THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
undergrowth. Nov. 15th: Several female birds were observed, but, owing 
to the density of the vegetation, it was not ascertainable whether they were 
nesting. No males. I found another nest, placed much higher than the 
one containing eggs, but in growth less dense; height took the place of 
seclusion. This nest was the temporary habitation of two nesthngs, 
apparently eight or nine days old, and covered with a duU-greyish down. 
I noted that they sat in the nest with their heads pointing south, and as I had 
watched the parent-bird fly in several times from a southern peripheral point, 
I concluded that they were wont to look for their guardian in that direction. 
Previous to nidification, Regent-Birds are to be seen in pairs around Ourimbah, 
but once incubation has commenced the male seems to retreat, leaving that 
function entirely to the female. Neither does the male seem to participate in 
nurturing the young. His hrilhant plumage would, no doubt, betray the 
whereabouts of the female and her nesthngs, where the female’s plumage 
harmonizes with her surroundings, and that, together with her shy habits, 
enables her to move about obscurely.” 
Later, Gilbert added : “I remarked that probably the female alone built 
the nest. I have since confirmed that deduction by actual observation. At 
Ourimbah (12/11/11) I watched a female Regent-Bird commencing her nest, 
and observed that she returned with material every three minutes. I spent 
some considerable time Avatching her movements, and am conAdnced that she 
alone constructs the nest. On 26/11/11 the nest contained one fresh egg; 
the female glided off as I approached.” 
Captain S. A. Halite recorded from the Bimya Mountains, S. Queensland: 
“ Strange to say, although many of these birds were seen — in fact they were 
fairly numerous—^yet only one or tAvo firll-plumaged males were met AA'ith. 
It is quite possible, through the drjoiess of the season, they had not 
nested, therefore the males had not put on their nuptial dress. Dr. Cleland 
gives the followfing : ‘ Iris greenish-yellow, Avdth broAvn specks; bill rich 
broAvn, culmen paler broAAm ; legs dark greyish-hroAVTi ; gape and pharynx 
orange-yelloAV.’ (These notes evidently pertain to a bird out of plumage, 
for the Avriter did not see a fuU-plumaged bird taken).” 
Jackson has given the soft parts as “ Adult d ; bill yellowish wax-colour; 
eyes golden-yelloAA^; legs broAAmish-horn. Adult $ ; bill blackish-brown; 
eyes golden-yelloAV mottled with broAvn ; legs, feet and claws blackish-horn; 
skin at gape of mouth rich golden-yelloAA^.” 
The technical history of such a striking species should be very simple, 
and the only complication seems due to an inexphcable error. 
LcAvin figured and named this species MelipJia chrysocephala, and Quoy 
and Gaimard described it as iicaa'. Tavo other synonyms were added by mis- 
356 
