8440 Birds. 



lanarius to this bird, and in this opinion I am borne out by Nilsson, for in the last 

 edition of his ' Birds of Scandinavia ' (1S58) he describes the Falco lanarius, Lin., as 

 quite a different bird, under the Swedish name of" slag falk." And although Linneus, 

 in his ' Systeuaa Naturae ' (at least in my translation by Turton, of 1800), in describing 

 the F. lanarius does not say anything regarding the colour of the head, Nilsson in de- 

 scribing the " slag falk " (F. lanarius, Lin.), distinctly says, " head white, tinged with 

 rusty yellow," and, except that he gives the length of the old female twenty inches, his 

 general description agrees with Dr. Bree's description of the lanner falcon (F. lanarius, 

 Schleg.), * Birds of Europe,' p. 37. Linneus's description of the lanner was from a 

 younger bird killed in Sweden. In Nilsson's description of the Falco Jer-falco he does 

 not use Linneus's synonym of F. lanarius, but he gives to it the synonym of F. rusti- 

 colus, Lin, Faun. p. 19 (older female), and also F. Jerfalco, Lin. Faun. p. 22 (young 

 bird). Neither Nilsson nor Sundewal will allow that there is more than one species of 

 jer-falcon in Sweden, in describing which Nilsson uses all these synonyms :— " Falco 

 Gyrfalco, F. islandicus, F. candicans, F. grcenlandicus, F. rusticolus, F. ftiscus, F. um- 

 brinus," and he gives it the Swedish names of jagt falk, hort falk, bla falk (the name by 

 which this dark F. Gyrfalco norvegicus is known on the Norwegian fells), and he also 

 gives to the same bird the Lapland name of reifsakfalle — thus clearly identifying it 

 with our Lap " rip-spenning," which word has precisely the same meaning as the rief- 

 sakfalle, only used in another district. He then gives us descriptions and measure- 

 ments taken by himself from fourteen different specimens, varying in length from 

 21 inches to 25 inches, and presenting every shade of plumage, from the dark young 

 to the old white mature bird. Nilsson's experience in Swedish Ornithology is very 

 great, and has extended over many years, and his opinion, with me at least, always 

 carries weight. I may remark that he divides his specimens into two series — the first 

 with oblong, the latter with transverse spots. He winds up his remarks with the fol- 

 lowing pertinent note, which I translate freely and fully : — " To this latter series pro- 

 bably belongs Schlegel's F. candicans islandicus, as he has described it in his ' Revue 

 Critique,' p. 4. It is also undeniable that Linne's F. rusticolus and F. Gyrfalco belong 

 to this group, but by referring to the above measurement it does not appear that the 

 F. Gyrfalco is so much smaller than F. candicans islandicus. Herr Schlegel (' Revue,' 

 p. 57) expresses his surprise that the true Norwegian F. Gyrfalco, which he (Schlegel) 

 nevertheless supposes to be identical with Linne's F. lanarius, Faun. Suec, should 

 have been altogether unknown to the Scandinavian naturalist until he (Schlegel) de- 

 scribed it. And Degland, in his ' European Ornithology,' reiterates the same. Yet it 

 would indeed have been very surprising had such been the case ; but not only has this 

 F. Gyrfalco been known to us even from Linne's time, but we also know the transitions 

 from this to the F. candicans islandicus of authors ; therefore we do not consider our- 

 selves justified in dividing them into two or more species.'' So much for Nilsson. He 

 clearly considers this F. Jerfalco norvegicus of Wooley, the F. grcenlandicus of Han- 

 cock and F. islandicus of Hancock as all varieties of one bird — F. Gyrfalco, Lin., and 

 not three distinct species ; and presumptuous as it may appear for me to differ with a 

 naturalist of such standing, I cannot help it. Without going into the question as to 

 whether F. islandicus of Hancock and F. grcenlandicus of Hancock are anything more 

 than local varieties of the same bird, I consider the dark Norwegian jer-falcon a clearly 

 distinct species from either; and although, perhaps, the young of this may be easily 

 confounded with the young of the F. islandicus of Hancock there is too marked a dif- 

 ference in my eye between the old bird to admit of their being considered as nothing 



