EESUME OF THE HISTOEY. 
Scansores. 
xix 
Name. 
Humerus. 
Ulna. 
Tibia. 
Tarsus. 
Bamphastos erythrorhynchus 
22 
•65 
34 
1 
34 
1 
20 
*59 
Pteroglossus Bailloni 
14 
•74 
19 
1 
22 
1-16 
13 
•68 
Hegalsema corvina 
14 
*77 
18 
1 
22 
1-22 
12 
*66 
Psilopogon pyrolophus 
12 
•75 
16 
1 
21 
1-31 
11 
•61 
Trachyphonus purpuratus 
12 
•96 
12-5 
1 
18 
1-44 
11 
•88 
f Centropus phasianus 
26 
1-18 
22 
1 
34 
1-55 
22 
1-00 
Piaya circe 
13 
1-04 
12-5 
1 
22-5 
1-80 
15 
1*20 
Cuculus cinereus 
14-5 
1-03 
14 
1 
15-5 
1-10 
9 
•64 
Turacus gigas 
30 
1-11 
27 
1 
45 
1-66 
21 
•77 
Picidce. 
Name. 
Humerus. 
Ulna. 
Tibia. 
Tarsus. 
Gecinus viridis 
1|6 
•80 
20 
1 
17 
•85 
12 
■60 
„ dmudiatus 
14 
•87 
16 
1 
18 
1-12 
10 
•62 
Hemiloplius validus 
15 
•88 
17 
1 
17 
1-00 
12 
■70 
Campethera brachyrhynchus 
10 
•87 
11-5 
1 
12 
1-04 
6-5 
•56 
Chloronerpes aurulentus 
12 
•80 
15 
1 
13 
•87 
8 
Melanerpes formieivorus 
13 
•81 
16 
1 
14 
•87 
8 
•50 
Picus major 
12 
•75 
16 
1 
14 
•87 
8 
*50 
Picumnus Temmiuckii 
6 
•86 
7 
1 
8 
1-14 
6 
•86 
_ In addition to this, the scansores have the soles of the feet usually balled, while in the 
fissirostres they are flat; the bodies of the former are heavy and awkward, in the latter 
the bodies are light, and the plumage fluffy. These last distinctions, though undefinable 
and comparative only, are very sure guides to the field ornithologist, and, in addition to 
those previously enumerated, make clear boundaries to the groups. The dimensions are all 
taken from Eyton’s 4 Osteologia Avium.’ 
The foregoing remarks will serve to separate the Barbets ( Capitonidce ) from the Trogons 
(Trogonida?) and the Puff-birds (Bucconidce ) ; and we have now to consider the distinctive 
points which entitle them to rank as a family apart from the remaining subgroups with 
which they have been at one time or another included, and which all belong to the 
Scansorial group, and present more or less close analogies to them. 
1st. The RampliastidcB, or Toucans, are very closely allied to the Barbets; and the 
differences between them are the most difficult of all to define satisfactorily. I n the genus 
Bamphastos, to which the best-known Toucans belong, the immense development of the 
bill is a sufficient guide ; but in the genus Pteroglossus the bill sometimes approaches very 
closely both in form and size to that of Megaloema. The most conspicuous feature is perhaps 
the tail, which is comparatively much longer in the Bamphastidce than in the Capitonidce 
Also the general size and geographical distribution will assist in identifying them: the 
geographical range of the former is far more limited than that of the latter ; and where 
they occur together, the latter seldom exceed one-third of the size and weight of the former. 
