Genus — T I M I X 0 S . 
Timixos, Blyth, Journ. As. Soc. Bengal, Vol. XI., 
p. 194, (after Feb. 26) 1842. Type (by 
monotypy): T. meruloides = Pachycephala olivacea Vigors & Horsfield. 
This generic name was proposed by Blyth for this species, which he did not 
recognise as a Pachycephala ” because the specimen was not localised. This 
should indicate that it is aberrant, but its features are more obvious than easily 
defined. Thus the plumage is much more lax, so that the species can be dis- 
criminated by touch, the birds are bigger, the bills are correspondingly smaller, 
and the coloration is aboriginal. It agrees fairly well with some females of the 
true Pachycephala and would appear to be the second stage in the evolution 
of their coloration. That such a state should be regarded as of generic value 
is confirmed by existence of such a form as Pachycephala gamblei Rothschild, 
which later Rothschild and Hartert ranked as a subspecies of P. rujinucha 
Sclater. Of this Ogilvie-Grant wrote : “ This is an aberrant species, with 
short, soft wings and tail, and I feel doubtful whether it should be retained 
in the genus Pachycephala ” — immediately after describing the nestling plu m age 
of deep chestnut characteristic of true Pachycephala, and remarking: “This 
remarkable chestnut plumage in the young bird is also found in P. sclilegeli 
obscurior, and is perhaps a characteristic of the genus.” 
I find that P. gamblei is a small bird, with very rounded wings, short 
tail, and very large bill, and in coloration has a red crown, yellow throat 
and white under-surface and superficially very unlike true Pachycephala , from 
which it has undoubtedly evolved. 
260 
