G-UXtAJR-JL S 9 G ray
CALORNIS GULARIS, Gray.
Purple-throated Glossy Starling'.
Calornis gularis, Gray, Proc. Zool.Soo.1861, pp. 431, 436—Id. Hand-list of Birds, ii. p. 27, no. 6385 ( 1 8 7 0 |g |
Walden, Trans. Zool. Soc: 80 (1872).—Sharpe, Ibis, 1876,p. 47.—Rosenb. Malay. Arch. p. 395
■ I (1879).—Forbes, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1SS4, p. 433.—Id. Nat. Wand. Bast. Arch. p. 365 (1885).
Calomis metallica, Selater, Proc; Zoól. Soc,. 1883, p. 51 (nec Temm.), ; "1
Calomis circumscripta, Meyer, Sitz. u. Abhandl, Gese'.lsch. Isis, 1884, Abth. i. p. 49.—Salvad. Proc. Zool. Soc.
1884, p. 579.
In the year 1861 the late Mr. G. H. Gray described a Glossy Starling, under the name of Calornis gularis,
which had been sent by Mr. A. R. Wallace from the island o f Mysol. The type specimen is still in the
British Museum and. has been variously- referred by ornithologists to Cahmis metaUica o r to a separate
and1 distinct species. In 1872 the late Marquis o f Tweeddale spoke of the species as “ apparently
nothing but C. metaUica -’’ but in a small review of the genus published by us in 1876 we ventured to differ
from Lord Tweeddale, and affirmed that C. gularis was a distinct species, recognizable by its small bill and
f g rp le throat. Count Salvadori, on the other hand, who examined the type specimen, which still remained
unique in the British Museum, did not hesitate to nnite it to C. metaUica; and when Mr. Forbes’s specimens
arrived from Timor Laut, D r. Selater identified them as belonging to the last-named species. Dr. Meyer,
however, having received some more specimens from Timor Laut, forwarded by Mr. Riedel, considered the
Calomis from this group of islands to be distinct from C, metaUica, and described'it-hs Cl'ar'cumscripta; and in
this view he has been upheld by Count Salvador!, who does not agree with Mr. Forbes in calling the bird
from Timor Laut Calornisgularis. Mr. Forbes has published his reasons for considering C. circumscripta of
Meyer to be synonymous with C. gularis o f Gray, and he submitted his series to our examination and fo r'
exact comparison with the type of C. gularis. So convinced were we o f the correctness o f his identification,
th at we agreed to figure the latter species from a pair o f Mr. Forbes’s Timor-Laut skins, and since
then Dr. Meyer has lent us some o f the typical examples o f his C. circumscripta. These, however, only
confirm the correctness o f Mr. Forbes’s identification ; and we are perfectly certain th at if Dr. Meyer and
Count Salvadori could re-examine the type of C. gularis, they would both be convinced of 'the absolute
identity of C. circumscripta. The type of C. gularis is labelled by Mr. Wallace, and the locality is in his own
handwriting, so that it is unlikely th at a mistake in the habitat o f the species lias beeu made ; bnt we agree
with Count Salvadori that it is curious that the same species should inhabit Mysol and Timor Laut, “ so far
apart one from the other, while true C. metallica lives in so many islands lying between them."
The figures in the Plate represent the male and female of about the natural size ; they have been drawn
from a pair of birds procured in Timor Laut by Mr. horbes.
1 [B. B. S.]