Birds of Celebes: Falconidae. 
19 
/ 
mine specimens, that the two forms lay eggs which differ remarkably, and that 
they have differently coloured irides. Nevertheless Gurney, at the time, was 
doubtful about their specific distinctness, and, in his “List of the Diurn. B. of 
Prey in Norwich Mus.” p. 32, he only admits A. cuculoides as a questionably 
valid subspecies. It should be remembered, that both occur together in the 
same localities — China, Java (Dresd. Mus.), Celebes, and, that at one time 
Swinhoe was not quite sure of the correct nomenclature for A. soloensis, A. vir- 
gatus and A. hadius, but on one or two occasions misemployed these names, 
whence it appears not unjustifiable to suppose that the eggs in the Swinhoe 
collection, referred to by Gurney as those of A. soloensis and A. cuculoides^ were in 
reality those of A. soloensis andM. mrgatus^ especially as A. cuculoides is not men- 
tioned by Swinhoe except in the synonymy oi A. soloensis (g 2) and we are not 
aware that any fourth species, corresponding to it, was ever spoken of by him. 
After examining the series of these forms (nearly 70 in all) in the British 
and- Leyden Museums (where is the type of T. cucidoides)^ in addition to six at 
" Dresden, we at first were qf opinion that the pale, more uniform plumage of 
T. cuculoides represents the old T. soloensis, especially the old male, though 
there is one very pale specimen at Leyden marked There is a male in the 
British Museum, assuming the adult dress, which is of as dark a rufous on the 
breast as the female, viz. specimen “fcfad. Pescadores (Swinhoe)” of Dr. Sharpe’s 
Catalogue (cl) which retains some immature plumage; other specimens, mostly 
males, if sexed, in the Leyden Museum afford transitions between such and the 
type oi cuculoides. But this supposition — that the pale vinous specimens are 
always old — is controverted by a specimen (cf) in the Sarasin Collection 
described above; it is in the pale plumage of T. cuculoides, but a- few brown 
feathers not yet moulted show that it is only a second year’s bird. The only 
conditions possible seem to be, therefore, either that T. soloensis and cuculoides 
are two distinct sjDecies, as Sharpe supposed, or that they form one species which 
varies a good deal in the intensity of the rufous on the breast and slaty on the 
back. The presence of intermediate specimens, the perfect agreement of the 
two forms in structure, and their occurrence in the same localities, are argu- 
ments against their being two species; we believe the other explanation to be 
the correct one. 
Very little has been recorded of the habits of A. soloensis. Kaup, examining 
the peculiar formation of the bill, believed himself justified in pronouncing 
that its food, especially when it has young, would prove to consist only of in- 
sects (f2)\ in Celebes v. Eosenberg found it to be “ein Hauptinsectenvertilger” 
(Malay. Archip. 1878, 271). VCe cannot put much stress upon either of these 
two statements. The specimen obtained by Zelebor during the visit of the 
“Novara” to Kar Nicobar was shot, however, while it was unsuccessfully chasing 
an Oriolus macrourus (Novara-Eeise, Vog. p. 12). 
When a species is found to range far over a group of islands and yet 
develop no differences of coloration in the various localities, it is usually safe 
3 * 
