Mr. R. B. Sharpe's Catalogue 0/ Accipitres. 439 



April 1871, one win^ 13*50, the other wing 13*90, tarsus 2, 

 middle toe s. u. 2-10. 



I will now refer very briefly to Falco babylonicus , a Falcon 

 that I consider to be nearly related to F. barbarus, from 

 which it seems chiefly to differ by its larger dimensions. It 

 is a very scarce species in European museums, and I am 

 not aware that I have ever seen an adult male, the few adults 

 that I have examined (including one recently received by Mr. 

 Seebohm from Samarcand) appearing by their dimensions 

 to be all females. I regret that I am unable to add to the 

 information supplied by Mr. Sharpe respecting this species ; 

 but as such is the case, I will pass on to the consideration of 

 Falco feldeggii and its very closely allied intertropical repre- 

 sentative, F. tanypterus. Mr. Sharpe treats these Falcons as 

 specifically distinct, aud thus describes the habitat of the 

 first, " the countries bordering on the Mediterranean, rarely 

 extending into Central Europe, or below Egypt into N.E. 

 Africa.'" The habitat of the second, Mr. Sharpe defines as 

 " N.E. Africa, from Nubia to Unyamuesi ; W. Africa, on the 

 Niger, and in Aguapim." 



Mr. Sharpe describes the adult plumage of F. tanypterus 

 as darker than that of F. feldeggii, and less spotted on the 

 breast in very old birds. These distinctions do, no doubt, 

 exist, though the difi'erence in the spots on the breast in the 

 old birds is not great, neither is it very constant. But the 

 two races so largely grade and merge into each other that, 

 at the most, they can only, in my opinion, be admitted 

 as subspecifically separable ; and I somewhat doubt whether 

 even this distinction can be rigidly maintained, in view 

 of the fact that not a few specimens exist, chiefly amongst 

 those collected in Egypt, in which the coloration is of such an 

 intermediate character as to make it doubtful whether they 

 should bear the specific name oi feldeggii or of tanypterus. 



The actual position of the case appears to me to be that 

 F. feldeggii and F, tanypterus are essentially one species ; but 

 a species subject to considerable individual variation, and, in 

 addition to this, assuming, more uniformly, as its liabitat 



