THE BIRDS OE AUSTRALIA. 
Gibson reported it from between Kalgoorlie and Eucla as “A few seen in 
the gum and wattle country at first only ; rare.” 
The early technical history of this ill-used species was carefully written 
up by me in the Austral Avian Record, Vol. III., pp. 25-30, Nov. 18th, 1915, 
accompanied by Plate n., a perfectly reproduced figure of Watling’s plate 
upon which the name Certhia atricapilla was based. Since that date it has 
become definitely recognised that the names given by Latham were not based 
on the “ Watling ” figures but on the equivalent Lambert ones. In the present 
case there can be no reasonable doubt that the paintings are of the identical 
bird as the description reproduced here shows. 
Latham described his “ Black-headecl Cr(eeper) ” thus: “ Length six 
inches ; bill dusky ; tongue bristly ; top of the head, and from the base of 
the upper mandible black, passing through the eye, and below it some way 
on each cheek ; hind-part of the neck, back, wings, and tail pale green, but the 
wings and tail are brown, with pale edges ; chin, sides of the neck, and fore¬ 
part of it, as well as the under-parts of the body, duskv-vdbte ; legs pale brown. 
Inhabits New South Wales.” 
This description is so perfect, except in the colour-shade of the head, 
that with the reproduction in front no one can hesitate to accept this 
figure as a most excellent painting of the present species. 
Yet because this species w r as not recognised by Gould as a distinct species, 
but simply as the immature of the White-naped Honey-eater, when the Lambert 
drawings were examined by G. R. Gray, he wwote 
“ Certhia atricapilla Lath. Melithreptes atricapiUus 
= Certhia lunulata Shaw, etc. Vieill.” 
In this particular instance Gould ignored the identification, but without 
disputing it or giving any reason for his omission, so that it may have been 
an oversight only. 
In his “Handbook” Gould admitted that he had previously confused this 
species and only grudgingly accepted the fact that it was quite distinct. He 
then observed that it had a name, as Vigors and Hors field had described 
it as Meliphaga brevirostris, and if the species were distinct that would be the 
name. It may be again pointed out that Vigors and Horsfield quoted Caley's 
note that it was a common bird. 
Immediately, Australian ornithologists recognised the distinctions and 
the species became well-known under the name Melithreptus brevirostris. In 
The Catalogue of the Birds of the British Museum this name was used by Gadow, 
as it was the easiest tiling to do. Though the identification of Latham’s Certhia 
atricapilla w r as recorded, Gould took no notice of it, never even mentioning 
it in any connection. This oversight w r as exposed by North twenty years 
280 
