TYIN EE WY) a
ANTHUS CERVINUS.
Red-throated Pipit.

Motacilla cervina, Pall. Zoog. Ross.-Asiat., tom

Ses Ie pe ele
Alauda Ceecili, Aud. Hist. de ’ Egypte, Ois. tab. v. fig 6

Anthus ryfogularis, Brehm, Lebrb., vol. ii. p. 963.—Id. Vig. Deutschl.. », 39
“7s S ’ Be a : a Ss: “UtSsCchl., p. 320.

———- Cecil, Blyth, Cat. of Birds in Mus. Asiat. Soc. Calcutta, p. 324 I

—_— cervinus, Keys. et Blas. Wirb. Eur., p. 172.—Midd Sib. o

Reise, vol. ii. p. 166 sy
Consp. Gen. Av., tom. i. p. 248, 4 p. 165, pl. xiv. fi

oS. 1-3.—Bonap.
S 1863 nthus, sp. 4.—Cab. Mus. Hein., Theil ee
Soc. ; OVS OO 4 a fp - ;
i 5 ae i 3, 334.—Id. Ibis, 1863, p. 311.—Sperl. Ibis, 1864. p. 279. ‘Trist. Proc. of gaaiee
33.— i a/R ‘ : at : ay : Oc. J D0CGe
» p. 435.—Id. Ibis, 1866, p. 290.—Bree, Hist. of Eur. Birds not obs. in Brit. Is] a
and fig. a rit. Isl., vol. ii. p. 155,

pratensis rufigularis, Schleg. Rev. Crit. des Ois. d’Eur., cee

1. p. 14.—Swinh. Proc. of Zool.

 

ConsIpERABLE oon exists hespecting the synonymy, the correct specific appellation, and the specific
net this pretty Pipit, some ornithologists believing it to be merely a variety of Anthus pratensis.

With regard to the synonymy, Professor Newton, in a letter to me, says, ‘The right name to be used for
this species s a point on which I cannot exactly satisfy myself. Brehi’s rufogularis appeared in his ‘ Lebr-
buch’ (vol. 11. p. 963) in 1824, while Pallas’s cervina was only published in 1831 (Zoogr. Ross.-Asiat., vol. i.
p- 911), though it had been in type since 1811. But I suspect the Authus Cecilii of Audouin to be the same
species; and if so, [ imagine that name will have unquestionable priority. I have not, however, been able
to refer to the letterpress of the ‘ Description de ’Egypte’ to see if the bird is therein properly described.”

Professor Newton, however, in his interesting account of his discovery of the breeding bird, published it
Dr. Bree’s ‘ History of the Birds of Europe not found in the British Isles’ (vol. ii. p. 155), uses Pall

1

dilas 8S
name of cervina ; and so also do Bonaparte, Dr. Blasius, Dr. Bree, Mr. G. R. Gray, and Dr. Cabanis ; while
Dr. Schlegel and others either regard the bird as identical with 4. pratensis, as a variety of that species, or
adopt Pastor Brehm’s name of rufogularis. With regard to its specific distinctness, I have no more doubt
than, from the paragraph hereafter quoted, will be found to exist in the mind of Professor Newton.

I cannot agree with Dr. Bree that it ‘ belongs to the Rock-Pipit branch of the family, its claws being much
curved,” and that “there has been much confusion about the bird in consequence of this fact being over-
looked ;” in point of fact, it is as slender in form, and as delicate in the structure of its legs and hind toe as
our own Titlark, and, moreover, bas the hinder claw of the same lengthened and slender form as in that bird.

With regard to the parts of the Old World inhabited by this species, the testimony of those who have ob-
served it in a state of nature gives Eastern Europe in winter, and Lapland, Finmark, Northern Russia, and
Siberia as the countries frequented by it in summer, in all of which it probably breeds. That it also frequents
the Crimea at the same season is certain, since the specimens from which my figures were taken were
obtained there at that period of the year. Dr. Jerdon considers the Indian bird of this form, to which
Mr. Hodgson assigned the specific term rosaceus, to be identical with A. cervinus ; but I have never seen an
individual of the latter from any part of India, and have no doubt that Mr. Hodgson was correct in charac-
terizing the Indian bird as distinct.

The recorded information respecting the history of this species ts but scanty, little having been mitten on the
subject except by Professor Newton ; I shall therefore take the liberty of extracting the greater part of his notes
from Dr. Bree’s work above quoted. . ee =

Dr. Bree, after remarking that the bird is found plentifully in Egypt, Nubia, ie and Barbary
during the winter, says, “I have been favoured with the following interesting account of its discovery in Kast
Finmark by Alfred Newton, Esq.” :-—* On the 22nd of June, | os
Mr. W. H. Simpson and I, in the course of a bird’s-nesting walk to the north-east of the town, to the distance
perhaps of a couple of English miles, came upon a bog, the Cee of wlan Le ie Diasec
had bitherto met with in Norway. We had crossed the meadows neat
trilling out their glad notes, al
| lainly told us that their eggs or

855, a few days after our arrival at Wadso,

our ornithological appetites than we
the houses, where Temminck’s Stint and the Shore-Lark were
itude of a pair of Golden Plovers }
autiously picking my way over the treacherous

d were traversing

a low ridge of barren moor, when the solic
young were near us... - A little while after, as I was ¢
neath my feet, and alight again close :
« on which [ was standing, to see the

b by, ina manner that I was sure could
‘ © ¥ S e e “ e A
ground, I saw a Pipit dart out from
itti -rass-grown hillocl
only be that of a sitting hen. Ibad but to step off the grass-g |
ss 2 ‘ Nye ‘yay
1 i ry herbage Je appearance
nest ensconced in a little nook, half covered by herbage. But the one aa
leed, but of a brown so warm thé

oe c f t in¢ €
Ww of a br own colour, : ; | oe
m in my mind with those ot the Lapland Bunting. However,
’
2 J

of the eggs took me by surprise 5
it I could only liken it
for they were unlike any I kne
to that of old mahogany-wood, and compare the

her almost as wellas if she had
there was the bird, running about so close to me

that, with my glass, I could see

| Sent

Ono. -

AR
yt

be