678 OBSERVATIONS ON 



Page 



270. Louisiana Shrike. The same observation. 



271. The group of Malaconotus was first proposed by us in the 

 Zoological Journal, and its distinguishing characters intimated. 

 Mr. Burchell subsequently adopted the genus, by describing one 

 species. The type is probably the Blanchot Shrike, p. 266, 

 with which the following species may be associated : — 

 Senegal Shrike, p. 267. Silent Shrike, p. 268. Barbary 

 Shrike, p. 270. Ceylon Thrush, 271. Lanius Erythropterus, 

 p. 271. Lanius Cuba and Boubo, are rightly supposed to 

 belong to this group. 



272. Thamnophitinee . Ornithologists, who attempt the elucidation 

 of all the species here enumerated, from the descriptions of 

 Lichtenstein, Azara, Vieillot, and Spix, will, I am fearful, dis- 

 cover the utter impossibility of achieving the task. In the first 

 place, it unfortunately happens, that these descriptions were 

 drawn up some years ago, before it was known that such 

 groups as Formicivora, Drymophila, and Urotamus had been 

 confounded with Thamnophllus, although the former belong to 

 the thrushes, and the latter to the Shrikes. Now as these 

 respective groups are only indicated, in the dead birds, by the 

 different construction of their tarsi, and as these members have 

 been passed over without any particular notice in the descrip- 

 tions before us, it becomes utterly impossible to say which are 

 Shrikes, or which Thrushes. But this is not all. There is 

 such a beautiful analogy between the two groups, that each 

 of the sub-families of Thamnophilinae, and Myotherinae, (under 

 which these birds are respectively arranged) may be almost said 

 mutually to contain representations of their respective species ; 

 insomuch that several of the descriptions here given of Thamno- 

 philinse, are equally applicable to the prototype species among 

 the Myotherinae. So completely, indeed, have ornithologists 

 been deceived by these extraordinary relations, that even the 

 accurate Azara, under the belief that the Myotherinae of Sonnini 

 were no other than so many Batara Shrikes, broadly accuses 

 that veracious ornithologist with cutting off the tails of his speci- 

 mens, and falsifying the account of their natural economy ! 

 The whole passage is particularly curious, and is, perhaps, one 



