LAZULENA. 
must also be recognised as the type of the substitute name Alcyon Lesson, 
which moreover is anticipated by Swainson’s Halcyon^ which is the correct 
spelhng. 
Of his genus Lesson recognised eight subgenera, Ceyx^ Alcedo, Syma, 
Tanysiptera, JDacelo, Choucalcyon, Melidora and Todiramphus. Of these 
only Ckoucalcyon was new and this was proposed for C. gaudichaldi ex Q. & G. 
and Choucalcyon australe=^ Dacelo gigas N.S.W. This was through a mis- 
interpretation of Dacelo Leach and in 1837 Lesson himself {Compl. de Bujfon, 
Vol. IX., Oiseaux, p. 355) declared that Dacelo gigas was the type of Chou- 
calcyon. I have already dealt with this mider the genus name Dacelo. 
In 1848 began the era of subdivision in this group. Kaup then broke 
into the genus Ceryle which had been introduced for large pecuharly coloured 
Kingfishers by Boie in 1828. Kaup’s sphtting did not touch any of the species 
here dealt with so we need not develop his action. 
Bonaparte in 1850, however, separated as genera Haley on^ Todiramphus 
and Actenoides. The former was subdivided into four sections, Paralcyoiiy 
Halcyon, Cancrophaga and Calialcyon. The first name was untenable, having 
been proposed by Gloger in 1827 in a different sense. Bonaparte’s species 
of Halcyon did not contain Swainson’s type while his Cancrophaga did and 
the tautonymic type is probably founded on a phase of senegalensis. His 
Calialcyon was given to the species which formed the basis of Horsfield’s 
Entomothera of nearly thirty years before. Consequently none of these 
names are available. 
Under Todiramphus Bonaparte ranged the Australian species sancla 
Vigors and Horsfield, sordida Gould, pyrrhopygia Gould and macleayi Jard. 
Actenoides was taken from the plate pubfished in connection with the 
Voy. Pole Sud, but which was there accompanied with a vernacular name 
only. This name is vahd. 
The next year Reichenbach added several names, of which Monachalcyon 
and Chelicutia show interest. The former was proposed on p. iv. for 
gaudichaudii Q. & G. and princeps nov. I have discussed the compheation 
about the former under the genus name Dacelo previously but will again 
refer to it later. The type of Chelicutia is the species A. chelicuti and the 
la^tter spelhng must be revived as Sharpe’s emendation to chelicutenMs is 
inadmissible. The dates given in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British 
Museum, Vol. XVII., show printer’s and other errors and are somewhat 
confusing. Thus in the first fine 1834 should be 1814 and in the fifth 1823 
should be 1820. 
In 1854 Bonaparte added in the Consp. Vol. Aniso, p. 9, Cyanalcyon 
for the pyrrhopygia, etc., series, separating these from Todiramphus. The 
143 
