We have before stated our conviction that the Merulidee and the Laniad.ee are
the two typical groups of the Dentirostres. To shew that there is good ground
for this belief, we shall now state the general analogies between the leading groups of these families.
Fam. LANIAD-®. ‘ Fam. MERULIDjE.
Laniaiue . . Bill gradually arched ; wings pointed......................... .Merulinae.
ThamnopholinceBill straight, abruptly hooked ; wings rounded. . . .Myotherinee.
Edolianee . . Feet short; hind toe lengthened..................................Brachypodinee.
Ceblepyrinee. .Rictus smooth ; rump feathers thick, spinous, or rigid. Oriolinee.
Tyrannies: . .Tail broad ; rictus bristled : insectivorous. . . . . . Crateropadinm.
The last analogy is so obscure, that we for some time questioned the accuracy
of the whole arrangement. Subsequently, however, we invariably observed, upon
trying to discover the analogies between typical circles, that at such points as are
most remote, the resemblances are also most remote. A moment’s reflection will
shew that this cannot be otherwise. The Tyranninee, for instance, and the Crate-
ropodincB stand at the utmost limits of their own circles; and, necessarily partaking
of many of those characters which belong to groups beyond those circles,
it is only surprising that nature preserves any resemblance between them. The
analogy which the Orioles bear to the Caterpillar-catchers is not only strong, but
particularly beautiful. In both groups the structure of the wing is the same ; so
also are the feathers on the rump ; but those of Oriolus, and of Irena, Horsf.,
from being less strong, offer little or no resistance. These, in fact, are the only
groups in their respective circles where the rictus is broad, wide, and smooth ; the
one living chiefly upon soft caterpillars, the other upon soft fruits. To dwell upon
the resemblance of the Short-legged Thrushes to the Edolianee is needless, since
they are united by absolute affinity; while the general analogies between the Bush
Shrikes and Ant-Thrushes have already engaged our attention, and will presently
be viewed more in detail. It only remains, therefore, to establish the analogy
between the true Shrikes and the Merulina or typical Thrushes,—these groups
standing opposite to each other in the foregoing table. As it is highly important
to our present views that this relation should be established beyond all doubt, and
by the unbiassed testimony of others, totally unconscious of the use that would
subsequently be made of their observations, we have brought together the most
striking peculiarities of two birds, which may be considered the types of their
respective families ; namely, the Lanins Carolinemis of authors, and the common
Mock-bird of North America. The words in Italics alone denote their respective
differences.
LaNIUS CaROLINENSIS, Wilson.
Bill arched from the base, short; rictus
bearded.
Colour above grey, beneath white; ears
black; wings obliquely rounded, black,—the
quills with a white band at their base; tail
black, graduated, tipped with white.
“ Makes its nest in a detached bush, in the
manner of the Mocking-bird.” Wilson, iii.,
p. 57.
<c Feeds on crickets and grasshoppers.”
p. 57.
The Cinereous and Red-backed Shrikes
imitate the notes of other birds. Lath., Gen.
Hist, ii„ p. 12.
Shrikes and rapacious birds are well known
to disgorge the undigested part of their food
in round pellets.
In Georgia, according to Mr. Abbot, the
Carolina Shrike is known by the name of Bigheaded
Mocking-bird. Lath., Gen. Hist, ii.f
A m e r ica n M o ck in g -b ir d .
Bill arched from the base, long; rictus
bearded.
Colour above grey, beneath white; wings
obliquely rounded: wings and tail of the same
structure and colour as those of Lanius Caro-
linensis.
te Feeds on winged insects, fruits, and
grasshoppers.” Wilson.
Imitates the notes of other birds.
Mr. Bar tram writes, " I haye observed that
the Mocking-bird ejects from his stomach,
through his mouth, the hard kernels of berries,
&c., retaining the pulpy part.” Wilson,
ii„ p. 25.
p. 7.
It seems impossible to conceive in what way this most extraordinary analogy
can be rendered more complete. Here are typical examples of two groups
birds of the same size—clothed in nearly the same coloured plumage, seeking the
same kind of nourishment, agreeing in the structure of their wings and tail,
(almost in their feet,) building the same kind of nest, imitating the notes of other
birds, ejecting their unserviceable food in the same manner, and, finally, called
almost by the same name,—and yet totally distinct in real affinity ! Well may
we exclaim, “ Wonderful are thy works, O Lord ! for they are full of wisdom.
If such astonishing relations become apparent on gaining the first imperfect
glimpse of His system, how inconceivably sublime must be the whole, could the
human mind ever attain unto such knowledge !