an 8 An Bae ee aa Te ae et eg Oe on ee, aaee dee aX eee aed aida,
SANTA AAR
MAUNA BAD PAW tte ds AS, Neg pa tins 7 “ « ¥;
feacovracsiuas ‘ ay oath LpT ENTS A th i4uey rt
Ui aes Yada at! " Way Ay rat an 1 it Nt i :
Wo AR AR UA a wi nn
RNINEMINDMISENEMINT NIMES MEMENUSTMUNTR ERT Cire no yore) VANS An nt My
ANCONA AERA ECA aR ThE wi
NINN hy SHUN 1
; \ aby ksh iy ui vat Mi aly
‘1 NIN ENEN LS “aibiahiealadal
ite 1, Lan Ahh “ i \ in 1
ni a
Sin ali eee seast
ce Speen ren RRR on ere re sete Rr
\ th 1
1% \ at
eye
Way bale
Wah bad had
=
‘ it
t Ny hy
i
r me Eel .
ay :
NG!
\
as
st ;
i
SUst
sh
i
+ ys lah aks itt
vail iy i
TAS
Vat yh
Ea
tea ih :
\
Suh
nit Wake
alia hiyeyadar
“™ }
bi Se
Ag ad pas
c
ergs:
ry i
4
.
. =.)
Er SH BIRDS.
VOT. a:
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
http://www.archive.org/details/historyofbritishO2bew!
A
HISTORY
OF
BRITISH BIRDS.
BY
WILLIAM YARRELL, V.P.LS. FZS.
FOURTH EDITION, IN FOUR VOLUMES.
ILLUSTRATED BY 564 WOOD-ENGRAVINGS.
VOLUME II, REVISED AND ENLARGED
BY
ALFRED NEWTON, M.A. F.RS.,
PROFESSOR OF ZOOLOGY AND COMPARATIVE ANATOMY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE,
F.L.S., F.Z.S., ETC.
LONDON:
JOHN VAN VOORST, PATERNOSTER ROW.
MDCCCLXXVI—MDCCCLXXXII.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY WOODFALL AND KINDER,
MILFORD LANE, STRAND, W.C,
CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
PASSERKES.
EMBERIZID&.
Plectrophanes nivalis. Snow-Bunting
is lapponicus. Lapland Bunting
Linberiza scheniclus. Reed-Bunting
- rustica. Rustic Bunting .
e pusilla. Little Bunting
f miliaria. Bunting
- cttrinella. Yellow Bunting
cirlus. Cirl-Bunting
is hortulana. Ortolan
Euspiza melanocephala. Black-headed Bunting
FRINGILLID.
Fringilla celebs. Chaffinch
u montifringilla. Brambling
Passer montanus. Tree-Sparrow
» domesticus. House-Sparrow .
Coccothraustes vulgaris. Hawfinch
re chloris. Greenfinch
Serinus hortulanus. Serin
Carduelis elegans. Goldfinch
spinus. Siskin . ;
LTinota linaria. Mealy Redpoll.
», vufescens. Lesser Redpoll
» cannabina. Linnet
5, flavirostris. 'Twite
vl CONTENTS,
FRINGILLIDH—continued,
Pyrrhula europea. Builfinch
: erythrina. Scarlet Grosbeak
7 enucleator. Pine-Grosbeak
Loxia curvirostra. Crossbill
5 pityopsittacus. Parrot-Crossbill
» bifasctata. Two-barred Crossbill
» leucoptera. White-winged Crossbill
IcTERIDA.
Ageleus pheniceus. Red-winged Starling
STURNIDZ.
Sturnus vulgaris. Starling :
Pastor roseus. Rose-coloured Starling
Corvipm.
Pyrrhocorax graculus. Chough.
Corvus corax. Raven. ‘
» corone. Black Crow
» cornie. Grey Crow
» frugilegus. Rook .
» monedula. Daw
Pica rustica. Pie
Garrulus qlandarius. Jay
Nucifraga caryocatactes. Nutcracker
HIRUNDINIDS.
Hirundo rustica. Swallow
Chelidon urbica. Martin . :
Cotile riparia. Sand-Martin
Proqne purpurea, Purple Martin
PICARLA.
CYPSELID®.
Oypselus apus. Swift :
» melba, Alpine Swift.
ho bo pb ft
J “7 Or Or
oe © bo
364
372
CONTENTS.
CAPRIMULGIDE.
Caprimulqus europeus. Nightjar
CucuLipaz.
Cuculus canorus. Cuckow :
Coccystes glandarius. Great Becred inne
Coccyzus americanus. American Yellow-billed Cuckow
Upupipa.
Upupa epops. Hoopoe
CORACIID.
Coracias garrulus. Koller.
MERopID2.
Merops wpiaster. Bee-eater
ALCEDINIDE.
Alcedo ispida. Kingfisher
Ceryle alcyon. Belted Kingfisher
PICcID2.
Grecinus viridis. Green Woodpecker
Dendrocopus major. Greater Spotted Wisiu eee:
: minor. Lesser Spotted Woodpecker
Lynx torquilla. Wryneck
Vil
419
435
44.3
452
ee
Or
ey SN
ee
CO” sar SJ
SI NI
BRITISH BIRDS.
PASSERES. EMBERIZIDA.
PLECTROPHANES NIVALIS (Linnezeus *),
THE SNOW-BUNTING.
Plectrophanes nivalis.
PLectropHANeEs, B. Meyer +—Bill hard, conical and short; the upper man-
dible narrower than the lower, the edges of both inflected and those of the
latter sinuated; the palate furnished with a projecting bony knob. Nostrils
oval, basal and placed somewhat near the culmen, nearly hidden by small
feathers. Gape angular. Wings long and pointed: first primary finely attenu-
ated and so small as to seem wanting; second and third nearly eyual and the
longest in the wing, but the fonrth is considerably longer than the fifth. ‘Tail
* Emberiza nivalis, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 308 (1766).
+ Zusiitze und Berichtigungen zu Meyers und Wolfs Taschenbuch der deutschen
Vogelkunde, p. 56 (1822).
VOL. II. Lb
2 EMBERIZIDA.
moderate and slightly forked. Tarsus scutellate in front, covered at the sides
with an undivided plate, forming a sharp ridge behind, about as long as the
middle toe. Claws but slightly curved, that of the hind toe elongated.
WHATEVER differences of opinion once existed, it has
long since been ascertained that the Mountain-, the Tawny
and the Snow-Bunting of old authors, are only names for
one and the same species in different states of plumage; but
to whom belongs the credit of establishing this fact beyond
dispute is by no means clear. Linneeus indeed never fal-
tered in his opinion of their identity, though Pennant and,
after him, Latham for some time, took the contrary view.
Turton, in 1807, was perhaps the first British naturalist who
united the three supposed species into one. This was also done
on the continent by Wolf in 1810, by Temminck in 1815 and
by Koch in 1816; but both at home and abroad they were
regarded as distinct by others, and Montagu maintained to
the last the separation of Emberiza montana, though allow-
ing that ZL. mustelina and £. nivalis might be specifically
identified, on the evidence apparently of his friend Foljambe,
an excellent practical ornithologist,—who in a letter to him
said “a few years ago, I shot more than forty from the same
flock, during severe weather in the month of January, hardly
any two of which exhibited precisely the same plumage, but
varied from the perfect Tawny to the Snow-Bunting in its
whitest state; the feathers of those of the intermediate
state being more or less charged with white.”
The Snow-Bunting or Snow-flake is generally considered
only a winter-visitor to this country, and to the other tem-
perate parts of Europe; large flocks, consisting chiefly of
the young birds of the year, bred in high northern latitudes,
annually visiting our islands in autumn. But there is little
doubt that some pairs breed every summer in the Highlands
of Scotland, while the nest and eggs have been several times
found in Unst the most northerly of the Shetlands. Pen-
nant, during one of his tours in Scotland, learnt that they
bred on the summit of the highest hills in the same places
as the Ptarmigan, especially naming Invercauld, where he
had one shot for him on August 4th; and Thornton mentions
SNOW-BUNTING. 3
that he saw some Snow-flakes on the top of a Ptarmigan-
mountain near Lochaber August 29th, probably in 1784 or
1785.* It does not appear that the Snow-Bunting was
again observed in summer in this district until the
middle of July 1874, when Mr. Nicholas Cooke (who had
seen several birds on Ben-y-Bhean, one of the Ben Nevis
range, July 6th, 1866), as he kindly informed the Editor,
saw one in immature plumage on Craig Maige, a hill about
4000 feet high at Loch Laggan. On the other hand the
species has been frequently noticed in summer in the neigh-
bourhood specified by Pennant. Thus Macgillivray mentions
his having observed a beautiful male bird flitting about the
summit of Ben-na-muic-dhui (4500 feet) August 4th, 1830,
and his meeting some days afterwards with a flock of eight
—evidently a family-party, near Lochnagar + (3700 feet) at
the top of which just twenty ycars later he again saw three
examples (Nat. Hist. Dee Side, p. 45), while he states on
the authority of three informants that the species breeds on
several other mountains in the vicinity. From his earlier
experience he had already inferred the probability of the
Snow-flake breeding, perhaps in considerable numbers, on
the higher Grampians, though he truly remarked that it was
impossible for the vast flocks seen on the lower grounds in
winter to be exclusively of Scottish origin. In 1859, Mr.
Edward asserted (Zool. p. 6597) that he had often met with
the bird in different places in Banffshire during summer,
but had never been able to detect it breeding. Mr. R. Gray
states that he has most satisfactory information as to the
species being seen throughout the year on the mountains
already named, as well as others near them in the counties
of Aberdeen, Banff and Inverness, adding that it was a
source of wonder to his informants that they had never
found the nest. On June 21st, 1870, Col. Drummond-Hay
saw a pair on Ben-na-muic-dhui where he had no doubt
* The year in which the Colonel's expedition was made seems to be nowhere
stated in his book, and the present Editor only gives it approximately from
internal evidence.
+ It must not however be supposed that the ‘‘ Snow-flake”’ of Byron’s poem on
this mountain refers to the bird.
4 EMBERIZID&.
they were nesting, and in 1871 Mr. Harvie Brown heard
that young birds had been again seen on Lochnagar. Mr.
Gray also learnt from Mr. Wilham Hamilton that on July
12th, 1868, that gentleman and his brother saw, on the top
of Scuir Ouran, a hill some 4000 feet high on the borders of
Inverness and Ross, two pairs of Snow-Buntings, which
no doubt were breeding, and the same- naturalist also states
that near Gairloch, in the western part of the latter county,
there is a group of high mountains which are lkewise
frequented by these birds in summer, while Mr. John
Bateson of Shielday has lately informed him that they breed
in a range of precipitous hills in that neighbourhood.*
In the posthumously-published ‘Birds of Shetland’ of
the lamented Dr. Saxby it is stated that a few Snow-Bunt-
ings invariably remain throughout the summer in those
islands. Many years ago, having observed them in pairs
from May till August on the hill and cliffs of Saxaford in
Unst, he became convinced that they must breed there, and
his suspicions were strengthened by seeing two of their eggs
among the spoils of a local dealer. However he says “No
certainty in the matter was arrived at until the 2nd July 1861,
when a man discovered a nest and three fresh eggs, all of
which he brought to me. He had found them in the crevice
of a rock near the top of one of the high sea-cliffs at Burra-
firth, below the hill of Saxaford. The nest was rather shallow,
and was composed of coarse grass and fibrous roots, lined
with wool and fine hair of horses and cows. After this I
often observed the birds in the breeding season, once in
July, about the chffs at Graveland, but usually near the old
spot.” In 1867 Saxby again obtained three more unidenti-
tied specimens, and in 1871 a nest and four eges which had
been found the preceding summer among the stones of a
demolished cain in Saxaford. This nest is described as
being very like the former one, but it was a little thicker
and contained a few pieces of fern in the walls.
In the Feeroes a considerable number of Snow-Buntings
pass the summer. On the more southerly of the islands
* Capt. Kennedy thinks that it also breeds in the Orkneys (Zool. s.s. p. 3914).
SNOW-BUNTING. 5
they are restricted to the mountain-tops, but on the more
northerly they frequent the lower grounds in small colonies.
Wolley found a nest with almost fully-fledged young and an
addled egg on the Loisinga Fjeld, July 15th, 1849, but on
that hill, in 1872, Capt. Feilden searched carefully without
coming across a bird. Throughout Iceland the species is
perhaps the commonest of small birds—a pair or more being
established in nearly every convenient locality, even among
the most desolate lava-streams, and 1t breeds there almost
on the sea-level as well as up to the snow-lne. According
to Faber it winters in that island. In Spitsbergen it is the
only Passerine bird which is ordinarily met with, and though
it can hardly be called very numerous there it breeds almost
as far to the northward as the land extends. It is doubtless
only a summer-visitor, and Dr. Malmgren observed a large
flock at sea in the latitude of Bear Island on May 19th,
which after resting for a short time on the rigging of the
vessel pursued their way in the direction of Spitsbergen.
In Nova Zembla Mr. Gillett found it to be very common,
and according to Dr. von Heuglin its southward migration
thence begins in the middle of September. It breeds
throughout Norway, both on the more northern islands of
the coast and on the higher fells of the interior, especially
within the Arctic Circle, but also on some of the southern
mountains, even in Thelemark so low as lat. 60°. Except
those on or near the frontier there are few hills in Sweden of
sufficient altitude to afford this species a congenial home,
but on such as are high enough both there and in Finland it
is almost unfailingly to be observed. In Russia the southern
limit of its summer-range does not seem to be recorded,
but it is believed to breed on the eastern slopes of the Ural,
and thence across the most northern portion of Siberia to
Behring’s Strait—its distribution at that season being pro-
bably as much affected by elevation above the sea-level as by
latitude. Throughout the most northern parts of the New
World it also breeds, and in many places very abundantly,
so that its summer-habits have there been well observed,
and for a long time the accounts given by the older explorers
6 EMBERIZID%.
of the Arctic coasts and islands of America furnished almost
all the information possessed by naturalists concerning its
nidification. But here again the southern limit of its
breeding-range seems to be unknown. Audubon mentions
a nest found on the White Mountains of New Hampshire,
but from the description we may almost safely pronounce
that it did not belong to this species. Mr. Allen however,
on the authority of Mr. C. W. Bennett, states that a pair
reared their young in 1862 at Springfield in Massachusetts.
Still Mi. Reeks believes that the Snow-Bunting can hardly
breed in Newfoundland, where one would expect that it
should, though he saw many there in June 1868. In Green-
land it is very abundant and breeds generally throughout
the country, for it was even observed by Dr. Pansch to be
the commonest land-bird on its seldom-visited east coast.
As already intimated on the approach of autumn the
Snow-Bunting migrates southward from most of its breed-
ing-quarters. In Iceland indeed it is found all the year
round, though we may presume that those which remain
there are comparatively few, and large flocks visit the Feroes
in winter-time, but in Norway at that season it rarely occurs
in the most northern districts. From Tromsé, however,
southward it frequents the coast-region in countless nun-
bers. These countries supply most of the examples which
regularly resort to our own islands and in some years
appear in vast flights. The beginning or middle of October
is usually the time of their arrival, but a few stragglers are
occasionally seen in September *, and though severe weather
generally drives them further to the southward, in many
localities they abide with us till the end of March or begin-
ning of April. During their stay with us the greater
number affect rough ground or open fields near the sea-
coast, but from time to time small parties occur far inland,
so that there is hardly a county in the three kingdoms in
* The earliest date for England is perhaps Sept. 16th, 1875, on the Lincolnshire
coast, of which Mr. Cordeaux has informed the Editor; but in the South-west of
Scotland Capt. Kennedy has observed it in July and August (Zool. s.s. p. 3914).
These birds may have been bred in Great Britain.
SNOW-BUNTING. if
which the species is not known to have been observed—its
appearance in the south of both England and Ireland being,
however, far less frequent and regular than in the north.
Elevated moors and uplands generally are, almost equally
with the localities just named, a favourite resort, and when
these are covered with snow the birds descend to the lower
grounds where larger supplies of food are to be obtained.
“Their call-note is pleasing,” remarks Selby, “and often
repeated during their flight, which is always in a very
compact body; and frequently before settling on the ground,
they make sudden whirls, coming almost in collision with
each other, at which time a peculiar note is produced.” So
close indeed do they fly that one of Thomson’s correspon-
dents states that he had killed thirty at a single shot, and
they crowd together as much when they alight, so that Mr.
Lubbock likens the appearance of a flock at rest to “a
variegated carpet.” Saxby writes “Seen against a dark hill-
side or a lowering sky, a flock of these birds presents an
exceedingly beautiful appearance, and it may then be seen
how aptly the term ‘Snow-flake’ has been applied to the
species. I am acquainted with no more pleasing combina-
tion of sight and sound than that afforded when a cloud of
these birds, backed by a dark grey sky, descends as it were
in a shower to the ground, to the music of their own sweet
tinkling notes.” Their food in winter seems to be chiefly
grass-seeds, so long as these are forthcoming, but on the
sea-coast near the Humber, it consists almost exclusively of
the seeds of Schoberia or Sueda maritima, as mentioned by
Mr. Cordeaux, and the Editor is able to state the same fact
as regards the west of England from examples sent him by
Mr. Cecil Smith and examined by Mr. Hiern. On occasion
they will also eat corn—especially oats. Thompson states
that once in the north of Ireland they did great harm by
picking the sown wheat from the ridges, and Dr. Gordon
informs the Editor that they yearly do considerable damage
in this way on the shore of the Moray Firth. In America
Wilson found them, in October, feeding not only on the seeds
of water-plants, but on the shelled mollusks which adhered
8 EMBERIZID &.
to the leaves. On the ground, and in Western Europe they
seldom perch on a tree or bush,* they run with ease and speed
after the manner of Larks, and like those birds are easily
netted or snared. They arecommonly fat and well-flavoured.
In confinement they seldom live long except under very
favourable conditions +.
On the continent the Snow-Bunting is a regular winter-
visitor to the north of France, central Germany and all the
countries between these parts and its breeding-haunts.
Stragelers occasionally wander further and have been ob-
tamed though rarely in the south of France, Switzerland
and Italy. Two examples are said to have been caught at
Malta in 1840 but possibly the species was mistaken.+
Nevertheless Tyrwhitt Drake saw a specimen, since exam-
* In North-eastern Russia, however, Messrs. Brown and Seebohm saw them
repeatedly perching, both singly and in flocks, upon trees. Audubon in America
speaks of their frequently alighting on trees (Orn. Biogr. ii. p. 516), but Dr.
Coues (Birds of the Northwest, p. 119) says he has rarely seen them do so.
Such is certainly not their habit with us, and the instance to the contrary
recorded by Mr. Murray Matthew (Zool. p. 6208) is possibly unique. The state-
ment in the published version of Linneus’s Lapland journal (Lachesis Lapponica,
ll. p. 97) respecting the people who with a crossbow-bolt ‘‘ take successful aim at
the Emberiza nivalis or Snow-Bunting sitting on the top of the most lofty pines ”
is such that no ornithologist could suppose was made by one so well acquainted
with this species as his account of it (Sw. Vet. Ak. Handl. 1740, p. 368)
shews him to have been, and therein he expressly says that it does not
commonly sit upon either bough or bush; but it is satisfactory to the Editor to
say, after consulting the original manuscript (p. 260) in the possession of the
Linnean Society, that the translator mistook the words ‘‘ sma Sparfver” (small
Sparrows) for ‘* Snd-Sparfver” (Snow-Sparrows) and thus led Sir James Smith
to the further error of introducing the scientific name of the latter.
+ They have however been more than once known to breed in eaptivity, and
Mr. Stevenson possessed a pair which in two successive seasons built a nest inside
some rock-work in his aviary. It was indeed inaccessible to his examination but
the birds were seen for some days carrying into the hole a large quantity of
materials, and soon after the hen used only to appear at long intervals and then
for but a few minutes at a time, feeding hastily like a sitting bird and returning
to the hole which was jealously guarded by the cock. This went on for about a
fortnight when it was supposed that the eggs were hatched, but the young pro-
hably died in a few days owing to the want of proper food, for the parents soou
abandoned the hole.
¢ The Snow-Finech (Montifringilla nivalis) from its general resemblance to the
Snow-Bunting has in several cases been the cause of error as to the occurrence of
the latter in the south of Europe. The bill and hind claws however afford ready
characters whereby the one bird may be distinguished from the other.
SNOW-BUNTING. 9
ined by Col. Irby, which had been picked up dead at
Cape Spartel near Tangier, and Mr. Godman mentions the
appearance of a flock of about a score on Corvo, one of the
Azores, in the winter of 1864-65, while an example killed
in Fayal, another island of that group, was subsequently
sent to him. There is no record of its occurrence in Por-
tugal or Spain, and it seems to be equally a stranger to
Greece or Turkey though it occasionally visits the Crimea.
In Asia we have no information as to the southern limit otf
its winter migration, but Mr. Swinhoe says that it visits the
north of China in cold weather, and the Zoological Society
has received a living example from Japan. In America its
distribution in winter seems to depend almost entirely on
the severity of the season and especially on the amount of
snow which may fall, but it is believed not ordinarily to
penetrate further towards the south than lat. 35° N. and on
the Pacific coast not so far. In the Missouri valley and in
New England it is often exceedingly abundant. In the
Bermudas it is said seldom to fail making its appearance in
December and January, sometimes in considerable numbers.
From all southern districts, on the approach of spring, it
again returns to the northern latitudes whence it came.
Many of the dreariest places in those countries are en-
livened by the Snow-Bunting making its home among them.
From his perch on some moderate elevation the cheerful,
not to say melodious, song of the cock, conspicuous in his
pied plumage, gladdens the heart of the traveller over the
wildest lava-streams and most barren moors of Iceland, and
in lands still more desolate, or even totally destitute of
human inhabitants, the agreeable effect of his notes is
heightened. But the song, or part of it, is also often
delivered on the wing, the bird springing into the air and
hovering some ten feet or more above his wonted seat to
which on its conclusion he again repairs, or he will flit to
some similar station an hundred yards off and thence renew
the performance; while his chosen partner, whose more
dusky attire makes her less easily seen, is busily engaged in
getting her living from the scanty herbage that sprouts
VOL. II. Cc
10 EMBERIZID%.
between the massive rocks and stones with which the ground
is thickly strewn,* or idly basks in a sheltered nook where
the slanting rays of the northern sun shed a warmth that
though feeble is not despicable. Each pair of birds seems
to occupy at this season a limited and almost definite range,
the invasion of which is instantly resented by the cock, who
with a defiant note darts towards the intruder, when there
follows a fierce fight only terminated by the conquest and
flight of one of the antagonists, whereupon the victor re-
turning to his citadel celebrates the triumph in his loudest
strain and most fantastic dance. Even the fitful changes of
the stormy summer of these countries do not altogether
quell the spirit of this brave little bird, and through driving
sleet or thick fog he may still be heard at his post, while
with the first gleam of sunshine he is again as gay as before.
When his mate is sitting he will often wander to a consider-
able distance, but his quickness in perceiving the moment
that she, however silently, leaves the nest is something
wonderful, and his instantaneously rejoining her shews that
he has never been forgetful of his duty. This feature in his
character makes the discovery of the nest by any one who
has a fair amount of patience almost a matter of certainty.
By keeping an eye on the actions of the cock the hen must
sooner or later be found, and if imeubation be begun not
many minutes will then pass before she cautiously commences
her return. This she generally accomplishes by a circuitous
route, and, creeping close to the earth, taking advantage of
every inequality of the ground so as if possible to keep out
of the spectator’s sight, her movements are hard to follow,
and occasionally the bird’s-nester will find that her ingenuity
has been too much for him. But prudence and a little ex-
perience will generally reward his efforts and enable him to
mark her disappearance in the mass of stones or chink of a
rock in which is the object of her care. Yet to reach the
nest when its place is thus discovered is often a work of toil.
It may be at the end of a long and tortuous approach, re-
* In Arctic America at this time the food is said by Richardson to be buds
of Saxifraga oppositifolia, one of the earliest of northern plants.
SNOW-BUNTING. lat
quiring the removal one by one of many stones of various |
sizes, it may be ensconced behind some huge boulder which
needs all the engineering resources of the seeker to stir or,
buried securely beneath a slab of earthfast rock, 1t may com-
pletely defy his power.* Then too his hopes are often cis-
appointed, for, despite his utmost precautions, at the last
and critical moment some earth or splinters of stone loosened
by lever or wedge may be found to have fallen in upon
and cracked the eggs as they he. All these circumstances
generally combine to render the successful taking of a
Snow-Bunting’s nest one of the most delicate and exciting
operations on which an oologist can enter, except that
personal danger is seldom if ever involved.
As is shewn by the accumulation of old materials often
found therein, the birds commonly use the same nest-hole
more than once. A rude collection of dry grass, moss or
any other plants that may be growing near forms the founda-
tion and outworks of the nest. This is hollowed out to
receive a quantity of finer grass and roots substantially
woven into a bowl, which will occasionally bear removal
from the outer mass without losing its shape, and is lined
with hair or soft feathers—especially those of the Ptarmigan
of the country. Herein are laid the eggs, from four to six
or even eight in number, measuring from ‘91 to ‘82 by from
‘65 to 57 in. They are white, more or less tinged with pale
greenish-blue, on which are patches of lilac, sometimes very
bright but generally dull, the whole closely or sparingly
spotted, streaked and splashed with deep brownish-red, upon
which again are frequently a few apparently black spots and
irregular lines. Some eggs when fresh are of exceeding and
almost indescribable beauty.
It remains to add that the young, soon after they are
* Capt. Lyons found a nest placed in the bosom of the corpse of an Esquimaux
child on Southampton Island.
+ Pages might be written on the breeding-habits of this species without ex~
hausting the subject. The Editor has necessarily to be brief here and only to
describe what seems to be absolutely requisite to give a slight notion of them. To
him the Snow-Bunting will always be one of the most interesting of birds, from
the many hours he has passed in watching its behaviour.
1 EMBERIZID &.
hatched, are clothed with dark sooty down, and are fed, as
would appear from Herr Collett’s observation, chietly on the
larvee of Zipulide. Their plumage when they have left the
nest will be presently described, and they accompany their
parents for some time, perhaps until the advancing season
gives all warning to depart for other lands. Then the dif-
ferent family-parties unite in bands whose numbers are daily
swollen by fresh adherents until they form a mighty host
that with the first frosts of winter takes wing over the
southern seas.
The adult male in breeding-plumage*, of which a good
representation is given by Bewick, has the bill black: the
irides hazel: the head, neck and all the lower parts pure
white, though in some examples the top of the head and the
nape are mottled with black, and there is generally a black
spot visible above and behind the ears. The upper wing-
coverts, except those of the bastard-wing which are black,
and the secondaries white; but the latter are often black
towards the extremity, though their tip seems to be always
white; and in some examples the middle wing-coverts are
also black, bordered with grevish-white, forming a distinct
black bar across the wing; the primaries and tertials are
black, the former however white at the base, and the latter
often bordered outwardly with white; the back is jet-black,
mottled more or less on the rump with white; the three
inner pairs of tail-quills black, occasionally shehtly bordered
or tipped with white, but the three outer pairs are nearly
white, with a black patch towards the tip: the legs, toes and
claws black.+
The adult female, at the same time, much resembles her
* Tn this state English specimens are very rare: one was killed in the grounds
of Mr. Wortham, at Royston, May 22nd, 1840, and given by him to the Author
of this work ; a second, ‘‘ pretty far advanced,” was shot near Penzance in April.
1864, as recorded by Mr, Rodd (Zool. p. 9109); a third, in “ full summer
OE:
plumage,” was obtained, according to Mr. Dutton (Zool. s.s. p. 792), April 14th,
1867, at Eastbourne, and a fourth, in ‘full breeding plumage,” at the same
place early in July, 1872, as mentioned by Capt. Kennedy (Zool. s.s. p. 3914).
+ The birds which in breeding-plumage exhibit the black mottling of the
head and the black bar on the wings are most likely those in which the white
tip of the fedthers is worn off more than in the others.
SNOW-BUNTING. 13
partner, but the white on the head and the rest of the upper
parts is much more mottled with black and dusky, and oe
colours are not so pure.
The young, in its first plumage, has the bill yellow, dark at
the tip of the upper mandible, the head, sides of the neck and
the back are of a greyish-olive, variegated towards the rump
with reddish-brown; the white of the wings is also tinged,
and the quills of both wings and tail are bordered with the
same colour; the throat and lower parts are dirty white,
tinged on the throat and belly with pale yellow, and on the
breast and flanks with reddish-brown.
The adult male, on its arrival here towards winter, as
figured at the head of this article, has the bill yellow,
darker at the tip: top of the head and the ear-coverts more
or less covered with deep reddish-brown on a white ground ;
the feathers on the back black at the base, with broad ends
of pale reddish-brown; the wings much as in the summer-
plumage except that the tertials are broadly bordered with
dull chestnut; upper tail-coverts black at the base with
broad ends of pale reddish-brown or, in some examples, of
white, and hardly shewing any of the first colour; the tail
as in summer; all the lower parts dull white, more or less
tinged with reddish-brown on the breast and flanks. In this
state it has been called the Tawny Bunting; when present-
ing less white than the figure here given, as is in the state
called the Mountain- Bunting.
The female at the same time, figured by Bewick as the
Tawny Bunting, has the top of the head dull chestnut-
brown, which becomes paler on the nape; the whole upper
surface mottled with blackish-brown and dull chestnut ;
the wings shew but little white except at the tip of the
lesser coverts and the base of the secondaries; the white
of the tail is less bright; the chin and throat are dull
chestnut, becoming deeper in tone across the upper part
of the breast, the rest of the lower surface dull white.
The whole leneth of the male is about seven inches.
From the carpal joint to the end of the longest quill-feather,
four inches and a quarter. The females are a httle smaller.
cs EMBERIZID.X.
Systematic ornithologists long ago recognized the distinct-
ness of the families Kinberizide and Fringillide, but of late
most authors have shewn a disposition to merge the former
in the latter. Very recently Prof. Parker has ascertained
the existence in the Hmberizide of an additional pair of
palatal bones (the “palato-maxillaries,” as he calls them)
which are wanting in the normal VFringillide, and this
discovery will probably lead to a restoration of the older
view; but it would seem that certain American forms, as
Cardinalis and Phrygilus, hitherto unhesitatingly assigned
to the Fringillide, also possess these bones, and will therefore
have to be included among the Lmberizide, though it is not at
all impossible that among the birds of the New World some
will be found which, by the structure of their palate, bridge
over the gap between the two families. The palatal knob,
so characteristic of most of the
of the Old World—is, according to the same investigator,
formed by a swollen ingrowth of the dentary edges of the
premaxillary mass. The Linnean genus Himberiza has
been split into many groups by various authors. Several otf
these obviously do not deserve recognition as genera, the
characters which distinguish them being very trifling; but
the present species and the next differ so much aa the
normal Buntings in the form of the wing, in the straight
hind-claw, and in their habit of running and not hopping on
the ground and of singing in the air, that the admission of
Bernhard Meyer’s genus, Plectrophanes, for their reception
would appear to be needed.
LAPLAND BUNTING. 15
PASSERES. EMBERIZIDA.
PLECTROPHANES LAPPONICUS (Linnzus *).
THE LAPLAND BUNTING.
Plectrophanes Lapponica.
THE LAPLAND BUNTING, a native, as its name imports,
of the most northern parts of Europe, and even of the
Arctic Regions pretty generally, has been taken on several
occasions in this country. ‘The first instance was announced
to the Linnean Society by Selby, early in 1826, the bird
having been found in Leadenhall Market, whither it had
been sent with some Larks from Cambridgeshire, and after
being preserved by Mr. Weighton of the City Road, passed
into Vigors’s collection, which was subsequently given to
the Museum of the Zoological Society. The second exam-
* Fringilla lapponica, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 317 (1766).
16 EMBERIZID®.
ple was caught on the downs near Brighton, in or prior to
1827, and kept caged for some months, when it came into
my own collection (Trans. Linn. Soc. xv. p. 156). The
third was also taken alive in September, 1828, a few miles
north of London, and its capture made known by Mr. Gould
(Zool. Journ. v. p. 104). The fourth, caught near Preston
in Laneashire, in October, 1853, was selected from a variety
of other small birds in the Manchester market, and is now
preserved in the museum of that city. The fifth is recorded
(Zool. p. 516) as having been obtained in the summer of
1843 near Milnthorpe in Westmoreland. Each of these
examples exhibited the plumage of the less conspicuous
bird in the woodeut here given. On September 30th, 1844,
an adult male was netted with some Larks on the downs near
Brighton ; and this specimen, which I have seen in the pos-
session of Mr. Borrer, is in the plumage of summer as
represented in the lower figure, but undergoing a slight
change from the advance of the season.
Since this date the occurrence in England of more than a
dozen examples has been put on record. Most of them
were caught alive, and kept for a longer or shorter time in
captivity. Three of them are said to have been taken near
Brighton, three not far from London, four in Norfolk, two
in the neighbourhood of Shrewsbury, one near Southport in
Laneashire, and one near Durham. In most cases the birds
were associating with Larks, and no mention is made of any
one of them being accompanied by others of its own species.
The Lapland Bunting is stated to have been found twice in
Caithness, the only instances of its being observed in Scot-
land; but its appearance in Ireland has not been recorded.
The home of this species is neither so far to the north-
ward nor in such alpine heights as that of the preceding.
It never verges on the line of perpetual snow nor inhabits
the stony wastes so much affected by the Snow-Bunting,
but prefers the upland swamps where there is a_ thick
growth of low willows and other plants characteristic of such
spots, especially if there be also an abundance of long
grass. These places are in Lapland equally the resort of
LAPLAND BUNTING. 17
the Bluethroat, the northern form of Yellow Wagtail, the
Red-throated Pipit and the Titlark; but this Bunting will
also frequent higher levels than any of those birds, the last
only excepted, and may be found in colonies where the
cloudberry and the dwarf birch form the prevailing vege-
tation. Arriving from the south at such bogs, so soon as
the surface-soil is thawed, the cock-birds are fond of display-
ing their gay plumage to the best advantage on any elevated
perch, and rising in the air deliver, while hovering on the
wing and then gently gliding to another station, a song that
though not marked by any brilliant notes has a tone of
sweetness; yet the gesture by which it is accompanied
supplies its principal attraction. When not singing they
mostly occupy themselves in chasing or being chased by one
another, or, sitting on the most prominent position avail-
able—and it must be said that any prominent position on a
bog of this kind is comparatively humble —from time to
time utter a rather harsh though plaintive note. The pre-
liminaries to the breeding-season being ended, this species
is usually seen in pairs, but the several pairs do not evince
that dislike of their neighbours’ society which is so cha-
racteristic of the Snow-Bunting, and thus the same suitable
moss or portion of a moss, often of very limited area, will
accommodate a dozen or more pairs which, the exciting
period just mentioned being past, soon enter peaceably
upon the work of nest-building. For this purpose the
shelter of a thick tussock of grass, the base of a lgneous
shrub or any inequality the ground itself may present is
chosen, and the foundation is laid with the usual rough
materials. Within this a cup-shaped nest is formed,
chiefly of the stems of dry grass, and then a bedding of
soft feathers is superimposed. This lining, according to
the Editor’s experience, invariably * distinguishes the nest
* Richardson, however, writing of this bird in Arctic America, says that the
‘‘nest is lined very neatly and compactly with deer’s hair.” He was an observer
so scrupulously accurate that one can hardly doubt his word, yet it is to be
remarked that it seems just possible for him to have mistaken the nest of one of
the allied North-American species (Plectrophanes pictus, which is said not to
use feathers, for example) for that of the Lapland Bunting. Nests of this last
VOL. II. D
18 EMBERIZID Ai.
of the Lapland Bunting from that of any other bird fre-
quenting the locality, and therefore deserves especial men-
tion, since the eggs, from five to seven in number, not
uncommonly so closely resemble those of the Red-throated
Pipit (Anthus cervinus), Titlark and even the Reed-Bunting
(which occasionally finds its way to the breeding-haunts of
the present species) that they cannot always be picked out.
They measure from ‘87 to ‘78 by from ‘61 to ‘55 in., and
have a clay-coloured or pale grevish-chocolate ground, suf-
fused with darker reddish-brown, on which are seen spots,
blotches and curved lines of a darker shade of the same
tint, in many places distinct, but the larger markings gene-
rally with blurred edges.
When the young have left the nest they accompany their
parents for some time, and the family-parties unite towards
the end of the summer, but it does not appear that this
species ever forms very vast congregations—indeed it is
hardly anywhere sufticiently numerous to do so, being
generally a local bird. In Europe its breeding-range
seems not to extend further southward than lat. 62° N., and
that only in the mountain-districts of Norway, while i
Sweden, Finland and Russia its summer-limit, though from
want of information not to be determined, must he much
more towards the north. In Asia also it cannot be said to
be known to breed outside of the Arctic Circle, but in
Eastern Siberia it is apparently more abundant than else-
where in the Old World, since in autumn Mr. Swinhoe
found it in the market at Tientsin by thousands which had
doubtless been bred to the northward. In the New World
it breeds on the most western of the Aleutian and on the
Prybilov Islands, as well as in Alaska. The Hepburn
Collection in the Museum of the University of Cam-
bridge contains a specimen in full summer-plumage from
Fort Simpson in British Columbia, which is perhaps the
obtained by Mr. H. Ws Elliott on the Prybiloy Islands are said to have con-
tained feathers, and those from Greenland, of which the Editor has seen several,
are profusely lined with them. It may here be mentioned that eggs of this
bird from Greenland are on the average distinctly larger than those from
Lapland.
LAPLAND BUNTING. 19
most southern locality known for the species in America at
that season, though Mr. Trippe’s observations in Minnesota
induce him (Proc. Essex Inst. vi. pp. 115-119) to think
that it may breed in that State. Richardson states that it
breeds in moist meadows on the shores of the Arctic Sea,
and that is also the case along the west coast of Green-
land, while the German Expedition obtained it in full sum-
mer-dress at Shannon Island on the east coast. Mr.
Dresser was informed by Herr Benzon that he had received
its eggs from Iceland, but the species must be rare in that
island if indeed there be more than the one unquestion-
able instance of its occurrence, in 1821, as recorded by
Faber.
The line of this bird’s migration has been supposed to
lie a good deal to the eastward, for though, as already said,
it is In summer pretty widely distributed in Norway and
Lapland its occurrence at other seasons has been but seldom
recorded in the western part of the continent of Europe.
This remark applies even to the lowlands of Central and
Southern Norway and Sweden, and it has only been observed
as an irregular autumnal visitor to Denmark, many districts
in Germany, Holland, Belgium and France. But on the
other hand this apparent rarity is most likely due to its
being overlooked in those countries, since Mr. Cordeaux, on
Mr. Giitke’s authority, says that in Heligoland it is so com-
mon in autumn as not to be considered worth shooting. In
severe winters it has been met with much further to the
southward, even in the neighbourhood of Montpellier, as
well as in Piedmont and in Lombardy, but it does not seem
to reach Central Italy. Its occurrence near Geneva was
long ago recorded by Necker, and further eastward it has
been met with in the Vienna market and at Lemberg. In
Central and Southern Russia it is said to be very rare, but
about Moscow and Jaroslav a few are met with in spring
and autumn, but not every year. Across the Ural—which
chain of mountains it has from the time of Pennant been
known to frequent, while it has even been supposed to breed
near Ekaterineburg—it becomes more abundant, and, accord-
20 EMBERIZID.E.
ing to Eversmann, is very common on the Kireis Steppes.
Thence we have no intelligence as to the extent of its
winter-migrations till we come to China, its appearance in
the northern parts of which country has been already
noticed. In America the limits of its range at the same
season are also uncertain, but it would seem not to reach
California on the west, further to the southward than the
Upper Missouri in the interior, or Kentucky and Pennsyl-
vamia for the eastern part of the continent. Richardson
never met with this species in the Fur-countries during
winter, but in 1827 it appeared on the plains at Carlton
House about the middle of May and on the newly-ploughed
land at Cumberland House, which is a little further to the
north, a few days later; but in the preceding year many
were seen early in May at Fort Franklin, though that is
situated within a degree of the Arctic Circle. The latest
collections, made by Kennicott and others, in this part of
the Dominion of Canada speak to the abundance of the
Lapland Bunting near the Mackenzie River and the Great
Slave Lake.
In its fondness for swampy places and its general appear-
ance this bird much resembles our common Reed-Bunting,
so that it may have been often mistaken for that species ;
but, though frequently perching on bushes, it runs on the
ground as does the Snow-Bunting; and, except in the breed-
ing-season, has many times been observed in company with
the latter or associated with the Shore-Lark. As to its
food little has been ascertained. The crops of those killed
at Fort Franklin were filled, says Richardson, with the
seeds of Arbutus alpina, but the Chinese, according to
Mr. Swinhoe, take them in springes baited with the small
maggots which are found in decaying millet-stalks, these
birds must therefore have a strong fancy for animal food
even in winter. Herr Collett found only small insects and
gravel in the stomachs of those which he examined during
the summer in Norway.
The adult male in full breeding-plumage has the bill
yellow, with the point black: irides hazel: the whole of
LAPLAND BUNTING. yen |
the head velvet-black *, with the exception of a streak of
yellowish-white which, beginning at the nostril, runs on
either side over the eyes, where it becomes a broad stripe,
and passes above and behind the ear-coverts to the sides of
the neck whence it turns downward to the throat; beneath
this stripe a collar of bright chestnut, widest on the nape of
the neck, extends forward to a point on either side; the
back, rump and upper wing-coverts, dark brown with lhehter
edges, those of the smaller wing-coverts being whitish, the
rest reddish-brown, which .becomes almost chestnut on
those of the greater coverts and tertials; the outer flight-
feathers blackish-brown, with a narrow light outer margin ;
the tail-feathers also blackish-brown, with narrow lighter
edges, but the two outer pairs have an angular patch of
white and a brown shaft-mark towards their tip ; beneath, the
black of the head descends to the throat and upper part of
the breast, where it forms a fine gorget surrounded by the
white stripe already described; the rest of the lower parts
dull white, the sides of the breast and flanks being streaked
with black: legs, toes and claws, pitch black.
The whole length is about six inches and a quarter,
From the carpal joint to the end of the wing, three inches
and five-eighths.
The female differs in wanting the conspicuous black head
and gorget, and in having the top of the head blackish-brown,
the feathers tipped with wood-brown, the under portion of
the ear-coverts and a stripe from the corner of the mouth
black—the rest dull yellowish-white; the chin and throat
dull white with a black line descending from each corner of
the lower mandible, which there uniting with the stripes from
the mouth forms an ill-defined patch on the upper part of
the breast; the chestnut collar is smaller and less bright
than in the male and is more or less mottled with dark
brown; the rest of the plumage is nearly alike in both
Sexes.
After the autumn-moult the male has those parts which
* If the plumage be not quite perfect there is generally a trace of a light
median streak on the occiput.
22, EMBERIZID%.
were black in summer, as well as the chestnut collar, mottled
with dark brown and white. The darker hue of the breed-
ing-dress is produced by the buff edges of the feathers
dropping off.
My own young bird has the bill brown: the whole
plumage dark brown, with light brown edges; wing- and
tail-quills brownish-black ; throat, breast and all the lower
surface, pale brown, spotted with darker brown on the
breast and flanks: legs, toes and claws, light brown.
The vignette represents the foot and sternum of this
species.
REED-BUNTING. 23
PASSERES. EMBERIZIDE,
EMBERIZA SCHGNICLUS, Linnzus *.
THE REED-BUNTING.
Emberiza scheniclus.
Empenriza, Linnewus t.—Bill hard, conical and short; the upper mandible not
wider than the lower, the edges of both inflected and those of the latter sinuated ;
the palate generally furnished with a projecting bony knob. Nostrils oval, basal
and placed somewhat near the culmen, partly hidden by small feathers. Gape
angular. Wings moderate: first primary finely attenuated and so small as to seem
wanting ; second, third and fourth generally nearly equal, the fourth or fifth
commonly the longest in the wing and considerably longer than the next. Tail
rather long and slightly forked. ‘Tarsus scutellate in front, covered at the sides
with an undivided plate forming a sharp ridge behind, almost as long as the middle
toe. Claws considerably curved, that of the hind toe of moderate length.
THE REED-BUNTING, or Reed-Sparrow f, as it is most com-
monly called, is a well-known inhabitant of marshy piaces
* Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 311 (1766). Tt Tom. cit. p. 308.
¢{ The name of Black-headed Bunting, first applied to this species by Beilby
(who wrote the text of the first volume of Bewick’s well-known work) and adopted
in former editions of these volumes, had already been appropriated by Latham to
a perfectly distinct species. As the latter has now to be included as a ‘ British
Bird” there seems to be no choice left but to fall back upon the older and far
more generally used name of Reed-Bunting.
24 EMBERIZID&.
and the sides of running or stagnant waters where they are
bordered by alders, osiers, reeds or rushes; and, though local
from its partiality to such situations, it is not a rare species 1
this country, where if remains throughout the year, shifting its
haunt however to some extent according to the season, and
in hard weather not unfrequently joining the congregations
of other Buntings and Finches which assemble round corn-
stacks and in barn-yards, occasionally far away from water.
The contrast of the black head of the cock-bird in spring or
summer with the white collar on the neck, and the varied
colours of the back, give it an agreeable appearance, and it 1s
accordingly a pretty general favourite. If suitable localities
are visited, the male during the breeding-season may be seen
perched on a conspicuous spray by the water-side, amusing
his mate and himself for an hour together with his song,
which consists of an interchange of two or three notes, the
first of which are short and the last of all long. This song,
repeated at brief intervals, has a family-likeness to that of
the allied species, but, apart from its seeming harmony with
the dreary spots the bird often frequents and enlivens, it must
be deemed wanting in melody, and when heard, as it may
also be, in a fertile valley amid the voices of other birds
sounds harshly and out of place. The nest is generally
built on the ground among long grass or rushes, at the foot
of a thorn or on the side of a bank, more rarely in a low
bush, elevated some few inches above the ground; but
Jardine states that he has frequently found it on a young
spruce-tir, at the height of from one to three yards. It con-
sists of coarse grass with a little moss, lined with finer grass
and hairs, or in places where reeds abound the feathery tops
of those plants often form the sole lining and the greater part
of the structure. The eggs are from four or five to seven
in number, of a pale purple-brown or clay-colour, spotted,
blotched and streaked with a darker purple-brown or black,
and measure from ‘83 to ‘7 by from ‘62 to 56 in. Incu-
bation often begins at the end of March, but a second nest
is generally made, and perhaps even a third brood is pro-
duced in July. Several observers have recorded the artifices
REED-BUNTING. yas
to which this species has resort to distract the attention of
man from its progeny. The most common of these is the
feigning of lameness by the mother-bird, who with trailing
wing or leg, as if disabled, will shuffle through the herbage
for a considerable distance; but at times the cock will also
enter into the wiles of his mate, and both parents will dis-
play an extraordinary amount of solicitude in regard to a
spot which does not harbour the young with the consequence
of misleading the intruder, if at all wanting in experience,
from the place where they lie. The food of the Reed-
Bunting is grain, seeds (chiefly those of grasses) and insects
—on the larve of which last the young are especially fed—
with small freshwater crustaceans and mollusks, and its
stomach usually contains much fine gravel.
By some of the older naturalists the song and the nest of
the Reed-Wren and Sedge-bird already described (vol. i. pages
369 and 376) have been attributed to the Reed-Sparrow, and
perhaps there may yet be writers so ill-informed as to con-
tinue the mistake. The hurried, varied and chattering notes
of both those Warblers can never be for a moment confounded
with the simple strain of this Bunting by any one who has
heard the latter, and in ike manner though its nest be occa-
sionally composed of the same materials as that of the Reed-
Wren, before figured in this work (tom. cit. page 375), the
one can always be known by its smaller size and neater
workmanship, and by its being wholly suspended between
the reed-stems, while the other even when attached to the
stems seems to be always supported from beneath.
The Reed-Bunting breeds in suitable localities almost
everywhere throughout the British Islands, Shetland being
the principal exception, since there, according to Saxby, only
three examples have been observed, but these arrived in the
earlier half of the year. Baikie and Heddle state that it has
bred in Orkney, and Mr. Gray says that it does so in most
of the Outer Hebrides, indeed, according to information
communicated by Capt. Powlett-Orde, it is very common in
North Uist. In Scotland generally its numbers seem to
receive a large increase in winter, and probably the same is
VOL. II. E
26 EMBERIZID &.
the case to some extent in England—at any rate on the
east coast. In Ireland, says Thompson, it is a resident
distributed over the whole island, which from the prevailing
humidity is peculiarly well suited to it.
It is found in swampy ground over almost the whole of
continental Europe from the neighbourhood of the North
Cape to the Straits of Gibraltar, and apparently in all the
principal islands of the Mediterranean as far as Crete. It
occurs too in the neighbourhood of Tangier, and, according
to Loche, inhabits all three of the provinces of Algeria, but
from the silence on the subject of several other observers in
that country 1t would seem not to be plentiful there, and it
is not to be traced further to the eastward in Africa. As
to the determination of its range in Asia great difficulty at
present exists, for there is certainly a second, if not a third,
form of Reed-Bunting found in many parts of Siberia, and
the Russian ornithologists do not agree with regard to the
rank to be assigned to either or both. It would seem,
however, that a form quite indistinguishable from our own
occurs throughout the south-western portion of the Russian
dominions in Asia, and that this was also found by Dr.
Severzov in Turkestan. Mr. Hume too (Ibis, 1869, p. 355)
has obtained it from near Badlee, some thirty miles to the
south of Delhi, and the identity of the species with the
European bird was subsequently confirmed by the late M.
Jules Verreaux, though the Reed-Bunting had been hitherto
unknown in India.
The bill is dusky brown above, paler beneath: irides
hazel: the adult male in breeding-plumage has the whole of
the head jet-black, bounded by a white collar, which descends
to the breast ; from near the corner of the gape a white stripe
passes backwards below the ear-coverts and joins a broad
white nuchal collar, which is succeeded by a narrow band
of iron-grey and dull black; back and wing-coverts deep
brownish-black, each feather broadly bordered with bright bay
and ochreous, the former so predominating on the upper
wing-coverts that they seem to be wholly of that colour; the
wing-quills dark brown, the primaries with a narrow margin
REED-BUNTING. 2
of ochreous-white, but that of the secondaries and tertials,
especially the latter, broader and redder as the inner part of
the wing is approached; the rump and upper tail-coverts
brownish-black mixed with iron-grey; the tail-quills dark
brown; the middle pair somewhat lighter than the rest and
with broad light edges, the two outer pairs margined exteriorly
with white and having a large white patch on the inner web ;
chin and throat black, which it first widens out under the
white collar and then forms a pointed gorget ending on the
upper part of the breast; all the rest of the lower plumage
white, which is pure on the sides of the breast, belly and
lower tail-coverts, but clouded and streaked with brown on
the sides of the body, flanks and tibize: legs, toes and claws,
brown.
The adult male in autumn and winter has all the feathers
of the upper parts so broadly bordered with heht reddish-
brown that the darker tints are greatly if not altogether
obscured. The same is the case on the chin and throat, so
that the bird seems to have a brown head, only here and
there mottled with black. In the spring these light edges
fall off and leave the head and throat of a pure black.
The whole length of the male is six inches. From the
carpal joint to the end of the wing, three inches: the third,
fourth and fifth primaries nearly equal in length, and con-
siderably longer than the second, which again is a httle
longer than the sixth.
The female is rather smaller than the male, and has the
upper part of the head and ear-coverts dark brown, the
feathers being bordered with lght reddish-brown; the lores
and a stripe over and behind the ear-coverts, pale yellowish-
brown; the back and wings almost as in the male; the chin
and lower parts dull white with an interrupted streak of dark
brown descending from each lower corner of the mandible ;
the feathers of the chest dark brown along the shaft,
becoming light reddish-brown on each web, and bordered
with dull white, so as to present a distinct and broad spotted
gorget.
Young birds in autumn and winter have the bill dusky
28 EMBERIZID®.
horn-colour, the lower mandible yellowish; the plumage
generally resembles that of the female, but the light-coloured
borders of the feathers are so long as to conceal nearly all
the darker part, and while those of the crown of the head,
the nape and back are edged with ochreous-erey, those of a
stripe on each side of the vertex, and of the wing-coverts,
tertials and inner secondaries are more rufous; the line
immediately over the eye, and the front and sides of the
neck are pale ochreous, but the ear-coverts and the streak
from the lower corner of the mandible are distinctly marked
with dark brown; the pectoral gorget is ill-defined, and the
longitudinal streaks which mark it are continued along the
sides of the body and flanks. Young males seem to acquire
the black head in the spring following their first winter.
It was proposed by Friedrich Boie (Isis, 1826, p. 974)
to separate this species from the genus EHmberiza, but
whatever reason he might have had for so doing he gave
none, and it seems to the Editor that none which can be
deemed sufficient is assignable. Nevertheless Boie’s pro-
posed genus Cynchramus has been adopted by several
writers.
The vignette below represents the breast-bones of the great
Bunting, to be presently described, and the Reed-Bunting.
ice =
a. \
: —— .
\
RUSTIC BUNTING. 29
PASSERES. EMBERIZIDE.
tele
EMBERIZA ‘RUSTICA, Pallas *.
Pe RUSTIC.’ BUNTENG.
News of the first and hitherto the only known occurrence
in England of the beautiful Bunting above figured was com-
municated to ‘The Ibis’ for 1869 (p. 128) by Mr. Gould in
a letter dated December 30th, 1868. The specimen, which
is now in the collection of Mr. Monk, was caught near
Brighton, October 23rd, 1867, and shewn while alive to Mr.
Rowley. Its portrait has been given by Mr. Gould in his
‘Birds of Great Britain.’
The proper home of this species is the north-eastern part
of Europe and the most northern part of Siberia. Pallas
originally described it as arriving in March in the willow-
beds of Dauuria, afterwards adding that it is abundant
along the rivers of Transbaikalia, where it sits on the
ground and trees singing with a voice not unlike that of the
Reed-Bunting. Steller observed it in Kamchatka, as Kitt-
litz subsequently did. Nearer to us it was shot at Hapa-
* Reisen durch verschiedene Provinzen des Russischen Reichs, ili. p. 698 (1776).
30 EMBERIZID.
randa, May 20th, 1821, and the specimens so obtained were
described as a new species, under the name of Hmberiza
horealis by Zetterstedt (Resa genom Sveriges och Norriges
Lappmarker, 1822, i. p. 107), who was not aware of
Pallas’s prior discovery; but Prof. Nilsson, who had pre-
viously met with the bird and thought it to be a variety
ot EE. scheniclus, a few years later conclusively identified
the two supposed species. Zetterstedt during a second
journey (Resa genom Umea Lappmarker, 1853) _ be-
lieved he had met with it in various places in Umea and
Lycksele Lappmark, but there is reason to suppose him
mistaken; for, though Schrader states (Journ. fiir Orn. 1853,
p- 256) that he found it breeding in Lapland, it never
revealed itself to the keen scrutiny of Wolley, Pastor
Sommerfelt or Herr Nordvi, and it must be regarded as
a mere straggler to that country. Nevertheless a little
further to eastward it would seem to be a regular summer-
visitant, and Dr. Malmgren has kindly informed the Editor
that it breeds every year near Kajana in Finland, in which
country it had before been observed by Johann von Wright
and Arthur von Nordmann. In the neighbourhood of
Archangel also it annually appears and doubtless breeds.
The naturalists to whom we owe nearly all our knowledge of
the ornithology of Northern and Eastern Siberia—Drs. von
Middendorff, von Schrenck and Radde—never found it
breeding in the parts of the country which they explored,
though they corroborated the statement of Pallas by
observing it as a regular bird-of-passage in various localities.
Mr. Swinhoe has met with it in North China; * and it has
long since been recorded as a visitor, at least, in Japan.
As astraggler in autumn or winter it has occurred several
times in Southern Sweden, and occasionally in Germany
from Altenburg to Austria. Mr. Giitke has obtained it at
least four times in Heligoland, and it extends its wanderings
* In one of his numerous and valuable contributions to Chinese ornithology
(Ibis, 1861, p. 255) he stated that this species had occurred to him in Talien
Bay, in June or July, 1860, but herein he was, as he has subsequently informed
the Editor, in error, having mistaken another species for it.
RUSTIC BUNTING. ol
not unfrequently to the South of France and Northern
Italy. Naturalists have long hesitated whether the Mtilene
de Provence, figured in the ‘Planches Enluminées’ (656,
fig. 2*), was not this species, and to judge from the plate
so it was; but the belief of De Montbeillard and some others
in its being a native of the countries bordering on the
Mediterranean is assuredly an error. It was said by
Temminck to occur in the Crimea, but this is probably
one of the random assertions to which he was prone, and
the authority on which it was made is not stated.
Of the habits of this bird little has been recorded. They
would seem on the whole not to differ much from those of
the Reed-Bunting; byt Messrs. Alston and Harvie Brown
state that the specimens they procured near Archangel
were found in marshy pine-woods and in openings in the
forest—places which would hardly be frequented by that
species. They add that its.call-note resembles that of its
congener; but other observers have likened the sound to
that produced by very different birds—the Redwing and
Redbreast for example. Disregarding, for the reasons before
assigned, the account given by Schrader, nothing seems to
be positively known as to its nidification. An egg pro-
fessedly belonging to this bird, in the possession of the
Editor, measures ‘84 by ‘6 in. and is of a pale greenish-
white, patched with dull ash-colour and streaked and spotted
with dark olive—much resembling certain varieties of those
which the Lapland Bunting occasionally lays.
Few of the Buntings bear confinement well, but M.
Barthélemy-Lapommeraye kept an example of this species in
an aviary for two years, and Mr. Keulemans, the draughtsman
to whom the present edition of this work is indebted for the
foregoing figures of this and some of the other species now
for the first time introduced, had an example for more
than eighteen months in a cage. It was a cock-bird, and
was bought by him at Amsterdam in October 1868, but made
its escape in England in April 1870; while in the year last
* On this figure is founded the Lmberiza leshia of J. F. Gmelin (Syst.
Nat. i. p. 382).
3 EMBERIZID&.
mentioned a third is said to have been brought alive from
Moscow to Berlin.
The adult male in full swnmer-plumage has the bill
greyish-yellow, with the upper mandible brown: the irides
yellowish-brown: the lores, ear-coverts and top of the head
black, with but a scanty trace of the pale median streak
along the vertex which at other seasons is very conspicuous ;
above and behind the eye a stripe of pure white passes
backwards, nearly meeting a white patch on the nape,
which is immediately succeeded by a collar of bright bay
descending on each side so as to encircle the throat; the
back and upper wing-coverts are reddish-brown mottled with
black, the feathers of the former, with the scapulars, being
black near the shaft edged with bright bay and then more or
less broadly bordered with buff; the middle and lower wing-
coverts brownish-black with heghter borders and white tips,
forming two well marked bars across the wing; quills dark
brown with lighter edges, the two outer tail-quills on each
side having an oblique white patch; rump and upper tail-
coverts bright bay, the feathers bordered with buff; chin
black next to the bill, and, in some specimens, with an inter-
rupted black line extending downwards on each side from
the lower corner of the mandible, the rest of the chin and
throat white, as is the whole of the lower surface beneath
the bay collar, which sometimes passes into deep brown
on the median line and always forms a more or less
well-defined band across the upper part of the breast; the
sides of the body and flanks broadly streaked with bright
bay: legs and toes flesh-coloured, claws somewhat darker.
In winter the same bird has the feathers generally
broadly bordered with buff, so as almost entirely to conceal
the deeper tints of the plumage, and, in many examples,
even at the sreeding-season, these borders not being entirely
shed, especially from the top of the head, give the bird a
very different appearance, but the characteristic colouring
may always be discovered by examining the middle part
of the feathers.
The adult female in summer has the bill yellow: the top
Cy:
5
RUSTIC BUNTING. 33
of the head and ear-coverts brown, mottled with dark brown
and buff; the lores, vertical streak, superciliary stripe and
nuchal patch ochreous-white ; the bay collar narrower and
duller than in the male, and the warmer tints of the whole
plumage fainter except on the rump, where the bay is as
bright as in the other sex.
The young in autumn greatly resemble those of the Reed-
Bunting at the same season, but the tone of plumage
generally is yellower, the nuchal spot is distinct, and the bay
of the collar, sides of the body and the rump, even when
partly concealed by the ochreous borders of the feathers,
can always be detected.
The nestling plumage resembles that of the old hen in
the breeding-season, but the reddish tints are less bright
above and entirely wanting beneath, while the whole of the
lower parts from the chin to the vent is thickly streaked or
spotted with dull black.
The specimen in full summer-plumage here described is
in the Strickland Collection of the University of Cambridge.
The other examples were kindly lent to the Editor by Mr.
Dresser.
VOL, Il.
by
34 EMBERIZID A‘.
PASSERES. EMBERIZIDA.
EMBERIZA PUSILLA, Pallas *.
LHE LITTLE BUNTING,
AT a meeting of the Zoological Society of London on
November 8th, 1864, Mr. Gould exhibited a specimen of
this species, previously unknown to Britain, which he said
had been lately taken in a clap-net near Brighton (Proc.
Zool. Soc. 1864, p. 377). Soon afterwards Mr. Rowley
furnished (Ibis, 1865, p. 113) some additional particulars
of its capture, which took place on the 2nd of the month
named, and, from his examination of the lhving bird, not
only identified the species to which it belonged, but con-
cluded that it had not escaped from captivity. This speci-
men has since passed into the possession of Mr. Monk.
While like the species last described a native of the
northern parts of Eastern Europe and of Asia, this
small Bunting seems to be far commoner and perhaps to
have a somewhat wider range in its autumnal wanderings
than Lmberiza rustica, as well as to be a regular instead
of an occasional visitor to certain localities in Western
Europe, though it has doubtless been often overlooked in
* Reisen durch versehiedene Provinzen des Russischen Reichs, 11. p. 697 (1776).
LITTLE BUNTING. 35
others. A hen-bird is recorded by Prof. Nilsson as having
been shot near Lund in April, 1815, but there is no men-
tion of the subsequent occurrence of the species in Sweden,
nor of its appearance in Finland, Norway, or Denmark. Yet
in Heligoland Mr. Giitke meets with one or two examples
in September or October of almost every year, and, accord-
ing to Prof. Schlegel, a hen was taken near Leyden, 18th
November, 1842. Mr. Keulemans has informed the writer
of three other examples in Holland :—the first was bought at
Rotterdam in September 1862, and, after living about three
months in confinement, is now in the Museum of Leyden:
the second was caught by Mr. Keulemans himself in October
1862, and the third was found by him in a cage, but the
owner refused to part with it. In the autumn of 1874, Mr.
Labouchere caught another near Harlem. Still in Germany
it is only reported from East Prussia, and it has not been
observed in Belgium or Northern France. In the South, how-
ever, of the country last namedit is said by M. Jaubert to be
the commonest of the rarer Buntings which annually con-
eregate about Marseilles, and several examples have been
taken in Northern Italy, where they seem for some time
to have passed under the name of #. durazzi, which is
now generally though not universally regarded as a synonym
of #. pusilla. A pair were obtained near Vienna in 1850,
by Herr Zelebor and are preserved in the Museum there.
It is included by Messrs. Elwes and Buckley as a rather
rare winter-visitor on the Bosphorus. Writers on European
ornithology were slow to admit this species to a place in
their works, and it was not until Prof. Schlegel had recorded
its occurrence in Holland, as above stated, that it was
recognized as a denizen of this quarter of the globe, yet it
has been found to be not unfrequent by all observers of
birds who have visited the north of Russia—Prof. Lillje-
borg, Herr Meves and Messrs. Alston, Harvie Brown and
Seebohm. Near Archangel, say the two first of our
countrymen, it is “avery common species, but apparently
somewhat locally distributed. It frequents both pine-woods
of large growth and thickets of underwood, but seems to
36 EMBERIZID.
prefer young woods with a mixture of pine, fir, alder, and
birch. We often heard their sweet low song, more resem-
bling the warbling of some Sylvia than of an Hmberiza,
which was generally poured forth from the top of a tree;
they had also a low ery of alarm, which may be expressed
by the words ‘tick, tick, tick’ repeated at intervals of about
a second. We did not find any nests, but obtained the
young in several stages.”
Pallas, who in Dauuria discovered this species, described
it as being common about the mountain-torrents and in the
higher larch-woods of that country, subsequently adding
willow-beds to these localities. It is there migratory but
often killed by the cold. In spring it eats beetles of the
family Tenebrionide, His successors in the exploration of
Eastern Siberia have amplified his observations. Dr. von
Middendorff found it breeding on the Boganida, where, how-
ever, if was very rare and he only obtained two of its nests
from which he figures three eggs. He also observed it on
passage on the shore of the Sea of Ochotsk. Dr. von
Schrenck found a nest on the Lower Amoor in the opening
of a fir-forest. This contained five eggs, was placed on
the ground between the tussocks of a swamp, and was art-
lessly built of grass-stalks and larch-leaves. Prof. Radde,
in the south of Eastern Siberia, obtained nearly a score
of specimens, including the young and old of both sexes,
but as a breeding bird it seemed to him to be rare and
segregated. It was late to arrive and late to depart. In
the north of China Mr. Swinhoe says it is abundant, spread-
ing southward in winter. At the same season it is found
over the whole extent of the Himalayas, and would seem
occasionally to wander into the plains of India during the
cold weather, for Jerdon who had already procured it at
Darjeeling afterwards shot one near Kolassee in the Purneah
district. Mr. Hodgson obtained it in Nepaul, and Prot.
Adams in the North-west Provinces.
The eggs are figured by Dr. von Middendorff as having an
ochreous-white ground, blotched and spotted with reddish-
brown and black, and measuring from ‘88 to ‘7 by from ‘)8
LITTLE BUNTING. a7
to ‘53 in. Linaria rufescens, Vieillot, Memorie della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di
Torino, xxiii. Se. Fis. p. 202 (1816-1318).
+ Not Pring la linaria, Linneus.
LESSER REDPOLL. 147
between the two forms, which, as before stated, Vieillot first
clearly pointed out. It is to be hoped that British ornitho-
logists will no longer perpetuate the error of calling their
little favourite by a name which does not belong to it.
In some English counties, particularly in the south, this
Redpoll is known only or chiefly as a winter-visitor, appear-
ing in flocks from Michaelmas till April, though in others
it breeds more or less regularly, and the nest has been found,
according to the late Mr. Bury, so far to the southward as
the Isle of Wight (Zool. p. 643). Towards the north, and
in Scotland especially, it is resident all the year, changing
its haunts however according to the season. Information
collected by Mr. More shews that of English counties it
occasionally breeds in Dorset, Hampshire, Oxford, Warwick
—where indeed Mr. Rake says (Zool. p. 9248) he has re-
peatedly taken its nests—and Salop—where Mr. Rocke
(Zool. p. 9781) believes it breeds regularly. To these Mid-
dlesex must be added on the authority of Mr. Harting, Kent
on that of Mr. Wharton (Zool. p. 8951), Surrey on that
of Newman (Zool. s.s. p. 3235), Cambridgeshire on that
of the Editor, and Worcestershire on that of Mr. J. A. Drake,
as cited by Mr. Morris. Mr. More further states that it
breeds annually in Gloucestershire, and it certainly does so
in Suffolk, Norfolk, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Derby-
shire, Cheshire and thence in every county lying to the
northward throughout the island. But the places it frequents
vary year by year, and, without our being able to account for
the fact, otherwise than on the general supposition that its
choice is influenced by the supply of food, it may be found
in a locality abundantly during one season and during the
next may be altogether wanting.* This remark however
chiefly holds good as regards the more southern parts of its
breeding-range, for in the more northern it exhibits a much
greater constancy. The same may be said of it in Ireland,
where it is found from north to south, though more plentiful
in the former, and in the latter, indeed—the counties Cork
* Mr. F. Norgate has known of thirty or more nests in one year at one locality
in Norfolk, and in the next year scarcely any.
148 FRINGILLIDA.
and Kerry for instance, it seems to have been only observed
as a winter-visitor. Yet it is presumed to have bred on the
Blackwater in Waterford, and is known to have done so in
Tipperary, about Clonmel.
According to the best authorities the Lesser Redpoll is in
some years abundant at the time of migration in Holland
and Belgium, and it has long been known in France as a
regular winter-visitant. It is of nearly annual occurrence,
says M. Lacroix, on the northern slopes of the Pyrenees,
and in some years reaches Southern Spain as well as Pro-
vence. Its breeding in France is denied, but is asserted by
Bailly with regard to the Alps of Savoy. Dr. Salvadori,
however, considers its appearance in Italy to be very doubt-
ful. That it should occur at least accidentally in Western
Germany seems highly probable, but the Editor cannot find
positive proof of the fact, and in the recorded cases of its occur-
rence in that country we may suspect that young examples of
the Mealy Redpoll. have been mistaken for it. It is certainly
unknown throughout Scandinavia. Its geographical range
thus seems to be extremely hmited*, and, with the asserted
exception above mentioned, its area of distribution during the
breeding-season appears to be confined to the British Islands.
If this be so some explanation is afforded of the difficulty
which many foreign naturalists have found in admitting the
distinctness of the present form of Redpoll, since few of them
probably have had the opportunity of examining a series of
specimens of the true Linota rufescens.
regard being had to the necessary effect of its restricted
range, as just indicated, the habits of the Lesser Redpoll so
closely resemble those of the Mealy Redpoll that the account
of them already given would almost as well apply to the
present bird. Yet in a few points some slight differences
may be noticed. The Lesser Redpoll, caer very partial
* Its supposed occurrence in Northern Russia has been shewn in a previous
note (p. 140) to be erroneous. Drake (Ibis, 1867, p. 427) included this bird
among thiose he saw in Morocco, and MM, Jaubert and Barthélemy-Lapommeraye
say that it sometimes visits Algeria in winter, but some further evidence is needed
before the belief that it goes so far to the southward can be accepted.
LESSER REDPOLL. 149
to holts of alders, birches and willows, is not at all exclusive
in its choice of them for its breeding-quarters, and, besides
selecting coppice or underwood, will quickly avail itself of
the accommodation offered by young plantations of larches,
firs or trees of almost any kind, as well as of shrubberies.
Some shelter however is always needed, and Mr. Gray says
that among the Hebrides he has been unable to trace it
where such is absent. From Saxby’s silence on the subject
it would seem not to breed in Shetland—possibly from the
same cause. Tho vicinity of water is generally preferred,
but its actual proximity is not absolutely essential, and the
distance of a mile or so from where it can be procured is no
bar to an otherwise eligible situation*. Such a spot is often
frequented by several or many pairs of these birds, which
will have their nests within the compass of a few yards, and
in that case the actions of the birds soon make the existence
of the settlement evident to an ordinary observer. But they
are by no means always gregarious even to this extent, and
single pairs may be found taking up their abode apart,
while again considerable numbers will often meet at places
far from their nests, apparently prompted only by their
social instincts—for they do not seem to be in search of
food, and, after passing half-an-hour or more in company,
will separate and go their respective ways. The nest is
usually built in a low tree or bush, but occasionally at a very
considerable height, and on the other hand an humble site
among heather may be chosen. Itis nearly always a structure
of the most delicate beauty, formed outwardly of a few fine
twigs as a foundation, on which are placed dry grass-stems,
sometimes intermixed with moss and wool, the thinner stalks
being innermost, and is lined with vegetable-down, that from
the catkins of the willow being most often used, with the
addition or substitution sometimes of hair and feathers.
The whole nest is about an inch and a half in diameter and
* Ina district very ill-supplied with water where these Redpolls have occa-
sionally bred in abundance, the Editor has found that waiting by a pond-side for
them to come to drink, and then marking the line of their return-flight, often
leads to the discovery of their nest.
150 FRINGILLID.®.
the same in depth inside, the walls being scarcely anywhere
an inch in thickness*. The eggs, from four to six in number,
are not to be distinguished in colour from those of the Mealy
Redpoll, but are smaller in size, measuring from *69 to °57
by from *52 to 45 in. The time of nidification would seem
to vary somewhat according to locality. In the north of
England it doubtless begins so late that the young are, as
stated by Selby, seldom able to fly before the end of June or
beginning of July, but further to the southward the birds
are certainly a month earlier, as eggs are known to have been
laid by the end of April, though they may be also found
unhatched in June. In the north of Ireland, according to
Thompson, the eggs are laid during the first half of May.
The tameness of this pleasing little bird has long been
known. Pennant says that one ‘“‘ was so tenacious of her
nest as to suffer us to take her off with our hand, and we
found that after we had released her she would not forsake
it.’ + But this absence of fear is not confined to the breed-
ing-season, and even in autumn and winter, when nearly all
other birds are wildest, a flock of Redpolls as they feed may
not only be closely approached, and their various engaging
actions studied within a very short distance, but advantage may
even be taken of their heedlessness or unsuspecting confid-
ence to capture some of the party by means of a limed rod, or
to shoot at will almost any number of victims, the survivors,
as Mr. W. T. Bree has remarked (Nat. 1838, p, 426), return-
ing to the same tree after each discharge of the gun.
As summer draws on the Lesser Redpoll may be seen in
bands scattered over tracts of open country, feeding, like
Goldfinches, on the seeds of the thistle, groundsel, dande-
lion and other composite plants, but with the approach of
autumn these bands usually unite in larger flocks, and
though some undoubtedly stay near their breeding-quarters,
betaking themselves once more to woods, plantations or
* A nest brought to the Editor which was taken, in 1873, in a garden at
Cambridge was built in and upon that of a Long-tailed Titmouse.
t+ Both this bird and the Mealy Redpoll are easily reconciled to and have bred
in captivity.
LESSER REDPOLL. 151
hedgerows, the majority and especially the young of the year
keep to the unenclosed districts and migrate southward.
Of these again a considerable number leave this country
altogether and resort, as has been already noticed, to the
Continent, but enough always remain with us during the
winter to render their appearance, except in the extreme west
of England and Ireland, no rare event. Many a dull day
at that time of year is enlivened to the outdoor naturalist by
his encountering a flock of Redpolls, for to watch their agile
movements as they flit from tree to tree or swing back-down-
wards from the ends of the pendulous branches, all the
while keeping up an incessant twittering, invariably affords
interest and amusement. At this season, and even earlier,
they often associate with Siskins in their search for food,
and eat the buds as well as the seeds of trees, proving in
this way, says Selby, seriously injurious to young plantations,
but in general their numbers cannot be sufficient to pro-
duce any great damage. Occasionally too they will fall in
with a troop of some species of Titmouse, but the incongruous
companionship does not last long. The same locality is
seldom frequented for any length of time: in a few days, or
perhaps little more than a week, the supply of food it fur-
nishes is exhausted, and then the party rove off in some
other direction. Towards the end of winter the cocks break
out in song, which though not powerful is lively and agree-
able, and begin to indulge in the characteristic exultant flight
during which it is generally uttered. Pairing is effected
without much more than the show of contention, and the
mated couples, who exhibit the strongest tokens of mutual
affection, shortly after look out a convenient home for the
ensuing season.
In summer the bill of the cock is brownish horn-colour,
the lower mandible tinged with yellow at the base: the
irides dusky brown: the feathers covering the nostrils light
brown ; lores and ear-coverts blackish-brown mixed with
rufous on the latter; forehead to behind the eyes glossy
blood-red; the rest of the head, nape, mantle and upper
wing-coverts, dark brown, the feathers more or less broadly
152 FRINGILLIDA,
edged with light reddish-brown intermixed sparingly with
whitish-erey; both middle and greater wing-coverts tipped
with pale reddish-brown (as in the nestling Mealy Redpoll),
forming two conspicuous light bars of unequal leneth on
the wing; quills of both wings and tail dusky, bordered ex-
ternally with wood-brown, and the tertials broadly tipped
with heht reddish-brown; lower part of the back, rump
and upper tail-coverts dusky-brown, bordered with lght
rufous, and the last tinged with crimson; chin black ;
throat, chest and sides of the breast, glossy rose-pink,
mingled with dull white; middle of the breast, the belly,
flanks and lower tail-coverts, dull greyish-white ; sides of the
body and flanks streaked with dusky-brown: legs and toes
blackish-brown, the claws darker.
In autumn and winter the bill is yellow with the point
blackish, the light margins of the feathers are everywhere
longer, giving the upper parts of the bird a more rufescent
appearance, and the pink tint hardly makes any show until
after midwinter at the earhest.
The whole length is four inches and a quarter; from the
carpal joint to the end of the wing, two inches and _five-
eighths ; the fourth primary is one-twelfth of an inch longer
than the fifth; the tail is about two inches lone.
The female is a little smaller, and has no trace of pink on
the breast or rump; the chin is brownish-black, and the
lower parts are dull brownish-white, the breast, sides of the
body and flanks being streaked with dusky brown.
The nestling has the bill pale brown, with the upper
mandible rather darker: the head and nape dark brown—
each feather broadly edged with dull white; back and
upper tail-coverts dark brown—the feathers bordered with
light reddish-brown ; the wings and tail resemble those of
the adult, but the feathers are edged and tipped with buff;
the chin, neck, breast and flanks dull white, with a tinge of
light reddish-brown on the first, each feather tipped with
dark brown ; the belly, flanks and lower tail-coverts greyish-
white—the last being streaked with dark brown: the legs
and toes pale brown, the claws darker.
LINNET. 153
PASSERES. FRINGILLIDA,
LINOTA CANNABINA (Linneus*).
THE LINNET.
Linota cannabina.
From the great changes undergone by the males of this
Species at different seasons of the year, it was long before
the earlier British naturalists fully admitted that what were
known to them as the Red Linnet and the Grey or Brown
Linnet were the same bird in different plumages, but now
for many years no reasonable doubt on that score has existed ;
though the conditions, under which the bright red colouring
of the breast and part of the head of the cock is donned and
doffed, may be still deemed open to discussion and awaiting
further investigation.
The Linnet is a very well-known species, existing in great
numbers on most of the uncultivated lands of this country,
preferring especially those that are more or less overgrown
with furze. Of late years, in the opinion of many observers
* Fringilla cannabina, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 322 (1766).
VoL. II. xs
154 FRINGILLID®.
who are fitted to judge, it has become much scarcer—as
indeed would naturally follow from the bringing its favourite
haunts under the plough—but this decrease does not seem
to be so general as in the case of the Goldfinch, and, since
the Linnet to some extent frequents also enclosures and the
outskirts of plantations, there are perhaps few rural parishes
in the United Kingdom to which it does not still resort.
Though as a species it is found with us all the year round,
there is no doubt that a considerable proportion of the birds
which pass the summer in England arrive here from the
south in spring, while in autumn very large flocks consisting
of the bulk of those that have been bred in this country, in
addition to the visitors, leave our shores. When congregated
before their departure they are eagerly sought by birdcatchers,
for they are easily netted, and the cocks always meet with a
ready sale, as when taken at that season they soon adapt
themselves to confinement and are much esteemed for their
song.* Of those captured in spring a large number on the
contrary are impatient of imprisonment and die within a
short time. The detestable practice of catching them at
this season no doubt further accelerates the diminution of
the species throughout the country.
Except when actually breeding, Linnets are usually seen
in flocks, roving from place to place, feeding generally on
small seeds, particularly those of the cruciferous plants, and
are believed to do much mischief at times to crops of cole-
worts, but they consume equally countless grains of the
obnoxious charlock and knot-grass, while they also confer
great benefit on the agriculturist by the destruction of weeds
belonging to the order Composite. Their fondness for the
seeds of the various species of flax (Linum) and hemp (Can-
nabis) has long been known, and has given them their name
in several European languages—our own and the Latin
among others. Some of the Linnets that remain with us
throughout the winter seem in time of need to add to their
diet such berries as are accessible, and are said even to eat
oats among other food.
* Willughby knew a Linnet which lived for fourteen years in a cage.
LINNET., 155
In the pairing season, the thickest clumps of furze are
generally frequented, and early in spring the cocks may be
seen rapidly flitting from bush to bush, always perching on
the higher or outer sprays, and singing almost incessantly.*
Their strain is commonly in a soft and low tone, but it has
some notes of a singularly shrill sweetness, that, at intervals
of the greatest irregularity, mark the confused warbling
which is the result of two or more rival performers—more
bent upon shewing off their own prowess than blending
their voices in harmonious concert. The nest is usually
formed of fine twigs and fibres outside, mixed with moss
and grass-stalks, and is lined with wool, hair or vegetable
down, and sometimes a few feathers are added. It is gene-
rally placed in a low bush, but often in a hedge and occa-
sionally in a tree at ten or twelve feet from the ground,
while other less usual sites have been recorded. The eggs
are from four to six in number, measuring from *76 to ‘64
by from *56 to °49 in., and are of a french-white, more or
less tinged with green or blue, generally spotted, speckled
or blotched with light reddish-brown and pale purplish-red,
but sometimes the markings are almost entirely absent,
while at others they are either suffused or collected into bold
and dark spots. The Linnet appears to breed twice in the
season, the first eggs being laid in April.
When the broods are reared and the summer is over the
different families unite to form large flocks, which may be
seen careering vaguely over the country—the individuals
composing each flock constantly crossing and recrossing one
another in flight. At this time they often resort to the more
enclosed districts, visiting alike pastures, stubbles and fal-
lows, in search of such small seeds as they can find, and
roosting at this season on the ground. Many also following
their migratory instinct repair to the coast, where they feed
on the seeds of the sea-purslane and other maritime plants,
* As songsters few birds are perhaps more variable than Linnets—a fact well
known to ‘‘the fancy’’. Some can only repeat two or three unconnected notes,
which may be of the harshest tone, while others have a very considerable comi-
pass, and sing in a continuous manner. Neville Wood inclined to the belief
that they improved in song the second or even the third year.
156 FRINGILLIDE.
and it is perhaps in such neighbourhoods that most of those
which stop with us reside until the returning spring.
Towards the close of a fine winter’s afternoon the various
straggling parties that have been foraging all day long con-
eregate on the top of some tall tree in the sunshine, and at
first join in a gentle sort of chirping, presently bursting into
a full chorus of song, and then again resuming their single
strains continue this performance till the sun is set.*
The Linnet is generally distributed, as before remarked,
over the United Kingdom—exception being made as regards
Shetland, and is especially common in Ireland. In the low-
lands of southern Norway it is pretty common, buf becomes
scarcer towards the north and is not known to breed beyond
lat. 63°. In Sweden it does not usually appear much higher,
but Johann Wahlberg obtained it at Lulea, and Wheel-
wright says that he saw it at Quickjock. The latitude above
mentioned seems also to mark off its ordinary limit in Fin-
land and Russia, in which latter it is found on the Dvina
and so probably to the Ural mountains. Pallas says it is
never seen in Siberia, but it is now known to inhabit
Turkestan, which at present must be taken as its most
eastern extension.t Thence it may be traced through
Persia, Circassia, Armenia, Asia Minor and Palestine,
where it breeds, to Egypt, where it is a winter-visitant, and
Abyssinia. In Algeria and Morocco it is abundant, as well
as in the Canaries and Madeira. In the locality last named,
the cocks are said to keep their bright colouring all the year,
instead of losing it in winter. Throughout all the rest of
Europe, south of the boundary above indicated, it is plenti-
fully dispersed, and, except in the most northern parts, is
generally to be found at every season, though, as with us, the
ereat bulk of the birds depart at the approach of winter.
* Tt is at this time that the combination of sounds resembles the ending of
the Redwing’s song as before stated (vol. i. page 270).
+ Under the name of Linota fringillirostris Bonaparte described (Monogr. des
Loxiens, p. 45, pl. 49) a bird said to come from Nepaul. It appears, however,
to be unknown to Indian ornithologists. Some authors refer it to the common
Linnet, to which, even if it be a good species, it must be nearly allied. Syrian
specimens of the Linnet, it may here be remarked, have been looked on as
forming a distinct species and called by Ehrenberg Fringilla bella.
LINNET. 157
A very fine male in full summer-dress has the bill of a
bluish lead-colour but paler at the base of the lower man-
dible : the irides hazel: the feathers immediately above the
bill, on the lores and round the eyes, light dusky ochreous ;
those of the fore part and top of the head glossy blood-red ;
those of the rest of the head, the ear-coverts, nape and sides
of the neck, brownish-grey, more or less distinctly streaked
with a darker shade; the back and upper wing-coverts,
nearly uniform rich chestnut-brown ; bastard-wing and coverts
of the primaries brownish-black, edged with hair-brown ; the
primaries and secondaries dull black, outwardly edged with
white, which on the fifth, sixth and seventh is broad and
very conspicuous during flight, the secondaries are also tipped
with greyish-white ; the tertials dusky, with their outer web
dull chestnut-brown ; upper tail-coverts brownish-black,
broadly edged with ochreous-white ; tail-quills black, nar-
rowly edged with white on the outer and broadly on the
inner web; chin and throat greyish-white, streaked along the
middle with greyish-brown ; breast glossy rose-red, passing
into light chestnut-brown on the sides of the body; belly
and lower tail-coverts dull white; flanks yellowish-brown :
legs, toes and claws, brown.
Such an example as is above described is not very often
to be met with. Most commonly the fine carmine of the
cap and of the breast is replaced by a brownish lake-red,
clouded with rufous-brown—the feathers on those parts not
having wholly shed their fringe of the latter colour; brown
prevails on the occiput and neck, and pale brownish-ochre on
the throat and belly, while the back is darker ; but it would
seem that the red tints continue to brighten as the summer
proceeds until the whole plumage is changed at the autumnal
moult.*
In autumn and winter the bill is brownish horn-colour:
the crimson wholly disappears from the cap and the breast ;
the feathers of the head, cheeks and ear-coverts, are dark
* What is known among birdeatchers as the ‘‘lemon”, ‘‘saffron” or
“sulphur ”’ -breasted Linnet occurs not unfrequently near Brighton, Mr. Rowley
thinks in the proportion of about one to fifty. In this the crimson of the breast
is replaced by a fine lemon-yellow.
158 FRINGILLID.©.
brown, with lighter brownish-grey edges; the back and upper
wing-coverts, dark brown, the margin of each feather being
lighter; the quills remain as in summer; but the throat,
breast, belly and lower tail-coverts, are pale wood-brown,
with conspicuous streaks of dark brown on the breast.
Males when caged never acquire the fine crimson seen on
the head and breast of wild birds; and such as are caught
when possessing it speedily lose it in captivity. Naturalists
generally believe that this brilliant tint is not assumed till
the second year or even till after the second moult*, but it is
an undoubted fact that many Linnets are found breeding
without the red breast, and this, as would appear, especially
in the north of England, though in the south some trace of
the ruddy colouring may nearly always be found in the
summer-plumage of the cocks. Its development indeed
seems due, as was stated long ago by Temminck and since
confirmed by Gloger, Macgillivray and Herr Meves, to the
weathering of the brown fringes of the feathers, may be
through rain, and possibly also to the action of light in dissi-
pating the duller hues. To this last cause perhaps may be
attributed the alleged fact of the Madeiran examples retain-
ing their gay tints all the year round.
The whole length is about five inches and three-quarters :
from the carpal joint to the tip of the wing, three inches and
an eighth; the second primary is usually the longest, but
there is some individual variation in this respect, the third
being occasionally longer than the second, but both are
always longer than the fourth, which is about a quarter of an
inch longer than the fifth, while the first as stated among the
eeneri¢ characters is so small as to be easily overlooked.
The female is a little smaller than the male, and has the
upper parts dark brown, each feather, however, being broadly
edged with light rufous-brown; while the lower parts are
dull ochreous-brown, slightly tinged with rufous, and streaked
* Mr. Hancock, however, has very recently stated “ that the males, from shed-
ding the nest feathers get a red breast, which they retain only during the first
season ; they then assume the garb of the female, which is retained for the rest of
their lives.”’ With the greatest respect to the experience, judgment and acute
observation of his friend, the Editor is compelled to think this opinion mistaken.
LINNET. 159
with dusky-brown. A female is said however to have been
taken bearing a fine red breast.
The young much resemble the female, but have less of
ochreous-brown and none of the rufous tinge on the breast,
belly and flanks.
The vignette represents the mode of working clap-nets, a
very effectual engine in constant use among birdcatchers.
It consists of two equal flaps of net, each about twelve yards
long by two yards and a half wide, which by a simple con-
trivance can be simultaneously pulled over towards each
other, so as to cover the space between their points of
motion, which are in parallel lines nearly as far apart as the
width of both flaps. Call-birds, either caged or tethered by a
brace, are set about the nets to decoy their wild brethren
that come within sight or hearing. One birdeatcher is
represented in the act of pulling the two flaps over to
enclose the birds between them: the man in the foreground,
with his nets packed at his back, exhibits their convenient
portability ; while the boy with the bird-call already in his
mouth shews another needful accessory to success.
160 FRINGILLID A.
PASSERES. FRINGILLID.
LINoTA FLAVIROSTRIS (Linnzeus *).
THE TWITE.
Linota montiumt.
Tue TwitkE is at once distinguished from the common
Linnet by the greater length of its tail, which gives it a
more elongated and slender appearance, and by having a red-
dish-tawny throat. Moreover it assumes no crimson colouring,
either on the head or breast, at any season of the year, though
the rump of the male is always more or less of that tint,
forming the chief external characteristic of the difference
of the sexes. This bird was first made known to Willughby
by Jessop, of Broom Hall, who found it in the Peak of Derby-
shire. Rudbeck, the Swedish naturalist, included its portrait
in his collection of coloured drawings and, on the strength of
this figure, it was named Fringilla flavirostris by Linneus,
who also described it in his ‘ Fauna Svecica,’ but so in-
adequately that, but for Prof. Nilsson’s subsequent deter-
mination of the subject of the picture (K. Vet.-Acad. Handb.
* Fringilla flavirostris, Linnwus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 322 (1766).
+ Fringilla montium, J. F, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 917 (1788).
TWITE. 161
1816, p. 27), the application of the name might still be
doubtful. In the meanwhile other authors, Brisson and
Pennant among them, had more fully described the species,
and some years later J. F. Gmelin in his compilation con-
ferred the name Fringilla montium on their bird without
perceiving that it was identical with #. flavirostris. For
this perhaps he is not much to be blamed, but his diagnosis
is altogether inapplicable, and, though his appellation has been
generally used by British writers, we need feel no compunc-
tion in setting it aside for that which had been before given.
The Mountain-Linnet, as many writers of books have called
it, though for nearly a century at least it has been far more
generally known to those most conversant with it as the
Twite, is only a visitor to the eastern and southern parts of
England, where it is generally seen in small flocks, which,
arriving in autumn, sometimes stop for the winter in favour-
able situations, but mostly pass on and may again be observed
on their return-journey in spring. In the south-west, Devon-
shire and Cornwall, it is of very rare occurrence indeed*,
but it breeds in some abundance in the more hilly districts
of the Midland Counties—Hereford, Salop, Stafford, Derby
and Chester, as well as in North Wales and the Isle of Man,
and on elevated moorlands in the higher glens with increas-
ing frequency northward from Lancashire and the West
Riding of Yorkshire to Shetland, though in some districts it
is rather scarce, and its stronghold in the west of Scotland is
the Outer Hebrides. In Iveland it is found from north to
south, and probably breeds in suitable localities throughout
the island, but the only counties in which the Editor can yet
say that it does so are Donegal, Tyrone, Armagh and Antrim
in the north, Shgo and Mayo in the west, Dublin and
Wicklow in the east, and Tipperary and Cork in the south.
In food, flight and general habits the Twite very closely
resembles the Linnet, which it partly or wholly replaces in
some of the wilder or more mountainous districts of these
islands, and much that has been said of that species applies
* Mr. More was informed that the nest had been found in the north of Dorset-
shire, but this is very unlikely.
VOL. It. x
162 FRINGILLIDA.
equally to the present. The Twite, however, is naturally far
more a bird of the open and, content with the shelter afforded
by long heather and the ordinary vegetation of a moorland
country, it commonly retires before the encroachments of
cultivation. But where, as in the northern and western
Scottish isles which it permanently inhabits, retreat is impos-
sible, it has of late years begun to accommodate itself to the
changes wrought by agriculture and the planting of trees.
[1 early spring it betakes itself to its chosen quarters, and
the flocks in which it has collected during winter disperse in
pairs over the hilly tracts. The song of the cock is pleasing,
and, though scarcely equal to it in compass, has much in
common with that of the kindred species, being often
delivered from an elevated perch, or while the bird is flutter-
ing above the spot where the nest is. This is most generally
placed among heather, furze or brushwood, but often on the
eround, under large stones, occasionally on a ledge of rock,
and in various other situations. Both in Shetland and in
the Hebrides the increasing growth of trees and shrubs has
latterly induced this bird to prefer them as a building-place,
and to that end it comes into gardens and occupies the fruit-
bushes, while a favourite site is beneath a long strip of turf
that has been turned up by the plough. The nest, which
seems to take a good many days in building, is neatly formed
c
of fibrous roots, twigs or stalks of plants, dry grass and
moss, worked up with wool, and usually lined with feathers,
hair or fur. The eges, five or six in number, measure from
‘74 to °65 by from °54 to°47 in. When looked at one by
one they are generally quite indistinguishable from those of
the Linnet, but a series shews that the light red markings
are less frequent end the bold dark brown specks or blotches,
which in this species often take the form of irregular lines,
more numerous.
Where, as in the Scottish isles, this bird is extremly
abundant, it assembles in vast flocks in winter and is accused,
apparently not without some show of reason, of being very
mischievous. It resorts to the corn-yards and undoubtedly
consumes, When the opportunity offers, a large quantity of
TWITE. 163
erain ; but Saxby has placed beyond doubt the fact that its
chief object in boring, as it does, into the stacks is rather
to obtain the innumerable small seeds of various weeds that
are harvested with the crop. Accordingly he thinks that
this habit should be reckoned among its good deeds. A far
graver charge against it, in these islands, is that of destroy-
ing the newly-springing turnips and cabbages, and the guilt
here must, he says, be admitted, though common precautions
would easily guard against the loss. On the whole he con-
siders that the farmer gains by the bird’s consuming the
seeds of noxious weeds, and especially by its rooting out the
hateful charlock on which it feeds equally with the cultivated
cruciferous plants. Over by far the greater part of this
country the ‘T'wite is not sufficiently numerous to affect crops
one way or the other, but when it visits the lowlands, as is
the case every winter, whatever it does must be beneficial, for
it keeps almost entirely to the stubbles and fallows, which at
that season afford it nothing that is valuable to man.
The appearance of the Twite in the south and east of
England is subject to much irregularity, especially as regards
numbers. It is most commonly seen consorting with
Linnets, frequenting like them the neighbourhood of the
sea-coast, and usually feeding on the seeds of maritime
plants, but it also oecurs not rarely inland. Our bird-
catchers immediately recognize its presence among a flock
of its congeners by its shriller call-note, the sound of which
is considered to resemble that of the word ‘“ twite,’’ whence
the name by which it is so generally known. Otherwise
there is not much to distinguish it when at large from the
Linnet, though a practised eye may perhaps perceive its more
taper form and the smaller extent of white shewn on the
wings and tail as it flies.
The Twite breeds in certain spots along the coast of
Norway as high as Tromso, as well as in some parts of the
interior, but it is not generally dispersed in that country, nor
in Sweden, where indeed its breeding-area seems still more
limited, not being known to extend below the subalpine dis-
tricts nor northward of lat. 64° 40'N. In Finland the bird
164 FRINGILLIDA.
has been observed near Uleaborg and may perhaps breed
there. In autumn however it is found abundantly through-
out the middle and southern parts of all these countries as
well as in Denmark, and occasionally winters there if the
weather be not too severe. Further eastward its boundaries
at no season of the year can be confidently laid down. It
may be presumed to breed in some parts of Russia since it
has been several times obtained near Archangel and it
occurs, though rarely, in winter in the southern Governments.
There is no authority for its appearance in Siberia, but
Messrs. Dickson and Ross include it as observed in flocks in
autumn at Erzeroom, and Dr. Severzov gives it as being
found in winter in Turkestan, but in both cases the nearly-
allied Linota brevirostris has most likely been mistaken for
it. KHxcept as above stated it nowhere breeds in Europe.
On the southern shores of the Baltic it arrives abundantly
in autumn and, if the season be mild, will winter in North
Germany, but if otherwise it passes further on, sometimes
appearing in Galizia, Bohemia, Austria, Switzerland and
Upper Italy. It comes to Holland and Belgium every
autumn in numerous bands, which pass on to Picardy and
Normandy: some stray even further south, but the bird is
rarer about Paris, and only occasionally reaches Provence and
Savoy. It has not been heard of in Portugal, but has been
obtained in the south of Spain—Murcia and Andalusia.
The bill in summer is of a pale yellowish flesh-colour:
the irides hazel: the lores dusky; the feathers immediately
above the bill, and above and below the lores and eyes, are
light reddish-ochreous ; the rest of the head, ear-coverts, and
upper parts generally, including the upper tail-coverts but
excepting the rump, dark brown, edged with light ochreous ;
the tertials and wing-coverts are likewise tipped with the
same, and the latter thus exhibit two bars across the wing ;
primaries and secondaries very dark brown, five of the
former having the outer web narrowly edged with white ; the
rump rich purplish-red, in some examples almost scarlet ;
the tail dark brown, the four middle and the outer pairs
being narrowly edged on the outer web with greyish-buff,
TWITE. 165
and the remaining three pairs with white, while all have the
inner web more or less margined with greyish-white; the chin
and throat are of a rich ochreous, which becomes paler on
the breast and flanks, where it is mottled with ill-defined
streaks of brown, and nearly white on the belly and under
tail-coverts, the vent being tinged with brown: legs, toes
and claws, very dark brown.
The red on the rump is in winter confined to the middle
of the feathers, and at that season the bill is of a greyish-
yellow, while the longer fringes of the feathers above give
the bird generally a lighter and more mottled appearance.
The whole length is five inches and a quarter: from the
carpal joint to the tip of the wing, three inches; the third
primary is generally the longest but herein there is some indi-
vidual variation, the second, third and fourth being sometimes
equal, while the first is so small as to be easily overlooked.
The female wants the red colour on the rump, and is also
lighter in colour above ; the bill, less decidedly yellow at the
base, is dusky brown at the tip.
Young birds have the bill pale greyish-brown and the
feet light brown, otherwise they generally resemble the adult
females, though their darker markings are lighter in colour
and the white on the wings is less extensive.*
* The removal of the last four birds from the genus Fringilla has been so
commonly approved that nothing need be said on that score, but the term which
should be used fur the genus so as to inelude all of them requires some explana-
tion. Linaria has been employed by many writers, and so far as zoology is
concerned it has priority; but, having been preoccupied in botany, since 1789,
by no less an authority than Jussieu, it was disallowed. Before however this
forestalling of the name had been recognized, Brehm proposed (Isis, 1828,
p. 1277) to separate the Redpolls from the Linnets, retaining Linaria for the
former and calling the latter Cannabina. If we were to follow him in keeping
this distinction, Cannabina should certainly be retained in the restricted sense ;
but, as already s‘ated, it is not intented here to alter the genera of Fringillida
before adopted in this work, and that word, haviog been first applied with a
distinctive meaning, cannot properly be used in one that comprehends the two
groups. We accordingly come next to Linota under which the inveutor de-
signedly embraced both. In the Redpolls it may he observed that the crimson
of the crown is permavent throughout the year, and the occipital feathers are
erectile. In the Linnets the former is either wanting or usually assumed only
for a season, and the latter lie smooth. The generic term -dgiothus is now
commonly employed for the Redpolls when ranked as distinct from the Linnets,
166 FRINGILLIDE.
PASSERES, FRINGILLIDA.
PYRRHULA EUROPA, Vieillot*.
THE BULLFINCH.
Pyrrhula vulgaris*.
Prrrnuna, Brisson t.—Bill hard, short, broad and thick at the hase, bulging at
the sides ; culmen rounded ; upper mandible considerably longer than the lower,
and overhanging its point. Nostrils basal, supernal, round, more or less hidden
by projecting and recurved frontal plumes. Gape slightly arched. Wings rather
short, with the first primary finely attenuated and so small as to seem wanting,
the third or fifth longest in the wing. Tail moderate, square or forked.
Tarsus scutellate in front, covered at the sides by a single plate, stout and
shortish. Claws moderately curved, rather short and strong.
THe Buuurincn, though far less abundant than most of
the other members of the family indigenous to this country,
is yet too common a bird not to be well known all over these
kingdoms. Shy and retiring in its habits, except at one
season of the year, it is far more often heard than seen, and
* Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. Ed. 2, iv. p. 286 (1816).
t Temminck, Man. d’Orn. Ed. 2, i. p. 338 (1820),
+ Ornithologie, iii. p. 308 (1760),
BULLFINCH. 167
is seldom found associated with birds of any other species.
It is most numerous in the wooded districts or those which
are enclosed by high and tangled hedgerows, whence it
makes its way to our shrubberies, orchards and gardens.
Here it has earnt for itself an ill name beyond almost any
other bird, for, while the Sparrow has many apologists and
defenders, little has been urged in extenuation of the Bull-
finch. Countless dissections have proved that the remains of
insects are so rarely found in its crop or stomach that their
entrance into its diet must be regarded as accidental,* while
the regular way in which it will at times set itself to bite off
the blossom-buds from one bough after another cannot be
denied by its warmest advocate. Even so friendly an author
as Selby writes (Nat. 1837, p. 208) that he was reluctantly
obliged to make war on it every spring. Yet there is a very
considerable choice used in its method. Some trees or bushes
will be wholly spared, while others growing among them
will be utterly stript. A like selection is exercised, as has
been before noticed (vol. i. page 484), by the Blue Titmouse,
but in that case the object is clear, while in the present it is
hidden. It must not be set down to mere caprice: some
cause doubtless exists and should be sought. - When it is
found we shall probably be able to judge the deeds of the
Bullfinch with that knowledge of the circumstances which
impartiality requires. Its so-called ravages, however, are
confined to a very short period of the year—about a month
or six weeks at the end of winter or beginning of spring,
and, as observed long since by Knapp, the buds which pro-
duce leaves are passed over, and those containing the embryo
of the blossom only eaten. Thus, “though the tree is pre-
vented from producing fruit, yet the foliage is expanded as
usual; but had the leaves, the lungs of the plant, been in-
discriminately consumed, the tree would probably have died,
*Tt must be remarked, however, that Macgillivray, a good authority on such a
point, says :—‘‘ Judging from the structure of its digestive organs, I should
doubt that such crude vegetable matters as buds could afford it sufficient nourish-
ment.” Newman also asserts (Zool. p. 8649) that it renders important services in
devouring the larvie of Chimatobia brumata, a very common and destructive pest
in gardens.
VOL. II. Z
168 FRINGILLIDE.
or its summer growth been materially injured: we may thus
lose our fruit this year, yet the tree survives, and hope lives,
too, that we may be more fortunate the next.” But it is
certain that the whole crop is not always destroyed, and it
has been suggested by Neville Wood (Orn. Text-Book, p. 61)
and others that the operation of this bird is in some instances
even beneficial, when, as not unfrequently happens, it only
thins the superabundant buds, and the pruning the tree or
bush thus receives (being just such as a judicious gardener,
if he could reach the branches, would himself perform)
increases the produce of the rest. At any rate, taking the
most exaggerated view of the damage done, it may be safely
said to be less serious than is frequently the effect of a single
frost somewhat later in the season, and the deficiency of the
fruit-crop due to this last cause is doubtless often wrongly
ascribed to the Bullfinch. The buds of the gooseberry are
the first to be attacked by this bird, and then generally those
of the cherry, after which it turns to those of the plum,
while those of the pear and apple come in for their share of its
attention so soon as they are in a sufficiently forward state ;
but the peach and kindred trees are observed to be always
neglected.*
The charges brought against this bird are so serious as to
demand the first and fullest consideration. There remains
to be said that except during the short season when the buds
are maturing its food is in no way detrimental to man, but
rather the reverse, consisting as it does the greater part of
the year of the leaves and seeds of countless plants, many
of which are noxious weeds, such as docks, thistles, ragwort,
eroundsel, chickweed and plantain. As autumn ripens the
various wild berries, those of the dog-rose in particular,
they are greedily sought by it in winter. After March it is
seldom seen out of the deep woodlands which form so secure
a refuge for it, or at any rate of such shrubberies and plan-
* Shooting Bullfinches, or other birds, as they sit on a branch, probably does
more harm than they can do to the trees, for nearly every twig that is hit by a
pellet of shot sustains a permanent injury, while that inflicted by the bird, how-
ever serious, is but temporary.
BULLFINCH. 169
tations as are thick enough to afford it the desired seclusion,
and soon begins to build. It has been said to produce but
one brood in the season, but this seems doubtful since it
frequently has eggs before the end of April, and eggs may be
found unhatched at the end of June. The nest is a beauti-
ful and very peculiar structure, formed of small twigs, chiefly
of the birch, beech or hornbeam, deftly interlaid and inter-
crossed so as to become a very solid platform, in the middle
of which is a recess curiously wrought with fibrous roots,
some of them of considerable length but coiled and entwined
together, those which form the lining being of course the
finest, and the whole is usually placed on a leafy branch from
four to six feet above the ground. The eggs are from four
to six in number, of a greenish-blue, which though variable
is never very deep in shade, speckled, spotted and occasion-
ally streaked with purplish-grey and dark brownish-purple
markings, generally distributed towards the larger end and
frequently in a zone-like form. They measure from *79 to
‘67 by from 57 to *52 in. Notwithstanding its natural
shyness and the mistrust it may well have of man, the Bull-
finch nearly always permits a close approach when upon its
nest ; and will occasionally allow itself to be caught by the
hand thereon.* Little doubt can exist that this bird, like
the Nightingale (vol. i. page 314), owes much of its being
able to maintain its numbers in this country to game-pre-
servers, who, during the critical period of breeding, so
jealously protect its woodland-retreats from disturbance.
The young continue to associate with their parents through
autumn and winter till the following spring; and so constant
is the attachment of these birds to one another, that they
are believed to pair for life.
The song of the Bullfinch has no remarkable quality of
tone to recommend it, and indeed is so feeble as to be seldom
heard except when one is close to the bird, which ceases from
the performance on the least alarm. It is accompanied by
* The Bullfinch will breed in confinement, particularly in aviaries where there
is sufficient space. Hybrids have been produced between this species and some
of the other Finches.
170 FRINGILLIDA.
much gesticulation—the feathers being puffed out and the
head sloped on one side or the other, while the whole body
throbs with each note, and the tail is swung laterally as
though to mark the time. Both sexes are said to sing.
The call-note, which is very frequently uttered, is soft and
plaintive. As a cage-bird the Bullfinch is principally prized
‘for its power of imitating a tune played to it on a flageolet
or on what is called a ‘“ bird-organ.” In Germany the art
of teaching this species to utter unnatural strains, and of
thus perverting an animal into an indifferent musical
instrument, is found to be lucrative and is accordingly exten-
sively practised.
The Bullfinch is commonly dispersed in suitable localities
throughout Great Britain, and, according to Thompson, it is
met with in every county, though at the same time is rather
scarce, in Ireland. It is not recorded from any of the
Hebrides, and an example, obtained at Lopness in 1809, is
the only one said to have appeared in Orkney. In Shetland,
in October 1863, Saxby saw a female at Halligarth, which
was afterwards shot and came into his possession. On the
continent its distribution is somewhat hard to trace, for the
form of Bullfinch which inhabits Northern and Eastern
Europe is a decidedly larger bird, the Pyrrhula major of
the eldest Brehm (Handb. Vog. Deutschl. p. 252), and the
occurrence of the true P. europea in Scandinavia, Russia or
the Turkish dominions is very doubtful. It breeds however
in Silesia, Bohemia and many districts of Germany, mostly
in the hilly country, but towards the western limits of that
empire also in the wooded lowlands, while in winter it seems
to occur pretty generally. Following it further to the south-
ward, it is also found in Styria and Switzerland, as well as
in the beech-region of the mountains of Northern and
Central Italy, whence it even occasionally penetrates to
Sicily, and, though very rarely, has reached Malta. Loche
found two examples in the market at Algiers (Expl. Sc. de
VAle. Ois. i. p. 160). It inhabits parts of Holland, Belgium
and the whole of France, and probably also the north,
though it seems not as yet to have been observed in the
BULLFINCH. 171
south, of Spain. It is common in the north of Portugal, but
is seldom seen in the southern provinces of that country.
In the adult male the bill is black : the irides dark brown:
the lores and head above the eyes and ear-coverts deep black
elossed with steel-blue ; nape, back and lesser wing-coverts,
dark smoky-grey ; the greater wing-coverts glossy blue-black,
tipped with light ashy-grey, forming a conspicuous bar across
the wing; the primaries dusky, the other wing-quills black,
glossed with steel-blue, but the innermost tertial has the
ereater part of the outer web fine tile-red; the rump pure
white ; upper tail-coverts and tail glossy blue-black; the chin
black ; ear-coverts, sides of the neck, throat, breast and
belly, tile-red; tibial feathers, vent and lower tail-coverts
dull white ; axillary plumes and inner wing-coverts glossy
ereyish-white ; wings-quills glossy grey and tail-quills glossy
ereyish-black beneath : legs and toes purplish-brown ; claws
dark brown.
The whole length is rather more than six inches; from
the carpal joint to the tip of the wing, three inches and one-
eighth: the fourth, third and second primaries, successively
shorter than the fifth, which is the longest in the wing; the
second and sixth being equal, and the first apparently
wanting: the tail nearly even.
The female has the grey of the back mixed with brown,
and beneath, where the male is red, is of a warm mouse-
colour; the innermost tertial is slightly tinged with red; the
head, wings and tail, not quite so deep or so glossy a black.
The young on leaving the nest much resemble the female,
but have the head coloured like the back; the bar on the
wing is of a light ochreous-brown, and the lower parts of
the body are lighter and tinged with ochreous, especially on
the belly. The black cap is assumed at the first moult, and
the cocks about the same time, or soon after, lose the dull
plumage of the breast which is replaced by the brightly-
tinted feathers that characterize the adults of their sex.
172 FRINGILLIDA.
PASSERES, FRINGILLIDA,
PYRRHULA ERYTHRINA (Pallas*).
THE SCARLET GROSBEAK.
First observed near Tomsk in Siberia by Messerschmidt,
this bird was originally described and figured by Pallas as an
inhabitant of Southern Russia, and in 1783 received from
Latham (Gen. Syn. ii. p. 271) the name of Crimson-headed
Finch. By subsequent British authors, however, it has been
generally called the Searlet Grosbeak or Searlet Bullfinch.
Its gradual extension westward to many parts of Europe is a
curious fact, and it may now be justifiably included in this
work as an occasional visitor to England.
The first unquestionable appearance of the Scarlet Gros-
beak in this country seems to have been recorded by Mr.
Wonfor ¢ (Zool. s.s. p. 1918), and the statement was
* Loxia erythrina, Pallas, Nov. Comment. Acad. Sc. Imp. Petropol. xiv.
p. 587 (1770).
+ This gentleman indeed called it the ‘‘ rosy bullfinch (Pyrrhula rosea)”, but
there is no doubt he was mistaken in so doing. The true Rosy Bullfinch, though
an allied, is a very distinct species, not yet known to have been taken in Britain.
SCARLET GROSBEAK. te
confirmed by Mr. Bond (op. cit. p. 1984)—a hen-bird having
been caught on the downs near Brighton in September, 1869.
This example was seen by the writer in Mr. Monk’s aviary
at Lewes, and lived there until June, 1876. On October
5th, 1870, another hen-bird was taken near Caen Wood in
Middlesex, as chronicled by Mr. Bond (op. cit. p. 2883), and
is now in his collection. It is very possible that other
examples have been obtained in Britain, but the particulars
given as to several supposed specimens leave it doubtful
whether they were correctly determined to be of this species.
In habits the Scarlet Grosbeak is described by observers
as bearing much resemblance to the Linnet, though it affects
marshy coppices rather than the open country. So far as
Europe is concerned perhaps the fullest account of its
manners is that furnished to Messrs. Sharpe and Dresser by
Dr. Taczanovski, who, writing from Warsaw, says that in that
neighbourhood it generally appears about the middle of May,
arriving singly and taking up its abode in bushes near water.
The cock-birds are very restless, perching on the top of a
tree or shrub, whence they utter a deep, clear and character-
istic song, repeated about ten times, and then descend in
search of food among the branches, but meanwhile they
sometimes warble in a very low tone, and after an interval
reappear to view and recommence their song.* In singing
the bird raises the feathers of its crown and throat, and in
the sunshine looks more beautiful than it really is. The
food consists chiefly of buds and the seeds of various trees
and bushes, but seldom those of smaller plants. The nest
is loosely built, but regular and neat inside, being lined with
fine shoots of plants, dry and often interlaced with a few
hairs. It is placed in the fork of a bush and always well
hidden in foliage. The eggs, from four to six In number,
measure from ‘76 to ‘74, by from °59 to 54 in. They are
of a deep greenish-blue, sparingly marked with well-defined,
* The note of the cock is said by Messrs. Seebohm and Harvie Brown to be
pitched high and is by them syllabled tu-wit-tu-tuz, which does not agree exactly
with the rendering of Prof. von Nordmann hi-u-ti-w hi-u-ti-u. The former
observers say that the note of the hen is ‘‘a low Greenfinch-like single zh-zh-zh”’
(Ibis. 1876, p. 115). Méncétries compares the song to a Chaftinch’s.
174 FRINGILLID®.
dark reddish-brown, or almost black, spots and_ specks,
besides blotches of pale purplish-red. Some specimens are
not unlike eggs of the Song-Thrush, though void of any
eloss, and, of course, much smaller.
There are several appearances recorded of what seems to have
been this species, under various names*, in Germany towards
the end of the last century, but these have to be regarded with
suspicion ; and, though more than one example occurred, says
Bernhard Meyer (on the information of G. A. Germann) at Dor-
pat in 1803, the first about which no doubt can be said to exist
is that given by J. F. Naumann, who states that in 1805 he
saw, in the collection of Count von Mathuschka at Breslau,
a cock-bird—one of a pair killed near that town—which was
afterwards transferred to the Berlin Museum. The positive
assurance of so excellent an authority as the same Naumann,
that he himself met with this species breeding on Sylt in
1819, is of course entitled to all respect; but it is yet to be
observed that not only must the extension of the bird’s range
so far to the westward at that time be considered very extra-
ordinary, but also that, though he was told it was not rare
and had for many years bred there +, it has never since been
known to visit that island and only once to occur on the adjoin-
ing mainland;. Still further its breeding at all in a locality so
unlike that which it elsewhere seems to affect 1s by no means
the least surprising thing in connexion with the incident.
Elsewhere in Western Europe this species has only been
observed as a wanderer. It has of course occurred in
Heligoland. An example is said to have been obtained
near Tournay, another near Abbeville, and a third at Lille,
Sept. 17th 1849; but it would seem to occur much more
frequently in the south of France—the young especially
* Much confusion has arisen between the present bird and the Fringilla flam-
mea of Linnwus, a very doubtful species founded on one of Rudbeck’s paintings,
which it is now almost impossible to dispel.
¢ It seems possible that Naumann’s informant may have mistaken a highly-
coloured cock Linnet (Linota cannabina) for this species, but of course he him-
self was incapable of such a blunder.
{¢ ‘This, according to Herr Rohweder (Vég. Schleswig-Holstein’s, p. 9), was at
Poppenbiill in Eiderstedt. .
SCARLET GROSBEAK. 175
appearing there almost every August or September, and has
even been recorded from Spain. Italy has long been known
to be within the range of its autumnal visits, and it appears
to have reached Malta. In Germany it is said to have been
once found breeding in the Queiss valley among the Silesian
mountains. Further to the northward it has been met with
on Gottland, and even, it is said, in Kast Finmark, where it
is reported to have bred, but possibly further information on
this point is required. However in Finland it is now recog-
nized as an annual summer-visitant so high as Kuopio,
where a pair or two may be observed every year, and further
to the southward it seems to breed regularly, as at Helsing-
fors, near which town Mr. Dresser procured its nest and eges,
July 3rd 1858.
Passing over the Russian Empire, throughout which it
seems to be found from Poland to Kamchatka, as well as
the various parts of Central Asia that are suited to its
habits, the Scarlet Grosbeak occurs in Persia, and is a
regular visitant from October to April to the greater portion
of India, extending to Assam and Arracan. In many
localities it appears numerously, inhabiting alike gardens,
eroves and jungles, but in the extreme south it chiefly fre-
quents bamboo-thickets. At the same season it also occurs in
China and especially abounds there during the spring-passage.
In the fully-coloured cock the bill is yellowish-brown,
lightest on the lower mandible: the irides are brown: the
top of the head glossy carmine-red ; lores and ear-coverts
reddish-brown ; nape, back and upper wing-coverts rich
brown-lake, the feathers being reddish-brown at the base
narrowly fringed with lght rufous-brown; the other wine-
coverts reddish-brown, broadly tipped and edged with light red
so as to form two bars of that colour across the wing; wing-
quills dusky brown edged outwardly with light red, which passes
into rufous on the primaries; rump and upper tail-coverts
glossy carmine-red tinged with brown; tail-quills dusky
brown narrowly edged with light-red; chin and throat glossy
rose-red, deepening into carmine towards the tip of each
feather, and passing on the breast into a paler and duller
VoL. II. AA
176 ERINGILLIDE.
shade of the same, which becomes still less deep on the belly
and dies away, over the vent and on the lower tail-coverts,
into a dull salmon-colour: legs, toes and claws reddish-
brown. The whole length is about five inches and four-
fifths ; the wing from the carpal joint nearly three and three-
eighths : tail, which is slightly forked, about two and a half.
In the hen the bill is brown: red is wholly wanting—the
general colour above being dull olive-brown, darkest on the
head and shehtly mottled on the back, the feathers there
having a darker middle and being (as well as the upper wing
and upper tail-coverts) edged with greenish-olive ; the other
wing-coverts are dusky brown, edged, as on the tertials, with
dull brownish-white ; the quills are as in the cock, but edged
with greenish; the lower parts generally are dull brownish-
white, streaked with hair-brown—lehtest on the chin, which
is bounded by a brown stripe descending from either corner
of the lower mandible, while a series of brown streaks begins
on the throat: these increase in breadth on the breast, which
is tinged with buff, and pass alone the sides of the body to
the flanks.
The young (and examples occurring in Britain may be
expected not to have assumed mature plumage) resemble the
adult female, but the olive-coloured edges of the feathers are
yellower and broader. In this state the birds beara very great
likeness to the not uncommon hybrids between the Green-
finch and the Linnet, and at present it seems impossible to
decide whether the bird described by Risso as Fringilla
incerta was one of these crosses, an abnormal example of
Pyrrhiula erythrina, or a variety of the Greenfinch in which,
from some unknown cause, all the yellow or green tints were
wanting. Several specimens, agreeing more or less closely
with the description of this supposed species, have been
obtained in England, and the majority of them have been
referred by Messrs. Sharpe and Dresser to the hybrid just
mentioned ; but, whether that determination be correct or not,
there ean be little doubt that the Ff. ieerta is an imaginary
species.
PINE-GROSBEAK. Ley.
PASSERES. FRINGILLIDA
PyRRHULA ENUCLEATOR (Linnzeus”).
THE PINE-GROSBEAK.
Pyrrhula enucleator.
THE PINE-GROSBEAK is a very rare bird in this country,
though many instances of its having been observed here are
on record. Scarcely any of them, however, withstand a
critical examination, and out of some two dozen, but four or
five at most seem to deserve serious attention. The earliest
of these is possibly that of a female, shot at Harrow-on-the-
Hill, and mentioned in former editions of this work as being
in the Author’s collection, whence it has passed to that: of
Mr. Bond. Next there comes another hen-bird noticed in
* Loxia enucleator, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 299 (1766).
178 FRINGILLIDA.
1831 by Selby (Trans. Nat. Hist. Soc. Newcastle, i. p. 265)
as having been shot at Bill Quay near Neweastle-on-Tyne,
and at that time in the possession of Mr. Anthony Clapham,
but now the property of Mr. Backhouse. Thirdly is a male
example which the Kditor is informed by Mr. Byne is in his
collection, and that he believes it to have been killed near
Exeter in the winter of 1854-5 and brought to his Jate father
by whom it was preserved. In the next rank to these—the
only presumably British-killed specimens known to exist, come
two which were said in 1845, by Lubbock (Faun. Norf. p.
36), to have been obtained near Great Yarmouth and to have
been then in a collection in that town. It appears, from the
investigations of Mr. Stevenson and others, that they belonged
to the late Mr. Miller and that, at the sale of his collection in
1853, they were lost sight of. To these two examples are
probably referable the statements of Messrs. Gurney and
Fisher (Zool. p. 1313) as to a pair of Pine-Grosbeaks sup-
posed to have been killed near Bungay, and another pair at
Raveningham in Norfolk—the notices of which may be fairly
taken to concern the same individuals, but the story of their
having a nest must be dismissed as in the highest degree
unlikely. Then there is the case of an adult cock-bird said
(Zool. p. 1025) to have been shot near Rochdale in February
1845, which was in the late Mr. Hamlet Clark’s collection when
it was seen by Mr. Bond, and no doubt can exist as to the
specific determination of the specimen. Since the dispersal,
however, of this collection its fate is unknown.
b
For one reason or other little if any trust can be placed in the
remaining records of the appearance of this species in Britain.*
“ There are more than half-a-dozen instances in which it has professedly been
seen in Great Britain, but nothing which can be called an act of identification
has followed the observation. They are :—(1) A flock of about a hundred un-
known birds that came to a hemp-yard in Pembrokeshire in Sept. 1694 as
reported by a Mr. Roberts to Lhwyd (Phil. Trans. xxvii. pp. 464, 466) who
suspected they were ** Virginia Nightingals” (Cardinalis virginianus) but later
writers suggested that they were Pine-Grosbeaks ; (2) The birds seen Aug. 5th,
1769, by Pennant (Tour in Scotl. Ed. 5, i. p. 132) at Invereauld in Aberdeen-
shire ; (8) A great number which, with Crossbills, for two years past had, ac-
cording to Don’s information in 1813 (Headrick’s ‘Gen. View Agricult. Angus’
p. 43), done much damage to the woods of Glammis and Lindertis in Forfarshive ;
PINE-GROSBEAK. 179
It is more than likely that in one case the birds seen were only
common Bullfinches, in others that the Crossbill has been
mistaken for the Pine-Grosbeak, while in others again that it
has been confounded with the Hawfinch, and the result of a
diligent but impartial investigation of the evidence on which
are based the claims of the present species to be accounted
‘‘ British ” shews that it can only be considered a very occa-
sional, and perhaps not always a voluntary, visitor ; for, since
the days of Edwards, it has been not uncommonly brought
(4) A flight said by the Messrs. Paget (Nat. Hist. Yarm. p. 6) to have been seen
on Yarmouth Denes in Nov. 1822 ; (5) One seen near Petworth in Sussex, by a
Mr. Mellersh, a few years before 1849, as mentioned by Mr. Knox (Orn. Rambl.
Ed. 3, p. 211) ; (6) One supposed to have been observed Aug. 20th, 1850, in
Corriemulzie, Braemar, by Macgillivray (N. H. Dee Side, p. 403); (7) One
believed to have been seen by Col. Drummond-Hay (Harting ‘ Handb. Br. B.’ p.
114) at Dunkeld ; and (8) Two seen, Nov. 8th, 1868, feeding on the seeds of an
arbor-vite at St. Germain’s in Cornwall, as Mr. Gatcombe informed Mr. J. H,
Gurney, jun. (Zool. 1877, p. 248).
We then have a class of cases wherein specimens are alleged to have been
killed in the British Islands, but about which doubt may be reasonably enter-
tained. Of these are :—(1) One, recorded at third hand by Thompson (N. H.
Irel. Birds, i. pp. 275, 276) and recognized from a very indifferent figure (Shaw
and Nodder’s ‘ Nat. Misc.’ pl. 685) by a person whom there is no reason to sup-
pose was a competent authority, is said to have been killed at the Cave-hill near
Belfast in or prior to 1819 ; (2) A female stated by Fox in 1827 (Synops. Newe.
Mus. p. 65) to be in his possession ‘‘ through the favour of Mr. Yarrell,” and to
have been shot near Welwyn in Hertfordshire—a statement, however, which
never having been publicly verified by the Author of this work must therefore
be held erroneous ; and (3) Two said to have been killed in Feb, 1848 in
Ashdown Forest, Sussex, one of which, an adult male, was seen by Mr. Knox,
who has now reason to disbelieve the statement. The statement as toa bird in
Hampshire by Mr. Reeks (Zool. p. 9023) originated, as he has informed the
Editor, in a mistake
Lastly there are many records in which the species is named as having occurred
in Great Britain, but obviously without discrimination. Among these may be
cited :—(1) Kirkmichael, Dumfriesshire, by Burgess (Stat. Acc. Scotl. 1791, i. p.
60) ; (2) Washing Green, Midlothian, by P. Neill, it is supposed (Allan Ram-
say's ‘Gentle Shepherd, &c, with illustrations’ 1808, i. p. 271); (8) Worcester-
shire, by Hastings (N. H. Worcest. 1834, p. 65); (4) Hulston, by Rylands on
Glazebrook’s authority (Nat. 1837, p. 352); (5) Kent, by Mr, P. Bartlett
from Plomley’s statement (Zool. p. 621) ; (6) Eccles in Berwickshire, by James
Thomson (New Stat. Ace. Scotl. iii, Berwicksh. 1845, p. 53) ; and (7) Somerset-
shire, by the late Mr. W. Baker (Archeol. and N. H. Soc. Somersetsh. Proc.
1849-50, pt. ii. p. 144). Fuller details of many of these statements than it is
here possible to give have been furnished by Mr. J. H. Gurney, jun. in the
‘Zoologist’ for 1877 (pp. 242-250).
180 FRINGILLIDA.
hither as a cage-bird, and the localities in which it is said to have
been procured are such as to raise a justifiable suspicion that
on each and every occasion the victim was an escaped captive.
The food of this species seems to consist of the seeds and
buds of many sorts of trees, but particulars on this point are
still wanting. Except when under the stress of winter-weather,
it invariably inhabits pine-forests, and hence we may perhaps
presume that its chief sustenance is obtained from conifers.
In summer however its diet appears to be occasionally varied
by insects. Schinz (Nester und Kier, pt. ii. p. 100, Taf. 35,
fice. 15, 16) described and figured two of its eggs, sent him by
Gravenhorst from Breslau, where, as appears from Thiene-
mann, they were laid in captivity. The writer last named
also figured the ege correctly and said (Fortpfl. ges. Vog. tab.
xxxvi. fig. 1, p. 418) that he had never compared but five
specimens thereof, which were from Labrador and Lapland—
the latter possibly obtained by Zetterstedt, who, so far as is
yet known, must be deemed the earliest discoverer of the
mode of breeding of this species, having met with several of
its nests near Juckasjirvi, at the end of June 1821 (Resa
genom Swer. och Norrig. Lappmarker, i. p. 243). Nothing
however can be said to have been positively known by English-
men on the subject until 1855, when Wolley, after two years
of ineffectual search, succeeded in obtaining the nests and
egos of the Pine-Grosbeak. The Editor well recollects these
treasures being for the first time brought to his late friend by
the trusty and intelligent Lapp who had been especially em-
ployed to look for them and had at last gained the reward
his efforts deserved.*
* The story, told in 1808 by the elder Naumann (Naturg. Land- und Wasser-
Vogel nérdl. Deutschl. Beitr. li. pp. 18, 19) of his having observed this species,
twenty-two years before, breeding in his own coppice at Ziebigk in Anhalt, is
evidently fabulous. He first described the incident in 1797 (op. eit. 1. pp. 61,
62) as referring to a Crossbill, which from the particulars he gives is just as un-
likely. In 1824 his son (Naturg. Vig. Deutschl. iv. p. 416) not unnaturally
stuck to his father’s later opinion, but without corroborating it by any further
evidence of weight. Indeed he almost places bis testimony out of court, since in
the same page he misquotes Bernhard Meyer's description (Vig. Liv- und Estbl.
p. 77) of the nest and eggs of the Greenfinch as those of the present bird, refer-
ring thereto in proof of his father’s accurate observation! Particulars of Wolley’s
PINE-GROSBEAK. 18]
The nest is generally placed some six feet or more from
the ground in a young fir, and rests on the horizontal
branches near to or touching the bole. It has an unmistak-
able likeness to that of the Bullfinch, and is a beautifully
neat structure, ‘‘ made externally of an extremely light net-
work of thin trailing twigs laced into each other; some of
which are more than two feet in length.” This fabric ‘is
suddenly changed into a compact bedding of bare roots,
mixed with a few sprigs of hair-lichen, which form together
almost a separate nest inside the outer network.’ Occasion-
ally the long stems of creeping plants are used instead of
twigs for the outworks, and Wolley saw one nest composed of
the vagrant stalks of the delicate Linnea, while dry grass some-
times almost exclusively replaces the roots of the ordinary lin-
ing. But, however different the materials, the style of architec-
ture never varies and whoever has seen a Bullfinch’s nest can
form a very just idea of that of the Pine-Grosbeak—the latter
however, as is natural, being considerably larger. The same
may be said of the eggs, which are commonly four in num-
ber, and, measuring from 1:1 to 91 by from °74 to -67 in., may
be described as exaggerated Bullfinches’, being of a deep
ereenish-blue, speckled, spotted or blotched with purplish-
grey or dark brownish-purple. The markings, especially of
the former colour, are seldom well defined and often much suf-
fused, in which case a brownish tint is imparted to the whole
shell, and the darker colour is often spread in the form of
large irregular blotches ; but there are eggs in which these
are remarkably well defined.
The Pine-Grosbeak inhabits the conifer-zone of the north-
ern parts of both the Old and the New World, seeking, we
may presume, in either Region a lower latitude during winter.
That in Europe it does so is evident, for towards the southern
extremity of the Scandinavian peninsula it appears yearly, and
sometimes in considerable numbers. Nevertheless it is only
induced by very severe weather to cross to Denmark, and but
rediscovery were given, in 1856, by Mr. Hewitson who also figured the eggs (Eggs
Br. B. Ed. 2, i. p. 210* pl. liii.*), and later in still greater detail by Mr.
Dresser in his admirable work.
182 FRINGILLIDE.
a single pair seems to have been noticed in Heligoland. As
to Holland and Belgium there is little to be said, but it is re-
corded as of casual occurrence in France and has even been
killed so far to the southward as Provence. Its appearance in
Italy has also been asserted, but this has to be considered
doubtful. Throughout Germany it would seem to have been
observed more often, and even to have visited the south of
the western part of that country occasionally, yet, however
suitable its pine-forests might be, there is no reason to sup-
pose that this bird ever abides there. It has been said to
shew itself in Germany more frequently of late years than
formerly ; but though this may be the case there is insuffi-
cient evidence to that effect. Further to the eastward it occurs
oftener, and we have G. A. Germann’s testimony, first pub-
lished in 1815, by Bernhard Meyer, that in the winters of 1790,
1798, 1795 and 1805 large flocks came about Dorpat, gener-
ally arriving in October and staying till the middle of Decem-
ber. It works its way however into Bohemia and Hungary
—possibly into Transsylvania also, but of this proof is
wanting. It is found almost throughout the whole breadth
of the Russian empire (suitable localities being of course
understood) ; but, though its limits to the northward are
unquestionably bounded by the fir-forests, its southern range
is unknown. It does not seem, however, at any time to cross
the open country, and has never been observed in the Hima-
layas nor in their prolongation in either direction, and it would
appear to become scarcer towards the east, though it is re-
corded from Udskoj-Ostrog, Its occurrence in China or Japan
cannot be asserted, but there may be a presumption in fayour
of its occasionally reaching both countries. In North America
likewise it is found in the pine-woods from the Pacific to the
Atlantic. Here again we may well suppose its northern range
to be conterminous with that of the conifers, but how far
to the southward it extends is as yet uncertain—Leaven-
worth in Kansas seems as yet the lowest point it has reached.
The fact however must be noticed that by some Transatlanticas
well as European ornithologists the American Pine-Grosbeak
is considered to be specifically distinct from our own. In ap-
PINE-GROSBEAK. 183
pearance there seems to be no constant difference between the
birds of the two continents, and in habits certainly none, but
such eggs of the American form (if that expression may here
be used) as the Editor has seen are invariably smaller than
those of the European, though according to some writers the
reverse is the case as regards the birds, which Mr. Dresser, after
comparing many specimens, regards as specifically identical.
North America, before Wolley’s sojourn in Lapland, was
the country in which the habits of the Pine-Grosbeak had
been most attentively studied, and Audubon has given some
interesting details of those of the Transatlantic form—
its smooth and undulating flight, its fondness of bathing,
its progression by short leaps and its tameness—whether
at large or in captivity, but above all its rich, clear note,
none of which, however, point to any difference from the
European bird. Few naturalists or none have had better
opportunity for observing the manners of this species than
Wolley, who lived so long among its haunts that he became
thoroughly familiar with it, while most of those persons who
have written on the subject have only known the bird as a
winter-migrant or have even judged it from its behaviour in
acage. Our regret must therefore be great that he did not
live to tell its history in his own graphic language as his
intention was. Possessing much of the retiring character of
the Bullfinch, the Pine-Grosbeak is, when at home, far less
often seen than heard, for its clear notes attract attention
while it is only to be descried after some search, since it does
not commonly shew itself on the outside of the tree on which
it is perched as do the Crossbills which hasty observers have
doubtless often mistaken for it; and, almost always a tame,
unsuspicious bird, it has acquired a reputation, quite un-
deserved, for stupidity. The call-note of the two sexes is
much alike, yet an acute ear can unfailingly distinguish
them, and that of the hen is at times repeated with varia-
tions sufficiently often to attain the dignity of a song.* The
* No naturalist seems to have given a clear description of the song of either
sex, and as the Editor has not heard it since the year 1855, he will not attempt
one from memory.
VOL. II, BB
184 FRINGILLID.E.
cock in the early spring will indeed mount to the summit of
wu fir, and thence utter his melody, chiefly at sunrise and
sunset, till as the days rapidly lengthen darkness ceases and
his evensong and mattins are blended. In general, however,
he keeps with his mate among the thicker boughs, and there
warbles, unseen without close scrutiny. Nor does he often
indulge in those desultory flights that are so remarkable in
the Crossbills. The adults seem seldom to wander from
their home, and it must be chiefly the young that form the
migratory bands which are said to have appeared in various
parts of Europe. Herr Collett has furnished Mr. Dresser
with a good account of the habits of these northern visitors,
which agrees with that of American observers as to the ease
with which, by one device or another, they may be entrapped.
in the male, as figured, the bill is dark brown, the base
of the lower mandible paler; the irides hazel: the frontal
plumes and the lores dusky black ; the whole of the head,
cheeks, ear-coverts and nape glossy vermilion-red; the
feathers of the back and seapulars greyish-black, with broad
red margins, which become yet broader on those of the rump
and the upper tail-coverts, so as to produce an almost contin-
uous red surface; the wing-coverts and wing-quills greyish-
black, the former broadly edged outwardly and tipped
with white, tinged with red, the latter narrowly edged out-
wardly with dull white, which is tinged with red on the
proximal part of the primaries and outer secondaries ; tail-
quills almost uniform ereyish-black, very narrowly edged with
a lighter shade, tinged near the base with red; the chin,
throat, breast and sides, vermilion-red, but the feathers
grey at the base; the belly, vent and lower tail-coverts, light
grey, the feathers sometimes streaked with dusky and tipped
with white; wings and tail beneath, slate-grey: legs and
toes blackish-brown ; the claws black.
The whole length is eight inches; from the carpal joint to
the tip of the wing, four inches and a half: the third and
fourth primaries nearly equal and the longest in the wing ;
the second shorter than the fifth ; while the first is apparently
wanting: the tail is slightly but decidedly forked.
PINE-GROSBEAK. 185
The adult female a good deal resembles the adult male,
but entirely wants any red colour, that being replaced by a
more or less golden-yellow (tinged in places with green) except
on the back which is of an almost uniform dark slate-grey,
and there is but little trace of yellow on the rump and flanks.
The female killed at Harrow has the bill orange-brown ;
the irides hazel : the head, ear-coverts and nape honey-yellow ;
back and scapulars slate-grey ; rump and upper tail-coverts
honey-yellow; both sets of wing-coverts, and all the wing-
quills greyish-black, edged and tipped with white, with-
out any red tinge ; tail above, uniform greyish-black ; all the
lower surface uniform ash-grey: legs, toes and claws, dark
brown.
This bird was considered to have been in the plumage
assumed after the first autumnal moult. The cock of the
same age is very similar, but the yellow of the head, nape
and rump is more or less strongly tinged with red, and the
breast is clouded with yellow.
The nestling also seems to resemble the hen, but the dull
erey has only a slight green tinge, and that chiefly on the
head and rump ; while the wing-feathers are edged and tipped
with grey instead of dull white.
Respecting the sequence of the changes of plumage which
obtains in this species much has been written and much of it
erroneously. Especially mistaken are those who observing
what takes place in caged birds infer that the same is the
rule for birds that are at liberty. Though the cause has not
yet been fully explained, it is certain that some groups of
Fringillide never assume their brightest colours in captivity.
Among such are the species of the genus Linota, as the term
is used in this work. Probably also the species last described
and the present certainly is subject to the same disability, as
are the Crossbills, an account of which is to follow. It is per-
fectly well known that a cock Pine-Grosbeak, however red he
may be when caught, will in confinement lose his ruddy hues
at the first moult, and, so long as he is a prisoner, never
regain them—the red being replaced by a more or less bright
tint of yellow or yellowish-green. Further notice of this
186 FRINGILLIDA.
peculiarity may be deferred until the changes which the
Crossbills undergo are considered. Here it is only need-
ful to observe that, though the cock Pine-Grosbeak has
undoubtedly been found breeding with his glowing crimson
suit undeveloped, there is no trustworthy evidence that this
brilliant plumage is a mark of mere adolescence, from which
he with age retrogrades into a less gaudy dress.
For the reason already assigned this species has been here
left in the genus Pyrrhula. But most modern authors re-
move it therefrom, and, if their example be fellowed, the
generic term Pinicola, instituted by Vieillot in 1807, should
most likely be used for it. The preceding species is also
commonly separated from Pyrrhult, under the generic
name Carpodacus applied to it by Kaup in 1829. It is
here placed in Pyrrhula since it manifestly differs less from
the Bullfinch than the Pine-Grosbeak does.
The vignette represents what is happily no longer to be
seen in this country. It is much to be wished that prohibi-
tion could be extended to all cases of the misapplication of
the powers of animals, including the education of ‘ piping”
Bullfinches.
CROSSBILL. 187
PASSERBES. FRINGILLIDA,
A
A
Loxta curvirnostra, Linneus,*
THE CROSSBILL.
Loxia curvirostra.
Lox1a, Linnwust.—Bill hard, strong, thick at the base, much compressed
towards the tip, the lower mandible curving upwards and its point crossing that
of the upper mandible. Nostrils round, basal, supernal, hidden by thick pro-
jecting bristly plumes. Wings long, pointed ; the first primary very small, the
* Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, 1. p. 299 (1766). + Loc. cit.
188 FRINGILLIDA.
second generally the longest. Tail short, forked. Tarsus short and stout, scutellate
in front. Toes short and stout. Claws moderately curved, short and stout.
Tue history of the Common Crossbill is still involved in
some obscurity, for—though it is now ascertained to breed
yearly in some parts of Scotland and in England frequently
—the origin, whether native or foreign, of most of the
examples so often yet so irregularly observed in the southern
kingdom is questionable, and, as will by and bye appear,
there is a great divergence of opinion as to the sequence of
the plumages it assumes. With us it is most commonly seen
in flocks between the latter part of June and the beginning
of February—the summer-flocks being family-parties com-
posed of the parents and the young which keep together
until, having exhausted the supply of food in any particular
place, they ordinarily leave it for another district. Several
instances however are known, and one is especially recorded
by Hoy (Mag. Nat. Hist. vii. pp. 54, 55 and ser. 2,1. p. 117),
in which the same birds have been closely watched and found
to remain until May, while Mr. Joseph Clarke states (tom.
prox. cit. p. 166) that the species was seen for more than
twelve months in plantations near Saffron-Walden in a
garden of which town the same naturalist says that a pair
built a nest. White of Selborne, in 1773, noticed its annual
appearance about midsummer at Ringmer in Sussex. Lewin,
in July 1791, shewed Latham a pair of old birds and a
young one shot in his garden, while others of the brood still
frequented the spot, and in August of the same year a hen-
bird, with a bare breast as if she had been sitting, was shot
at Erith, according to the naturalist last named, who also, in
a contribution to the edition of Pennant’s ‘ British Zoology’
published in 1812, stated that a pair built a nest near Dart-
ford in Kent, but no eges were laid therein, for the birds for-
sook it owing to the too great curiosity of visitors. Bullock
is said to have received the young from near Bath, early in
July. According to Sheppard and Whitear a pair completed
their nest, in Mareh 1815, at Offton in Suffolk, but were
unfortunately killed by a Hawk. Another pair, however,
say they, built in a fir at Livermere in the same county, and
CROSSBILL. 189
succeeded in rearing their young several times. Mr. Earthy
mentions (Essex Literary Journal, Jan. 1889, p. 90) having
heard that the Crossbill bred in Orwell Park, near Ipswich,
in 1822. In June 1821, Selby obtained many examples in
Northumberland, and remarked that the denuded state of
the breasts of the females shewed that they had lately been
incubating. Knapp also noticed the same condition in a
female killed in Gloucestershire, and in truth hardly a year
passes in which similar observations may not be made. Mr.
Hewitson in 1837 figured an egg of this species (Brit. Ool.
pl. exxxiv.) which had been taken in the summer of 1829 from
a nest in a larch-tree at Boynton in Yorkshire, and supplied
to him by Arthur Strickland. The late Miss Anna Gurney in
her natural-history notes, since published, records a Crossbill’s
nest at Sherringham in Norfolk in April of the year last
mentioned (Trans. Norf. & Norw. Nat. Soc. i. p. 19); and
Mr. Hancock states that a nest with the young was found at
Hesleyside in Northumberland July 15th, 1838.* From this
both parents and young were shot, and one of the latter is in
his collection. In the following year the Author received
from Mr. H. L. Long a nest, two eggs and a nestling of
this species which had been procured in the Holt Forest,
near Farnham—all of which specimens were exhibited to
the Zoological Society soon after (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1839, p.
60), and that gentleman states (Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 2, iii.
pp. 236-238 and 311) that after having a diligent watch
kept three nests had been met with there in the early spring
of 1839. In the same year two nests of the species were
seen by Mr. J. Brown (tom. cit. p. 810 and Hewitson, ‘ Kges
Br. B.’ i. p. 170) in Gloucestershire.
Up to about this time it was presumed that owing to the
ereatly-increased extent of fir-plantations the Crossbill was
becoming far more numerous in England, but experience
seems to shew that this has hardly been the case, and of
late years no very considerable additions to the number of
instances of its breeding in England have been made. Still
* Mr. Hancock mentions two other instances, as he was informed, of the
species breeding in that county or in Durham.
190 FRINGILLIDA.
cases occur from time to time, and, as mentioned by Mr. G.
J. D. Lees (Zool. 1877, p. 254), a nest with four young was
found on March 16th of the present year in a fir on the out-
skirts of Bournemouth in Hampshire. According to infor-
mation collected by Mr. More it has been known to breed
in the following English counties besides those already in-
dicated :—Deyon, Somerset, Surrey, Sussex, Herts, Leicester
and Cumberland. Bedford may be added to this list.*
The visits of this species to various parts of our islands
happen at irregular periods, sometimes with intervals of
many years as regards any particular place; and some
curious records of the appearance of large flocks have been
preserved. The earliest known of these is by the chronicler
Matthew Paris and has reference to the year 1251, thus :—
Anni quoq; sub ejusdem circulo, temporibus fructuum,
quiedam aves mirabiles, que nunquam in Anglia antea vide-
bantur, in pomeriis Maxime apparuerunt, alaudis parum ma-
jores, pomorum grana, & non aliud de eisdem pomis com-
edentes : unde dampnose nimis arbores suis fructibus vidu-
arunt. Habebant autem partes rostri cancellatas, per quas po-
ma quasi forcipe vel cultello dividebant. Partes insuper pomo-
rum, quas relinquebant, fuerant quasi veneno intoxicate.” +
In illustration of the foregoing, Wats, in 1640 the editor
of Matthew's work, appended (Vita duorum Offarum Xe. p.
263) a Latin version of an account of a similar visitation,}
* Mv. More included Norfolk in his list, apparently by mistake for Suffolk, as
Miss Gurney’s record had not then been published. The instance is not solitary,
for Lord Lilford has stated his belief to the Editor that it has several times bred
in West Norfolk. As regards Suffolk, besides the nests mentioned by Sheppard
and Whitear long ago, the Editor recollects the species being so continuously
common for about two consecutive years (1846-48) at and about Elveden that he
has not a doubt of its having bred there at that time, though no nest was found.
It did not remain a resident in the district.
+ Thanks to the good offices of his friend Mr. Lewis, F.S.A. the Editor has
enjoyed the privilege of consulting the original MS. of this work now in the
library of Corpus-Christi College, Cambridge. The page containing the passage
quoted above (fol. 252) has in the margin a figure purporting to be a representa-
tion of one of the wonderful birds, but it is rude and not characteristic.
+ Wats, it may be remarked, invites his readers to judge whether the species
of bird be not the Lowa of Gesner and Aldrovandus.
CROSSBILL. 191
supplied to him in English by Sir Roger Twysden. The
collections of that antiquary subsequently passed into the
possession of the late Rey. L. B. Larking of Ryarsh, near
Maidstone, who favoured the Author with a copy of the
document * in the following terms :—‘‘ That the yeere 1593
was a greate and exceeding yeere of apples; and there were
create plenty of strang birds, that shewed themselves at the
time the apples were full rype, who fedde uppon the kernells
onely of those apples, and haveinge a bill with one beake
wrythinge over the other, which would presently bore a
ereate hole in the apple, and make way to the kernells;
they were of the bignesse of a Bullfinch, the henne right
like the henne of the Bullfinch in coulour; the cocke a very
glorious bird, in a manner al redde or yellowe on the brest,
backe, and head. The oldest man living never heard or
reade of any such like bird; and the thinge most to bee
noted was, that it seemed they came out of some country
not inhabited ; for that they at the first would abide shoot-
ing at them, either with pellet, bowe, or other engine, and
not remove till they were stricken downe; moreover, they
would abide the throweing at them, in so much as diverse
were stricken downe and killed with often throweing at them
with apples. They came when the apples were rype, and
went away when the apples were cleane fallen. They were
very good meate.”’
It may have been this visitation that Childrey mentions in
his ‘Britannia Baconica: or, The Natural Rarities of England,
Scotland, & Wales’ (London: 1661. p. 18), as follows—
“Tn Q. Elizabeths time a flock of Birds came into Cornwall
about Harvest, a little bigger than a Sparrow, which had
bils thwarted crosswise at the end, and with these they
would cut an apple in two at one snap, eating onely the
Kernels ; and they made a great spoil among the apples.”
From the many accounts of this species given in different
* The Editor greatly regrets that he has been unable to see this document so
as to ascertain its approximate date and possibly its author. Mr. J. W. Larking,
brother of the gentleman named above, has kindly but ineffectually searched for
it. Bewick in his later editions gave a retranslation of it into English from the
Latin version of Wats.
VOL. II. Cc Cc
192 FRINGILLIDE.
works, it appears to have occurred in almost every English
county. Depending mainly for food on the seeds of conifers
and the pips of apples *, its movements are irregular beyond
those of most birds, and it would seem to rove in almost any
direction and at almost any season in quest of its staple
sustenance. Want of space here forbids any statement of
more than its greater visitations, as these have been set
down. Edwards, writing in 1757, states that great flights
had lately occurred near London. In June and July 1791,
says Montagu, a bird-catcher at Bath took an hundred pairs
of which the greater part were males and generally sold at
five shillings each. In 1806, as appears from Mr. Dillwyn’s
statement, a flock inhabited a clump of firs in a sheltered
Glamorganshire valley. In 1821,as recorded by many authors,
Crossbills were numerous and flocks were seen in various
parts of the country—particularly in the counties of Oxford,
Worcester, Warwick and Northumberland. In 1828 they
appeared in Westmoreland and the following year were
numerous in Yorkshire. In the summer of 1835, according
to Blyth, they were again plentiful, and so they continued
in several districts from that time to 1839—among other
instances flocks having been seen in Dorset in 1856, about
Carlisle, says Heysham, in June 1837, and twenty having
been killed by one person in Hampshire during the first
week of August 1838. Coming to later years, they were
very generally seen throughout the kingdom from 1846 to
1848, in the winter of 1853-54, again in 1855, in 1861, in
1866 and in 1868. But as yet nothing, otherwise than con-
jecturally, has been made out that will correlate their
abundance or scarcity with other natural phenomena. This
must be the work of future naturalists and physicists.
In Scotland, as in England, the Crossbill is said to have
been taken in every county, though not in any of the Outer
* Hence one of the old names for this bird is ‘‘Shell-apple.” Of late it has
not been often observed feeding on apples, very possibly owing to the greatly
increased growth of firs, and especially larches, throughout the country. In the
days of its great depredations in orchards, there could have been few if any
conifers in England. In Germany it does not seem to have been ever generally
known as attacking fruit-trees.
CROSSBILL. 193
Hebrides. According to Mr. Gray, it ‘‘ breeds perhaps more
numerously in the central counties than elsewhere,” but he
adds that many nests have been obtained every year near
Dumfries, and that it is found in considerable numbers
during the breeding season in Lanarkshire. Nests have
also been several times known near Girvan, and young
broods observed in Dumbartonshire. But this would seem
to have been the case only of late, for Jardine, writing in
1839, though knowing that the birds remained throughout
the year, states that he had ‘hitherto been unable to dis-
cover the nest or any traces of their having built.”” In the
northern counties the same may be asserted. St. John said,
in 1849, that the species had of late years become numerous
in the fir-woods of Sutherland, and that it certainly bred
plentifully in that county. In 1850 he, in company with
Mr. Hancock, took, near the Findhorn, a nest whence the
young (which they saw close by being fed by their parents)
had flown and found at the same time a second nest with
the remains of others. It was not till 1854 that the na-
turalist last named obtained the nest and eggs from Ross,
since which time there can be no doubt of the species breeding
regularly in many of the revived highland-forests. In the
northern islands, it is, as might be expected, but an accidental
visitor, though, according to Saxby as regards Shetland, in
increasing frequency and numbers of late in proportion to
the growth of young trees. This observer has some inter-
esting notes shewing its disposition to adapt itself to such
accommodation as these woodless localities afford, and among
them none is more curious than its often retiring for the
night to the stubbles, though as a rule it roosts in such
trees and bushes as offer themselves.
In Ireland, Thompson remarked that it had long been
known as an occasional visitant, and had bred there of late
years. Many were recorded as seen in the county Down in
1707, and nearly a century later vast flights came over to
the county Cork, and thence spread inwards and northwards
so far as Dublin, making (as of old time in England) great
havoc in the orchards. Another flight is supposed to have
194 FRINGILLIDA.
appeared in the county Armagh in 1818 and 1814, and again
they visited Ireland in 1821, when so many overran Great
Britain. Further particulars of other occurrences are given
by him in detail, and especially note-worthy are those, with
regard to the presumed breeding of the species in 1838 and
1839 in the counties Wicklow, Meath and 'Tipperary—the
latter supplied by Mr. R. Davis, who received a young bird
shot, in the act of taking food from an old male, at Balli-
brado near Cahir. No nest however was found, and it
remained for Mr. Blake Knox to establish beyond doubt
the fact of its breeding in Ireland. This he did in 1868
(Zool. s.s. p. 1183) having been furnished by Mr. Roussel of
Kilkea, county Kildare, with particulars of five or six pairs
which had nests at that place in the spring of 1867.
It may be reasonably supposed that the great flocks which
shew themselves from time to time in our islands have
crossed the sea from the continent, but that the small parties
which are more frequently though very intermittently
observed are natives of Britain. The pleasure enjoyed by
the true naturalist in meeting for the first time with a com-
pany of Crossbills has been related in his usual happy way by
Mr. Knox*, but the pleasure hardly loses by repetition, for
no one can watch the manners of these birds without being
thereby greatly entertained. The easy skill with which they
snap off a cone and grasp it, if it be of moderate size, in one
foot, while with the other they secure their perch, and then,
holding the cone firmly against the bough on which they sit,
tear it to pieces and pick out the seeds it contains, must
be seen to be appreciated. The larger cones are said to
be rifled as they hang (though on this point there is some
doubt),+ or cut in two before they are dealt with, and at times
a cone may be held in a convenient position by the fore-
toes of both feet, the hind toes only clasping the perch.
In the execution of these feats the birds display astonish-
ing bodily strength and put themselves rapidly into almost
* Autumns on the Spey, pp. 33-35.
+ Lord Tweeddale, in a note to the Editor, states that the bird can carry
about in its bill without ditticulty the laree heavy cone of a spruce-fir.
CROSSBILL. 195
every conceivable attitude — hanging back downwards, or
extending themselves in any direction that may be neces-
sary to attain their object. When they, as they sometimes
do, feed on the buds of trees their movements are much
slower and quieter, resembling those of Bullfinches while
similarly engaged. The attention of a passenger is mostly
drawn to the presence of a flock of Crossbills in one or
other of two ways. He may notice the ground strewn with
the fragments of enucleated cones, or—and this possibly
the more often—he may hear a strange call-note, which has
been syllabled jip, jip, jip, frequently repeated, and on look-
ing up will find that it proceeds from birds that are ever and
anon flying out from the branches of a tree, generally a
conifer, and resettling upon it. Then he can stop to watch
their actions carefully, for these birds are almost invariably
tame and admit of a very close approach—so much so,
indeed, that instances are not uncommon in which they
have been ensnared by a running noose affixed to the end
of a long pole or fishing-rod and passed over their head,
or, touched with a limed twig, adroitly applied by the same
means, fall helpless victims to the ground. The firing of a
eun, though it may deal death to some of their numbers
seldom has any other effect than momentarily to alarm the
survivors, who after a short flight will return to the very trees
on which they were before engaged, or at least to others close
by. In one of these ways almost the whole flock may be pro-
cured if such be the desire of the captor. Unsuspicious as they
commonly are, in fine warm weather they become more difti-
cult to take, for then the whole flock will at times suddenly
take wing and, after flying round for a minute or more utter-
ing their loud call-notes, will alight on some tall tree near by
and there sit, the cocks warbling to one another in an agreeable
tone, while the hens join in the concert with their scarcely less
musical chimes. This description however is that of the
birds’ habits in very early spring and does not apply to
them in their limited family-parties somewhat later in the
season. Then they are far less noisy, and such notes are
only uttered by the leaders of the band as will evoke a reply
196 FRINGILLIDA.
from its younger members sufficient to keep the troop
together.*
From what has just been stated it will be perceived that
the seeds of various conifers—pines, firs and larches—nowa-
days supply the chief food of this species, but besides the
pips of apples to which reference has been already made,
the seeds of the rowan, or mountain-ash, appear from the
observations of Macgillivray and Saxby to be at times laid
under contribution. The berries of this tree it will even
follow to the ground if it fails to secure the bunch at the first
intention. The Editor has more than once known the buds
of the elm to be eaten by the Crossbill and that at a season
when they cannot be sought, as Saxby states they are in
Shetland, for the sake of the aphides which gather on the
underside of the leaves of this tree, though he is no doubt
right in saying that such insects and those which infest the
sycamore are greedily devoured by it. In confinement the
bird soon becomes tame, and is a most amusing subject of
observation, climbing like a Parrot with the help of its bill
in any direction.t Introduced to hempseed, the Crossbill, like
most birds, quickly takes to that attractive diet, shelling each
seed deftly with the cutting edges of its mandibles, but even
then its fondness for the seeds of the Conifere is not forgotten.
Its efforts to free itself from captivity are so unceasing that
a cage of very hard wood or of well-viveted metal is needed
* A most faithful account of the habits of the Crosshill was furnished to the
Author by Mr. R. F. Wright of Hinton Blewit in Somerset, and printed at
length in former editions of this work. So much has since been written on the
subject, that it seems unnecessary at this time to give the words of this communica-
tion, the important parts of which are incorporated with other information in the
above paragraph. In like manner it would be but a repetition here to insert
the notice, formerly introduced, of a flock of Crossbills seen by Macgillivray (Br.
B. i. p. 425), graphic and excellent as itis. The chief fact of which he was a
witness will be immediately mentioned in the text. Owing to the wide range
of the Crossbill in England there must now be but few ornithologists in the
country who have not had the opportunity of personally observing it.
+ This peculiarity, together with that of their holding in their foot the fruit
from which they are extracting the seeds, has led some naturalists to consider the
Crossbills allied to the Psittac?, and their representatives in the northern hemi-
sphere, a belief to which very slight knowledge of Comparative Anatomy gives a
positive denial.
CROSSBILL. 197
to keep it a prisoner, since it will busily ply its bill so as to
whittle away the bars and bend an ordinary wire. Still it is
by no means an impatient prisoner,* and is therefore often
kept in confinement. The principal bird-dealers in London
and other large towns are seldom without examples for sale.
Its flesh too is esteemed for the table, perhaps mostly by
those who cannot at the moment get a better viand, but in
many parts of the continent it is certainly in request, and
even in England it has been eaten with relish.
The nidification of this species has been more or less
fully described by many writers, thongh it has fallen under
the observation of comparatively few ornithologists. For
three centuries and more the Crossbill has been known
to breed almost in the depth of winter or very early in
the year— circa natalitia Christi’ even, as an old author t
has it. But second broods are apparently not uncommonly
produced, or if not certain individuals must delay their
breeding-season for some months. Most of the nests observed ~
in these islands have been found in March or April, but
February is not too early nor May too late to look for them
when the birds by their constancy to some particular spot
give hope of their breeding there. Without being really
sociable it often happens that several pairs breed in propin-
quity. The nest is generally built on the horizontal bough
of a fir—though an apple-tree has also been recorded as a
site, at an elevation varying from five to forty feet, and nearly
always concealed by the foliage. In close woods, remarks
Mr. Hancock, where the lower branches have fallen off it is
necessarily placed high up, but where these (the trees having
room) are retained, they are not unfrequently preferred.
The nest from the Holt Forest, exhibited in 1839 to the
Zoological Society (wt supra), was rather small in proportion
to the size of the bird, measuring externally only four inches
and a half across the top, and the cup but three inches in
diameter. The outside was strengthened by a few slender
* Tt has been known to build a nest and lay eggs in the aviary at Audley End
as recorded by Mr. Clarke (loc. cit.).
t Schwenckfeld, ‘Theriotropheum Silesiz.’ Lignicii: 1603, 4to, p. 253.
198 FRINGILLID®
fir-twigs: then was a layer of coarse, dry grass, and it was
lined with finer grass and a few long hairs. It was lodged
close to the stem of a Scotch fir, about thirty inches below
its summit, at the base of the shoots of the year 1837, and
supported by five or six ascending lateral branches which
so concealed it that it could have been scarcely perceptible
from the ground. The Gloucestershire nest (wt supra) is
described as built of dead twigs of the larch and spruce,
within which it was formed of dry grass and tender stalks,
compacted with wool and the whole lined with horsehair.
Other nests from Scotland are neatly and firmly built—
externally of fir-sticks and heather, with a few splinters of
decayed wood. Mixed with these is a little fine grass inter-
woven with long vegetable fibres, and the lining is of white
hair-lichen with some bits of moss and wool. The outward
size of the nest varies a good deal, for it occasionally
measures as much as eight inches in diameter, but its
internal dimensions are pretty constant.
The eggs, in number four or, rarely, five, are very like
Greenfinches’ except that they are larger, measuring from
*94 to ‘73 by from °68 to °57 in. Their colour is french-
white, sometimes tinged with very pale blue, and they are
sparingly speckled, spotted and blotched with reddish-brown
of two or three shades, the lightest being in the form of
suffused patches, and the darkest in that of well-defined
markings—these last being often surrounded by a penumbra
of lighter red, but occasionally dwindling to mere lines.
On the European continent the Crossbill inhabits almost
all pine-forests from Lapland to Spain on the west and
to Greece on the east. It is also permanently resident in
Mauritania. Though more abundant towards the north, it
yet breeds in nearly the extreme southern countries of its
range, and its nest has been found equally on the Atlas and
on Parnassus. Gifted with considerable power of flight, and
impelled by casual dearth of food to exercise that faculty, it
visits, though in the character only of a wanderer, spots that
possess few or none of the requisites for its peculiar needs,
and thus it has been obtained on Bear Island (lat. 74° 30’) by
CROSSBILL. 199
Dr. Malmgren and at Malta by Mr. Wright. Its appearance
therefore from time to time in places equally devoid of its
natural supplies, but less far removed than those just named
from its proper haunts, is easily explained, and in such dis-
tricts it does the best it can to obtain a living from the seeds
of various plants. An unsuccessful attempt has been made
to regard examples obtained in the Balearic Isles (where it
seems to be resident) as forming a distinct species (Journ.
fiir Orn. 1864, p. 224). It occurs also not unfrequently in
Sicily and in the Cyclades. Further to the eastward it is
found across the whole of that part of Asia which is in-
cluded in the Palearctic Region—suitable districts being
understood, from Smyrna to Japan, including the northern
portions of China and Formosa—though indeed Chinese and
Japanese specimens have been described as differing specifi-
cally (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1870, p. 487). Throughout this wide
tract, however, there are few places in which its appearance
can be deemed constant. Governed as its movements are by
the imperious necessity of finding food, and food of a kind
that frequently fails in any particular locality, it roves from
one country to another as regardless of latitude and longi-
tude as of heat and cold, breeding, as may be gathered from
what has been above said, wherever it happens to be when
the season comes round. Yet like almost every other animal
it has its geographical bounds. So far as we are aware,
neither Iceland nor any of the Atlantic islands knows its
presence, though there seems no reason why so great a
traveller may not find its way thither. The Great Desert
of Africa of course puts a limit to its wanderings, and the
firless plains of Egypt equally discourage its approach.
The steppes of Tartary likewise interpose themselves as a
barrier to its southern progress in Asia, and in the Hima-
layas we find its place taken by a distinct though nearly-
allied form, Loxia himalayana. The common Crossbill
of the New World has long been separated from that of the
Old, and its separation, as L. americana, seems to be justi-
fiable, on account of its smaller bill and, in the males, more
scarlet plumage.
VOL. II. DD
200 FRINGILLIDA.
The plumage of the nestling-Crossbill obtained in Holt
Forest, as before stated, is greyish-white over nearly the
whole body, tinged with yellow and streaked longitudinally
with dusky brown—the wings and tail being dark brown, the
feathers edged and tipped with pale wood-brown. At this
time, when the bird may be about three weeks old the bill is
straight,* the lower mandible shutting within the upper.
The legs and toes are flesh-coloured. An example undoubtedly
bred in this country the same year (1839) and obtained near
Winchester at the end of March, which, through the kindness
of Mr. J. Leadbeater, I had the opportunity of examining,
confirmed what has already been stated, and there was not
the slightest indication as to which side either mandible
would hereafter have been inclined.
The young, as seen in June and July, have the head, neck
and all the lower parts of the body, as in the nestling, but
the wings and tail are uniform dull brown. At this age, as
observed by Blyth (Mag. Nat. Hist. ix. p. 635), they re-
semble a hen Siskin in plumage; but the sexes, as he after-
wards stated (op. cit. New Ser. 1. p. 451) may be distin-
guished by the cocks having the striations considerably more
distinct, and more vividly contrasted, than the hens. The
upper figure in the woodeut at the head of this subject repre-
sents a young bird. By September the young cocks have
lost much of the striped appearance, and at their moult
begin to assume the red plumage of maturity. Some do
this at once, and this seems to be the normal mode though
they do not so early develope their most brilliant hues.
Others, possibly of a less vigorous constitution, have the red
feathers mixed with yellow, or become dull orange—the effect
of red and yellow combined, while others again put on a
yellow or yellowish-green dress, and these are probably birds
in which development is, from some cause, still further re-
* Blyth says (Field-Nat. i. p. 130) he was informed by a man who sawa brood
taken near Sevenoaks, in Kent, that the nestlings when about half-fledged
“had the bill as much crossed as the adults.” But Blyth did not assert this
on his own authority and it is clearly a mistake. The fact, very suggestive from
the evolutionist’s point of view, that the nestling’s mandibles are not crossed
was noticed so long ago as 1806 by Necker.
CROSSBILL. 201
tarded. Absolute proof that this yellowish-green suit (which
is that almost invariably assumed by caged birds) is ulti-
mately replaced by one of red is wanting; but, though the
wearers of this livery may not unfrequently be found breed-
ing in it, there is good reason to believe that the change
takes place.* As itis there is great variation in the bril-
liancy of the colour, whether yellowish-green, yellow, orange
or red.t+
A red male, that had completed his first autumnal moult,
had the bill dull reddish-brown, darkest towards the tip of
the upper mandible: irides dark brown: the head, rump,
throat, breast and belly, tile-red; the feathers on the back
mixed with brown, producing a chestnut-brown ; wing- and
tail-feathers, nearly uniform dark brown; vent, and lower
tail-coverts, greyish-white : legs, toes and claws, dark brown.
The middle figure of the woodcut represents such a bird.
A second male killed at the same time as that last de-
scribed, had the head, rump and lower surface of the body,
pale yellow, tinged with green ; the back olive-brown ; wings
and tail like those of the red bird.
A third male, also killed at the same time, had the top
of the head and the back reddish-brown mixed with dark
orange ; rump reddish-orange ; upper tail-coverts bright
orange; chin, throat and upper part of the breast, red,
passing lower down and on the sides, to orange.
Red males moulting in confinement change to greenish-
yellow, or sometimes to bright yellow, and hence has arisen
the misconception of many ornithologists that the yellow
colour was that of the normal older livery ; but in captivity
several instances are known of red and yeilow examples
* The Editor regrets being here again compelled to differ from the opinion of
his friend Mr. Hancock (B. Northumb. &c. p. 50) on the subject of the change
of plumage in birds of this genus as well as of the genus Zinota (pige 158).
Unfortunately there has been a laxity on the part of observers in recording
whether the objects of their observations have been caged birds or at liberty.
+ Examples are mentioned in which the wing-coverts have bright red edges.
Such birds are regarded by some as forming a distinct species—the Crucirostra
bifasciata of C. L. Brehm—and one of them is figured by Bonaparte and Schlegel
(Monogr. Lox. pl. 5). The Editor does not know of any example of this variety
having been observed in Britain.
202 FRINGILLIDA,
changing back to dull brown, as dark as, or even darker than
their early plumage. ‘This is probably the effect of un-
natural conditions such as particular food, and the want of
air and light—all of which must exercise a debilitating in-
fluence on them as on other birds.
Young females, after their first striated dress, acquire a
greenish-yellow tint on the crown, and the lower parts of the
body, mixed with greyish-brown; the rump and upper tail-
coverts of primrose-yellow, tinged with green; wings, tail
and legs, as in the male. The lower figure of the group is
‘rom a female.
The Crossbill varies a little in size, measuring from six
inches and a quarter to seven inches in length; the average
extent of the wings from tip to tip, is about eleven inches ;
from the carpal joint to the end of the longest primary three
inches and three-quarters; the third a very little shorter
than the second; the fourth a little shorter than the third,
and the fifth feather one quarter of an inch shorter than the
fourth.
Besides specimens in my own collection, killed in July,
September, November aud January; others selected with
reference to particular states of plumage, and various oppor-
tunities of examining examples kept in confinement, I have
been favoured with many more from Mr. W. Wells of Red-
leaf, Mr. W. Browne of Cheam, Mr. Joseph Clarke of
Saffron-Walden and Mr. H. Doubleday.*
The peculiar form of the bill in this bird, altogether unique
unong animals,t had long excited the attention of zoologisis,
and De Button, in 1775, especially distinguished himself by
* The series of specimens at the Author's disposal was doubtless far larger
than ornithologists of the time were accustomed to consult, but it may be remarked
that the present state of science requires a much more extended comparison to
obtain satisfactory results. Messrs. Sharpe and Dresser enumerate one hundred
cxamples (from various localities) as having been examined by them, and the
Editor must have handled nearly as many.
+ As an occasional monstrosity, the result of overgrowth of the horny casing
of the bill, the peculiarity has, however. been many times observed in other
svoups of birds and especially among the Crows. Such cases may well be com-
pared to the malformation often seen in niammals of the order Glircs, wherein
ihe incisors often grow to inordinate length.
CROSSBILL. 203
calling it (Hist. Nat. Ois. ii. pp. 449, 450) a defect—an
error of Nature, which could not fail to be very inconvenient
to the bird in feeding—though he had the direct evidence of
several observers to the contrary.* This view was first
strenuously opposed by Townson (Tracts and Observations
on Natural History &c. London: 1799, pp. 116-123)
who, having carefully studied the Crossbill’s habits in Ger-
many charged the account given by ‘‘ the French Pliny”
with being ‘‘ as void of sound philosophy as of the knowledge
of the facts,” and ‘ characterised by strong marks of error,
carelessness and presumption.” The observations of this
naturalist are in nearly every particular apt and accurate,
but much yet remained to be known, and it was not till
thirty years later that the beautiful structure and mode of
application of this wonderfully specialized organ was explained
(Zool. Journ. iv. pp. 459-465, pl. xiv. figs. 1-7). The
description then given, with a copy of its accompanying
illustrations, is here reproduced in a condensed form, for, so
ereatly has the knowledge of zoological anatomy advanced
since it first appeared, that much which was then wanted by
even the scientific reader for its proper understanding is for-
tunately now unnecessary.t
The specimen examined was one in which the upper
mandible, or, to speak technically, the maxilla, curved to
* De Buffon’s special animosity on this point may be suspected to have arisen
from an old legend (which however he does not notice) best known to English
readers by Mr. Longfellow’s version of Mosen’s poem, to the effect that this bird
acquired its peculiar conformation of bill and coloration of plumage from its
effo:ts to release the suffering Saviour at the crucifixion. Schwenckfeld (op. cit.
pp. 253, 254) bas given this pretty fable in the ‘‘egregium Hlegiacum carmen
D.D. Johannis Majoris poéte celeberrimi” of some fifteen couplets, from which
one may here be quoted :—
Fama est, has [sc, aves] rostro tentasse revellere clavos,
In cruce pendentem qvi tenuere Deum.
The whole poem has been lately reprinted (Notes and Queries, Ser. 5, vil.
p: 505).
+ It must be stated also that certain anatomical terms at that time in vogue
have now no longer the same meaning as then, while others have completely
dropped out of use. The Editor has therefore tried to replace them by their
modern equivalents.
204 FRINGILLID.
the left as will be seen by the vignette (figs. 1, 2), and this
must be borne in mind, while following the description for
the maxilla as often as not curves to the right.* When the
bird is held in the hand, the point of the lower mandible, or
mandibula, can be brought immediately below that of the
maxilla, so as to touch it, but not beyond it towards the left,
while on its own side the point passes easily some three
eighths of an inch. The maxilla has a limited amount
of vertical motion, the union between the nasals and the
frontals being a flexible lamina. The transpalatal pro-
cesses are considerably prolonged downwards (fig. 38, a)
affording space for the attachment of large pterygoid muscles.
The pterygoid itself (fig. 3, b) on each side is strongly arti-
culated to the quadrate (fig. 3, c), affording firm support to
the movable portion of the maxilla. The jugal (d), which
is united to the maxillary in front, is firmly attached by its
hinder end to the outer side of the quadrate. When there-
fore the last is pulled upwards and forwards by its own pecu-
liar muscles, to be after described, the jugal on each side by
its pressure forwards raises the maxilla.
The lower process of the quadrate forming the condyle to
which the mandibula is articulated is in very many birds
somewhat linear from before backwards, admitting only ver-
tical motion; but in the Crossbill this process (fig. 38, ¢) is
spherical, and is received by the lower jaw in a hollow cup
(fig. 5, a), so that the articulation possesses much of the
universal motion of a ball-and-socket joint.
The mandibula is of great strength with prominent coro-
noid processes (fig. 5, b, b), to which, as to. the whole outer
surface of its hinder portions the temporal muscles are
attached. ‘The temporal and pyramidal muscles on the right
(that being the side to which the mandibula inclines) are
considerably larger than those on the left (figs. 1, 4, a, 0).
The pterygoid muscles (fig. 2, c, c) are also very large.
The muscles depressing the mandibula are three in number,
but only one of them, the great pyramidal, is shewn in the
* The opinion, now generally acknowledged to be erroneous, used to prevail
that the sexes in the Crossbill might thus be distinguished.
CROSSBILL. 205
woodcuts (figs. 1, 4, b), for this covers the other two. They
all have their origin on the occipital bone and are attached
to the mandibula behind the centre of motion, so as, by
their simultaneous contraction, to lower its anterior part.
The lower portions of the quadrates are, by this compres-
sion, pushed somewhat forwards, assisted by two smaller
muscles not represented, but the position of which may be
understood (fig. 3): One of them, which is small and flat,
arises from the interorbital septum, behind the optic foramen,
and passing downward is attached to the styloid process of
the quadrate. The other is pyramidally shaped, arising
also from the septum, but in front of the former, and passing
downward and backward is attached to the pterygoid. Both
these muscles in contracting pull the quadrate forward and
thus raise the maxilla. The depressors of the lower jaw
and elevators of the upper therefore act together to open the
bill. To close it the temporal and pterygoid muscles raise
the mandibula, while two slender slips (fig. 2, d, d) which
extend forwards to the premaxillaries combine to bring them
down. When lateral motion is required the great pyramidal
on the right pulls the end of the mandibula, to which it is
attached, backwards, the pterygoid muscle on the left at the
same time assisting by carrying that side of the mandibula
inwards.
Having thus described these muscles, their peculiar action
in the Crossbill must be related. The bird partly opening
its mouth brings the points of the bill from their ordinary
crossed position to be directly over each other. In this
reduced compass they are inserted between the scales of the
cone on which it is about to feed and then in the act of sepa-
rating them still more widely the mandibula is drawn side-
ways and thus forces the scales asunder.
At this stage the tongue is brought into play. The
anterior end of the hyoid has attached to it a narrow bony
projection covered with horn (figs. 6, 7, a), about three
eighths of an inch long, extending forwards and downwards,
its sides curved upwards, and shaped at the tip like a scoop,
while at the proximal end there are two small elongated pro-
206 FRINGILLIDA.
cesses, to each of which is attached a slender muscle (figs.
6, 7, b) extending backwards to the glottis, and these muscles
by their contraction extend and raise the scoop-like tip.
Beneath the articulation of this appendage is another small
muscle (fig. 7, ¢) attached to its distal portion at one
extremity and at the other to the hyoid. This by its anta-
gonism to the former muscles ()) bends the extremity down-
wards and backwards, so that while the points of the bill
press the scales from the cone, the tongue exserted by its
own genio-hyoid muscle directs the scoop under the seed,
which being thereby dislodged is conveyed to the mouth.
PARROT-CROSSBILI. 207,
PASSERES. FRINGILLIDEA
Loxia prryopsrrracus, Bechstein.”
THE PARROT-CROSSBILL.
Loxia pityopsittacus.
Tue first notice of this bird’s appearance in Britain is
that of Pennant who, in 1766, after remarking (Br. Zool.
p- 106) on the ‘‘ two varieties” of Crossbill, of which
Edwards had accurately figured ‘ the lesser kind” that he
had seen frequently, while the other was very rare, says :-—
“We received a male and female out of Shropshire, which
were superior in size to the former, the bill remarkably thick
and short, more encurvated than that of the common kind,
and the ends more blunt.’’ This larger Crossbill, at first
considered only a variety of the common bird, has for many
years received specific recognition from the most approved
authors and its claim thereto need not be discussed here.
Since the time of Pennant, many examples of the Parrot-
* Loxia pytiopsittacus (by mistake) Bechstein, Orn, Taschenb. i, p. 106 (1802).
VOL. II. EE
208 FRINGILLIDA.
Crossbill—for so it has come to be called in English—have
been recorded as occurring in England, occasionally in Scot-
land, and once also in Wales. Mr. Harting (Handb. Br. B.
pp. 114, 115) has carefully compiled a list of these notices,
but the critical ornithologist will with justice forbear from
trusting all of them. As already stated the common Cross-
bill varies somewhat in size, and it may be fairly presumed
—there being little but size to distinguish the two forms—
that a fine specimen of the ordinary bird has been occasion-
ally set down by a sanguine collector, without any desire of
deception on his part, for the rarer kind. Enough to say
now that this last has been indubitably taken several times
in Britain, for scarcely any useful end would be attained
by investigating, even if that were possible, each reputed
instance. The Editor has more than once had brought
under his notice birds, supposed to be Parrot-Crossbills
which were certainly not such, but he has seen sufficient
examples, about which no reasonable doubt could be enter-
tained, to justify the retention of the bird in the present
work. Among these are two in the Museum of the Univer-
sity of Cambridge—one, apparently a hen, certified by a
label in Mr. Jenyns’s handwriting as having been killed at
Blythbure in Suffolk in 1818, and the second, in the cock’s
red plumage, which was obtained of Mr. Head, formerly a
bird-stuffer at Bury St. Edmunds, and said by him to have
been killed at Saxham in the same county, in November
1850. In the possession of Mr. Thornhill of Riddlesworth
in Norfolk, is also another red male, shot at or near that
place a few years before (Zool. p. 3145). Other specimens
are doubtless just as trustworthy theugh the Editor cannot
speak of them from personal knowledge. Of these may be
mentioned one said by Blyth, in his edition of White’s
‘Selborne’ (p. 160, note), to have been shot in the New
Forest in the autumn of 1835 or 1836. Several examples,
as stated in the former edition of this work, were brought to
the London market in March 1838, and were eagerly bought
by those who were aware of their rarity. Two of these I
examined. Ma. Bartlett was the purchaser of a third, and
PARROT-CROSSBILI. 209
IT am indebted to him for being able to figure its sternum to
show its difference in size from that of the common bird.
Mr. Bond possesses three examples, one shot with others out
of a flock near Lymington in March, 1842, and two obtained
near Christchurch twenty years later. Newman saw one,
said to have been killed at Harrow January 21st, 1850
(Zool. p. 2770) ; Doubleday records (Zool. p. 7759) three
shot near Epping, September 20th, 1861; and Dr. Bree
(Zool. p. 8032) had three brought to him, February
21st, 1862, which had been just killed near Colchester.
According to Mr. Harting also a pair were shot at
Southgate, in Middlesex, in November 1864, of which the
male is now in Mr. J. H. Gurney’s collection. In Scotland
two were obtained, according to Jardine, in Ross (prior to
1833), one of which came into his possession and the other
into Selby’s, where it served to illustrate that gentleman’s
work as well as the later editions of Bewick’s. Mr. Gray
says he has a very characteristic specimen, which was killed
with a stone out of a flock on the shores of Wemyss Bay in
the spring of 1862. About the determination of all these
examples no doubt need be felt.
The habits of this bird, so far as has been ascertained,
agree so closely with those of the commoner Crossbill that
little needs to be said of them; but it is to be observed that
in the parts of Sweden where it has been known to breed,
its appearance scarcely ever coincides with that of Lovia
curvirostra, and it is always the rarer of the two, feeding,
according to Wheelwright who is herein corroborated by
Taezanovski, more upon the seeds of the Scotch fir, while
the smaller form is said to prefer those of the spruce.
According to the Editor’s experience the manners of the
two birds do not differ, and the only fact in those of the
larger form which he had not before observed in the smaller,
was its constantly coming to drink and bathe (the season
happened to be very dry) even in the foul water that had
drained from a yard in which cattle were penned.
The geographical range of the Parrot-Crossbill is much
more limited than that of the ordinary form. Its home
210 FRINGILLIDE.
seems to be the pine-forests of Scandinavia and Northern
Russia, in which it breeds from the interior of Lapland to
the middle of Norway and Sweden as well as to Livonia and
Kstonia. The elder Von Nordmann states also that it breeds
uumerously in the Ghouriel mountains, but it does not seem
to reach the Ural. It appears, chiefly as a winter-visitant,
in Poland and Germany, but is said to have been found
breeding in the latter. It also occasionally reaches Holland,
Belgium and France, besides Italy if authors may be credited,
but is unknown in Spain, while its appearance in Greece is
open to doubt. In all the details of reproduction it resembles
L. curvirostra, but the nest and eggs as might be expected
are generally somewhat larger—the latter measuring from
-95 to ‘87 by from °69 to °62.
It is impossible to give any description of the plumage
of this bird which would distinguish it from the commoner
form, though the red is sometimes brighter. Wheelwright
says he has found the cock breeding in bright yellow apparel,
but that only once, and it seems to be subject to exactly the
same laws as regards its change of colour as L. curvirostra.
Herr Meves however mentions (C#fvers. Vet. Ak. Forh. 1860,
p. 211) a hen bird in red dress. Mr. Dresser who has per-
haps examined more specimens of both birds than any one
else gives the following as the measurements of each :—
L. pityopsittacus :—Whole length from 6°3 to 7, wing
from 4 to 4°3, tail from 2°7 to 2°8, tarsus °75, culmen °9,
height of bill at base *6, width of mandible at base *5 in.
L. curvirostra:—Whole length from 5-7 to 6, wing from
3°7 to 3:9, tail from 2°5 to 2°7, tarsus from °6 to °65, culmen
from *75 to °85, height of bill at base °5, width of mandible
from °387 to °4 in.
TWO-BARRED CROSSBILL. 21]
PASSERES., FRINGILLIDA.
Loxta sirascrata (C. L. Brehm.*)
THE TWO-BARRED CROSSBILL.
Loxia bifasciata.
THis white-winged Crossbill was described as a new
species, in the year 1827, almost simultaneously by the
eldest Brehm and by Gloger+, to the former of whom the
priority of publication seems to belong; but ornithologists
were slow to believe in its distinctness from the American
form which had, as will presently be perceived, been long
before known, and the differences between the two were for
many years slighted or ignored, until the investigations of
Professor Nilsson and Baron de Selys-Longchamps set the
matter at rest. Brehm, however, to the last maintained that
* Crucirostra bifasciata, C. L. Brehm, Ornis, iii. p. 85 (1827).
+ Loxia tenioptera, Gloger, Isis, 1827, p. 411.
212 FRINGILLID#,
his Crucirostra bifasciata was not exactly the same as
Gloger’s Loria tenioptera, but wherein the distinction lay
would puzzle the clearest heads, and Gloger himself several
years afterwards, though retaining the name he had before
given, reverted to the old notion of the specific identity of
the European and American birds. The difference between
them will in due time be shewn.
The instances in which the present form can be confi-
dently stated to have occurred in Britain amount to about
half-a-dozen, but in some of them small flocks were noticed,
so that considerably more than that number of specimens
has been obtained.* The earliest on record is that of a
female shot at Grenville near Belfast, January 11th, 1802,
as recorded by Templeton in a letter to Dawson Turner
(Trans. Linn. Soc. vii. p. 309). The specimen indeed
seems to have perished, but a coloured drawing of it was
fortunately preserved, and helped Thompson (B. Irel. i. p.
* Of instances in which ‘‘ white-winged Crossbills’’ are said to have occurred
without the distinction hetween the Nearctic and Palwarctic forms being ob-
served or capable of later determination the following may be noted :—(1)
Latham in a contribution to the posthumous edition (1812) of Pennant’s
‘British Zoology’ (i. p. 428) says that, before knowing of the Trish specimen
mentioned in the text, he had been informed of the bird baving been met with
in Scotland, but the report was too uncertain for him to notice ; (2) Mr.
Edward writing in 1859 (Zool. p. 6631) declared that one stormy winter about
fifty years before a large flock appeared at Banff ; (8) Hoy informed the Author
that, some time prior to 1839, Mr. Seaman of Ipswich had shot one apparently
near that town ; (4) Bury in 1844 said (Zool. p. 643) he had been told of a pair
of Crossbills with white bars on their wings having been obtained about six
years before in the Isle of Wight; (5) the late Archibald Jerdon, as accurate an
observer as lis more distinguished brother, stated (Zool. p. 221) that he examined
one, apparently a hen, shot in February, 1841, near Bonjedward in Roxburgh-
shire; (6) in March 1845, Mr. J. Cooper had one alive which was caught near
Birmingham, as Strickland informed the Author ; (7) My. R. J. Bell mentions
(Zool. p. 1247) a hen shot, while accompanying Fieldfares, at Mickleover near
Derby in November 1845 ; (8) Salmon, in a contribution to Newman's ‘ Letters
of Rusticus’, published in 1849 (p. 158), notices a cock lird shot in Unsted
Wood, Surrey, and then belonging to Mr. Nicholson of Waverley Abbey; (9)
Mr. Sterland says that four were shot at Edwinstowe, in Nottinghamshire, in
the spring of 1849; and (10) Mr. Prideaux in 1852 recorded (Zool. 3474) one
at Taunton, without giving any date for it. Several of these particulars having
hitherto been erroneously given by various authors, the foregoing list, which,
so far as it goes, is helieved to be accurate, may be found useful.
TWO-BARRED CROSSBILL. 213
283) to its determination. Mr. Rodd in 1843 mentioned
(Zool. p. 142) that one had been killed a few years before
at Larrigan in Cornwall, and the specimen, which is still
in his collection, he has since referred to the present form.
In the autumn of 1845 a considerable number appeared
in Cumberland, and a hen now in Mr. Hancock’s collection
was shot out of a flock of about fifteen near Brampton in
that county, while at least nine more were obtained in the
neighbourhood either at the same time or in the following
year (Zool. pp. 1551, 1638). Of these last, two were lent
for the use of this work by Capt. Johnson of Walton House.
In May 1846, two or three were killed from a flock at Drink-
stone, near Bury St. EKdmund’s in Suffolk* (Zool. pp. 1498,
2419), one of which is in Mr. Gurney’s possession and a
second, received at the time by Heysham, passed from him
with one of the Cumberland specimens to Doubleday and
thence to Mr. Stevenson’s possession (Zool. s.s. p. 8778,
note). Somewhere about the same time, it is believed,
Doubleday shot a young bird in his own garden at Epping.
Mr. Blake Knox has more recently recorded (Zool. s.s. p.
1376) a specimen obtained by him in Ireland in 1868,
All these examples, so far as the Editor can judge, may
be safely assigned to L. bifasciata.
This bird has at times occurred in considerable num-
bers in various parts of Europe whither it has strayed from
its home in the northern and eastern parts of the Russian
dominions. In 1792, one is said to have been taken at
Stockholm, and this is perhaps the first known instance
of its appearance in Europe; but, in 1815, Meisner and
Schinz noticed in the Museum at Bern a specimen, said
to have been taken in Switzerland, which was probably of
this species. In 1824 the younger Naumann figured, as a
variety of Loxia curvirostra, an immature example of the
present bird (obtained presumably in Germany) being one
of the only two he said he had ever seen. In the summer
* From the fact of two of the specimens having been sent to a birdstuffer at
Thetford, the neighbourhood of that town was inferred to have been the locality
where they were obtained. The Editor well remembers them in his hands.
214 FRINGILLID&.
or autumn of 1826, however, a very considerable number
appeared in central Europe, sometimes in troops of from
twenty to fifty, which of course attracted some attention,
particularly as has been already said, from Gloger and the
eldest Brehm. Virtually this was the year of its discovery
as an European bird, for the previous observations, in
Sweden, Britain and Switzerland, had been almost entirely
overlooked. How far this particular visitation (the head-
quarters of which seems to have been in Silesia and
Thuringia) extended cannot be said, but there is evidence of
stragglers in the course of that autumn or of the following
winter having reached the neighbourhood of Vienna, Munich,
Nuremberg, Liege, Antwerp and Copenhagen. Possibly
some even remained to breed, or else a second visitation
‘followed, for in the severe winter of 1829, according to Von
Kettner, it appeared on the mountains of the Murg valley in
Baden. Since this time it has been observed in Hungary
(Isis, 1848, p. 86), several times in Bohemia, and frequently
in Germany, appearing, say Drs. Blasius and Baldamus,
almost yearly in the Harz in company with the common
species, and it 1s recorded also from Tyroi and the Berga-
masco southward, while westward it has reached the neigh-
bourhood of Caen in Normandy. It has also more than
once visited Belgium as in September 1842, and November
and December 1845, when flocks appeared. In February
1846 it was seen in Holland near Utrecht. Mr. Gatke
has occasionally obtained it in Heligoland, where it is, how-
ever, very rare. It visited Denmark in October 1845 and
December 1849, and was observed in Norway, in August
1840, October 1852 and in the autumn of 1858—each
time in the botanic garden at Christiania. In Sweden it
continues to come at uncertain times to Stockholm, near
which city, as well as near Gottenburg and in Scania, it was
especially observed in the autumn of 1845, and it has also
occurred at Gefle, but is not yet recorded from any more
northern locality in that or the sister kingdom. In Finland
Magnus von Wright stated in 1849 that it had been of late
years observed near Helsingfors, where the younger Von
TWO-BARRED CROSSBILL. 215
Nordmann obtained several examples, and in 1856 Mr.
Dresser got many at Viborg; but, though J. von Wright
procured it the following year at Haminanlaks, it is not
mentioned by Dr. Malmgren as a bird of the Kajana tract.
In Russia it was apparently unknown till 1841, when
Prof. Brandt announced it as of very rare occurrence in that
country. In July 1848, Prof. Lilljeborg, however, found it
in plenty near Archangel ; but the experience of later travel-
lers seems to shew that even there its appearance is fitful,
and, though in some seasons it is numerous, years may pass
without seeing it. When it does appear it seems to breed,
and its song and beautiful plumage make it eagerly sought
and highly prized as a cage-bird. The larch-forests of Siberia
probably afford it a more certain residence, and in that country
it is especially abundant, reaching to the Arctic Circle on the
Jennesei, and having been met with throughout Manchuria
to the Pacific. It has been also included among the birds
of Japan; but seemingly on the evidence only of native
drawings.*
As regards habits little difference has been observed
between this and other Crossbills. Its call-notes however
are said to be peculiar. The earlier observers, Brehm and
Gloger, syllabled them by the words krit, tutt, tutt and
gatt, gatt or gratt, grdtt—all to be pronounced as in German.
Baron de Selys, who has so effectually contributed to a better
knowledge of this bird, says (Bull. Acad. Belg. 1846, pt. i.
p. 381) that his attention was first drawn to it by its ery,
which somewhat resembled that of a Bullfinch, and he had
the pleasure of observing a flock for more than a fortnight
on his property at Longchamps-sur-Geer. They preferred
the seeds of the larch to those of other firs. Those that
Prof. Lilljeborg saw near Archangel however haunted a wood
* The skin of a white-winged Crossbill, formerly in the possession of Mr.
Gould, purported to come from the Himalayas, and has been figured by Bonaparte
and Prof. Schlegel in their fine ‘Monographie des Loxiens’ (p. 8, pl. 10) as a
specimen of Z, leucoptera, but as stated by the Author in the last Edition of
the present work it belongs to Z. bifasctata, and agrees with various examples
taken in this country.
ViOln.> IL. : F F
216 FRINGILIID A.
chiefly of spruces where there were no larches. He says that
the note seemed to him sharper than that of the common
species. With respect to the nidification of the Two-barred
Crossbill no details whatever have been given. The egg
is exceedingly rare in collections, and the only specimen as
yet figured was laid ina cage. A specimen in the Editor's
possession, received through a trusty channel from the neigh-
bourhood of Archangel, presents precisely the appearance
of an ordinary Crossbill’s eg¢ and measures ‘97 by °66 in.
The adult male in full plumage has the bill of a dusky
horn-colour: the head, neck, mantle and rump are brilliant
light crimson-red, the dusky base of the feathers appearing
in places and giving a mottled look to the whole; the scap-
ulars and feathers of the back are dull blackish-brown,
broadly tipped with the same crimson-red, as are also the
upper tail-coverts, but in them the red is mixed with white;
the wings are dark blackish-brown—the middle and greater
wing-coyerts dusky at the base and then pure white, or white
tinged with pink, for more than half their length, forming
two conspicuous white bands; the quills are narrowly fringed
with reddish- or yellowish-white, and most of them are tipped
with white—the tertials very broadly; the tail-quills are also
dark brownish-black, edged with white, sometimes tinged
with red or yellow on the outer fringe ; the throat, breast and
flanks are nearly as the head and greater part of the upper
surface; the belly greyish-white ; the lower tail-coverts dull
white tinged with pink, each having a dusky base which runs
into a pointed median stripe ; legs, toes and claws, dusky.
In a male, which had been apparently kept in confine-
ment, the head, back, breast and flanks are varied with
bright yellow, forming a most gaudy combination of colours.
The whole leneth of the male is six inches and a quarter ;
the wing from the carpal joint three inches and three quar-
ters: the height of the bill at the base from *35 to *45 inch.
The youngest bird seen by the Editor has much the same
striated plumage as the common Crossbill at the same age—
the white bars on the wines, which are then as conspicuous
as in adults, of course excepted. The exact course of the
TWO-BARRED CROSSBILL. Ae
change that follows is not with certainty known ; but there
is no doubt that much of the striated character is soon lost,
particularly by the cocks, which appear to attain before or in
their first autumn a greyish suit, suffused here and there by
a rosy blush or a warm ochreous tinge. The hens com-
monly retain the striations to a great degree, while their
general plumage inclines to green or greenish-yellow on the
breast and rump. Except the white wing-bars there is little
difference in style of coloration between them and the hens
of the common species.
Confusion, however, of the preseut bird with its American
representative must be guarded against. The differential
characters are rather minute, but most of those assigned by
various writers appear to be constant. Exception may be
taken to the alleged difference in the red colouring of the
cocks, the intensity and tone of which varies considerably
and some European examples are quite as brilliant as any
from America. The more constant differences may be thus
summed up. The bird of the Old World is very decidedly
the larger and with a more powerful bill, which is obvious
even in young examples; and the scapulars and feathers of
the middle of the back are much more broadly tipped and
edged with brown orred, The tail also is rather less forked,
but perhaps a better character is found in the fact that its
feathers seldom lose their light margins, which indeed are
often very conspicuous, while the American bird is almost as
seldom seen possessing them. Further distinction has
also been sought (Cufvers. K. Vet.-Ak. Forhand1. 1846, p. 40)
in the proportional length of the toes and claws, but the
examination of a considerable series of specimens casts
doubt upon this as a character. It follows then that the
general dimensions, and especially those of the bill, are alone
to be trusted, though the presence or absence of the light
margins of the tail-feathers, and in cock birds the colour of
the scapulars and back, will in the great majority of cases
decide the question at a glance.
218 FRINGILLID.X.
PASSERES. FPRINGILLIDA.
Loxta LEUCOPTERA, J. F. Gmelin.*
THE WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL.
Loxia leucoptera.
For a long time the only known form of Crossbill with
white on its wings, this bird was originally described in 1783
under the above English name by Latham (Gen. Syn. B. ii. p.
108) who had received specimens from Hudson’s Bay and New
York. A few years later, the compiler Gmelin bestowed on
it the scientific appellation it still bears and thereby fore-
stalled its first describer’s wish, not expressed till 1790 (Ind.
Orn. i. p. 371), of calling it Loria faleirostra. As has
been said already it was not for many years after that the
white-winged Crossbill of the Old World was recognized as
distinct from that of the New.
It is not improbable that a specimen or more of American
origin may have been among those white-winged Crossbills
* Syst. Nat. i. p. 844 (1788).
WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL. 219
that have occurred in this country without being subjected to
the eye of a critical ornithologist, and it is certain that with
several writers professing to treat only of British or Euro-
pean species Western examples have done duty for Eastern ;
but there are three undoubted instances of birds, which
agree in every respect with specimens obtained in America,
finding their way to England or to English waters. The
earliest of these was a hen, killed near Worcester in 1838,
as communicated to this work by Strickland, and the speci-
men labelled by him being still in his collection at Cambridge
there can be no doubt about its identification. Next comes
a fine red cock, from which the preceding figure was drawn,
exhibited at a meeting of the Zoological Society, Sept. 23rd,
1845, by Mr. E. B. Fitton who said he had found it dead
and partly covered with wet sand in a crevice of some loose
rocks on the shore at Exmouth, on the 17th of the same
month, the wind being at the time south-west, and westerly
gales having prevailed for some days (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1845,
p- 91). The Author with Mr. Fitton examined this bird
while in the flesh. On dissection it proved to be an adult
male, and its stomach was empty. When some time after
that gentleman went to New Zealand he kindly sent it to the
Author and it is now in Mr. Knox’s collection. The third
example was bought alive in October 1872, by Mr. J. H.
Gurney, of a man at Great Yarmouth who said that it had
been caught on the rigging of a vessel which arrived at that
port in October 1870. It had become very tame, and so
continued after its transfer to Mr. Stevenson’s aviary at
Norwich, where it lived till December, 1874, having in the
mean time been more than once seen by the Editor. It was
a hen, and some particulars of its captivity have been pub-
lished by both the gentlemen named (Trans. Norf. and Norw.
Nat. Soc. 1872-73, p. 117; Zool. s.s. p. 4695). To these
notices is appropriate the statement made to Mr. R. Gray by
the late Dr. Dewar, to the effect that some twelve or fifteen
years before, when on his passage from America, he observed
great numbers of this kind of Crossbill crossing the Atlantic
before a stiff westerly breeze. Many of the flocks alighted
290 FRINGILLIDAR,
on the rigging and deck of the steamer which was about six
hundred miles from the Newfoundland coast. He secured
ten or twelve examples, of which one or two escaped as the
ship neared the [Trish coast and made straight forland. Two
others flew out of their cage in the streets of Liverpool, and
five were sent to Mr. Gray, with whom they lived for a few
months. There have probably been many other men who
like Dr. Dewar have helped winged wanderers across the
Atlantic—with what success we may perhaps guess, though
we shall never know, from the American element in our list
of so-called ‘* British” birds.*
Except perhaps in Heligoland, where it seems to have
occurred, this Crossbill appears to be otherwise quite unknown
in Europe, and continental writers are not wanting who
deny that it has ever reached this quarter of the globe.
Many years since the elder Reinhardt reported (K. Dansk
Selsk. Naturvid. Afhandl. 1838, p. 92) his receipt of a dried
Specimen, apparently an adult male, which had been brought
by an Esquimaux from the east coast of Greenland, and his
son mentions (Ibis, 1861, p. 8) that in later years another
adult male and three young birds, now in the Royal Museum
at Copenhagen, were obtained in South Greenland. To that
desolate country it is of course only a chance straggler, but
in Newfoundland (where, according to Mr. Reeks, it is
known as the Spruce-bird) it is common throughout the
year, being most abundant during winter, when it gathers in
flocks of from five to twenty, and feeds chiefly on the seeds
of the Abies alba, as it does throughout the whole of its
range, which stretches across the breadth of the continent
from Labrador to Alaska. Richardson observed it in lat.
62° N. and thought it probably went as high as the dense
forests of white spruce extend. It is recorded by Mr. Weiz
as breeding at Okkak in Labrador (Proc. Bost. Soc. N.H. x.
p. 267) and by Mr. Boardman as doing the like in winter at
Calais in the State of Maine (op. cit. ix. p. 126). The only
* Two white-winged Crossbills shot by Saxby at Halligarth in Unst, Sept. 4th,
1559, would seem from his partial description to have presented American
characteristics. What became of the specimens the Editor does not know,
WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL. 221
certain particulars, however, we have of its nidification are
those given by Messrs. Baird, Brewer and Ridgway, in their
‘Birds of North America’, from a nest and egg taken, in
1868, by Dr. A. Adams at Frederickton, in New Brunswick.
The egg is said to be ‘‘ pale blue, the large end rather thickly
spattered with fine dots of black and ashy-llac’”’, and to
measure *8 by ‘56 in. The nest is described as being
“deeply saucer-shaped, and composed of a rather thin wall
of fibrous pale-green lichens, encased on the outside with
spruce twigs, and thinly lined with coarse hairs and fine
shreds of inner bark. Its external diameter is a little less
than four inches, the rim being almost perfectly circular ;
the cavity is an inch and a half deep by two and a half
broad.”
Though some examples winter in the Dominion, the
majority seem to migrate southward as autumn approaches,
and in the Eastern States of the Union to reach Pennsylvania,
where, rare as their occurrence was in Wilson’s days, they
have since been found more abundantly (Proce. Ac. N. 8.
Phil. 1854, p. 203). In spring they mostly return to the
north, and Audubon in May saw many on the rocky islands
in the Bay of Fundy, and again encountered a flock while
crossing the Gulf of St. Lawrence, all evidently journeying
northward. This Crossbill was not observed in the United
States to the west of the Mississippi until 1860, when it
was found in June by Dr. Hayden on the Wind River
Mountains, and west of the Rocky Mountains it has not
been known to occur south of British Columbia. In beha-
viour it is like all the other Crossbills, and its tameness and
pleasing song have been noticed by many transatlantic
observers. Its note has been syllabled ‘* week.”
In all its plumages this bird so closely resembles the pre-
ceding that a general description of them is rendered unne-
cessary. By colour alone it would seem almost impossible
to distinguish the young of either sex, and the females of the
one form, from corresponding examples of the other, except
that in the bird of the New World the light edging of the
tail-feathers is seldom visible, while in that of the Old this
[Ss)
a FRINGILLID.X.
character is usually very conspicuous. The same difference
obtains also in the adult males, while they may be besides
generally distinguished, as has been said already (page 217),
by the colour of the scapulars and middle of the back, which
in the American bird are of an almost uniform pitch-black,
as dark as or darker than the flight-feathers, and in freshly-
moulted examples present a very pleasing contrast on the
one side to the white wing-bars and on the other to the red
mantle and rump.
The whole length of the male is five inches and three-
quarters ; the wing from the carpal joint three inches and
a half. The longest primaries are generally narrower and
more pointed in the present bird than in its Eastern repre-
sentative, and the height of the bill at the base rarely if
ever exceeds ‘3 in. The tapering form of this feature has
been before mentioned.
That the present is the form entitled to the name of
‘* White-winged Crossbill”’ none can doubt, and the word
‘* American’ added thereto in the last Edition of this work
is an encumbrance which requires a corresponding geogra-
phical epithet in the case of the preceding bird. That of
‘* European ” then applied is misleading, for the head-quarters
of Loxia bifasciata are rather in Asia than Europe. When
the difference between the two forms was recognized by
British ornithologists, Newman proposed (Zool. p. 2300) to
eall that of the Old World the ‘‘ Two-barred Crossbill,”’
and this earliest distinctive name, though possibly not the
happiest that might have:been chosen, has been accordingly
here retained for it, while the ancient style of the American
form is left unchanged,*
* Certain writers, it may be remarked, for some recondite reason have removed
the Crossbills from the genus Zovia, but to the Editor it seems unquestionable
that LZ. curvirostra must be considered the type of that genus as founded by
Linneus, who, as was his wont, combined in his appellation the names by which
it had been before known to naturalists, while the derivation of the word Loxia
(from the Greek Aces, wry) shows that it is unsuitable to any of the other groups
to which it has been applied. Some writers have also separated the Crossbills
from the Fringillide, and have given them the rank of a family under the
name of Loxiid@—a very needless division since they are most intimately
related to many of the unquestionable Finches.
RED-WINGED STARLING. 293
PASSERES. ICTERIDA.
AGELEHUS PHG@NICEUS (Linneus *).
THE RED-WINGED STARLING.
Agelaius pheniceus.
AcrLaus, Vieillot+.—Bill as long as the head, hard, stout, straight and
cuneated ; the mandibles nearly equal, their edges inflected. Nostrils basal, oval,
overhung by a rudimentary operculum. Gape angular. Wings moderate, with
only nine primaries, that which is ordinarily the first being absent, and of those
present the outermost is shorter than the next two. Tail rather long, rounded.
Tarsi scutellated in front, covered behind by a single plate ; claws moderate.
A sPECIMEN of this common American bird, shot near
London, was figured in 1738 by Albin, who says that he
* Oriolus phoeniceus, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed, 12, i. p. 161 (1766),
+ Agelaius (by mistake), Vieillot, Analyse &c. p. 33 (1816).
VOL. II. Cac
224 ICTERID®.
found in its gizzard, grubs, beetles and small maggots,
adding ‘* I believe it was a Cage-Bird, which had got loose.”
The plate shews it to have been an adult male.
This species is indeed so common a cage-bird, so patient
of captivity and so certain to find, at least for a time, its
living in this country (in the case of its escape from confine-
ment) that, setting aside the possibility (which is of course
not to be denied) of its crossing the Atlantic without human
aid, the wonder perhaps is that a far longer list of its
occurrences at large in Britain has not to be noticed. More
than a century, however, passed away between the time when
Albin painted its portrait and that of its being next observed
in this island. On June 2d, 1843, an example was shot
near Barton Broad in Norfolk, when another bird of the
species was said to have been in its company. While quite
fresh this specimen, which was a male in good condition, its
stomach filled with the remains of beetles, came into the
possession of Mr. Gurney, who kindly allowed the preceding
fieure to be taken from it. In the autumn of 1844 another
example, as originally recorded in the ‘ Supplement’ to the
First Edition of this ‘ History’, was shot among reeds in a
brick-field at Shepherd’s Bush near London; and the speci-
men, which is now in Mr. Bond’s collection, was also lent for
the use of this work. It was also a male, apparently older
than the Norfolk bird. Mr. Jeffery has recorded (Zool. p.
8951) the shooting of a male at Sidlesham in Sussex, Decem-
ber 25th, 1863. My. Harting mentions haying been informed
by Mr. J. H. Gurney of another male, said to have been
killed near Romney in Kent, which was seen by him in the
hands of a birdstuffer at Rye, in June 1864 or 1865, and in
May of the latter year, according to Mr. W. Jesse (Zool. p.
9782), a male was seen at Liphook in Hampshire, for about
a fortnight. A male, now in Mr. Monk’s collection, is said
to have been caught near Brighton, March 21st, 1866 (Zool.
s.s. p. 229).* A young male, writes Mr. Edward (Zool.
* My. Harting (Handbook, p. 117) speaks of ‘two others procured at the
same time’; but these specimens, Mr. Rowley informs the Editor, were skins
sent to the same birdstuffer to be mounted.
RED-WINGED STARLING. 220
s.s. p. 310), was shot near Banff in June 1866, and was
subsequently exhibited to the Glasgow Natural History
Society. Mr. Gray states, on the information of My. R.
Scot Skirving, that a male example was seen in Kast Lothian
a few years before he wrote. Lastly Mr. 8. L. Mosley has
recorded (Zool. 1877, p. 257) a male found dead under the
telegraph-wires at Adwick-le-Street, in Yorkshire, in March
1877, which was soon after exhibited to the Huddersfield
Scientific Club.*
Wilson, Audubon and Nuttall, as well as other more recent
American ornithologists, have given interesting accounts of
this bird, which abounds in suitable places from the Atlantic
to the Pacific, at least so far northward as Great Slave Lake
and southward as Guatemala, where Mr. Salvin has found it to
be a resident. Towards the north, however, it is migratory,
arriving in spring and departing in autumn. In most parts
of the country it has gained a very bad reputation from its
plundering propensities. It not only plucks up the germinat-
ing grain; but ravages also the ripening crops—amaize, rice
or buckwheat, especially while the seeds are yet soft—its
numbers making its depredations very formidable. Yet for
a considerable portion of the year the ‘‘ Corn-thief,” as it is
very commonly called,t is not only harmless, but positively
beneficial to the husbandman, and more than compensates
him for the damage done at other times. In New England,
from March to July, its food consists almost wholly of insects,
* Tt is to be remarked that in every recorded case of the species being observed
in Britain the specimen has been a cock, and this fact favours the view that all
have been imported examples that have escaped; since the hen, owing to her
dingy plumage, is seldom kept in confinement. It may be objected on the other
hand that the cock would obviously attract attention sooner than the hen, but
her dull appearance would hardly save her from the notice of the numerous keen
observers always looking out for curious birds, as testified by the fact that quite
as many strangers of obscure as of bright plumage have from time to time been
detected by our field-naturalists.
+ Another name for it is Swamp- or Marsh-Blackbird. In Canada it is very
generally known as the ‘‘ Field-officer’”’—the scarlet patch on the wings of the
cock being thought to resemble the crimson sash distinguishing the higher ranks
of the army. In like manner it was named Commendador or Commandeur by
the early Spanish and French colonists in America—a red badge being worn, say
old authors, by the commanders of a certain Spanish order of knighthood,
296 ICTERIDE.
and these of the most noxious kind—the grubs and cater-
pulars that are the greatest enemies to vegetation. In
August it collects im small bands, which as the season
advances join company and move southward. In winter the
associated flocks may be numbered, says Audubon, by
millions, and chiefly frequent marshy grounds whereon they
feed. Wilson compared the noise of their wings as they rose
to thunder. In the air they wheel about, and appear at
times like a black cloud driven by the wind and varying in
shape every moment. Presently they will alight in some
detached grove, and at once begin a grand vocal performance
which, the same observer says, can be heard more than two
miles off. Towards evening they settle with much noise in
compact bodies on the reeds and rushes close above the
water, and, when disturbed, repeat their aerial evolutions ; but,
finally pitching on the spot first chosen, remain there for the
night.* Early in March these large assemblies break up.
A part separate in pairs and remain among the southern
swamps, but the greater number in small flocks, the males
leading the way, return northward and seek their breeding-
haunts, which are on the borders of streams or marshy spots.
The nest is usually placed in a low bush, among thick reeds
or even on the ground, but oceasionally a loftier site is chosen.
Its outer framework is usually of rushes and flags, within
which are arranged sedge and grass. The eges vary much,
and are of a greenish-white or pale pinkish-brown, blotched
and lined with dark liver-brown—some of the markings, which
often form a cap or zone, being sharply defined, while others
are surrounded by a penumbra—besides a few blotches of light
ash-colour. They measure from 1:15 to *92 by from °76 to
‘65 in. In New Eneland these birds rear but one brood in
the season, but further to the southward they are said to have
three or more.
Some of the habits of this species will thus be seen
ereatly to resemble those of our Starling, but the two birds
* Dr. Coues states that the sexes of the western form (Agelwus tricolor)
keep apart in their winter-flocks. Whether this is also the case with the eastern
bird does not appear.
RED-WINGED STARLING. 227,
belong to wholly different families, which have little structural
affinity, and the Editor cannot but regret that the Author
having included the present member of the purely American
family Icteride in this work its position must still be
retained here. It has been most properly refused admission
to the European list by all foreign ornithologists.*
The male, killed in Norfolk, had the bill black: the irides
dark brown: the head, neck, scapulars and back, black; the
feathers below the neck edged with reddish-brown ; the lesser
wing-coverts red, the middle orange-yellow, the greater black,
edged with brownish-buff; wings and tail black; the lower
part of the body black: legs, toes and claws, black.
The specimen killed at Shepherd’s Bush, being older, had
lost all the buff margins of the feathers of the back, scapu-
lars and greater wing-coverts ; the whole plumage, except the
red and yellow patch on the wing, being of an uniform glossy
black.
The length of the male ig about nine inches; the wing
from the carpal joint nearly five inches.
The female is much smaller, dark brown above, the feathers
edged with light brown; a light stripe along the middle of
the head; the lesser wing-coverts tinged with red; wings
and tail blackish-brown, the feathers margined with brownish-
red; a yellowish band over the eye; beneath dull white
streaked with dark brown, except on the throat, which
together with the lores and sides of the neck, is tinged with
carmine. The young resemble the female, but have no red
tinge, and the throat is pale yellowish-brown.
* Three examples of Sturnella ludoviciana, the ‘t Meadow-Lark”’ of North
America, which belongs also to the /eteridw, are said to have been observed in
England—one seen by Capt. Jary in Norfolk in October, 18545; a second shot at
Thrandeston in Suffolk in March, 1860, andnowin Mr. H. T. Frere’s possession—
both recorded by Mr. Sclater (Ibis, 1861, p. 177); and a third, killed near
Cheltenham many years ago, as mentioned by Mr. Harting (Handbook, p. 118) on
Mr. J. W. Lloyd’s authority.
225 STURNID.
PASSERES. STURNIDA.
* —R,
ANY
fl
STuRNUS VULGARIS (Linneus *).
THE STARLING.
Sturnus vulgaris.
Srurnus, Linnwust.—Bill as long as the head, almost straight, blunt at the
tip, depressed so as to be wider than high; edges of the upper mandible extend-
ing over those of the lower and both quite smooth. Nostrils basal, supernal and
partly overlaid by an operculum. Gape angular and free from bristles. Feathers
of the head and anterior part of the body pointed and elongated. Wings long,
pointed, with ten primaries ; the first very short, the second or third the longest.
Tail short, rectrices diverging at the tip. Tarsus scutellate in front, covered at
the side by an undivided plate, forming a sharp ridge behind. Claws short
and moderately curved.
e Syst. Nat, Ed. Le: 1. )- 290 (1766). aR Loc. cit.
STARLING. 229
THE StTaruine, from its lustrous plumage, its sprightly
actions and, during some part of the year, its familiar
disposition, is with most people a favourite bird; while
its abundance and nowadays its very general distribution
throughout the British Islands make it also one of our best
known species. Its clear, lively notes, forming a varied and
agreeable song also recommend it, and even those who are
unaffected by such considerations as these may know that in
this bird, if they have studied its habits, they have a bene-
factor of almost priceless value, since the pilfering of fruit
and damage to seeds, presently to be noticed, of which it is
at times guilty, though bearing hard upon some persons, go
for nothing compared with the general advantages to the
community conferred by its almost ceaseless destruction of
injurious insects. In plumage it stands nearly alone among
our common small birds, for its feathers, bespangled with
amber and reflecting a brilliant metallic sheen, bespeak its
alliance with some of the brightest denizens of the tropics.
In activity, though its gait on the ground has been not inaptly
termed shambling, it is firm and rapid, and the Starling runs
over the turf of our lawns with an case only surpassed, among
our Land-birds, by a Wagtail, while it will cling ike a Wood-
pecker to the rough bark of a tree in search of the larvee
therein harboured. The familiarity with which it occupies
our dwellings manifests a trustfulness, sometimes unfortu-
nately misplaced, equal to that of the Swallow or Martin,
and a sociability that is free from the intrusive pertness of
the House-Sparrow. Its song is as imitative as that of the
vaunted Mocking-bird, and in nothing perhaps is it more
erateful than in the reminiscences it brings to our homes of
its wilder associates far afield; for Starlings consort with
many kinds of birds, learn their notes and frequently mingle
them in their own strain.*
* Thus the well-known wail of the Lapwing and the piping note of the Ringed
Plover may be heard in places wholly unsuited to the habits of those birds.
Messrs. Matthews mention Starlings imitating the cry of the Kestrel, Wryneck,
Partridge, Moorhen and Coot among otber birds (Zool. p. 2430). Saxby says that
in Shetland the notes of the Oyster-catcher, Golden Plover, Redshank, Curlew,
230 STURNIDA.
Some conception of the Starling’s utility as a destroyer of
insects may be formed by any one who will avail himself of
the opportunities, which its tameness so commonly gives, to
watch it while feeding. Hardly a fly or a beetle escapes its
quick sight or, if at all within reach, its agile motions as it
runs over the grass. More than this, it industriously probes
beneath the surface for the grubs which lurk at the roots, and,
thrusting aside obstructions by opening its bill, skilfully
extracts these still greater enemies to some kinds of vegeta-
tion than the perfect insect ; and Mr. Cordeaux has noticed its
enormous destruction of the Aphides that feed on tares and
pease (Zool. p. 9280 and s.s. p. 944). It may be often
seen perched on the back of sheep and oxen as they graze,
and their owners speak highly of its services in removing
the ticks or other parasites with which these animals may be
infested. But it is not only on or near the ground that the
Starling follows its useful labour: in hot weather it may be:
seen soaring aloft engaged in diminishing the swarms of
high-flying insects which at times mount above the tallest
trees.* Its appetite is insatiable,t and when insects are
Whimbrel and Herring-Gull are perfectly mimicked. Mr. Hooper, of Upton near
Didcot, informs the Editor that Starlings in that neighbourhood will render
exactly the characteristic cry of the Quail and the Corn-Crake. The common
sounds of the poultry-yard are often copied with more or less accuracy, and a
Duck may be heard to quack, a Hen to cackle and a Cock to crow from the
topmost bough of a tall tree. It seems quite possible that in some of the stories
which have been told of Blackbirds’ crowing or cackling (vol. i. page 281) the
imitator may have been a Starling. In confinement it will readily learn to utter
sounds resembling the human voice. Pliny mentions one which spoke two
languages, Greek and Latin—a feat performed by another, some 1500 years
later, in regard to German and Polish (Journ. fiir Orn. 1870, p. 65). Nanmann
tells us of one which had been taught to repeat the Lord’s Prayer word for word,
and the bird celebrated by Sterne will never be forgotten so long as English
literature lasts.
* The very destructive Phyllopertha horticola is thus taken in great numbers,
though far more are consumed in its larval state, while buried in the ground.
+ Thompson remarks that in quantity as well as variety of food consumed,
Starlings exceed all birds that have come under his notice, and gives some details
as to the contents of the stomach of several examples examined by him. M.
Florent Prevost’s observations on the Starling’s diet throughout the year in France
will be found in the ‘ Zoologist’ (p. 8762), and Newman in the same magazine
(s.s. p. 2632, note) has named the insects which are chiefly destroyed by this
bird and the Rook.
STARLING. 231
wanting the smaller mollusks are as busily sought, while
worms are at all times readily taken. In winter a certain
proportion of seeds enters into its diet, and among them
occasionally a few grains of corn may be found, but these
seem to be its last resource. Berries however of various kinds
have their attractions,* and it cannot be denied that of late
years charges have been often brought against the Starling, and
apparently not without cause, of doing considerable damage
in cherry-orchards—especially in Kent. The actual extent
of its depredations has perhaps been exaggerated, for such
is the wont of horticulturists, who are always prone to
condemn in a sweeping sentence a whole race of beings when
they have been losers by any part of it. The naturalist will
wait to enquire whether the injuries complained of may not
be inflicted by some individuals rather than by the species
generally, whether they may not be due, in part at least, to
some peculiarity of the season which has for a time changed
the birds’ habits, or whether the damage be really one of the
results of the great increase of the species which has been
continually going on for some years past in this island.
This increase is indeed a very remarkable fact, attested on
so many sides that it must be accepted, though there are some
few places in which the contrary has to a slight degree been
observed. The growing abundance of the Starling with us
has been ascribed to the destruction of birds-of-prey, but
perhaps too hastily, since though Hawks of every kind have
become of late years scarce in this country, there is no Hawk
known specially to prey upon Starlings. Nor can we reason-
ably suppose that the increase of the latter has been much
induced by those who, following the example of Waterton,t
* Bolton figured this bird feeding on crow-berries (Hmpetrum nigrum) of
which he says he noticed near Halifax that it seemed to be particularly fond.
Elder-berries are also eaten by it.
+ No naturalist will of course have the least wish to undervalue the efforts
made by Waterton for domiciling the Starling. To him the praise is due that he
was one of the first to appreciate its benefits, and to make the attempt which in
his case succeeded so perfectly. In his old gateway he many years ago made two
dozen suitable holes which were forthwith and for the rest of his life tenanted by
as many pairs of this bird. Bewick often told Mr. Hancock how delighted he
should be if a Starling could be induced to build its nest in his house, but from
VOL. II. H H
Doe STURNIDE.
have provided shelter for it, since unless a sufficiency of
food is forthcoming for the many additional mouths accom-
modation for additional bodies would avail little. Moreover,
as is the case throughout Scotland (to be more particularly
dwelt on presently), Starlings have become more and more
abundant in places whither they have not been invited. The
true cause of their increase is more likely to lie in a growing
abundance of food, but we must confess our ignorance as to
how that growing abundance has been produced.
The Starling builds its nest in the holes of trees, cliffs or
banks, all of which must be regarded as its natural habitations
but will, though very rarely, make one after the fashion of
most other birds.* It readily avails itself of any convenient
situation which may be afforded it by man or other animals,
and has been often found the tenant of a rabbit-burrow
when opening on the face of a declivity, while its occupation
of man’s edifices, from the towers of the proudest cathedral
to the wall of a lowly hut, composed of boulders and turf—
from the venerable ruins of an ancient castle to the preten-
tious villa of modern days, whose peeling stucco invites the
Starling to penetrate its fissures—is known to all. It will
dispute with a Woodpecker the hole which the latter has
laboriously chiselled in a tree, and will almost always gain
an easy victory, for on its carrying in some nest-furniture the
Woodpecker at once yields possession. The Starling too
the bird’s scarcity in the north of England in those days, the wish was apparently
never gratified. Where the species is at all numerous nothing is easier than to
attract it, by setting up a nest-box for its accommodation.
* The Editor well remembers a Starling’s nest (an old Sparrow’s very likely
forming its foundation) built of straw in a Jarge yew, and open tothe sky. This
was at Elveden in 1842 or 1843, and, though at the time perfectly aware of its
being a deviation from the bird’s usual habit, he did not imagine that such an
instance had not been recorded as known before, or that some five-and-thirty
years after he should be unable to cite more than a few similar cases. Mr. G.
B. Clarke mentions (Nat. 1851, p. 214) some platform-nests, composed of twigs
and bents in fir-branches at Woburn, and Mr. J. P. Thomasson twenty years later
(Zool. s.s. p. 2682) a nest built against the trunk of a small fir near Bolton-le-
Moors. As an equally exceptional site for a nest may be mentioned that described
by Mr. J. Sclater (Zool. s.s. p. 83647), where a small hole in the level surface of
the ground was used and a brood hatched. Mr. J. W. Barlow (Zool. p. 1023)
was told of a Starling which laid in the same nest with a Pie.
STARLING. 233
will share with the Sparrow* any convenient site that an
ordinary dwelling-house affords, and will frequently occupy a
niche in a Dove-cote—but very seldom to the detriment of
the Pigeons, with which it generally lives in perfect harmony.
To the majority of us it is most familiar as our fellow-lodger
under the same roof, and it freely enters the precincts of our
largest and smokiest cities—even London and Glasgow, at
the breeding-season, when a disused chimney, a displaced
slate or tile, a defective cornice or any of the numerous
faults of a building, will give it the accommodation it needs.
But it is seen to best advantage in the country, and nowhere
better than around the gabled manor-house and battlemented
church steeple, bosomed in stately elms, or the snug home-
stead and thatched cottage, surrounded by trim crofts and
meadows—where each eave, coping, buttress and gurgoyle
offers a nursing-chamber for the young, and every turret,
weather-cock, pinnacle and finial a footing for the old. The
ivy that clothes so many old walls and trees adds yet more
to its convenience, and their summits resound, especially on
sunny mornings and evenings, with the never-ending varia-
tions of its song—the chattering harshness of some of its
notes making the long drawn out sweetness of others, to
which they are linked, all the more acceptable to the ear.
Very early in the year the Starling resorts to the breeding-
place of its choice, at first for only a short time in each day,
but as the season advances its visits are of longer duration,
until the needs of getting food or building-material alone
cause its absence. The nest, which is generally the joint work
of both sexes, consists of a large mass of dry grass or straw,
with a few roots and slender twigs, arranged without much
art. A little moss, wool and occasionally feathers are also
used. These are rudely disposed cup-fashion, and therein
are laid the eggs, from four to seven in number, of a delicate
* Tt must be admitted that Mr. Gray’s evidence tells ill for the Starling. On
one occasion he says he saw it drag five newly-hatched Sparrows in succession
from their hole, and leisurely swallow them on the roof of the house. It is to
be hoped that this murderous disposition is very exceptional : it is certainly
uncommon, and most people will agree in stating, as the result of close observa ~
tion, that Sparrows shew no jealousy of Starlings being near them.
934 STURNIDA.
pale blue, in some specimens slightly tinged with green, but
generally varying only in shade, their thin and semitrans-
parent shell giving them when fresh an opalescence of
surpassing beauty, which vanishes so soon as the contents
are emptied. They measure from 1°26 to 1:08 by from -88
to ‘8lin. Some Starlings begin to breed the first week in
April, while others hardly set about their nests till late in
May*—a fact which has led many people to suppose that
the same pair has two or more broods in the year, for
occasionally the same hole may be tenanted twice in the
season—but such an occurrence seems to be very rare in
this country.+ The hen sits so closely that she may be often
caught on the nest, and the cock assists her by bringing her
food. The eges are hatched in about sixteen} days, and
both old birds assiduously nurse the young till they can
fly. Loud are the cries of both parents and offspring at
feeding-time. The former uttering, mostly when there is
cause for alarm, a sharp and angry ‘‘ spate ”’, ‘‘ spate ’’, while
the greeting of the latter sounds like ‘‘ square’, ‘‘ square ”’.
By the end of a fortnight the nestlings are fully fledged,
and are then led abroad to find their own living in the
nearest pastures, wandering by degrees further and further
away ; but, for some weeks, the family continues in company,
and all its members return at nightfall to roost as close to
their home as circumstances permit.
When the young towards midsummer have attained their
full streneth, the various families begin to take yet wider
beats in search of food, and, falling in with others on the
same quest, gather in small companies, to which accessions
are constantly being made, until considerable bands are
formed. These range over the whole country—at times
affecting grassy downs or uplands, at times the fallows, or,
again, the lower and moister meadows, according as insects
* Instances are recorded of the Starling breeding in autumn (Zool. p. 6328
and s.s. pp. 3313, 3368): in spring the hen’s habit of occasionally dropping an
+ Saxby speaks of it, however, as being the rule in Shetland.
+ On this point observers differ. Naumann says fourteen days, Herr H. C.
Miller (in the Feroes) eighteen.
on the grass must be known to many people.
eg!
STARLING, 235
are found to be procurable—occasionally even crossing the
sea. In some localities the birds’ movements are conspicu-
ously constant, in others they are marked by the greatest
irregularity, and the supply of food alone can be assigned as
the cause of this diversity, which thus depends largely on
the variability of the season. On the produce of any dis-
trict being exhausted, the bands separate and rove in search
of new feeding-grounds, which being found, they collect as
before, or possibly even in greater numbers. Thus it may
happen that certain parts of the country may on a sudden
be almost wholly deserted, as the Starlings collect in other
parts or even leave the island. This desultory kind of life
continues to the end of summer, and brings them into con-
tact with several very different kinds of birds having the
same object in view—especially Rooks, Daws and Lapwings,
whom they accompany without any other bond of union than
self-interest,* and from whom during some hours of the day
they generally, and towards sunset they always, secede—re-
sorting to certain well-known places, perhaps at the distance
of many miles, to roost. As evening approaches they may
be seen high in air, flying steadily towards these points, and
night after night, and year after year at the same season,
the same station is thus occupied, the different bands
commonly collecting, as the afternoon advances, on the tops
of tall trees, where they sit and chatter tumultuously for a
longer or shorter time, preparatory to their final departure
for their night-quarters. These Starling-roosts, as varied in
character as in magnitude, have excited the wonder of many
observers, from Sir Thomas Browne’s days to our own, and
exist in many places throughout the kingdom. Reed-beds
are especially a favourite resort, and where reeds form a
valuable property and are regularly harvested, the serious
nature of the damage often done by Starlings is not for a
moment to be disputed, for the stems are borne down,
broken and crushed by the mere weight of the birds that
* Some observers have thought that Starlings act as pilots to their larger com-
panions, others that they are only followers ; but the fact seems to be as stated
above—the association being merely fortuitous.
236 STURNIDE.
alight upon them, as though they had been subjected to
some mechanical process.* Fir-plantations are also a
favourite haunt, as well as shrubberies of holly, ilex and the
like, and this work is indebted to the late Dean Goodenough
for the following account+ of perhaps the largest Starling-
roost in England, as it existed some years ago, on the pro-
perty of the late Mr. Miles at King’s Weston near Bristol :
— ‘This locality is an evergreen plantation of arbutus,
laurustinus, &c., covering some acres, to which these birds
repair in an evening—lI was going to say, and I believe I
might with truth say—by millions, from the low grounds
about the Severn, where their noise and stench are some-
thine altogether unusual. By packing in such myriads
upon the evergreens, they have stripped them of their leaves,
except just at the tops, and have driven the Pheasants, for
whom the plantation was intended, quite away from the
eround. In the day-time, when the birds are not there,
the stench is still excessive. Mr. Miles was about to cut
the whole plantation down to get rid of them, two years ago,
but I begged him not to do so on account of the curiosity of
the scene, and he has since been well pleased that he
abstained.”
Another similar and perhaps larger congregation has been
described by Mr. Ball, who, in 1845, stated that from
150,000 to 200,000 Starlings were computed to roost, every
night between the end of October and the end of March, in
* The calamity is aggravated by the fact that a reed, which can sustain the
weight of perhaps two or three Starlings, breaks when as many more attempt to
perch upon it. Then all these have to try a fresh stem, which in its turn gives
way, and so on until the birds have injured far more reeds than would suflice to
seat the whole flock comfortably but for their disorderly crowding. But the evil
can be and generally is averted by various expedients such as the firing of guns
to scare away the collecting myriads, while the discharge of rockets, after the
birds have found a resting-place, is not without its use as a means of driving
them from their haunt. The uproar caused by a night-alarm of this kind is
indescribable.
+ This account was published in the First Edition of this work in 1839. It
appears that the present proprietor not appreciating the almost unique privilege
(so far as England is concerned) keeps the evergreens cut low, and so deprives the
Starlings of their roosting-place.
STARLING. Zon
some thorn-trees in the Zoological Garden at Dublin, and
that this enormous estimate was the result of many observa-
tions. When the birds were first noticed their number was
put at from 15,000 to 20,000, but within three years it
seemed to have increased tenfold.* Accounts of two other
very large Irish Starling-roosts, at Lough Fern in Donegal,
and at Doohyle Lough, co. Limerick, were communicated to
the Dublin Natural-History Society (Jan. 8th, and Feb. 5th,
1858) by Mr. Montgomery and Mr. G. H. Kinahan.
Though the ordinary flight of Starlings is very swift and
well-sustained,+ it would not need special remark, were it
not for the wonderful performances of the multitudes, whose
congregations have just been noticed, prior to their going to
roost for the night, and occasionally during the day by smaller
bodies, especially when disturbed by a Hawk, but sometimes,
particularly in early spring, apparently for mere joy. Pos-
sessing very considerable powers of wing these are turned
to account in an extraordinary manner by the birds com-
posing the flock. They wheel, close, open out, rise and
descend, as if each were obeying a commander, and all this
is done with the most marvellous precision while the flock
is proceeding at a rapid pace high in air. At times it may
extend in a long and nearly straight thread; suddenly an
undulation is visible along the line, and, in a moment, it
takes the form of a thin and smoke-like cloud: another
moment, and it is a dense and almost perfect globe!; then,
possibly having preserved this appearance for a perceptibly
longer time, it becomes pear-shaped and, in another
instant, assumes a spiral figure; an instant after, it has
spread out like a sheet, and its members are seen streaming
softly along the ground, perhaps to alight or perhaps once
* Mr. Ball’s description, originally published in ‘Saunders’ Newsletter’ (March
25th, 1845), has been reprinted in full by Thompson. Mr. More (1877) informs
the Editor that for the last four years the Starlings have not resorted to this
roost, and that for some time before they used to come only at uncertain inter-
vals, absenting themselves for perhaps two or three years and then returning.
+ Gilbert White says ‘‘ Starlings as it were swim along.”
t+ Sturnorum generi proprium catervatim volare, et quodam pile orbe cir-
cumagi, omnibus in medium agmen tendentibus. — C. Plinii Nat. Hist. x, 24.
238 STURNID®E.
more to mount aloft and cirele as before. These perform-
ances are varied also by the flock becoming momentarily
invisible or partly so, through the birds as they wheel turn-
ing their wings edgeways to the spectator’s eye, and then,
on a calm day, the noise caused by the sudden change of
direction will reach his ear from the distance like the rum-
bling sound of a heavy carriage on a hard road. Few things
of the kind are more entertaining than to watch a flock of
Starlings as they rise with the Rooks, Daws or Lapwings
in whose company they may be. While the Lapwings
slowly marshal themselves into their accustomed forma-
tion, or the Rooks and Daws, with not much more speed,
betake themselves skyward after some uncertain beating of
the air, the organization of the Starlings seems to be perfect
from the moment they leave the ground, and they shoot
ahead of and across the flight of the larger birds; or, wheel-
ing round, pass through the comparatively unformed ranks
without the slightest disturbance of their own array—now
on this side, now on that—and, returning, should the alarm
prove needless, perhaps to the spot whence they had risen,
resume feeding as busily as ever, long before their incon-
ertious associates have been able to judge of the probable
danger and to act in accordance with their sagacity.
In winter comparatively few Starlings are left in most
parts of the interior of England. Even about midsummer,
as has already been stated, some begin to cross the sea, and
it would seem to be the ordinary habit of this species to
move westward as autumn approaches. The regularity of
its appearance at that season in Wales, Cornwall and
Treland was observed long ago, before it had become, as it
now is, more plentiful as a resident in those parts; but
even at the present day the influx of large flocks from the
eastward is very evident. In like manner, as the experience
of our lighthouse-keepers tells us,* we receive great addi-
tions from the Continent in the fall of the year. Most of
the strangers, no doubt, pass on, but many tarry for a time
* Excepting perhaps Skylarks, no birds are more frequently attracted to the
lanterns than Starlings.
STARLING, 239
and join the majority of our home-bred birds in their sea-
side resorts or along the banks of tidal rivers. In such
places marine animals, and especially crustaceans, furnish
much of their food, and to obtain it they examine the heaps
of washed-up seaweed or turn over the stones with their
bill. The minority which stay about their own home are,
during hard frost, driven to great extremity, and, pinched
with hunger, depend chiefly on what may be got in sheep-
folds and cattle-lairs ; but, when the weather permits, they
assiduously follow the plough and in the pastures, beside
the grubs of Tipule so constantly present, there is often
a good store of food accessible, except in time of snow,
under dried cowdung. With the first indications of
returning spring our Starlings hasten to their old breeding-
quarters and await the arrival of that glad season.*
The Starling is now found in almost every part of the
United Kingdom. On the Scottish mainland it used to be
comparatively scarce, and it was rare in the southern and
midland counties even when Macgillivray wrote. Mr. Gray
says that its appearance in the cultivated districts was an
event so recent as to have excited universal attention. But
at present there are few if any counties in which it does
not regularly breed more or less plentifully, and it seems to
have always frequented the rocky parts of the coast, and to
have been especially abundant in the Hebrides, Orkney and
Shetland, in all of which it occupies the same haunts as the
Rock-Dove and the Cormorant. Of Wales (though infor-
mation is far less precise) and Cornwall, much the same
may be averred (Zool. p. 8045 and s.s. pp. 137, 455); but
* In thus attempting to trace the Starling’s life the Editor, besides his own
observation, has been assisted by information from sources far too numerous to
mention. None of these, however, excels the admirable account given in
Stanley's ‘Familiar History of Birds’, which proves its author to have been
unsurpassed as an accurate observer and faithful narrator when opportunity
allowed him. But it must be remembered that, though one of the best chapters
of ornithological biography ever written, it had professedly but a local scope, its
scene being laid at Alderley in Cheshire. In the foregoing paragraphs there has
been no intention of copying that inimitable account, but it cannot have failed
to aifect the Editor in writing them, as from boyhood he has known it almost
by heart, and indeed it is one that no lover of birds who has read it can forget.
VoL. It. 11
240 STURNIDA.
it is still a rare bird in summer. With regard to Ireland,
according to Thompson, it is common and breeds in many
parts of the island, but investigation of the evidence offered
by him (in great detail) and other Irish naturalists, espe-
cially Mr. Blake Knox, shews that its breeding-places there
are still few and far between, that from most districts it
disappears altogether in spring, and that it is only abun-
dant in winter—regularly arriving in the north, as first
observed by Templeton, in autumn, though it has been
known to immigrate at midsummer (Zool. p. 9211).
The Starling is stated by Prof. Reinhardt to have once
strayed to Greenland. In the Freroes it is resident and the
native race of those islands can generally be distinguished
from that of our own. In Norway it occurs, but not very
plentifully, so high as the Lofodens, and it has been re-
peatedly observed at Tromso in spring and autumn, while it
has twice been obtained in Kast Finmark. In Sweden it is
unknown to the north of about lat. 64° N. It appears in
the western and southern provinces of Finland, throughout
Russia, to the southward of lat. 60° N. and thence across
Siberia, at a somewhat lower elevation, to Lake Baikal, but
its limits are not defined with any certainty by Dr. Radakoff*.
The asserted extension of its range to China and Japan is
very doubtful, but it is found in Northern India, and even
near Caleutta. Some ornithologists have considered the
Indian bird to form a distinct species, but most authorities
deny its validity. In Cashmere and Persia, however,
there is a Starling, Sturnus hwmii, which seems to differ
constantly from the common species, and so likewise in
Armenia, where is found a form distinguished as S.
purpurascens ; but our S. vulgaris probably occurs as well
in all these countries—certainly in Persia. It also visits
Asia Minort, Palestine, Arabia and Egypt, in winter. At
* Hland-Atlas der geographischen Ausbreitung der in europiiischen Russland
nistenden Vogel. Fol. Moskau: 1876.
+ The Marchese Oratio Antinori estimated a dock he saw in January, 1858,
crossing the Gulf of Smyrna to contain 2,500,000 birds (Journ. fiir Orn. 1858,
p. 489).
STARLING, 24]
the same season it appears regularly in Mauritania, the
Canaries and Madeira, though it does not breed there as it
does in the Azores, where it is common and resident. To
Portugal, Spain, Southern France, Italy, Turkey and Greece,
as well as the Mediterranean islands, it is a more or less
abundant winter-visitant, but in most if not all of these
countries its place as a resident is taken by the nearly allied
species S. unicolor. Throughout the rest of Europe it is
generally common, though with some scattered exceptions,
as for instance, according to Dr. Borggreve, part of Upper
Silesia. In some places it has been induced to take up
its quarters by accommodating it with nest-boxes, and
Mr. Dresser says that in Russia he found many villages so
supplied; the people knowing the great services it renders
to their crops, and especially in ridding the oak-forests of
the injurious Tortrix viridana. Holland seems by all
accounts to be the country in which the Starling is most
numerous.”
The adult male in summer has the bill yellow, light blue
at the base: the irides brownt: almost the whole plumage
black, but brilliantly shot with purple, green and, in some
parts, with steel-blue, according to the reflection of the light ;
the feathers of the hind head, nape and upper parts gene-
rally, tipped with white or pale buff, in the form of trian-
gular spots; wing- and tail-quills greyish-black, partially shot
with like brilliant hues on the outer web, and edged with light
reddish-brown: legs, toes and claws, dark reddish-brown.
The whole length is eight inches and a half; the wing
from the carpal joint, five inches and one-eighth : the first
primary about half an inch in length.
After the autumnal moult the feathers of the whole of
the head, and of the lower parts generally, are broadly
* The Starling has been taken to New Zealand, where it will doubtless aid in
the extinction of the original avifauna. The bitter taste of its flesh has long
been notorious, but this does not hinder the bird from being served at foreign
tables as a *‘ Grive”, in anticipation of the season when Thrushes are abundant.
+ Macegillivray says he has seen the iris yellowish, and it is perhaps worthy of
remark that several exotic species of Sturnidw have white or bright yellow eyes.
242 STURNIDA,
tipped with white or pale buff, in the form of arrow-heads,
the triangular spots on the upper parts being larger. These
are carried through the winter, but gradually diminish in
size as spring comes on, so that those on the top of the head,
and lower parts generally, disappear almost entirely before the
following summer. In autumn and winter also the bill is
dusky horn-colour, which brightens into yellow on the approach
of spring. Whether any other change takes place as the
bird grows older may well be doubted.
The female is very similar to the male, but her plumage
is rather less brilliant, and the terminal spots are generally
larger and, especially in spring and summer, more numerous
—not being worn off to the same extent: the bill also does
not assume the same bright yellow.
The young of the year, before the first moult, is of an
uniform greyish-brown above; the wing- and tail-quills
edged with leht rufous-brown; the throat dull white, and
the breast and belly clouded with white: the bill dusky
horn-colour, with the gape yellow: legs and toes much as
in the adult but more dusky. In this stage it is the
‘* Solitary Thrush” of Montagu*, Bewick and Knapp. As
the nestling plumage is lost that of the adult appears in
patches, presenting a curious mixture.
* Montagu’s specimen is in the British Museum, and leaves no doubt on the
matter. The real ‘‘Solitary Thrush’, Monticola cyanus, is a very different bird
(see vol. i. page 295).
ROSK-COLOURED STARLING. 243
PASSERES. STURNIDA.
Pastor ROsEUS (Linnzus*).
THE ROSE-COLOURED STARLING.
Pastor roseus.
Pastor, Zemminck+.— Bill moderate, convex above, straight beneath, com-
pressed, the upper mandible notched and slightly decurved. Nostrils basal,
lateral, oval, partly closed by a membrane covered with small feathers. Gape
angular, and free from bristles. Feathers on the crown pointed and elongated,
forming a crest. Wings long, the first primary very short, the second and the
third nearly equal and the longest. Tail moderate, rectrices straight. Tarsus
scutellate in front, covered at the sides by an indistinctly divided plate, forming
a sharp ridge behind. Claws considerably curved.
THE Rosk-cOLOURED STARLING was first noticed as British
by Edwards, who, in 1742, took his representation from
a specimen killed at Norwood, and preserved at a coffee-
house in Chelsea, where, he says, he ‘‘ had liberty to draw
it.’ Soon after he mentioned another which was shot in
June 1747 by Mr. Roger North cof Rougham in Norfolk.
Latham in 1783 announced that a third example, shot at
* Turdus roscus, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12,1. p. 294 (1766).
+ Manuel d’Ornithologie, p. 82 (1815).
244 STURNIDA.
Grantham, was in Banks’s possession, and that he was in-
formed of one or more being shot almost every season near
Ormskirk. In 1796, Shaw figured the species, stating that
an example had been shot the year before in Oxfordshire.
The increased attention paid to ornithology during the
present century shews that this beautiful creature has
occurred more or less often in nearly three-fourths of the
English counties*, and that its appearance, though to some
extent irregular in point of season and place, may probably
be an annual event. The majority of instances, as might
be expected, are recorded from the eastern side of the king-
dom, but the bird has not unfrequently been obtained in the
extreme west—near the Land’s End and in the Scilly Isles,
while it has been also met with both in South and North
Wales. According to Thompson it has visited all quarters
of Ireland, including the range of the most western counties,
the latter assertion being supported by details of its capture
on the Isles of Arran in Galway Bay, and, three or four
times, in Kerry. In Scotland, says Mr. Gray, it has occurred
in almost every county from Wigtownshire to Shetland, but
he has not heard of its appearance in any of the Outer
Hebrides. Its visits to the British Islands usually take
place between the middle of June and the end of August,
but it has several times been noticed so early as May—once
even (Nat. 1853, p. 156) on the 3d of that month +t, and so
late as October (Zool. p. 5320), while an example is said
(Zool. p. 52038) to have lingered to December 20th. Emi-
nently gregarious as this bird is known to be where it is
abundant, it has been seldom seen in this country accom-
panied by any of its own species, and when it visits us it has
to forego its social habits or to indulge them by joining a
flock of common Starlings. Specimens taken here are quite
* Those in which no record of its appearance has been found are Berks,
Gloucester, Hereford, Warwick, Hunts, Northampton, Rutland, Leicester, Staf-
ford, Cheshire and Westmoreland, but its recognition in these counties sooner
or later is doubtless to be expected.
+ There is a record (Zool. p. 2598), hardly to be deemed satisfactory, of its
occurrence in Oxfordshire in February, 1838. If there be no error the example
may have been one that had wintered in this part of the world.
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING. 245
as often in full plumage as not, and considering the early
time at which some of them so frequently arrive it may be
concluded that they have strayed from their comrades while
seeking a breeding-place and, overshooting their mark, have
continued that north-westerly course which seems natural
to them in the spring of the year*. Many of the examples
obtained in the British Islands have been observed feeding
on cherries or other fruits, but as with the rest of its family
insects, and especially locusts and grasshoppers, form its
chief sustenance. In a general way, and with certain impor-
tant peculiarities to be presently noticed, it greatly resembles
our Starling in habits, but Saxby remarks that the actions of
a young bird, which he watched for some three hours among
a flock of Starlings, differed slightly from those of its asso-
ciates. It did not instinctively follow all their motions in
flight—as indeed may have been natural in a stranger—and
seemed to procure its food on the surface, in a careless way,
without boring the ground for it as they did. It ran with
greater speed, carrying its body more horizontally, and often
stood on a stone or other elevation. Its note was a little
like a Starling’s but less harsh.
Long known as this bird has beenf, little until of late
years was ascertained of its mode of propagation. It had
been supposed to breed occasionally in Italy, Switzerland
and Germany, but with respect to the first of these the
evidence is admittedly imperfect, and in regard to the two
last Dr. Stolker maintains (Bericht u.s.w. St. Gall. naturw.
Gesellsch. 1874-75, pp. 283, 284) that such as he was able
to cite is worthless. He however omits mention of three
instances recorded by Lord Lilford (Zool. p. 2968), who was
in 1850 shewn, by Dr. Linder of Geneva, eggs said to have
* Mr. Gray, on the authority of Mr. John Wilson, says that in 1840 the bird
attempted to breed near Methlick in Aberdeenshire, but stronger evidence is
needed for the acceptance of the statement.
+ It seems to have been first described and figured by Aldrovandi, who,
although the birdcatchers of his country called it a Sea-Starling, thought it was
rather a Thrush, and so other writers, chiefly relying on the shape of its bill,
considered it to be. Scopoli appears to have been the first naturalist who
referred it to the Starlings, and there can be no doubt he was right.
246 STURNID.E.
been taken from a nest near that town, and some credit must
be given to this assertion, though the cases, as will appear,
were certainly abnormal. In 1838 a valuable account of
this bird’s habits, as observed by Alexander von Nordmann
in certain parts of the Russian dominions, was communicated
to the Academy of St. Petersburg (Bull. Se. v. pp. 1-18).
He was persuaded that it must frequently, though not annu-
ally, breed in societies near Odessa, but at that time he had
not known of a single nest, nor was it until six years later
that he fell in with any of its communities, an interesting
description of which he shortly after supplied to the same
Academy (Bull. Phys.-Math. iv. pp. 98-102). For some
few years past the Rose-coloured Starling had only visited
the South of Russia in small numbers, but in Apyil 1844
huge flocks made their appearance, covering the pastures by
day and at even collecting with outcries to roost on the trees.
Most of the birds were already paired, and by the end of the
month or the beginning of May, they took possession of
every wall or heap of stones that offered a chink for the nest,
which was composed of sticks, straws, wool, pieces of bast
and the like, assiduously gathered by both cock and hen and
formed into a largish, round, bowl-shaped structure, neither
firm nor very neat. Stone-quarries also were equally inha-
bited, and all this not only close to Odessa, but far and wide
throughout the Government of Cherson so abundant were
the birds that the boys collected their eggs by the capful.
These were in number from six to nine, but generally six or
seven in each nest, and it was thought that some birds had
laid twice. So soon as the broods were flown they repaired
to the nearest gardens, where they clustered on the trees by
thousands, while their parents fed them with locusts brought
from the neighbouring steppes, and these assemblages were
scenes of the greatest noise and confusion imaginable. As
the old birds arrived with their bill distended with food and
sought their own offspring, the young indiscriminately
snatched it from them. Of their numbers some estimate
may be formed from the fact that one particular garden
at Taschina, about 50 versts from Odessa, contained 1500
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING. 247
trees, on each of which were perched several dozens of
young birds, while many hundreds sat on the larger trees,
in the tops of which all roosted at night. In this garden
the birds remained about ten days and then dispersed.
In the summer of 1856 the Marchese Oratio Antinori had
as ample an opportunity of observing one of these wonderful
breeding-assemblages near Smyrna. Large flocks of the
birds appeared about May 15th, and others continued to
arrive until June 5th, soon after which it became evident
that they were breeding in the neighbourhood. It was not
however until June 27th, that he, with Herr Gonzenbach,
obtained any eggs. On the 30th those gentlemen ascended
the hills above the village of Bournabat (the gardens of
which were full of these Starlings—both old and young, for
many of the latter had already left the nest) when they
found every stone covered with the droppings of the birds,
while higher up an extent of rock for 200 square yards
looked as though lime-washed. On this spot says the first
of these observers (Naumannia, 1856, p. 407) ‘the nests
were by thousands, some quite open and uncovered, others
so hidden under blocks of stone that these needed turning
to examine them; some were at the depth of about a foot,
others could not be reached by the arm. The nests were so
close together that they often touched. They were built
without any skill, for the bird was content with a deepening
scraped in the soil, in which were to be found some dry
straws or leaves of the agnocasta, and very seldom a border
of grass-stalks: I saw several in which the eggs lay on the
bare ground.” Around was evidence of the destruction
caused by various four-footed foes, from jackals to rats,
which preyed on old and young alike, while snakes probably
took toll indefinitely of the eggs.
But what must have been in several respects a still
more remarkable visitation has been recounted by Sig. de
Betta (Atti del R. Istituto veneto, ser. V. ii.), as occurring
at Villafranca in the province of Verona. In the afternoon
of June 3d, 1875, a flock of about twenty birds alighted
on the high ruins of the castle at that place, and was
VoL. Il. K K
248 STURNIDA.
presently followed by another of about an hundred, which
by their cries attracted the notice of the inhabitants.
Later in the evening there arrived many thousands more,
which joined the first comers and at dusk all dispersed in
numerous troops over the country. Before daybreak the
next morning, however, the people were awakened by the cries
of some 12,000 or 14,000 Rose-coloured Starlings which met
at the castle, and completely took possession of it, ejecting,
after a sharp struggle, the other birds which were its ordi-
nary occupants, and, since its walls did not even then afford
sufficient accommodation, overflowed to the neighbouring
housetops. The new arrivals at once set to work clearing
out the rubbish from the holes and fissures they had thus
gained, and, that done, on the morning of the 5th they
began to build their own nests of twigs, straws, hay and
other dry plants, leaving a hollow, lined with roots, leaves,
moss and feathers, in the middle for the eges. The next few
days were occupied by constant strife for sites, and fierce
contests between the males, who shewed however the most
ardent attachment to their partners, and it was not till the
17th that Sig. de Betta (who made several visits to Villa-
franea at this interesting period) was able to ascertain that
eges, five or six in number, were laid; yet by July 10th
the young, having been most assiduously fed with locusts by
their parents, were fledged, so that some were able to take
flight with their parents on the 12th. On the 14th all the
remainder were seen to depart, and Villafranca to the great
regret of its inhabitants was absolutely deserted by its
unusual visitors. Large numbers of the young were, how-
ever, taken alive and a brisk traffic in them sprang up, but
it was observed that they did not live long in confinement.
The old cocks were also netted in the neighbourhood, while
they were gathering food for their sitting mates, to such an
extent as visibly to reduce their numbers. Their song is
described by Sig. de Betta as being a continuous babble,
mixed with harsh and disagreeable notes. The cry of the
hens is equally stridulous and peevish. Both are begun
early in the morning, continued for a long time, and renewed
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING, | 249
at intervals after feeding.* The eggs are of a glossy french-
white, with a very faint tinge of bluish-green or greenish-
blue, and measure from 1°12 to 1:08 by from °85 to 81 in.
The foregoing paragraphs will perhaps have sufficiently set
forth the more remarkable facts in the propagation of this
bird, but we must bear in mind that if its wonderful
irruptions take place yearly they are not constantly directed
to any one spot. Thus, as will have been inferred, its
appearance in Southern Russia is extremely irregular, and
near Smyrna, though it has more than once bred there since
1856, even ornithologists like Dr. Kritper and Mr. Seebohm
have failed to find its nests, notwithstanding the arrival of
large flocks in the vicinity; while such an invasion as that of
Villafranca may confidently be asserted to have never before
been witnessed in Italy. So too we have Mr. Barkley’s
testimonyt that it only comes abundantly to Bulgaria in some
years, and then takes up its quarters in heaps of stones or,
as in 1867, when Mr. A. Cullen obtained its eggs, in a railway-
cutting. Messrs. Elwes and Buckley saw the breeding-
place of a large colony at Molchova in the Dobrudja in
1869, and it has been said to breed occasionally in the
Cyclades. One circumstance concerning its settlements is
too curious to be omitted here. Whenever the species has
pitched in full force on a place, the surrounding district
has been either simultaneously or not long after ravaged
by locusts, which are eagerly sought by it, not only as food
(though that is doubtless the principal object) but, as
several independent witnesses aver, that it may kill them.
The connexion of the two apparitions has been repeatedly
discussed, and it has been often assumed that the birds have
followed the insects. Dr. Stolker however shews (loc. cit.)
* An English translation of the most important part of Sig. de Betta’s memoir
has been published in the ‘ Zoologist’ for 1878 (p. 16), and one by Mr. Sclater
of the Marchese O. Antinori’s paper appeared in the same journal for 1857
(p. 5668). A French version of Von Nordmann’s first communication was pub-
lished in Demidoff’s ‘Voyage dans la Russie Méridionale’ (iii. p. 307), whence
an abstract of it has been given by Mr. Dresser, but his second and perhaps most
valuable article seems to have been overlooked hy most ornithologists.
+ Bulgaria, &c. By H. C. Barkley. London: 1877, p. 141.
250 STURNIDE.
that is not the case, for the former are generally the first to
arrive and he wisely concludes that additional observation is
needed to explain the mutual relation of the events. Another
matter worthy of further attention is the fact that these birds
have been frequently observed to affect trees or shrubs bear-
ing rose-coloured flowers—as Nerium oleander and Robinia
viscosa—amone the blossoms of which, so like in tint to part
of their own plumage, they may easily escape notice.
That these nomadic hordes visit Asia Minor and Europe
from the east is unquestionable. In Africa the species is
unknown save as a rare straggler to Egypt or Algeria. In
Palestine its appearance, though often in large numbers, is
very uncertain. Of its movements further eastward we
have little continuous knowledge till we reach India, over
nearly the whole of which it regularly appears, generally in
the cold weather, but to this there are a few singular local
exceptions, which at present seem inexplicable, and it strays
oceasionally to Ceylon and the Andamans. Frequenting
some parts of the country in myriads, and at times doing
ereat damage to the grain-crops, it has long attracted atten-
tion, yet hitherto it is not known to have bred there, and
the prevalent belief, that it arrives in India from the west-
ward, is probably correct. Yet it is reported by Dr. Severzov
as breeding over the whole of Turkestan, though we find no
evidence of its occurrence in the countries immediately west
of the Indus except Mesopotamia, the north-western corner
of Persia, and Armenia. We are therefore wholly ignorant
of the route taken by the flocks which visit India.
Returning to Europe we have proof of its irregular
appearance in almost every country. Apart from Southern
Russia, Turkey and Greece, in which it occurs most abun-
dantly, flocks of from one hundred or more occasionally
shew themselves in the eastern parts of the Austrian
dominions, and smaller parties at rarer intervals penetrate
further northward and westward. In Russia it has occurred
at Saratov, and single birds have not only reached Finland,
but, as has been known since the days of Linneus, even
Lapland. Several examples have been killed in Sweden,
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING. 251
though none are recorded in Norway. ‘To the southward its
appearance in Italy has been already noticed. It has not
unfrequently been taken at Malta; in Provence it occurs
nearly every year, and, though a rare visitant to Spain, has
at least once reached Seville. The whole number of recorded
captures throughout Europe from Switzerland to Denmark
and the shores of the North Sea and the Channel is by no
means, however, so great as in the British Islands-—a fact
probably due in part to the greater publicity given to such
events here than on the Continent, and in part also to the
circumstance of its generally appearing at a season when in
most countries the use of firearms is forbidden.
In the adult male in summer the bill is rose-coloured,
except at the base of the lower mandible, where it is almost
black: irides deep red-brown: head, neck and upper tail-
coverts, black, glossed with violet-blue ; wing-coverts black,
with glossy reflections of purplish-blue and green, accord-
ing as the light strikes them ; wing- and tail-quills black
with a steel-blue gloss; back, scapulars, and rump, pale rose-
pink; chin and throat purplish-plack; breast, sides and
abdomen, rose-pink ; inner wing-coverts greyish-black edged
with rose-colour ; thighs and lower tail-coverts black: legs
and toes yellowish-brown ; claws darker brown.
The whole length is eight inches and a half; from the
carpal joint to the tip of the wing, five inches.
The adult female, at the same time, resembles the male,
but wants the black patch at the base of the bill, has a
shorter crest, and Jess bright tints; the inner wing-coverts
and lower tail-coverts are generally edged with dull white.
In the young of the year, the bill is yellow at the base,
brown along the culmen and at the point: there is no crest:
the whole of the upper parts nearly uniform light greyish-
brown, faintly striped on the top of the head with a deeper
shade ; the wings and tail a dark brown, the feathers edged
with dull buffy-white; chin and throat dull white, the latter
with indistinct brown stripes; the rest of the lower parts
dull buffy-white, tinged on the flanks with ashy-brown ;
legs, toes and claws, brown.
252 CORVID®.
PASSERES. CORVIDA.
PyrrHocorax GRAcULUS (Linneeus*).
THE CHOUGH.
Fregilus graculus.
Pyrruocorax, Tunstall +.—Beak hard, slender, compressed, arched, and
pointed. Nostrils basal, hidden by small, closely-set feathers. Wings long and
graduated ; first primary much shorter than the second, and about half as long
as the third, the fourth the longest. Tail nearly even. Feet strong, tarsus
longer than the middle toe, to which the outer toe is united as far as its first
joint ; claws strong and much curved,
Tue CHovucn in Eneland is not a common bird, and is
nowadays almost exclusively confined to the neighbourhood
of the bolder parts of the sea-coast of the southern and
western counties, where it inhabits the higher cliffs, though
it apparently frequented a good many inland localities in
former times. Merrett in 1667 speaks of it as found ‘in
* Corvus graculus, Linnieus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 158 (1766).
+ Orn. Brit. po 2 (1 70k):
CHOUGH, 2538
omnibus oris maritimis a Cornubia ad Doroberniam*”’, and
there is poetical authority, at least, for its existence near
Dover at a much earlier date. Shakespear, in his well-
known description of the celebrated cliff which now bears
his name, says in reference to its height :—
The Crows and Choughst, that wing the midway air,
Shew scarce so gross as beetles. —Aing Lear, Act iv. Se. 6.
Gilbert White wrote in 17738 that these birds abounded and
bred on Beachy Head, and in all the cliffs of the Sussex
coast ; but both in that county and in Kent the species is
now believed to be extinct—indeed it seems to have been lost
to the latter in Montaeu’s time (1802). The Author has
seen it on the highest part of the cliffs between Freshwater
Gate and the Needles in the Isle of Wight; but its habita-
tion of this locality at present seems to be doubtful. In
the Isle of Purbeck a few pairs still remain from Studland
to Lulworth Cove—Gadcliff and St. Alban’s Head being
their stronghold. Further to the westward in Dorset the
species does not now occur, and its existence on the south
coast of Devon is questionable. In Cornwall, though very
far from abundant, it is more numerous, and has been so
long associated in popular estimation with that ancient
* Meaning no doubt Dover ; but it may be noted that another Dorobernia,
the city of Canterbury, bears Choughs in itsarms. Pennant in the editions of bis
‘British Zoology’, published in 1776, said that they were found in small numbers
on Dover Cliff, ‘‘ where they came by accident :” a pair sent from Cornwall having
“escaped, and stocked these rocks.’”’ No date is given, but as the passage is not
in his earlier editions, we may infer that the event was recent. Merrett’s testimony,
which was possibly unknown to Pennant, induces the opinion that he was misin-
formed, or else that his statement refers to a restoration of the species to its old
haunts.
+ The word Chough was doubtless to some extent interchangeable with Daw
in Shakespear’s time, as it is at this day, even in Cornwall, according to informa-
tion received by the Editor from Mr. D. Stephens, of Trevornan. But that the
poet was acquainted with the present species is proved by the epithet ‘‘russet-
pated”? applied to it by him in another place (Midsummer Night's Dream, Act
iii. Sc. 2). The meaning of this epithet has given rise to much ingenious dis-
cussion, but the late Mr. E. T. Bennett, in 1835, doubtless supplied its true
explanation, when he suggested (Zool. Journ. v. p. 496) that the correct reading
is ‘‘russet-patted ” ze. ‘‘ red-footed”’ ( patte being a known equivalent of foot),
and this view has been adopted by Mr. Aldis Wright in his recent edition of the
play (Clarendon Press Series, pp. 30, 112).
” ”
954 CORVIDE.
duchy, that the prefix ‘‘ Cornish”? has been very generally
applied to its name.* Upton, a canon of Salisbury, whose
heraldic work, written about the middle of the fifteenth
century, was published some two hundred years latert, speaks
of it as especially found in Cornwall, some of the old families
of which (as indeed of other counties also) bore it in their
coat-armour. Turner, in 1544, though confounding it with
its yellow-billed relation (Pyrrhocorax alpinus) mentioned
Cornwall as the only locality for it in England, as, in 1586,
did Camden (p. 73), who speaks of its dangerous and
thieving propensities—carrying sticks of fire? and stealing
money. On this account Carew in his ‘ Survey of Cornwall ’
(1602, fol. 36) termed it a ‘ slaunder”’ of that county, to
which it was peculiar—statements repeated by Childrey, in
1661.§ Charleton in 1668 (p. 68) speaks to its frequency in
Cornwall, where, he adds, it was also called ‘ Killegrew ’—
a name that seems to have become extinct. Borlase, in 1758,
who had the advantage of coming after Willughby and Ray,
is less credulous. He naturally makes the most of the bird,
alleging that its imputed faults are really due to the Daw,
and he was the first to refer to Upton, as above quoted. In
Cornwall now it is extremely local and very far from common,
being only met with sparingly in certain spots, chiefly in the
northern coast, yet breeding, or attempting to breed, there
annually. Dr. Bullmore says that some years ago large
numbers used to be caught by baited steel-traps on the
Perran Sands. On the north coast of Devon the Chough is
said still to have a few resorts, and on Lundy Island it is
reported to be yet numerous. In Somerset a few of this
species used to breed regularly near Minehead ; but, their
nests being, says Mr. Cecil Smith, one year destroyed by
some masons, the birds never returned to their old quarters,
* This usage is not limited to English authors. Sibbald, in 1684, named the
bird the ** Cornwall Kac”’, and that is all he says about it ; but he has ‘‘ Cornix,
the Chough” as well (ii. pt. 2, p. 15).
+ Nicolai Vpton de studio militari, Ed. Bisse, Londini : 1651, fol. p. 194.
+ The bird’s red bill possibly suggested the charge.
§ The Editor finds that the passage before quoted (page 191) from this author
is founded on Carew’s evidence (op. cit. fol. 25 verso).
CHOUGH. 255
and the Chough’s last appearance in that county was at
Bagborough, quite away from the sea, where, in April, 1868,
a pair seemed disposed to build in the church-tower, until
they were shot. On the northern shore of the Bristol
Channel, and thence round Wales, a good many spots,
chiefly in the counties of Glamorgan, Pembroke, Anglesey,
Flint and Denbigh, appear to be still inhabited by the Chough
In the county last named, Montagu says that a pair had bred
for many years on the ruins of a castle in the vale of Llan-
gollen. Further to the north Mr. Brockholes stated, in 1874,
that he had some years before met with a flock in a field at
Leasowe in Cheshire. It was reported to Mr. More as breed-
ing occasionally in Westmoreland and regularly in Cumber-
land, and it was formerly resident in the Isle of Man,
particularly its southern part and the rock called the Calf of
Man, where it used to breed, and may perhaps still do so.*
In Scotland, as Mr. Gray well remarks, the history of this
bird presents some facts worthy of notice. Bishop Leslie in
his treatise ‘De Origine &c. Scotorum’ published in 1578
(Ed. 1675, p. 17) stated that it bred in his time between
St. Abb’s Head and Fast Castle, where, according to Dr. G.
Johnston, in 1832, Mr. A. Baird found it so doing (Hist.
Berw. Nat. Club, i. p. 6). Turnbull, in 1867, supposed that
the stock was reduced to a single pair; but Mr. Gray, about
1869, said it was questionable whether one had been seen
there, its only station on the east coast of our island, or at
Troup Head, which was formerly another of its haunts, for
the last ten or fifteen years. Moreover, it appears certain
that not so very long ago this bird inhabited inland stations
from which it has utterly vanished—as the Corra Linn, the
Campsie Fells, the Clova Mountains, Glenlyon and Achmore
—particulars respecting which are given in detail by Mr.
Gray. Islay seems to be the only place in Scotland where it
has preserved its numbers, for from the Solway to Skye, at
* A few instances of Choughs straying from their haunts have been recorded.
Thus Mr. Lees mentions (Mag. N. H. i. p. 394) one shot in Worcestershire, Novem-
ber 1826 ; an anonymous writer (Field Nat. i. p. 129) one killed in Wiltshire,
August 1832, Mr. A. C. Smith another in the same county, and Blyth (Mag. N.
H. ix. p. 636) one that occurred in Surrey. Two more are noticed by Mr. Morris,
VOL. Il. LL
256 CORVIDA.
present considered its northern limit, though there are many
spots that it still frequents, there is no other in which they
have not greatly diminished, while from some of the Hebrides
and adjacent parts of the mainland it has disappeared as
entirely as from the Scottish localities first mentioned. In
Pennant’s time it inhabited Sutherland, and in 1848 St.
John saw it there, but Mr. Harvie Brown has since failed to
find it. Much the same story is to be told of this bird in
Ireland. Though formerly, as Thompson states, inhabiting
precipitous rocks in various parts of that country, and among
them several inland localities, it would seem now to be found
only on the coast and islands, and almost everywhere in
reduced numbers. The dwindling away of the Chough
throughout the British Islands is undeniable, and specula-
tions have been hazarded to account for the fact. As none
of them seem based on sufficient observation they need no
further notice here. It has been often remarked, however, that
where the Chough grows rare or becomes extinct the Daw
appears or increases in numbers, though whether the latter
expels as well as replaces the former is not yet established,
This bird feeds on insects, crustaceans and berries, occa-
sionally on grain and even, it is said, on carrion. It seeks
its sustenance along the shore, on the cliffs and in the
adjacent fields, sometimes following the plough to obtain the
erubs that may be thereby exposed. The nest is placed in a
cleft or other hole among high rocks and stones, or in ruined
buildings. It is generally hidden, at some distance from the
opening, and is built of sticks with a lining of wool or hair.
The eggs, four or five in number, are of a french-white,
sometimes tinged with yellow, freckled, spotted, streaked
or blotched with several shades of ash-grey and light brown,
and measure from 1°63 to 1°33 by from 1:14 to lin. Its
cry is somewhat like that of the Daw, but from its more
musical and ringing tone is easily recognized. Its flight
much resembles that of a Rook, and the pinions when
extended shew the ends of the primaries distinctly apart. It
takes wing or alights with ease ; and, from its comparatively
long legs, its appearance when perched on a projecting stone,
CHOUGH. 25d
or walking on the short turf* of the cliffs, is graceful. The
sight of a pair of Choughs or more, with their glossy black
plumage, their red bill and legs, on a green bank, engaged in
preening their own or their companions’ plumage, or basking
in the sunshine, is one that will gladden any true naturalist,
and lend an additional charm to the fine scenery which they
generally affect.
The Chough inhabits the Channel Islands, being especially
numerous in Guernsey, but is only found accidentally in the
north of France. It however frequents Belle Isle, and this
appears to be its only maritime resort outside of the British
dominions, for in what other country soever it may dwell, its
station is always inland and in mountainous or hilly districts.
Thus it abounds in some parts of the Pyrenees, and occurs
in elevated situations throughout Spain and Portugal. It
breeds commonly in Palma, one of the Canaries, but is not
found elsewhere among the Atlantic Islands. Though local
it inhabits the higher lands of Barbary from Tetuan along
the Algerian Atlas. Returning to Europe it is found again
in the hill-country of Provence and Dauphigny, among the
Vosges and the mountainous parts of Southern Germany,
but there very sparsely. It is a scarce inhabitant of the
Swiss Alps to the height of about 10,500 feet, and thence is
found at corresponding elevations along the Appenines, and
in the Italian Islands—Sardinia and Sicily. It occurs, says
Zawadski, on the Central Carpathians. Its presence in Trans-
sylvania is not proved, but it is found, though rarely, in the
highlands of Styria and Carinthia. Missing the intervening
country, it reappears in Greece, and is abundant, says Mr.
Danford,in Asia Minor. It is not recorded from Palestine,
though it inhabits the mountains of Abyssinia and Arabia,
and may be traced through Persia and Afghanistan to the
Himalayas, whence in winter it visits the plains of India,
and Northern China. The Chough of several of these
Asiatic countries has been indeed thought to differ from the
* Young birds taken from the nest and kept alive in gardens, where they soon
become tame, shew great unwillingness to step off the gravel paths or masonry-
work of their place of detention.
258 CORVIDE.
European, but Mr. Dresser says that, after carefully examining
a large series of specimens, he cannot find any specific dis-
tinction. Itis resident in Dauuria and Turkestan, in some
places breeding in the roofs of houses and churches. In the
Caucasus it is abundant and it seems to frequent the Ural
up to the Government of Archangel.
The whole plumage is jet black, glossed with steel blue
which has a violet tinge on the flight-feathers and tail: the
irides are of two circles, the inner red. the outer blue; the
eyelids red; the inside of the mouth and the tongue yellow ;
the beak, legs and toes, coral-red ; the claws black.
The male measures nearly seventeen inches in length.
The beak one inch and seven-eighths: the wing from the
carpal joint to the tip eleven inches and three-quarters ; the
third, fourth and fifth primaries are nearly equal, but the
fourth the longest.
A female, sent from Tyneham by Mr. Thomas Bond,
measured fourteen inches and a half in leneth; the beak one
inch and a half; the wing from the carpal joint to the tip
nine inches and three-quarters ; the wing-quills were not so
decidedly black as those of the male.
Young birds, as Mr. J. Lumsden informed Mr. Dresser,
have the bill and legs at first dull brownish-orange which
turns to reddish-orange and finally becomes red. The plu-
mage has but little purple gloss until after the first moult.
RAVEN, 259
PASSERES., CORVID.
Corvus corax, Linneus.*
THE RAVEN.
Corvus corax.
Corvus, Linneust.—Beak hard, stout, compressed, straight at the base,
arched towards the point, and sharp at the edges. Nostrils basal, generally
hidden by stiff feathers directed forwards. Wings long and graduated; the first
primary much shorter than the second, but more than half as long as the third,
the fourth the longest. Tail more or less graduated. Feet strong ; tarsus longer
than the middle toe, to which the outer toe is united as far as its first joint ;
claws strong, curved and sharp.
Tuts, by far the largest British species of the Order
Passeres, and among its exotic members only equalled in
size by two or three allied forms, has been from very ancient
times one of the best known of birds. The wide range of
the Raven in the northern hemisphere has doubtless also
* Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 155 (1766). + Loc. cit.
260 CORVIDAE.
contributed to its recognition, while its association with the
cherished beliefs of many nations causes it yet to be regarded
with awe and reverence even by those who hate it. Bold
and sagacious, with a quick eye and, possibly, a keen sense
of smell, it must have been the familiar follower of the
prehistoric hunter and fisher, as, where it now exists, it is of
their successors, feasting on the refuse of their spoils and
hardly molested by them ; but it must always have been an
object of distrust, or something stronger, to herdsmen. No
sooner does an animal betray any sign of weakness, than the
Raven is on the watch for the opportunity, and, cautiously
awaiting the prostration of its victim, it begins its attack on
the eye—especially if the creature be large and still alive,
after which, applying itself to the perineum, it proceeds
eradually to draw out the intestines, until the muscles of
the eviscerated carcase alone are left to furnish a future meal.
This, however, is a state of things which follows chiefly on
the bird’s acquaintance with man and the beasts he has
domesticated ; for, though undoubtedly the Raven is not
slow to avail itself of any carrion that falls in its way, it is
yet far from being entirely dependent on such means of
subsistence, but hunts and takes prey for itself much after
the manner of some of the Accipitres, whereby it does not
incur the reprobation with which it is so often, and often so
truly, charged. A pair of Ravens, known for many years to
the Editor, lived almost exclusively on moles, as he had
ample facility of determining from repeated examination of
the pellets of bone and hair which they, like so many other
carnivorous birds, cast up; and unless Ravens, as is now
rarely the case in England, happen to be plentiful in any
district, the amount of harm they do is insignificant. Yet
it is otherwise in the wilder and mountainous parts of
Britain, and considerable loss is there inflicted by the Raven
on the owners of sheep, while even larger cattle suffer from
its attacks. But, as Saxby has well shewn, these are almost
invariably the beasts that, in the last stage of feebleness or
want, are left to take their chance on the barren hillside
and thus meet their fate, the blame being due rather to
RAVEN. 261
their careless or cruel masters than to the Raven that puts
an end to their wretched existence. Like the other birds of
this genus, the Raven is not particular in its diet: animal
food of any kind is welcome, and on the sea-coast the shore
is closely searched for dead fishes, mollusks, crustaceans or
other invertebrates, while, inland, grain is occasionally eaten.
The Raven inhabits high rocks or open plains, where
danger may be seen and avoided. For that reason it, in
these days, generally avoids woodland and enclosed countries,
though in truth, it having now been extirpated throughout
most of the interior of England, one cannot positively assert
that this was so formerly. There was a time, and that not
so long ago, when nearly every district, even in the midland
counties, had its pair, well known to the whole countryside,
while equally well known was the tall ‘‘ Ravens’ tree’’ in
which, year after year, the old nest was refurnished and the
eges laid. Space would here fail to repeat the numerous
accounts that have been published of these historic haunts,
for there are few faunists who have not dwelt upon the
fortunes of the race of Ravens inhabiting the district of
which they treat, and the narratives of Gilbert White, Bishop
Stanley, Mr. Knox and other more recent writers are remem-
bered by all who have read them. In some few cases, pro-
tection has been successfully obtained for these ancient
tenants by an influential neighbour; but too often, and
especially as superstition, within the last twenty or thirty
years, has gradually lost ground, the most deadly drugs have
been covertly laid by the shepherd or the gamekeeper, and
the ancestral seat rendered desolate. It used to be observed
that when one of the pair of birds was killed, the survivor
generally and quickly obtained a new mate, but since the
number of Ravens in England has now been so much re-
duced, this happens more and more seldom, while still more
rarely does it at this day occur that should both birds be
killed their place is taken by a fresh pair. These remarks of
course refer chiefly to inland localities, for the rocky parts of
the coast are still fairly stocked, and there are yet districts
where not unfrequently the practised ear will catch the hoarse
262 CORVID.
and characteristic croak of a wanderer, which then may be
descried speeding its way or circling high in air as much in
quest of a safe lodging as of food.
These birds breed earlier in the year than any other wild
British species. If all has gone well with them, and the
season be mild, they will begin the repair of their accus-
tomed nest about the middle of January, and a couple of
weeks after the eggs will have been laid; but generally all
this happens a month later. When the nest is built in a
tree, one that, from its height, form or branchless stem,
presents a diffienlt access to marauders is usually chosen,
and a stout crotch commonly supports the structure, which
as years go by becomes a huge mass of sticks. But by far
the greater number of Ravens frequent the sea-coast, and
there some convenient ledge or cranny of the cliff, protected
by its elevation or by an overhanging crag, supplies a site.
In all cases however, the outworks being of sticks or some
vegetable substitute, the lining is of soft animal material—
sheep’s wool, rabbits’ fur and, in parks, the shed winter coat
of deer. The eggs are from four to six in number, of a
bluish-green colour varying in depth of shade, and more or
less splashed, blotched and streaked, or sometimes speckled
and spotted, with dark olive-brown which often deepens to
black, besides blotches of greyish-purple. Some eges, how-
ever, have scarcely any other markings than a few streaks or
smears of light olive-brown.* ‘They ordinarily measure from
2°16 to 1°55 by from 1°39 to 1:28 in.; but a dwarf ege may
not exceed 1°52 by 1:12 in. Incubation lasts some twenty days,
during which time the male not only feeds his mate as she
sits and occasionlly takes her place on the eggs, but repels
by repeated attacks almost every bird, from an Eagle to a
* An extraordinary variation is shewn by a nestful of four eggs sent from
Unst in 1854 by Mr. J. Smith of that island. The ground-colour of these
specimens is a warm, creamy white; and the markings, which are quite normal
in size and shape, consist of the greyish-purple blotches often seen, with specks,
spots and blotches of deep reddish clove-brown, so as closely to resemble the eggs
commonly laid by the South-African Corvus capensis or by the birds of the genus
Porphyrio. A similar aberration of colouring will have to be mentioned in
treating of the larger Gulls.
RAVEN. 263
Pigeon, that approaches the nest. At this period and earlier
in the year his actions are worthy of study. Until his
partner takes to her task, he never leaves her, but follows
her every course—now near now further off—and occasionally
approaching very close to her, turns over sideways on his
back as he flies, shooting in that position in front of or past
her, and, uttering a sonorous yet tender note, then resumes
his natural attitude of flight. The wants of the nestlings
are assiduously supplied by their parents, and for some few
weeks after the offspring are flown the whole family remains
in company; but, when fully able to provide for themselves,
the young birds are invariably driven from the home in which
they have been reared and forced to seek a new abode or to
become wanderers.
Though possessed of great power as well as courage,
Ravens seldom make any other attempt to defend their nest
against man than a show of resistance, and indeed they
have in general every reason to shun so deadly an enemy as
he often proves to be. Yet in the exceptional cases where
they have no experience of molestation they become bold
beyond most kinds of birds.
Northward in Europe the Raven is plentiful in the Feroes
and Iceland, especially near the fishing-stations, where it
gets a good living from the offal by which they are surrounded ;
but in the former its abundance is checked by a somewhat
heavy tax (Nebbetold) laid upon the people of the different
districts, and only to be redeemed by the production of a
fixed number of its beaks—its depredations on the useful
Sea-fowls which breed on the cliffs of those islands being the
chief cause of this peculiar fiscal law. In Norway and
Sweden, even to the extreme north, it is also pretty com-
mon, mostly along the coasts, but also inhabiting the wilder
parts of the interior. In Spitsbergen it is said to have been
seen only once (Ibis, 1875, p. 272). It ranges over the
whole of the Russian dominions to Saghalien, but seems to
be replaced in China and Japan by one or more forms of a
bird (Corvus japonensis) concerning which doubts are enter-
tained whether it should not be rather reckoned a Crow.
VOL. Il. M M
264: CORVIDA.
The southern range of the Raven in Asia is not well deter-
mined; but it would seem to occur throughout Thibet, in
the eastern Himalayas (except Sikim) and thence westward to
Kumaon, Ladak, Cashmere, the Punjab, Sind and Affehanis-
tan. It is common in the hiehlands of Persia, in Armenia,
Anatolia and Palestine. Mr. Wyatt believes that he twice
saw it in flocks near Sinai, but it does not appear in Keypt,
nor indeed anywhere in Africa. It is reported as inhabit-
ing Cyprus, Crete and generally the other islands of the
Mediterranean, though Mr. Wright never observed it in Malta.
Throughout the rest of Europe it is more or less numerous.
In the Nearctic Region it ranges from East Greenland to
Oonalaska, and from Cape Lupton, where it was found breed-
ing by the last Arctic Expedition, to Guatemala, or per-
haps to Honduras (Ibis, 1860, p. 112), but varying greatly
in abundance according to locality. Thus it is more or less
plentiful over the whole of the fur-countries, and as a rule
is more generally distributed throughout the western than
the eastern portion of the North-American continent, for it
is common on the Pacific coast from Sitka to San Diego,
while in New England and some of the Atlantic States it is
very rare. There are districts also of the interior, even to
the southward, in which it is plentiful, as in Arizona, where,
according to Dr. Coues, it is resident; and it seems to be
equally abundant in Texas and on the high plains of Mexico.
Audubon wrote of it as being in some degree migratory in
the United States, but since it was observed to brave the
severity of an arctic winter* in some of the more northern
localities visited by our explorers, the movements noticed by
him are probably limited to the young which, in the New
as in the Old World, are driven away by their parents.+
* The rigours of such a winter are curiously exemplified by the fact that at
Port Bowen, the Ravens were frequently observed to have a white ring about
their neck, caused by the condensation of their own breath.
+ Examples of the Raven from many extra-European countries have been
specifically separated by some writers from the true Corvus corax ; but Mr.
Dresser, after due consideration, reunites most of them thereto—tbe Ravens of
Africa (C. wmbrinus, C. affinis and QO. tingitanus), two of which also occur in
South-western Asia, being, however, recognized as distinct.
RAVEN. 265
The beak is black: the irides brown and grey: the whole
plumage black, glossed with steel-blue and purple; the
throat-feathers elongated and pointed, and more lustrous
than those of other parts: legs, toes and claws, black.
The whole length of the male is twenty-six inches. The
wing, from the carpal joint to the tip, seventeen inches and
one-quarter: the first primary four inches shorter than the
second, which is one inch shorter than the third; the fourth
a little longer than the third, and the longest in the wing:
the primaries are narrow and pointed, the tertials broad and
rounded. The tail cuneate in form.
The female is smaller than the male; and her plumage,
as also that of the young before their first moult, has less
metallic lustre.
As was before announced (vol. i. page 263) it is intended
in this Edition only to notice some particular cases of the
partial or total albinism among birds which has been so
frequently observed. White Ravens have been known
from very ancient times, though their rarity was always
admitted, and Aristotle attributed their want of colour to
the season of the year and cold weather. The fact
that pied varieties of the Raven have been described
as forming a distinct species, the Corvus leucopheus of
Vieillot, makes a few words upon them necessary. They
seem always to have been most numerous in the Feroes, but
it has long been perfectly well known there that they form
no peculiar race, and that they are most frequently the
progeny of perfectly black parents—a pied bird, or perhaps
a second, being found in a brood, all the rest of which are
normally coloured. The amount of white they display may
vary from a few feathers to the greater part of the plumage,
the toes and claws also being not unfrequently affected in
like manner. Pied Ravens have occasionally occurred in the
British Islands, and Macgillivray mentions one which he saw
in Harris. In some examples, from various countries, the
base of the feathers, especially those of the neck, will be
found to be quite white, without shewing, however, any
trace of it as the plumage lies in its natural position.
266 CORVIDE.
Among British birds there is none able to imitate the
varied sounds of the human voice more successfully than
the Raven, and many instances are known of its talking
with a distinctness of articulation and accuracy of tone
that are almost perfect, while it will occasionally utter
phrases that by their accidental aptness are positively
startling to the hearer, and produce an effect not to be
exaggerated even in fiction. Here there is no need to
repeat any of the oft-told stories in proof of its mocking
man’s speech, but the fact that it can do so leads us to con-
sider the means whereby the exercise of that faculty is pos-
sible, and this, it will be found, has a direct bearing on some
important points in Systematic Ornithology.
The various powers of voice possessed by birds in general,
caused by the diversity of structure of the windpipe, have
justly excited the‘attention of many of the greatest zoologists,
from Cuvier to those of our own day, inducing them to
carry on investigations which have finally contributed
(among other things) to the establishment of a far sounder
mode of classifying the forms combined in preceding
Editions of this work in an ‘‘ Order” to which the name of
INsEssorES was applied by Vigors*. Without attempting
to recount fully the progress of these researches, or the
way in which one investigator after another improved on the
method of his predecessor, it will be sufticient and expedient
here to state briefly the chief results that have been reached,
so far as they affect the members of the British Fauna. It
has been long known that each of the Orders Piece and
Passeres established by Linnreus was composed of a very
heterogeneous assemblage, artificially grouped together, and
* This ‘¢Order” was propounded in 1828 (Trans. Linn. Soe. xiv. p. 425),
and the name published in 1826. It comprehended all the genera included by
Linnweus in his Orders Picw and Pusseres, with the exception of Columba and the
addition of Lantus. In accordance with the principles of the ‘* Quinary System”
—hbased on an hypothesis then and later adopted by many of the best English
zoologists, but now finding few or no adherents—the new Order was divided
into five ‘tribes :—Dentirostres, Conirostres, Scansores, Tenuirostres and
Fissirostres, an arrangement followed by the Author of this work. That these
‘* tribes ” were unnatural groups will presently appear, and accordingly allusion
to them is omitted throughout this Wdition.
RAVEN. 267
in particular that two of the genera, Columba and Capri-
mulgus, included in the latter must be removed from the
rest. Further examination has shewn that several genera
of Pice, such as Certhia, Sitta, Oriolus and Corvus, have
‘a much greater affinity to the majority of groups contained
in his Passeres, and these genera, with the addition of
Lanius (placed by him among the Accipitres), have accord-
ingly been referred thereto. This determination, effected
by Nitzsch, and based on the structure of the vocal organs,
was published in 1829. As the name Pice, through the
removal of the Crows (including Brisson’s genus Pica)
became inapplicable to the remainder, the word Picartim-
was subsequently proposed by Nitzsch for them, the genera
Caprimulgus and Cypselus (the latter having in the mean-
time been separated from Hirundo) being also added.
Though doubtless the Picarie, as thus constituted and
published in 1840 by Burmeister, contain several groups
that differ from others ranged with them as greatly as they
do from the Passeres in their reformed condition, ornitho-
logists are by no means agreed as to the best way of dividing
the assemblage, and accordingly for simplicity’s sake the
term Picarie will be here used exactly in the sense, so far
as British forms are concerned, in which it was used by
Nitzsch. He did not know, however, that many genera or
families, which he left among the Passeres (or Passerin@ as
he called them), do not possess the kind of vocal apparatus,
the presence or absence of which had been the prime cause of
the new division. This was due to the fact that no European
Passerine bird (for to European species his dissections
were confined) lacks it, and the discovery of Passeres (now
known to be chiefly American) not possessing this particular
structure, made some years later by Johannes Miiller, com-
pelled a further division of the Order, based accordingly
again on the vocal apparatus, It is needless here to go
further into this matter. It will be enough to say that,
after various modifications suggested, among others, by
Blasius, Dr. Cabanis, Gloger, Prof. Huxley and Sundevall,
Prof. Garrod seems to have verified the existence of two well-
268 CORVIDA.
marked groups of Passrres, to which he has applied (Proc.
Zool. Soc. 1876, p. 507) the names Acromyodi and Meso-
myodi, according as the song-muscles (presently to be
described) are attached to the end or to the middle of the
incomplete rings forming the bronchial tubes. The latter:
eroup, not being represented in the British Fauna, may be
here disregarded: the former group he separates into a
Normal and Abnormal division. ‘This last contains no
British form, and therefore the Normal or true Passeres—
Oscines as they are termed by some—await our attention.*
So far as structure goes there can be no doubt of these
normal Passeres forming an extremely homogeneous group,
perhaps one of the most homogeneous groups of the same
extent to be found in Nature. The more important
osteological features are common to all its members, and
means whereby the comparative anatomist may distinguish
the various sections into which convenience requires its
separation must be sought in modifications to which in
several Orders of Birds—to say nothing of other Classes of
Vertebrates—he would attach but slight value. And not
only is there this great uniformity in the skeleton, but, so
far as known, the arrangement of the vocal organs is
nearly identical throughout these true Passeres, while at
the same time it is unlike that found in any other group of
Birds. The bulk of the Raven renders it of all the British
members of the Order that in which these organs can be
most advantageously studied, and the figures of them here
introduced are given of the natural size, being copied, and
the description modified, from the Author’s original memoir
(Trans. Linn. Soc. xvi. pp. 805-321, pls. 17, 18).
* The Editor desires to express his thanks to Prof. Garrod for his valuable
assistance in modifying the following account of the vocal organs of the Raven,
so as to adapt it to the present state of knowledge. The Editor however must
at the same time say that his friend’s abnormal Passeres (the Australian genera
Menura and Atrichia) seem, from osteological characters, of greater significance
than those afforded by the voice-muscles, to be further removed from the true
Passeres than are many if not most of the A/csomyodi.
+ The excellent description and figures of the trachea of the Rook and other
birds, given by Macgillivray (Br. B. ii. pp. 21-37, pls. x.-xil.), may also be
advantageously compared.
RAVEN. 269
The organ of voice in Birds generally may be regarded as
composed of four parts: (i.) the glottis or superior larynx,
(i.) the windpipe or trachea, (iii.) the inferior larynx or
syrinx, and (iv.) the bronchial tubes or bronchi. The glottis
opens into the mouth at the root of the tongue. Fig. 1 of
the accompanying woodcuts shews (a, a, @) the principle
a
lee
i
tN
Fig. 3. Fic. 4.
cartilage, lying upon the pharyngeal portion between the
hyoid or tongue-bones, and apparently performing the
double office of the thyroid and cricoid cartilages in
Mammals. It is thin and nearly triangular, the posterior
corners curving upwards. In the midst is the long and
narrow orifice of the windpipe, behind which the surface
is beset with papille pointing backward, and serving in the
absence of an epiglottis, or cover of the opening, to direct
270 CORVIDE.
and convey the food to the gullet, or cesophagus, and hinder
its return so as to enter the windpipe. This orifice is
bounded on either side by the arytznoid cartilages, seen
more plainly in Fig. 2 (b, b), where the greater part of the
cricoid cartilage (a, a, a) has been removed, together with
the investments of the windpipe (c), that the bony rings of
which this is composed may appear more clearly. Figs. 3
and 4 illustrate the muscles which control the size of the
orifice, and constitute one of the accessory means by which
the sound of the voice is regulated. Of these there are
two pairs. The first, of which a portion is shewn in (Fig. 3
(a) and the whole displayed in Fig. 4 (a, a), extend from
the upper portion of the cricoid cartilage (Fig. 2, a) along
the two branches of the arytenoid cartilages (Fig. 2, b) in
the outer edge of each of which they are respectively
inserted, and serve to close the orifice. The second,
sufficiently visible in Fig. 3 (b, b), are those which open the
orifice, and arise from the lateral and posterior portion of
the cricoid cartilage (Fig. 2, a), and their fibres, passing
over the closing muscles just described, are inserted on the
inner edge of each arytenoid cartilage (Fig. 2, b).
The tube of the windpipe, or trachea, is composed of two
membranes enclosing numerous rings forming a cylinder
from end to end. At first cartilaginous, they become bony
as the bird grows older, and their ossification begins in
front and gradually extends backward towards the gullet*.
So far then there is no essential difference between the
Raven and other birds in the parts described.
The inferior larynx or syrinx, which is the real seat of
* In certain birds ossification of all the tracheal rings is not completed.
Various inequalities of diameter and convolutions of the tube (some of which
will be hereafter described and figured) also occur, producing, as might be
expected, particular effects on the voice. Generally the proportionate length of
the trachea deserves consideration, for shrill notes are produced by short tubes
and vice versd. On the structure of the tube, too, certain effects depend. Asa
general rule, though not without exceptions, birds which possess strong and
broad cartilages or bony rings have a monotonous and loud voice, while slenderer
rings with wider interspaces allow a freedom of motion producing a correspond-
ing variety in the scale of tone.
RAVEN, Jt)
the vocal organ in Birds, is at the bottom of the tube, and
is formed by the more or less firm union of several of the
lower bony rings of the trachea, as shewn in Fig. 5 (b),
where the parts are divested of their attachments, and again
in Fig. 6 (b) where one bronchus has also been removed to
exhibit the inner side (c) of the other, together with a
median cross-bone, as represented in Fig. 7 (a, a), extend-
ing from behind to the front, and dividing the tube into
two equal parts, from the outer side of each of which the
bronchi spring and diverge to the Iungs*. From the upper
edge of this cross-bone a crescént-shaped membrane, concave
above, ascends for a short distancé inside thé main tube, and
thus forms a ‘“ three-way piece ’’,
The bronchi are, like the trachea, perfectly flexible, but the’
rings of which they are formed, though similarly connected
with one another by membrane, as shewn in Fis. 5 (c), are
incomplete on the inner side, which is composed of a
delicate membrane, known as the membrana tympaniformis,
seen in Fig. 6 (c), on the change of form and length of
which some of the varieties of intonation depend. These
tubes diminish in size as they approach the lungs, and they
are slightly attached to each other and to the esophagus.
The muscles of the glottis consist, so far as is known,
uniformly of the two pairs already described, but those of
* In one group of Birds—the American Vultures (Cathartide)—and therein
only, it is believed, there is no special modification of the trachea into a gyrinx.
VOL. II. NN
aie CORVIDE.
the syrinx, which are the real vocal muscles, vary in number
in different groups, reaching their maximum in the true
Passeres, which have always five pairs. These are represented
in their natural position in Figs. 8-10, giving a front, back
and side view of these parts in the Raven, while Fig. 11
repeats the last but shews three of the five pairs partly
displaced to render their superior attachment more obvious.
To describe these muscles more particularly it may be said
that two pairs of them have a common origin about the
middle of the trachea, and, descending on its outside, divide
at a short distance above the end of the tube; one of them
—the long posterior tensor (f), being directed downward and
backward, is inserted at the extreme posterior end of the
first half-ring of the bronchus, while its counterpart—the
long anterior tensor (v), passing from the place of separation
downward and forward is inserted below the extreme point
of the last ring of the trachea. Within the angle formed
by the divergence of each of these pairs, a third slender and
cord-like muscle—the sterno-tracheal (() arises on each side
and goes off to be inserted in the sternum. The fourth pair
—the short posterior tensor (h) is the smallest of all, and,
arising near the middle of the lower end of the trachea,
its fibres, directed obliquely downwards and backwards, are
inserted on the extremity of the first of the incomplete
vines of the bronchi. The fifth pair—the short anterior
tensor (gy) springs like the last from the middle of the
trachea, but is somewhat larger and thicker, appearing as
though made up of several small muscles in close contact.
Its direction is obliquely downward and forward; it is
partly hidden by the long anterior tensor (e), and, attached
by a broad base to the last ring of the trachea and to the
cartilage immediately below, it reaches the extreme end* of
the first or second of the bronchial half-rings.
Thus while the lunes govern the volume of air as well as
the force with which it is expelled, the syringeal muscles
* As before stated, in the other great division of Passeres—Prof. Garrod’s
Mesomyodi—none of which are British or even European, such forms as possess
muscles that reach to the bronchi, have their muscles joined to the middle and
not the extremity of the bronchial half-rings.
RAVEN. 27a
influence both the diameter and the length of the bronchi,
and the absurdity of the vulgar belief that to enable a bird
to “speak” the slitting of its tongue is necessary ought
hereby to be manifest. The principle on which the vocal
organs in Birds are framed is that which prevails in wind-
instruments generally; the notes in the ascending scale being
produced by a corresponding contraction of the diameter or
the length of the tube, and vice versa.
274 CORVIDS.
PASSERES., CORVIDA.
Corvus corone, Linneus*.
THE BLACK CROW.
Corvus corone.
EVIDENCE accumulated during many years, through the
observation of ornithologists of many countries and of
many schools, seems at last to compel the conclusion that
no specific distinction can be maintained between the birds
long known scientifieally as Corvus corone and Corvus
cornix, and in English as the Black or Carrion-Crow and
the Grey, Hooded or Royston Crow. True it is that each
for the most part may be readily recognized from the other
by its different coloration, that each has a different range
and, to some extent, slightly different habits ; but when we
Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 155 (1766).
CROW. Lt
PASSERES. CORVIDA.
Corvus cornix, Linneus*.
THE GREY CROW.
Corvus cornix.
find that, in the districts in which both oecur, they breed
together commonly and indiscriminately, that the offspring
sometimes combine the characters of both parents, and
sometimes favour one or the other of them, or that in the
same brood all three phases appear, or again that the pro-
geny of parents belonging to one form may present all the
characteristics of the other, it seems almost impossible for +
scientific naturalist to retain the time-honoured belief that
the two forms are distinct species. Though the Editor utters
this opinion with some diffidence, that diffidence chiefly
* Syst. Nat, Ed. 12, i. p. 156 (1766).
276 CORVIDE.
rests upon its novelty in regard to British authorities*. The
case, it must be owned, is one of a rare kind, and, though
certainly not singular in ornithology, we have at present to
go to India or the heart of North America to find its
parallelst. Yet its rarity is no valid objection. If there be
any degree of truth in the theories which have of late years
been so prominently set forth, such cases must at one time
or another have been countless; but to discuss those theories
would here be out of place. All that is now required is
to consider, with the utmost fairness, the peculiar characters
of each form under every aspect—whether of structure,
coloration, habits or distribution, and then to test their
yralue in regard to the admitted fact of the frequent inter-
breeding of the two forms where they both occur, as well as
to the indisputable results of that interbreeding. For this
purpose it will be convenient to invert the order generally
followed in the present work, and first to describe each form.
In the technical sense of the term not an atom of struc-
tural difference has been found between the Black and the
Grey Crows. Taking in hand a typical specimen of each
there is nought to distinguish them but colour. The Grey
Crow varies in size as it varies in shade—examples from
southern countries are smaller, and have their lighter
plumage of a clearer tint, than those from the north; but
as regards bulk the Black Crow varies in like manner, and in
both the females are less than the males. The whole length
of either form is from eighteen and a half to twenty inches ;
the wing, from the carpal joint to the tip, is from twelve to
fourteen inches; the first primary is about three inches
shorter than the second, which is an inch shorter than the
third, and this is a little shorter than the fourth. The tail
* The notion, however, has long prevailed in the mind or the imagination of
some of those best fitted to exercise either. As an example, the excellent
remarks on this subject of Mr. Hancock in his ‘ Birds of Northumberland and
Durham’ (pp. 32-36) may especially be cited.
+ Instances more or less similar are found in the interbreeding of certain
species” of Himalayan Pheasants (Gallophasis—tbe Euplocamus of some
authors), of Rollers (Coracias (ndicus ad C. affinis) in India, and of the North-
American Woodpeckers of the genus Co/aptes.
ee
CROW. 277
varies from seven to nearly eight inches and a half; the bill
measures a trifle more than half an inch in height and from
two to two inches and a quarter in length; the tarsus from
a little over two to a little over two inches and a third.
In both forms the bill, lees and toes are black; but in the
Grey Crow the claws are of a very dark horn-colour, while
in the Black Crow they are pure black: the irides are in
both of a dark greyish-brown. In the Black Crow the
whole plumage is entirely black, glossed above with violet
and green reflexions according to the light in which it is
viewed. In the Grey Crow the nape, back, rump and lower
parts of the body (except the black feathers covering the
tibio-tarsal joint) are of a smoky-grey, the shafts of most of
the feathers being dark slaty-grey or black, while all the
rest of the plumage is precisely as in the Black Crow; but
the exact extent of grey varies in some degree, as also does
its shade, as before said. In both forms the young are
distinguished by the want of lustre on their feathers.
Next as regards habits. If our view be limited by the
confines of the United Kingdom, two discrepancies are mani-
fest. First, that, while the Black Crow inhabits chiefly
more or less wooded country, the Grey Crow frequents moor-
land tracts—both remarks referring to the breeding-season.
But directly we cross to Holland we find the Black Crow
nesting on the ground in open districts, while in Scandinavia
the Grey Crow frequents localities of the same kind as those
which the Black Crow affects with us. It seems not un-
reasonable, knowing that many of our treeless moors were
once covered with forest, to suppose that when first occupied
by the ancestors of the Grey Crows which now possess those
places, they did not so much differ as at present from the
woodland haunts of the Norwegian and Swedish birds. The
Grey Crow readily adapts itself to circumstances. It builds
its nest equally on the storm-swept cliffs of Shetland and on
the palms of sunny Egypt. There is accordingly no wonder
in its retaining its seat in Scotland or Ireland, though the
trees which once sheltered its fore-fathers have long since
been laid low.
278 CORVIDA.
The second discrepancy of habit which must be noticed
is one that will weigh heavier with many naturalists, and yet
it seems really to have but little significance. Throughout
the greater part of the British Islands the Black Crow, where
it occurs, is mostly a summer-visitant, while the Grey Crow,
in England at least, is, as a rule, an autumnal immigrant,
appearing regularly in the fall of the year, and disappearing
as regularly in spring. But then we have to consider the
general principle of migration. Whatsoever its cause may be
and howsoever it may be effected, its process is undisputed.
In the northern hemisphere as summer wanes all birds
subject to its influence move in a generally southward
direction. Now Crows, whether Black or Grey, notoriously
belong to this category and shift their quarters accordingly.
In Great Britain, and to a certain extent elsewhere, the
Black Crow occupies a more southern range than the Grey
Crow. This relative position is preserved irrespective of
season. Each follows the sun towards the equator and
each moves northwards as the sun returns towards the pole,
so that both are impelled by precisely the same movement*.
We know how with many kinds of birds our native stock
emigrates more or less entirely towards autumn, and its
place is taken by an influx of northern strangers. In
some species the most practised eye can detect no difference
between its indigenous and its foreign members; but in
others such a difference is easily discerned. In the Crow
the difference is wider perhaps than in any, but the difference
is only of degree, it is quantitative and not qualitative.
Hence, while the discrepancy affords us no proof that the
Grey and Black Crows are specifically distinct, it furnishes no
good ground for asserting that they are specifically identical.
In other respects the habits of the two forms defy differ-
entiation. Their food, cries and mode of nidification, their
rapacity, wariness and conduct generally are absolutely alike ;
and their geographical distribution, which offers many points
of interest, alone remains to be considered. In the British
Islands it may be said that the Black Crow breeds, if per-
* This bas been admirably put by Mr. Hancock (wt supra).
CROW. 279
mitted by gamekeepers, more or less commonly throughout
England and Wales, to the almost total exclusion of the
Grey Crow—the instances in which the latter, unaided by
the former, has been known to build its nest south of the
border being very few in number*. Beyond this limit,
however, the case is altered, and almost at once the Grey
becomes the commoner form, for, though the Black Crow
holds positions, apparently in the low-lying districts, even
far to the northwardt, its numbers bear no comparison with
those of the other throughout Scotland generally, where both
are almost universally called ‘‘ Huddies’’—a name corrupted
from Hooded Crow, and therefore properly belonging to the
parti-coloured birds—the whole-coloured birds being distin-
guished as Black Huddies. Indeed so much do the two
forms intermingle that in many parts of the country the
notion prevails that the difference in plumage is due to sex.
So long ago as 1828 Fleming described the female of Corvus
a
* The Editor learns from Mr. More that it is supposed to have done so in
Devon, but its rarity in that county at any time casts suspicion on the story.
Mr. Laver informed Dr. Bree that some used to breed every year near the Black-
water, in Essex; but it would seem that this is not so now. In Norfolk a pair
is said by Hunt (Br. Orn. ii. p. 43, note) to have reared a brood in 1816 nea
King’s Lynn; what looked like a young bird was seen near Yarmouth in July,
1843 (Zool. p. 316), and others near Cromer in August, 1867 and 1877
(Zool. s.s. p. 1012, and 1877, p. 443). In Lincolnshire, Mr. Cordeaux shot a
partly-fledged example August 5th, 1873 (Zool. s.s. p. 3685). It has been
observed twice, or oftener, near Flamborough under circumstances which pre-
sume its breeding there (Zool. p. 6142, s.s. pp. 2728, 5081). Williamson
declared (P. Z. S. 1836, p. 76) that it had bred on two or three occasions near
Scarborough, but the only instances of which he gave details shew that one of
the parties to the union was a Black Crow. It was also reported to Mr. More
as breeding regularly in Cumberland, and occasionally in North Wales ; but
confirmation is needed in either case. That it does so, however, annually in the
Isle of Man seems to be established.
+ Mr. More obtained evidence of its breeding regularly in all the counties
south of the Firths of Forth and Clyde, and northwards in those of Dumbarton,
Argyle, Clackmannan, Perth, Aberdeen and Banff—occasionally also, it would
seem, in Caithness and (if it has not been confounded with the Rook) in some
of the Hebrides, but whether in all these localities it breeds unpaired with the
Grey form, is open to doubt. St. John says that in Moray it is impossible to
decide on the line which divides the two birds, though the Grey Crow is so much
the commoner as to be the Crow of the country, and that he never saw there
a pair of perfectly Black Crows (Nat. Hist. and Sport in Moray, p. 58).
vou. It. 0 0
I80 CORVID.
cornix as “wanting the grey,” while several Scottish
observers on the other hand have considered grey feathers
to be an unfailing characteristic of the hen,*
In Ireland the Grey Crow is common and resident, accord-
ing to Thompson, in all quarters of the island, though in
some parts its numbers seem to decrease in winter ; but the
Black form is comparatively rare, and on that account
probably escaped the notice of the earlier writers who men-
tioned Irish birds—such as Payne, in 1589, and Moryson,
in 1617, who deny its occurrence there,—Charles Smith, in
1750, being apparently the first to include it among those of
the County Cork. It was known to Thompson as appearing
in the north, east and west, as well as in Kilkenny and
Tipperary, but details of its distribution are wholly wanting.
Nor is evidence forthcoming of its breeding there, unless
paired with the Grey Crow, of which there is a single case
recorded in Antrim. Mr. Watters says that he had never
met with the Black form in the eastern counties, and that
the only examples he had ever seen were two, obtained in
Clare in the summer of 1846, though he had heard of its
occasional occurrence near Belfast, where indeed Thompson
had already noticed it. Lord Clermont informs the Editor
that one was trapped in May 1851 at Ravensdale Park—the
sole instance to his knowledge of its appearance in that
neighbourhood. All this testimony, taken with the silence
of other observers, shews that the Black Crow is but an
accidental visitor to Ireland.
Northward of the British Islands the Grey Crow is a
common resident in the Fieroes, and occasionally strays to
Iceland, where also the Black Crow has been reported, but
very doubtfully, though it perhaps sometimes reaches the
Feroes. The latter is a rare visitant to Norway, and still
* Mhis divergence of opinion is probably due to the faet of the particular
observer relying on insufficient evidence. Having once perhaps ascertained the
sex of the grey or black partner of a pair, he imagines that all other cases must
be similar ; not knowing that a Black hen may mate with a Grey cock and
vice versa, Any doubt on the subject should be dispelled by St. John’s statement
(op. cit.) that he had killed Crows ‘‘in every shade of plumage from pure black to
the perfectly marked ” Hooded Crow, ‘‘ and this without reference to age or sex.”
CROW. 281
more seldom to Sweden—in both kingdoms having only
appeared in the south, while its occurrence in Finland is
extremely dubious. On the other hand the Grey Crow is
abundant in nearly every part of all three countries, and
throughout the Russian dominions eastward to about the
distance of two hundred versts from Krasnoiarsk. But the
Black Crow also appears in certain districts of European
Russia, extending from Archangel to the Black Sea, though
not further in Western Siberia, according to Dr. Radde,
than the eastern slopes of the Ural, until some two hundred
versts beyond Tomsk, where curiously enough it reappears,
at first in small numbers compared with the Grey Crow,
but that decreases until, at about the same distance from the
Jennisei, the Black Crow alone is found. The intermediate
space, says Mr. Seebohm (Ibis, 1878, pp. 328, 529), is held
in common by both forms in about equal proportions, but the
number of mongrels between them is computed to be double
that of either pure Black or pure Grey birds. Northwards
the range of each form is about conterminous with the
erowth of the forests. Eastwards the Black Crow seems to
dwell in the land continuously to the sea of Ochotsk and
southwards in Mongolia. It also inhabits Japan. In
Turkestan and thence to the Caucasus both forms appear,
but then again C. corone has alone been found in Cashmere,
while from Affehanistan to Asia Minor C. cornix seems only
to occur. The latter also inhabits Syria and the south of
Palestine, though it seems to be local in its distribution, but
it is a well-known bird of Egypt and even appears in Nubia.
In Algeria Loche says that the Black Crow commonly
frequents the woodlands, while the Grey only appears occa-
sionally, but he has possibly mistaken the small Raven
(C. tingitanus) for the first, which is nevertheless recorded
from Eastern Morocco, Madeira and the Cape Verd Islands.
Major von Homeyer found its nest in Majorca (Journ. f. Orn.
1862, p. 252) and it is resident in Spain, breeding, though
rarely, near Gibraltar ; but the Grey Crow is of still rarer
occurrence in the south of that country if indeed it appears
there at all. Inthe south of France this last is also rare,
282 CORVIDE.
and only found in winter, but it becomes more numerous
towards the north till, in Normandy and Picardy, it is as
abundant at that season asin any part of England. On the
other hand the Black Crow is said to be resident throughout
France, and in the south very plentiful in winter. In
Belgium and Holland it is also resident and common. In
Germany, the Elbe is stated to mark roughly the boundary
of the breeding-limits of the two forms—the Black Crow
occupying the districts to the westward and the Grey Crow
those to the eastward of that river, but in Upper Lusatia,
Anhalt, Brunswick (Journ. f. Orn. 1871, p. 212), and
Mecklenburg both are found breeding; and in the duchy last
named hybrids frequently occur, as they do also in Holstein.
In Denmark, however, the Grey birds almost entirely prevail,
the Black being very rare, and even in that part of Germany
where the Black Crow breeds the Grey predominates in
winter. In Savoy the Black form is common and resident,
but the Grey is rare and does not breed. The latter how-
ever, says Dr. Salvadori, is common and resident throughout
the whole of Italy and its islands, while he believes that the
former is confined to Upper Italy and is wanting from
Tuscany southwards, but further observations are hereon
required. In Piedmont hybrids between the two occur. In
the Austrian Dominions their distribution has not as yet
been clearly defined, and with regard to some parts of it the
evidence is to a certain extent conflicting, though the Grey
Crow seems generally to pervade the whole. The Black
Crow also occurs in Moravia and Bohemia, but in the last it
is chiefly if not entirely confined to the wooded highlands of
the west. In Austria proper it is very rare, though abundant
in the Tyrol. In Styria it appears in winter, but it is not
recorded by modern writers from Carinthia. It occurs, how-
ever, in Servia, Wallachia, Bulgaria and Macedonia, but its
asserted existence in Greece must at present be regarded as
doubtful—while the Grey Crow inhabits all these and the
intervening countries, extends to most of the islands of the
Greek Archipelago, and was found breeding in Crete by Col.
Drummond-Hay.
CROW. 283
Thus it will be seen that though our knowledge of the
subject is still imperfect as regards a few minor details, it
admits of our arriving at some important generalizations,
and the result shews that the geographical distribution of the
two forms supplies no better proof of their specific distinctness
than does any of the other characteristics before considered.
The Black Crow is found at the extreme western as at the
extreme eastern limits of the range of both, while the Grey
Crow occupies the most northern as well as the most southern
countries frequented by either. It cannot therefore be said
that one is a western and the other an eastern race, or that
one is a northern and the other a southern. So far the only
rational mode of regarding the Black and Grey Crows would
appear to be as members of a single dimorphic species, and
the inability to point out why this species should possess
that admittedly exceptional quality is no more an argument
against that view, than is the inability to explain why a
wholly black plumage should prevail in nearly all the species
of Corvus, while in a few others the black should be varied
by grey or white. It must also be remembered that the
present case does not stand as one of simple local variation as
is that of so many other birds—some of them even belong-
ing to the same genus, as the Daw, presently to be noticed,
and the C. splendens of the Indian Region, of which Hima-
layan examples have an ash-coloured breast and collar, which
is darker in specimens from Bengal and Southern India,
and darker still in those from Ceylon (Ann. Nat. Hist. ser. 2,
xill. p. 214), while in some of those from Burma and Siam
nearly all trace of the grey is lost (Ibis, 1867, p. 298)*.
A more important objection, however, to the view above
taken may be raised, and one that has not before been stated.
By many naturalists it has long been held that the infertility
of hybrids between any two forms affords the strongest
eround for considering them distinct species—whether the
* Mr. Hume suggests (Stray Feathers, 1874, p. 480 and 1875, p. 144), that
these deserve specific recognition. Mr. Sharpe notices (Cat. B. Br. Mus. iii.
p. 33) a specimen, said to be from Malacca, of the ordinary dark form. When
more is known about the dark-eyed and white-eyed Crows of Australia the case of
our own birds may be further illustrated (cf. E. P. Ramsay, Ibis, 1865, p. 303),
284 CORVID®,
converse position be true or not. Now that hybrids of the
Black and Grey Crows are fertile has been proved by several
observers, and Mr. Seebohm has furnished (loc. cit.) addi-
tional evidence of the fact. But he has at the same time
come to the conclusion that though this is the case in some
instances it is not always so, and he bases his opinion on the
circumstance that at one place in that part of Siberia which
is tenanted in common by both forms he, in the breeding-
season, shot all the Crows he could—-thirteen of them being
“thoroughbred” and fifteen hybrids. Of the latter seven
were males and eight females, but the proportion of the sexes
in the former was very different, being eleven males and two
females. Hence he naturally supposes that most of the
‘thoroughbred ” females were engaged in incubation and
out of his reach, while the majority of hybrids were not, and
for the reason that they were barren. Whether this reason
be valid must be left to future determination, but if the
tendency to infertility, which Mr. Seebohm believes himself
to have observed, be finally established it must be allowed to
have due weight upon this very curious question™.
Like the Raven, our Crows seem to pair for life, and,
though some few pass the winter in or near their breeding-
haunts, whither their presence may attract chance strangers
of their kind, the greater number, including all the young
birds, collect in flocks towards the end of summer in places
where food is most abundant, and keeping more or less
together gradually make their way southward until the turn
of the season, when they retrace their flight in like manner.
Gregarious as they thus are during the greater part of the
year, they appear to associate less from the love of company
than from the opportunities thereby afforded of performing
their migrations in safety, or of getting their living with
facility. In the breeding-season the flocks separate, and
* Some doubt however may be expressed as to whether all the birds deemed by
Mr. Seebohm to be ‘‘ thoroughbred.”’ were really so, for it seems that hybrids
of the two forms, as often as not, wholly resemble either one parent or the other,
while an entirely Black bird has been seen in a brood of which both the parents
were Grey (Verhandl. zool.-bot. Ver. Wien, 1854, p. 619).
CROW, 285
each pair of birds takes up a particular beat. This fact has
led many English observers to think that the Black form—
being as before remarked chiefly a summer-visitant to these
islands, and consequently most usually seen in pairs or,
after the young are flown, in small family-parties—was less
sociable in its habits than the Grey, which being better
known in this kingdom as a winter-guest, appears of course
at that season most often in bands.* The comparative
scarcity too of the Black form has encouraged this belief,
for from its continued destruction by shepherds and game-
keepers throughout most parts of England, it is almost
impossible for a sufficient number to be nowadays bred in
this country to admit of the collection of any considerable
flocks.+ In the wilder and less frequented districts of Scotland
and Ireland, the Grey Crow enjoys greater immunity, though
there are in each wide tracts of country where it has been
almost entirely extirpated, chiefly by the use of poison ; but
by far the larger portion of the birds of this form which are
seen with us in winter are unquestionably of foreign origin, }
reaching this country about October.
Crows are not very early breeders, and it is generally the
end of April or the beginning of May before the nest is
prepared. This, as has been already said, is variously
placed in trees, rocks, or on the ground, but one that has
been used before is very commonly refurnished, and a
favourite site is often tenanted for a long series of seasons,
* The precise range of the Grey Crow in England has yet to be determined
and well deserves attention. Mr. Knox says that though it is numerous in
winter to the eastward of Shoreham, he never detected it on the Sussex coast to
the west of Bognor. The Editor can state that it does not visit a district
within sight, and not twenty miles to the westward, of the Royston Downs,
whence it takes one of its commonest names.
+ Yet in the strictly-preserved county of Norfolk, Mr. Norgate informs the
Editor that he has known more than a dozen Crows’ nests, the sites of which
were visible from one single spot. It is, however, almost useless to remark that
nearly all of them would be also known to the neighbouring gamekeepers, and
that no increase of the species, but the contrary, would be the result.
+ So well is this known along the eastern coast of England, where the birds
may be seen arriving from over sea in autumn, that they are called Danish
Crows. At the same season Black Crows, but in far smaller numbers, also
appear on the coast and some of them seem to winter with us.
286 CORVIDE.
in which case the annual addition of fresh materials makes
a structure of huge bulk. Sticks, heather, roots, turf, sea-
weed, bones—in short, almost anything that the birds can
find and carry—are built into its foundation and outworks ;
but, however large these may be, the interior is always a cup
lined with moss, wool, fur, hair and feathers, neatly inter-
woven and smooth, and of a size fitted to hold from four to
six eggs, subsequently laid therein. These are in colour
very like Ravens’, but seldom have the markings so deep in
shade—black for instance being almost wholly wanting—or
so numerous: in size they measure from 2°07 to 1°5 by from
1:27 to 1:04 inch. It is well known of many birds that
when one of a pair is killed, the survivor speedily obtains a
new mate, who continues the work of reproduction. This has
been repeatedly observed to be the case with Crows, from
the fact, probably, that few species are more systematically
slaughtered in the breeding-season.
The food of the Crow is varied, but consists almost exclu-
sively of animal matter, of which nothing that can be found
comes amiss, from the carcase of a large quadruped to the
grubs of insects. The heaps of refuse washed up on the
sea-beach, and the shores of tidal rivers, as well as on lands
that have been recently flooded, supply a great portion, and
in such places the birds may be seen, often in considerable
flocks, diligently seeking for anything eatable, each individual
as intently watching the actions of its comrades as carrying
on its own search, so that the discovery by one of booty
larger than common is sure to be observed by the rest, who
hasten to share the spoil, pieces of which are torn off and
conveyed to a convenient station to be devoured. Bones and
shelled animals, the marrow or soft parts of which cannot be
readily extracted, are borne aloft to a considerable height and
dropped upon rocks or stones that they may be broken, the
bird following them very closely in their fall; but several
observers have noticed that it often mistakes the nature of
the ground beneath, and repeated trials are frequently needed
to attain a successful performance of the cunning feat. It
will also hover over the water and seize fishes or offal that
CROW. 287
may be near the surface. Were the Crow but content with
food of this kind it would make few enemies ; but unfortu-
nately for itself it has earned a reputation of being only less
mischievous as it is less powerful than the Raven, and, where
it is plentiful, its injuriousness to flock-masters cannot be
gainsaid. Yeaning ewes and their new-born lambs not
unfrequently fall victims to its attacks when removed from
the shepherd’s care. The gamekeeper detests it even worse
than the Raven, for it is more abundant, and its partiality to
egos, from those of an Eagle to those of a Titlark, leads it to
beat deliberately over moors and fields, hedgerows and borders
of woods, to find the nests of Grouse, Partridges and Phea-
sants, which it speedily empties of their contents, each egg
being separately carried off on the point of its bill and then
sucked. Nor does it shew any mercy to the tender broods,
and from its habit of haunting the waterside it is particu-
larly destructive to Ducklings. Leverets, young rabbits and
other small mammals it will also capture. It will snatch a
wounded bird almost from the grasp of the gunner, and that
which at nightfall he has marked as fallen dead will be found
by him next day with its bones picked clean. Though grain
is seldom touched by it, when opportunity offers it will take
cherries and walnuts. Thus by nearly all classes it is ranked
as one of the most heinous of feathered offenders. Yet
Waterton had a good word for it, urging that for nine or ten
months of the year it does very little injury to man, while
during the greater part of that time it is as assiduous as the
Rook in the consumption of noxious larvae. For this cause
also, Vieillot reckons it among the birds that are useful, but
notwithstanding these witnesses in its favour any attempt to
plead the cause of the Crow in this country would be vain.
The sagacity of the Crow is as proverbial as that of the
Raven, and in illustration of this quality a nearly endless num-
ber of anecdotes might be cited—some of venerable antiquity.
Many no doubt rest on fancy, but men who have seen the
bird’s habit of dropping shell-fishes that they may be broken
by the fall, have some excuse for fabling that it would
fill a pitcher with stones to raise the level of the water it
VOL. II. PP
288 CORVID®.
held. Its mode of hiding portions of food that cannot at
the time be conveniently eaten naturally suggests an amount
of forethought that can pardonably be exaggerated. In the
same way any one who has listened to the strange sounds which
a Crow will divert itself by uttering for half an hour together,
or the various tones* in which it will call to and be answered
by a distant comrade, can well understand how the faculty of
intelligible speech came to be attributed to this bird. In-
deed it is hardly possible for us to deny it the power of
carrying on a conversation of some sort, for it is admitted
that while most birds by their notes express alarm, pleasure
and certain other feelings, none has a greater capacity for
indicating different sensations (whatever they may be) by its
articulations, and it is not surprising that the varied notes
of the Crow have met with many attempts at interpretation
on the part of the rural population of this country and
others, some of them being highly humorous.t
* Macgillivray professes to have recognized a difference in the voices of the
two forms, but the Editor believes there is none, and herein his opinion is corro-
borated by Mr. Seebohm, whose testimony, from the opportunities he has en-
joyed of hearing both almost simultaneously, is of great value.
+ The Grey Crow is the subject of a monograph in Dutch by Dr. N. Meursinge
—‘ Verhandeling over de Bonte Kraai’ (Groningen: 1851, 8vo, 332 pp.).
ROOK. 289
PASSERES. CORVIDA.
CoRVUS FRUGILEGUS, Linneeus*.
THE ROOK.
Corvus frugilequs.
Tue Roox, as Pennant says, is the Corvus of Virgil t, no
other bird of this name being so eminently gregarious. The
sociability of its disposition, however, is not confined to its
seeking the company of its own kind and constantly living
in flocks at all seasons of the year, but is further shewn by
its apparent preference of the abodes of man, near which to
establish itself; for it has been remarked that a rookery is
seldom seen except in the immediate vicinity of houses, and
it is also declared that instances are not wanting of an ancient
* Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 156 (1766).
+ It may be remarked that the district in which the poet was born and educated
is, as will presently be shewn, almost the only part of Italy in which the Rook
breeds.
290 CORVID”,
settlement being deserted when the neighbouring dwelling
has been pulled down, or even abandoned as a habitation.
This seeming partiality is carried to such an extent that
Rooks’ nests are occasionally found in various parts of the
most crowded cities, and even in London itself, though here
the extension of buildings in every direction, by widening
the distance of the birds’ feeding-ground, has lessened and
will go on lessening their numbers. The large rookery that,
existed in the Temple Gardens and furnished Goldsmith
with opportunities of observing its ‘‘ policy” came to an end
in the early part of this century*, and that in Carlton House
Gardens in 1827, though its evicted owners are said to have
removed to Spring Gardens. The rookery also in Doctors’
Commons has ceased to exist, but that in Gray’s Inn Garden
still flourishes and is now the largest in London, containing
about thirty nests. Until the year 1885, when the steeple
of Bow Church was repaired, a pair had their nest between
the wings of the dragon forming the vane at its top. Then
they removed to a plane-tree near the corner of Wood Street
and Cheapside, where they remained for some years, a second
nest being also built in it in 1845. In 1838, a pair began
a nest on the crown which surmounts the vane of St. Olave’s,
Crutched Friars. In the garden of Chesterfield House
there was for many years a considerable rookery, containing
about fifty nests in 1846, but this is now built over, though
the adjoining garden of Wharncliffe House still harbours
some ten nests. There are besides several other settlements
of the species within the limits of London.t Mr. Blackwall
recorded (Zool. Journ. v. p. 10) that for two years three
* Mr. Harting has kindly pointed out that in an anonymous ‘ History of
Epsom’ this rookery is said (p. 150) to have originated in birds taken from
Woodcote Green in Surrey by Sir William Northey, and to have existed in 1825.
Rennie however wrote of it in 1831 (Archit. B. p. 220) as being ‘long
abandoned”.
+ Thus Dr. Hamilton mentions (Zool. 1878, pp. 194-196) rookeries at Holland
House, in Kensington Gardens, Hyde Park, Hereford Square, Marylebone Road,
Gower Street and Gordon Place. In 1831, says Rennie, there was a rookery at
the back of Whitehall ; according to Jennings (Ornithologia, p. 75) there was
one for many years in the churchyard of St. Dunstan’s-in-the-East; and My.
Harting says that in 1876 there was a nest in Bermondsey churchyard.
ROOK. 291
pairs built on some poplars in a central part of Manchester,
and Bewick noticed a nest on the vane of the Exchange, in
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, which was tenanted for ten successive
seasons till the spire was taken down; while Macgillivray
speaks of several small rookeries in the heart of Edinburgh.*
Rooks are often credited with a peculiar degree of sagacity
in selecting or avoiding certain trees, and it has been more
than once asserted that any which have been marked in the
usual way for felling are abandoned by the birds; but stronger
evidence is required before the naturalist can accept this as
the sole warning upon which they have acted. There may
be better grounds for supposing that they leave trees the
insecurity of which is proved by subsequent storms. The
Author is inclined in these cases to think that the age, or
incipient decay of the trees, had affected the upper branches,
and that the Rooks found them less fit for their purpose than
those of more healthy trees which were close by. Other
kinds of knowledge are also ascribed to Rooks. They are
commonly believed to forecast the weather; and to strengthen
their nests against a coming gale of wind, while several
stories profess to shew their yet more marvellous acquaint-
ance with human affairs, manifested by a change of abode,
on the death or arrival of a proprietor who has disturbed
or favoured their interests—some of these tales being sup-
ported by a curious coincidence of events.t
The balance between injury or benefit derived from Rooks
* An instance of Rooks building in cliffs is given by De Montbeillard, and
their occupying for many years the church of Walbourn in Lincolnshire is noticed
by Erasmus Darwin (Zoonomia, Hd. 3, i. p. 247). Mr. G. Norman mentions (Zool.
p. 1366) two nests on housetops at Kingston-on-Hull in 1846, and Mr. Stevenson
(Zool. s.s, p. 1910) a nest attempted to be built in 1869 on the church at Swaff-
ham in Norfolk.
+ The particulars of two such coincidences have been kindly communi-
cated to the Editor, through Mr. Knox, by Lord Home. In 1824 the late
Lord Home was desirous of destroying a rookery near Coldstream, and, after
three years, effected his purpose. During the remainder of his life not a single
Rook’s nest was built on the property, but in 1842, the first spring after his
death, the birds returned, not indeed to their former haunts, but to some old
trees within a mile of the place. A similar thing happened at Douglas Castle.
The Rooks had been driven away in 1841. In 1857 the present Lord Home
went to live there, and in the following year they returned to their old quarters.
292 CORVID.E.
by agriculturists is a question which general opinion seems
to have settled by considering that the damage, though
often great, is much more than outweighed by the ser-
vices rendered in the destruction of millions of grubs
of the cockchafer, chovy, the several species of wireworm,
and the larve of crane-flies, commonly called harry-long-
legs; these, and many others equally injurious to vegetation,
are eagerly sought and devoured, forming a very large pro-
portion of the food of this most numerous species. Early in
the morning Rooks visit meadows while the grass is yet wet
with dew to break their fast on worms and slugs. Later in
the day they may be seen, either searching newly-ploughed
land for the various insects there exposed, or again visiting
pastures for other purposes. They have been accused of
destroying the grass by pulling it up by the roots; but this
is an error. The tufts of grass or other plants, so often
found withered on the surface, have already been destroyed
by the grubs which live in the soil having eaten into their
roots, as is evident on examination. The plants retain their
position in the ground and for some time their verdure, but
are quite loose and can be removed almost by a touch. The
Rooks merely pull them up in the act of getting at the
authors of the mischief. The grass that is uninjured is left
crowing. In what way the birds first detect the presence of
erubs in the ground is not known to us. Some think by
actual experiment: others by the altered appearance of the
plant; but the result is certain: large patches of a pasture
are often thus probed, and, though the damage already done
be considerable, further injury, especially that which would
follow from the grubs attaining maturity and propagating
their kind, is completely prevented.* The utility of
Rooks on other occasions has also been declared. Many
years ago, it is said (Mag. Nat. Hist. vi. p. 148), a flight of
locusts visited Crayen, and their numbers created consider-
able alarm among the farmers of the district. The Rooks,
however, flocked in from all sides by thousands and devoured
“The Rook however is not the only bird which confers this benefit. Par-
tridges destroy a vast number of grass-eating grubs.
5 d 5 oOo 5
ROOK. 293
the insects so greedily that they were all destroyed in a short
time. It is also stated (loc. cit.) that, about 1830, there was
such an enormous quantity of caterpillars upon Skiddaw,
that they devoured all the vegetation on the mountain, and
people feared they would attack the crops in the enclosed
lands; but the Rooks, having discovered them, in a very
short time put a stop to their ravages.
A very different opinion once prevailed. In 1532 an Act
of Parliament (24 Hen. VIII. c. x.) enjoined all persons to kill
and utterly destroy all manner of Choughs, Crows and Rooks”,
and declared that the inhabitants of every place containing at
least ten households should at their own cost provide a nett
which was to be set at all convenient times at a ‘‘shrape ”’f,
made with chaff and other things fit for that purpose for the
destruction of these birds, and kept in repair for ten years
under penalty of 10s., a reward of twopence a dozen being
given for old birds. Bishop Stanley quotes an entry among
certain presentments concerning Alderley in Cheshire in
1598 :—“ We find that there is no Crow-nett in the parish,
a payne that one be bought by the charge of the parish ” ;
and doubtless many other such records exist.
In Scotland, legal persecution began still earlier, and an
Act passed in 1424, followed by another in 1457, forfeited to
the king all trees whereon Rooks were suffered to build their
nests, should the nests be left at Beltane (May-day). In
Ireland, the statute of 17 Geo. II. c. x. offered a reward
for the head of any of the Crow-tribe.
The attempts made by man to interfere directly with the
* The vague meaning of ‘*Chough” has been already mentioned (page 253,
note). ‘‘ Crow” and “ Rook’’ are in common speech even now interchangeable,
witness Mr. Tennyson’s ‘ many-winter’d crow that leads the clanging rookery
home.”
t The Crow-net is figured and described in Willughby’s ‘Ornithology’, but
not very clearly. It ‘‘ may be placed near any Barn-door where Corn is win-
nowed, or in a Corn-stubble, or on the Greensword in the Morning and Evening
haunts of any Birds where they gather Worms. Where-ever placed it must be
carefully hid and concealed, as much ag may be, from the view of the Birds, as
if near a Barn-door by casting Chaff upon it, &c.”
¢ ‘*Shrape ’ signifies a place scraped, and so prepared for the catching of birds
which was apparently carried on in time of snow.
294 CORVID.E.
balance of Nature are seldom profitable, and it is said that
wherever Rooks or other birds of the kind have been effect-
ually destroyed, the result has shewn that the proceeding
was a mistake, and that agriculturists to save their crops
were compelled to reinstate the birds they had exterminated.*
Yet the experience thus gained is usually lost on all save
those immediately concerned in the affair, and accordingly
every now and then in some place or other, but mostly in
Scotland, agitation on the subject prevails.| This occasion-
ally leads to a more or less general persecution being ordered
and for a time carried on, but it frequently happens that the
landlord is better advised than his tenants, and after the
first outbreak of discontent his influence contrives that their
destructive efforts shall gradually cease.
The food of the Rook, as already shewn, consists prin-
cipally of worms and insects}, which, from the numbers of
the birds, are consumed to an enormous extent. But its
diet is extremely varied, and almost any other kind of animal
matter, even carrion, fishes and small birds and mammals are
acceptable, besides many vegetable products. Newly-sown
erain§ until it has sprouted well above the ground requires
watching, and ripe corn, especially if laid by the wind or
when eut and in sheaves, sometimes suffers severely from the
* Though reference to instances of this kind is made by many writers, the
Editor is unable to find any document in which the details of a single case are
satisfactorily given: the nearest approach to one is perhaps Mr. C. J. Cox’s note
(Zool. p. 8953).
ft Such a movement was excited in the South-west of Scotland in 1838, but it
seems to have been allayed by the late Sir J. Stuart-Menteath by a pamphlet
entitled ‘Farmers v. Rooks’ which the Editor however has not seen. He has
been more fortunate, thanks to Mr. Harvie Brown, in regard to a correspondence
which arose in 1844 between Mr. Hog of Newliston and his tenantry. In the
former controversy Selly, and in the latter Waterton, took part.
t Melolontha solstitialis, Phyllopertha horticola, several species of Agriotes,
Agrotis segetum and A. caclumutionis, and Tipula oleracea may be specially
named.
§ Yet there is much truth in Jesse’s remark that when the ploughman and the
sower are at work in the same field, the former will be followed by a train of
Rooks, while the latter will be unattended, and his grain remain untouched.
However the castings of Rooks, found under the trees they frequent, prove by the
husks they contain that these birds do eat corn, and sometimes a good deal of it.
ROOK. 295
depredations of this bird. Perhaps however the potato-crop
is that which is commonly most injured by it, unless care be
taken to drive off the marauders both in the planting-season
and when the tubers are mature. Acorns, beechmast and
berries also contribute to the Rook’s support, and when oppor-
tunity offers fruits, especially cherries and walnuts, are often
taken, as are fir-cones for the larve they contain. In hard
frosts it will attack turnips, but its object seems to be as
much the grubs by which they are frequently infested as the
plants themselves. Much has been said of its egg-stealing
propensity, which indeed cannot be denied, but it seems to be
chiefly indulged in during droughts, when the scanty herbage
leaves exposed the nests of many birds that breed on the
ground ; and it is certain that, if Rooks were half so destruc-
tive to game as many people think, hardly a covey of Par-
tridges would be hatched. Among the minor supplies of the
Rook may be mentioned the caterpillars which occasionally
infest the foliage of oaks, the galls (Zool. s.s. p. 3628)
formed beneath the leaves of the same trees, and, as Mr.
Knox informs the Editor, may-flies drifted by the wind to a
river-bank.
The Rook chiefly inhabits wooded and cultivated districts.
In autumn the rookery is generally frequented for some
days by the birds belonging to it, and they are seen sitting
on or about the old nests, occasionally carrying sticks, as
though intent on breeding, while hardly a year passes but,
in one part of the country or another, matters proceed so far
that eggs are laid and hatched at that season. According to
Jesse, the unpublished papers of Gilbert White mention a
nest with young in it on Noy. 26th. Sir C. Anderson wrote
the Author word that in 1817 a pair of Rooks had a nest
with eggs at Lea near Gainsborough in the same month,
and like information was received from Mr. Rodd as regards
Cornwall in 1836. So many similar cases have since been
recorded that enumeration of them is needless. It seems a
mistake to term them, as is often done, instances of late
breeding: they should rather be considered premature, since
the breeding-season must be held to be ended by the annual
VoL. II. 2 Q
296 CORVIDE.
moult, which takes place in July. Very early in the year,
sometimes in January, but oftener in the next month, the
birds return to their nests, which are usually placed in the tops
of tall trees*, half a dozen or more being frequently built on
the same treet, but for a few weeks little is done beyond com-
pleting the noisy ceremonies of courtship and taking posses-
sion of sites. About the second week in March, the work of
repairing, building and furnishing is begun in earnest, and
is carried on amid bursts of uproar that at times arise from
various causes, but chiefly from attempts made by the birds
to rob one another of materials ; notwithstanding that while
a nest is in progress, one of the proprietors nearly always re-
mains at home to guard it, the other fetching whatever may
be next wanted for the structure. It has been repeatedly
noticed, that when a pair of Rooks attempt to build in a
tree previously unoccupied, and at a distance from the main
body, the rest often destroy the nest; but the motive which
prompts these and other curious acts observable in the habits
of the community cannot be safely interpreted. The Rook’s
nest is about two feet in external diameter, and is formed of
sticks and twigs lined with straws, grass and fibrous roots,
as well as wool and other soft materials. The eggs, from
four to six in number, are quite indistinguishable from
Crows’, though perhaps generally rather smaller.
During incubation, the loud disturbances that had hitherto
from time to time prevailed almost wholly cease, and com-
parative quiet reigns in the rookery. The male feeds the
female constantly, and occasionally takes her place on the
* Instances however are not wanting of lower sites being chosen, especially
where high trees are scarce. Mr.Stevenson mentions nests in laurustinus bushes
and in a dwarf ilex. Mr. Cordeaux has known them in pollard willows, on an
apple-tree not more than seven feet from the ground and in a rough hedge.
At Dunipace, in 1878, according to Mr. Harvie Brown, some birds bred in low
holly-bushes, and a nest is recorded (Zool. p. 9626) which was built on the ground.
+ In some cases the number is far greater and the clusters present an extraordi-
nary appearance. Macgillivray mentions three trees in one rookery that bore
respectively twenty-six, twenty-five and twenty-three nests. In the ‘ Monthly
Magazine’ (xxvii. p. 804) for April 1809 it is said that a single ash-tree, then
recently blown down, at Barton-on-Humber used to bear on an average one
hundred nests, constituting the entire rookery.
ROOK. 297
eges. Both birds labour incessantly to collect food for their
young when hatched, and may be seen early and late convey-
ing it with distended mouth, for the dilatable skin under the
tongue, common to most Passerine birds, is in this species,
from being bare of feathers and of a whitish colour, rendered
particularly conspicuous. The young are fledged about the
middle of May, and then leave the nest for the nearest
branches, on which they sit, occasionally trying their powers
in short trips from bough to bough. About the end of that
month or the beginning of June, they are able to follow their
parents to the fields, where they are still fed for a time, but
soon learn to get their own living. The nest-trees are then
in most cases deserted for some time, and all the members
of the rookery roost together night after night in any con-
venient wood, whence at an early hour they repair in flocks
to their feeding-grounds. As the day draws on the birds
break up into smaller parties and range widely in their
ceaseless search for victual. Whenever the main body are
feeding, or otherwise engaged on the ground, two or three
individuals are generally seen posted, like sentinels, in trees
close by, whose note of caution or alarm is perfectly under-
stood by the rest, and surprise is thereby avoided. Towards
evening the scattered bands gradually collect in some par-
ticular spot, until the whole body is once more united.
Those that have fared the best arrive earliest at the meeting-
place, which may be an open field or a clump of high trees,
and are joined by the rest according to the success they have
found. All sit gravely, and but little noise is heard as they
assemble. Shortly before sunset some signs of impatience
are shewn, and an occasional movement is made by a few
restless birds who sweep round over the others and alight in
anew position. Suddenly a loud rush of wings announces
the general rising, and off goes the entire multitude with
slow and measured flight on their return homewards. Mostly
silent hitherto or only by chance uttering a note, as the birds
near the roosting-place all find their voices, and reaching it,
the air is filled with the tumult of sounds that bursts from
so many throats, the Daws that have been their almost con-
298 CORVID.
stant companions during the day adding their share to the
babel. Then occasionally follows one of the strangest sights
that an observer can witness. Mounted to a very great
height the Rooks will suddenly let themselves drop headlong,
twisting as they fall, to within a few feet of the trees or of
the ground, when they recover themselves and glide onwards.
One after another, as though they had all gone mad, they
precipitate themselves in this wonderful way, some of them
wheeling round and rising again to perform the feat a second
time. The indulgence of this very curious habit is com-
monly held to portend wind, but the belief, like that in many
other supposed prognostications of the weather by birds, is
probably erroneous. The motive however which urges the
Rooks is wholly unknown, and all that can be reasonably
concluded is that they delight in this performance.* Most
usually they content themselves by soaring and circling
over the trees for a short time and then perching, but this
last is not accomplished quietly or quickly, and it is generally
dusk before all have found a place, while after nightfall,
especially when the moon is shining, belated foraging par-
ties come trooping in, and their arrival always produces a
certain amount of disturbance.
Besides the Rooks which stop with us all the year, this
country certainly receives in autumn the visits of some
foreigners, and it is hardly to be doubted that a portion of
our natives emigrate at the same season, and join the large
bands that in winter repair to the south of Europe. The
number of those that leave us, which by the analogy of other
species we may infer are mainly birds of the year, is perhaps
not very large, for the general practice of shooting the
‘‘branchers”’—as the young on quitting the nest are called—
in May and June greatly reduces the surplus population,
the amount of which, equally with the supply of food, controls
* Waterton explains it as being merely the shortest way of effecting a descent
from the great height the birds have reached, but this can hardly be so since
they constantly return at the same elevation while the performance is gone
through comparatively seldom, and the fact that some of the birds having just
executed the movement will take the trouble of again mounting aloft and
repeating it testifies to its voluntary nature.
ROOK. 299
the tendency to emigration. In long-continued frosts Rooks
suffer severely and are often put to the last shift to preserve
life. Foggy weather also, as Mr. J. B. Lawes, in an obliging
communication, has reminded the Editor, suspends their
usual operations, and they will then sit for hours, moping
and disconsolate, on or near their roosting-places, waiting
for the air to clear, for they have apparently only the sense of
sight to guide them to their distant feeding-grounds. The
speed, however, with which space can be traversed when
occasion needs is only to be appreciated by persons who have
witnessed a flock of these birds escaping from a Falcon.
Rooks, though less docile than most of the Crow-tribe,
can be tamed, and becoming attached to their owners will
learn many amusing tricks, that of imitating a variety of
cries and sounds among the rest. The ordinary note of the
Rook needs no description since it has given a word to the
English language, but according to the coincident action or
to the season of the year it has many modulations,* and
the soft crooning of the bird that is fondling its mate or
feeding its young is as different from the loud caw of the
same when mixing in the public life of the community as
sounds proceeding from one mouth well can be. Young
Rooks, taken from the nest, it may be remarked, should be
fed chiefly or wholly on animal food. Though they will readily
eat many vegetable products they cannot be reared on such
diet. New rookeries have been several times successfully
formed by placing Rooks’ eggs in the nests of Daws, who
make excellent foster-parents. The young birds will then
generally establish themselves in or near the place of their
birth if it be at all suitable to their requirements.
A large volume might easily be written on this species,
but even then its habits could be hardly described in full.
Each rookery seems to have some custom peculiarly its own.
In one the birds will roost in the nest-trees all the year,
in another they will seek their night-quarters at a great
distance, only visiting the rookery at certain seasons. In
* Rooks, as Gilbert White says, ‘‘in the breeding season, attempt sometimes
in the gaiety of their hearts to sing, but with no great success.”
300 CORVIDA.
one case the members of a rookery seem always to keep
together, in another they will disperse, forming two or more
bands which feed and roost widely apart, only meeting in
the breeding-season at their common tenement; while again,
it is not very rare for all the Rooks of the district, belonging
to many distinct settlements, to collect in autumn and pass
the winter in one grand convention. But besides these more
obvious differences, some of which doubtless depend on the
capabilities of the locality, many others may easily be ob-
served. In one rookery trees of several kinds will be used
alike, in another the nests are strictly confined to those of
the same species, or even to such of them as have the same
habit of growth; and so on with regard to minor details far
too numerous to mention in a work like the present. ) runs thus :—‘ Ther
lacken vnkynde faucons, gerfaucons, partrychis fesaunte,
Nyghtyngals & pyes, Ther lacken also Roo and bucke and
Tlespiles wontes and othir venymous bestes.”’
In 1578, Derricke, who wrote ‘The Image of Irelande’,
published in London in 1581, says—
No Pies to plucke the Thatch from house,
are breed in Irishe grounde :
But worse then Pies, the same to burne,
a thousande maic be founde +
* Higden’s words, as given by Prof. Churehill Babington in 1865 (Rolls Ed. i.
p. 338), are :—‘‘desunt hic degeneres faleones, quos laniarios vocant, desunt et
gyrofaleones, perdices, phasiani, pice et philomele. Caret quoque capreis
et damis, hericiis, putaceis et talpis et ceteris venenosis.’ This list of de-
ficiencies has largely benefited subsequent writers, and generally without acknow-
ledement on their part.
+ On the margin are the notes ‘* Trelande hath no Pyes breeding in it”, and
’
Better it were to haue Pyes the prowlers.’
PIE. 319
In 1589, one Robert Payne wrote ‘A Brife description of
Treland ’—the apparently unique copy of the second edition
of which was reprinted by Dr. Aquilla Smith among the
‘Tracts’ published by the Irish Archeological Society in
1841, and herein (i. no. 2, p. 14) we find it remarked that in
Treland ‘‘ There is neither mol, pye, nor carren crow”’. In
1617, Fynes Moryson was still able to repeat (Itinerary, pt.
iii. bk. iii. p. 160) ‘ Jreland hath neither singing Nightin-
gall, nor chattering Pye, nor vndermining Moule”; but in
1711, Dean Swift, writing in his ‘Journal’ to ‘ Stella”
(Esther Johnson) says (letter xxvi.), under date of July 9,
1711, of Wexford :—‘‘ magpies have been always there, and
no where else in Ireland, till of late years.”’* This state-
ment, though no doubt partly erroneous, points to the first
appearance of the bird in the south-east of the island.
K’eogh, in 1739, included it as an Irish species in his
‘ Zoologia Medicinalis’, assigning it (p. 61) a native name
‘‘Mageidipye” +; and Charles Smith, writing about 1746,
says (Antient and Present State &c. of Cork, i. p. 325),
* Hereon Ogilby writing to the Author says :—‘‘ It must be confessed that the
testimony afforded by this passage is not so explicitas could be wished. That the
Magpie existed always, or, in other words, was indigenous to the vicinity of Wex-
ford, and to no other part of the country, is scarcely credible, even if it were not
directly contradicted by the preceding qnotation from Derrick. That it might
have continued to be a local denizen for a considerable time after its introduction,
is more probable, and more in accordance with the habits of the bird: and this
circumstance of its locality probably gave origin to the popular idea expressed by
Swift, of its being indigenous to the county of Wexford. We may, however, con-
clude with greater certainty, for upon this point our authority is express, —that
it was only in the reign of Queen Anne that the bird began to spread geverally
over the kingdom ;—that is, at the same period as the introduction of Frogs ;
and indeed I have sometimes heard these two events spoken of traditionally as
baving been simultaneous. The town of Wexford is remarkable as having been
the first place of strength in the island which was reduced and colonised by the
English. Even to the present day the great majority of the inhabitants of that
part of the country are of English extraction; and it is not improbable that
their forefathers brought the Magpie with them from Eng!and, perhaps as a pet,
to put them in mind of their native land ; for it is scarcely possible that any
one would voluntarily introduce so mischievous an animal. At all events,
St. Patrick’s curse, which is said to rest so heavily on the whole tribe of serpents,
does not appear to have extended to Frogs and Magpies, for I know no part of
the world where both breeds thrive better or faster than in Jreland.”’
+ Dr, A. Smith hereon observes :—‘*‘ This evidently Anglo-Irish word, for we
VOUT Li. TL
320 CORVIDE.
that, thoueh then very common, it was unknown fifty years
before, while Rutty in 1772 observes :—‘‘It is a foreigner,
naturalized here since the latter end of K. James the IId’s
reign, and is said to have been driven hither by a strong
wind.” There is however a widely-spread belief in Ireland
that the Pie was imported into the country by the English out
of spite. At what precise date and under what circumstances
it first made its appearance we must remain in doubt, but
the bird is now unquestionably abundant enough in many
parts, and Capt. Clark-Kennedy informs the Editor that he
has counted more than seventy in a single field in Donegal.
To return to the geographical range of this bird, a matter
on which opinions are divided. It is very generally distri-
buted throughout the continent of Europe, for, though exam-
ples from the south of Spain present some slight variation ,*
hardly an ornithologist is now so bold as to say that we have
two species in this quarter of the globe. From information
obtained by Wolley in Lapland, it appears within the last
century to have been gradually pushing its way along the
coast and into the interior from one fishing-station or settler’s
house to the next, and it has now reached the vicinity of the
North Cape on the one side and far up most of the river basons
on the other. In the north-east of Russia it is not known
to extend beyond Cholmogory in the Government of Arch-
angel. It is found in the larger islands of the Mediter-
ranean from Sicily to Cyprus, as well as in Asia Minor, but
is nowadays wanting in Syria and Palestine, though given
by Russell as occurring about Aleppo in the last century.
RXiippell included it as being pretty plentiful in winter in
Lower Egypt, where later observers have failed to find it.
Further to the eastward the difficulty begins. Under various
names Pies from different parts of Asia have been described
as forming at least five distinct species+; but both Mr.
have no name for it in the ancient Trish language, favours the opinion held hy
our best informed naturalists, that this bird is of recent introduction into this
country.” The Welsh name seems to he Piogen and the Gaelic Pioghaid.
* They have the rump pure black and a bare spot behind the eye, in these
characters resembling the Pie of North-west Africa, Pica mauritanica ; ut that
has the postocular patch of a fine blue and the wings much shorter.
+ These are P. leucoptera from Turkestan and Tibet, P. bactriana from
PIR. 32]
Dresser and Mr. Sharpe, two of the most recent investiga-
tors of the subject—the one in his well-known ‘ Birds of
Europe’, and the other in his ‘Catalogue of the Birds
in the British Museum’ (ili. pp. 62—66)—agree in refusing
them that rank, though more or less doubtfully allowing the
Pica leucoptera of Central Asia to be a local race or sub-
species, while on the other hand Dr. Finsch considers it a
very good species *. With the possible exception then of the
undefined territory occupied by this form, we may conclude
that the greater part of the rest of Asia belonging to the
Palearctic Region, to about lat. 60° N. t—that is, from Persia
to Kamchatka and Japan—is occupied by our own species,
which also occurs throughout China, with its islands
Hainan t and Formosa. Crossing Behring’s Strait a Pie is
found inhabiting the western part of North America from
Alaska, and some of its outlying islands as Ounga and
Kodiak, as far south as Arizona, and stretching eastward
to the upper waters of the Missouri and Yellowstone. This
bird has been by many ornithologists regarded as a distinct
species under the name of Pica hudsonia, and much inge-
nuity has been exercised to establish that view; but none
of the differences assigned (cf. Pr. Max, Journ. fiir Orn.
1856, p. 204) seem to be constant, and even Messrs. Dresser
and Sharpe are at one in considering it specifically identical
with our own bird, the longitudinal range of which in the
northern hemisphere is therefore very extensive. §
Affchanistan, P. bottanensis from Bhotan, P. media from China and P. japonica
from Japan (cf. G. R. Gray, Hand-List, ii. p. 10). There is also Mr. Hodgson’s
P. tibetana (Ann. & Mag. N. H. ser. 2, iii. p. 203) which, according to Blyth
(Ibis, 1867, p. 36), should have no white on the scapulars, but herein there
seems to be some mistake.
* Tt is described by Mr. Sharpe (op. cit.) as being similar to P. rustica, ‘‘ but
having the white on the quills extended sometimes to the very tip of the inner
web, never reaching less than to 0°3 inch of the tip; on the throat the base of
the feathers white ; tail in adult bird coppery green.”’
+ Mr. Seebohm was informed of its occasional occurrence on the Jennesei so far
as 694°. As in Lapland it will probably extend its range as settlements increase.
t In Hainan, says Swinhoe, its introduction was effected about a.p. 1450—
a singular parallel to its appearance in Jreland some two hundred years later.
§ In California however there is what is often deemed a second species,
P. nuttalli, easily recognized by its yellow bill and the bare, yellow skin round
622 CORVIDAE.
The beak is black: the irides hazel: the head, neck and
back, black with a greenish gloss; rump generally greyish-
white; upper tail-coyerts black; scapulars pure white ;
upper wing-coverts and tertials of a fine shining blue,
tinged according to the light in which they are seen with
ereen; secondaries black, glossed with violet; primaries
black glossed with green and haying an elongated patch
of pure white, varying in extent, on the inner web of each ;
tail black but beautifully iridescent above, on the outer
web of all the side-feathers and on both webs of the
middle feathers, being richly glossed with greenish-bronze,
passing through purple at either end and tipped with violet-
black. Chin and throat black, the shafts of some of the
feathers shining greyish-white; upper part of the breast
black; the lower part of the breast, the belly, sides and
flanks, pure white ; thighs and lower tail-coverts black: legs,
toes and claws, black.
The size varies not inconsiderably but the average length
of a male is fully eighteen inches, of which the longest tail-
feathers often measure nearly eleven; the wing from the
carpal joint to the tip is about seven inches and a quarter :
the first primary only two inches and a half long; the
second about an ineh shorter than the third; the fourth,
fifth and sixth nearly equal in leneth, but the fifth is com-
monly the longest.
The female is smaller, the tail is shorter, and the plu-
mage less brilliant.
the eyes ; but as Prof. Baird has remarked (B. N. Am. p. 578) :—‘‘It is a very
serious question, whether the bird is anything more than a permanently yellow-
billed variety of the common bird.” Here may be noticed the very remarkable
fact that a Pie with a yellow beak has twice been seen in Great Britain, first by
Mr. Harvie Brown and Mr. J. G. K. Young in Stirlingshire, Feb. 23d, 1867
(Zool. 8.8. pp. 706, 877), and secondly, in the July following, by Mr. G. F.
Mathew near Buckfastleigh in Devon (op. c/t. p. 1016). Whether these birds
were accidental varieties of our own form, or imported examples, and still more
whether, notwithstanding the wide distance of the two localities, the same indi-
vidual was twice seen, must remain open questions; but the accuracy of the
observation in neither case almits of doubt. A specimen curiously discoloured,
even to its bill, is mentioned by Maegillivray (Br. B. i. p. 365); and a Daw
with a yellowish bill has been known for more than two hundred and fifty years
(Schwenckfeld, Theriotroph. Siles. p. 305).
JAY, ao
PASSERES. CORVID A.
GARRULUS GLANDARIUS (Linnzeus*),
THE JAY.
Garrulus glandarius.
GARRULUS, Brissont. Beak shorter than the bead, hard, stout and compressed,
straight at the base, sharp at the edges, commissure straight. Nostrils basal,
hidden by stiff feathers directed forwards. Feathers of the crown long and
erectile. Wings moderate, rounded ; the first primary short and not attenuated,
the fourth, fifth and sixth, nearly equal, and one of them the longest in the wing.
Yail moderate and slightly rounded. Feet strong, tarsus longer than the middle
toe, to which the outer toe is united at its base ; claws stout, curved, and sharp.
THe Jay is a handsome bird, still well known in most of
the wooded districts of England, though far less numerous
than formerly. More arboreal in its habits than the other
members of its family which constantly abide with us, it
* Corvus glandarius, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 156 (1766).
+ Ornithologie, ii. p. 46 (1760).
a oe | CORVID.E.
prefers the shelter and security of thick coverts, never fre-
quenting the open country, and rarely seen on the ground
unless beneath trees or bushes, where it finds its chief
sustenance, which consists for the greater part of the year of
worms, insects and slugs, such kinds of berries or fruit as
are in season, and especially nuts, beech-mast and acorns.
These last it frequently stores in chinks of the bark of
trees, hides under fallen leaves, or buries in the earth, not,
as has often been said, in hoards, but separately, as con-
venience or fancy may direct. Generally shy and wary in
summer, tempted by cherries, strawberries, plums and pease,
it boldly makes inroads into our orchards and gardens, and
unquestionably will, if permitted, devour or carry off no small
portion of the crops; but, in most cases, the plunder can
be prevented by nets, or where the ground is too extensive
for their use, the marauders can generally be kept off by a
few gunshots, though should they still persist in their
depredations the death of two or three and the exposure of
their bodies will effectually stop the visits of the survivors.
However, the most serious charge brought against the Jay
is that of rifling the nests of other birds, and, though the
extent of its egg-sucking and chick-killing propensity is
doubtless greatly exaggerated, its effect is to make an
enemy of every gamekeeper, and no mercy is shewn to the
race, recourse being had to any device that will lessen its
numbers, as the dismal array of decaying carcases that dis-
figures many a pleasing glade testifies. Consequently in
many parts of the country the Jay has been almost extir-
pated, and were it not for its wandering disposition and its
extraordinary caution during the breeding-season, it would
soon cease to exist in England. Noisy as is the bird in
autumn and winter, when spring draws on it becomes almost
silent, and the detection of its presence by any sound it may
utter is then almost impossible, so that a pair of Jays or
more may take up their abode even in a moderately small
wood or plantation without their presence being suspected
by any save the most attentive observer. The appearance of
a Fox or Cat, however, dispels this cautious behaviour and
JAY. O20
produces for a time a scolding outery the meaning of which
is unmistakable to those who are alive to country-sounds.
The Jay seldom builds its nest above twenty feet from the
ground, preferring tall coppice or a bush in a high hedge-
row, while occasionally one of the lower branches of a large
tree, if sufficiently leafy to afford concealment will be chosen.
The nest is cup-shaped, open at the top, consisting of a large
platform of short sticks and twigs, thickly lined with fine
roots very neatly interwoven and sometimes intermixed with
a few grasses.* Towards the end of March or early in April
the hen lays from four to seven eges of a greenish-white, so
closely minutely and thickly freckled all over as to seem
suffused with light olive, and almost presenting the appear-
ance of gigantic eggs of the Sedge- Warbler ; but the markings
are sometimes gathered into a zone. They measure from
1°38 to 1:16 by from :95 to °85 in.
The young follow their parents for some weeks after
leaving the nest, but subsequently their practice varies
greatly in different localities, depending doubtless on the
supply of food obtainable. In certain districts the family
party will keep together for the greater part of the winter,
but most generally the young seem to quit the place of their
birth, and to form small bands which wander to and fro
throughout the autumn and winter. In the fall of the year
this country, and especially its eastern parts, is commonly
visited by a large number of Jays which have probably been
bred abroad, and from them our stock is very likely replen-
ished. Sheppard and Whitear have recorded an observation
of the arrival at this season near the coast of Suffolk of a
flight of Jays, consisting of some thousands, but the incident
on so large a scale must be regarded as out of the common way.
Brought up from the nest, Jays soon become very tame
and are amusing captives, thriving best on a mixed diet,
though preferring animal food. In addition to their natural
harsh screech, which, so “‘ discordant, heard alone,” always
brings pleasure to the ear of a true naturalist, they speedily
learn many other notes, and indeed there is scarcely any
* The nest bas been found in the hole of a tree (Journ. tf. Orn. 1861, p. 470.)
326 CORVID”.
sound that comes in their way which they will not imitate
more or less exactly—from the human voice to the noise of
any instrument, a saw for example. This mocking faculty
is also possessed by wild birds of the species, though oppor-
tunities of listening to its exercise do not readily occur to
most ornithologists, and the bleat of a lamb, the neigh of a
horse, the mew of a cat, the bark of a dog, the wail of a
Kite or Buzzard (in the days when Kites and Buzzards still
inhabited our woods), the hoot of an Owl, the crow of a Cock
or the cackle of a Hen, have been heard by persevering or
favoured observers to be faithfully rendered by the Jay.
These imitations are chiefly practised in early spring, and,
interposed with sounds that suggest articulate pronunciation,
as well as ejaculations of a kind quite indescribable in words,
which are connected by soft and melodious nofes, are intro-
duced into what may fairly be called the song of the species.
But to hear such a performance is the reward of those only
that know how to approach the timid and wary musician,
who during its execution is embowered among leafy shades,
and is ever on the alert to take alarm at the slightest un-
wonted rustle of a bough, the crack of a twig, or at a footfall
that is not absolutely inaudible.
The flight of the Jay seems to be laborious, the bird
making its way with an undulating progress and frequent
flappings of its wings. Generally it is seen only when flitting for
a short distance from tree to tree, but its migrations prove
that it is capable of sustaining a very long voyage through
the air. On the ground it moves chiefly if not entirely by
hopping, neyer, so far as has been recorded, walking or
running like most of the Corvide. When perched on a
tree and thinking itself unobserved, its gesticulations are
free and lively. The head is constantly turned from side to
side, the crest alternately raised and lowered, the wings at
times drooped and then drawn up and concealed by the
long loose feathers of the flanks, the tail elevated and
depressed, and swung now to the right and now to the left.
He, however, who would watch the actions of the Jay, must
act as cautiously as has been prescribed in the case of him
JAY. 327
who would hear its varied utterances ; for, on perceiving the
human presence, the bird instantly shifts to a thick bough
if such be near, or, if compelled to remain exposed, becomes
motionless and silent—looking like a dead stump, and when
the intruder’s nearer approach urges a change of position it
drops as though shot into the brushwood beneath, making
its escape thence in some unexpected direction.
As before observed, the Jay is less common in England
than formerly, though Mr. Cordeaux notes its increase of
late years in Lincolnshire; but in Scotland, according to
the very careful researches of Mr. Lumsden (Scott. Nat. iii.
p- 233), it has decreased of late years even more rapidly
than in England, being in all counties south of the Gram-
pians but local, and in few anything but rare. North of that
chain it seems only to appear as a strageler. There is no
evidence of its occurrence in Orkney, and but one is recorded
in Shetland. All Mr. Lumsden’s authorities concur in
saying that formerly the Jay was much more common in
Scotland, and that its decrease is attributable to its destruc-
tion by gamekeepers*. In Ireland it seems now to be
indigenous but in the southern half of the island, and even
there to be very local and far from numerous, though there
is reason to suppose, from the evidence adduced by Thompson,
that it once inhabited and bred in the northern counties.
In Norway and Sweden it seems to travel so far as lat 64° N.,
but it occasionally extends far within the Arctic Circle,
Wolley haying obtained it in autumn near Muonioniska. It
inhabits most parts of Finland, and is said to be resident
all the year round even at Kajana, and thence it is found
across the forest region of Russia to the Ural Mountains,
where it is replaced by the nearly-allied but more deeply-
tinted Garrulus brandti.} Further to the south the line
of demarcation between G. glandarius and the kindred G.
krynicki, which seems to be a distinctly recognizable form,
* But what also causes the death of a very large number of Jays is the value
set upon its pretty blue feathers by fishermen for making artificial flies.
+ Herr Sabanaeff informed Messrs. Sharpe and Dresser that the Jay found in
Perm, Kasan and Simbirsk is an intermediate ‘‘ species’? between G. brandti
and G. glandarius.
VoL. II. Uw
328 CORVID,
can hardly yet be drawn, and the elder Von Nordmann says
he has seen in the Crimea individuals intermediate between
the two. The common Jay, however, inhabits the forest-
districts to the west of the Black Sea to Constantinople,
and thence throughout Epirus and Greece. Col. Drum-
mond-Hay found it breeding in Crete. It inhabits nearly
all suitable districts throughout the European Continent,
and most of its islands*, as Sicily and Sardinia, but in the
south of Spain, as at Gibraltar, it is only a winter-visitant,
and it does not appear to cross the Mediterranean to Africa t
—Malta even being outside its range—and its place in
Algeria is taken by the very distinet G. cervicalis.
The beak is blackish horn-colour: the irides very pale
blue: on each side of the gape there is a black patch an
inch long; face, forehead and crown dull-white tinged with
buff, each feather tipped with black, which, as the feathers be-
come elongated, takes the form of a median stripe, until behind
the line of the eyes these stripes pass into purplish-cinnamon
curiously barred with a distinct shade of the same colour ;
the nape, scapulars and back, cinnamon; wing-coverts
barred with very pale blue, deepening into bright cobalt-blue
and then into black, across the exposed part of the web,
the hidden part being nearly uniform black ; primaries dusky
black, externally edged with dull white; secondaries velvet
black; each with a well-defined white patch, often tinged
with blue, on the basal half of the outer web; outer tertials
velvet-black, indistinctly barred with blue and black at the
base of the outer web; inmost tertials rich chestnut; rump
and upper tail-coverts pure white; tail-feathers blackish-
brown, indistinctly barred with pale blue at the base; chin
and throat dull white; breast and belly pale cinnamon
deepening in colour on the flanks; vent and lower tail-
coverts dull white; wings and tail-feathers beneath smoke-
erey: legs, toes and claws, pale brown.
The whole length varies from thirteen inches and three-
* Mr. Cecil Smith excludes it from his recent ‘ Birds of Guernsey ’.
t+ Unless, indeed, the G. minor described from Algeria by J. P. Verreaux be,
as Mr. Dresser states, the young of G. glandurius,
JAY, 329
quarters to fourteen inches and a half or even more. From
the carpal joint to the end of the wing, seven inches and an
eighth ; the first primary about two inches and a half long ;
the second about four inches and an half, and nearly an
inch shorter than the third; the fourth, fifth and sixth
nearly equal, but the fifth longest.
There is little difference in the plumage of the sexes, and
the young also resemble the adults, but have brown irides.
The expediency of dividing the Linneus genus Corvus
has long been recognized and the genera here adopted are
accepted by nearly all modern systematists. The Editor is
inclined to regard the Corvide as the most highly-organized
family of the Order Passeres—themselves the highest type
of Bird-structure. In most of the genera of this family,
the first plumage of the young resembles that of the adult,
the occasional exceptions found in the Rook being perhaps
explicable on the hypothesis before suggested (supra page
303); but in that view the genus next to be described must
be deemed less developed and differentiated, retaining as do
most of its members that unmistakable mark of youth—a
spotted plumage—to the end of their life.
} ai
i
t
330 CORVIDE.
PASSERES., CORVIDA,
NUCIFRAGA CARYOCATACTES (Linnzeus *).
THE NUTCRACKER.
Nucifraga caryocatactes.
Nvucirraca, Brissont.—Beak about as long as the head, hard, stout and
straight, dilated at the base ; both mandibles terminating obtusely, the maxilla
prolonged and slightly depressed at the tip. Nostrils basal, round, hidden by
stiff feathers directed forwards. Feathers of the crown short. Wings moderate
and rather pointed; the first primary the shortest, the fourth, fifth and sixth
nearly equal, but the fifth longest. Tail moderate and nearly square. Feet
stout ; tarsus longer than the middle toe, to which the outer toe is united at the
base ; claws stout, curved and sharp.
THe Nurcracker, though not uncommon in some parts
of Europe, occurs in this country so rarely that the examples
recorded as obtained may be here enumerated. The first
* Corvus caryocatactes, Linnzeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 157 (1766).
+ Ornithologie, ii. p. 46 (1760).
NUTCRACKER. Soe
known is said by Pennant (Br. Zool, Ed. 1, p. 78 note, and
Ed. 2, ii. p. 488) to have been shot at Mostyn, in Flintshire,
October 5th, 1753. Latham, in 1781 (Synops. i. p. 401),
added a second instance, having seen the mutilated skin of
one obtained in Kent. In 1813*, Montagu mentioned one
in the collection of Mr. Comyns, which had been shot in
North Devon in August 1808. Another was recorded by Moore
(Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 2, i. p. 179) as shot near Washford
Pyne Moor, in the same county, in 1829, by Mr. W. Tucker.
On September 26th, 1844, one, now in Mr. Borrer’s collec-
tion, was killed at Littlington in Sussex (Zool. p. 868), and
on October 80th of the same year, another, which passed
into Mr. Gurney’s possession, was shot at Rollesby, near
Yarmouth (op. cit. pp. 824, 1020, 1873). About 1847 one
is said (op. cit. p. 2914) to have been killed on Clandon
Common in Surrey, and early in October, 1853, one was
obtained near Yarmouth (op. cit. pp. 4096, 4124). Mr.
Foster recorded (op. cit. p. 6809) one killed at Wisbech,
October 8th, 1859, and on the same day of 1864, one was
obtained at Gorleston in Suffolk (op. cit. p. 9405). In the
autumn of 1865, according to Mr. Harting, one was killed
near Wakefield, and on November 6th, 1868, one near
Christchurch (Zool. s. s. pp. 1481, 1511).t
* In the same year (1813) Graves figured (Br. “Orn. il.) a specimen from
Bullock’s Museum, said to have been shot in Devon and given to the proprietor
by a Mr. Harrison. No notice of it, however, is taken in the ‘ Guide’ to that
collection nor in the catalogue of its contents when sold a few years later. The
anonymous compiler (believed by Mr. Harting to have been Mr. James of
Manaccan) of a list of the birds of Cornwall and Devon (Monthly Mag. xxvi.
pt. ii. p. 484, for Dec. 1808) mentions one seen by him in autumn in one of those
counties. Whether it was the specimen recorded by Montagu is uncertain.
+ In 1846, Messrs. Gurney and Fisher mentioned (Zool. p. 1315) an example
‘‘taken some years since at Southwold, in Suffolk,” but the Editor, without
expressing any doubt as to the statement, is compelled to remark that he has
failed in obtaining any confirmation of it. He is however informed by Sir E.
Kerrison that he has had a specimen in his possession for about forty years,
which he believes to have been killed at Oakley Park in the same county. An
example is said (Zool. p. 4168) to have occurred near Whitehaven in Cumberland,
but the list which includes it contains so many extraordinary assertions that
belief in this particular statement may await the adducement of further
evidence, the more so since it is not declared whether the example was procured
Soe CORVIDA.
As regards Scotland, Macgillivray says that a specimen
then in the Museum of the University of Edinburgh was
said to have been shot in that kingdom, and that there
was another in the collection of Mr. Arbuthnot at Peter-
head, which last is alleged by the author of the Statistical
Account of that parish to have been killed there.* Neither
of these statements can be fully accepted, and the only occur-
rence of the species in Scotland which is free from doubt
would seem to be that of an example sent to Mr. M‘Leay
of Inverness, having been shot, according to Mr. Gray, at
Invergarry in that county in October, 1868. The Nut-
cracker cannot be announced with any certainty as having
been observed in Ireland. Templeton’s notes, quoted by
Thompson, mention one shot in Tipperary, but the
naturalist -last named put little faith in the statement,
and Mr. Watters does not even allude to it.
There is much likeness between the history of this
species and that of the Waxwing as before given (vol. 1.
page 523). The Nuteracker had been for centuries a well-
known bird in Western Europe, appearing at irregular
intervals, mostly in autumn or winter, sometimes in large
bands or even flocks, as in 1754, 1768, 1798, 1805, 1814,
or not. The species has been many times noticed ag seen in various parts of
England, and, though observers may in some cases have been mistaken, the
records deserve mention. The first of them relates to a bird watched for some
time through a telescope near Bridgewater in the autumn of 1805, by Mr. Anstice,
whom Montagu regarded as an accurate observer. The second bird was observed
in Netherwitton Wood, in the autumn of 1819, by Admiral Mitford, the
coadjutor of Selby, who records the incident. The third was seen on the banks
of Hooe Lake in the parish of Plymstock by the late Mr. Thomas Bulteel, as
Mr. Rodd informed the Author. Newman (Letters of Rusticus, p. 159) notices
two seen in Surrey—one closely watched by Mr. R. Haines in Peperharow Park,
the other by Mr. W. Kidd near Guildford. Mr. Rowe (B. Devon, p. 28) is
pretty sure he saw one near Saltram in October, 1862, and Mr. T. C. Melville
says (Zool. s. s. p. 3689) he saw one near North Petherton in Somerset, August
4th, 1873; while the late Lord Tweeddale told the Editor of one supposed to
have been seen at Yester in Kast Lothian in December, 1876.
* Mr. R. Gray, who in 1869 examined this collection in the Peterhead
Museum, could find no trace of the specimen, The statement, like many others
touching Zoology in the same compilation, very possibly originated in a mistake.
Macgillivray is frequently said to have asserted that the specimen he described
was also killed in Scotland, whereas he did nothing of the kind.
NUTCRACKER. 300
1821, 1822, 1886, 1844, 1847 and 1868—the year 1844
being especially remarkable in this respect; but little or
nothing had been ascertained in regard to its breeding-
habits or its home, for nearly all of those that came into
the hands of Ornithologists were evidently stragglers, and
were perhaps wanderers from afar. Great curiosity was
therefore felt for the discovery of its true haunts and
habits, and even now, as will immediately appear, that
curiosity cannot said to be satisfied, though a laborious
monograph * of the species, recently published, clears up
much that had been hitherto obscure, by compendiously
bringing together nearly all the information that could be
obtained on the subject, and has been freely laid under
contribution in the following pages.
During the breeding-season the Nutcracker undoubtedly
prefers retired forests in which conifers prevail, if they do
not grow alone, and as in Central and Southern Europe
such forests only exist in mountainous districts, the belief
arose that mountainous districts were needed to afford the
species a fitting abode. But this is not wholly true, and
it will be found as much at home in the woods of Southern
Scandinavia—in Dalsland and Bornholm, where there are
no hills of great height—as in those which clothe the
rugged sides of the Alps or other notable ranges. But the
particular spots which it chooses for the business of propaga-
tion are of comparatively small extent, though they occur
discontinuously over a great part of Europe, and we may
hence conclude that, notwithstanding the success of recent
researches, there is yet much more to be learnt of the Nut-
cracker’s economy. The older accounts of its mode of
nidification have proved to be mere suppositions and very
wide of the mark. Among them, however, there is only
* ¢Der Tannenheher (Nucifraga carvocatactes.) Ein monographischer Versuch
von Victor Ritter von Tschusi-Schmidhofen.’ 4to, Dresden [1874]. Herr Vogel’s
able paper, ‘‘ Die Fortpflanzung des Tannenhihers in Jura Solothurns”’ in the
‘Bericht’ of the Natural History Society of St. Gall for 1871-72 (p. 156)
contains much of interest. The excellent account of this species in Mr. Dresser’s
‘Birds of Europe’ includes copious extracts from both these works as well as
others of hardly less importance.
"aye
334 CORVIDE.
need here to note the statement (since it found a place in
former editions of this work, and has been repeated by
compilers who have thence drawn their sole information)
that it nested in holes of trees, which like Woodpeckers
it excavated or enlarged for its purpose. That such a site
may yet be found cannot be denied, but hitherto all the
Nutcrackers’ nests, which the zeal and care of ornithological
explorers (now not a few in number) have discovered, were
placed on the boughs of trees, at a height of about twenty
feet from the ground. It is possible that in some cases
the birds themselves had not built the whole fabric, but
had availed themselves of an older structure which they
had repaired and adapted to their own use. It is now
admitted that Thienemann was the first to obtain a nest
of this species, but the year in which he did so is not
known, and that the late Abbé Caire in 1846 was the first
to procure its eggs, though no record of either fact was
published till long after. Even then so great was the
prevalent uncertainty that grave doubts continued to be
expressed by the best-informed ornithologists.* The chief
reason why the nest and eggs of the Nutcracker remained
so long unknown seems to be that, noisy and obtrusive as
it is for a great part of the year, it becomes, like the Jay,
silent and beyond measure shy as the pairing-season
approaches. In very early spring, ere the snow has fallen
from the trees or melted on the ground, and the forests it
frequents are yet difficult of access, it begins to prepare its
nest, and its full complement of eggs is laid, and the young
are often hatched, amid all the rigours of winter. In
Switzerland four nests have been found on the same 10th
* As regards our countrymen these doubts only began to be dispelled in 1862,
when a Nutcracker’s nest and fledgeling, obtained in Bornholm by HH. Erichsen,
Fischer and Theobald, of Copenhagen, were exbibited at a meeting of the Zoo-
logical Society (P. Z. S. 1862, p. 206). In the following year the gentlemen
just named found in the same wood, and the produce it would seem of the same
parents, a nest with newly-hatched young, and in 1864, three nests with eggs,
one set of which they with the greatest liberality transmitted, as they had the
first nest and one of its tenants, to the Editor (op. cit. 1867, p. 162). In 1862
also the discovery of Herr Schiitt, of which more presently, was made known to
English readers (Ibis, 1862, p. 365).
NUTCRACKER. 335
of March, each with four eggs, and in Bornholm the young
have been taken on 9th April. Yet one instance is on record
of eges being unhatched on the 17th of that month. Locality
seems hardly to affect the time of breeding, and the period
of incubation, which is said to be performed by the hen-
bird only, has been surmised to be from seventeen to
nineteen days.
Many nests of the Nutcracker have now been described,
but there seems to be no essential difference in their con-
struction. One in the Editor's possession is five or six
inches in thickness with an outside diameter of about a
foot and six inches across the interior. It is composed
outwardly of sticks and twigs of larch, spruce and birch,
all, as the swollen state of their buds shews, freshly
plucked, as is also the grass with which it is thickly lined.
A few bits of moss and lichen are present, but they seem
rather to have adhered to the other materials than to have
been intentionally added. In some nests a considerable
quantity of earth or rotten wood underlies the lining, which
occasionally consists of hair-like lichen. The eggs, generally
four but not unfrequently five in number, are white, slightly
tinged with bluish-green, sometimes nearly spotless but
usually sparsely freckled with pale olive- or ash-colour,
though occasionally these markings are numerous and
pretty evenly distributed over the whole surface. In size
they measure from 1°38 to 1:26 by from ‘97 to °93 in.*
Taking in order the European countries in which the
Nutcracker is known to be indigenous we may begin with
Norway, though here details are meagre. Herr Collett says
(Norges Fugle, p. 28), on the authority of Pastor Schiibeler
that it bred several times between 1840 and 1848 near
Porsgrund, and according to Dy. Printz that a nest was
found in 1854 at Land on the Rands Fjord—but no
* The caution of the late Mr. Hewitson in refusing to figure supposed eggs of
this bird has been amply justified by the fact that those offered to him, as
shewn by the description given of them, clearly belonged to some other species,
The first representation of a true Nutcracker’s egg seems to be that by Bedeker
pola} tas
(Journ. fiir Orn. 1856, Taf. i. fig. 1), but itis not good. The only trustworthy
figure published in England is Mr. Smit’s (P. Z. 8. 1867, pl. xv. fig. 2).
ViOERs TI. X X
aS 1O: CORVIDE.
specimen of the nest or ege, if taken, seems to have been pre-
served or described from either locality. As regards Sweden
Dr. Baldamus is said to have received in 1850, from Seania,
what subsequently appeared to be a true egg of this bird;
but the first identified nest, with small young and fragments
of egg-shells, was sent in 1868 from Hesselskog in Dalsland
to Herr Stenstrom, who in succeeding years got three more
nests with perfect eges, while in 1872 Herr Meves received
a nest with eggs from Wermland. In 1862 and the follow-
ing years the Danish island of Bornholm furnished HH.
Erichsen, Fischer and Theobald with the reward they had
been so long seeking and so well deserved.* In Germany
an empty nest, found by Thienemann in the Riesengebirge
many years ago and exhibited in the Museum at Dresden,
is believed, as before stated, to be the first authentic example
ever seen by a naturalist. According to Hintz (J. f. O.
L861, p. 469) a nest was found in the Biitower district
of Pomerania in 1860, and in 1862 Herr Schiitt obtained
three nests near Waldkirchen in Baden,* while in 1868 a
nest was found in the Nedlitzer district of Anhalt, an ege
from which came into Dr. Baldamus’s possession. In
Austria, according to Herr Grill (Verh, k.k. z.-b. Ver. 1858,
p. 427), a nest with young was found in 1858 in the
Langbaththale on the northern slopes of the Hollgebirge.
The reports of nests obtained in Hungary by Petényi have
been deemed unsatisfactory, but an egg obtained by Herr
Bielz from the South Carpathian mountains and sent in
1847 to Dr. Baldamus, from whom it passed into the Editor’s
keeping, seems to have been correctly assigned to this
species. In Styria the eggs from two nests, found in 1867
on the Hochanger Alp near Bruck, were sent by Dr. Fister
to Seidensacher, after whose death others were transmitted
from the same locality to various collectors, and in 1871
the Ritter V. von Tschusi-Schmidhoffen himself, and Dr.
Hanf, took each a nest on the Sirbitzkogel, at the height
of 4500 to 5000 feet above the sea, while two other nests
were taken the same season by Dr. Fiister near Bruck. In
* See foot-note on page 334,
NUTCRACKER. 337
Tyrol Herr Franz obtained no less than five nests at
Schlanders in 1864. At Tiefenkasten in the Grisons in
1867, Dr. Baldamus himself found two nests with fledged
young and a single egg, and six more nests were taken
between 1868 and 1872 in the Jura of Soleure—five of
them by Herr G. Vogel of Ziirich. To France however
belongs the merit of the earliest discovery of the eges of
the Nutcracker, for it was near Sanieres in the department
of the Lower Alps that Caire, as before said, obtained
its eggs in 1846, and from him specimens reached Dr.
Baldamus in 1848, while others came later, through his
means, to Bedeker and several German oologists, as well
as one, taken in 1858, to the Editor. There is no
doubt that many other localities in Europe, from Russia
to Sardinia (where Lord Lilford received positive assurance
of its breeding) and possibly Spain—since it has been
obtained in Estremadura—serve the Nutcracker as nesting-
stations, but the evidence above adduced may here suffice,
and any that is less positive be omitted for the present.
The young are fed partly on insects, which in summer and
autumn form with snails the chief diet of the adults also,
but, as winter comes on, the berries, nuts and seeds of forest-
trees become their staple sustenance, and whenever these
become scarce in the native haunts of the birds, they wander
far and wide in search of food, so that they occur irregularly
in most parts of the continent, though no examples have
yet been observed in Greece, Turkey or the Crimea. The
Nutcracker doubtless breeds in the forest-districts of Siberia,
for the young have been seen in the far east of that country.
It also occurs in Kamchatka, Northern China and Japan.
The flight of this bird is commonly said to be laboured
and only unwillingly prolonged in the open, yet Dr. Radde
states that he has seen small flocks rising and circling
aloft till they were almost out of sight, and then dropping
suddenly, one bird after another, to a tree-top, whence they
would, after a short time, renew their practice—much it
would seem after the manner in which Rooks perform their
strange aerial sports before described. Among trees the
338 COKVIDA.
Nutcracker is said to be very active, and, while on the wing,
to pluck the cones or nuts from the smaller boughs. It
then repairs to a larger branch and there, holding its booty
fast to the perch with one foot, skilfully picks out the seeds
from the former, or hammers the latter with its beak till the
shell is cracked and the kernel exposed.* But it also gets
a creat deal of its living from the ground, and the Author
was told by the late Mr. Dann that, at his residence in the
south of Sweden, he had watched family-parties of six or
seven Nutcrackers busily picking off and turning over the
moss and lichens growing on rocks for the sake of the
insects to be found beneath. The ordinary note of the
species 18 described as sounding like cré@h, cradh, or crit, cra,
but when alarmed it has a harsh cry which, by many, is
compared to that of the Mistletoe-Thrush, and the hen
when being fed by her mate utters a soft crooning noise.
Many persons have remarked on the resemblance of this
bird’s habits to those of the Jay. The old notion of its
affinity to the Woodpeckers seems to have originated with
theorists, and, while not borne out by those who have seen
most of it when alive, is absolutely refuted by its purely
Corvine structure when examined after death.
The beak is blackish horn-colour: irides brown: lores
and nasal coverts dull white; top of the head uniform
wmber-brown ; sides of the head, neck, scapulars, lesser wing-
coverts, and all the lower plumage to the vent, dark clove-
brown, each feather tipped by a white spot varying in shape
from linear on the head and throat to guttiform on the
back and sub-triangular beneath; greater wing-coverts and
remiges blackish-brown, some tipped with white, and most
of them glossed with bluish-green and purple on the
exposed surface, the sixth and seventh primaries having a
white patch on the inner web; rump uniform dark clove-
* The Author however noticed that a Nuteracker in the Zoological Gardens
was unable to crack nuts. Possibly the bird bad only a smooth perch, which,
besides heing an unsuitable anvil, would not afford it a steady fuothold. Mr.
Hancock has some interesting notes on the habits of one in confinement (Trams.
Northumb, and Durch. vi. p. 59).
NUTCRACKER. 339
brown ; upper tail-coverts umber-brown occasionally tipped
with white ; tail-feathers blackish-brown, glossed with green,
and exhibiting indistinctly the barring so characteristic of
the family, the middle pair narrowly, and the rest conspic-
uously, tipped with white, which occupies more space on
each feather approaching the outside, but is subject to much
individual variation as to extent; lower tail-coverts pure
white: legs, toes and claws, black.
The whole length varies from twelve inches and three-
quarters to fifteen and a quarter. From the carpal joint
to the end of the wing, six and seven-eighths to seven inches
and three-quarters ; the first primary is about an inch and
a half shorter than the second, which is three-quarters of
an inch shorter than the third; the fourth, fifth and sixth
about a quarter of an inch longer than the third.
The sexes do not differ outwardly. In the breeding-
season many of the white spots disappear or lessen, through
the wearing off of the feathers at the tip, and the brown of
the whole plumage becomes lighter. The nestling much
resembles its parents, even to the gloss on the wing-
feathers, but its colours are much less pure and distinct—
the brown being sooty, the spots larger and of a dirty white,
and the lower tail-coverts are smoky-white.
The difference in the length of the bill (which varies from
2°2 to 1°7 in.) first noticed by Klein in examples of the Nut-
cracker has led some to suppose that we had in Europe two
species—to the shorter-billed of which, presumably from
Scandinavia, the name Nucifraga brachyrhynchus was ap-
plied; but the best authorities are now persuaded that no
specific distinction can be made out, and that the length of
the bill does not depend upon locality. There is however
some ground for thinking it a sexual character, for males
seem to have this feature longer than females, and the case
of the New-Zealand ‘‘ Huia’’ (Heterolocha, formerly called
Neomorpha) has been cited as analogous. In the latter bird,
now said to belong to the Sturnide, the difierence, which
is much greater than in the Nuteracker, certainly is sexual,
but the male has the short and the female the long bill.
340 HIRUNDINID.®.
PASSERES., HIRUNDINID,
Hirunpo rustica, Linnus.*
THE SWALLOW.
Hirundo rustica.
Hrrunpo, Linncust.—Bill short, depressed, and very wide at the base, com-
missure straight. Nostrils basal, oval, partly closed by a membrane. Wings
with nine primaries, long and pointed. Tail deeply forked, of twelve feathers,
the outermost greatly elongated and abruptly attenuated. Legs and feet slender
and bare, toes rather long, three in front, one behind ; claws moderate.
‘‘THE SWALLOW,” says Davy, in his ‘ Salmonia,’ ‘‘is one
of my favourite birds, and a rival of the nightingale; for he
cheers my sense of seeing as much as the other does my
sense of hearing. He is the glad prophet of the year—the
harbinger of the best season: he lives a life of enjoyment
amonest the loveliest forms of nature: winter is unknown
to him; and he leaves the green meadows of England in
autumn, for the myrtle and orange groves of Italy, and for
* Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 343 (1766). + Loe. cit.
p ]
SWALLOW. 341
the palms of Africa.” This is a brief, but a true outline of
the Swallow’s history, told in detail by so many authors,*
but by none with greater success than by Gilbert White, whose
monograph of the species and of what were then deemed the
other British Hirundinide, as regards this country, exceeds
in minute accuracy the accounts given by all others, most of
which are overladen by a mass of nearly useless observations.
The Swallow is known to all as a periodical visitor to
Europe, and more records are preserved of its first appearance
in spring, than of that of any other bird. These seem to
give the first week of April as the average time of its
arrival in this country, but it takes several days—how many
cannot be stated—to reach the northern parts of our island,
while the lapse of a fortnight may be safely reckoned ere
the great body of returning wanderers begins to follow the first
comers, and the influx continues for at least a month. In
looking for the Swallow’s appearance it must be borne in mind
that certain spots in nearly every district are yearly visited
some days sooner than other places, even in close vicinity.t
The spots so selected are not always the most sheltered, and
indeed differ apparently in nothing from the surrounding
country, yet they must possess some advantages, possibly as
regards the supply of food, or perhaps of a kind at which we
can hardly guess. The character of the season must also
be taken into consideration, but this seems to have far less
influence than is commonly supposed, though it often affects
the birds most disastrously after they have reached this
country. Unlike most of our spring visitors, the Sylviide
°
e
especially, the males of which usually precede the females
* Mr. Ruskin is one of the latest writers who has taken this bird for his
theme, and he has discoursed upon it with his wonted force of expression.
Unfortunately an imperfect knowledge of facts renders his eloquent essay (Love's
Meinie, Lecture 2. The Swallow. Keston : 1878) as ridiculous to the expert as it
is misleading to the tiro, while the charge lodged against the Author of the
present work will be seen by every ornithologist, who is also a French scholar, to
be utterly groundless.
+ This is true of nearly all migratory birds, and is one of the chief causes
that invalidate so many of the countless published records of their supposed
first. appearance, since casual observers are seldom aware of the fact, and few of
those who regularly watch the arrival of our visitors make allowance for it.
342 HIRUNDINID&.
by some days, the Swallow generally comes to us in pairs,
though several or many pairs may be in company, and where
a single bird only is seen the presumption may be fairly
entertained that it has lost its mate through some accident of
travel.
Arrived in this country the Swallow at once attaches itself
to the habitations of man, mostly preferring such as are
near water since they probably supply more plentifully the
winged insects on which it almost solely subsists.* These are
sought in the air nearly all day, for the power of flight this
species enjoys enables it to remain on the wing for hours
in succession with little apparent fatigue. It is one of the
earliest birds to awake in the morning and few are so late
to take rest. Towards the end of April or the beginning of
May, should the season be favourable, the site of the nest is
chosen, and in most cases resort is had to the place that in
former years has served the same purpose, the old structure,
if still remaining, being repaired and refurnished. In many
parts of the country the nest is frequently built inside a
chimney, at some five or six feet from the top, advantage
being taken of any irregularity of surface to obtain support
for the foundation ; but in other districts such a situation is
rarely or never selected, and the Swallow will establish itself
in the disused shaft of a mine, or an old well, while sheds,
barns, or any buildings with open roofs, to which access can
be constantly obtained, are almost everywhere occupied, the
nest being then commonly placed on a wall-plate, girder or
any horizontal beam. A favourite site is afforded underneath
bridges of wood or iron, as well as clock-turrets, and, though
much more rarely, the nest may be built beneath the eaves
of a cottage. So familiar is the bird with man, that it will
often enter inhabited houses, if a window always kept open,
a broken pane of glass, or a perforated shutter give it free
admission, and begin its nest on a shelf, ledge or any projec-
tion that may serve as a buttress, for without some such
inducement the little mason seldom commences its opera-
‘In the spring Swallows seem to feed almost exclusively on gnats and
crane-flies, but in summer small beetles are very largely taken.
SWALLOW. 343
tions. Many more exceptional sites used by the Swallow
have been observed—a bracket, a picture-frame and a bell-
crank among others. A nest built on the wings and body of
a dead Owl, hanging from a rafter in a barn, as mentioned
by White, was long preserved in the Leverian Museum, and
afterwards became the Author's property,* while an instance
almost exactly similar is recorded by Thompson. The half-
open drawer of a table, and the loop of a chain in a boat-
house, have equally given the needful accommodation, as well
as ships, from Cleopatra’s galley (according to Plutarch)
to the steam-tug of our own times, if we may believe news-
paper stories ; but perhaps the most unwonted site known to
have been chosen was on the bough of a sycamore hanging
low over the moat, at Penshurst in Kent, in 1832, as
represented in the vignette from a drawing by Mr. Cooke,
R.A., executed at the request of Mr. Wells of Redleaf.
Blyth states that he had known an instance of this species
building in a hole of a tree, about thirty feet from the ground.
Couch says (Mag. N. H.v. p. 735) that he had seen it
visiting a cave near Polperro in such a way as to suggest
its using the place for breeding, and Mr. Edward asserts
(Zool. p. 6842) that it breeds on the Banffshire coast
wherever there is a suitable cave or projecting rock; but
confirmation of each of these statements is desirable, since
no similar instances seem to have presented themselves to
other observers in the United Kingdom or indeed in Western
Europe.
Wheresoever placed, the nest is formed of small lumps of
moist earth, which the bird may be seen collecting on the
ground at the water’s edge, and tempering (it is believed) with
its saliva. These are carried in its bill to the chosen spot,
there to be modelled with short straws and sticks into the
required shape, which is generally that of half a saucer,
* The Editor was told by Mr. Yarrell shortly before his death that this
historical specimen was still in his possession, but at the sale of his effects it was
not forthcoming. White says that the Owl and its burden heing brought away,
a conch-shell was fixed in the same place and the next year a Swallow's nest was
built in it.
VOL. II. Naa
344 IIRUNDINID®,
but varying somewhat according to the peculiarities of the
site. In many cases a rim only of this mason-work, which
as it dries quickly hardens into a crust, is needed, and the
lining, consisting always of feathers, commonly caught as
they drift in the air, and fine grasses, then rests on the bare
wall or wood that forms the base of the nest. The eggs
are from four to six in number,* of a translucent white,
boldly blotched and speckled with ashy-grey and orange-
brown deepening into black, and measure from *9 to ‘72, by
from *56 to *52 in. Two broods are reared in the season, the
first being usually fledged by the end of June, and the
second by the end of August. While the hen is sitting the
cock is assiduous in waiting upon her, frequently pausing in
his flight to perch on some place within sound of her, and
thence warbling in a soft and sweet strain. The song is also
often uttered on the wing, but on any alarm is at once
changed to a sharp and angry note, which may perhaps be
syllabled feeta/eet-feetafeetit, and is quickly taken up by all
other Swallows that are near, when the assembled band
will unite to drive off the intruding cat or hawk, by bravely
and repeatedly dashing at the marauder, glancing upward to
avoid its clutch after each assault.
On the young first leaving the nest they scramble or
flutter to the chimney-top or to an adjacent roof, where they
sit and are fed by their parents. Their next essay is to
reach some leafless bough, whence at intervals they make
excursions in the air of gradually increasing leneth, but
continue to receive their food as before. Soon after they
take more boldly to the wing; but, still unable to earn their
own living, they accompany their parents in the search of prey,
and when enough is collected, young and old at a signal
advance to each other, rising in the air, soas to meet and
transfer a mouthful from the latter to the former, which accepts
it with a note of gratification.
The early broods when able to shift for themselves spread
over the country, and as the season advances collect in vast
* Lister informed Ray of a Swallow that laid nineteen eggs successively
(Willughby’s ‘ Ornithology,’ Engl. ed. pref. p. 9).
SWALLOW. 346
numbers about pools or rivers, feeding on the swarms of
insects there generated, and roosting by night in the trees,
reeds and rushes that fringe the banks, while their parents
stay about their home and busy themselves with the cares
of a second family. When the second broods are hatched
and flown they are led to the parts frequented by their
predecessors, who by that time are strong on the wing, and
at the end of August or beginning of September, quit this
country, leaving behind their parents and younger brethren
to follow when the latter are fit, which commonly happens
about a month later. Yet a good many still tarry, and not
a year passes but a few Swallows may be seen here and there
throughout November, while the records of the appearance
in December, even to the 28rd and 24th of that month of
birds, too weak, it would seem, to perform their journey, are
far too numerous to be here particularized.~ But it very
rarely happens that any occur in Britain during the two
months that follow. Yet Mr. Job Johnson says (Zool.
p- 1619) that he saw three near Wakefield, January 18th,
1837, and Thomas Forster (Observ. &c. p. 456) that one
appeared at Clapton, January 29th, 1809. Mr. Parke
recorded (Zool. p. 7988) one near Halifax, February 4th,
1862. Graves states (Nat. Pocket-Book, p. 63) that he saw
one February 7th, 1817. Mr. Gurney, junior, saw at a
bird-stuffer’s one said to have been taken at Southampton,
February 26th, 1871, and Messrs. Matthews report: (Zool.
p. 2534) three occurring February 28th and 29th, 1846, in
Oxfordshire. If there be no error in any of these observa-
tions, only one of which was confirmed by capture, the birds
seen had possibly wintered in this country, for few spring-
arrivals are recorded earlier than the third week of March.
The migrations of the Swallow are in a direction nearly
due north and south, and their course has been satisfactorily
traced across the Mediterranean to and from Africa. A few
* Among others, the case mentioned by White in his twenty-third letter to
Pennant ; but, from the Editor’s experience, even ‘‘a very respectable gentle-
man” may be deceived in a matter of this kind, and too much trust should not
be placed in the observation of White’s informant.
340 ITRUNDINIDA.
Swallows, as Canon Tristram reports, winter in the oases on
the northern verge of the Great Desert, but by far the larger
number unquestionably go much further, though whether
the birds (undoubtedly of our own species) which occur so
abundantly between November and February at the Cape of
Good Hope and elsewhere in South Africa, are individuals of
British birth is as yet unknown. It is however certain
that they do not breed either there or along the West Coast
of Africa, where they are also very abundant during the
time they are absent from us, and it is also certain that
at this season they moult,* so that when they return to
their northern home they are in the fullest perfection of
plumage.t Their passage seems generally to be effected as
much as possible overland, but observations are not wanting
to shew that at times their ordinary course is deflected sea-
wards,; and when this is the case, they no doubt suffer
extremely, arriving at their destination (if they do reach it)
in a very exhausted state, due possibly as much to hunger as
to fatigue. They have been not unfrequently seen to alight
on the water, and presently to fly off again, while there are
many notices of their settling in crowds on ships.
The Swallow is common in summer throughout nearly all
the British Islands, but it does not seem to breed on the
Outer Hebrides, though it occurs there every year, as it
does also in Shetland (where however its nest has several
times been known), the Fieroes, and Iceland. It has been
once observed in Spitsbergen (Ibis, 1875, p. 272), and Mr.
Gillet saw a pair in Nova Zembla (op. cit. 1870, p. 306).
Herr Nordvi is said to have found it breeding in East Fin-
mark; but it can hardly be deemed much more than an
occasional strageler in Scandinavia beyond lat. 68° 80' N.,
though below this line it is common enough in Lapland.
It is widely distributed throughout Russia from Archangel
* This fact seems first to have been ascertained from birds in captivity by Mr.
James Pearson, and communicated by Sir John Trevelyan to Bewick who pub-
lished it in 1826.
‘+ Some very important points on this matter were clearly put forth by Messrs.
Sharpe and Dresser (Proc. Zool. Soc, 1870, pp. 244-249),
} They only occur accidentally in the Atlantic Islands.
SWALLOW. 347
southward, and Western Siberia; but its eastern limits
are very imperfectly traced. Mr. Seebohm found it common
enough at Jennisaisk, and examples from China and Japan,
though presenting some slight modifications, are assigned
to this species by Mr. Dresser, who remarks, however, that
‘fas one moves eastward it will be observable that there
is a general tendency in specimens to diverge from the
typical European form towards Hirundo horreorwm, the
species which inhabits the Nearctic region; and in Eastern
Siberia, near Lake Baikal, specimens of this latter form
are found in no way differimg from typical American
examples.”” The same excellent authority is disposed to
think that Mr. Gould’s H. fretensis from North Australia is
identical with H. rustica, and he has examined specimens of
the latter from several islands in the Malay Archipelago,
the Andamans, Ceylon and many places in India. Our
Swallow, therefore, taking also into account its appearance
throughout Africa, has a very wide range, but it must be
understood that all the southern localities are but its
winter retreats, and it is to be remarked that most of these
localities are the home of some species of Swallow more
or less resembling our own, which is either wholly
stationary or much less migratory than H. rustica.
In the adult male on arrival in spring, the bill is black:
irides hazel: forehead chestnut, rest of the head and all the
upper parts shining steel-blue, the feathers of the back
being white at the base; wing- and tail-quills black, glossed
with bluish-green, the middle rectrices wholly so, the rest
of them with a white patch on the inner web, nearly round
on the pair next the middle, but gradually elongated on the
others till, on the outermost, it becomes a diagonal stripe ;
the chin and throat chestnut, followed by a broad thoracic
band of black glossed with steel-blue ; the rest of the lower
surface warm buffy-white, deepest in tint about the vent;
lower tail-coverts occasionally with a black shaft-streak : legs,
toes and claws black.
Whole length eight inches and a half, of which the outer-
most tail-feathers measure nearly five inches; the wings
348 HIRUNDINID&.
reaching three-quarters of an inch beyond the end of the
second tail-feather ; from the carpal joint to the tip of the
wing, five inches; the first and second quill-feathers nearly
equal, but the first longest.
The female has less chestnut on the forehead, the upper
surface generally not so glossy, the dark thoracic band
narrower, the lower parts less tinged with buff and the
belly nearly white, while the outermost tail-feathers are also
shorter.
The young on leaving the nest have the forehead, a line
over the eye, and the chin, pale chestnut, the thoracic band
dull black, but faintly glossed and the upper parts generally
are much less bright, while the white spots on the tail-
feathers are tinged with rufous. The outermost tail-feathers
do not acquire their full length till after the first moult.
MARTIN. 349
PASSERES. HIRUNDINIDA.
CHELIDON uURBIcA (Linneus*),
THE MARTIN.
Hirundo urbieca.
Cuntinon, F. Boie.+—Bill short, depressed and very wide at the base, commis-
sure slightly decurved. Nostrils basal, oval, partly closed by a membrane and
opening laterally. Wings, with nine primaries, long and pointed. Tail forked,
of twelve feathers, the outermost not abruptly attenuated. Legs and feet
slender, closely feathered above, toes rather long, three in front, one behind,
claws moderate, sharp.
THE spring-appearance of the Martin in Europe is usually
some days later than that of the Swallow whose habits
its own in many respects closely resemble, but the former
does not with us attach itself so exclusively to buildings as
does the latter, and though it is often observed to be more
numerous in towns than the Swallow, the Martin yet retains
in this country some of its original seats, for it still chooses
its breeding-place in cliffs, generally on the coast, but some-
times inland, and quite apart from any human habitation.
* Hirundo urbica, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 344 (1766).
+ Isis, 1822, p. 550.
350 . HIRUNDINID&.
Its nest also, though constructed of the same materials as
the Swallow’s, is of a very different shape, the mud-walls
being raised to meet and be partly borne by the shelter
under which it is built, leaving only an opening sufficient for
entrance and exit. Furthermore the nest never seems to
be placed within a chimney or room, but is either fixed
beneath a porch or archway or on the outside of a building,
most commonly under the eaves, and not unfrequently in the
upper corner of a window—sometimes even resting partially
against the glass. Its shape is approximately that of the
half or the quarter of a hemisphere, but never hemi-
spherical as has so often been said. Built as it almost
always is without any prop to support its weight, its founda-
tions require no ordinary care, and a week or more is often
occupied in laying them, after frequent trial of various spots
—the builders clinging to the wall by their feet and assist-
ing themselves with their tail to retain their precarious hold,
while depositing the materials which as just said, are similar
to those used by the Swallow and are collected in the same
way. Moreover the nest is at first very gradually constructed,
the lower layers of mud being left to dry and harden before
more are added. When the base is become firm, the
remainder is often finished with great rapidity, and the
interior, being furnished with feathers and a few bents or
fine straws, forms the nuptial couch of the owners who
frequently occupy it at the same time.*
* The curious and rather ludicrous mistake of an eminent French biologist
must here be noticed since it has led other ornithologists astray. On March
7th, 1870, the late M. Pouchet announced to the French Academy of Sciences
(Comptes Rendus, \xx. p. 492) that within the last half-century some of the
** Hirendelles” of Rouen had wholly changed their style of architecture, adapt-
ing it to that which had been lately introduced by man. In the new part of
the city he observed that their nests were built on a very different (and, as
seemed to him, an improved) plan from that which was still followed in the
older part. Hence he interred that the birds possessed greater intellectual
faculties than had been thought, since they were able to avail themselves of the
advance of civilization. But the simple explanation of a circumstance so extra-
ordinary was not long delayed, for on July 4th, of the same year, M. Noulet
was able to shew that his distinguished predecessor had been a little hasty. It
was true, said he (op. cit. 1xxi. p. 78), that the nests in the two parts of the
city differed as had heen described, but then the one belonged to Wivondelles de
MARTIN. 351
The Martin sets about breeding very soon after it returns
to us, and a nest which has outlasted the winter’s stcrms is
almost at once reoccupied; but if a new nest needs to be
built the operation is often greatly retarded by the inclem-
ency of the season and various accidents to which the rising
edifice is liable. Indeed both this species and the Swallow
seem dependent in this as in some other respects on the
weather, for any excess of wet or drought renders the collec-
tion and preparation of building-materials more difficult,
while the Martin’s work is so exposed that heavy, driving
rain will often wash it away. Then too, when all is happily
ended, there is the frequent eviction of the owners by House-
Sparrows, as already (page 91) related, and, even if retaliation
be ever made in the way that has been asserted, delay is
not thereby avoided. Martins are much more social than
Swallows, and their nests are not uncommonly built to touch
one another in a long row under eaves in a favourite locality.
Yet this is a sight now not often seen, for several good observers
have remarked that the Martin is less plentiful than formerly
in England, though the Editor is inclined to believe that its
numbers, which in his experience had certainly diminished,
have within the last three or four years somewhat increased.
The eggs, four or five in number, of a pure translucent
white, measure from ‘83 to ‘75 by from °54 to *5 in. Incu-
bation lasts thirteen days. The young are at first fed within
the nest, but on growing older thrust their head out of the
opening to receive the nourishment brought them by their
parents who cling to the outside while feeding them. Two
broods are almost invariably brought forth from the same
nest in the course of the season, and not unfrequently a
third, the hen beginning to lay again so soon as each is
flown. Jenner states (Phil. Trans. 1824, p. 25) that, at
Berkeley in 1786, a pair of Martins hatched four broods, but
the latest, when about half fledged, perished in the nest in
the middle of October, and the parents returning to it the
following May threw out the skeletons.
fenétre, our House-Martins, and the other to Hirondelles de cheminée, our Chim-
ney-Swallows ! (Cf. Ann. N. H. ser. 4, v. p. 307, vi. p. 270.)
VoL. II. ZZ
oe HIRUNDINID®.
The fact that the latest broods of Martins commonly die
in the nest has been very often observed, but the cause of
it is by no means clear, notwithstanding the attention paid
to the subject by Mr. Blackwall (who, in his ‘ Zoological
Researches,’ has some interesting observations upon it) and
others. We can hardly believe that the strong natural affec-
tion of the parents suddenly gives way to the instinct of self-
preservation, and that they voluntarily leave their offspring
to starve in the hope of saving their own life by a timely
retreat. Yet, if this supposition be rejected, we seem to have
but the alternative of thinking that the supply of food may
all at once fall short in the neighbourhood of the nest, and
that the old birds have to seek it at such a distance that the
delay in taking it to their young is the cause of the latter’s
death.* In this case there would be no desertion on the
part of the parents, and it could not be objected to this
explanation that the parents would suffer in like manner,
since they, finding their progeny dead from the temporary
want of food, would naturally depart and in an hour or two
be in the midst of plenty. Considering the extreme sud-
denness with which many kinds of insects appear and disap-
pear, there would seem to be no reason why the suggestion here
made should not be correct, and the suddenness with which
Martins and Swallows often vanish would also be explained.t
About the middle of October nearly all the Martins that
are able to travel leave this country, but it must be under-
stood that the earlier broods have generally taken their depar-
ture some six weeks or a month sooner, since, as with
Swallows, these earlier broods for the most part quit their
birth-place and resort to localities affording greater supplies
* Those who have reared young birds by hand, especially such as require an
insect diet, well know that a very short deprivation of food will often prove
immediately fatal.
+ Mr. A. Matthews (Zool. p. 3178) records an instance in which not only the
young but the parents perished, observing of the latter that ‘‘ their strength
visibly declined,” which rather confirms the view taken above, for in this case
supplies must have fallen off gradually. Had they suddenly ceased, the young
alone would probably have perished, and the old birds, having no longer a tie to
the spot, would have saved themselves.
MARTIN, 353
of food. The assemblages, whether commingled or separate,
before emigrating have long been noticed, and since the
extension of telegraphs throughout the country perhaps
attract still more attention, as the flocks, often consisting of
many hundreds, find the wires a favourite resting-place,
almost to the exclusion of the buildings and dead trees
which formerly served that purpose, and, from their usually
conspicuous position, render the congregations more easily
observed. Yet considerable bodies are often seen much
later, a flock of more than a hundred was noticed at Dover
November 13th, 1831, and one twice as large at Barnstaple,
November 17th, 1838. It may safely be said that not a year
passes without Martins being seen more or less numerously
in that month, and often to its end, in some part or other of
England, sometimes for many days in succession, while
there are many records of their appearance in the first half
of December, and at least twice (Zool. pp. 2892, 6891) have
they been noticed within a few days of Christmas. It must
be remarked, however, that these late birds seem generally
to be strangers and not the natives of the locality—all of
whom have departed some weeks earlier.
The Martin is a regular summer-visitor to nearly the
whole of Europe and to part of Asia. It is wanting in the
Outer Hebrides, but breeds, though in small numbers, both
in Orkney and Shetland. In the Feroes it not unfrequently
appears, and in the north of Iceland Faber saw a pair which
began to build a nest. On the continent it is abundant
much further north, especially in the interior of Lapland,*
and it extends to East Finmark. It breeds also at Arch-
angel, but does not seem to appear on the Petchora. The
boundaries of the range of this species and one of its eastern
* At Muonioniska in 1853, Wolley, as he wrote to Hewitson, counted from 160
to 170 nests round the courtyard of a house, though those on one side had lately
fallen down. In Lapland the people almost everywhere multiply their eaves by nail-
ing narrew planks to the walls, at such a distance that there is just room between
them for the nests, which thus appear row under row. Other houses in that village
and elsewhere, were in 1855, as the Editor remembers, nearly as much frequented.
The cause of the bird’s abundance in the country and of the accommodation so
gladly given to it is not far to seek when one sees and feels the innumerable gnats.
354 HIRUNDINIDA.
representatives, Chelidon lagopoda, cannot as yet be laid
down, for Russian ornithologists have hardly recognized
their distinctness. The latter however was alone found by
Mr. Seebohm on the Jennisei,* but the former is said not to
be rare in Persia, and though as regards India it was only
known to Jerdon from one locality on the Neilgherries,
Tickell records it from Moulmein (J. A. 8. B. xxiv. p. 277),
adding that large flocks occur in India from time to time—a
statement confirmed by subsequent observers. In Arabia,
Eeypt and Nubia, it is only a bird of passage, and since Mr.
Blanford obtained but a single specimen in Abyssinia in
February, it seems to winter more to the southward. The
same inference may be drawn from its being very scarce at
that season in Algeria though numerous there in summer.
But we know no more of its further African wanderings than
that Mr. Keulemans shot an example in January on Prince’s
Island in the Gulf of Guinea, where he was told, says Mr.
Dresser, that it had not been before observed. It seems
also to be but a straggler in the Canaries and Madeira, and
is not recorded from the Azores.
In the adult the bill is black: the irides brown: the top
and sides of the head, nape, wing-coverts and back, rich,
elossy bluish-black, the feathers of the nape and back white
at the base; rump and upper tail-coverts, except those next
the tail which are glossy bluish-black, white ; wing- and tail-
quills dull black, shafts white beneath; chin and all the
lower part of the body white, as are the feathers which
cover the legs and toes; axillaries and lower wing-coverts
pale brown : claws greyish horn-colour.
The whole length is rather more than five inches and a
quarter; from the carpal joint to the tip of the first primary,
which is the longest, four inches and a quarter.
There is no external distinction of sex. The young are
sooty-brown above with hardly any gloss, and not of so pure
a white beneath, while the tail is shorter and less forked.
* There they attempted to build nests on the masts of bis ship. Herr Holm-
gren (Skand. Fogl. p. 877) quotes an account of our Martin building its nest
and bringing up a brood on board a steamer plying on the river Klar in Sweden.
SAND-MARTIN. 355
PASSERES. HIRUNDINID.A.
CoTILE RIPARIA (Linneus*),
THE SAND-MARTIN.
Hirundo riparia.
Corte, F. Bote +.—Bill short, depressed and very wide at the base, commis-
sure straight. Nostrils basal, oval, partly closed by a membrane and opening
laterally. Wings, with nine primaries, long and pointed. Tail forked, of twelve
feathers, the outermost not abruptly attenuated. Legs and feet slender, and
bare except a tuft of feathers on the tarsus just above the hallux ; toes moderate,
three in front, one behind ; claws strong.
THe Sanp-Martin is the smallest of the Hirundinide of
this country, and commonly the earliest to arrive in spring ;
but, not presenting itself to the gaze of men by at once
frequenting their habitations, its annual return is not 30
regularly or so generally noticed.{ Indeed for some time
* Hirundo riparia, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 344.
+ Isis, 1822, p. 550.
~ The Editor suspects that most of the ‘‘ Karly Swallows” of newspaper-para-
356 HIRUNDINID®,
after it has reached us it commonly keeps pretty close to
streams or ponds, over which it may be seen taking its food
with the curious jerking flight, so well noted by Gilbert
White, and it does not seek its breeding-quarters till towards
the end of April or beginning of May.
Like the species already described, this bird comes
to us no doubt from Africa, and almost always chooses its
nesting-place in the banks of rivers, sand-pits, railway-
cuttings, and other vertical surfaces of earth of a nature
that will enable it to perforate them for its purpose. In
such situations it bores horizontal galleries with a degree of
regularity, and an amount of labour, rarely exceeded among
birds. The mode in which these holes are made has
been described more or less fully by White, Rennie, and
Macgillivray’s correspondents—Messrs. Duncan and Weir.
When beginning its excavation, the bird clings to the face
of the bank, steadying itself by its tail, and, using its bill
as a pickaxe, loosens the earth, which at first falls down by
its own weight clear of the hole. In doing this the bird
works from the centre outwards, assuming all sorts of posi-
tions, and as often as not hangs head downwards while
grasping the circumference with its claws. When the hole
is carried further the same method is pursued, but the
detached soil has then to be scraped out by its feet, since
the gallery though generally sloping upwards frem the
entrance is too nearly horizontal for the earth to run out of
itself. The form of the boring and its length seem to
depend much on the nature of the soil. Dry, friable sand,
though easily pierced, has its disadvantages in the crumbling
of the sides, especially as the bird is breaking ground, till a
large irregular hole is made, and then the burrow is extended
perhaps to four, six, or, as one authority says, even nine feet.
Harder sand, lying often in layers, produces shorter tunnels,
from eighteen inches to three feet in length, with an oval or
oblong section, and it is only in very tenacious soil that the
graphs are nothing but Sand-Martins, the difference in the plumage and flight of
the two species, obvious at a glance to an expert, being unknown to the casual
observer.
SAND-MARTIN, 307.
opening is really circular. The intention seems to be that
the gallery should be straight, but inequalities of the
ground, and the occurrence of stones, frequently cause it to
take a sinuous course, and the little miner often meets
with a stone too big to be removed or evaded, in which case
the hole is abandoned, and a fresh attempt made. Both the
partners in the undertaking seem to work at it by turn, and
operations are seldom carried on except in the early morn-
ing. When the gallery is bored far enough, and what deter-
mines this is not always apparent, the end is slightly enlarged
to form a chamber, and hither are brought materials for the
nest, consisting chiefly of dry grass-stalks, or near the coast
(as Wolley found at Bridlington) of seaweed, to serve as a
loose foundation, on which is laid a bed of feathers, which
seem to be collected from some neighbouring water, and
these last are invariably disposed with much neatness, so that
a Sand-Martin’s nest, carefully removed from its grave is a
beautiful object.*
The eggs are commonly from four to six in number,
though late in the season not more than two or three are
laid, and are translucent white, measuring from -78 to °6 by
from °52 to °45 in. Since the species is pretty numerous
and places fitted for its subterranean nurseries are some-
times far apart, it throngs to those that are favourable, and
in such cases the nests are often made close together, so
that the face of the bank is riddled with its holes, in a way
that has suggested to many the comparison with a honey-
comb. Depth of soil has nothing to do with the occupation
of a locality by the Sand-Martin. It will drive its galleries
into the middle of a bluff a hundred feet high, or be content
with the thin layer of mould, hardly exceeding eighteen
inches, that in some spots caps the side of a chalk-cutting.
Nor is height more regarded, for the nests may be found at
almost any distance from either top or bottom of a suitable
escarpment, and a shallow sand-pit, that will hardly hide a
* Those who have dug out the nests of this bird need not be reminded of the
inconvenience which the operation is likely to produce from the swarms of fleas,
with which, towards the end of summer, they are infested.
358 HIRUNDINID&.
boy, will serve its ends as well as a lofty precipice. It has
some of the adaptiveness of its relatives. In Norway it will
make its nest in the turf-roof of a hut, and in England
it has been often known to breed in holes in old walls.*
Dr. Norman Moore tells us, in his life of Waterton (p. 125),
how that ingenious naturalist fitted more than fifty holes in
a walled bank with draining-pipes, that they might form
nesting-places for this species, and that the year they were
completed every hole was tenanted. But perhaps a more
singular case still is that, discovered by Mr. E. Bidwell (Zool.
s.s. p. 5108), and confirmed by Mr. Upcher, of its breeding
in some numbers in huge heaps of sawdust near Brandon.
The young are fed with gnats and other small insects,
and, sometimes, according to White, with dragon-flies almost
as long as themselves. When they leave the nest they sit
for a time on any convenient perch, and are so unsuspicious of
evil that they may be easily taken by the hand. A little later
they fly with their parents, from whom they receive food on
the wing, the act being so rapidly performed that it escaped
his observant eye. Afterwards, like other species of the
family, they get their own living, chiefly over the surface of
water, and roost in swarms on the trees or among the
vegetation at its side. The notes of this species are quite
inexpressible by any combination of letters. The most
ordinary is a low complacent chirp, which is quickly changed
to a loud and angry cry on the approach of danger. The
cock has a very gay, twittering song, commonly delivered on
the wing near the nest. At least two broods are hatched in
the course of the season, but the Sand-Martin leaves this
country earlier than either of its allies. Towards the end
of August, the numbers at its breeding-places are visibly
* White mentions its breeding in the scaffold-holes of an ancient building at
Bishop’s Waltham, and the like has been noticed in the crumbling mortar of old
walls at Godstow by two observers (Zool. p. 7844, and s.s. p. 2344)—the latter of
whom, Mr. C. B. Wharton, ‘‘ found a nest about a foot down a hole in the gnarled
stem of an elm tree, which itself grows out from beneath the masonry.” Mr.
Harvie Brown in Scotland saw numbers of the species flying into and resting in
holes in an old wall, though he could not be sure that they nested there (op. cit.
p. 897), while Mr, Prior, near Bedford, bad proof of the fact (Zool. 1877, p. 450).
SAND-MARTIN. 359
thinned, but myriads coutinue to haunt the larger rivers.
About the beginning or middle of September these take
their departure, and by the third week of that month it is
rare to see a single bird. Nor do stray examples ordinarily
appear afterwards, as is so commonly the case with the
Swallow and the House-Martin. Mr. W. Jeffery, however,
in 1867 (Zool. s.s. p. 1033) noticed the Sand-Martin in
Sussex until October 6th; Thompson mentions its having
been observed at Wexford, October 81st; and, according
to Kinahan (Zool. p. 6962), it occurred in the county
Limerick, November 80th, 1859—the latest date known
to the Editor. In spring, too, exceptional arrivals are
very rare, the earliest on record being apparently that by
Mr. D’Urban (Zool. p. 5098) at Exeter, March 18th, 1856,
which is certainly not more than ten days sooner than its
ordinary coming.
The Sand-Martin is generally but rather locally distributed
throughout the British Islands, including most of the
Outer Hebrides and Orkney, but it is not known to breed in
Shetland though often appearing there. On the continent
of Europe it goes nearly as far as the North Cape, and
thence is found across the Russian dominions to the Sea of
Ochotsk, being very numerous in roany places. It is sup-
posed to have been obtained in Japan (Ibis, 1878, p. 231)
and is numerous in China, but its southern range in Asia
is not at all known. Mr. Davidson (Stray Feathers, vi. p.
44) found it common in winter in the Thatone subdistrict of
Tennasserim, and at the same season it visits several parts of
India, but not, as would seem, the southern half of the penin-
sula, and from Mr. Hume’s experience it must be rare.
Thence it is found in Afghanistan, Persia and Arabia. In
Africa it had not been till lately known to reach further to
the southward than Zanzibar on the east coast, though
Canon Tristram, who saw a few at El Aghouat in Novem-
ber, thought that it did not winter in the Sahara, and Drake
believed the same of it as concerns Eastern Morocco; but
the receipt by Mr. Gurney of several specimens from Trans-
vaal greatly extends its range. Mr. Godman obtained a
VOL. Il. oA
360 HIRUNDINIDE,
specimen at Teneriffe.* Throughout the enormous tract of
which the limits have just been imperfectly traced the Sand-
Martin is pretty numerous in most suitable localities, regard
being had to the time of year. But this is by no means all,
for the bird is not confined to the Old World. In America
it has a range quite as wonderful. Natterer obtained it at
Caicara in Brazil, and a pair was seen on Melville Island in
1820, as recorded by Parry (Journal &c. p. 195)—the dis-
tance between these two points being about 90° of latitude.
{t has also been observed at many intermediate stations, and
is as well known throughout North America as in Europe.
Dall found it breeding in immense numbers in Alaska,
Richardson saw settlements of thousands at the mouth of
the Mackenzie River, and Mr. Reeks records it (Zool. s.s.
p- 1695) from Newfoundland, in parts of which it is said
to be very common. Few species of birds have a range so
extensive as the Sand-Martin, and certainly there is no
Passerine bird which can compare with it in this respect.
The adults have the bill brownish-black: the irides hazel :
upper parts nearly uniform mouse-colour, darker on the
crown and round the eyes, and palest on the rump; wing-
and tail-quills blackish-brown, the latter with lighter edges ;
chin, throat, breast, belly and lower tail-coverts, white,
except a broad mouse-coloured band across the upper part
of the breast; the avxillaries, flanks and lower wing-coverts
mouse-coloured, those of the latter which cover the meta-
carpus being tipped with dull white; the tarsal tuft pale
buff: legs, toes, and claws dark brown.
The whole length is four inches and three-quarters ; from
the carpal joint to the tip of the first and longest primary,
four inches.
Young birds of the year, on leaving the nest, have the
feathers of the back and upper tail-coverts, as also the tertials
and wing-covyerts, tipped with buffy-white, as shewn in the
upper figure of the woodeut ; the chin is also buffy-white.
* Both in Asia and Africa our Sand-Martin has several congeners, the exist-
ence of which throws suspicion on some of the older statements as to its appear-
ance in the south of both these quarters of the globe.
PURPLE MARTIN. 361
PASSERES. HIRUNDINID&.
PRoGNE PURPUREA (Linneus*).
PURPLE MARTIN.
Hirundo purpurea.
Proane, /. Bote t.—Bill stout, depressed and very wide at the base, culmen
and commissure much decurved. Nosirils round, inopereulate and opening up-
wards. Wings with nine primaries, long and pointed. Tail much forked, of
twelve feathers, the outermost tapering gradually to a point. Legs and feet
pretty strong, bare; toes three in front, one behind.
Toe Purete Martin of America is here included on the
authority of Prof. M‘Coy, who, early in the year 1840, in-
formed the Author that a female example had been lately
shot near Kingstown, in the county Dublin, and a few hours
after sent for dissection to the late Dr. Scouler. It was
subsequently placed in the Museum of the Royal Dublin
Society, which now forms part of the Museum of Science
and Art in that capital, and the specimen is still preserved
there, as Mr. More informs the Editor. f
The Purple Martin is a common summer-visitor to nearly the
* Hirundo purpurea, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 344 (1766).
+ Isis, 1826, p. 971.
+ It is said that in the first week of September, 1842, two examples of this
species were shot at Kingsbury Reservoir. One of them, a young bird of the
year from which the above figure was taken, passed into Mr. Bond’s collection.
Subsequently the other specimen, an adult male in brilliant plumage, was brought
to the Author. The Editor agrees with Mr. Harting (Handb. Br. B. p. 125) in
thinking that Mr. Yarrell was misinformed on this subject, and has failed to get
362 HIRUNDINIDE.
whole of North America, especially in the interior, breeding
from very high latitudes to Florida, and from the Atlantic to the
Pacific. It seems to be of rare occurrence in Newfoundland
(Zool. s.s. p. 1741) and was not recognized as occurring in
the Bermudas until September 22nd, 1849, when a large
flight of Swifts and Swallows including many of this species
suddenly appeared in those islands (Contrib. Orn. 1850, p.
35).* It arrives at New Orleans from the south in the be-
sinning of February and gradually continues its way north-
wards, reaching the Arctic Circle about the middle of May.
Its departure takes place early. The limits of its range in
winter have not been determined. It is known to arrive at
that season in Mexico and Lower California, and Mr. Sclater
says (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1872, p. 606) that it reaches the Rio
Negro on the border of Patagonia, where Mr. Darwin and Mr.
Hudson (loc. cit.) observed it breeding in great numbers.+
Interesting accounts of the habits of this species, which
in Canada and the United States is everywhere a welcome
guest, are given by Wilson, Audubon, Nuttall and other
American ornithologists, but its very slight claim to be
counted a ‘* British Bird” lessens the need of entering upon
them at any length. Naturally breeding in hollow trees,
often in the deserted holes of Woodpeckers, it readily takes
to the accommodation provided for it by those who wish to
encourage it about their home, and ‘‘ Martin-boxes”’, made
expressly for the purpose, are therefore very generally set up
in gardens, and near houses. The nest consists of a loose
gathering of twigs, leaves and grass, intermixed with shreds
of cloth, or any material the bird may chance to find, and
is lined with feathers or other soft substances. The eggs,
from four to six in number, are white and measure from *99
to ‘93 by from *85 to °65. Several pairs will breed in the
same box, and they generally rear two broods in a season.
any satisfactory corroboration of other asserted instances of the occurrence of
the species in Britain.
* Tt seems not to have appeared there since (Zool. 1877, p. 407).
+ Several ornithologists, however, consider the South-American birds to be
specifically distinct, in which case those observed by the two naturalists just
named are the Progne elegans of Prof. Baird.
PURPLE MARTIN. 363
The male has the whole body black, highly glossed with
shining purple-blue, except a white patch on each side
beneath the wing; the wings and tail are brownish-black
slightly glossed with purple, which on the wing-coverts
form indistinct bars: the bill is black: the irides dark:
the legs and feet blackish-brown. The whole length is six
inches and three-quarters, the wing from the carpal joint
five inches and a half.
The female is very similar, but much duller, above, and
beneath brownish-grey, which becomes lighter on the belly
and crest, but the feathers of the latter have a dark shaft.*
With this species ends the account of the Order Passeres
to be here given. Those which next follow form a hetero-
geneous assemblage, contrasting remarkably with the unifor-
mity of internal structure that characterizes all the Passeres,
however they may differ in habits and outward uppearance.
It does not appear desirable in the course of the present
work to enter deeply into disquisitions on systematic arrange-
ment, but it must be evident to all serious students of orni-
thology that the various so-called ‘‘ Families”’ of true
Passeres are by no means so distinct as the ‘‘ Families ”’ of
the next Order. The Hirundinide, however, may fairly be
regarded as a well-defined group, for, strictly Passerine as
they are in every part of their structure, they are sharply
separated from every other section that the ingenuity of
systematists has invented—no existing form having pre-
sented itself that will ally them to any other Family.
* The supposed occurrence at Derby, in 1850, of another American Swallow,
Tachycineta bicolor, was recorded by Wolley (Zool. p. 3806), and though he,
with his usual caution, was careful to remark that there was ‘‘a possibility of
mistake ’’ about the matter, there can be little doubt of the truth of the story
told to him. The species at first sight somewhat resembles our House-Martin,
but is easily distinguished by wanting the white rump and the feathered legs of
that bird. Wolley’s specimen was exhibited to the Zoological Society, February
28th, 1860, and is now in the Museum at Norwich.
364 CYPSELIDA,
PICARLA. CYPSELIDE.
CypseLus apus (Linneus*),
THE SWIFT.
Cypselus apus.
Cypsetus, //liger+.—Bill very short, wide, triangular at its base and depressed ;
culmen and commissure much decurved ; gape extending beyond the eyes. Nos-
trils longitudinal, the edges raised and furnished with small feathers. Wings,
with ten curved primaries, very long and pointed, the first a little shorter than
the second, but longer than the third. Tail, of ten feathers, somewhat deeply
forked, ‘Iarsi very short, feathered in front ; toes four, all ordinarily directed
forwards, the middle and outer with three phalanges only ; claws short, large and
much curved.
Tue characters which distinguish the Swifts from the
Swallows are even on a slight examination so well marked
and so decisive that it is curious their important bearing on
* Hirundo apus, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 344 (1766).
+ Prodr. Syst. Mamm. et Av. p. 229 (1811).
SWIFT. 365
classification was not sooner recognized. Though so like
Swallows in much of their external appearance and in many
of their habits, Swifts have scarcely any part of their
structure which is not formed on a different plan; and, in-
stead of any near affinity existing between the two groups,
it can scarcely be doubted by an unprejudiced person that
the Cypselide not only differ far more from the Hirundinide
than these do from any other Family of Passeres, but that
they belong to what, in the present state of ornithology,
must be deemed a distinct Order of Birds—and they are
here included among the Picarie, as before (page 267) indi-
cated. In deference to the practice of British zoologists,
who have been so long accustomed to regard the Swallows
and Swifts as members of the same Family, it seems expe-
dient in this work to place the latter next to the former, but
it must be understood that they really have no relationship
therewith, and that in fact, except a somewhat remote con-
nexion with the Caprimulgide, the only true allies of the
Cypseide are the Trochilide, or Humming-Birds, with
which they form a group that has received from Nitzsch the
name of Macrochires.
The Swift comes to us from Africa, arriving sometimes
soon after the middle but more commonly towards the end of
April, or even not till the beginning of May, the variation in
the time of its appearance being possibly due to the state of
the season in the countries whence it takes its departure
or over which it passes on its way. Its stay in the British
Islands is comparatively short, most of the birds which
breed or are reared here generally leaving their home with
ereat punctuality very early in August, though stray exam-
ples, and sometimes considerable companies, not unfrequently
make their appearance during the next two months. Mr.
Blackwall saw a Swift October 20th, 1815, Mr. C. Bowring
sent the Author word of one seen by him near Conway, October
31st, 1855, while Mr. W. Adam records (Mag. Nat. Hist. viii.
p- 513) one that he saw in Perthshire, November 8th, 1834,
and Mr. Cornish is reported to have seen one in Devonshire,
November 27th, 1835.
366 CYPSELID.®.
The Swift commonly chooses its nesting-place in holes
under the eaves of houses, in church-towers and other build-
ings, as well as crevices in rocks, and will not disdain a
cranny in the face of a chalk-pit. In countries not offering
such accommodation it uses hollow trees, and it has been
recorded as so doing in England, though perhaps on insuf-
ficient authority. It has been also said to remain for hours
in its retreat on windy days, motionless and in the dark, but
this assertion is certainly not generally, if ever, true; for
when insects are to be had the bird is regardless of weather,
and its occasional withdrawal from observation during storms
can with reason be accounted for by the vast distances to
which its speed of flight enables it to range without difficulty,
in quest of prey that may be more abundant away from its
home. Ordinarily it is seen darting rapidly or wheeling in
circles while in pursuit of its insect-food ; at one time sailing
with ease and pleasure at an elevation where it is scarcely
perceivable, and at another passing the spectator, in Gilbert
White’s words, ‘‘ with the almost inconceivable swiftness of a
meteor.” Little, or perhaps nothing, is known of the means
whereby birds in their rapid career are able to adjust their
sight, so as to avoid obstacles and make their captures, but
it is obvious from the most cursory observation, that few can
more completely control their visual organs than Swifts, though
Swallows must approach them very nearly in this respect.*
The nest is formed of bits of straw, dry grass and a few
feathers, all collected on the wing, and glued firmly together
by the mucous secretions of the bird+ so as to become a hard
* Mr. O. Clapton says (Mag. Nat. Hist. v. p. 203) that at Hastings he saw a
Swift dash itself against a wall, when it was picked up stunned, and almost
immediately died in his hand. He could not perceive any defect in its eyes, but
he mentions that it was infested with parasites, which may well bave impaired
its vision. Mr. Watters also mentions a Swift in his possession, obtained by
striking against a man’s hat in a Dublin street and falling senseless at his side.
t Macgillivray’s figure (Br. B. pl. xxii. fig. 5) of the digestive organs of the
Swift shews the enormous size of its salivary glands, situated between the rami
of the lower jaw, whence these secretions arise, but it is doubtful whether they
may not be supplemented by others proceeding from the proventriculus. Such
at any rate, according to Home (Phil. Trans. 1817, p. 332, pl. xvi.), appears
to be the case in birds of the allied genus Collocalia, which, though commonly
SWIFT. 307
crust. In this country, from the site generally chosen, the
structure is deeply begrimed with dust or soot, so as to pre-
sent, notwithstanding the neat arrangement of its materials,
a most uninviting aspect. Occasionally other substances are
added, such as shreds of cloth not unfrequently, and two
nests taken by Weir to Macgillivray were thickly intermixed
with bud-seales of the Scotch-fir, while Mr. Gould states
that he has found fresh petals of the buttercup adhering to
the inner walls. The eggs, from two to four in number, are
of a dead white and measure from 1:08 to 92 by from
°68 to °62 in. The young are ordinarily hatched about the
middle of June; but they do not take flight till the end of
July or sometimes still later. Though zealously fed by
their parents, while they stay in the nest, they are but little
attended to afterwards, and usually the whole family leave
their home so soon as the young are able to sustain them-
selves firmly on the wing. Unless some accident happens
to the first eggs, the Swift produces only one set in the
season, but should they meet with disaster, a second seems
to be invariably laid, and Salmon found young in a nest so
late as October 1Ist—nearly seven weeks after all the asso-
called ‘‘ Swallows,’ belong to the Cypselide and form the edible nests so eagerly
sought by Chinese epicures. These nests, one of which is here represented, are
when first constructed, wholly composed of mucus, which dries and looks something
like isinglass. Their marketable value depends on their colour and purity, for they
are often intermixed with feathers and other foreign substances. The Collocalic,
of which the number of species seems to be uncertain, inhabit chiefly the islands
of the Indian Ocean from Mauritius eastward, as well as most of the tropical
islands of the Pacific as far as the Marquesas—one species occurring in the hill-
country of India.
VoL. Il. 3B
368 CYPSELID®.
ciates of their parents had departed (Mag. Nat. Hist.
Ber. 2,4. ps LL).
Year by year the Swift revisits its old haunts, generally
arriving in pairs, and, unless access to its accustomed lodg-
ings has been made impossible, it will reoccupy them, as
proved nearly a century since by Jenner (Phil. Trans. 1824,
p- 16), who determined the identity of some of the birds so
returning by marking them indelibly*. New buildings it
seldom affects, partly no doubt because, owing to their con-
dition, it cannot effect an entrance to them, and Gilbert
White, in his unsurpassed monograph of the species, has
noticed the fact of a particular locality being annually fre-
quented by exactly the same number of pairs of birds
throughout a long series of years. Almost every natural
function of the Swift—sleep, oviposition and incubation
excepted—seems to be performed in the air, and its evolu-
tions on the wing have been admirably described by Macgil-
livray in terms which need not be repeated here. A most
engaging sight it is to watch its movements aloft, but it is
no less interesting to behold some half-dozen birds racing,
as they often do, within a few feet of the ground through
the narrow lanes or up and down the most confined courts of
a small country town or village, uttering the while their
singular squealing note, which writers have tried to syllable
swee-ree. This ery has obtained for the bird in some parts
of England the name of ‘‘ Screech-Owl’’t, and its emission
has been thought by some observers to depend on the state
of the weather, which is no more true than that is indicative,
as Maceillivray held, of an abundance of prey. It seems to
be of the nature of a song {, and is probably peculiar to the
male, when impelled by the same feelings of love or jealousy
as actuate other birds. It is seldom heard far from the
breeding-place, though the Swift, as before stated, roams
* One of the examples marked by him was recognized seven years afterwards.
So little is known of the age to which birds attain, that this piece of incontro-
vertible evidence is worth preserving.
+ Another common name is ‘‘ Deviling.”
It must be remembered, however, that the Swift has no true song-muscles.
SWIFT. 369
daily to great distances, and may be frequently seen pursuing
its prey miles from its abode, as on open spaces like Salis-
bury Plain, or following the course of a river when, in its
eagerness, it will sometimes seize the artificial fly of the
angler, and pay for its impetuosity the penalty of its life.
On the ground it has been often said to be almost helpless,
and unable to take wing until, by creeping to the edge of an
uneven surface, it can launch forth and avail itself of the
limbs on which its living depends*; but this is denied by
Mr. Hancock (B. Northumb. &c. p. 82), who has twice seen
a captive Swift take flight from the level ground. Couch
observes (Mag. Nat. Hist. v. p. 737) that it grasps by its
claws in opposing pairs, not bending its toes, but straighten-
ing them and decurving its claws underneath them. Placed
in a cage it can move in all directions, clinging to the wires,
hanging back downwards to the top, aiding its progress with
its chin, though not with its mandibles, and roosting upright
against the side. During the breeding-season a rank odour
pervades this bird.
The Swift is pretty generally distributed over Great
Britain, except in the Outer Hebrides, and occurs occa-
sionally in Orkney and Shetland. It is common also in
certain localities in Ireland, though never seen, says Thomp-
son, in some extensive districts—especially of the west.
It has been met with a few times in the Feroes, but is
common throughout the greater part of continental Scan-
dinavia, breeding as far north as Enara, and Herr Nordvi
informs the Editor that two examples were obtained in the
autumn of 1876 0n the Varanger Fjord. Thence its summer-
range extends to the government of Archangel and so to the
Ural. Mr. Seebohm seems not to have found it in Siberia,
but it is said to occur in Dauuria and Mongolia, and possibly
thence to China. It appears to be common in Turkestan,
Afghanistan and Cashmere, and is abundant in some of the
valleys of the Western Himalayas, visiting the Punjab in the
* Aldrovandus long ago remarked (lib. xvii.) ‘* Apodes ut pennis prevalent,
sic pedibus degenerant.” The flexibility of the axillary joint in the Swift is very
singular. Holding one by the body the wings droop as though broken.
370 CYPSELID/A.
rainy season, but in India generally is replaced by the allied
Cypselus affinis. It has been observed in Persia, and is
common in Asia Minor and Palestine. It seems not to have
been determined from Egypt until Mr. J. H. Gurney, jun. ob-
tained a specimen there in 1875, and its asserted appearance
in the rest of North-Eastern Africa is questionable, since
C. pallidus, a form long confounded with it, has perhaps
been mistaken for it, but otherwise it ranges, so far as
may be inferred, over the whole of that continent, even to
the Cape of Good Hope, where it is extremely abundant from
towards the end of the year till May. It is not known to
occur in the Atlantic islands, but in those of the Mediter-
ranean, as well as throughout every country of Europe, it is
a well-known summer-visitor.
The bill is black: irides dark brown: the whole plumage,
except a small greyish-white patch under the chin, nearly
uniform blackish-brown, glossy above: toes and claws black.
There is no external difference between the sexes.
The whole length is nearly seven inches and a half. From
the carpal joint to the tip of the wing, which reaches an inch
and a quarter beyond that of the tail, six inches and five-
eighths.
Young birds have the chin of a purer white, and most of
the feathers on the upper surface tipped with buffy-white.
The middle figure of the vignette represents the sternal
apparatus of the Swift, which will be seen at a glance to
differ most essentially from that of any Passerine bird, in
the form of the coracoids and fureula, and in the absence of
the forked manubrium or anterior process of the keel, as
well as in the absence of the postericr notches of the sternum.
The peculiar structure of the foot is also exhibited by the
two lateral figures, one shewing that limb with the four toes
directed forwards in their ordinary position, and the other
the several bones composing it divested of their integu-
ments. It will be observed in this figure that the digital
phalanges instead of following the usual arithmetical series
among birds generally—2, 38, 4, 5, are 2, 8, 8, 3—one
phalanx being absent in the third digit and two phalanges
SWIFT. ou
wanting in the fourth. This structure is found in the genus
Cypselus and its ally Panyptila (an American form) but not,
so far as is known, in other genera of Cypselide.*
* An example of the ‘‘ Needle-tailed Swallow ” of Latham (Synops. Suppl. ii.
p. 259), a species belonging to the genus Acanthyllis or Chetura of modern
ornithologists and to the family Cypselidw, was shot at Great Horkesley near
Colchester, July 8th, 1846, having been seen there two days before; and, while
yet fresh, was examined by Newman, Doubleday, Mr. Fisher and the Author of
this work (Zool. p. 1492). Mr. Yarrell, however, did not think fit to mention
it in his last edition, doubtless regarding it as a straggler from Australia,
While the present sheet was under revision the occurrence of a second example
in England became known to the Editor. This was killed July 26th or 27th,
1879, near Ringwood, having been a few days before seen flying with a com-
panion over the river Avon by Mr. Corbin, who kindly allowed the specimen to
be exhibited to the Zoological Society, January 6th, 1880, The species is not
known to have been noticed in Western Asia or elsewhere in Europe ; yet, when
its wide range and great power of flight is considered, its appearance here need
not excite surprise. Though first made known in 1802, from a specimen obtained
in New South Wales) to which country and to Tasmania Acanthyllis or Chetura
caudacuta annually migrates), it was procured by Steller many years before near
Irkutsk, and was observed in Dauuria by Pallas, who, not recognizing its identity
with Latham’s species, redescribed it (Zoogr. R.-As. i. p. 541) under the name
of Hirundo ciris. It has since been recorded from Amoorland and China, as
well as Nepaul, Sikim and Bhotan, for it is identical with the C. nudipes of Mr.
Hodgson ; and it is said to breed in the Himalayas, as it doubtless does in
Eastern Siberia. The genus can be easily distinguished by the structure of the
tail, in which the shaft of each feather protrudes beyond the web as a sharp
spine, and by the feet being formed on the ordinary model, and not as in Cypselus.
372 CYPSELIDE.
PICARLA, CYPSELIDE.
CypseLUs MELBA (Linnzus”).
THE ALPINE SWIFT.
Cypselus alpinust.
Ar least eighteen examples of this Swift are now recorded
as having been taken within the limits of the British Is-
lands; the first of which was shot at sea eight or ten miles
from the south coast of Ireland about midsummer 1829, and
was sent by Mr. Sinclaire to Selby, as mentioned by him in
1831 (Edinb. Journ, Nat. and Geogr. Sc. n.s. iii. p. 170;
Trans. N. H. Soc. Northumb. i. p. 291). A second speci-
men, ‘‘since”’, according to Mr. Jenyns (Br. Vert. p. 160),
killed at Kingsgate in the Isle of Thanet, was seen by Mr.
Gould in 1832 (P. Z. S. 1832, p. 180), and, subsequently
passing into the possession of Mr. R. B. Hale, was lent by
him for the use of this work, the figure above inserted being
drawn from it. According to Mr. E. P. Thompson (Notebook
* THirundo melba, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 345 (1766).
+ Hirundo alpina, Secopoli, Annus I. Historico-Naturalis, p. 166 (1769).
{ In former editions of this work the bird was said to have been ‘* shot early
ALPINE SWIFT. ote
of a Naturalist, p. 226) an example flew into a room at Dover,
August 20th, 1830, and was secured; but this statement
was not published till 1845. The fourth bird was shot in the
latter part of September, 1831, at Old Buckenham in Norfolk
(Mag. N. H. vi. p. 286; Field-Nat. i. p. 172), and was after-
wards presented by Mr. Fulcher, who obtained it, to the Mu-
seum at Norwich. A fifth, being the second Irish occurrence,
is said by W. Thompson (P. Z. S. 1834, p. 29*) to have been
killed at Rathfarnham, near Dublin, early in March 1833,
and to be preserved in the collection of Mr. Warren, to whom
it was sent while perfectly fresh. The sixth example was
picked up dead at Hinxton near Saffron-Walden, in July
1838, as communicated to the Author by Mr. Joseph Clarke.
On October 8th, 1841, an example, killed at Wokingham,
was seen by the Author before it was skinned, Mr. Gould
having brought it to London to preserve. It is now in Mr.
Bond’s collection. Couch (Corn. Fauna, ii. p. 147) states
that in June 1842, one was taken on board a vessel about
forty miles west of the Land’s End. Thompson says that
an example was shot at Doneraile in the county Cork in June
1844 or 1845. In October 1851, one was knocked down,
while sitting on a rail, at St. Leonard’s, and passed into the
possession of Mr. Johnson of that place (Zool. p. 3300). In
the same year an example was exhibited to the Somer-
set Archeological and Natural History Society (Nat. 1851,
p- 284) as having been killed in that county—near Ax-
bridge, as Mr. Cecil Smith, who has since seen it, be-
lieves. Mr. Rodd records (Zool. p. 6808 and s.s. p. 2240)
one, now in his collection, shot at Mylor near Falmouth in
the summer of 1859, and also another obtained some years
before near the Lizard. In August 1860, a specimen, now
the property of Mr. Whitaker, was shot at Finchley, as
in June 1820.” Mr. Jenyns’s assertion above quoted indicates that herein was a
mistake, and possibly 1830 was the year in which it occurred. Mr. Gould
unfortunately did not give the date, and can now throw no light on the matter.
* The first record of this is in the ‘Dublin Penny Journal’ (i. p. 320) of
March 30th, 1835, where it is said (incorrectly, according to Thompson) to have
occurred in the preceding February. Its appearance in a northern latitude, so
early as March, is of itself surprising enough.
374 CYPSELID.%.
stated by Mr. Sterland (Zool. 1879, p. 489). From October
16th to 18th, 1863, one was noticed in St. Mary’s church at
Hulme near Manchester, which, on the latter day, fell ex-
hausted while service was being performed (Zool. p. 8955).
On September 8th, 1870, one of two birds of this species,
flying into a house at Aldeburgh, was killed and examined
by Mr. Hele (Trans. Norf. and Norw. Nat. Soc. 1872-78,
p. 117); and an immature example, now in Mr. Gurney’s
collection, was shot at Breydon in Norfolk, on September
9th, 1872 (Zool. s.s. pp. 3319, 5046). While, lastly, Mr. H.
EK. Rawson has recorded (Zool. 1880, p. 108) one shot, while
flying with two more, near Ilfracombe, October 4th, 1876.*
This bird regularly visits Europe from Africa, in which
quarter of the globe (though, during our winter, it is abun-
dant so far as the Cape of Good Hope) it only seems to breed
in Algeria. It is therefore as truly a native of Europe as
the preceding species, but its breeding-range is entirely con-
fined to the mountainous districts of the southern and central
parts of the continent, within which limits it generally makes
its nest in the church-towers and other lofty buildings rather
than in rocky cliffs. All the examples that occur in Britain
and the northern parts of Europe must be regarded as strag-
glers from their home. Several have been obtained in Heli-
goland, but one only, and that so long ago as 1804, in Den-
mark. Even in central, and still more in northern, Germany
* This species is said to have been observed on several other occasions, though
the specimens were not procured. Blyth says (Mag. N. H. vii. p. 346) that in
May 1854 he saw some examples in company with the common species in Surrey,
but so high as to be out of gunshot. Couch in 1838 (Corn. Fauna, i. p. 20)
had been informed, on probable evidence, of two instances of its occurrence in
Cornwall. According to Macgillivray, Mr. Harley of Leicester saw an individual
Sept. 23d, 1839. One is said to have been observed at Kingsbury in August
1841, which may possibly have been the bird soon after killed at Wokingham.
In May 1844, one is supposed (Zool. p. 1191) to have been twice seen near Cam-
bridge. Mr, Blake-Knox records (Zool. s.s, pp. 456, 523) the observation of
this species at Achill and Arran on the west coast of Ireland. According to
Mr. Harting, an example is said to have been observed at Colchester June 8th,
1871, and in the same month it is believed to have been seen twice near Norwich
by Mr. Stevenson (Trans. Norf. and Norw. Nat. Soc. uf supra), and in Kent by
Mr. Bartlett (Zool. s.s. p. 5046), as well as on the succeeding July 24th at
Souter Point on the coast of Durham (op, cit. p. 2767).
Qo
ALPINE SWIFT. O15
it is as irregular and uncommon as with us. It has once,
according to M. de Selys-Longchamps, been observed in Bel-
gium. In France it is seldom seen away from its mountain-
haunts in the Pyrenees, the Alps and the Vosges*, and an
example, killed at Etretat in Normandy, as recorded by M.
Lemetteil (Cat. Ois. Seine-Infér. i. p. 218), seems to be the
only one that has occurred in the north of that country.
Eastwards the extreme limit of its normal summer-range
seems to be much the same as in Western Europe, and it
may be traced, due regard being had to the nature of the
district, from Transsylvania across the Ural to Turkestan,
while there is a possibility of its reaching Mongolia. It is
not uncommon in many parts of India, breeding in some of
the higher elevations and wintering lower down, while it
occurs also in Ceylon in the cold season, if it does not breed
there, as Capt. Legge (B. Ceyl. p. 318) thinks is possible.
The White-bellied Swift, to use a name often applied to
this species, seems to have been first made known in 1741,
by Edwards, to whom it was sent by Catesby as having been
obtained by his brother at Gibraltar, where it was afterwards
observed by John White, as he wrote to Linneus, to breed
in thousands, but sparingly only in our own time by Col.
Irby. It appears to reach Europe somewhat later than the
common Swift, and to have the same general habits, though,
from its proportionally larger wings, it flies more rapidly, and
from its larger size and conspicuously white belly, is easily
distinguished. Its nest, placed (as before said) in holes of
rocks or buildings, is described as being small for the size of
the bird, semicircular when placed against a vertical surface,
and formed of straws, grasses and leaves, with moss or
almost any other material it can collect on the wing, the
whole being glued together with its saliva. The eges are
said to be from two to five in number. They are of a dead
white, and measure from 1:26 to 1:17 by from °8 to *72 inch.
The bill is black : the irides dark brown : the lores brownish-
black, bounded above by a dull white line; the head, sides of
the neck, and the whole upper surface of a nearly uniform
* Dr. Marchant however says (Cat. Ois. Cote-d’or, p. 59) it breeds near Nolay.
VOL. I. 8
376 CYPSELIDA,
hair-brown, glossed with green, the flight-feathers rather
darker, and mostly edged with pale brown, the shafts of the
primaries greyish-brown; middle of the chin, throat, lower
part of the breast, and the belly, white; across the upper
part of the breast a broad hair-brown band; legs, feet and
lower tail- as well as wing-coverts hair-brown, the last with
light tips: toes orange-brown ; claws dark brown.
The whole length is about eight inches and three-eighths ;
from the carpal joint to the tips of the wings, which, when
closed, reach more than two inches beyond the tail, about
eight inches and five-eighths.
There is no appreciable difference in the outward appear-
ance of the two sexes. The young have nearly all their
feathers tipped with dull white.
gee
yO
NIGHTJAR. Bie
PICARLA. CAPRIMULGIDA.,
CAPRIMULGUS EUROPmUS, Linneus”*.
THE NIGHTJAR.
Caprimulgus Europeus.
CaprimuLeaus, Linnceust.—Bill very short, flexible, broad at the base, much
compressed at the point; gape very wide, extending behind the large eyes ;
upper mandible decurved at the tip, and beset on each side with a row of move-
able bristles, directed forwards ; lower mandible upturned at the tip, so as to
meet the upper at the point, leaving an open space further back. Nostrils basal,
with a prominent membranaceous rim, clothed with very small feathers. Wings
long ; with ten primaries, the first shorter than the second, which is the longest.
Tail, of ten feathers, pretty long and slightly rounded. Legs weak; tarsi short,
feathered in front for two-thirds of their length; feet with three toes hefore, one
behind, the anterior united as far as the first joint, the posterior turned inwards
at right angles, inner and outer toes equal, the latter with but four phalanges ;
claws short, except that of the middle toe, which is long and serrated on the
inner edge.
* Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 346 (1766). + Loe. cit.
378 CAPRIMULGID®.
THE NiIGHTsar or Goatsucker* is the only representative
among our native birds of a very interesting and _ well-
characterized Family, which inhabits almost all parts of the
world, and has some alliance with that last treated, though
the difference between the Cypselide and the Caprimulgide
is so marked, that no doubt has ever been entertained as to
their separation being warranted. The habit of taking their
insect-food on the wing is indeed possessed by both groups
in common with the Swallows and some other birds ; but with
nearly all the Nightjars this habit is nocturnal or crepuscu-
lar, and, being correlated with many peculiarities of external
structure and form, is sufficient to render their determination
easy, apart from the presence of many internal characters.
The Nightjar is a summer-visitant to britain, and, like
most of the species included in that category, it comes to us
from Africa. It is ordinarily one of the latest to arrive, and
seldom reaches this country before the middle of May, com-
monly departing about the middle of September. Capt.
Hadfield, however, records (Zool. p. 6977) his having seen
one in the Isle of Wight February 19th, 1860, and Mr. Gat-
combe informed Mr. Harting (Summer Migrants, p. 204)
of its appearance near Plymouth April 10th, 1872, while
Montagu mentions haying shot one in Devonshire, Novem-
ber 8th, 1805, and Couch says one was killed in Cornwall,
November 27th, 1821.+
The Nightjar commonly frequents moors and _ heaths,
especially such as are diversified by patches of fern, as well
as woods and plantations, most usually resting on the ground.
If disturbed it will often fly to a high tree, should one be
near, and then, on being cautiously approached, it may be
found crouching on a branch, not sitting athwart, as most
* The absurdity of this common name, which has its equivalent in most
European tongues—both ancient and modern, nowadays needs no shewing, but
the absurdity was not so great as that of the notion entertained by some writers
that the bird directed its course by looking through the roof of its mouth, which,
to that end, was so thin as to be transparent !
+ The Editor, when a boy, was told by a woodman at Elveden of his having,
many years before, flushed a Nightjar from her eggs on the 2d November, of
which date the finder felt sure by its being his birthday.
NIGHTJAR. 379
birds do, but lengthways*, the head being kept lower than
the body—a position which it commonly if not invariably
assumes whenever it perches; and in such an attitude re-
quiring a quick eye to detect it. On the ground also it
squats close; and, owing to the colour of its plumage closely
resembling that of the surrounding surface, is seldom seen
until it is almost trodden upon, when it suddenly opens its
wings and starts up silently as if from under the intruder’s
feet. It generally affects dry, sandy or stony places, where
they exist in the neighbourhood of its haunts, and is said to
be partial to those in which it can bask in the sun; but it is
certainly often found under the deep shade of trees where
the soil is comparatively free from vegetation. One habit,
well known to all who are acquainted with the bird, but of
which Mr, Dillwyn first sent word to the Author, is that of
stationing itself in the middle of a dusty road or pathway
in the summer-twilight, with the apparent object of enjoy-
ing a sand-bath, and of flying on, when approached, some
twenty or thirty yards to a similar dusty spot—a proceeding
it will repeat time after time, in advance of the wayfarer,
until it has traversed a distance perhaps of half a mile, when
it will wheel round and resume its station behind him.
Like some other crepuscular animals, the Nightjar seems
often to have a regular range of flight which it follows many
times in succession; but continued observation will shew
that this apparent regularity really depends on the quarter
whence the wind, if any, be blowing, and the consequent
course of the heavy-bodied insects on which the bird chiefly
feeds. Let the weather change and its beat is at once
adapted to the new conditions. So, too, at one time some
particular tree happens to be especially infested with cock-
chafers, rendering it a favourite resort of the Nightjar, which
may then be seen, for several consecutive evenings, wheeling
round the leafy mass in active pursuit of prey. During the
period when, in our latitudes, there is no real night, this
bird seems to be engaged in seeking its food from sunset till
dawn, but no one can say for how long it hunts when the
* Hence, says Vieillot, comes one of its vulgar names—‘‘ Clochebranche.”
580 CAPRIMULGID®.
days become shorter, and information is wholly wanting as
to its behaviour in its tropical winter-quarters where twilight
lasts only a few minutes, as well as in the extreme limits of
its northern range where in summer the night is as light as
the day. It is, however, certain that the Nightjar, much as
may be its custom, when with us, to pass in slumber the
whole time that the sun is above the horizon, is far from
being incapacitated by the broad glare of noon, and, among
other witnesses to the fact, Sheppard and Whitear state
(Trans. Linn. Soc. xv. p. 33) that they had twice seen it
hawking about in search of food at midday, upon one of
which occasions the sun was shining very brightly.*
The presence of the Nightjar is made known to us almost
immediately on its return hither by its conspicuous habit of
chasing its prey in the twilight as already mentioned. As
the season advances the song, for so it must be called, of the
cock attracts attention from its peculiarity. This song seems
to be always uttered when the bird is at rest, though the
contrary has been asserted, and is the continuous repeti-
tion of a single jarring note which has been likened to
the noise made by many kinds of machinery in motion, a
spinning-wheel+ among others. The sound can be easily
imitated by vibrating the tongue against the roof of the
mouth ; but the imitation, excellent as it may be close to the
performer, is greatly inferior in power, being almost inaud-
ible to any one twenty yards off, while the original can be
heard in calm weather for half a mile or more. It is uttered
at intervals, chiefly in the evening, and seldom lasts above
five minutes at a time, its duration being commonly only
from a minute and a half to two minutes. In hot weather
* The elder Lambert noticed the fact (op. cit. iii. p. 13) of the bird taking
moths, to the annoyance of a practical entomologist, so late as ten o'clock at
night, but he omitted to mention the precise season of the year, or whether the
moon was shining. Its availing itself of the pursuits of entomologists has also
been elsewhere remarked (Zool. ss. p. 2660).
+ Hence come many of the local names of the species :— ‘‘ Spinner,” ‘* Wheel-
bird,” ‘* Nightchurr” and perhaps ‘‘ Churn-Owl ’’—though this Jast may possibly
be a corruption of ‘* Fern-Owl,” suggested by its nocturnal habits and its haunt-
ing places where brakes grow.
NIGHTIJAR. 381
it may be heard by day even at noontide, but it is then de-
livered drowsily, as it were, and without the vigour that
characterizes its crepuscular or nocturnal performance. On
the wing while toying with his mate, or executing his rapid
evolutions round the trees where both find their food, the
cock occasionally produces another and equally extraordinary
sound, which by some excellent observers has been called a
squeak, but to the writer is exactly like that which can be
made by swinging a whip-thong in the air. How the bird
produces this sound is unknown, but it often accompanies a
sudden change in the direction of flight, and especially a
sudden shooting aloft which ends in a downward glide.
When disturbed from rest, something of the same kind may
also be often heard, but then it would seem to be the result
of smiting the wings together, though at other times the
flight is noiseless. Among the many agreeable occupations
which so frequently gratify the lover of Nature, not the least
is that of watching the behaviour of Nightjars on a summer’s
evening, especially if they be engaged in seeking their food
near the ground, as they not unfrequently do.* Their com-
mand of wing is very great, and the rapid twists they make
in quest of active prey, rendering them alternately invisible
in the gathering shades and then conspicuous against the
fading light adds a mysterious charm to their silent flittings,
for the spectator never knows in what quarter to expect one
of them to appear, and indeed is apt to exaggerate the num-
ber of birds around him. The common opinion that the
Nightjar always flies open-mouthed is not confirmed by such
observations as circumstances permit, and, as Macgillivray
has well remarked, would seem to be unreasonable. The
wide gape can doubtless be instantaneously opened and shut,
* Some dogs delight to hunt field-mice in the meadows at nightfall. When so
employed their movements disturb a considerable number of moths, and the
Nightjar, thereby attracted, will keep hovering over the dog’s head, and eagerly
seize every moth that takes wing. Mr. R. Gray says that he has seen this bird
‘*in grass fields cleverly picking ghost moths (Hepialus humuli) otf the stems,
from the points of which these sluggish insects were temptingly hanging.” The
Editor, however, has never observed the Nightjar take any prey that was nob
flying, though it has been said to eat caterpillars, slugs and other small mollusks,
as well as young frogs and their spawn (Bailly, Orn. Savoie, i. pp. 220, 221) !
382 CAPRIMULGID.
and the captured insect immediately finds itself overwhelmed
with the viscid saliva secreted by the faucial glands.
That the bristles along each side of the upper mandible
assist this bird while feeding on the wing, by increasing the
means of capture by the mouth, there can be little doubt—
though it is to be remarked that one section of the Family,
containing among others the American Night-Hawks (Chorde-
diles), is not so provided; but the use of the serrated claw
on each middle toe is not so obvious; and zoologists have
delighted in exercising their ingenuity to explain the func-
tion of this organ, which, equally with the maxillary bristles,
is not possessed by all the Caprimulgide, while it is found
also in several other groups of birds by no means related to
them. Gilbert White thought he had distinctly seen the
Goatsucker ‘‘ put out its short leg whilst on the wing, and,
by a bend of the head, deliver somewhat into its mouth.”
Hence he not unnaturally inferred that the use of the ser-
rated claw was to aid in the capture of prey. Atkinson also
quotes (Comp. Orn. p. 108) the opinion of a correspondent
to the same effect, but the very weak grasping-power of the
bird’s foot forbids our accepting this explanation. Other
uses have been assigned to this organ, namely to comb out
the rictal bristles—which seems inadmissible, since many
genera of the Family want them though possessing the ser-
rated claw—or to clear the mouth from the sharp hooks on
the legs of insects—as suggested by Mr. Hayward (Mag.
N. H. iii. p. 449) and others, while some have supposed it
is suppled as a means of getting rid of parasites—a process
which Wilson says he actually saw in the case of a captured
bird of an allied American species, Caprimulgus carolinensis*.
Mr. Sterland believes (B. Sherw. p. 174) that this feature
is correlated with the bird’s practice of sitting, as before
stated, lengthways on a branch—the serrated edge of the
claws being ‘placed in exactly the best position for prevent-
ing the foot from slipping sideways ’’—an inconvenience
* The observation is doubtless true so far as it goes, but too much importance
must not be attached thereto. Birds generally use their claws for this purpose,
and birds in eaptivity especially do so if denied the means of dusting themselves.
NIGHTJAR. 383
which is further guarded against by the lateral position of
the hind-toes—and remarks in corroboration of this theory
that some exotic Nightjars, of the genera Podargus and
Aigotheles especially, which have the middle claw smooth
and the hind-toe directed backwards, perch across the branch
on which they sit. Amid all these suppositions it seems
best to confess that the true function of the organ has yet to
be determined, the last being perhaps the most plausible,
though not applying to all birds similarly furnished.
The Nightjar makes no nest whatever, but lays its two*
eges on the ground, sometimes choosing the bare soil, but
nearly as often placing them on lichen or moss of short
growth. After incubation has made some progress, a slight
hollow, caused no doubt by the weight of the sitting bird
(light though it be) is perceptible; but there is no sign of
any depression being formed intentionally, nor is any shelter
sought. Yet markless as the spot may be, it is often used
year after year by the mother, the eggs being laid within a
few inches of where their predecessors of the summer before
had been deposited. So far as is actually known, only one
brood, accidents excepted, is produced in the season, but
since eges may be found from the end of May to the end of
July—or even in August (Journ. f. Orn. 1860, p. 472)—a
second seems to be occasionally possible. They are generally
laid about the beginning of June, and are of elongated
form, having both ends nearly equal, white, sometimes
tinged with cream-colour, blotched, mottled, clouded or
veined, in wonderful variety, with brownish-black, lighter
brown or lilac-grey of different shades,t and measure from
1:34 to 1:08 by from ‘89 to*78 in. The young when hatched
are covered with down, and, though remaining for some days
in their birth-place, can, it would seem, at an early age dis-
* Mr. P. Bartlett records (Zool. p. 445) the finding of two young birds and
one egg in a ‘‘nest’’; but there is nothing to shew that all were the offspring of
one mother.
+ No reasonable person can doubt the protective nature of the colouring of
these eggs, exposed as they are to innumerable dangers. Some species of Night-
jars are said to remove their eggs in their mouth if they have been found and
handled. The Editor cannot find proof that our own bird takes this precaution,
VOL. II. 3D
384 CAPRIMULGIDA,
play on occasion a considerable amount of activity.* When
about half-grown the feathers begin to shew. The fledglings
are not very hard to rear, and may be kept through the
winter, as recorded by Salmon (Mag. N. H. ix. p. 528) and
others (Journ. f. Orn. 1869, p. 220; 1870, p. 69), but it
seems that in captivity they never attempt to feed themselves.
The Nightjar is common in nearly every county of Great
Britain, though perhaps more plentiful in some of the
southern counties of England.t In Ireland, says Thomp-
son, it is a regular summer-visitant to certain localities in
all parts of the country, but of rare appearance elsewhere.
Its occurrence in the Outer Hebrides is only known from one
obtained in North Uist in 1870, as Sir John Orde informs
the Editor, and it is but an accidental straggler to Orkney
and Shetland, though it has been many times observed in
the latter. It is also an occasional visitor to the Feroes. In
Scandinavia it seems to be pretty abundant as far as lat. 63°,
and in Russia it reaches Archangel. Its range further east-
ward is very imperfectly defined. Pallas, indeed, gives it as
being found throughout the whole of temperate Siberia, but
it probably does not extend beyond Irkutsk. It would seem
to inhabit Turkestan and Persia, some of the specimens ob-
tained in both countries varying by having a hghter plumage.
It is a summer-visitant to Palestine and is found in Arabia.
In Egypt and Nubia it appears to have been only observed
on passage, but how much further it goes to take up its
winter-quarters is unknown, for the South-African Nightjar,
recognized by Andrew Smith as identical with our own, has
been since described as specifically distinct. Drake says it
* Mr. H. M. Wallis writes to the Editor that he once put a Nightjar off her
two down-clad young, which he picked up and set side by side on his hand. One
remained quiet, but, to his surprise, ‘‘the other jumped off, and ran like a
cilicken to the roots of a bush near by,’”’ where it squatted.
+ In some places it suffers much persecution from the perversity of game-
keepers who stupidly consider that a Lird which looks so much like a Hawk on the
wing as to be mistaken fur one by little birds, when it comes abroad, must have
Hawk-like habits. As itis, we bave not a more harmless species than the Night-
jar and not wany more beneficial, for it feeds almost entirely on cockchefers and
moths—the latter being chiefly those whose lary are as destructive to the roots
of grass as are the grubs of the former.
NIGHTJAR. 385
breeds in Morocco, and it is said to occur in Algeria even
in winter. It is also recorded from Madeira. Throughout
Europe, short of the limits already assigned, it is very gene-
rally distributed.
The upper mandible is black, the lower also black near
the tip, but pale brown at the base: the irides dusky-black :
the upper plumage generally is greyish-brown, produced by
minute specks of blackish-brown on a yellowish-white ground,
with blackish-brown stripes on the head, the scapulars,
and middle of the back, varied also in places, especially
behind the nape and on the margin of the scapulars, with
buff patches; the fore part of the wing is dark brown, the
feathers mostly tipped with deep buff; the wing-quills are
brown, irregularly barred with deep buff, and near the tip
marbled with dark grey, the first three primaries on each
side, in the male, with a large well-defined white spot'on the
inner web; the middle tail-feathers greyish-brown, freckled
and irregularly barred with brownish-black; on the lateral
quills this dark barring increases in width, occupying the
ereater extent of the webs, and the lighter spaces are tinged
with buff; the two outermost quills on each side, in the
male, are broad, tipped with white; the sides of the head
and ear-coverts are buff, closely barred with dark brown; the
chin is the same, but bounded beneath the gape by an in-
definite streak of buffy-white; the throat generally presents
a white patch tinged with buff, varying much in extent; the
breast greyish-brown closely barred and freckled with dark
brown, but on the lower parts the ground-colour becomes
buff and the bars and freckling are less numerous, until, on
the belly, flanks and tarsi, the latter wholly disappears and
on the lower tail-coverts the former are far apart: the legs,
toes and claws, orange-brown.
The whole length is ten inches and a half: from the
carpus to the tip of the wing, seven inches and three-eighths.
The female is darker and less ferruginous than the male,
and wants the white spots on the quills of the wings and tail.
The young, when first hatched, are clothed in down,
ereyish-buff at the base and dark brown at the top, forming
386 CAPRIMULGID®.
a mottled surface above, and beneath uniform pale brown.
The feet are early well-developed, being, when the feathers
begin to grow, nearly as long as those of the adult. At this
age the claw of the middle toes is not serrated. The first
plumage much resembles that of the parents; but the males
have the spots on the wings and tail buff, more or less
mottled with brown, instead of pure white.*
* Mr. Hancock recorded (Ibis, 1862, p. 39) the occurrence, October 5th,
1856, at Killingworth in Northumberland, of a Red-necked Nightjar, Capri-
mulgus ruficollis,—a South-Kuropean species, much resembling our own, but
distinguishable by its larger size, its lighter grey head and rufous collar. Other
examples may possibly have visited this country, and been mistaken for those
of the common species, but C. ruficoll’s has a range so far to the southward that
its only known appearance in England, especially when the season of the occur-
rence is considered, seems at present not to justify its being regarded asa ‘‘ British
3ird’’. It has not been recognized in any part of Germany, or even in central
France.
CUCKOW. 387
PICARIZ. CUCULIDA.
CucuLus canorus, Linnzus*.
THE CUCKOW.
Cuculus ecanorus.
Cucuius, Linnceus +.—Bill short and subcylindrical, culmen somewhat de-
curved, upper mandible slightly notched near the tip; lower mandible nearly
straight beneath; gape wide. Nostrils basal, circular, with a prominent mem-
branaceous rim. Wings with ten primaries, the first short, the third longest,
the innermost three shorter than the first. Tail of ten feathers, the outer three
pairs graduated, the middle two nearly equal. Tarsi short, feathered for nearly
half their length ; toes two before, two behind.
* Syst. Nat. i. p. 168 (1766). + Loe. cit.
388 CUCULIDA.
TuHE history of the Cuckow has always been a subject of
interest not only to ornithologists but to all lovers of Nature,
and perhaps no bird has attracted so much attention, while
of none have more idle tales been told.* Some of its habits
are now well ascertained, but in regard to many of its pre-
sumed peculiarities there is still much to be learnt, before
our knowledge of them can be deemed satisfactory, while
the conflicting testimony offered even by trained and credible
observers makes the task of the Cuckow’s historian one of
the hardest that Ornithology imposes on her followers. Its
strange and, according to the experience of most people, its
singular custom of depositing its eggs in the nests of other
birds, thus freeing itself from the duty of further providing
for its offspring, and leaving their education to foster-parents,
is enough to account for much of the curiosity that has been
felt; but this custom is shared by many of its Old- World
relatives, and in America by birds not at all related to it.
As to the way in which this parasitism can have originated,
nothing save conjecture is to be offered, and that may be so
far from the truth as to be hardly worth consideration.t
Anatomists and physiologists have over and over again
taxed their powers to discover the reason of this extra-
ordinary custom, but hitherto the various explanations,
which have from time to time been offered, can hardly
be deemed adequate, and the matter must still be left to
the ingenuity of speculative minds. In this work it is
desirable to avoid speculation as far as possible, yet it must
be owned that some hypothesis is needed to render the
Cuckow’s history at all intelligible, partly to supply informa-
* A mere list of the different contributions to the history of this species would
probably extend over as many pages as can here be allotted to its consideration.
Much of the Cuckow-literature is certainly of little value, and by no means
repays the student, but all of it has to be mastered by any one wishing to do
justice to the subject.
+ On this subject reference may be made to some remarks in the ‘ Encyclo-
pedia Britannica’ (Ed, 9, iii. p. 772), too long to be here quoted, but it is to be
observed that, granting the probability of the ancestors of our parasitic Cuckows,
having at some early period habitually built their own nests, there is of course
no evidence of the progenitors of the many species which are now their dupes
having ever been their invaders.
CUCKOW. 389
tion that we lack, and partly to connect such results of
observation as may be deemed facts. Even with this limita-
tion the biography of the bird, to be written fully, would
require a volume.
The Cuckow generally appears in this country about the
middle of April,* the cock-birds arriving first, and their
well-known notes are heard with pleasure as evidence that
spring has returned. In a few days the hens follow, and
soon after amorous contests between keen and loud-voiced
suitors may be noticed—contests that are continued for
some weeks, until the respective pretensions of the rivals
are decided. But while the females rove about almost at
random, the males seem not to wander far from the station
they assume so soon as they have settled themselves. There
is a general and apparently well-founded belief that the
latter are more numerous than the former, and it is also
pretty evident that, unlike most other birds, Cuckows do not
pair. Hence, according to the opinion of the best observers,
Cuckows are not polygamous in the ordinary sense of the
word, but the hens consort with one cock after another in
succession. Thus though a hen may often be seen followed
by more than one cock, she is not followed very far or very
long by any one bird in particular, her suitors returning
one after another each to his own haunt, whence they con-
tinue to proclaim themselves almost incessantly. Even by
night they are not silent, but as the season advances, their
song is less frequently heard; and the Cuckow seems
rather to avoid observation as much as possible, the more
so since whenever it shews itself it is a signal for all the
small birds of the neighbourhood to be up in its pursuit,
just as though it were a Hawk, to which, indeed, its mode
“ Tts arrival has frequently been reported in March or earlier still, but such
records must be treated with suspicion if not incredulity. Mr. Harper says
(Zool. p. 83115) that a Cuckow’'s egg was taken in Norfolk, April 5th, 1851. and
(p. 3145) that on the 14th of the same month he saw two, one of which he shot.
Mr. Borrer informs the Editor that, in a series of observations made in Sussex
for more than twenty year, April 6th, 1844, was the earliest day on which he
noticed the Cuckow’s occurrence.
t Cf. Van Mons, Bull. Acad. Bruxelles, i. p. 115.
390 CUCULIDE.
of flight and general appearance give it an undoubted re-
semblance.* Towards the middle or end of June its cry
is no longer the “‘ plain song” that was heard on its arrival ;
it becomes rather hoarser in tone, and its first syllable or
note is doubled. Soon after it is no longer heard at all,
and by the middle of July an old Cuckow is seldom to be
found in these islands, though a stray example, or even,
but very rarely, two or three birds in company, may occasion-
ally be seen for a month later.
So far about as much of the story of the Cuckow’s life as
falls within the experience of most people in this country
has been told, but it relates mainly to the birds of one sex
only. The females have been living for most of this time
in a way even still more secluded. They are less numerous,
as has been already said, than the males to begin with.
They have no loud and musical note to attract attention t—
one that they utter has been compared to the cry of the
Dabchick, another (or perhaps the same) sounds to the
writer not unlike the cail-note of the Whimbrel. The
roaming habit and flight in the open, which soon after their
arrival rendered them conspicuous, has almost entirely
ceased, and when seen, which is comparatively seldom, they
are ordinarily lurking under some kind of shelter. Their
chief business may be safely presumed to be the hunt-
ing for birds’ nests into which they may introduce their
own eggs. From what has gone before it may be gathered
that, in connection with this subject, a good deal remains to
be determined, most of which, however probable, is still to
* Dr. A. E. Brehm (Ornith. Centralblatt, 1877, p. 132) denies, however,
that they take it for a Hawk, asserting that their behaviour towards a Cuckow
is very different. The old fable of the Cuckow turning into a Hawk in winter-
time would seem to have had its origin rather in the appearance of the one
coinciding with the disappearance of the other, than in their outward likeness,
though this indeed leads many people in these days, who ought to know better,
into considering the Cuckow a ‘‘ bird-of-prey.”’
+ Some observers have expressed their belief that the female sings, and the
evidence of Blyth (Mag. N. H. viii. p. 329) has been quoted as affording
an ‘unquestionable instance” of the fact. Reference to the statement. will
shew that it does not rest on his own observation, and he with others may be
safely deemed to have been misled in this matter.
CUCKOW. 391
be proved. ‘There is abundant evidence that the nest chosen
by the Cuckow is often so situated, or so built, that it
would be an absolute impossibility for a bird of her size to
lay her ege therein by sitting upon or in the fabric, as birds
commonly do,* yet so much caution is used by the Cuckow
in her selection that the act of inserting the egg has been
but seldom witnessed. It is not allowable to assume that
the practice is always followed, but there have been a few
fortunate observers that have actually seen the laying of her
egg on the ground by the hen Cuckow, who then taking it
into her bill has introduced it into the nest—though whether
she had previously found and surveyed the nest, or not, is
another point on which no opinion has been reached.
Among such observers of one part of the operation, so far
as our own country is concerned, the earliest seem to have
been two sons of Mr. Tripeny, of Coxmuir, who informed
Weir, as recorded by Macgillivray (Br. B. iii. p. 130), that
as they were tending cattle on June 24th, 1838, they saw a
Cuckow alight on a hillock near them. ‘It picked up an
ego with its bill, and after having looked round about as if
to ascertain whether there was any one in sight, it hopped
down with it amongst the heath. The lads immediately ran
to the place into which they had observed it descend, and
when at the distance of about six feet, they saw it rise
from the side of a titlark’s nest into which it had intro-
duced its head. In the nest, which was arched over with
strong heath, and had a narrow entrance from the side,
there was a newly dropped Cuckoo’s egg along with one of
the titlark’s own.” But perhaps the most satisfactory
evidence on the point is that of Herr Adolf Miller, a
forester at Gladenbach in Darmstadt, who says (Zool. Gar-
ten, 1866, p. 874) that through a telescope he watched a
Cuckow as she laid her ege on a bank and then saw her
slope her head to the ground, take the egg in her widely-
opened bill and carry it to a Wagtail’s nest close at hand, in
which he immediately afterwards found it.
* Young Cuckows too have more than once been found in a nest whence it was
not easy to see how they could escape.
VOL. Il. 3.5
392 CUCULIDA.
Cuckows indeed have been not unfrequently shot as they
were carrying a Cuckow’s egg, presumably their own, in
their bill*—a fact which has probably given rise to the belief
that they suck the eges of other birds. The testimony in
favour of this belief proves on examination to be very weak,t
but it has doubtless been fostered by imperfect observation
of circumstances the true explanation of which seems to
have been first supplied by the late Mr. Rowley. This
gentleman, who for a while made the Cuckow his particular
study and had much experience of its habits, declared (Ibis,
1865, p. 186) as one of the results of his investigations that
the hen Cuckow seldom succeeds in introducing her egg
into another bird's nest without the act being resented, and
consequently without using more or less violence and engag-
ing in a seuflle, of which traces often remain. It would
therefore appear that we may justifiably suppose that the
Cuckow ordinarily, when inserting her egg, excites the fury
(already stimulated by her Hawk-like aspect) of the owners
of the nest by breaking, turning out of it, or even carrying
off from it one or some of the eggs that may have been
already laid therein, and this induces the dupe to brood all
the more eagerly what is left to her. As to the assertion
that the Cuckow herself takes any further interest in the
fate of the eee she has foisted upon her dupe, or in the
future welfare of its product, there is really no evidence
* The earliest instance of this in Britain seems to be that observed by Kinahan
and Prof. Haughton as reported by Thompson (B. Ivel. iii. p. 442). Another
was soon after recorded by Mr. Harper (Zool. p. 3145) who saw a Cuckow flying
with something between its mandibles. He followed and reached within twenty
yards of it as it crawled like a Parrot by the side of a drain in a meadow. Then
it stopped and he shot it, when he found the substance he had noticed in its bill
to be its egg. Le Vaillant, however, seems to have been the first to discover this
interesting fact, not indeed in our own species, but in the South-African ‘* Coucou
Didric ’—the Lamprococeyx cupreus or Chalcites aureus of authors—a bird of
like parasitic habits, two females of which he says (Ois. d’Afrique, v. pp. 47, 48)
were shot by himself and his Hottentot Klaas, as they were carrying one of their
eggs in their bill.
t Hoy, it is true, says (Mag. N. H. v. p. 278) that he detected a Cuckow
flying away from a Wagtail’s nest with one of that bird’s eggs in its bill, after
having left an egg of its own in exchange for the one taken. Other ornitholo-
gists have given similar evidence, but there is nothing to prove that the Cuckow
meant to swallow its spoil.
CUCKOW. 393
worth attention, though some men of high scientific rank
have asserted that such is the case. It is enough to remark
that none of them have been sufficiently accustomed to out-
door observation to inspire confidence in their own experience,
or to be competent judges of that of others. Most of them
relied on statements, made no doubt in good faith, but made
without the accurate practice so necessary for a field-natural-
ist.* Anold Cuckow may very likely in the pursuit of her
business be now and then seen near a nest containing a
young Cuckow; but that the latter was her own offspring, or
that she was intentionally visiting it, are assumptions which
cannot be allowed without stronger evidence than has been
in most cases adduced.
The egg of the Cuckow—of which more must be said
presently—having been successfully placed in the nest of
her dupe,t it will be convenient to describe the subsequent
* Stories of this kind seem to have been first put forth in England in 1772 by
Barrington (Phil. Trans. xii. p. 299, note) whose example was unfortunately
followed by Erasmus Darwin (Zoonomia, ed. 1794, i. pp. 172, 173, and ed.
1796, i. pp. 175-177) and Fleming (Brit. Anim. pp. 90, 91). In 1823, and
again about five years later, Mr. Blackwall (Mem. Lit. Philos. Soc. Manchester,
ser. 2, iv. pp. 464, 465, and Zool. Journ. iv. pp. 297-300), reversing the
experience of White (in his seventh letter to Barrington), gave what is no
doubt the correct explanation of the more prominent cases reported by those
authors, namely that the birds seen were Nightjars. But notwithstanding
this, John Edward Gray subsequently revived the belief by relating, it is said
(Proc. Zool, Soe. 1836, p. 104), ‘‘a series of facts,’ to the effect that the hen
Cuckow sometimes takes care of her young, feeds it after leaving the nest in
which it was hatched, and teaches it to fly. The details of this naturalist’s
observations, which were ‘‘made by himself,” as stated by Mr. Gould, in
1836 or 1837, (B. Eur. pt. xix.), seem never to have been published, and
the only other information about them is that given by Blyth who said
(Analyst, ix. pp. 67, 68) that Gray ‘‘affirms that he has himself seen a
Cuckoo, day after day, visit the spot where one of its offspring was being reared,
and which it finally enticed away from its foster-parents.” There is therefore no
means of accounting for the mistake, but that a mistake was made scarcely any
one can doubt. In 1859 even, a celebrated ornithologist tried to persuade the
Editor and some of his friends that the naked breast and belly of a Cuckow
was full proof of the bird having been brooding. The nudity of these parts,
figured by Prof. Schlegel, in 1831, in illustration of his often-quoted and l'ttle-
read prize-essay (Natuurk. Verhandel. Haarlem, xix. pp. 237-268, fig. 1), is
characteristic of both sexes of the Cuckow, and the example in question proved
on dissection to be a male !
+ Of the birds included in this work the egg of the Cuckow is recorded as
394: CUCULIDA.
events. There is abundant proof that the time of its inser-
tion is very variable. It may be deposited before the owner
of the nest has laid any egg of her own, or after she has
completed her clutch. Several authorities have declared that
the Cuckow’s egg needs not so long a period of incubation
as the eggs of most of the birds upon which its care is
imposed; but this is a matter that must at present be
deemed undecided.* In due time it is hatched, and then
takes place one of the most wonderful things in the whole
history of this wonderful bird ; for the discovery of which we
are indebted to the accurate observations of the celebrated
Edward Jenner, as related by him in a letter to John Hunter,
by whom they were communicated to the Royal Society
(Phil. Trans. 1788, pp. 219-237). So strange a chapter of
Natural History had never before been published, and it is
by no means surprising that some of the contemporaries of
those great men hesitated to credit what they therein read.
Jenner’s account of what he saw has, however, been fully
confirmed by later experience, and exception can only be
taken to some minor details of which it was impossible for
him to assure himself.| It had of course been commonly
known for centuries that very soon after the Cuckow was
having been found in the nests of the following species though not necessarily
in the British Islands :—all the Shrikes; the Spotted Flycatcher ; the Golden
Oriole ; the Song-Thrush, Mistletoe-Thrush (Zool. Garten, 1878, p. 177), Black-
bird, Ring-Ouzel and Rock-Thrush ; the Sylviide except the Rufous, Savi’s and
the Yellow-browed Warbler; the Wren; the Treecreeper; the Great Tit-
mouse ; all the Wagtails and Pipits ; the Larks except the Shore- and the White-
winged Lark; the Reed-, Great, Yellow and Cirl-Bunting and the Ortolan ;
the Chaftinch and Brambling, the Tree- and House-Sparrow, the Hawfinch
and Greentinch, the Serin, the Linnet and Mealy Redpoll and the Bullfinch ;
the Swallow; the Daw, Pie and Jay ; the Ring-, Stock- and Turtle-Dove ; and,
most strange of all, the Little Grebe (Journ. fiir Ornith. 1876, p. 391)! But
of these birds, seventy-eight in number, four—the Hedge-Sparrow, Reed-
Warbler, Pied Wagtail and Meadow-Pipit, deserve particular notice as being
those most commonly chosen as foster-parents.
* Thus Jenner, in the course of his observations immediately to be mentioned,
thought that the Cuckow’s egg is usually hatched first, but he knew of one
instance to the contrary (p. 228, note).
+ For instance where he states (p. 221) that the Cuckow’s dupe ‘‘ whilst she is
sitting, not unfrequently throws out some of her own eggs, and sometimes
injures them in such a way that they become addle.”
CUCKOW. 395
hatched the eggs or young, if such there were, of its foster-
parent disappeared from the nest, of which the interloper
remained the sole tenant, but the way in which they were
got rid of was wholly unsuspected until ascertained by
Jenner. Some people believed with Lottinger that the
parent Cuckow was the author of their destruction,* others
supposed that they were smothered by the disproportionate
size of their fellow-nestling and their corpses cast out by their
own parents. Bya succession of experiments, the particulars
of which it is here impossible to give, Jenner learnt that the
young Cuckow, alone and unaided, was the agent, and it was
in June 1787 that he ascertained this fact. On the 18th of
that month he examined a Hedge-Sparrow’s nest, which
then contained a Cuckow’s egg and three eggs of its owner.
Inspecting it the next day he found therein a young Cuckow
and a young Hedge-Sparrow, and as it was so placed that
he could distinctly observe what went on in it, he, to his
astonishment, saw the former, though so lately hatched, in
the act of turning out its companion :—
‘* The mode of accomplishing this was very curious. The
little animal with the assistance of its rump and wings,
contrived to get the bird upon its back, and making a lodge-
ment for the burden by elevating its elbows, clambered back-
ward with it up the side of the nest till it reached the top,
where resting for a moment, it threw off its load with a jerk,
and quite disengaged it from the nest. It remained in this
situation a short time, feeling about with the extremities of
its wings, as if to be convinced whether the business was
properly executed, and then dropped into the nest again.
With these (the extremities of its wings) I have often seen
it examine, as it were, an egg and nestling before it began
its operations ; and the nice sensibility which these parts
appeared to possess seemed sufficiently to compensate the
want of sight, which as yet it was destitute of. I afterwards
put in an egg, and this, by a similar process, was conveyed
to the edge of the nest, and thrown out. These experiments
* Yet in 1782 Lottinger himself had personal proof of the expulsion of an
egg from the nest by a young Cuckow (Hist. du Coucou d'Europe, p. 18).
396 CUCULIDE.
I have since repeated several times in different nests, and
have always found the young Cuckoo disposed to act in the
same manner. In climbing up the nest, it sometimes drops
its burden, and thus is foiled in its endeavours; but, after a
little respite, the work is resumed, and goes on almost
incessantly till it is effected. It is wonderful to see the
extraordinary exertions of the young Cuckoo, when it is
two or three days old, if a bird be put into the nest with it
that is too weighty for it to lift out. In this state it seems
ever restless and uneasy. But this disposition for turning
out its companions begins to decline from the time it is two
or three till it is about twelve days old, when, as far as I
have hitherto seen, it ceases. Indeed, the disposition for
throwing out the eges appears to cease a few days sooner ; for
I have frequently seen the young Cuckoo, after it had been
hatched nine or ten days, remove a nestling that had been
placed in the nest with it, when it suffered an egg, put there
at the same time, to remain unmolested. The singularity
of its shape is well adapted to these purposes ; for, different
from other newly-hatched birds, its back from the scapule
downwards is very broad, with a considerable depression in
the middle. This depression seems formed by nature for
the design of giving a more secure lodgement to the egg of
the Hedge-sparrow, or its young one, when the young
Cuckoo is employed in removing either of them from the
nest. When it is about twelve days old, this cavity is quite
filled up, and then the back assumes the shape of nestling
birds in general.”
This remarkable habit of the young Cuckow has been so
abundantly confirmed by the testimony of unimpeachable
eye-witnesses in many countries, and in England among
others by Montagu and Mr. Blackwall, whose names are a
sufficient guarantee for the accuracy of their observations,
that the unbelief in Jenner’s statements, hinted or openly
expressed by some zoologists is hardly to be justified by the
most ardent supporter of absolute proof.* In 1872 a lady
* It is painful to find Waterton one of the strongest impugners of Jenner’s
word, and, without any warrant, declaring dogmatically in a letter to Ord
\
CUCKOW. 397
published* an artistic sketch, taken from life, of the callow,
blind, but far from helpless young Cuckow in the act of
heaving one of its foster-brethren—a Titlark some days older
than itself—over the side of the nest.
It not unfrequently happens that two Cuckows’ eges ft are
deposited (presumably by different birds) in the same nest.
Of one such instance that came under Jenner’s observa-
tion he writes:—‘‘ June 27, 1787. Two Cuckoos and a
Hedge-sparrow were hatched in the same nest this morning ;
one Hedge-sparrow’s egg remained unhatched. In a few
hours after, a contest began between the Cuckoos for the
possession of the nest, which continued undetermined till
the next afternoon ; when one of them, which was somewhat
superior in size, turned out the other, together with the
youne Hedge-sparrow and the unhatched egg. This con-
test was very remarkable. The combatants alternately
appeared to have the advantage, as each carried the other
several times nearly to the top of the nest, and then sunk
down again, oppressed by the weight of its burthen ; till at
length, after various efforts, the strongest prevailed, and was
afterwards brought up by the Hedge-sparrows.” On the
other hand it must be mentioned that in a case recorded by
‘*He never saw what he relates.’” Mr. Gould, though once (B. Eur. pt. xix.)
admitting the possibility of the young Cuckow’s shouldering out its companions,
in 1864 (B. Gr. Brit. pt. v.) held the old belief that they were ejected by
their own parents ; but the evidence of Mrs. Blackburn, being suitably brought
to his notice, induced him to confess (op. ct. Introd.) that his former opinion
was erroneous.
* ‘The Pipits, illustrated by J. H. B.’ [Mrs. Blackburn] pl. 11 (Glasgow : 1872).
The sketch was adapted to form one of Mr. Gould’s plates (B. Gr. Brit. pt. xxv. ),
but not, it would seem (Nature, ix. p. 123), too accurately, and was reproduced
by him (op. cit. Introd.) as well as by Mr. Harting (Summer Migrants, p. 239).
+ The passion for evicting the tenants of a nest is shewn by an observation of
Herr Brucklacher (Zool. Garten, 1868, p. 154), who, having set at opposite ends
of a window-sill a young Cuckow and a nest full of young Bullfinches, saw the
former after some time crawl straight across to the latter, climb up the nest,
and possess himself of it, though the resistance of its occupants made him take
a couple of hours to perform the feat.
+ Mr. E. ©. Moor records (Zool. s.s. p. 2344) the successive taking of three
Cuckow’s eggs from the same Wagtail’s nest, used three times in the same
season. These he supposes to have been laid by the same Cuckow, but it does
not seem that two eggs were ever in the nest simultaneously.
398 CUCULIDE.
Herr Adolf Miiller (Zool. Garten, 1868, pp. 845 349) the
larger of two Cuckows in the same nest perished, and Mr.
H. Turner (Mag. Nat. Hist. viii. pp. 287, 288) knew of two
that throve in company for the ten days he was able to
observe them.
The young murderer having thus become the only object
of the solicitous cares of his foster-parents, thrives and grows
very quickly, leaving the nest in about a fortnight or less,*
being by that time completely fledged, though his wings and
tail have not reached their full dimensions. Yet nearly as
long as he remains in the land of his birth his wants are
anxiously supplied by the victims of his mother’s dupery.
Their actions when he attains his full stature become almost
ridiculous, for they have often to perch between his shoulders
to place in his gaping, up-turned mouth the delicate morsels
he is too lazy or too stupid to take from their bill. The
time during which he is thus supported by his foster-parents
has not been determined, but it seems to last for some
weeks. At leneth however he begins to shift for himself,
and then follows the elders of his kin to more southern
climes, though it appears certain that he does not accompany
them on their migration, for nearly all the old Cuckows,
as has been said, leave this country by the middle of July,
and are hardly ever seen in August, while the young have
been observed at the end of that month or even at the
beginning of September. Indeed Mr. Rodd sent word that
he had known them remain in Cornwall till October ;
Thompson was informed of two shot near Tralee on the
5th, and Mr. Curtler (Zool. p. 2455) records one shot near
Worcester on the 14th of that month.
* If taken when about that age the Cuckow is not hard to rear in captivity,
especially if its keeper delegates the duty of satisfying its inordinate appetite to
a cage-companion, for something of what may be called ‘‘ fascination”’ is exer-
cised by the young monster, which no bird that is wont to feed its own helpless
offspring seems able to resist. Indeed cases are known of the foster-parents
being voluntarily assisted in their task by other birds when all are at liberty.
In confinement the Cuckow is not amiable, and though it has been kept not
unfrequently through the winter, has moulted its nestling’s feathers, and, accord-
ing to some, has been heard to utter its well-known ery, it seems never to have
been known to pick up its own food.
\
CUCKOW. 399
To what cause we may attribute the parasitism of the
Cuckow is at present beyond our knowledge; and, when so
many other cases of the same habit throughout the whole range
of Natural History are remembered—cases in comparison
with which that of this bird, though presenting some peculiar
characters, is by no means remarkable—it would be vain, as
premised, to indulge in conjectures on the subject. Yet a
few of the explanations which have been proposed require
notice here, if only to shew their futility. First is that of
Hérissant (Mém. de l’Acad. R. des Sci. 1752, pp. 417-428,
pls. 15-17) who supposed that Cuckows do not hatch their
own eggs because their stomach lies behind the sternum and
beneath the bowels, forming a protuberance which would
make incubation inconvenient. This suggestion, which
found favour with Dr. Opel (Journ. fiir Orn. 1858, pp. 205,
285) was, however, long ago shewn by White, in his
thirtieth letter to Barrington, to be insufficient, since a
Nightjar, which unquestionably broods its eggs, has a
similar arrangement of the viscera—a fact that has since
been observed in many other birds that incubate. Prof.
Schlegel, in 1831, arrived at the conclusion that the peculiar
nature and effect of the Cuckow’s food produces an en-
largement of the stomach, and at the same time affords but
little nutriment, whence follows a constant hunger, which,
he thought, influences the development of the eggs in the
ovary ; while the bird, incessantly occupied in search of sus-
tenance, has no time for incubation, and would have still
less the means of provisioning its young if it had to feed
them. Moreover the eggs being produced but slowly, and at
comparatively long intervals, the earliest of them would be
spoilt before the last was laid, and finally the young would
not be in a sufficiently advanced condition to perform their
migration.* These allegations have been disposed of by
Macgillivray (Brit. B. iii. pp. 128, 124), who found that the
stomach of the two common North-American Cuckows was
* Prof. Schlegel’s views have been adopted by some of the latest biographers
of this species, Dr. Altum (Journ. f. Orn. 1866, pp. 165-171) and M. O. des
Murs in his work ‘ La Vérité sur le Coucou’ (Paris: 1879).
VOL. Il. oF
400 CUCULIDA.
‘ precisely similar’ in structure and position to that of our
own bird, and yet those species perform maternal duties.
The Author of the present work seems to have thrown out
a more valid hint when he suggested first in 1828, in a note
in Jennings’s ‘Ornithologia’ (p. 138), and more fully in a
communication to Blyth, printed in his edition of White’s
‘Natural History of Selborne’ (Introd. p. iii.), that the
small size of the sexual organs in this bird, and particularly
of the blood-vessels which supply them, with the probably
low state of excitement consequent thereupon, may diminish
the interest attached to the providing for the wants of the
young. But it must be borne in mind that in many cases
we really know not which is cause and which is effect, so
that there is always a risk of mistaking the one for the other,
and in the present instance it may be quite as reasonable to
suppose that the small size of the organs in question may be
the result of diminished parental affection, as the converse.
To return to the ege¢ of this bird. It has long been known
to be variable in colour. This was Jenner’s opinion (Phil.
Trans. 1788, p. 227), though he was ignorant of the amount
of variability attributed to it by former writers, and in recent
times the subject has given rise to a long controversy. It
may be stated, however, that in this country Cuckows’ eggs
have scarcely ever been observed to differ to the extent
asserted by some foreign oologists. With the exception of
two, mentioned by Mr. Cordeaux and Mr. A. C. Smith (Zool.
s.8. pp. 1285, 3516), which were blue, British specimens are
ordinarily of a pale greyish-green or reddish-grey, more or less
closely mottled with darker markings, spots or specks of dif-
ferent sizes, and also suffused with patches of a lighter shade.
They measure from *95 to °78 by from ‘78 to ‘61 in. Avhan,
who flourished in the second century, declared that the
Cuckow did not lay her eggs indiscriminately in the nests of
all birds, but only of those that she knew to produce eggs
like her own, which from their similarity would thus not be
recognized or suspected.* In 1767, Salerne, evidently not
* This statement has not been accurately represented by some authors who
have referred to it, as for example De Montbeillard (Hist. Nat. Ois. vi. p. 309),
CUCKOW. 401
knowing what AXlian had said, reported with doubt (L’Hist.
Nat. &c. p. 42) the assertion of an inhabitant of Sologne
to the effect that the hen Cuckow lays her eggs precisely of
the same colour as those in the nest of which she makes use.*
The statements of these authors were commonly rejected
as absurd by those who referred to them; but in 1853 a
similar belief was independently and prominently professed
by Dr. Baldamus (Naumannia, 1858, pp. 3807-825), and
after some time became known in this country.; Most
English ornithologists, like the majority of their continental
brethren, were sceptical of its truth, as the former might
well be, since no likeness whatever is ordinarily apparent in
the familiar case of the blue-green eggs of the Hedge-Sparrow
and that of the Cuckow which is so often found beside it.
Dr. Baldamus based his belief on a series of eggs in his
cabinet,{ whence he subsequently figured (Naumannia, 1854,
pl. 5, p. 415) a selection of sixteen specimens to illustrate
his observations.§ However the matter is to be explained,
it seems impossible, save on one supposition, to resist the
testimony these specimens, and others of a like kind,
afford. This one supposition is that the eggs in question
have been wrongly ascribed to the Cuckow, and that they
are only exceptionally large examples of the eggs of the
birds in whose nests they were found; for it cannot be gain-
said that some such monstrous examples are occasionally to
be met with. In opposition to that view is to be urged the
and from him M. des Murs (op. cit. p. 69). The passage (De Nat. Animal.
III, xxx.) is too long to extract ; but its real meaning is as above. Some of the
examples Adlian cites are very inappropriate, so that his statement is of little
value except as shewing the antiquity of a belief which most persons suppose to
be of very recent origin.
* <¢Pour ce qui est de l’assertion d’un autre Soiognot, qui dit que la femelle
du Coucou pond gon ceuf précisément de la méme couleur que ceux du nid qu’elle
adopte, c’est une chose incompr¢hensible.”’
ft Chambers’s Journ. Pop. Lit. Science and Art, No. 208, 26 Dec. 1857, viii.
pp. 410, 411; Ibis, 1865, pp. 178-186 ; Wilts. Mag. x. pp. 115-1380; Zool.
s.s. pp. 1146-1166.
t In 1861 he kindly shewed this series to the Editor.
§ Another most interesting series of sixteen eggs has been beautifully figured
by the owner, M. Nicoud, in illustration of a paper by M. de Rougemont (Bull.
Soc. Sc. Nat. de Neuchatel, xi, pp. 509-517, pl.).
402 CUCULIDE.
well-known fact that abnormally-large eges are mostly
deficient in depth of colour and in stoutness of shell,
neither of which characters is observable in Dr. Baldamus’s
specimens; and, that, though no doubt more precise and
delicate examination than any to which they seem to have
been subjected were desirable, some other evidence in favour
of his having rightly assigned them is to be considered.
Thus Herr Braune at Greitz shot a hen Cuckow as she was
leaving the nest of an Ieterine Warbler, and found (Nau-
mannia, 1858, pp. 807, 813) in the oviduct of the former
an egg coloured very like that of the latter, while on looking
into the nest he saw there an exactly similar egg, which
there can be no reasonable doubt had just been placed there
by that very Cuckow.* Again, Herr Grunack (Journ. fiir
Orn. 1873, p. 454) has since found one of the most abnormally-
coloured specimens—a blue one—to contain an embryo so
fully formed as to shew the characteristic zygodactyl feet of
the bird, thus proving incontestibly its parentage.t Now
both of these being extreme cases, the question is worthy of
serious attention, but we must also bear in mind the far more
numerous instances in which not the least similarity can be
traced, as in the very common case of the Hedge-Sparrow
already mentioned, and if we attempt any explanatory
hypothesis it must be one to fit all round. But any such
hypothesis must needs be based mainly on speculation, and
* Herr von Homeyer (Ornith. Centralblatt, ili. p. 75) has objected to this
statement as relating an impossibility, arguing that in no bird do the fully-
coloured eggs follow each other so quickly that two such are simultaneously ready,
and least of all in the Cuckow, where the intervals of laying are presumably
long ; but Herr Braune’s statement is supported by the evidence of Saxby (Zool.
pp. 8165-8168), who shot a Cuckow carrying an egg which she must have laid
some time previously, and afterwards discovered a seeond and perfect egg in
her ovary. A case almost exactly parallel is cited by Thompson (B, Ivel. iii.
pp. 442, 443) on the authority of Kinahan, corroborated in certain particulars
by Mr. J. Haughton, the late Mr. R. Ball and Prof. Allman. Here an egg which
the bird was carrying in her mouth, was seen by the first two of these gentle-
men to fall from it, while two full-grown eggs, one of them ready to pass into
the oviduct, were found on dissection by the last witness. The often-repeated
assertion that Cuckows’ eggs are only laid at several days’ interval cannot there-
fore be accepted unconditionally.
+ The like fact is recorded by Mr. Seebohm (Zool. 1880, p. 861).
CUCKOW. 403
that, as before stated, would be here out of place.* It is
however especially necessary to guard against the error, into
which some writers have fallen, of supposing that the Cuckow
has the power of diversifying the colour of her eggs at will;
that, having laid it, she should look at it, and then decide
into what bird’s nest she should put it; or further that its
colour can, in any mysterious way, be affected by the action
of external objects on her perceptive faculties. Such suppo-
sitions are wholly unreasonable. The assimilationt, if such
there be, must be involuntary on her part, and its only object
be to render it less easily recognized by the foster-parents
as supposititious. This and nothing more is the “theory”
of Dr. Baldamus. It remains to say that, in depositing her
egos, the Cuckow (vagrant though she be) will, season after
season, resort to the same spot, or as near thereto as may be.
Among many instances of this fact which might be cited, it
will be sufficient to refer to Mr. Gurney’s statement, on
Mr. E. Fountaine’s authority (Zool. s.s. p. 3648), that a
pair of Pied Wagtails nested twice every season with a single
exception for eight or nine years, ending in 1871, in the ivy
* Yet an hypothesis has been proposed (Encycl. Brit. ed. 9, vi. pp. 686, 687),
which in outline is this:—Some birds resent interference with their nests much
less than others: among the former is the Hedge-Sparrow, and in her case no
assimilation is needed, in others it may be wanted. The tendency of habits to
become hereditary is admitted, and since it is probable that a Cuckow commonly
puts her eggs into the nest of the same species, it is no violent supposition that
her posterity should have the same habit. Again, the family likeness between
the eggs laid by the same individual is unquestionable, and therefore the habit of
laying a particular style of egg is probable to be hereditary also. Combining
this supposition with the last, it will be seen that on the principle of ‘‘ Natural
Selection’? the asserted facts would follow. This principle would operate most
strongly in species which are not easily duped, that is in the cases which occur
least frequently. Here it is we find it, for Cuckows’ eggs deposited in nests of
the Red-backed Shrike, the Redstart, the Icterine Warbler, and the Great Bunting
approximate most nearly to the eggs of those species— species in whose nests the
Cuckow rarely (in comparison with others) deposits eggs. The assimilation of
the eggs of the Great Spotted Cuckow (the species next to be described) to those of
the birds in whose nests they are found, is in some cases very remarkable, and
will in due time be mentioned.
+ This word, like ‘‘mimicry’’, as implying the idea of consciousness, is open
to objection on the part of those who do not know its technical meaning.
That idea must be excluded from both words, whenever either is employed
by a naturalist.
404 CUCULIDA.
on a particular garden-wall, and that in each of those years a
Cuckow invariably laid her egg in their second nest. In 1872
the Wagtails changed their site, and though the Cuckow was
several times seen in the garden, it seems she did not dis-
cover their nest. In 1878 they returned to the ivy, but no
Cuckow’s egg was laid.
The food of this species on its arrival here seems to
consist of insects generally, and then the inner surface of
its gizzard is smooth, but it soon begins to live almost
wholly on hairy caterpillars, such as appear to be eaten by
scarcely any other bird, and the hairs with which they are
clothed accumulate in its stomach, either aggregated into a
elobular mass, or insinuated, through muscular action, into
its epithelium, and arranged in a regular spiral direction,
so as to coat it completely, whence hasty observers have
thought that this organ naturally has a hairy hning. The
microscope, however, has shewn this to be a mistake, and
revealed its true origin. In the stomach of the young also
is often found a ball of hairs, which Jenner thought must
have been obtained from, and swallowed while the bird was
in, the nest; but the ordinary food of the nestling is of
course such as its foster-parents would supply to their own
offspring, and accordingly varies somewhat with the species
to which they belong. This includes not only insects of
almost every kind, and in every stage, which form the chief
part, as well as small snails, but also soft corn, vetches, the
tender shoots of grasses, and a few seeds—generally those
of a Galium. Masses of dry grass have also been found in
the stomach of the young, sometimes so large as apparently
to cause its death (Zool. s.s. p. 38314).
Little need be added as to the well-known song of the
Cuckow.* The curious change which takes place in its note
has already been mentioned, and is the theme of a quaint
epigram by one of our minor poetst. The chirp of the
* For the musical expression of its notes reference may be made to Prof.
Oppel’s paper (Zool. Garten, 1871, pp. 33-41).
+ John Heywood (circa 1587-1598)—‘ The sixth hundred of Epigrammes.’
No. 95 ‘‘ Of vse.” Here it may be said that want of space forbids the Editor
CUCKOW. 405
young is plaintive, and has been likened to that of both the
Hedge-Sparrow and the Titlark, but the bird has also a
strange, loud, rattling note, which it will at times utter (at
least in confinement) without any apparent cause.
The Cuckow is commonly distributed every summer over
the greater part of Europe and its islands, including the
whole of Ireland, the Hebrides and Orkney. Shetland it
visits not infrequently, and breeds there; but in the Feroes
it is only recorded to have appeared thrice, and it is not
known to have reached Iceland. It occurs also in the wooded
parts of Norway as high as lat. 70° 20’ N., as well as on the
Varanger Fjord, but not every year. About Archangel it is
common, and thence it is found across Northern Asia, regard
being had to the growth of vegetation which accommodates
the insects that form its food, to the shores of the Pacific,
while examples from Japan seem to be specifically identical.
It is common throughout China according to the season, and
in winter extends very far to the southward, having been
obtained in Celebes by Mr. Wallace (Ibis, 1866, p. 359), in
from dwelling on the fact that for six hundred years English versifiers, good, bad
and indifferent, have made this bird a favourite theme. Mr. Chappell (Ballad
Literature Xc. i. pl. i. pp. 21-24) has given from the Harleian Manuscripts
(No. 978) a fac-simile of a song of the thirteenth century—‘‘ the earliest secular
composition in parts, known to exist in any country ’’—which hails the coming
in of summer and has for its burden ‘‘Sing cuccu.” Passing over the many
passages in which Shakespear, Milton and other great poets have happily cele-
brated this bird, there belongs to the last century an ‘‘ Ode to the Cuckoo”’, of
disputed authorship (cf. Brit. Quart. Rev. lxi. pp. 500-513), one of the most
beautiful pieces in our language. The same reason here excludes quotation of
the numerous popular rimes relating to this bird, but as one set (which has many
variations) of these has been printed in former editions of this work the fullest
version of the doggrel may be here inserted :—
In March he leaves his perch, In July he’s ready to fly,
In April come he will, Come August go he must,
In May he sings all day, In September you’ll him remember,
In June he changes his tune, But October he’ll never get over.
For old superstitions and legends relating to the Cuckow reference may be
made to Grimm’s ‘ Deutsche Mythologie’ (ed. 2, 1844, pp. 640-646—abstract
Ann. N, H. xiii. pp. 403-405); Broderip’s ‘ Zoological Recreations’ (pp. 68-81) ;
‘Notes and Queries’ (almost every volume) ; Prof. Gubernatis’s ‘ Zoological
Mythology ’ (ii. pp. 226-236) ; and M. Rolland’s ‘Faune Populaire de la France’
(ii, pp. 82-99),
406 CUCULIDE.
Eastern Timor, in the Andamans, and in Ceylon—though
twice only according to Capt. Legge.* In South Africa it
has been found wintering in Natal on the East coast,+ and
in Damara-land on the West, besides several other localities
nearer the equator, until to the northward it becomes as
common a bird as it is in Europe—its season of abundance,
however, always alternating with our own. It has been
observed in the Canaries and in Madeira, but is probably not
a regular visitant to either. Within the limits thus indicated
it seems to occur more or less plentifully in all suitable
districts, but everywhere it appears to be of migratory habits,
while many of the more southern, allied forms are, in com-
parison if not wholly, stationary.
The adult Cuckow has the bill bluish-black, passing into
yellow at the base and edges: gape, orbits and irides deep
yellow: upper parts generally bluish-grey ; wing-quills rather
darker, and barred with white on the broad inner web for
about three-fourths of their length; tail-quills greyish-black,
tipped with white, and sparsely spotted along the shaft and
near the inside, forming a series of incomplete white bars.
A slight green glossis often perceptible in the feathers of
the upper surface. Chin and neck ash-grey; breast, belly,
and inner wing-coverts, white, barred with black; vent and
lower tail-coverts, white, often tinged with buff, and barred,
but less thickly, with black: legs, toes and claws, gamboge-
yellow.
The whole length is about fourteen inches; the wing,
from the carpal joint to the tip, eight inches and three-
* Tt must be observed that in Asia and its islands there are several allied
species, some of them inhabiting India, which, on a cursory examination, may
be readily mistaken for Cuculus canorus.
+ The C. canorus recorded by Desjardins (Proc. Zool. Soc, 1832, p. 111) from
Madagasear and Mauritius is no doubt the nearly-allied C. rochi (op. cit. 1862,
p. 224), which, though greatly resembling the former, has a very different song
(Ibis, 1863, p. 453). Mr. Dresser regards this as specifically the same as
C. canorus, which seems to be an erroneous view, and MM. A. Milne-Edwards
and Grandidier (Ois. de Madagascar, i. p. 176, pl. 66) treat it as a variety of
the Indian C. poliocephalus ; but that has dark irides, while those of the Mada-
gascar bird are said on geod authority to be orange, though M, Grandidier asserts
the contrary. Other allied species are also found in Africa,
CUCKOW, 407
quarters ; the first primary nearly three inches shorter than
the second, which varies in its proportion to the fourth.
The female is commonly a little smaller than the male,
but there is no other outward distinction of sex.
Young birds in their first plumage have the irides brown:
the upper parts generally, except a white spot on the nape,
clove-brown, barred with brownish-red, wing- and tail-quills
clove-brown, the former barred on the outer web with brownish-
red, and on the inner with white, the latter barred irregularly
with brownish-red and interruptedly with white; neck,
breast, and lower parts, dull white, often tinged with buff,
and more or less closely barred with blackish-brown. In
this stage they form the Cuculus hepaticus of some authors.
Certain examples, presumably young, put on a plumage
very different from that generally assumed, and such indi-
viduals have been described as forming a distinct species
under the name of C. rufus. One of them shot at Dod-
dington in Kent, about 1850, and now in the Cambridge
Museum, is of a dull, light red or pale cinnamon-colour,
rather closely barred, except on the upper tail-coverts, with
dull blackish-brown: the tail has the tip white, but perhaps
a little less clear than usual, while the chin, throat, and
upper part of the breast are much as the upper parts, but
paler and with a finer barring, and the breast and belly are
dull white with fewer and thinner bars ; the lower tail-coverts
are pale buff.
The vignette represents the sternum of this species.
VOL. II. 8 G
408 CUCULID:2:.
PICARIZ. CUCULID.E.
CoccysTES GLANDARIUS (Linneus”).
THE GREAT SPOTTED CUCKOW.
Cuculus glandarius.
CocerstEes, Gloger t.—Bill moderate, compressed towards the tip, culmen
decurved, cutting edge smooth ; lower mandible slightly decurved beneath ; gape
moderate. Nostrils basal, oval, the upper part closed by a membrane. Head
crested. Wings moderate, with ten primaries, the first short, the third longest,
but the fourth nearly its equal, the ninth as long as, and the tenth shorter than,
the first. Tail long, of ten feathers, the outer three pairs graduated, the middle
two nearly equal. Tarsi strong and long, bare behind, slightly feathered in front
above ; toes two before, two bebind.
Tue late Mr. R. Ball in 1843 briefly noticed (Ann. Nat.
Hist. xii. p. 149) the occurrence in Galway of an example
of this species, which he had seen, then the property of
* Cuculus glandarius, Linnwus, Syst. Nat, Ed, 12, i, p. 169 (1766).
+ Vollst. Handb, der Naturgesch. der Vig. Eur. p. 449 (1834).
GREAT SPOTTED CUCKOW. 409
Mr. Creighton, of Clifden, and subsequently sent the Author
further particulars, to the effect that the bird was caught alive
by two persons on the island of Omagh, where, pursued by
Hawks, it flew for refuge into a hole in a stone fence.* It
appeared fatigued, weak, and emaciated, as if after a long
flight ; but lived for four days, attempts being made to feed
it on potatoes. The specimen, which Thompson thought to
be an adult, was afterwards obtained for the Museum of
Trinity College, Dublin, but has since perished. Another
specimen, the first known in Great Britain, was recorded
(Zool. s.s. p. 2844) as having been shot in Northumberland
in 1870, and Mr. Hancock states (B. Northumb. &ce. p. 27)
that it was killed near Bellingham on the North Tyne,
August 5th of that year, and afterwards presented to the
Newcastle Museum.t
This species was first described and figured in 1743 by
Edwards (Nat. Hist. Uncomm. Birds, ii. pl. 57) from an
example shot at Gibraltar by Catesby’s brother, and is a
regular summer-visitant to the Iberian peninsula, in some
parts of which it is common, while it appears accidentally,
almost always in spring, in the south of France,{ though
unknown in the rest of that country. It is said, however,
to have occurred on two occasions in Germany. ‘The first of
* There is much discrepancy as to the date of the occurrence. Ball writing (ué
supra) July 19, 1848, gives ‘‘ last spring.” In the Second Edition of this work
(ii. p. 201) the Author, from Ball’s subsequent information, stated ‘‘ about Christ-
mas, 1843’’—an obvious error as to the year, and corrected in the Third Edition
(ii. p. 206) to ‘£1842.” Thompson, however, asserted (B. Irel. i. p. 364) that
‘*The month of March, 1842, is said to have been the time of its capture.”
+ In the last Edition of this work another instance was mentioned ; but,
looking to the authority cited (Zool. p. 3046), it will be seen that the statement
refers to the Great Spotted Woodpecker.
t+ The details of its appearance are not very precise. Vieillot (Faune Franc.
p. 60) says that several examples have been found in Languedoc in different
yefrs, and Roux that others have been found in Provence. Crespon, in 1840,
mentioned (Orn. Gard, pp. 268, 269) having killed a fine male near the Rhone in
May, 1837, and that the next day two were seen not far from the same place
by a farmer, who shot one of them and sent it to him, while another had
been lately killed near Montpellier. One netted in that neighbourhood is also
recorded by MM. Jaubert and Barthélemy-Lapommeraye (Rich. Orn. p. 338),
Lacroix says (Ois. Pyrén. Frang. p. 273) it is a very rare and irregular visitor tq
the Eastern Pyrenees, and he particularizes one he received May 2nd, 1870,
410 CUCULID#.
these was recorded in 1820, by the eldest Brehm, who stated
(Beitrage, i. p. 501) that one, of two seen, was shot many
years before near Liibben in Lusatia: the second, in 1837,
by Hornschuch and Schilling (Verz. der in Pommern vor-
komm. Vogel, p. 12) and by Herr E. F. Homeyer (Syst.
Uebers. Vog. Pommerns, pp. 9, 10) as having been shot in
August, also many years before, near Teterow in Pomerania,
and taken to Herr Pauly, who sent it to the Greifswald
Museum, where it still is (Journ. fiir. Orn. 1876, p. 117).
Herr Finger included the species in his ‘ Ornis Austriaca’
(Verhandl. z.-b. Ver. Wien, 1857, p. 562) from an example,
prepared by him, which was sent in the flesh from Croatia
to Prince Richard Kheyenhiller in 1856, as the Editor is
kindly informed by Herr von Pelzeln. Von Nordmann re-
cords (Faune Pont. p. 209) a specimen killed in Bessarabia,
the only one known to him in the Russian empire. Several
examples, say Drs. Hartlaub and Kriiper (Griech. Jahresz.
1875, p. 184), have of late years been killed in Attica, and
the latter adds that it is common in Asia Minor. Col.
St. John found it breeding near Shiraz, the most eastern
locality it is yet known to reach. It is by no means rare in
parts of Palestine, though never in great numbers, and, as
in all countries not lying to the south of the Mediterranean,
a summer-visitant only. In Egypt, on the contrary, it is,
according to Capt. Shelley, a resident, and both there and
in Nubia may be met with abundantly. Indeed, it seems to
occur over the greater part of Africa, becoming however less
plentiful towards the south, and being very rare within the
Cape Colony, though not uncommon in Damara-land. It
has also been obtained at various places on the west coast,
and, according to Webb and Berthelot (Orn. Canar. p. 25),
it occasionally visits the Canaries. In Barbary it is a regu-
lar summer-visitant, arriving there, as it does in its other
haunts at the same season, earlier than its better-known
relative— Drake (Ibis, 1867, p. 425) having seen it at Tangier,
January 10th. In Savoy and Italy it is of very rare occur-
rence, but it has occurred both on the mainland and in
Sicily, as also in Malta.
GREAT SPOTTED CUCKOW. 411
Until 1858, no certain information as to the most im-
portant part of this species’s habits had been published.*
But in that year Dr. A. E. Brehm made known (Journ. fiir
Orn. 1853, pp. 144, 145) the result of the observations made
in 1850 by himself, his late brother Oscar, and Dr. Vier-
thaler, to the effect that in Egypt it was parasitic upon the
Grey Crow (Corvus cornix)t, and its eggs were figured by
Badeker (tom. cit. Extrah. p. 117, Taf. v. Fig. 4). In 1857
Canon Tristram, with Messrs. Hudleston and Salvin brought
from Algeria (Ibis, 1859, pp. 76-78, 316-318) several
specimens, found in nests of the Moorish Pie (Pica mauri-
tanica), and two of them were figured by Hewitson (tom. cit.
pl. ii. figs. 1, 2); but the first of these gentlemen was some
time before he could persuade himself that the bird evaded
all parental duties. His subsequent experience, however, of
its habits in Palestine following upon that gathered mean-
while in Egypt by Allen (op. cit. 1862, p. 857; 1863, p. 363)
and Mr. Cochrane (tom. cit. 361), and in Spain by Dr. A. E.
Brehm (Journ. fiir Orn. 1861, p. 393) and Lord Lilford (Ibis,
1866, pp. 177-179, 183, 184 and 881) convinced him (tom.
cit. p. 281) of its absolute parasitism, and was subsequently
confirmed by Mr. E. C. Taylor (op. cit. 1867, p. 55) in
Egypt, and again in Spain by Mr. Saunders (op. cit. 1869,
p- 401) and Mr. Dresser. No doubt indeed can now exist
as to the fact, and the notes of these observers give a pretty
full account of its way of breeding. It lays its eggs very early
in the year, and, so far as is known, always in the nest of one
* In 1767 appeared Gerini’s posthumous ‘Storia Nat. degli Uccelli’, wherein
are figured both the adult and immature of this bird, as though distinct species
(pls. 70, 71), and the latter is stated (i. p. 81) to have nidified among bushes at
Pisa, in 1739, to have had four young, and to have been never seen since—a
manifest error, as Dr. Salvadori (Uccelli d@’Italia, p. 42) remarks ; but on this
authority was based the Pisan Cuckow of Latham (Syn. i. p. 520), and hence
Gmelin’s Cuculus pisanus. Though the species was found to be abundant
enough in Egypt by the French naturalists, its mode of propagation was unknown
to them (Audouin, Descr. de l’Egypte, xxiii. p. 383). Drs. Kriiper and Hartlaub
ascribe the discovery of its breeding to Herr Gonzenbach, without however
stating the year in which he made it. From his own observations (Journ. f. Orn.
1861, pp. 238, 239) he had certainly not ascertained the truth in 1858.
+ This interesting paper was translated by Mr. Sclater (Zool. p. 3987).
4]2 CUCULID.
of the Corvide*—in Egypt and Barbary the species already
named being chosen as the foster-parents of its offspring,
but in Spain both the Pies of that country (Pica rustica and
Cyanopica cooki). It seems commonly to impose two of its
eges on the bird whose nest it invades, and, though there is
evidence that it will on occasion destroy some of those of
the owners, there is none to prove that its progeny evicts
theirs—the young of both parents having been several times
found to all appearance in peaceful occupation of the same
cradle. More than this, perhaps, cannot be safely averred,
and thus, notwithstanding the excellent contributions to the
history of this species above cited, a good deal evidently yet
remains to be learnt. The eggs are of a pale greenish-blue,
blotched and spotted with light brown and dull lilac. Their
shell, generally thin, is not unfrequently beset with pimples
and rugosities, such as are often seen on that of imperfectly
developed eggs. They measure from 1:28 to 1:18 by from
°99 to ‘94 in.t
The food of this species consists almost entirely of insects
in various stages, but Allen found a bit of egeg-shell (pre-
sumably that of a Common Fowl) in the stomach of one
example, and there is other evidence, though perhaps not of
the strongest, as to its occasional oophagy. It is said to
have three distinct notes—one, which has been syllabled
kee-ou, kee-ou, somewhat like that of the common Cuckow,
and possibly peculiar to the male, a short grating alarm-cry
cark, and an angry wurree, wurree, whence is doubtless
derived its Arab name ‘ Burroo-burroo.”’
* There seems to be a possibility (Ibis, 1859, p. 78 ; 1866, p. 282) of the
Southern Little Owl (Carine glaux) being also utilized for this purpose, as well
as the Syrian Jay (Garrulus melanocephalus), according to Canon Tristram.
+ The first eggs obtained by Canon Tristiam’s party, from nests of the Moorish
Pie, so curiously resembled those of the latter, that they were unsuspiciously
assigned thereto, and their real nature not recognized before they were unpacked
in England some months afterwards. That naturalist and his friends, practised
oologists as they were, were unaware of the treasures they were collecting until,
on emptying an egg supposed to be that of Pica mauritanica, the zygodactyl
structure of the embryo extracted revealed the truth (Ibis, 1859, pp. 78, 316,
317). The important bearing of this fact on the ‘‘assimilation”’ question in
regard to eggs of the common Cuckow should not be overlooked.
GREAT SPOTTED CUCKOW. 413
The male has the bill purplish-black with the base of the
lower mandible yellow beneath: the orbits yellow : the irides
brown: the head and cheeks are dark ash-grey, the shaft of
the crest-feathers black; the rest of the upper parts greyish-
brown, many of the feathers broadly tipped with white ;
wing-quills dull hair-brown, with the hidden part of most of
the primaries rusty, and tipped with white ; tail-quills darker
ereyish-brown, tipped with white, the middle pair glossed
with green ; lower parts generally white, tinged with yellow,
especially on the throat and sides of the neck: legs, toes
and claws, bluish-black.
The whole length is from fifteen and a half to sixteen
inches, of which the tail alone measures about nine; the
wing from the carpal joint eight inches and a quarter.
The female differs from the male in having the primaries
chestnut, except at the tip.
Considerable difference is shewn by the young, in which
the head is blackish-brown instead of grey, and the whole
of the upper surface is much darker, while the chin and
throat are of a deeper yellow, verging upon orange.
The vignette represents the young of the common Cuckow.
414 CUCULIDA.
PICA RIE. CUCULIDA.,
Coceyzus AMERICANUS (Linneus*),
THE AMERICAN YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOW.
Coceyzus Americanus.
Cocorzus, Vieillot ¢.—Bill long, much compressed at the sides; culmen con-
siderably decurved ; cutting edge quite smooth ; lower mandible decurved beneath.
Gape moderate. Nostrils basal, linear-oval, half-closed by a membrane. Wings
short, with ten primaries, the first short, the third longest. Tail very long,
of ten feathers, graduated. Tarsi strong, short, bare behind, feathered in front
and on the outside above ; toes two before, two behind.
Tue first notice of the occurrence in Britain of this
American bird was published in January, 1883 (Field Natu-
ralist, i. pp. 6, 7), the late Mr. Ball making known, under
date of October 20th, 1832, the capture of two specimens :—
one (which was there figured) shot in the autumn of 1825
near Youghal, in the county of Cork, and brought to him
while still warm and bleeding; the other but recently shot
at Old Connaught, near Bray, and in the possession of
Glennon, the well-known bird-stuffer at Dublin. What be-
came of the latter is unknown, but the former, after having
* Cuculus americanus, Linneus, Syst. Nat. Ed. 12, i. p. 170 (1766).
+ Analyse d’une nouv, Orn. p. 28 (1816).
AMERICAN YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOW. 415
“been exhibited to the Zoological Society of London by
Thompson (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1835, pp. 83, 84), was placed
in the Museum of Trinity College, Dublin, whence it has
lately disappeared. Meanwhile a third example had been
procured in Britain, having been shot near Stackpole Court,
in Pembrokeshire (Zool. p. 3046), also in the autumn of
1832. This was submitted to the same Society (Proc. Zool.
Soc. 1833, p. 26) by Lord Cawdor, who then gave it to the
British Museum, where it now is, and the preceding figure
was drawn from it. The occurrence of a fourth British-
killed specimen, obtained in Cornwall, was announced in
1835, by Temminck (Man. d’Orn. iii. p. 279) and by
Mr. Jenyns (Man. Br. Vert. p. 155) on the information of
the Author, but further particulars respecting it are want-
ing.* Since that time Mr. Dresser exhibited to the Zoo-
logical Society (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1871, p. 299+) a young
male, found dead in a wood by the sea, at Wallog, near
Aberystwith, October 26th, 1870, and sent him by its present
possessor, Capt. Cosens ; while Mr. Murray Mathew informs
the Editor that he believes a sixth was picked up dead
beneath the light-house on Lundy Island, in October, 1874,
and taken to Mr. H. G. Heaven for determination.|
This bird was originally described and figured by Catesby
* Mr. Eyton seems to have been in error, when, writing in 1836, he said
(Rarer Br. B. p. 24) that ‘‘ Five or six specimens appear to have occurred in the
United Kingdom.”
+ The note contains some errors, here corrected through Capt. Legge’s kind-
ness.
t{ Another example was said (Zool. s.s. p. 2948) to have been killed in Treland ;
but Lord Clermont soon after (p. 3022) referred the specimen to the American
Black-billed Cuckow (Coccyzus erythrophthalmus), which it proved to be (Proc.
Zool. Soc. 1872, p. 681). The bird was shot at the end of September, 1871,
at Kilbead in the county Antrim. Only one other instance of its occurrence in
Europe seems to be recorded, namely, by Dr. Bolle (Journ. f. Orn. 1858, p. 457),
the specimen having been obtained in the plains near Lucca in 1858, and being
in the Museum at Pisa, where Baron de Selys-Longehamps saw it (Ibis, 1870,
p. 452), as testify also Dr. Salvadori (Ucc. d'Ital. p. 43) and Savi (Orn. Ital.
p. 299). Its admission as a ‘‘ British Bird” is not to be countenanced, but it
may be useful to point out that while generally resembling its congener, C. amer?-
canus, C. erythrophthalmus differs by having the bill wholly black, a bare red
space round the eyes, the back browner and no rufous on its wings.
VOL. Il. 3.4
416 CUCULID.
(Nat. Hist. Carol. i. p. 9, pl. ix.) as the ‘ Cuckow of Caro-
lina’, and hence became known to the naturalists of the
last century; but, except a few particulars (which prove to
be in the main correct and were apparently furnished by
Dy. Garden) published by Pennant (Arct. Zool. ii. p. 265),
little was known of its habits until the time of Wilson.
They have since been elucidated by a succession of American
ornithologists, and though of course more details remain to
be determined, the chief facts of its history are now as well
established as those relating to almost any bird, for the
species is plentiful in some places throughout most of the
eastern States of the Union, and is in them scarcely less an
object of interest than is our own Cuckow with us.
Arriving in North America in the spring its loud ery,
cow, cow, cow, many times repeated, is heard from the
thickest foliage of the orchard, and as the bird is commonly
supposed to be most clamorous in anticipation of wet weather,
it in many parts of the country obtains the name of ‘ Rain-
Crow.’’* The cocks, as usual, arrive first, and after a few
days are followed by the hens. They soon begin their nest,
which is generally built in a low tree, and consists of but a
scanty platform of dry twigs, artlessly bestrewn with a few
crass stalks. On this the hen lays her ege and, in most
cases it would appear, broods it at once, though laying eight
or ten more eges subsequently, the young being hatched in suc-
cession (just as often happens with some Owls) and the later
fostered by the warmth of their earlier brethren. More than
four eges are said to be seldom found in the nest at once, and
these will be in different stages of development, as is also
the case with the young. The parents, though delegating
part of their duty to the elder members of their family, are
surpassed by no birds in solicitude and affection for their
progeny. While the hen is sitting, the cock is usually not
far off and gives the alarm on the approach of danger, and,
when this is seriously threatened, one or both will try to with-
* Tn Wilson’s time it seems to have been also known as the ‘‘Cow-bird,”’? but
that name is now generally applied to Molcthrus pecoris—the especially parasitic
bird of North America.
AMERICAN YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOW. 417
draw attention from their offspring, fluttering and tumbling
on the ground as though wounded. Conjugal love is also
shewn in like manner, for Mr. Edward Newton mentions
(Ibis, 1859, p. 149) that having shot a male which fell
shrieking, the female instantly flew to the spot, and by feign-
ing lameness endeavoured to lead his pursuer astray. Yet
this species seems sometimes to intrude upon the economy
of others, as first noticed by Nuttall, who says he had found
its ege in the nest of a Cat-bird (Mimus carolinensis) as
well as in that of the American Robin (Turdus migratorius),
in the latter case together with two of the owners’ eggs.
On each occasion he believed that the mere appropriation of
the nest was the invader’s intention. Until lately no other
writer had mentioned any similar instance, but in 1877
Mr. A. M. Frazar informed Mr. J. A. Allen (Bull. Nuttall
Club, ii. p. 110) of this Cuckow laying in a Robin’s nest,
and also in that of a Wood-Thrush (7. mustelinus), while
Mr. Ridgeway states (op. cit. ii. p. 165) that eggs of both species
of North-American Cuckow were found in Illinois in the
same nest.* The eges of this present bird have a dull and
somewhat soft chalky shell of a uniform pale sea-green
colour, and measure from 1°25 to 1°18 by ‘98 to :91 in.
Towards the end of summer both old and young retire south-
wards from their breeding-haunts in North America, though
some are said to winter in Florida.
In South America this species has been found by Mr. Hud-
son to reach Buenos Ayres (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1872, p. 496),
and examples have been obtained by different collectors at
various places in the more northern part of that continent.
Léotaud says it is a common visitant to Trinidad in winter,
and at the same season it appears throughout Central America
and Mexico. It is known to occur in several of the Antilles,
as Jamaicat, Cuba, Porto Rico and St. Croix—in which last
* It is to be regretted that further details of these cases, so exceedingly inte-
resting in their bearing on the habits of our own Cuckow, were not published.
t The Jamaican bird has been described as distinct under the name of C. bairdi
(P. Z. 8. 1864, p. 120), and that from Sombrero as C. judient (Ann. Lye. N. H.
New York, 1864, p. 42), but neither seems really to differ from the true C.
americanus.
418 CUCULID &.
it was found breeding by Mr. Edward Newton. Its appear-
ance to the west of the Rocky Mountains, long ago asserted
by Nuttall and Townsend, was subsequently doubted, but
has since been fully established by Mr. Cooper (Ornith. Calif.
i. p. 872) and others. On the eastern side it commonly
ranges from the Missouri plains to the Atlantic, and north-
ward to Ontario and New Brunswick ; but, though Audubon
says he observed it in Labrador, it does not seem to reach
Newfoundland. My. Dresser records one, on Herr Benzon’s
authority, as having occurred at Julianehaab in Greenland,
in 1874. It occasionally visits Bermuda, and Wedderburn
and Mr. Hurdis noticed its arrival there, October 9th,
1849, in an extraordinary flight of thousands, most of
which disappeared the following day. On the continent
of Europe only one example is known, which, says M.
Alph. Dubois (Bull. Ac. R. Belg. ser. 2, xxxix. pp. 9-11),
was killed at Bois-de-Lessines in Hainault, October 22nd,
1874—the same season, be it remarked, in which the sup-
posed specimen was obtained on Lundy Island.
The bill has the upper mandible brownish-black, inclining
to yellow at the base; the lower yellow except at the tip,
which is dusky: the irides are brown: the upper part of the
head, neck and body, the wing-coverts and the two middle tail-
feathers are mouse-colour, the last being tipped with dark-
brown, and having the shaft rufous; the wing-quills are
brown, the primaries tinged with reddish, and, except the
exterior pair, have the hidden part chestnut ; the remaining
tail-feathers are blackish-brown, tipped with white, increasing
in extent on each pair from the middle outwardly, and on the
exterior occupying nearly all the outer web; the chin, throat
and lower parts are white, the sides of the neck tinged with
ash-grey: lees, toes and claws, lead-colour.
The whole length is about twelve inches, from the carpus
to the tip of the wing five inches and five-eighths; the first
primary shorter than the second.
The sexes hardly differ; but the young are easily distin-
suished by having the tail-quills dusky, with the white tip
smaller and less well defined.
ILOOPOR. 419
PICARIA. UPUPIDA.
Urupa rmpors, Linneus™.
THE HOOPOE.
Upupa epops.
Upura, Linneust.—Bill long, slender, slightly arched, sharp and much com-
pressed. Nostrils basal, oval, partly concealed by feathers. Tongue very short,
and heart-shaped. Head with an erectile crest of oblong feathers set regularly in
pairs for the whole length. Wings moderately long, very broad, with ten prim-
aries, the first about half as long as the second, which is nearly an inch shorter
than the third, the fourth or fifth longest, but the sixth nearly equal to them.
Tail of ten feathers, almost square at the end. Feet with the tarsi scutellated
behind as well as before ; toes three before, one behind, the outer and middle
united as far as the first joint ; claws but slightly curved.
So remarkable is the appearance of the Hoopoe, that on
being seen in this country it is nearly always followed to the
death, as though it were a great prize; yet it is by no means
rare with us, since not a year passes without examples being
obtained; and its occurrence has been recorded in more than
* Syst. Nat. Hd. 12, i. p. 183 (1766). t Loc. cit.
420 UPUPIDA.
three-fourths of the English counties,* in both North and
South Wales, in Ireland and Scotland, while in all the
counties on our southern and eastern coasts it has been
many times killed. Turner, in 1544, said that, so far as he
knew, it was not found in Britain; but in 1667 Merrett
(Pinax, p. 178) announced its occurrence in the New Forest
and in Essex, and the next year Charleton (Onomasticon,
pp. 92, 98) described and figured one killed ten miles from
London in the winter of 1666-7. Sir T. Browne soon after,
as it would seem, wrote that he had often seen this ‘ gallant
marked bird” (presumably in Norfolk), adding, ‘“ ’tis not
hard to shoot them.” Willughby noticed examples pro-
cured in Northumberland and Surrey, and Plot others
observed in Oxfordshire; while, in 1684, Sibbald (Hist.
Anim. Scotl. p. 16) recorded it from the Scottish border and
Orkney. In the first half of the last century Albin and
Edwards recorded more specimens obtained in England, as
did Charles Smith (State of Waterford, Ed. 2, p. 237) one
shot at Stradbally in Ireland, during the great frost of 1739.
Being a regular summer-visitant to Europe, the Hoopoe is
mostly seen in spring in the British Islands, but it is by no
means uncommon in autumn, and is occasionally observed
in winter, as shewn by two of the records just cited. Hunt
also mentions having had specimens which were shot in
November and December; Graves (Nat. Journ. i. p. 22) one
killed at Musselburgh in February, 1852; and Blyth (Mag.
N. H. ser. 2, ii. p. 595) one that occurred in Scilly in
January, 1837; another was found dead, but quite fresh, in
Suffolk in the beginning of December, 1846 (Zool. p. 1693) ;
and according to Jardine’s communication to Mr. Harting
two were shot in Dumfriesshire in the winter of 1870-1.
That this species, if not so uselessly molested, would
yearly breed in this country there can be little doubt.
White, writing in 1767, said that a pair frequented the
eround adjoining his garden for some weeks in the summer,
* Those which seem not to be yet stained with its blood are Huntingdon,
Rutland, Derby, Monmouth, Hereford, Worcester, Warwick, Chester and West-
moreland, but their innocence is doubtless only a matter of time.
HOOPOE. 42]
and seemed disposed to breed in his outlet, but were frighted
by boys, who would never let them rest; and, on Tunstall’s
authority, Latham (Gen. Syn. B. Suppl. pp. 122, 123) men-
tions a pair that a few years before (1787) had begun a nest
in Hampshire, which being disturbed they forsook ; * as well
as a fully-fledged young bird killed in Kent and sent him,
May 10th, 1786. Blyth noticed (Field Nat. ii. p. 58) a pair
that haunted a garden at Tooting in the summer of 1832,
until they were shot; and Jesse (Gleanings, ill. p. 148), in
1835, said that some years before a pair built their nest and
hatched their young in a tree at Parkend, near Chichester.
The like was reported to Mr. A. C. Smith (Wilts. Mag. ix.
p- 54) as having happened at Rodburn-Cheney, in Wiltshire,
and the following year the birds built again, but the eggs
were destroyed. Mr. J. P. Bartlett recorded (Zool. p. 564)
a supposed case of the Hoopoe’s breeding near Dorking in
1841; and Mr. Saunders communicated a note to Messrs.
Sharpe and Dresser to the effect that, in 1847, a pair nested
in the hole of a yew at Leatherhead, where, being protected
by the owner, they successfully brought up their young, to the
number (it was believed) of five, and rewarded him by dis-
playing themselves with their progeny on his lawn.t There
seems to be no evidence of the Hoopoe being otherwise than
a strageler in the rest of the United Kingdom, but it occurs
not unfrequently in Scotland from West Galloway to Suther-
land—seven or eight times in Aberdeenshire alone, according
to Mr. Gray, at least thrice in Shetland and once in North
Uist.f It appears from time to time in all quarters of Ireland,
Thompson, in 1849, having given a list of more than two
scores of instances, and there is little doubt that it has since
* This information, given in Tunstall’s own words by Fox (Syn. Newe. Mus,
p. 61), possibly refers to the Selborne incident recorded by White.
+ Some other instances in which this bird is supposed to have bred in Eng-
land are recorded by Mr. More (Ibis, 1865, p. 137) as reported to him. In
Johnes’s ‘‘Birds of Dartmoor,” published by Mrs, Bray (Description of the Part
of Devonshire bordering on the Tamar and the Tavy, ed. 1, i. p. 350; ed. 2,
i. p. 305) a nest with four young, taken many years ago at Morwell, near Tavi-
stock, is mentioned.
+ Beside the Scottish counties named already, it seems to have visited Ber-
wick, Ayr, Renfrew, Fife, Perth, and Banff.
422 UPUPID®.
continued to visit that kingdom, though details of its occur-
rence may be wanting.*
The conspicuous plumage of the Hoopoe, together with its
familiarity towards man in countries where it is unmolested,
render it an attractive object to travellers.} When no danger
threatens the cock sits on a bough, a stump or a wall,
uttering his simple love-song hoo, hoo, hoo,} puffing out his
throat and striking his bill against his perch at each note ; or
he parades the ground with a stately walk, his head bowing
at every step, and his crest alternately lifted and lowered, in
a slow and graceful manner. Nor does the bird wholly drop
this deportment when engaged in feeding, though that occu-
pation quickens its pace and often leads it to the most
undignified spots in search of the worms or grubs there to
be found abundantly, either by probing the soil or by stamp-
ing on the earth and so making them come to the surface.
As each animal appears it is seized—if it be small, it is
jerked into the air, adroitly caught again and gulped down;
if it be large, it is beaten against the ground, and then, by a
sudden throwing-back of the head, made to fall into the
open gape—but the bill is always raised aloft in the act of
swallowing. Though the bird generally seeks its living amid
the most obscene refuse, there are places in which it finds
food of a less impure origin, as Mr. Greenhow (Mag. Nat.
* Tt seems to have appeared most frequently in Wexford, Waterford, and Cork,
but occasionally in Kerry, Limerick, Clare, Galway and Antrim.
++ When the former editions of this work appeared the habits of this bird, as
well as of the two whose history next follow, had been studied by but few of our
countrymen, and the Author had to write from very insufficient sources of infor-
mation. A great change has since taken place in this respect, and so far as
general habits can be observed theirs have been by many excellent field-workers
in many different lands. The wealth of materials offered to a compiler is now
very great, as regards all three species, and it can hardly be doubted that the
impulse given by these earlier had much to do with its acquisition.
+ Sometimes syllabled hoop, hoop, hoop or hoo, poo, poo. The sound seems to
be produced by expelling the air from the dilatable esophagus. From this ery
comes the name which the bird hears in many widely-differing languages. The
French Hupe, or as now commonly written Huppe, is often thought to refer to
the tuft of feathers which is so characteristic of the species ; but according to
M. Littré (Dict. de la Langue France, i. p. 2067) is but a secondary meaning of
the word, and the tuft is named from the bird, not the bird from the tuft.
HOOPOE. 423
Hist. vii. p. 155) observed it examining the pollard willows
and poplars near Bordeaux for the sake of the insects which
infest their decaying trunks. Beetles of many kinds and in
every stage, as well as caterpillars are also eaten, and Capt.
Sperling (Ibis, 1864, p. 282) saw it in Rhodes hawking in the
air for flies. The Hoopoe is not commonly credited with
much power of wing, yet this fact and that of its affording
the falconer a good flight,* to say nothing of the vast dis-
tances it traverses in its yearly migrations, and of its generally
wandering habits,t prove that to be far greater than has been
supposed. Ordinarily, however, it is seen to fly but little,
merely flitting in an undulatory course from one feeding-
ground to another near by, or mounting to some place where
it may cleanse its bill from the soil that has accumulated
thereon while digging. It is seldom found far from the
shelter of trees or buildings, for its timidity is great. It
flinches from the swoop of a passing Swallow, and on the
appearance of a Hawk, or even a Crow, say Bechstein and
Naumann, it squats on the earth, spreading its tail and
wings, so that the latter almost meet in front, and throws
back its head, pointing the bill upwards, in which strange
posture it remains till the danger is over. Yet as regards its
own kind it is courageous enough, and in spring the cocks
fight violently, leaving, says Necker, the ground covered with
their feathers.
With all its dignity and beauty, the Hoopoe possesses, as
has been stated, some very unpleasant peculiarities, and these
are intensified during the breeding-season. The eggs are
usually laid in a hollow tree, wall or stone-heap,} sometimes,
* The late Mr. Newcome told the Editor of a flight in which both Hawk
and Hoopoe mounted out of sight, and so quickly that his informant, a Dutch
falconer, said it was as though they had been ‘‘ pulled up to the sky by ropes.””
+ Bishop Stanley says (Fam. Hist. B. ii. p. 67) that ‘* one approached a vessel
in the middle of the Atlantic, and kept company with it for a good way, but did
not settle on board, which it probably would have done had it been tired.”
t Pallas (Zoogr. Rosso-As. i. p. 434) mentions an extraordinary site for a
nest :—‘‘Zarizyni in domo extra urbem sita, diu non habitata, intra ipsas
latrinas pullos educaverat Upupa, et licet tune hominum frequentia turbata,
postero anno tamen ad eundem nidum rediit.” He adds that he found another
nest, with some young, ‘‘ qui foctidissimo ichore ex ano ejaculato se defende-
9
VO. ii: ol
424 UPUPID.
it would seem, without any bedding, but often the old nest
of a Starling or other bird is used, or possibly fresh twigs,
erass and the like are added. The Hoopoe, however, is not
content with this: the furnishing of its nursery is nearly
always completed by introducing some of the foulest material
that ean be conceived ; and the hen, it would appear, scarcely
ever leaves the nest for the sixteen days of her incubation,
the cock assiduously feeding her at the hole’s mouth. Things
become worse when the young are hatched, for their fices
are discharged all around, producing, in warm climates espe-
cially, an indescribable stench.* The eggs, from four to
seven in number, are of elongate form, with a dull surface
minutely pitted, the sides of the hollows shewing white, but
otherwise uniform in colour. When first laid, says Lord
Lilford, they are of a fine pale greenish-blue ; but, as ordinarily
seen, some are of a lavender-grey, others pale olive, while
again others have a distinctly reddish tinge. They measure
from 1°08 to :96 by from ‘74 to 68 in.
The Hoopoe soon becomes tame in captivity, and even, it
is said, strongly attached to its keeper, while its lively actions
render it an amusing tenant of the aviary. But without
ereat care it does not long endure prison-life, and one of its
chief requirements seems to be plenty of sand in which it can
roll itself. Blyth states (Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 2, 11. p. 597)
that in 1888 a pair ‘‘ built and incubated”’ in the menagerie
at Knowsley. Notwithstanding its nauseous mode of feed-
ing, this bird, which towards autumn becomes very fat, is
deemed a delicacy in many parts of the south of Europe, and
especially by the Greeks of Constantinople. To Jews and
bant,”’ in the chest of a rotting corpse that had been loosely covered with stones.
In China, says Swinhoe (Ibis, 1860, p. 49), Hoopoes often breed in the holes of
exposed coffins, whence the people call them by a name meaning ‘‘ Coffin-bird.”
* Some of this is denied by Naumann, but, it would seem, by him alone, and
the assertions in the text are corroborated by many witnesses. In Central
Germany, where his observations were chiefly made, it is indeed probable that
matters are not so bad as in more southern countries, and it is quite likely that
if a pair of Hoopoes were again suffered to breed with us they would not be
found to be any nuisance to their neighbours. Certainly in the few instances
recorded, no disgust appears to have been felt, and no complaint made. How-
ever, ‘*Sale comme une Huppe”’ is a French proverb.
HOOPOE. 4.25
Mahometans it is by law forbidden as unclean. Of the part
played by the Hoopoe in Egyptian and classical mythology,
and in the traditions and pharmacopeeia of the Arabs, there is
not here space to tell.
This bird in summer has several times wandered to the
most northern parts of Norway, and in 1868 one was taken
in Spitsbergen, but in Scandinavia it has been only known to
breed in Denmark—though not recently, in the extreme south
of Sweden and in Gottland and Aland. It is but rarely
observed in Finland, and in Russia does not seem, according
to Dr. Sabanejev, to go northward of the Jaroslav Govern-
ment, though abundant in the south, and on the Asiatic border
hardly attains lat. 60° N. Further eastward its northern
limit has not been laid down, but it is very common in
Western Siberia, is found in Dauuria, even on the high
plains, and thence through Amoorland to the Pacific. It is
included among the birds of Japan, and in China occurs from
Pekin to Canton, being resident in parts at least of that
empire. To the south its range is as yet ill-defined, for
Messrs. Sharpe and Dresser incline to believe that the Hoopoe
of the Indo-Chinese countries may be specifically separated
under the name of Upupa longirostris ; but the true U. epops
is certainly found throughout India, though perhaps only as
a winter-visitant—what is believed to be a third species,
U. indica, being the perennial form in that country.* Thence
our Hoopoe prevails throughout South-western Asia to Egypt
and Nubia, where it is resident. In Abyssinia as also in
Senegal it seems to occur only in winter, but its southern
limits in Africa require further investigation.t North of the
Sahara U. epops is very abundant; it is common in the
Canaries, and occurs in Madeira and the Azores. Through-
out the Mediterranean islands it is a well-known bird-of-
* Another reputed species, U. nigripennis, inhabits Southern India and
Ceylon, but Messrs. Sharpe and Dresser unite it to U. indica.
+ From Zambesia on the east to Benguela on the west U. epops is replaced by
what the authors last named term a distinct and excellent species, UV. africana
(U. minor and U. decorata of some writers), which extends to the Cape of Good
Hope.