« 이전계속 »
nigricollis, nobis, XII, 960, and rodogaster, Hodg., ibid. (the young): found in Nepal and Assam, as well as in the vicinity of the Straits. Myiophonus, Tem. Two Indian species, both figured in Gould's ‘Century of Himalayan birds.” M. Temminckii is indeed common throughout the Himalaya, frequenting the beds of streams in the lower ranges; and its musical whistle (according to Mr. Vigne,) is the sweetest note heard in the hills: but M. Horsfieldi is confined exclusively to the mountainous parts of Southern India. Two other species occur in Java, M. cyaneus, (Horsfield), v. glaucinus, Tem. ; and M. flavirostris, (Horsfield), v. metallicus, Tem. A fifth would seem to exist in le Merle bleu de la Chine of Sonnerat, v. Gracula caerulea, Scop., and Turdus violaceus, Lath. Mr. Swainson also mentions M. nitidus, Gray; but this is probably one of the two Indian species already referred to. The great series of South American Myiotherinae seems to grade completely into the Thamnophilinae or Bush Shrikes of Swainson, inhabiting the same regions; but presents some forms which certainly approximate the Brachyuri of the Old World and Australia; and others again grade into the Wrens (Troglodytes), also chiefly an American group, but which comprises a few Old World species, among which are two from the Himalaya described in XIV, 589. I now add a very distinct form, by the name Rimator, nobis. The species upon which this division is founded is a very curious little Myiotherine bird, the immediate affinities of which are not obvious. Bill longer than the head, compressed, a little incurved, the curvature increasing to the tip where the extremity of the upper mandible passes and bends over that of the lower one, but without any well defined emargination ; culmen rounded for the terminal two-thirds or more, but becoming angulated towards the base; and the tomiae but little inflected: the nostrils pierced in an ovate basal membrane, their aperture being a little removed from the base of the bill: gape extending to beneath the fore-part of the eye, and unarmed, or having but a few short and inconspicuous hairs: legs moderately strong, suited for progression either upon the ground, or up the slanting bough of a tree; the tarse nearly as long as the middle toe with its claw, and having four long scutae to the front, and two shorter ones below : toes rather long, the outer a trifle more so than the inner, and reaching to the base of the claw of the mid-toe : claws not much curved, that of the
hind-toe large, being twice the size of the middle front-claw. Wings much bowed and rounded, the first primary reaching to but half the length of the fifth, which equals the two next, and a little exceeds the fourth and eighth. The tail short and weak, its feathers slender and flexible, with soft tips a little pointed. Plumage lax, being excessively so and very copious over the rump. R. malacoptilus, nobis. Length five inches, of which the tail measures one and a quarter, and the bill to forehead an inch; wing two inches and a quarter; tarse seven-eighths; and long hind-claw about three-eighths. Colour of the upper-parts deep brown, with pale shafts to the feathers, forming a central streak on those of the nape and back; scapularies and interscapularies black on the inner web, and brown on the outer; the mass of loose feathers on the rump brown, with light shafts more or less apparent; and the tail and large wingfeathers uniform deep brown with a slight ruddy tinge: under-parts pale brown, lightest on the middle of the breast and on the throat, and becoming whitish towards the chin; a black streak borders each side of the throat, which has also a few dusky specks; and the breastfeathers generally are margined, the lateral more broadly, with olive, which colour prevails and is tinged with ferruginous on the flanks; the lower tail-coverts being dark ferruginous. Bill dark horny, mingled with whitish; and legs light brown. From Darjeeling. Another very distinct genus of the great Myiotherine series appears to me to exist in Enicurus, Temminck. At least eight species may be enumerated, four pertaining to the Malayan fauna, and four to that of India.” 1. E. ruficapillus, Tem. : Turdus avensis (?), Gray, figured from a bad native drawing in Griffith's ‘Animal Kingdom,’ VI, 530. Inhabits Java. This fine species, while pre-eminently typical of its group, strongly exhibits in the form of its bill, and in the rufous colouring of its head and nape, the Myiotherine affinities of the genus, upon comparing it with such birds as the Formicarius cayennensis (Bodd.), v. Myiocincla colma, Swainson, &c. The bill is considerably longer and more slender than in the figure cited in Griffith's ‘Animal Kingdom,” with the upper mandible conspicuously hooked over at tip; much as in Cinclus, minus the hook and nareal orifices; and it is also the same form of bill which reappears in that very curious Malayan bird, the Eupetes macrocercus of Temminck. From the figure referred to, it differs in the white of the face being confined to a frontal crescent, each horn of which reaches to above the middle of the eye; in having narrow white tips to the tertiaries; and a forked tail of moderate length, with its two outer feathers on each side wholly white: the rufous of the nape should also spread a little lower down; the black of the fore-neck not so far; and beneath this, the pectoral feathers are each margined with black, as rudely represented in the figure of Turdus avensis. Length of wing three inches and a half; of outer tail-feathers three inches; bill to forehead above three-quarters; and of tarse an inch. It is a peculiarly interesting species, as indicating, more than either of the others, the affinities of its group. 2. E. diadematus, Tem. Of this species, from the mountainous interior of Sumatra, I have no description. It is probably identical with the only species I have yet seen from the Malayan peninsula, and which is remarkable for a triangular frontal crest of white feathers, evidently erectile, and those forming the apex being longer than the black coronal feathers they impend. Rest of the plumage black, with white lower abdomen, wing-band, rump, and two outermost tail-feathers on each side, the other tail-feathers white-tipped. Dimensions as in the preceding species: the young having the frontal crest much reduced. If distinct and new, E. frontalis, nobis. 3. E. speciosus, (Horsfield): E. coronatus, Tem. Inhabits Java. 4. E. velatus, Tem. Inhabits Java. 5. E. maculatus, Vigors; figured in Gould's ‘Century': E. fuliginosus, Hodgson, As. Res. XIX, 190 (the young). A specimen forwarded to the Society's Museum by Mr. Hodgson with the latter name, I consider to be decidedly the immature dress of the present species: differing from the adult in the flimsy texture of its clothing plumage, in having the dark portion of its upper-parts spotless fuliginous-brown, with indistinct pale mesial lines, passing into white on the belly: wings as in the adult; tail wanting in the specimen. E. maculatus appears to be a very common Himalayan species, and occurs rarely in Arracan.
* Motacilla maderaspatana (nec madaraspatensis) of Latham is probably a
o *pecies. It is remarkable that none has hitherto been observed in the south of Edia.
6. E. immaculatus, Hodgson, As. Res. XIX, 190. This resembles the next species, except in having the upper-parts deep black, where the other is slaty, and the tail seems to be constantly shorter; its outermost feathers not exceeding four inches and three-quarters in any that I have seen, whereas those of E. schistaceus measure commonly five inches and a half. A very rare species in Nepal; but common in Arracan.
7. E. schistaceus, Hodgson, As. Res XIX, 191. A common species in the eastern Himalaya, and found likewise in the Tenasserim provinces.”
8. E. Scouleri, Vigors; figured in Gould's ‘Century'. Himalaya; rarer to the westward. Remarkable for the shortness of its bill, and for having the tail scarcely furcate.
(To be continued. J
Bhāsha Parichéda, or Division of Language. A logical Treatise, translated from the Sanscrit, by E. Roek.
In the following introduction to a translation of the Bhāsha Parichéda, one of the most celebrated works of the Nyāya philosophy, it has been my endeavour to subject the logic of the Nyaya, as well as the leading ideas of this and the Váishéshika systems, to a critical review, in order to bring the discussion about the merits of the philosophical researches of the Hindus more to a point. Colebrooke's exposition of the Nyāya and Váishéshika systems, though founded on the ablest and most exact *searches, as well in a philosophical as in a critical point of view, does
"It is probably Dr. W. Jameson's s cies, noticed in Calc. Journ. Nat Hist. 1846, p. 360. I doubt o: ...demo Thibetan animals will prove so new as he imagines: e. g, his Marmot (p. 361), and the Lagomys (?) mentioned with it, &c. &c. The large Hare is doubtless 1. oistolus (v. tibetanus): and I can already pronounce Ovis ammon to be distinct from O. montana.
not suffice for this purpose, as it is a mere abstract from the works of those schools, and does not enter upon the discussion of the position they are to hold as systems of philosophy.
It is perhaps not impossible to write a history of Indian philosophy, if it be limited to the task of tracing the gradual development of philosophical principles and modes of thinking, without reference to a strict chronological order; but as yet many more materials are required to complete a work, beset with so many difficulties. At the same time we must admit, that even in this attempt, with more ample materials, we can only partially succeed. The doctrines even of those who are considered as the founders of the different schools, bear the marks of a far advanced progress in systematical discussion, and must therefore have been the result of a long series of preceding philosophical enquiries. Hence it would be preposterous to expect, that we should be able to discover the first steps of their researches. We cannot, however, deem this a very great loss, as we have the first philosophical attempts of the Greeks, and we may safely affirm, that a great similarity must have obtained between both of them. We, however, decline here embarking upon any historical research, believing, that under the present circumstances, it is more important to place an original work of Hindu philosophy before the public, and to examine the principles under which it has been constructed. For this end we consider the Nyāya in that shape, which it has acquired by its amalgamation with the doctrines of the Váishéshikas, since we are of Colebrooke's opinion, that both sprang from the same root, and are but branches of the same school; the one being directed more to the explanation of material, the other of logical forms.” Or to state it more exactly,–to the Nyāya belong the logical doctrines of the forms of syllogisms, terms and propositions; to the Váishéshika the systematical explanation of the categories (the simplest metaphysical ideas) of the metaphysical, physical, and psychical notions, which notions are hardly touched upon in Gositama's (the supposed founder of the Nyāya) Sūtras. They differ in their statement of the several modes of proof; the Nyāya asserting four modes of proof–from perception, inference, analogy, and verbal communication; the Váishéshika admitting only the two first ones.
* Vid. “Colebrooke's Miscell. Essays,’ Vol. i. p. 261.