54(1 Dr. E. Hartert — Some Anticriticisms. 



When Dr. Blanford described a new " variety " of Crested 

 Lark from Abyssinia, in 1870, he called it 



"Alauda (Galerita) aremcola ? Tristram, var. fusca." 



I suppose that was the old system. 



I would call this form (.if I could separate it) 



"Galerida thekl.i: pus< \." 



That is with three names (easily reduced to two, instead of 

 six words and a comma. 



And what has Mr. Dresser done with the Crested Larks 'r 

 In the " Manual ' he has recognised two Crested Larks, 

 calling them 



" CoRYDUS CRISTATUS" and 

 a Subsp. CORYDU8 [SABELLIXUS." 



I suppose that is another form of the " old system." 



Let us, nevertheless, see what it means, for it is full of 

 mistakes. First of all, two distinct species. G. cristata and 

 G. t/iekla are lumped. Secondly, one out of about ten 

 equally distinct subspecies is recognised, and this arbitrary 

 proceeding is backed by the bold statement that "this 

 species is subject to considerable individual variation both 

 in colour and size, and has consequently been greatly sub- 

 divided by modem ornithologists." This statement, however. 

 apart from the insinuation that "modern ornithologist^" 

 name individual aberrations, is a dangerous misrepresenta- 

 tion of facts, because there is. on the contrary, very little 

 individual variation in the Crested Larks, the variation being 

 connected with the " habitat " and geographically limited! 

 If Mr. Dresser had not made his erroneous statement, and 

 if he had united all Crested Larks, saying, lor example, 

 "Adhering to the old-fashioned method of only recognizing 

 broad facts in nature, disregarding geographical races and 

 troublesome details, I only recognize one species, which 

 1 call Galerida cristata," then we should be able to under- 

 stand him. There would then only be one mistake, the 

 uniting of G. thekloe with it, which we cannot understand, 

 since equally and even more similar species of Phylloscopus, 



