(210) 



correct in separating affinis, virgatus and gularis, bnt some of ray other conclosions 

 (lifter from his. According to my investigations these forms must be separated as 

 follows : 



1. Accipiter virgatus virgatus (Temm.). 



Fidco ririyilus Temminck, PI. Col. 109 (1822 — Java. The plate shows an adult male with the 

 thigh.s barred). 



1 Acrijtiler liexra Jerdon, Mailnis ./mirna! Lill. (£• St', x. p. 84 (1839 — description indifferent ; id., 

 ///. ///(/. Uni. pis. 4 and 29. Plate 4 shows a young male from South India, pi. 29 a female 

 " after its first moult " ; I should say that the first might be the South Indian form, but the 

 female represented on pi. 29 is troublesome, showing sharp barring on the throat, up to the 

 chin). 



Accipiter nifotibialis Sharpe, Ihin 1887. p. 437 (Kina Balu on Borneo). 



Accipiter virgntus (Temm.) has a male whicli is dark slate above, the tail slate- 

 grey with three wide dark slate bars ; nnder-snrface bright rnsty red, chiu wliitisli 

 buff with brown shaft-stripes along the centre, middle of abdomen white with 

 rnfons bars, belly and nnder tail-coverts white, more or less barred. Thighs either 

 barred or nniform rusty red or rufous. Wing abont 150 — 153 mm. 



The adult female is — according to Schlegel, who had a series — either similar 

 to the male in coloration, or barred underneath. The female (in this and all the 

 allied forms) is of course much larger than the male. 



The young male appears to be more rufescent than that of the allied forms, the 

 feathers of the upperside margined with bright cinnamon. 



This bird inhabits Java, Borneo, Sumatra, and probably Bali, Lorabok, 

 Sambawa and Flores (Everett coll.). A very similar race inhabits Southern India 

 and Ceylon; in fact, adult males appear to be indistinguishable, only the under wing- 

 coverts appear to be more whitish. Moreover, if the adult female of the true firgafus 

 from Java is, in coloration, exactly like the male, and only occasionally barred, 

 as it would appear from Schlegel (Vogels van Nederlandsch Indie, Vallicogels, 

 pi. xii., and Notes Legden Museum, Accipitres, 1873, p. 75), and the adult female 

 of the Ceylonese (and South Indian, I sliould say) bird is never uniform rufous on 

 tlie breast as Legge says (Z?. Ceglon, p. 2S), the two forms would be different. If 

 they are, the form from Ceylon and South India would have to be called, I suppose, 

 Accipiter virgatus besra. The material in the British Museum (cf. Grant, Ibis, 189G, 

 p. 109) and that in Tring being rather poor, I do not think the ipiestion, whether 

 tlie Snnda Islands form and that from Ceylon and Soutli India are separable, can 

 be decided at present, except by an actual comparison of the series in Leyden from 

 Java with that from India at the British Museum. Tlie more whitish nnder wing- 

 coverts may be a distinguishing character. 



Mr. Ogilvie-Graiil, following Sharpe, separated as a " sjiecies," Accipiter 

 rii/otihiaUs, bnt erroneously. The type of A. nifotibialis in the Tring Museum 

 agrees very well with a male from Mt. Qedeh in Java ; the typical males of 

 virgatus from Java are just as small as the Kina Balu ones, and the coloration 

 of the thighs varies in the Java birds. The under tail-coverts of the type of 

 ,1. rufotibialis are white, as they are in Javanese examples ; Dr. Sharpe described 

 them as chestnut, but this must have beeu a pen-slip or misprint. 



1a. Accipiter virgatus confusus Hartert. 

 See above, p. 209. 



