Family— SPHE CO THE RIDML 
In the Austral Avian Record, Vol. III., Ho. 6, p. 139, June 25, 1918, I discussed 
T urdus maxillaris Latham, and then continued : 44 Other items may be here 
noted. First, the systematic position of the genus : in my “ List,” following 
the traditional location, it was included in the Family Oriolidce, but this does not 
seem to be at all correct. Superficially, a separation seemed necessary, and I 
had been looking for a suitable alternative when I came across the following 
account by Pycraft in the Proc . Zool. Soc. (. Loud .), 1907, p. 376 : 4 1 have been 
much puzzled as to the systematic position of the genus Sphecotheres. Generally 
regarded as one of the Oriolidce, it seems to me much more nearly allied to the 
Campophagidce, and should, indeed, be included in this Family. The skull bears 
a general resemblance to that of Graucalus. It is certainly not an Oriole, at any 
rate, if the skulls in the Museum Collection are rightly labelled, and there seems 
to be no reason to doubt this. The fact that Sphecotheres has not developed the 
peculiar shiny rump feathers so characteristic of the Campophagidce may be 
urged, by some, as an objection to the introduction of this genus to the Family 
Campophagidce. This, however, does not seem a very weighty objection, for the 
feathers in question vary in the degree of their spininess very considerably, in 
some genera it is hardly noticeable.’ On p. 96, Supplement, Vol. XII., of the 
Emu, 1913, a footnote reads : 4 * 714-715, Mr. Milligan claims that, as a result of 
field and cabinet observation, this genus should be included in the Campophagidce . ’ 
I have seen no further explanation given by Milligan, but if his observations 
were made, ignorant of Pycraft’s conclusions, the transference of the genus to 
the neighbourhood of the Campophagidce is certain. I will therefore accept 
this location as the best at the present time.” 
158 
