14G Godwin-Austen — On the 6^e^iem Pellorneum rtWf/ Pomatorhinus, [June, 



4. Some notes on Birds of the Genera Pellorneum and Pomatorhinns, 

 with a description of a variety of Chleuasicus ruficeps, Blyth. By Major 

 H. H. Godwin-Austen, F. R. G. S. 



Since writing the remarks on the genus Bellorneum published in 

 Part II, No. 1 of the Journal for this year, I have, I think, determined a 

 bird among those collected by Mr. Ossian Limborg on and under the Mule- 

 it range, Tenasserim, as the Pellorneum Ticlcelli of Blyth, originally from 

 the same locality, where it was obtained by Capt. Tickell. This is not a 

 Bellorneum but should, I consider, be placed in the genus Alcippe. 



Its having been first placed in the genus Pellorneum is, I suspect, the 

 reason (as it was in my own case) of the considerable confusion that has 

 arisen regarding it, and led me and others to think Pellorneum Tic- 

 lcelli possessed the striated frontal plumage seen in typical P. ruficeps. 

 Blyth commences his description of P. Ticlcelli by saying " absolutely 

 identical in structure with P. ruficeps^' ; this, though it is clear enough on 

 careful reading that Blyth was not alluding to coloration, yet brings P. 

 ruficeps and its allies vividly to the mind. ^6 mention is made of any 

 markings on the breast ; the description being in fact that of a dull-pluma- 

 ged bird about which very few lines could be given. Mr. Gates appears 

 to have recognized the species, and, in his list of Birds from Upper Pegu 

 (Stray Feathers, Vol. III. p. 119), finds fault with the describer by 

 saying — " agrees pretty well with Blj^th's meagre description" ; but this 

 meagre description is almost as much as could be written about so dull- 

 plumaged a bird, and, supplemented by that of Captain Tickell, is ample. 

 In fact, it applies exceedingly well, even to the measurements, to the speci- 

 men we have lately received, and of which I give some account and the 

 dimensions below. "When this identification was made, I remembered that 

 in the Museum we possessed two very similar mounted but unnamed birds 

 (No. 852a), the history of which had been lost ; on comparison they proved 

 identical with the Tenasserim form and are very probably the original 

 type specimens, the labels of which have been destroyed since Blyth 

 described them. 



Mr. Gates, in S. F. Vol. IV, p. 406, again calls attention to the two 

 birds, and in continuation of his original identification of Pellorneum 

 Tichelli, gives some account of the specimens in his possession, but he is 

 perfectly wrong and unjust in his strictures when he takes Lord Tweeddale 

 to task for making P. Ticlcelli equal to P. subocliraceum, for if he will 

 turn again to J. A. S. B. 1875, p. 114, he will find that it was Mr. Blyth 

 who made this identification. 



Lord Tweeddale had never seen a specimen of P. Ticlcelli but naturally 

 thought that Blyth knew his own species. Therefore, assuming Mr. Blyth 

 was right, and as P. minor (rectius minus) and P. sulochraceum were known 



