2 
Orocyps*, G. R. Gray (1841). Vultur, Daud. 
O. auricularis, (Daud.) G. R. Gray. Levaill. Ois. d Afr., pl. 9. 
Subfam. 1V. RACAMIN A. 
Racama, J. #. Gray(1840). Gypaétos, Daud. Polyborus ? Benn. 
Vultur, Lath. Faleo, Gm. 
R. angolensis, (Gm.) J. #. Gray, Lev. Mus.,t.7. P.? hypo- 
leucus, Benn. 
Family I. FALCONIDA. Falco, L. - 
Subfam. I. POLYBORIN/®. 
Isycrer. Vieill. (1816). Caracara, Cuv. Gymnops, Spix (1824). 
Falco, Gm. 
I. aquilinus, (Gm.) G. R. Gray, Pl.enl. 417. F. formosus, Lath. 
F. nudicollis, Daud. I. leucogaster, Vieddl. 
Darrtrivs, Vieill.(1816). Ibycter. Sw. Gymnops, Spix (1824). 
D. ater, Vieill. Gal. des Ois., pl. 5. D. aterrimus, Temm., Pl. col. 
37. and 342. 
Miivaco, Spiz (1824). Polyborus, Vieill. Senex, J. EB. Gray 
(1839). Phalcobcenus, D’ Orb(1837). Parasifalco, Less. (1837). 
M. chimachima (Vieill.) G. 2. Gray. | M. ochrocephala, Spiz, 
Av. Br., pl. 1. F. degener, Pr. Maz. 
a On examining M. Temminck’s remarks on the species of the genus 
Vultur, as given in the Pl. col., I find that he considered the V. auricularis 
and V. egypius to be the same species. In the fourth part of his Manuel 
d’Ornithologie, he notices the V. auricularis as found about Athens, &c., 
and refers to the figure given in the Hist. Nat. d’Egypte, Ois. pl. 11, as 
* d’un jeune a l’age moyen,” and also to the V. egypius of Pl. col. 407, as 
the ‘« femelle ou jeune encore dépourvu de l’appendice aux oreilles.” Sa- 
vigny established his genus #gypius on the specimgp figured in the Hist. 
Nat. d’Egypte, which is considered by M. Temminck to be the same as V. 
auricularis. “‘ Therefore,” Mr. Strickland has stated, “ the generic name of 
Agypius should be given to the group containing V’. auricularis and pondi- 
cerianus.”’ But that gentleman has since called my attention to the opinion 
which M. Lafresnaye has expressed in the Dict. Univ. d’Hist. Nat. ; viz. 
that he considered the figure of Savigny, referred to above, as the young of 
V. cinereus and not of V. auricularis, as stated by M. Temminck. After 
having carefully examined the various figures together, I have no hesita- 
tion in agreeing with M. Lafresnaye. I have therefore adopted Savigny’s 
generic name Algypius, with the V. cinereus as the type ; to this genus be- 
longs the V. monachus, although Savigny had supposed that it might pro- 
bably form a distinct genus from his Zgypius. 
It becomes, in consequence, necessary to designate those species which 
were improperly supposed to belong to Savigny’s genus, and of which the 
late Mr. Bennett intimated as far back as 1831, in his excellent work on 
the ‘Gardens and Menagerie of the Zoological Society,’ that they should 
form a distinct genus, of which he gave characters, but no generic appella- 
tion. I have therefore taken his type (V. auricularis), and formed the genus 
under the name of Otogyps, as given above. 
ee tt es nl 
