MONOGRAPH OF THE FALCONID^E, 
cens, and not Glaucopteryoc cinerascens , I mean that I shall never 
approve of giving to these suhgenera the importance of true genera. 
If this should be done (and with some nicely distinguished sub- 
genera, viz. — Herpetotheres , Gynmogenys, Spilornis , Circaetus, 
Poliornis of the genus Circaetus , &c., it has been done long ago) 
then the now generally adopted sense of genus would he overthrown 
again. The suhgenera, as made use of by me, will prove an easy 
means to men of science and research, and will hear out by their 
characters the repetition of their five different types. 
Whether my opinion and its consequences, viz., that each family 
is to he considered as one whole, confined to itself, and that conse- 
quently no double or similar names of species are to he tolerated 
in it, will hold good, must be left to ornithologists of superior intel- 
ligence to decide. With respect to the Falconidce, I was obliged 
to give to several species new names on that account. Such a con- 
sistency offers the advantage, that each species of a family, when 
speaking of it, may he pointed out accurately without naming the 
genus, and yet every mistake be avoided. 
Against my way of mentioning the authors, since I always indi- 
cate the discoverer of each species after its name, even if he has 
not put it in its proper genus, warm objections have been urged by 
my v orthy and learned friend, Mr. Gr. R. Gray, who is so highly 
distinguished by his multifarious knowledge ; and I must own, that 
my way of writing may be apt to lead astray, not scientific men, 
but beginners among zoologists, since they will vainly search in 
ancient authors for genera like Hierax, Harpagus, &c. 
Much sensation has been already occasioned by my having de- 
thioned the Accipitres , those birds of heraldry, from the high 
station which they have occupied since the days of yore, and by my 
placing them where nature meant and made them to stand. 
All objections, however, may be easily refuted by asking the 
simple question. You zoologists (who, imitating Linnseus, have 
placed the Accipitres and the ugly vultures at the head of all birds), 
why do you not give to the cats and the tiger the first place at the 
head of all mammalia, as Pallas proposed to do % If the Psittacidce 
are analogous to the Primates , then the Accipitres cannot be so 
too. The man who lays down a system, cannot be induced either 
y the beauty of the form, or by the courage, the voraciousness and 
cruelty, vhich is the nature of some Accipitres , to assign to them 
