Mr. H. Seebolim on the Ornithology of Siberia. 351 
Pallas, apud Temminck (Man. d’Orn. iv. p. 620), is identified 
with M. lugubris (Man. d^Orn. iii. p. 175), which undoubtedly 
includes the Japanese bird. Our bird therefore stands as 
M. lugens, probably of Pallas apud Kittlitz, partly of Pallas 
apud Temminck, certainly of Temminck and Schlegel. Since 
it only involves a change of authority and not of name, this 
seems to me to be a case in which we may safely avail our¬ 
selves of the strict letter of the rules of nomenclature, and 
call our bird Motacilla lugens, Temm. et Schl., on the ground 
that this name was clearly defined for the first time in the 
^ Fauna Japonica,^—rejecting also Swinhoe^s name of M. 
japonica, as having been subsequently given, under the erro¬ 
neous impression that the name M. lugens had already been 
applied to the very different western species^'’ [vide P. Z. S. 
1870, p. 130). 
It is somewhat remarkable that such an eventful day^s rat¬ 
hunting should end without a kill, that of the three rats 
started {M. lugubris^ Pall., M. lugens, Pall., and M. lugens, 
Illig.) every one should be run to earth, and that there is the 
strongest probability that all the three rats are phantom 
rats, myths. It is still more remarkable that the references 
to these names should be quoted with so many blunders; but 
perhaps the most remarkable circumstance of all is, that Pro¬ 
fessor Newton, in the note already twice referred to, should 
have made another complication by starting a fourth 
phantom rat, M. lugens, Illig. apud Schlegel*. 
Motacilla flava, Linn. 
I shot a solitary example of the Blue-headed Wagtail with 
the white eye-stripe on the 11th June, on the Arctic circle. 
This bird had probably accidentally migrated with the large 
flocks of M. viridis beyond his usual latitude. 
* Since the above was written, Professor Newton has pointed out to 
me that in all probability it was Bonaparte who first ascribed the name 
lugens ” to Illiger in 1850, the correctness of which statement Midden- 
dorfi* no doubt took for granted in 1851. Professor Newton desires to 
correct his footnote (Newton’s ‘ Yarrell,’ i. p. 541) as follows:—“ .... 
and the Japanese form therein appeared as ^ M. lugens^ a name ascribed by 
several writers, and amongst them Bonaparte (Consp. Av. i. p. 250), to 
Illiger; but whether . . . 
