^O General Notes. \^^^ 



The Cuculidae of the A. O. U. List. — I am sorrj to perceive that our 

 treatment of this family involves several errors. One of these is a mere 

 hlunder, almost self-corrective; another is a grammatical mistake, easily 

 set right; but two others are ornithological improprieties of considerable 

 taxonomic consequence. 



1. Cuculus canorus telephonus appears as a member of the "Subfamily 

 Coccygince, American Cuckoos," which of course it is not. This is a 

 mere editorial inadvertency, or mechanical defect in the make-up of the 

 List, by omission of a heading " Subfamily CucultncB" to cover this case. 

 The 'break' is obvious, and easily mended. 



2. " Coccygi/Ks'' appears as the name of the American subfamily. 

 This should be Coccyzince, of course, as derived from the name of the 

 genus Coccyzus. I am well aware that the form Coccygince is used by 

 many writers, including myself; it has so stood in the 'Key' since 1884 

 after Baird, Cabanis, and others, who alter Coccyzus of Vieillot into 

 Coccygus. But those who preserve the original orthography of names, 

 however faulty, must write Coccyzus and consequently CoccyzintB, as I did 

 in the orig. ed. of the ' Key ', 1872. (This criticism does not reach our 

 use of Coccyges as a subordinal term, for the latter is independently formed 

 direct from the Greek kokkv^, a cuckoo, not from any generic name. ) 

 I am happy to be able to defend Vieillot's Coccyzus on good linguistic 

 grounds ; for it is derivable direct from the classic Greek verb kokkv^w, 

 '' I cry ' cuckoo.' " We are therefore philologically justified, as well as 

 canonically correct, in using Coccyzus and CoccyziticE. I may remark, 

 in passing, the quite gratuitous changes which have been rung upon 

 Coccyzus, namely: Coccyzon, Coccygius, Coccysus, Coccygus, Coccyzt'us, 

 Coccygon, Coccycua, Coccyz(sa, and probably yet other forms, all of them 

 superfluous and supererogatory. 



3. CoccyzincE. As to the necessity or expediency of recognizing for the 

 American Tree Cuckoos any subfamily apart from Old World CuculincB, 

 there may easily be two opinions. I have kept them apart in all my 

 works, but am coming to tlie conclusion that they can hardly be so con- 

 sidered, if we duly regard the various interrelations of genera in the whole 

 family CuculidcB. The strongest character I have seen ascribed to the 

 American forms is that adduced by Beddard, P. Z. S. 1885, p. 187, who 

 finds the ventral pteryla double at its commencement in Coccyzus, Piaya, 

 Saurothera, and perhaps Diplopterus, it being there single in Cuculus, 

 etc. But even Beddard brings all these forms under one subfamily, Cucu- 

 lince; and Shelley, Cat. B. Brit. Mus., XIX, 1891, p. 211, finds no super- 

 generic difference between Coccyzus and Cuculus, though he recognizes 

 altogether no fewer than six subfamilies of Cuculidce. I should wish to be 

 better informed than I am before pronouncing upon this case without 

 reserve ; but my present impression is, that CoccyziticE must be abandoned 

 as a subfamily, and merged in Cuculince, substantially according to Bed- 

 dard's views. 



