18 Mr. J. A. Harvie Brown on the 



as I find it unsupported bj any other observers before or since: 

 while applying the rule to other people's records, I must, of 

 course, apply it to our own where the least doubt occurs. We 

 did not handle any specimens of Kites at Archangel ; but the 

 deeply forked tail and very rufous colour of one that was 

 fired at and wounded, and which fell to the ground, but reco- 

 vered and made off, was what induced our i^erha^s too positive 

 record in 1873. I have since then made the acquaintance of 

 both species in another country (Transylvania), and morally 

 I feel convinced of the correctness of our Russian obser- 

 vations ; in accordance with the rule, however, I attach a 

 query to the record*. 



(4) Falco gyrfaho, Schleg. No. 10 in Table. 



Herr Goebel also includes Falco sacer (sic) ; but Falco 

 gyrfalco is doubtless intended, as he does not elsewhere take 

 notice of the last-named species, although it is included in the 

 collection in the Archangel Museum. Herr Meves also men- 

 tions having obtained an Qgg of this species {Falco gyrfalco) 

 taken in Kanin. 



(5) 19. Circus ceruginosus (L.) ? No. 20 in Table. 



Meves shot a specimen at Kasnosoffskaya, which locality I 

 identified with Knaschestrowskaya, near Archangel (Stieler's 

 Hand-Atlas, No. 31). 



(6) {Athene noctua^ Retz.) No number. 



Herr Goebel's record of this species is the only one I can 

 find. I did not observe any specimen of it in the Archangel 

 Museum in 1875 ; nor have any specimens been sent home, 

 that I can hear off. 



* Our record, however, is strongly supported by Dresser (B. of Europe, 

 part xl.), who says, " In Russia it certainly occurs as far north as Arch- 

 angel, where my collector informs me it is not rare." 



t I wish here to say a few words in connexion ^Nath my criticisms of 

 some of HeiT Goebel's records. I wrote some months ago to Herr 

 Goebel, care of Professor Cabanis, Berlin, for fm-ther information con- 

 cerning some of the species by him recorded as occuniug or breeding in 

 the Archangel district. Up to this time (the date of going to press) I 

 have had no communication from him, so am unwillingly obliged to send 

 in the MS. as it stands. I hope, however, at some future opportunity to 

 treat more fully of the breeding-zones of birds in North Kussia, when I 

 may be able more critically to examine the records of breeding species. 

 Meanwhile I ■will only mention here some of the records which appear to 

 me to require fuller authentication, which, I believe, it is quite possible 

 Herr Goebel may be able to supply, as he states that many of the eggs 

 purchased or otherwise obtained by him at Archangel have pencil notes 



