1871.] TO MALAYAN OENITIIOLOGY." 109 



representative forms are rare, if even known ; and no difference can be detected between 



Sumatran and Malaccan examples of Irena. The ornis of Java differs considerably from that 



of Malacca and Sumatra ; and the Javan Irena is also found to differ. Again, the Philippine 



ornis, though generally Indo-Malayan in its character, still contains genera not belonging to 



that region, and its relations are even more remote than those uniting Malabar, Malacca, and 



Java. The Philippine Irena, in conformity with the aberrant characters of its area, differs more 



from the Malabar, Malayan, and Javan species than they do among one another. Are we not 



then, by the bestowal of distinctive titles, to give currency to these facts because we happen to 



disagree in our definitions of the term " species '"? Is it not begging the whole question of the 



origin of species, and the laws which govern their variation, to maintain that two forms palpably 



differing in certain constant characters are not different I As generally understood, the problem 



to be solved is. Why do they differ "? Why does one member of a genus differ more widely from 



a given standard than another of its members % We shall never discover the solution if we ibis, 1871, 



start by refusing to acknowledge the facts presented to us by nature, or if we make the amount P- l' • 



of difference necessary to establish a species an arbitrary matter of degree, dependant on 



individual opinion, and not on positive fact. 



G7. Lanius lucionensis, Linn. 



Probably L. cristatus, Linn., which certainly occurs in the Malay peninsula. I very much 

 doubt the Nicobar and Andaman halitat of L. lucionensis. 



68. Lanius magnieosteis, Less. 



Lanius waldeni, Swinhoe, P. Z. S. 1870, p. 131, pi. xi., ex Szechuen, is nothing but this 

 species in breeding-plumage ; and 1 am much disposed to the opinion that L. phcenicurus, Pall., 

 is L. cristatus, Linn., in breeding-plumage. Lake-Baikal examples are only to be distinguished 

 from Indian by the purer rufous of the upper plumage and the purer white of the under. 

 I have received L. cristatus from the N.W. Provinces of India. 



69. Tepheodoea-is sordida, Wallace. 



This is Lesson's specific title (Voy. Bel. p. 253, 1834) for T. ])ondiceriana (Gm.). T. grisola, 

 Blyth (described J. A. 8. B. 1842, p. 799, named op. cit., 1843, p. 180 bis) is probably the 

 species meant. It is again referred to by Mr. Blyth, oj). cit. 1840, p. 305, where he states 

 that he had received an undoubted specimen from Java and another from Penang. The type 

 was shot by Mr. Blyth in the neighbourhood of Calcutta along with, curiously enough, a young 

 individual of T. pondiceriana. It is included by Dr. Jerdon in his ' Birds of India' (i. p. 411). 



The type of Swainson's genus Tcphrodornis is Lanius virgatus, Temra.,^ Lanius (jularis. 

 Raffles (if the Javan and Sumatran species are really identical, which has yet to be proved). 

 Tephrodornis is therefore, on Dr. Stoliczka's own showing, equal to Tenthaca, Hodgs., the type 

 of which is Tenthaca pelvica, Hodgs. The only generic title available for the other members 

 of the group is Keroula, Gray. 



