CIRCUS. 
Again, Circus differs from these two in the following particulars only : 
“ les ailes tres-longues ” against “ les ailes courtes ” and “ ie tarse long 
et grele ” instead of “ le tarse long only. 
Further, Milvus differs from Buteo only in the character “ le tarse court 
et foible” against le tarse gros et court.” 
In the XIVth Volume of Quadrupeds in Hist. Nat. Buffon, ed. Didot, 
published in 1802, Daudin reproduced LacepMe’s diagnoses without alteration, 
but added to them the species figured and described in the Buffon bird 
portion, giving Latin names to these accounts and utilising the Lacepedean 
genera. From this place, therefore, must the above-mentioned genera be 
dated. 
Thus to Astur Daudin added, p. 219 : Astur palumharius, Astur 
hadius and Astur cayanensis. 
To Nisus, Daudin (p. 220) allotted Nisus vulgaris, Nisus columbarius 
and Nisus magnirostris. 
To Buteo, Daudin (p. 220) accorded Buteo vulgaris, Buteo cinereus and 
Buteo apivorus. 
To Circus, Daudin (p. 221) added Circus ceruginosus. Circus cyaneus. 
Circus pygargus and Circus rufus. 
As Milvus, Daudin (p. 221) recognised Milvus vulgaris, Milvus furcatus 
and Milvus ater. 
The types of Nisus, Buteo and Milvus are settled by tautonymy, and 
Vigors in 1824 and Lesson in 1828 designated the types of Astur and Circus, 
and these names continue in their conventional significance, the only alteration 
being their reference to Daudin instead of Lacepede. 
The genus Circus as here accepted has been subdivided, but it is difficult 
from a superficial examination of the external features to determine these 
subdivisions. Bonaparte, in the Giorn. Arcad. Eoma, Vol. XLIX., p. 36, 1831, 
first indicated a subdivision Strigiceps, but no definition whatever was given, 
the name occurring only as a nomen nudum. In 1838, however, in his Comp. 
List of Birds of Europe and North America, p. 5, he included un,der this 
name Circus pygargus Linn6, known at that time by Montagu’s latW name 
of C. cinerascens. 
Kaup, in his investigations into the Quinary system, split Circus up 
into five subgenera, viz., Strigiceps, Glaucopterix, Spilocircus, Spizacircus 
and Circus. 
In Jardine^s Contr. Om. 1849, p. 70, he explained one case as follows: 
“If I made Circus cinerascens and pallidus into a subgenus, I did it not 
only on account of the short secondaries, the long primaries, and the 
small number of emarginated quills. . . . That both species get only in their 
13 
