given by Professor Schlegel already quoted ; it is not sufficient to warrant us in 

 affirming that the Ceram bird is the largest ; and for the time the question must be left 

 undetermined. Moreover, as the Dutch naturalists all unite in giving Cuculus punctatus, L., 

 from Amboyna, the probability is that Count Bentinck's specimen came from there ; I therefore 

 cannot follow Dr. Cabanis so far as to refer the Ceram and not the Amboyna bird to C. orientalis 

 \e\ punctattts, L. 



