1 
THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
restricted to the two Australian species. As Dacelo was formed by anagram 
from AlcedOf early ornithologists, on grounds of purism, provided substitutes, 
Gloger proposing Paralcyon in 1827, and improving (?) in 1842 by introducing 
Nycticeyx. Billberg suggested Agreutes. Lesson proposed Choucalcyon for 
the same group, as he had misunderstood Dacelo and used it for another group. 
This was remarked by his contemporaries and most recent writers, but Miller 
has recently revived Choucalcyon to replace Sauromarptis for gaudichaudi, 
citing Gray’s type designation of that species in 1855. However, Lesson, 
in 1837, definitely stated that the type of Choucalcyon was australe, which is 
Dacelo gigas, so that Choucalcyon must remain a synonym of Dacelo. This 
would leave Sauromarptis as the name for the gaudichaudi group, but a 
complication is present in the case of Monachalcyon. This name was proposed 
for two species, M. gaudichaudi ex Q. and G. and M. princeps. At its 
introduction Reichenbach wrote : “Von Lesson falschlich mit Dacelo gigantea 
zu einer Gattung vereint und beide mit einem franzosischen Namen-nur fiir 
franzosische Bucher passend — Choucalcyon gennant.” This applies only to 
gaudichaudi and suggests this as the basis of the genus. This view was accepted 
by Bonaparte, who in 1854 utilised “ Choucalcyon Bp. ex Less. {Monach- 
alcyon Reich.) ” for gaudichaudi Q. and G. alone, and classed “ monachus 
Forsten (== princeps Forsten) ” in '‘‘‘Paralcyon Bp. ex Gloger.” The latter 
was a direct misusage of Gloger’s term. Gray, in 1855, accepted Bonaparte’s 
determination of Monachalcyon. Cabanis and Heine, in 1860, recognised 
Bonaparte’s misusage of Choucalcyon and replaced it by Sauromarptis nov., 
stating that Monachalcyon had been wrongly synonymised, and that it was 
based on princeps Reichenb. = monachus. This view has been accepted, 
but it seems incorrect. I would prefer Monachalcyon for the Sauromarptis 
group. It may be argued that by indirect tautonymy the type would be 
monaxhuSy but if “ indirect tautonymy ” were once admitted complications 
without end would arise, as instance Cyanalcyon has been typified by 
pyrrhopygia, and also used for macleayi, but as a synonym of the sancta 
group is cyanea Forster, and another name is in use for that series, and 
many cases could be cited. Using Monachalcyon for monachus, Miller wrote : 
“ Monachalcyon fulgidus recognised by Sharpe in his Monograph as a distinct 
genus, Caridonax, I have not seen. It is apparently much like Monachalcyon 
in form, but strikingly different in coloration, and closer examination may 
discover characters of generic value.” Caridonax is easily separable by colour 
alone, while structural differences can be easily seen. It seems to have 
no direct phylogenetic affinity with Monachalcyon monachus. While this 
seems to be the correct specific name, as of Bonaparte 1850, the second 
species admitted in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum 
116 
