NOTES. 329 



litotes. 



Mr. W. T.Blanford furnishes us in tlie Ibis for January 

 1874 with many valuable identifications. He has kindly sent 

 me a copy of his paper direct, the Ibis itself has not yet 

 reached me. He says :— *- 



" Crateropus salvadorii, De F. 1865 = Malacocercus HUTTONI,* 

 Blyth, 1847,= Chatorhea caudata (partim), Jerdon. It is a true 

 Crateropus, as are also Chatorhea (or Malacocercus) caudata, 

 Dum., and C. gularis, Blyth, unless, indeed, the group contain- 

 ing Crateropus chalybceus, Bp., C.acacice, Riipp., &c, be removed 

 from the genus (as is done by Gray in his Hand-list), in which 

 case they would form a subgeneric section. Crateropus Huttoni 

 is a well-marked species, fairly distinguishable by both its size 

 and colour from C. caudatus. There is a specimen of the former 

 from Candahar in the British Museum which agrees with skins 

 obtained by Major St. John near Shiraz, the locality of De 

 Filippi's species. 



Melizophilus striatus, Brooks (P. A. S. B., April 1872, p. 66), 

 is not a Melizophilus. It has ten tail-feathers only, and is an 

 aberrant Drymoeca, and identical with D. inquieta, Hupp. 

 Ruppell's figure in the Atlas is so bad that I do not wonder at 

 the bird not being recognized. The species, however, is very 

 well described by v. Heuglin in ' The Ibis' for 1869, p. 129. 

 The affinities of the bird are shown not only by the number of 

 its tail-feathers, but also by its nest, which is domed, as in 

 other species of Drymoeca (see Ibis, 1872, p. 180). 



It appears to me that this bird has far better claims to form 

 the type of a separate genus or subgenus than I). gracilis, the 

 type of Burnesia; and I think we should follow Sundevall in 

 using for it the term Scotocerca, as he has lately proposed in his 

 i Methodi Naturalis Avium disponendarum Tentamen' (p. 7). 



By the kindness of Mr. Tristram I have been enabled to 

 examine his types of Drymoeca eremita and D. striaticeps. The 

 former is certainly identical with D. inquieta; and I much 

 doubt if the latter be more than a variety. It is rather paler 

 in color both above and below ; the stria? on the throat and 

 upper breast are very faint, indeed scarcely to be recognized ; 

 and the abdomen and flanks are nearly white or only pale buff. 

 But all these characters are variable in D. inquieta, and Mr. 

 Hume describes a specimen from Sind without strise on the chin 

 and throat ( f Stray Feathers,' i., p. 201). 



* The oldest specific name is given in larger type in every case. 



