1893.] scIE^^}IFIC name of a HrMALAXAN cuckoo. 317 



Mr. Gates (Ibis, 1889, p. 355), who carefully guarded himself 

 by saying that the names used \vere proAdsional, as he had 

 not gone into the question of nomenclature. But in 1890 

 Mr. Seebohm, in his ' Birds of the Japanese Empire,' p. 170, showed 

 that neither the name C. liimcdayanus nor that of C. striatus could 

 apply to the Himalayan Cuckoo — the fii-st clearly belonging to 

 the rufous state of O. poliocejylialus, whilst the latter, founded 

 on a Javan specimen 12 French inches (13 English) long, must be 

 referred to C. canorus. I quite agree in both these determinations, 

 and I should attach as much weight to the coloration of C. striatus 

 as to its length, for it is described as having the " parties supe- 

 rieures d'un brun cendre, bleuatre,"'which might apply to G. canorus, 

 but not to the adult Himalayan Cuckoo, in which the upper parts 

 are not brown at all, but very dark ashy grey. That C. striatus 

 cannot have been C. mieroijterus, as was formerly supposed, is, 

 I think, certain, for there is no mention in Drapiez's description 

 of the dark subterminal tail-band characteristic of the latter 

 species, and the upper parts of C. micro])terus could never be 

 termed 'bleuatre.' 



Mr. Seebohm, after having disposed of the names by which the 

 Himalayan Cuckoo had hitherto been Icnowu, selected for it 

 an old term of Yahl's, C. intermedius, which, if it belonged to the 

 bird, would certainly be peculiarly appropriate, for the species is 

 intermediate in size between its two near allies, G. canorus and 

 G. poliocejihalus. The name G. intermedius was adopted by 

 Captain Shelley in the British Museum Catalogue of Birds 

 (vol. xix. p. 252), though both Guculus striatus, Drapiez, and 

 G. himalayanus, Vigors, are quoted as synonyms, in opposition 

 to Mr. Seebohm's opinion. 



I very much fear, however, that the name Guculus intermedius 

 cannot possibly apply to the middle-sized Himalayan Cuckoo, for 

 the following reasons. The oi'iginal description of G. inter- 

 medius by \ti\\\ (Skriv. af Nat. Selskabet, Kjobenhavn, vol, iv. 

 p. 58,1789) ran thus: — "Intermedius Guculus cauda rotundata 

 nigricante albo-maculata, pectore cinereo ferrutjineo-tincto, humeris 

 immaculatis,remi(jihusfuscis. Hab. Trauquebarioe ; " and the species 

 is said to be distinguished from G. passerinus by being " dimidio 

 major," and from G. canorus by being " dtiplo minor, pennis pectO" 

 ralibus apice ferrugineis, remigibus in colorem fuscum mar/is ver- 

 gentibus, humeris immaculalis, non albis nigro punctatis.^^ Now the 

 middle-sized Himalayan Cuclvoo cannot be said to be half the size 

 of G. canoru.s, and only half as large again as G. passerinus, 

 whilst G. poliocephalus exactly fits the description, and the last- 

 named species occurs in Southern India, whilst to the best of 

 my belief the Himalayan Cuckoo does not. No notice of its 

 occurrence in the Indian Peninsula is to be found in Jerdou, 

 nor has it, so far as I can ascertain, been procured by any 

 subsequent collector ; certainly there is no specimen from any 

 place west of the Bay of Bengal and south o£ lat. 20° N. in the 

 Hume Collection. Nor has it ever been obtained in Ceylon, as it 



Paoc. ZooL. Soo.— 1893, No. XXU. 22 



