BLUE KINGFISHER. 
blue which extends from the cheeks to the sides of the breast and thence 
down the flanks.” Sharpe’s idea of a subspecies was apparently not the 
modern one, as under A. 'pulchra he includes Cape York birds and under the 
species azurea he also records Cape York specimens collected at the same time 
by the same collector. 
Hartert, in the Nov. Zool (Vol. VI., p. 427, 1899), catalogued birds from 
Cape York as Alcyone azurea pulchra, writing : “ The collection contains a 
very flne series of this Kingflsher. I agree with Dr. Sharpe, who, in 
Cat. B. Brit. Mus., v. 17, p. 169, calls it a subspecies of A. azurea, but the 
characters and the distribution of the two forms as given in the Cat. B. are 
not very clear. The deeper and brighter cinnamon or bay colour of the 
under-surface is not a character to distinguish this form with any certainty, 
for a number of those before me (either younger birds or individuals in 
older, more faded plumage) are paler than any A. azurea azurea I ever saw. 
The richer and more purplish-blue colour of the upper-side is generally apparent 
enough, but sometimes difficult to see. Another character, however, is not 
mentioned by Sharpe, viz. the smaller size, especially the shorter bill of 
pulchra. The bill in A. a. azurea is about 46-49 mm. (exposed part of culmen 
measured), the wing 75-79. In a. pulchra these measurements are : exposed 
culmen, 42-44 ; wing, 72-74 mm. The flanks are more suffused with lilac 
in .4. a. pulchra, and the blue-purplish extends sometimes along the flanks, 
but not always. If A. a. pulchra is the northern representative of A. azurea 
azurea, then Sharpe’s specimens, x, y, z, a' and V in the list of specimens 
of azurea, must belong to pulchra, and I think they do so undoubtedly.” 
Two years later, in the same periodical (Vol. VIII., p. 142), Rothschild and 
Hartert discussed Papuan Kingflshers and gave notes on the subspecies 
recognised. At that time these workers had a fair amount of material but from 
widely separated localities, no long series being secured. Consequently 
they were unable to determine the ranges of the subspecies with any exacti- 
tude, and therefore accepted the four forms recognised by Sharpe as four 
subspecies thus — 
Alcyone azurea azurea (Latham). Southern Australia. 
Alcyone azurea pulchra Gould. Northern Australia. \ 
Alcyone azurea lessoni Cassin. New Guinea. 
It was obvious that more than one subspecies would be recognisable in such 
an extent of country as New Guinea, but it was impossible with the many 
odd specimens to define such. 
Alcyone azurea affinis Gray. Batchian, Halmahera, etc. 
Almost simultaneously a collection was received by the Tring Museum 
from the Tenimber Group, and a form was distinguished by Rothschild in the 
91 
