ERYTHKOTRIOECHIS. 
A note is given to the effect that the “ measurements have been taken 
with the ends of the bones laid bare.” 
On this account the bird has been placed near or in Astur, but commonly 
Eryihrotriorchis has been generically used. I regard this genus as nearer 
Astur than Buteo, but again emphasize the fact that here the personal 
equation is unreliable, and recourse to anatomy is the only sure guide. 
The bill is short with a small cere, the nostril is somewhat rounded and 
open, not hidden by the loreal bristles. 
The wing is long, with the third, fourth and fifth primaries subequal and 
longest, the fourth slightly exceeding the others : the second primary is shorter 
than the sixth, and the first subequal but usually shorter than the seventh. 
The tail is long, but is just about three-fifths the length of the wing. 
The legs and feet are very stout and strong: the tarsus is about 
one-third the length of the tail. In front it is regularly scutellated, and 
behind it is reticulated just as in Astur, but here no fusion is shown in the 
adult. The toes are stout and normal and the claws are long: the foot is 
weU figured in the Emu, Vol. X., pi. opposite p. 251, 1911, and I have also 
given a figure, antea p. 55. 
In my “ List,” as a synonym of Erythrotriorchis I included MegatriorcMs^ 
following Sharpe, Rothschild and Hartert and an examination of a bird so 
named in the British Museum. This synonymy is incorrect, as shown by 
Rothschild and Hartert in the Nov. Zool, Vol. XXII., p. 51, Feb. 12, 1915, 
under the heading MegatriorcJiis dorice, thus : “ This genus was separated 
on account of its short rounded wings^ the very small difference in length 
between primaries and secondaries, and the long tail ; in the original diagnosis 
is a misprint, ‘ remigibus primaries paulo brevioribus ’ instead of ‘ paulo 
longioribus ’ : this is evident from a look at the bird and from Salvador! 
{Orn. Pap., Vol. I., p. 42). Later on Sharpe united Megatriorchis and 
Erythrotriorchis, but we cannot accept this alteration ; it was done on the 
strength of a bird which Sharpe wrongly identified with M. dorim, and which 
we were obliged to describe as a new species. In the typical Erythrotriorchis 
(type E. radiatus) the wings are much longer, the distance between the longest 
primaries and secondaries considerable, viz., 11-13.5 cm. as against 25-35 mm. ! 
in Megatriorchis. The tail in Erythrotriorchis is shorter, and more even in 
Megatriorchis, so that the bird has altogether a very different appearance.” 
As Rothschild and Hartert are genus-lumpers, I at once agree in the 
recognition of Megatriorchis as a distinct genus. It is worth notice that in the 
B.O.U. List of British Birds a genus admitted by Hartert, Herbivocula, is 
suppressed : in view of the wide limits given by Hartert to genera such a 
conclusion is remarkable, and examination of the bird proves Hartert 
85 
