OWLS. Si^S 



propriety. As its author has united the genera Ulula 

 and Otus of Cuvier, which are tuftless and tufted owls 

 otherwise simihir, it is strange that, for the same rea- 

 son, he has not united his own genera Noctua and Bubo, 

 which also are tufted and tuftless owls, generally simi- 

 lar. As the birds of this family have not undergone 

 sufficient investigation, it is clear that the limitation of 

 the generic groups cannot at present be permanently 

 fixed. For this reason, although various arrangements 

 have been proposed, I intend to add another to the list, 

 considering it merely as temporary. Were the obser- 

 vations respecting the structure of the ear of owls 

 made by Cuvier and others tolerably correct and suffi- 

 ciently detailed, the number of genera would, I be- 

 lieve, be much smaller than it is usually considered. 



It appears to me that, in conformity with the views 

 given in the Preface, the presence or absence of tufts 

 of feathers on the head or neck of birds cannot be of 

 much value in determining generic groups. Thus Per- 

 nis cristatus is not considered generically different from 

 Pernis apivorus ; nor Tetrao umbellus from Tetrao ca- 

 nadensis ; and certainly the male of Strix brachyotos, 

 which has tufts on the head, cannot belong to a diffe- 

 rent genus from the female of the same species, which, 

 if it has tufts, has them so short that they cannot be 

 perceived in the ordinary state of the bird. For this 

 reason, as the genera Noctua and Bubo of Cuvier and 

 St Hilaire, difi'er, according to their own statements, 

 in little or nothing else, they might be united under 

 the name Syrnium. Noctua was a name applied by 

 Linnaeus to a group of insects, and moreover is very 

 inapplicable to the diurnal or accipitrine owls ; and 



