2J® Observations on the 



ritUy and some other groups ; but this resemblance is merely ana1o« 

 gous, as the whole habit of the bird is evidently rapacious ; while 

 the structure of the bill is so characteristic of the Thamnophilinte 

 that I am disposed to consider Fanga as the type of the whole fa- 

 mily. May not the Lanins virgaius, T. which we have already 

 noticed, be nearly related to this type? At present, Fa«o"« ap- 

 pears more isolated than any group we have hitherto considered. 



Closely connected with Malaconotus, is that singular African 

 bird, called by Le Vaillant Le Geoff/ oy, and forming the genus 

 Prio7ioj)S of M. Vieiilot. Its peculiarity consists in having the 

 base of the bill concealed by a semi-circular crest of stiff, setaceous 

 feathers ; which completely cover the nostrils, over which they are 

 directed ; the wings also are more than usually long. Here I sus- 

 pect we shall detect an affinity to Dicrurus,* whose nostrils are 

 invariably defended by stiff incurved bristles, and whose wings are 

 much longer than those of Malaconotus ; this affinity seems to be 

 strengthened by the plumage of Prionups having a metallic lustre, 

 and the bristles at the rictus, (like those in Dicrurus) being re- 

 markably long. 



I feel considerable difficulty in assigning a station to the genus 

 Laniarius of M. Vieiilot, the type of which is the Lanius Bar- 

 barusy L. or Barbary Shrike of English writers. I notice it in this 

 place, because if it is eventually included in the family of Laniadcc, 

 its situation, undoubtedly, will be among the Thamnophilincc. To 

 these birds it is allied in general habit ; its wings are short and 

 feeble, its tail slightly rounded, though somewhat more length- 

 ened ; its plumage thick, soft, and lax, and the feathers on the 

 lower part of the back particularly long. All these characters 

 present a strong resemblance to Thamnophilus and Malaconotus ; 

 but in the bill, we see a marked difference ; its structure is consi- 

 derably weaker ; it is deprived of the strong hook so conspicuous 

 in these genera, and we are, in fact, presented with a form altoge- 

 ther resembling that of the Meruladce : this resemblance further 



* I adopt M. Vieillot's name for this group, in preference to that oi Edolius, 

 as proposed by M. Cuvier, because it has the unquestionable right of priority ; 

 setting aside its peculiar excellence in expressing a character which pervades 

 the whole genus. 



