Content uploaded by Justin J.F.J. Jansen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Justin J.F.J. Jansen on Jul 28, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
The complicated early nomenclature of Yellow-
tufted Honeyeater Lichenostomus melanops, and the
watercolours examined by John Latham
by Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe
Received 9 April 2015
SLichenostomus melanops was described under
Thrush’ and ‘Turdus melanops’, the original binomial of Lichenostomus melanops.
We review the history of the watercolours copied by Latham, and the complicated
nomenclature of L. melanops L. melanops that Latham
inscribed ‘Turdus melanops
‘Watling’ set reviewed by Sharpe (1906). A specimen of L. melanops >200 years
original descriptions. Conditions simulating those under which Latham may have
green typical of L. melanops.
Lichenostomus melanops, one of two species in the genus
Lichenostomus
Turdus melanops
of L. melanops
Turdus melanops. Sharpe’s designation is doubly incorrect: not only did he use the wrong
set of watercolours to designate the ‘type’, but designation of a ‘type’ from a watercolour is
International code of zoological nomenclature (ICZN 1999), although
it was customary at the time.
L. melanops
specimen of L. melanops
To identify which illustrations Latham used for his four named species, we examined all
of the watercolours annotated and copied by Latham. We tried to understand why Latham
failed to recognise that all were of the same species, and we examined the coloration of the
watercolours. The Paris specimen could have been seen by Latham while describing the
species, and is discussed in this paper.
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe 29 Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
The dierent sets of watercolours
The Watling watercoloursL. melanops are
History Museum (NHMUK), London. Known as the Watling collection (henceforth
Watling), the paintings depict Australian birds (271 watercolours), mammals (16), reptiles
watercolours, but 25 watercolours (all birds) are lost (Hindwood 1970). The collection was
The Watling volume is one of several collections of natural history artwork produced
2001, Annemaat 2014). Other volumes, held in Sydney, Canberra and Wellington, were
L. melanops.
The Watling volume includes the work of at least three artists, but only Thomas
(Calaby 1999). The Watling watercolours are variously annotated by White, Watling and
others (Calaby 1999). L. melanops is depicted in four watercolours in Watling: nos. 121, 122,
133 and 156 in Latham’s ms list (Sharpe 1906, Hindwood 1970). Only one of these, no. 122,
is signed by Watling.
The Lambert watercolours.—In March 1797, White lent a substantial portion (c
artists) and bound into three volumes (henceforth Lambert). According to Calaby (1999),
watercolours, all unsigned, of birds (214), mammals (ten) and a view of Norfolk Island,
most were copies of those in Watling (Hindwood 1970). The Lambert volumes also include
22 watercolours of birds with no equivalent in Watling, which may be copies of the 25
watercolours now missing from Watling.
where they remain (C. Fisher in li. 2013). Three other volumes of watercolours depicting
acquired in 1929, comprises 100 watercolours of Australian birds dating to c.1790 and
L. melanops. Copies of
the four Watling watercolours depicting L. melanops are in the second volume of Lambert,
hereafter Lambert (2) nos. 10, 40, 60 and 65.
The Latham watercolours.—After Lambert had copies made of the original watercolours
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe 30 Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
Coach, which is at the Bell Savage, Ludgate Hill. I have according to my promise given a
Name to each Bird, altho’ I have been at much loss in respect to the genus of many of them
independent of many circumstances not possible to be ascertained by delineations, unless
aided by accurate descriptions, and which, had the Painter been at all versed in ornithology,
he could not have failed to have remarked in writing. I should therefore think it not unlikely
Lichenostomus
melanops, Library, Natural History Museum, London,
UK (© NHMUK, London). The ‘Watling’ watercolour
used by ‘Lambert’.
Lichenostomus
melanops, Mitchell Library, State Library of New
South Wales, Sydney (© Mitchell Library). The
(2) no. 64, presumably).
Lichenostomus
melanops, Library, Natural History Museum, London,
‘Latham’ watercolour.
12
3
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe 31 Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
that in case the specimens themselves should hereafter come before You and Me, we might
alter our previous opinion. I do not suppose that any other Notes in writing can be got at
besides those already in My possession, but if so, I should advise you to take advantage of
lower margins of the pages (Mathews 1931, contra Hindwood 1970). As Lambert had
from other sources in addition to those in Lambert) are now housed at NHMUK and
depicted in the Watling watercolours (see below), he apparently never listed his own
include two of L. melanops
Latham evidently did not examine the original watercolours in Watling prior to
publication of his second Supplement. On 12 October 1799, Latham wrote to Thomas
Pennant: ‘Mr. White, The Surgeon, brought over very many drawings as well as new Birds,
but I am sorry to say that altho’ I sent out to Him every instruction I could, as also a copy
However, I think it may not be useless to inform you that I have since seen Copies of all
Lichenostomus melanops,
coloration of upperparts.
Lichenostomus melanops,
using small halogen lamps positioned either side of
54
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe 32 Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
Although information included in Latham’s second Supplement was taken from
notes inscribed on Watling’s watercolours, as Latham had not seen the original Watling
watercolours before then, it appears that Lambert had at least some of the notes transcribed
while ‘I do not suppose any other Notes in writing can be got at besides those already in
my possession’ shows Latham copied the notes for his own use. Some of this information
(known only from these watercolours according to Hindwood 1970) was not used by
Latham until he published his General history of birds
assertion to Pennant that he had seen copies of all of White’s drawings, he failed to describe
some taxa in the second Supplement, illustrations of which are missing from Lambert but
present in Watling.
however, is proven by a list in his handwriting, identifying the birds in Watling, included
with the Watling volume when sold to the NHMUK. The sequence of this list and the
watercolours in Watling correspond to that in Latham’s second Supplement, indicating that
noted the page numbers on which the birds are described in the second Supplement, with
the watercolours in Watling being annotated by Latham with the names and same page
numbers from the second Supplement.
Sharpe (1906) and Hindwood (1970) as Crescent Honeyeater Phylidonyris pyrrhopterus, no.
Meliphaga lewinii
(1906) and Hindwood (1970) as Fuscous Honeyeater Ptilotula fusca
Honeyeater Caligavis chrysops, respectively.
The depictions of Yellow-tufted Honeyeater
Latham’s ‘Bearded Thrush’ L.
melanops, Lambert (2), no. 10, copied from Watling no. 156, Latham inscribed: ‘Muscic.
p[age] 239’).
In the appendix to White’s Journal of a voyage to New South Wales (1790), George Shaw,
curator of the Leverian Museum, described and gave the Latin binomial ‘Motacilla australis’
Eopsaltria australis.
L. melanops depicted in Lambert (2) no. 10 with the
E. australis Muscicapa. Latham later
itself, as the ‘Bearded Thrush.’ He did not include a description of ‘Bearded Thrush’ in
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe 33 Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
binomial.
Latham’s ‘Yellow-tufted Flycatcher’.—On the second of the Lambert watercolours
depicting L. melanops, Lambert (2), no. 40, copied from Watling no. 122, Lambert inscribed:
In his Index ornithologicus
with the ‘Yellow Eared Fly Catcher’ depicted in Pl. 10 in White (1790), and Latham also
Lichenostomus chrysops
Sylvia chrysops
White 1790 depicts L. chrysops), ICZN suppressed the name novaehollandiae (Hemming 1956,
Paynter 1967).
of Watling no. 122 there is a note, the edges of which were lost when the drawing was
the watercolour, reads:
very lively Bird, and by us called the yellow eared Flycatcher. The Tongue is feathered at
the tip for Sucking Honey, which it is very fond of. It builds its Nest on the pensile branch
Guana, and Birds and Mice. The yellow at the Ears are Tufts of Feathers longer than those
on the other part of the Head.’
‘This is considerably larger than the Hedge Sparrow: bill and legs black: tongue bristly
at the tip: the general colour of the plumage on the upperparts is olive green: the crown, and
at the back part of which, on the ears, a tuft of yellow, which tuft consists of feathers longer
than the others: the outer tail feathers yellow.’
nest on the extreme pendant branches of low trees or shrubs, and by this means escapes
the plunder of various smaller quadrupeds, who are unable to reach the nest with safety.
Whether this is allied to the last, I will not take upon me to ascertain.’
Latham’s ‘Mustachoe Flycatcher’.—On the third Lambert watercolour depicting
L. melanops, Lambert (2), no. 60, copied from Watling no. 133, Latham inscribed ‘Sylvia
mystacea’. Unlike the previous two depictions, Latham did not associate this bird with
one depicted in White (1790). Instead, Latham described it as a new taxon, ‘Mustachoe
li). Between examining the Lambert watercolour and publication of the Supplementum,
SylviaMuscicapa). Latham
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe 34 Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
subsequently inscribed ‘Mustachoe Flycatcher’ on the original Watling watercolour, no.
133. Latham’s description reads:
band, which grows broader, and passes under the eye to the hind neck, where it is fringed
the smaller Parakeets.’
Latham’s ‘Black-eyed Thrush’.—The fourth Lambert watercolour depicting L. melanops
(Figs. 1–2), Lambert (2), no. 65, copied from Watling no. 121, was annotated ‘Turdus
melanops’ by Latham. Again, he considered this to be a new taxon, which Latham named
Turdus melanops
dusky: nape, wings, and tail rusty brown, the two last margined with yellow: from the gape
springs a black streak growing broader, surrounding the eye, and descending on each side
New South Wales.’
Latham added two annotations in pencil above the illustration on Watling no. 121:
2, p. [number cropped]’ and transcribed the note quoted above.
Vieillot’s ‘L’héorotaire a oreilles jaunes’
L. melanops depuis peu) reached
fortuitously found the specimen of L. melanops, mounted with its skull in situ, described by
sic
dating from c
Ptilotis, Lichenostomus, was erected
c
that the data were taken from a subsequently discarded old label. But even that label would
with original labels: no Cook, Baudin, Bullock, Temminck, Lichtenstein, Bonelli or Leverian
Museum birds examined by him bear such. The precise origin, collector and date of
Glossopsia pusilla
Strepera graculina, also mentioned by Levaillant
Tachyglossus aculeatus (de Beaufort 1966). The G.
pusilla
these specimens, like those of other Australian taxa (including Superb Lyrebird Menura
novaehollandiaeCinclosoma punctatum and Platypus Ornithorhynchus
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe 35 Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
anatinus
Discussion
Although the four watercolours in the second volume of Lambert, nos. 10, 40, 60 and 65,
all depict L. melanops
Muscicapa, Sylvia and Turdus
in Muscicapa and Turdus
four Watling watercolours of L. melanops
‘Bearded Thrush’, and used the note on the reverse of Watling no. 122 in his description
Turdus melanops, Muscicapa auricomis and Muscicapa mystacea, with melanops
the Lambert series.
L. melanops
Watling no. 133, the artist extended the black facial mask into a long, broad stripe tipped by
an upswept yellow ‘moustache’, while in Lambert (2), no, 40, copied from Watling no. 122,
a spot of yellow at the tip.
L.
melanops.
above, Latham had a copy made of Lambert (2) no. 65 for his own collection. Comparison
in Latham’s copy, the upperparts are brown and underparts greenish yellow. In Watling
no. 121 and Lambert (2) no. 65, the crown is greenish yellow and the chin bright yellow,
but in Latham’s copy, the crown and chin are the same greenish yellow as the rest of the
underparts. This indicates that, instead of Lambert (2) no. 65, Latham used his own copy of
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe 36 Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
plumage of L. melanops under natural light.
the specimen against a green backdrop, using small halogen lamps sited either side of the
green to beige and the specimen’s upperparts from greenish grey to rusty brown (Fig. 5).
Thrush’ in having the nape, wings and tail rusty brown, crown and underparts yellow,
rectrices fringed yellow, and bill and legs brownish.
description (and halogen lighting >50 years later still), the remarkable congruence in the
initially examined Banks’ specimen of L. melanops under conditions in some way similar
or other tests conducted. Irrespective of the above, the two sets of photographs provide
Latham made extensive use of Banks’ collection in describing new species and obtained
included many descriptions of birds in Banks’ collection in his General synopsis
121 and Lambert and Latham’s copies, only the pale ventral side of the tail is visible. That
Watling no. 121, the original watercolour, shows only the undertail, proves this was not a
simple copying error in the copies examined by Latham. That Latham described the dorsal
coloration suggests he had another reference to hand.
specimen to the birds depicted in Watling no. 121 and Lambert (2) no. 65 (head uptilted,
bill open and tongue exposed) indicate it was posed to resemble these watercolours when
1795 and c Supplement
Supplement was published,
Conclusion
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe 37 Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
melanops’. However, according to ICZN (1999) an illustration cannot be designated as
the type specimen (Art. 72.5.6), only the specimen on which the description was based.
Therefore, the Latham watercolour has no type status.
L. melanops is
highly circumstantial. Although there is no doubt that Latham examined the Lambert
however, given that it came from Banks and is similar to the watercolours, it is quite
brown plumage for ‘Turdus melanops’, they do not prove that lighting was responsible
for the errors in his description. Further testing under various light conditions might be
early taxonomic history of the species.
Acknowledgements
by the Working Group on Avian Nomenclature of the International Ornithologists’ Union.
References:
Annemaat, L. 2014. Natural curiosity: unseen art of the rst eet. New South Publishing, Sydney.
de Beaufort, F. 1966. Catalogue des types de mammifères du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, vols. 6–7.
Hist. Rec. Austral.
Sci. 12: 313–329.
Bull.
Zool. Nomencl. 13: 173–190.
Hindwood, K. A. 1964. George Raper: an artist of the First Fleet. J. Royal Aust. Hist. Soc. 50: 32–57.
Hindwood, K. A. 1970. The ‘Watling’ drawings, with incidental notes on the ‘Lambert’ and the ‘Latham’
drawings. J. Proc. Roy. Soc. N.S.W
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). 1999. International code of zoological
nomenclature. Fourth edn. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London.
J. Natl. Mus. (Prague), Nat. Hist. Ser
Porzana
sandwichensis, with some comments on their type status. Bull. Br. Orn. Cl. 133: 59–67.
Zool. Library, London.
Index ornithologicus
Supplement II to the General synopsis of birds
Supplementum indicis ornithologici, sive Systematis ornithologiae
London.
General history of birds
A general history of birds
Library, London.
Histoire naturelle des perroquets
Histoire naturelle des oiseaux de paradis et des rolliers, suivie de celle des toucans et des barbus,
Mathews, G. M. 1923. The birds of Australia
Ibis 73: 466–475.
Notornis 23: 44–60.
Pacic Sci. 35: 105–175.
Justin J. F. J. Jansen & Richard S. Roe Bull. B.O.C. 2016 136(1)
© 2016 The Authors; Journal compilation © 2016 British Ornithologists’ Club
biography of the messenger of the echidna and the waratah. Archiv. Nat. Hist. 25: 149–211.
Neville, R. 2012. Mr J W Lewin. Painter & naturalist. New South Publishing, Sydney.
Olsen, P. 2001. Feather and brush: three centuries of Australian bird art
Paynter, R. A. 1967. Check-list of birds of the world, vol. 12. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA.
Sharpe, R. B. 1906. The history of the collections contained in the natural history departments of the British Museum.
Birds. Trustees of the Brit. Mus., London.
Oiseaux dorés ou à reets métalliques
Journal of a voyage to New South Wales. Oxford City Press, Oxford.
Addresses