MISCELLANEOUS NOTES. 199 



referred to, to say nothing of the shades from the glossy dark brown or black 

 back and almost chocolate breast of the Himalayan variety, to the washed- 

 out dull back and light brown breast of the S. Indian bird. 



In the above case, we find a great variety of birds differing in colour and 

 size, which once had specific rank, now united under the one heading. 



So much for limiting species, and now let us consider the other side of the 

 question. To do this let us go back, in the first instance, to the Hawk-Eagles 

 (Splzaeli) The distinction between S, nepal-.nais and S. kelaarti seems so 

 trivial that one wondets what justification there is for giving each specific 

 rank. Legge gives as a reason for the separation, the size and robustness of 

 the claws and toot ; but according to Blanford, two skins were procured in 

 Travancore, which is quite out of the range of S. vepalemis, of S. kelaarti, 

 in which the claws were not larger than those of S. nepalensis. In any case, 

 I would not lay much stress on a point in which the difference is so slight ; for 

 even in many birds, procured in exactly the same place, there might easily be 

 a difference of a fraction of an inch in the length and thickness of claws. 



If the question of claws and an inch or two in measurement be dispensed 

 with, we only have the colouring left to contend against. In S. kelaarti 

 the markings are more or less identical with those of S. tiepalensis, only 

 less pronounced, or in a lighter shade, and the chief .difference lies in the 

 white bars on the breast feathers being intercepted by the shaft in one case 

 and being continuous in the other. If, as in the case of Spilornis, the 

 entire question of barring and colouring is not sufficient to separate the 

 various types, why should such a very small diversity be enough to separate 

 S. npaleusis from S. kelaarti ? Why should one not be considered the 

 Southern India variety of S. nepalensis or vice versa? Such anomalies seem 

 hard to explain. 



From this case to the next, which in times past has been the subject of 

 much controversy, is only a step, but still the step is a long one. 



The Steppe Eagle (Aquila bifasciata) has been in turn confounded with The 

 Imperial (Aq. heliacu), The Tawny (Aq. vindhiana) and even with the Large 

 Spotted Eagle (Aq. maculata) till Messrs. Brooks and Anderson finally stepped 

 into the breach and solved the problem. 



In the days when Aq. bifasciala was considered only a phase of the 

 immature plumage of Aq, heliaca, it is strange that it never struck anyone 

 to pause and consider why there should be such an enormous proportion of 

 birds in immature garb to those in adult dress. Taking the dark, almost 

 black, plumage with the buff head and white barred tail as the type of the 

 adult dress of Aq. heliaca, we find the species fairly well distributed, but 

 by no means common anywhere, while during the winter the Steppe and the 

 Tawny are by far the commonest eagles in N. India at any rate, and to 

 every one typical Imperial iu adult plumage one sees during a day's shoot, at 

 least 15 to 2 ) " Steppes" will be seen. 



Should there be such a preponderance of birds in immature garb over 

 those in full adult plumage, is a question that would almost naturally occur 



