33Q 
Mr. J. H. Gurney's Notes on 
Magazine of Natural History 3 for 1874, p. 373, and there 
supported by reasons which appear to me to be quite 
satisfactory. I am not, however, so well satisfied with the view 
advocated by Mr. Dresser in the paper above referred to, and 
adopted byMr. Sharpe, that the lesser Spotted Eagle of Europe 
should bear the specific name of “maculata 33 An able article 
on these three Eagles from the pen of Mr. Brooks will be 
found in vol. iv. p. 268 of f Stray Feathers/ in which cause is 
shown for believing that the term “maculata” may have been 
intended to apply to the larger species; and I believe that 
Mr. Dresser now agrees with me that sufficient uncertainty 
exists on this point to render it incumbent on ornithologists 
to drop the term “i maculata 33 in the same way that Mr. 
Sharpe has already very properly dropped that of “ ncevia 33 
I am indebted to the kind assistance of Mr. Dresser for 
enabling me to analyze the remaining synonyms quoted by 
Mr. Sharpe as referring to the lesser Spotted Eagle of Europe, 
and have arrived at the following result:—“ melanaetus 33 of 
Savigny, and also “ bifasciata ” and “fusca 33 of Brehm, ap¬ 
pear to appertain without doubt to the larger Spotted Eagle; 
ncevia, var. pallida, 33 of Lichtenstein, I believe, as I have 
already mentioned, to be A. fulvescens ; “ subncevia ” and 
“ fulviventris 33 of Brehm are so imperfectly described that it 
is impossible to decide with any certainty to what species 
these two names were intended to apply. There remains but 
one other synonym to be accounted for, viz. “ pomarina” of 
Brehm. This, I think, was probably founded on the European 
lesser Spotted Eagle; but if so, the description is inaccurate 
in one important particular, the nostril being described as 
“ ear-shaped;” and this discrepancy must, I think, forbid the 
use of “ pomarina 3 3 as a specific name for the lesser Spotted 
Eagle of Europe. Under these circumstances, I am of opinion 
that this species ought to bear the specific appellation of 
“ rufonuchalis 33 proposed for it by Mr. Brooks in the paper 
above referred to; and I think that Mr. Brooks has done 
good service in providing a name that is liable to no doubt 
for this well-known species, which, by the laches of previous 
authors, had practically lapsed into an anonymous position. 
