INHABITING THE PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO. 165 
Buffon (/.¢.) is incontestably not original, but extracted from Brisson; while Buffon’s 
title seems to have originated in Brisson’s assertion that his type inhabited the Moluccas. 
Le Vaillant mentions (/.¢.) that the example in Aubrey’s cabinet, Brisson’s type, was 
of a very young bird and much mutilated, both its tail and wings having been cut. It 
is difficult to decide, on the evidence we possess, how many individuals served as subjects 
for Brisson, D’Aubenton, and Le Vaillant. If we are to believe the last author, there 
were in Paris at least three examples:—first, Aubrey’s—Brisson’s type, and which 
Le Vaillant says he purchased when Aubrey’s collection was sold; second, the subject 
of D’Aubenton’s plate, said by Buffon to have been taken from a set-up specimen, but 
without mentioning to whom it belonged; third, the example figured by Le Vaillant 
(1. ¢.), and which he informs us he had acquired a short time previously. But, according 
to Temminck (/. ¢.), Le Vaillant figured the identical specimen which was the original 
subject of D’Aubenton’s plate, and which at the time Temminck wrote (1824) was 
still preserved, although much deteriorated, in the Paris Museum. 
On the whole, the probabilities are that there never was more than one specimen, and 
that the Brissonian type, which must have passed from Aubrey’s collection to that of 
the Paris Museum. With Temminck’s identification of this specimen as being 
the young of the large Philippine Hornbill we must rest content. Anyhow we may 
safely reject Le Vaillant’s statement that le Calao of Brisson was the young of the 
Calao & casque concave of Le Vaillant, op. cit. plates 3 & 5, drawn from manufactured 
specimens with the heads only of B. bicornis. The drawing of the bill (/. c.) was made 
by Le Vaillant from a specimen in the Leyden Museum (teste Temm.). 
The sexes of this species, as represented by the examples collected by Dr. Meyer, do 
not differ either in colouring or in dimensions. In a young bird, body-plumage dingy 
greyish tawny, the bill is entirely black, with the exception of the tip of the maxille 
and the under surface of the rami of the mandible, which are bright blood-red. 
Buceros bicornis, Linn., and this species belong to the same natural section of the 
Hornbills*. 
Hydrocorax philippinensis, Briss. Orn. iv. p. 568, no. 2, “ Philippines,” a title founded 
on a head and beak in M. Aubrey’s cabinet, and said to have come from the Philippines, 
is, so far as we know, not a Philippine species, but identical with B. dicornis, Linn. 
CRANIORRHINUS, Cabanis. 
67. * CRANIORRHINUS LEUCOCEPHALUS. (Pl. XXVII. fig. 1, ¢; fig. 2, 2.) 
Buceros leucocephalus, Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. iv. p. 592, “ Moluques” (1816), fide Bp. 
Consp. i. p. 91. 
Buceros sulcatus, Reinw., Temm., Pl. Col. 69, “ Philippines et Mariannes ” (1823) ; Schlegel, Mus. 
Pays-Bas, Buceros, p. 10. 
Hab, Mindanao (Schlegel). 
* To which must be added B. homrai, Hodgs., if the Indian bird is specifically distinct from the Indo- 
Malayan. 
VOL. 1X.—PART . April, 1875. Z 
