i; ms ‘ye “ POW HitcW bile Veteyay CEG AL ie ee Chey i aera ittat f) Copcin oN i chee e Dive wt sep - UMC) DL ne pe Res Bap Cictow iter wire veh) STEP Cae tery oh hom “weet Rte e yy: Ween yy We feeb we Rate Ths Vey wey rhe TAN ye arin 1944 Hi tye 10) habe Mine peat 7} ea Doster « Nao ) TPL PSR TORS Bib ahy Mia ig SU a eas Hol HF Seis yy ely Mind tng avy £910 YS9) a SI hija age VMAs varaal yeas caret ey 1” a) +4 ody Wem eat ntity a hty PMN AT ey Aap ithe yh i vere NV Werea: phone te wy ) late : Hrs atti \ et { hh Pd at J Be i Ve ye ) | ABM ay ays wl yep ey Hew eg i A a | a See) ve ah Oriel) Yh siate Hane csdne Ve I: Aah A guint gt : aby War isles maa ney tae FEN G4 4 / WAU a a attr ary 1 OW WD ass eed tie be ? ety NP VLAN oe M6 ; dN Nabarlvanie tq UAL WN) EM Oat a ai anen nate Me PAE CELE eset he Myon * ANE be Ad wy Linea aN) vw , Vira vary OO Oe) if WAN ll oe anys f 7 hy mateigratat yh Was be es vena theegtas pave Le { Pa lotattiilalssie nan ueaiyn eet Wiad arent TAs habe sis @ Ae waite abet bts Ory ir 4 - ' et spe Peeskes chek Pie teats, A OF ouealeatars ii fib Me en CIE Ore” ay) Yeas ‘ or ak TO hay een ‘ q HL ie baw. i G HAWN Ren IRE ee air bil ‘ PBT AP 80 is bea ga ' aA af Hel ie i eT Re he mi) (8 6 eerie) uel At Os eran hie a SOAS ABN ios oy ete Ae wt bY Mata IT Teer rahe boride goiuletd DARE nD ay Dak WN a) day) 9 Ps A] Se Ot seenstoad te PAA, Met Tt eae 5 % ‘ " [ “1 ae ' . A Nt mh 4 v% SIC : ne oh ADH a Yes ony Ra AL ty att, i, y SO aa eR ery ‘ hh am Hes yr an ey i Celt ite CRAs eat an ny dish eta, 1 deb ay Kas ths “ Ab Abs ey ‘ eas Hai an ia wlylath + VAae eh ay, A Va wae pre eR A Be weg ne HMO DM OSU brie e WU abi LA PEM aT et bere alia, AP A ea A LTD LGAs Ona tinted satae hata a Seat ee LO UN ata be WLW set calm rebing ep ANeT, Carry curry et PAPC eaR ORR oy UAT Ee) Hain eet r a mar dae BAT it Pease pipe SU AEe Wen tay rai tinvalany ’ PaTU. eee oe i ee 1 * aa hte ttt tts Wee aletta liane 2 OW tear ‘ Pasbae Hetay Hickpe SMR Ys ty ee 1 my heveu aly p Mea WEILER in ter erie a ib Cee eH debs dgktg SU eNO te rary ) q y 4 hye YORE ra Ocehlalal. A Ym ake Veron mses ee brbebda tats » NP ent : eo ehtgn 1 A Sor Vornt ts tap ge TNE he 8 wey . ih tas he be Sree Nnar evn AL CIS » ig AT whheta rr vibe ae ten ble veh ee tet terete baat ‘Wor aror ata ey ne = ts APL alt ev ee epee te 4, thy ory ene om bs Te» PUUN rhe erat , ' , )} it 9) doom gh ad 5 TF beet ney ge td YEN hae Arp 4 lecovprer pe td Peas Wipe ? atte Woy oF th f vie MV ey va pat fe ae OF Lee ivy Vee sheet HSER ab gbday Sra ‘4 aT ferenai WW be ea Whe snr ie ina 994 99°18 We iy a PIS ie brio nee he bem Mealy *, Thee ntl Se aes sth ” Ale hs wo ha He oe ldo cts Laka bed Ne ee tes lukemiagy sieviy Nola ey by blpbinetrtekaeaets tah’ 4 95 BHR Stee Hye, SPM P een en Se En be hein "Sp twee stone We aee. yt ” tos reba as tie tht Say te: Ded ts Wee eee J hee te 5, emcee Pacmerere ul peat AS Wont seal ay se Tt Petes Pyne aaa! Tien enee Me Wheel ¢ A > eM Suh VA} wo ey bale 3 aes HD San! ee {) stat rts Piet A py Dt Aor ty AK her er HRAe az a Vee A eae or vats barnes ee i a Sarat he ae bea a4 te pe TP Ts Peel ylal a gheans retail ee ad erprbrery ree a eae oe, a ongeetnnae “| \ NMS Si BRAY a puget yh INSECTIVORA. INSECT-EATING MAMMALS. Tue five British members of this order are comprised in four genera, viz. -—/a/pa, represented by the Mole; Z7znaceus, by the Hedgehog ; Sovex, by the Common and Pygmy Shrews ; and Neomys, by the Water Shrew. Of these the Hedgehog and Pygmy Shrew are alone found in all three sections of the kingdom. The Mole, Common Shrew, and Water Shrew, although common in Great Britain, are unknown in Ireland. These four genera are typical of as many families, and since in dealing with them there arises no question of super- generic importance affecting British natural history, it seems best to shorten the introduction to this order and to omit all technical descriptions of the families. This course leaves more space for the ampler treatment demanded by more difficult groups, such as bats, rodents, seals, and whales. To non-technical eyes the British insectivora, excepting the shrews, present few points of resemblance, and even the characteristic to which they owe the name of their order is not absolute, since, although restricted as a whole to a diet of invertebrates, they have no objection to attack and devour the higher animals when an opportunity occurs. In fact, the Hedgehog is in this respect a frequent, the Water Shrew an habitual, offender; and for the others, the limits of their menu are probably in this respect governed rather by their lack of power than by any lack of relish for flesh. As mentioned in detail under the various species, some insectivores will even eat vegetable matter, when no other food is available. ' VOL. II. A 2 INSECTIVORA Each family consists of a highly specialised and ancient group, with no near allies of any sort in Britain. The semi-blind, burrowing Mole, its whole frame adapted for a life spent in pursuit of earthworms ; the comparatively .nactive Hedgehog, hunting its humble prey in the midst of enemies, and relying for its own safety on the passive defence of a coat of spines; and the shrews, always lively and alert vy +ther on land or water—are each unique types in the British fauna. The shrew and the Mole are active throughout the year, whereas the Hedgehog undergoes at least a partial hibernation during the colder months. The Pygmy Shrew is remarkable for being the smallest non- volant British mammal, and in this respect it has few rivals, and none outside its own order, throughout the world. Shrews, hedgehogs, and moles are well known in literature, and stand for well-defined and characteristic types in the public mind. Besides the genera mentioned above as British, there are found in continental Europe, the white-toothed shrews of the sub-family Cvocedurine, which are numerous in species and widely distributed in Asia and Africa. The desmans (genus Desmana, Goldenstadt, 1777, ante-dating AZygale, G. Cuvier, 1800, and Galemys, Kaup, 1829), which were formerly more widely distributed and included Britain in their range, are now in Europe confined to southern Russia, with the Pyrenees and the Iberian Peninsula, where there are at least two species. They are inhabitants of streams and rivers, and their habits are said to resemble those of the water rats, with the difference that they feed, not on vegetable matter, but on invertebrates. The order insectivora is extremely old, being of pre-Pliocene age, both in Europe and America. Further details will be found under the several genera and species. AEP De, TRUE MOLES. GENUS LALP.A. 1758. TALPA, Carolus Linnzeus, Systema Nature, x., 52; xii., 73, 1766: based on T. europea of Linnzus, and 7. asiéatica of Linnzus. In Britain this genus includes only the well-known 7. europea, the type of its genus, of form and habits so character- istic as to require few words of description. True moles are burrowing insectivores, with the body cylin- drical, short limbs and tail, and immense hands; with abundant velvety fur set vertically in the skin; with eye and ear very much reduced or entirely absent as external organs; with the head, which is used for turning up the earth, tapering to the extremity of the slender, flexible, and sensitive snout. The arm is modified so as to form a powerful digging organ; the radius and ulna are well developed, short, and strong; the humerus and clavicle are short and broad, the latter particularly so, thus bringing the arm well forward. The hand is very broad and flat, and, when digging, faces outwards, not downwards (Plates I. and II., Fig. 1); it cannot be closed, but by inclination of the terminal phalanges forms a very efficient hoe; its great breadth arises principally from a special development of the proximal inner wrist-bone or radial sesamoid, a large curved ossicle known as the os falczforme. All five fingers are present and carry strong, acutely-pointed claws, which are firmly embedded in the elongated terminal phalanges. The other phalanges are much shortened. In the hind limb the tibia and fibula are united, and there is no pubic symphysis. The foot is comparatively small and weak, but all five digits are present. The intestine is without a caecum. 3 4 TALPIDAt-—TALPA The skull is elongated and possesses auditory bullae and slender zygomatic arches but no post-orbital processes. There are forty-four teeth, an exceptional number for a recent species, but regarded as typical for the primitive placental mammalia. They are arranged as follows :— ohh G er pm +—4, m 3—3, ae 4-4 w | 2 The chisel-shaped incisors are disposed in a_ semicircle ; the median upper pair are slightly larger than their fellows, the lower are not ex- 2 aia tended forwards horizontally Bot as in the shrews. The long ey and conical upper canine is - : == double-rooted. Then follow (\g0 DI Ce three small, subequal, double- bas rooted premolars; the fourth is larger and more in series with the three molars, of which the second is largest and has seven cusps, two internal and five arranged as an external W (compare Plate II., Fig. 14, Voli 124). In the lower jaw the canine is indistinguishable from the incisors, and the anterior lower premolar is enlarged to take its place. The premolars are small, but increase in size from the front backwards. The last molar, the smallest of its series, is comparatively larger than that of the upper jaw. True moles are almost confined to the temperate regions of Europe and Asia, from Great Britain through the Himalaya and Altai ranges to the mountainous parts of Assam and Burma, where they réach at least 10,000 feet (Blanford). The best known species after 7. europea, is Savi’s T. ceca of south Europe except Spain, where is found 7. occzdentalis (Cabrera), a smaller animal with functionless eyes and shorter snout; Thomas’s 7. vomana, a large-toothed form, was described from the neighbourhood of Rome, Italy (Azz. and Mag. Nat. Hist., December 1902, 516-517). Others, such FIG. 1.—SIDE VIEW (diagrammatic and magni- fied 2 times) OF TEETH OF Za/fa europea. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 5 as Milne-Edwards’s 7. dongzrostris of western China and Tibet, the short-tailed 7. mzcrura of Hodgson from the south-western Himalayas, and 7. a/tazca of Nikolski, from the Altais, are little known. In all, except 7. europea, the eyes are said to be covered by a membrane. The genus is unrepresented in Africa, where its place is taken by the golden moles or Chrysochloride ; and in the new world. In the latter the four allied genera, Scadops, Scapanus, Parascalops, and Condylura (see True, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xix. [No. trot], 1-112, 1896), have the first upper incisor much larger than the second. 7Zadsa is connected with Sorex through Uvotrichus and Neiirotrichus, the mcle-shrews of Japan and North America respectively, and through U7ro- psilus of Tibet, the latter a shrew with a mole’s_ skull. Remains of moles occur in the upper Eocene deposits of Europe (Protalpa), and the genus 7a/pa itself dates from the Miocene period. Other allied genera are :—Scapéochirus, with forty teeth, of China, Mongolia, Asia Minor, and Syria; Parascaptor of Indo-China to Tibet, and Mogera of Formosa, Japan, and Siberia, each with forty-two teeth; and the hardly known Dymecodon of Japan (see Thomas, Proc. Zool. Soc., London, 4th February 1908, 51, footnote). THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT. TALPA EUROPA, Linneus. 1758. TALPA EUROPA, Carolus Linnzus, Systema Nature, x., 52; xii. 733, 1766; and all authors, except as below ; described from Upsala, Sweden. 1776, TALPA FRISIUS, P. L. S. Miiller, Matursystems Supplements und Register Band, Suppl., 36; described from Ost-Friesland. 1777. TALPA EUROPAA, a ALBO-MACULATA, J. C. R. Erxleben, Systema Regni Animalts, i., 117 ; described from Ost-Friesland. 1785. TALPA VULGARIS, P. Boddaert, Elenchus Animalium, i,, 126; from Brisson, renaming 7. europea, 1789. TALPA EUROPA, 8 VARIEGATA, J. F. Gmelin, Systema Nature, i., ed. xiii., 110; based on a colour-variety. 1789. TALPA EUROPA, 7 ALBA, J. F. Gmelin, /oc. cz¢.,; based on a white variety. 1792. TALPA EUROPAA NIGRA, Robert Kerr, Animal Kingdom, 200; apparently renaming 7. europea. 6 TALPIDA—TALPA 1792, TALPA EUROPA CINEREA, Robert Kerr, Joc. cit.; based on a cinereous variety. 1797. TALPA EUROPA RUFA, J. M. Bechstein, Der Zoologe, i., v.-viii., 13 ; described from southern France. La Taupe of the French ; der Maulwurf of the Germans. Terminology :—The name “mole,” written as molle or mule, only appears, according to the New English Dictionary, in Middle English, having been borrowed from Middle Dutch sol or mol/le about 1398. This would imply an independent derivation from mw, the root of mould, from the Indo-germanic root me/ = to grind, so that mwu//e meant the “grinder” or “crumbler.” But the latter view is only problematic, since there is some evidence to show that “mole” may after all be an English word. Thus, the forms madlan or mullan, which are given as Irish by O’Reilly, can only have been derived from a similar Anglo-saxon form, since the animal itself did not occur in Ireland. In any case, the forms sole and moldwarp, though they come from the same original root, and have been confused in usage, are two totally different words. The two parts of the name mold-warp (molde= mould, and weorpan = to throw) certainly existed separately in Anglo- saxon, although the compound itself has not been discovered. On the other hand, where the word so/d occurs at a later period, it is not necessarily an abbreviation of sold-warp, but may be an independent extension of the form 7xo/e, An early and unknown translator (about 1420) of Palladius (//us- bondrie, Early English Text Society, 108, iv., 130) has :— “The molde, and other such as diggeth lowe.” Spenser (1553-1598) uses only smou/dwarp, but Shakespeare employs both forms, as in Hamlet, I., v., 162 :— “Well said, old mole! canst work i’ the earth so fast ?” and again in Henry IV. (II1., i, 149) :— “He angers me With telling me of the moldwarp and the ant ;” so that the abbreviation, or extension, of the word, whichever view be taken, was of early date. On the other hand, Topsell (1607) has both mole and want. Want, woont, or wunt, which is variously corrupted into vont, hunt, wunitt, etc., is derived, obviously, from Middle English zvon¢t = a mole, which stood, undoubtedly, for an older form, wand, and came from the same root as Anglo-saxon wzvdan = to wind. The form wand is found in the most ancient English document in existence, viz., the THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 7 Epinal Glossary, which has been attributed to about 700 a.p. This is in the Mercian, ze, Anglian, dialect, but the Saxon form must have been identical with the Anglian, as is known from the history of similarly formed words. Sex names :—Boar and sow. Local names (non-Celtic):—MJoldwarp or mouldwarp; want or wunt, with innumerable corruptions, of which formidable lists are given in Wright ; these are explained under Terminology. (Celtic) :—Irish —caochdn = “blind one.” Scottish Gaelic — famh- thalmhainn (ath-thalmhain); dallag = “blind one”; dubh-threobhaiche = “black ploughman”; 7zr-threobhaiche = “mould-plougher.” Manx —kyaghan =“blind one”; voddan-ootrey = “earth-rat”; /ugh-ghoal = “blind mouse.” Welsh—gwadd ; twrch daear = “earth hog”; twrch gorddodyn = “burrowing hog”; older form, ylyr. Cornish—older, god; later form, godh, gidh. Mole-hills are known as want-heaves or tumps in various parts of England, both heave and tump being terms having, according to Wright, the general meaning of “heap.” Distribution :—The Common Mole, possibly including forms hitherto undistinguished from it, ranges through boreal and transitional Europe and Asia, from sea-level to about 6000 feet in the Alps (Blasius) ; and from Scotland, to in Sweden about 59° N. lat. (but not in Norway), the middle Dvina district in north Russia, and corresponding latitudes of Siberia to central France; it there gives way to 7. c@ca, as well as in Dalmatia, Greece, and in most countries south of the Alps. In Spain it is replaced by 7. occidentalis, and in the neighbourhood of Rome by 7. romana. Eastwards the limits of its distribution are imperfectly known, but it occurs from Great Britain to probably the Pacific coast of Siberia. In western China, Tibet, the south-western Himalayas, and the Altais it meets other species, already mentioned on p. 5. In Great Britain the Mole is probably abundant in every county of England, Wales, and Scotland. It is numerous even in Sutherland and Caithness (Harvie-Brown and Buckley), in the former of which Selby reported it as common in 1834 (Edinburgh New Phil. Journ., xx., 159, 1836). The evidence of Scottish naturalists is, however, in favour of a general recent increase in its numbers with a corresponding extension of its range, and there are stated to be areas, such as Southend, Kintyre (Boyd Watt), which it has not yet reached. Wherever the soil permits or earth-worms are found, it ascends to the summits of the highest hills, as in Yorkshire (Roberts, Zoologist, 1872, 3182-3183). It has been observed at altitudes of 1700 feet, or practically the highest point, on the Pentlands, and even higher on the Ochils (W. Evans), while in the Solway and 8 TALPIDA-—TALPA Clyde areas, and in Wales, it has been detected by Service, Boyd Watt, and Forrest at 2000 feet at least in each case, the first observer recording its presence at 2782 feet on the Merrick (Zraus. Edinburgh Field Naturalists and Microscopical Society, vi., i., 64, 1907-8). Boyd Watt has found it at 1200 feet, when the snow-line was 200 feet below. For the Tay area it has been recorded from 1500 feet (Godfrey in Harvie- Brown), and its workings occur at well over 2000 feet on the Loch Tay hills (Evans zz /z¢.). On the other hand, its burrows may be found in the sand-dunes by the sea beach, as at Thurso, Caithness (Kinnear), at North Berwick, Haddington (Evans), and elsewhere; at Malldraeth and elsewhere in Anglesey it even frequents ground flooded by spring tides (Oldham in MS.; see also Forrest). From the islands it is as a rule absent, but occurs in Jersey (Bunting, Zoologist, 1908, 461) and Alderney (Eagle Clarke) ; is common in Wight (More; Bury ; Wadham); and numerous in Anglesey (Coward). In the Clyde Isles and Inner Hebrides it is known only from Bute, whence Pennant reported it in 1777 (see also W. Evans, Ann. Scott. Nat. Hist., 1905, 241); Ulva, off Mull, where it is stated to have first appeared in February 1892 (Harvie-Brown and Buckley); and Mull, where it is numerous and its presence is locally attributed to a legendary introduction in a boatload of earth sent from Morven early in the eighteenth century (Alston). Remains found on Ailsa Craig were probably carried there by predatory birds (Boyd Watt). Despite its absence from the Shetlands, Orkneys, Outer Hebrides, Man, and Ireland,! it is known by a Gaelic name to the inhabitants of the two latter islands. Distribution in time :—A species from the Cromer Forest Bed (late Pliocene) hitherto referred to 7. europea, in reality belongs to another and extinct species. The fossil remains which are found in British late Pleistocene deposits, such as the Ightham Fissures in Kent and the Teesdale caves in Yorkshire, represent a form much more closely related to the living 7. euvopea than the older Forest Bed species. The rutting season is normally confined to the end of March, April, and, occasionally, part of May. The period of gestation is about four weeks, or slightly more. The young, averaging between three and four, with extremes of one and seven, are born normally from about the 24th April to the middle of June. Occasionally late litters have been observed in August or September, but there is no evidence that the Mole breeds twice a year (Adams, Wem. and Proc. Manchester Lit. and Philosoph. Soc., x\vii., No. 4, 23, read 18th Nov. 1902 (1903) ). 1 A bird’s “ pellet” picked up in Benevenagh Woods, Bellarena, Co. Londonderry, by R. Welch, was found by Adams to contain the skull of a mole, perhaps brought over by a hawk from Scotland (/77shk Naturalist, 1905, 72). THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 9 Description :—The general form and appearance of the Common Mole are typical of its genus. The eye is set low down and far forward. The small eyeball has a diameter of about 1 m.; the irides are dark brown, the pupil circular (see Davy, Proc. Zool, Soc. (London), 1851, 129-131). The eye is relatively more prominent in the fcetus (Geoffroy, also Bruton, Manchester Mem. ctt. supra, x\viii, 1904, No. 20). There is neither orbit nor eyelash, and the small external aperture, about I m. in diameter, can only doubtfully be said to possess an eyelid. The ear is without any external conch. The fingers are short, with all the phalanges about equal in size. The very soft, short, silky fur covers the whole body down to the feet and hands, but on the scaly tail is reduced to a few long stiff hairs. It shines like iridescent velvet, so that the colour, which at the first impression appears to be pure black, varies according to the direction from which it is viewed ; it is bright grey when seen in the direction in which the hairs lie, and rich deep black from the opposite point of view ; a slight yellowish tinge appears on the lower jaw and along the middle of the belly. There is much individual variation, both as to general colour and amongst the individual hairs, which may have the tips and bases of different shades. Little is known as regards seasonal variation or moult; the latter takes place, perhaps as in the shrews, twice a year, namely, in spring and autumn. Service (Zvans. Edinburgh Field Naturalists and Micro- scopical Society, vi., i., 64, 1907-8) states that the winter coat is changed immediately after the breeding season, the male preceding the female by several weeks, but both sexes have usually assumed their new coat by the first week of June. Adams’s observation of a mole shedding its coat in May (zz /z¢.) is corroboratory. The young at birth are pink and hairless, but as they increase in size the skin grows darker, assuming a dark slate-blue colour before the fur begins to appear (see also p. 12). The number of mamme is probably variable. The most usual number is believed to be six, but Adams (of. cz¢., Fig. 28) has figured a specimen having eight, placed in pairs along the entire pectoral and inguinal surface. They are not readily seen even when the female has young. Genital organs:—Without dissection it is difficult to distinguish the sex of immature animals. Until the first breeding season, the vagina is imperforate and the clitoris closely resembles a penis. At the end of January the uterus and vagina of the female, and the testes, prostate, and corpus spongiosum of the male undergo considerable enlargement, attaining a maximum at about the end of March or beginning of April, when pairing takes place. After this date VOL. II, B 10 TALPIDAK—TALPA the organs decrease, and by the end of May have returned to their minimum size, which they retain for the rest of the year (Adams, op. ctt.). The skull and teeth are typical of the genus. Individual colour variation is very frequent. The most usual types may be arranged in three classes, viz. (1) true pink-eyed albinos ; (2) those with yellow or whitish markings; (3) ashy or silver grey. Class 1—Absolutely white specimens with pink eyes are almost or quite unknown, but there are on record a cream-coloured one from near Eton (Clark-Kennedy, Zoologist, 1867, 702) and an “orange-pink” male, with dusky shading on the back, from Somerset (Garnett, /7ze/d, 21st June 1902, 978), each with pink eyes. Class 2 includes numerous individuals displaying almost every form of gradation from wholly whitish, but not absolutely white, to normal, with orange, yellowish, or whitish markings. These markings most usually take the form of a patch or streak on the throat or abdomen, and in such cases there are usually a few whitish hairs on the feet and tail (see Service’s figures, Azu. Scott. Nat. Hzst., 1903, pl. i.). In many of the wholly cream-coloured forms, the throat and under side are more or less completely tinted with rich orange and ferruginous hues, which may extend to the limbs, cheeks, nape, or dorsal line (Southwell, Zoologist, 1888, 22). Variations of the above type are so numerous that they can hardly be styled abnormal. They are often confined to definite areas (Service; see also Perkins, /ze/d, 1oth April 19009, 641), and in some localities, as near Oby and Clippesby in Norfolk (Southwell, Zvaus. Norfolk and Norwich Nat. Soc., iii., 25th March 1884, 667), and on Gullane Links, Haddington (W. Evans, zz “7.), they are common, and appear to be restricted to certain families, in which all the young of a litter may be affected. In some cases associated with the above type the tips of the hairs remain of a dusky colour, although the bases are light (Aplin, Zoologzst, 1882, 351). In a female described by Service (Amn. Scott. Nat. Hist., 1904, 66), the general colour was glossy slate-black, with suggestions of plum-blue on the upper side; the light hair-bases were restricted to the under side. In another example, sent for examination by Forrest, all the hairs were bicoloured, with the bases on the right side only of the body tinted with orange; the central abdominal region, a throat- patch, and a band running across the head between the eyes and snout, were also orange. Pied or skewbald varieties, other than as described above, are quite rare; one is stated to have had two white spots on the back, the white hairs being of unusual length (Ford, Zoologzst, 1882, 263); as was also the case with one from Bristol (Charbonnier) ; others were cream or orange coloured, mottled or striped with black (Cordeaux, THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT II Zoologist, 1868, 1186; Prior, Journ. cit., 1877, 225-226); one had a white head (W. Evans); in another the nose and tail were tipped with white, and there was a white breast-spot (Forrest); while J. Whitaker has figured one which was largely cream colour with dark underside and head, the lines of demarcation being of irregular course (Scribblings of a Hedgerow Naturalist, 1904, 238). Class 3—Ash, or mouse-coloured, silvery-grey, and bluish-lead speci- mens are occasionally met with, but are not common (see Tomes, V7zcz. Co. Hist., Worcestershire, 174; Larken, Zoologzst, 1890, 97-98; Crewe, Field, 25th February 1893, 296; Service, Ann. Scott. Nat. Hist., 1908, 117). Adams writes me that he possesses an ash-coloured specimen caught at Penistone, Yorkshire, and W. Evans reports a fawn-coloured one taken at Gullane, Haddington, in November Ig10, also a beautiful silvery-grey variety taken near Edinburgh in February 1911 (zz &z.). The sex of animals varying in colour is seldom given by recorders, and even when stated is not always reliable, field naturalists being fre- quently in error in judging the sex of moles. Service, however, states that in cream-coloured specimens the female is always lighter than the male (Zoologist, 1893, 425). This writer’s articles on variation may be consulted for further information, as may be Harting, /7ze/d, 19th July TOO2; 141. The Common Mole seems to be very free from geographical variation, but Matschie (Sztzungs-Berichte der Gesellschaft Naturfor- schender Freunde (Berlin), 1901, 9, 229) suggests that the Roumanian form differs from that of central Germany ; and Rollinat and Trouessart (Comptes rendus Soc. Biol. (Paris), 15th December 1906, 602) state that in France, towards the southern limit of its range, the degree of develop- ment of the eye is variable, and that frequently no external eye is visible. They conclude that the disappearance of the eyes has taken place recently, and that it is connected with the stronger light of the south. Satunin has described a subspecies, 7: ¢. drvaunerz, from south Russia, but I have not been able to examine it. William Evans believes that individuals inhabiting the upland districts of the Edinburgh district are on the average rather larger than those of the lowlands. DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES. Ten specimens in Tail (without terminal Hind foot (without British Museum. Head and body. irs claws). Maximum . - : 147 32 21 Average 3 A - 139 27°7 19°2 Minimum . - 7 122 20 16 The above dimensions are taken from the labels, and rest on the 12 TALPIDA—TALPA authority of the various collectors. The sex of the specimens has not been given here, as such determinations are frequently unreliable. . Service (Zrans. Edinburgh Field Naturalists and Microscopical Society, vi., iL, 64, 1907-8) states that males are larger than females, the maximum total length known to him for each sex being about 195 and 156 respectively, but these figures were quite exceptional, and the average for females would be about 140. Adams also finds males larger; adults measured by him have had the head and body varying between 140 and 127, while young in the nest have reached 118. Three females averaged for head and body 133, tail 33, and hind foot 20. The table following, for which I am indebted to Adams, indicates the rate of growth of young examined in the nest from the first to the twenty-second day after birth (see also Alem. and Proc. Manchester Lit. and Philosoph. Soc., \iv., 2, 9, 1909) :— Number of | Head and . Hind , : days old. body. Tail. ‘Palen Colour. Remarks. 1 42 8 5 Veryred . : ( . | Umbilical cord unhealed. 2 47 9 55 Red . 5 . 3 - Do. 5 62 10 8 Pink. 70 12 9 7 f \ Pink. 71 15 oh 9 80 15 11 Slightly lead coloured on : back only. ll f fe ” ao N Lead coloured above, lower \ 91 17 13 | parts pink. 12 95 16 14 Do. 14 105 17 16 Lead coloured all over ; fur just visible. 17 } 114 23 16 | Completely clothed with | Ears open. velvety, lead-coloured fur 21 117 25 17 | Fur approaching normal | Eyes showing spot of matter, but colour and length not yet open. 22 118 27 165 | Furalmostnormal . . | Eyes opening. Skull :—Condylar basal length, 34 to 36; greatest breadth at zygoma, 12 to 13; greatest breadth of brain-case, 14:8 to 17-8; greatest inter- orbital breadth, 8-2 to 8-8; breadth of rostrum over canines, 4:8 to 5 ; depth of brain-case through bulla, 10-2 to 10:6; length of mandible, 22 to 23-4; length of upper tooth-row, excluding incisors, 12-8 to 13-4; length of entire lower tooth-row (alveolar), 13 to 13-2. Weights:—Eagle Clarke sends me the following weights in grammes of thirteen Scottish specimens taken near Edinburgh :—81-6 (19th September) ; 74-5 (3rd October) ; 121-5, 112-7, 110-8, 101-7, 95-2, OI, 88-5, 86, 82-2, 77-5, 68-5 (9th November). Several were no doubt immature, but, since 100 grammes= 3-6 oz., the larger measurements agree with Aflalo’s statement that the average weight of adults is just under 4 0z. One weighed by Kinnear reached 80-64 grammes. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 13 Few of our native mammals have supplied more material for fancy writing to authors of works on natural history than the subject of this article, many pages of imaginative admiration having been devoted to it. Difficulties of observation have no doubt much to do with this. At any rate, paragraphs are published expressing commiseration with the poor creature’s life of incessant toil in subterranean darkness, and rapture at its form and the peculiarities of its structure. Surprise is expressed at its wonderful adaptation to its mode of life, and minute descriptions are added of the well-nigh mathematical plans upon which its under-ground home and habitations are supposed to be constructed. Amongst so much fiction,’ to which authorities of such weight as Blasius, MacGillivray, and Bell contributed each their quotum, it is difficult to findthe truth. Indeed, were it not for the recent studies of Messrs William Evans’ and Lionel E. Adams,’ the compiler’s task would have been most unenviable. Few accurate observations were previously on record. Gilbert White almost ignored the animal, and other early writers were unacquainted with its habits. For the first detailed account of the life of the Mole, we are indebted to Henri le Court, who originally held a lucrative situation at the French Court, but retired from the horrors of the Revolution into the country, to devote himself to the study of this animal and of the most efficient means for its extirpa- tion. Le Court imparted his knowledge to his friend and pupil Antoine Alexis Cadet de Vaux, who published a small book on the subject in 1803." Mr Adams thinks that this interesting 1 A paper in the F7ze/d of 11th July 1908, 90-91, wherein Colonel R. F. Meysey- Thompson quotes largely from a mole-catcher, is a good example of the prevailing intermixture of correct and incorrect observations. ? First published in 1892 in Proc. Roy. Phys. Soc., Edinburgh, Sess, xi., 1890- 1891, 85-171, read 15th April 1891. I am also indebted to Evans for many unpublished original observations of which I have made free use. 3 “A Contribution to our Knowledge of the Mole (7alpa europea),” Mem. and Proc. Manchester Lit. and Philosoph. Soc., x\vii., 4, 1-39, read 18th November 1902 (1903); “Observations on a Captive Mole (Zalpa europea),” Journ. cit. 1., 9, 1-7, read roth April 1906 (1906); also, “‘Some Notes on the Breeding Habits of the Common Mole,” Journ. cit., liv., 2, 1-9, and plate, read 19th October 1909 (1909). Adams has also favoured me with his note-books containing many supplementary observations of great value and interest, the whole of which he has placed at my disposal, and has, besides, rendered assistance by reading the MS. of this article. 4 Dela Taupe, de ses meurs, deses habitudes, et des moyens de la détruire (Paris, 1803). VOL. II, B2 14 TALPIDA—TALPA work is on the whole a trustworthy record of Le Court’s observations, although here and there the writer has allowed considerable play to his imagination. Le Court’s studies attracted the attention of the celebrated naturalist Etienne Geoffroy, who visited him for the purpose of ascertaining the truth and extent of his discoveries, and sub- sequently copied most of de Vaux’s essay for his own work, published in 1829." Geoffroy’s account of the animal may be divided into two parts, in one of which he reproduced de Vaux ; in the other he published the results of his own anatomical studies. The former, in which the imaginative parts unfortun- ately occupy a prominent position, has been the happy hunting- ground of most subsequent writers ; the latter, although interest- ing and valuable, has been frequently ignored. Verification of de Vaux’s statements has been but seldom attempted, but Bingley’s account of the animal may be mentioned as still readable and instructive. An extraordinary and amusing, but original, treatise is that of the Rev. James Grierson, who, writing in 1821 to 1822, transcribed the information imparted to him by a mole-catcher.’ A great many of the myths surrounding the natural history of the Mole were exploded by Mr Adams’s classical paper, the results of four years’ study in the neighbourhood of Stafford. This paper will no doubt for long form the model of future accounts of the animal. The Mole is essentially a burrowing animal, spending nearly all its time under-ground, and feeding, almost but not exclusively, on the earthworms which it meets in its tunnelling. It follows that its form and limbs are highly specialised for the fulfilment of a peculiar existence, from the ordinary routine of which there is but little variation, and which is accompanied by curious and interesting instincts. The general form of the body is calculated to facilitate its rapid progress through the subterranean passages which form its habitual routes between the different parts of its domain. 1 Cours del Histoire Naturelle des Mammiféres (Paris, 1829). 2 “Some Observations on the Natural History and Habits of the Mole,” by the Rev. James Grierson, M.D., M.W.S., Minister of Cockpen, in Alem. Wernerian Soc., IV., 1., 218-236, 1821-22. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 15 The anterior extremities are admirably constructed for the purpose of progression through the soil, while the hind legs are employed in such acts of running or walking as are insepar- able even from a miner’s existence. The snout is a very important organ, being employed either in acts of prehension, or as the sensitive guide to assist the hands when boring; it is also the seat of what is probably the most highly developed sense the Mole possesses, that of smell. The sense of sight, so important to most animals, would in the present case be useless, at least during by far the greater portion of its existence; and hence we find that it is reduced to its minimum of development, and sacrificed, as it were, to the necessary pre-eminence of that of smell. There can, indeed, be no doubt that to the latter sense the Mole is indebted for the perception of its food, of its enemies, and of its mate; indeed, Mr J. L. Bonhote informs me that a captive in his possession could always detect worms placed at the other side of a wooden partition in its box. At the same time, it appears to be much assisted by the sense of hearing, which, although without the usual aid of an external conch, is certainly very acute. Shakespeare was not unmindful of this fact :— “Pray you, tread softly, that the blind mole may not Hear a footfall :” —The Tempest, 1V., 1, 194. The interesting question whether the Common Mole pos- sesses true vision, has long been discussed amongst naturalists, whose opinions have no doubt been at times confused by the existence of more than one European species of the genus. The eyes of Savi’s Mole,’ which replaces our own in parts of the south of Europe, have no external opening, a fact which is probably responsible for Aristotle’s declaration that the Mole is absolutely blind. The eyes of the Common Mole are, how- ever, at least in England, provided with an aperture admitting the entrance of light, and the actual eyeballs and lenses, although very small, are both present and capable of use. This was shown long ago by Geoffroy, and more recently by iT... cca, Savi. 16 TALPIDA:—TALPA Herr Carl Hess! of Germany. The latter denies that the animal is even short-sighted. But, even allowing so much, it was conceded by Herr Hess that while under-ground the eyes must be quite useless. It is evident that their low forward position in a head, the aspect of which is downwards, not to mention the thick fur surrounding them, and the grass amongst which the animal usually moves when above ground, must combine to restrict the vision, even of acute eyes, to a radius of a few inches. This is entirely borne out by the observations of practical naturalists like E. R. Alston,’ Dr H. Laver,’? and Mr Adams, who, although admitting that the eyes appear functional, find from careful observation that they are of little or no service to the animal. Mr Adams is thoroughly convinced that the Mole is practically blind. A captive individual, when confronted with a worm, immediately perceives its proximity and shows signs of excitement. But it invariably has to search for it ; and the random way in which it does so until it strikes the worm haphazard, suggests a probable absence of sight. So much was this the case, indeed, with one kept captive by Alston, which “ puzzled round” a piece of meat so long before finding it, that he was inclined to disparage its sense of smell also. Although a very slight movement is at once perceived, probably by the sense of hearing, a mole proved absolutely indifferent to the presence of a lighted candle, even when waved about before its face, and would have actually run into the flame if permitted to do so. Mr Adams argues that the animal could hardly be indifferent to such a startling and unfamiliar phenomenon close in front of its eyes, unless the light were imperceptible.* It is probable that the whole controversy has arisen out of an existing variability in the eyesight of individuals. For instance, Messrs R. Rollinat and E. L. Trouessart find that towards the southern extremity of the Mole’s range in France the eyes are not infrequently concealed beneath the skin, and 1 Nature, xli., 1889-90, 373, transcribed in Zoologist, 1890, 98 ; see also John Davy, Proc. Zool. Soc. (London), 1851, 129. 2 Zoologist, 1865, 9707. 3 In lit. 4 But it should be noted that many wild or inexperienced domestic animals apparently take no notice of a light or a fire until they approach near enough to feel the heat. A. H. Cocks finds also that the sense of smell is not normal in animals confined in boxes or cages. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 17 the conflicting reports are very easily intelligible if it is supposed that this variability extends to other districts. A curious, but true, old story, that the fur around the eyes is sometimes radiated, has been mentioned by many authors, and dates at least from the latter half of the fifteenth century, when Bartholomzeus Anglicus' wrote: ‘‘ And some men trow that the skin of the mole breaketh for anguish and sorrow when he beginneth to die, and beginneth then to open the eyes in dying that were closed living.” This has been observed by Mr Adams during the spasms of a dying mole, as well as fre- quently by Dr Laver.” Mr F. A. Bruton® has noticed that a distinct conical cavity may be formed by radiation of the fur, at the bottom of which the black circular eye was clearly seen by him with no protection whatever. Everyone has seen on the surface of the ground the evidences of the Mole’s burrowing for its food; they are indeed plain almost everywhere in Great Britain, from the sand-dunes and salt-marshes of the sea-shore to the upland pastures and the higher slopes of the mountains. The plan upon which it works has, however, formed the subject of some discussion; by most writers the animal has been endowed with a knowledge of architectural symmetry in the scheme of its tunnels, charac- teristic rather of an engineer than of a wild animal. The usual idea of the domain, district, or encampment, as it is variously called, is somewhat as shown in Fig. 1, each animal being supposed to confine itself to the actual limits or immediate neighbourhood of its own district. But this cannot really be the case, since a trap placed in a run may catch many more than one. Possibly the truth is that the old males, as in the case of so many other mammals, are more or less solitary, the females and young comparatively sociable. There is a central habitation or fortress, from which ex- tends a main tunnel or high-road, by which it is supposed that the animal reaches the extremities of its domain, and from which open out numerous minor galleries or excavations. These are the hunting-grounds of the males, and are being continually extended in their search for food. This description, strange to 1 De Proprietatibus Rerum, \ib. 18, cap. 100, fol. 1471, English version, 1535. wy Bre 3 Of. cit. supra, p. 9. 18 TALPIDA—TALPA say, does not apply to the females, which dig their runs in all directions, so as to form no recognisable high-road. This fact was discovered by le Court and verified by Mr Adams. In both types, there are sometimes to be found certain partially or FIG, 2.—ENCAMPMENT OF MOLE. ¢ male, 9 female, (0) fortress, ww» tunnels, O outlets for earth (diagrammatic, after Adams). completely open surface-furrows, which are usually known as “coupling runs,” “rutting angles,”! or ¢vaces d’amour. These * Angle, a name given to the holes or runs of animals, such as badgers or field- mice, and in some places to artificial burrows used for capturing rabbits in warrens, is not connected with “angle,” a worm for fishing, or ‘‘angle-dog,” a Devonshire name for an earthworm (see Wright). THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT — 19 are more frequently met with during the pairing season than at other times, but on damp soft land they may occasionally be seen at any time of the year. They may be straight and long (as if the work of a male), having been measured by Mr Adams up to a length of one hundred yards; or much shorter, reaching fifteen to twenty yards only, and tortuous or meandering (suggestive of a female). They are probably the work of an animal changing its district, but whether of an individual in search of a mate or otherwise, has not been determined. The structure of the fortress was long supposed to be based on an unvarying plan of remarkable symmetry, and most text-books complacently reproduce, apparently without attempt at veri- fication, a stereotyped figure which owes its origin to Geoffroy, with elaborations by Blasius. This figure is largely imagina- tive, and differs from that presented by de Vaux, evidently as the result of an actual dissection; nevertheless it seems to have met with universal acceptance until Captain Mayne Reid questioned its accuracy." In 1891, Mr Evans, after frequent excavations of “hillocks” in Scotland, confessed his inability to harmonise them with the accepted diagram, and figured the plan of one differing markedly therefrom. Occasionally a close agreement may be observed; but as a rule the departure from the stereotyped form is considerable, a conclusion com- pletely substantiated by that of Mr Adams, formed eleven years later, after carefully drawing numerous fortresses. Mr Adams’s plans show that sometimes the fortresses are extremely complicated and sometimes very simple, but in no case are they, as suggested by the books, built on a pre- arranged system of labyrinthine escapes from enemies above and below. On the contrary, the galleries are rather the natural, incidental, and inevitable outcome of the work of excavating the nest-cavity and piling up the superincumbent mound. “The site for the fortress having been determined,” writes this author, ‘a circular cavity as a receptacle for the nest is made from two to six inches below the original surface of the ground, except in boggy soil or low-lying land liable to floods, where 1 The Naturalist in Siluria, 124, 1889, wherein are also some other interesting remarks on the Mole, which I should have quoted had I been able to secure a copy earlier. ‘ 20 ; TALPIDA—TALPA Fic. 3.—PLAN OF TUNNELS OF SIMPLE FORTRESS. See also Fig. 4. Fic. 4.—SECTION OF SIMPLE FORTRESS, plan of which is shown in Fig. 3. FIG. 5.—PLAN OF COMPLICATED FORTRESS, FIG. 6.—PLAN OF COMPLICATED FORTRESS, WITH ELEVEN EXITs. WITH SEVERAL BLIND TERMINALS. See also Fig. 12. Fic. 7.—SECTION OF FORTRESS ON MARSHY GROUND, WITH OLD (Nr) AND New (N2)_ FIG. 8.—PLAN OF FORTRESS SHOWN NEsTs. See also Fig. 8, IN FIG. 7. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 21 the nest is often above the ground-level in the centre of a heap of earth which is thrown up from converging runs (Figs. 7, 8, and g).1 Now, the easiest way to dispose of the earth when the nest-cavity is being excavated is to push it upwards on to F1iG. 9.—SECTION OF NEST ABOVE GROUND-LEVEL IN LAND LIABLE TO BE FLOODED. the surface, and in order to do this a tunnel must be made. Fig. 10 shows the whole heap made entirely by this tunnel. Fig. 11 illustrates a low fortress on boggy ground, the whole heap being formed by a single tunnel (a) leading upwards from the nest. This nest had seven outlets just below the soil. There was no other tunnel or bolt-run.” ‘“When this superincumbent earth has reached an incon- venient height another tunnel is made, sometimes from another part of the nest-cavity (Figs. 3, 4 4, 6), but more often side- ways from the first upward tunnel.” Meanwhile the Mole is constantly making fresh runs from the fortress in various directions in search of food. As these fresh runs grow in length, the task of piling up the protective mound is lightened by the excavations of new tunnels from runs near the edge of the fortress, which usually lie above those leading from the nest-cavity. The tunnels in the fortress serve two distinct purposes :—- (a) To eject earth from the nest-cavity and bolt-run. 1 KEY TO LETTERING ON 18 DIAGRAMS OF MOLE EXCAVATIONS. The same letters apply to all. a. = Apex of tunnels. l.c.g. = Lower circular gallery. b. = Bolt-runs, or tunnels made in wzc.g. = Upper circular gallery. excavating nest. a = | Turf. & = Tunnelsmadeinforming protec- N. = Nest. tive heap, and their outlets. N1, N2, N3 = First, second, and third D. = Downshaft. nests. ye. = Flood exit. 0.0. = Original outline of fortress. fl. = Flood level. oz = Original tunnel formed by heap- n.r.l. = Normal river level. ing up the fortress. 22 TALPIDAE—TALPA FIG. 10.—SECTION OF FORTRESS, with FIG. 11.—PLAN OF LOW-LYING FORTRESS heap made entirely of earth excavated ON BoGGy GROUND, the whole heap from nest, and pushed upwards through formed by a single tunnel (a) leading one tunnel. There are two bolt-runs, upwards from the nest. There are seven direct outlets from the nest. FIG. 12.—SECTION OF FORTRESS SHOWN IN’ FIG. 13.—PLAN OF FORTRESS, showing Fic. 6, showing spiral gallery and blind ter- portions of tunnels which subsequently minals. fell in, and their probable course ::::: FIG. 14.—PLAN OF UNUSUAL FORTRESS WITH BOTH UPPER AND LOWER CIRCULAR GALLERIES. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 23 ' Ir \iy Mays Ae Ws, FIG. 15.—SECTION OF BREEDING NEST, lying Fic. 16.—SECTION OF NEST UNDER MOUND IN just below slightly upraised and unbroken turf. BROKEN TURF IN PEATY LAND. 1G. 17.—SECTION OF NeST IN MARSHY LAND. Fic. 18.—SECTION OF FORTRESS WITH THREE NESTs, The down-shaft D, measuring eighteen inches the new one (N3) built on top of the others. in length from bottom of nest, was full of water when found ; fe. was probably a flood exit. FIG. 19.—SECTION OF FORTRESS IN OLD FIG. 20.—SECTION OF FORTREsS IN Low Boccy TREE-TRUNK. LAND, a4 TALPIDA—TALPA These are generally in ascending spirals, and often terminate blindly (Fig. 12). (4) Those not connected directly with the nest - cavity, but traversing the fortress from runs outside it. Through these earth has been carried to form a protective heap over the nest. Fig. 14 represents a rare case of the spiral tunnel assuming the stereotyped form of upper and lower “circular galleries,” as represented by de Vaux and others. The so-called “lower circular gallery” is formed, accord- ing to Mr Adams’s explanation, when the many tunnels and up-shafts become connected at their bases during the heaving- up of turf. In peaty or marshy grounds large pieces of turf are often raised, and beneath such an upheaval Mr Adams has found a nest containing young. The average fortress is about one foot in height and three feet in diameter, but Mr Adams has measured one fifteen inches in height and five feet in diameter. Mr Evans examined another, the diameter of which reached no less than eight and the height nearly two and a half feet. The nest-cavity is roughly spherical, about the size of a large cottage loaf, and quite smooth from constant friction and use. The nest, which completely fills the nest-cavity, is a ball of grass, or leaves and moss,’ or a mixture of all three. Mr Adams found a nest made entirely of dead beech leaves, others entirely of dead oak leaves. Ina nest made of grass the finest and driest material is in the centre, the coarsest outside and mixed with damp earth. Usually, if taken out bodily, the nest must be unwound to find the centre, but on land where the grass is short it comes to pieces very easily. There is never a hole apparent, and not only is the nest always found closed when the young are within, but in all cases, even when old and long deserted. When dry grass is not obtainable fresh green grass is used, which soon withers and gets dry with the heat of the mole’s body. The inside of the nest is warm to the touch when the animal has not long quitted it. Nests con- taining young, as well as those of the males found in their fortresses, are invariably infested with fleas and mites. Despite le Court’s contrary assertions, Mr Adams has in 1 This paragraph, fide Adams and Evans. ca ‘story OF BRITISH BIRDS continued, ‘Histories of very many ‘others, which were formerly little known, have been fully elucidated, while, speaking generally, an immense increase in our knowledge on such important subjects as Migra- tion, . Distribution, Habits, Nidification, Plumages, has accrued: - And lastly, a new and important branch of study has been instituted an —namely, the recognition of the various Racial Forms or Sub- species exhibited by certain birds in the British Islands, on the Continent, and elsewhere. A great advance has also been made towards a more satis- factory system of classification of the Aves—always a difficult subject—and this necessitates departures from the older views. To bring this Standard Work thoroughly abreast of the most recent knowledge in all these departments is the object of the present work. | It should be Heiareed that while it is not intended to go fully into Synonomy, yet, where changes of nomenclature have been necessary in order to conform with the Law of Priority—the only _ method by which complete uniformity in nomenclature can ulti- _ mately be attained—the names used in the Fourth Edition of ui Yarrell’s “British Birds” and in Saunders’ “Manual,” and the Trinomial Names of the British Racial Forms, and of those occurring in Britain as visitors from the Continent, will be quoted, as will also the Original Name under which the species was _ described. ! In requesting Mr Eagle Clarke to undertake the duties of Editorship, the Publishers desire to make it known that they are acting under the advice of the late Mr Howard Saunders, who ‘plaeed all his collected notes for a New Edition at Mr Eagle _Clarke’s disposal for this purpose. That Mr Eagle Clarke is emin- ently fitted for the work is well-known to all who are interested in ornithological science. Through his investigations of the subject, and contributions to its literature, he has long been recognised as one of the foremost authorities on all that relates to British birds. He has studied our native birds in many portions of the British Islands, and has visited a number of bird-haunts in various parts of Europe in order to become acquainted in their Continental homes with the visitants that seek our - shores. On the important matter of the Migrations performed by British Birds, Mr Eagle Clarke’s knowledge is unrivalled—a material fact, when it is called to mind how little has been said ‘on this most important subject in any published History of British Birds. . A new and important feature of the New Work will be a - Coloured Plate of each species. These will be reproduced in the _ best style from original drawings specially executed for the work by Miss Lilian Medland, F.Z.S., an accomplished and well- he known bird artist, GURNEY & JACKSON | PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, E.C. Member of the British Auabelation Corian on May Migration Vk rds as vat it PSE Observed on the British and Irish Coasts, and Author ial its: Fact iRietteo _ Reports, vied th etc. Ache ‘ With Numerous Illustrations co a Walt any ITH the exception of the two initial work is entirely original, being the result author's investigations and personal experiences. have been enjoyed for acquiring knowledge on ‘Bitd-migr generally, and its British aspects in particular. vie ei In 1884 Mr Eagle Clarke was elected a member of the Bi Association ns canotay a on the Migration of hil as | obser - enquiry, he was anal by his colleagues to i sh the ‘fin ip reports on the results obtained—a difficult and: arduous: task, which he accomplished in 1903. “ne During the preparation of these . reports (five in number), Mr Eagle Clarke became much impressed with the advantages which were likely to accrue from placing a trained ornithologist — ‘ati a number of the most favourably situated observing-stations 5 around our coasts. If this could be done, he believed that some _ of the difficulties which the phenomena presented might be solved, and our knowledge reearding the Midi hai Renecatty considerably advanced. it. This conviction led him to undertake, by the! Sheetal ea : sion of the Elder Brethren of the Trinity House and the Commis- i sioners of Northern Lighthouses, a series of personal investigations at various light-stations, each of which was selected for a ‘special — purpose. In all, Mr Eagle Clarke has resided no fewer than forty- two weeks in these isolated and remote observatories ; the stations visited being the Eddystone Lighthouse, the Kentish, Knock Lightship (33 miles off the Essex coast), the lighthouses on: ‘the at Flannan Isles and Suleskerry (both lying far out in the Atlantic), and the lighthouse at Fair Isle (the “British Heligoland”). He also visited the Island of Ushant—an important station —and Alderney for similar purposes; and spent a month or more in the autumn of ro1o at St Kilda, for the purpose of carrying: the investigations to the outmost fringe of the British area. With these unrivalled experiences for its foundations, the book should not only prove a valuable contribution to the subject of Bird-Migration, but should occupy a place visas au ite own in ai ornithological rial scant th GURNEY & JACKSON PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, EC. | Oliver and d Bova Printers, Edinburgh, ; “ tee! ‘September ety In Preparation A NEW AND REVISED EDITION oc YARRELL, NEWTON, AND ‘SAUNDERS’ EDITED BY "WILLIAM EAGLE CLARKE, F.RS.E,, F. us. Keeper of the Natural History Department, The Royal Scottish Museum); Muinber of spe) British Association Committee on the Migration of Birds as Obseryed on the British — and Irish Coasts; Corresponding Fellow of the American Ornithologists’ Union; — _” ‘ath Correspondirender Mitglied des Ornithologischen Vereins in Wien; ok URIS CUR og Membre Honoraire du Bureau Central Ornithologique Hongrois; — Member of the British Ornithologists’ Union, etc. ILLUSTRATED BY ORIGINAL COLOURED PLATES OF EACH SPECIES — rahe: SPECIALLY EXECUTED BY | Pan ite MISS LILIAN MEDLAND HE publication of Yarrell’s “History of British Birds” was commenced in 1837 and completed in 1843. Its outstanding merits were at once recognised, and a Second Edition was fag called for in 1845, followed by a third in 1856. / ed From the issue of the Original Edition down to the present day, Yarrell’s “History of British Birds” has generally and — deservedly been regarded as the standard wiser ad on British = ornithology. A. In the year 1871 a Fourth Edition was bene under’ ‘the masterly editorship of Professor Newton—the greatest British ornithologist of all time. | Unfortunately Professor Newton’s official engagements at the University of Cambridge only allowed _—j. him to complete the first two volumes; and in 1882 Mr Howard _ Saunders was selected to edit the remaining volumes, a task which he successfully accomplished to the entire satisfaction of ornithologists in 1885. “hikathies: (Ce), The many excellences of this last edition advanced the work Nils; more than ever in the public and in scientific favour. To its UM IA | stimulating influence is to be mainly attributed the marvellous and unprecedented activity which has resulted in those extraordinary _'\ ‘advances made in all branches of British ornithology during recent years—advances which have rendered it essential that a _ new work based upon this classical and comprehensive founda- fio tion should be issued. HU iy During the period alluded to, a considerable number of new and interesting species have been added to our avifauna. The [Continued on Page 3 ‘of Cover CONTENTS OF PART VII. TALPIDE— Genus 7alpa— The Common Mole, Moldwarp or Want . : : 25 ERINACEID& (True Hedgehogs)— Genus Lvrinaceus , : : ; 45 The Hedgehog or Urchin . ‘ P : 47 The English local names have been revised in part by Mr W. W. Skeat, M.A. (assisted by Professor W. W. Skeat), and in part by Mr C. M. Drennan, M.A. Lond., late Scholar Emm. Coll. Camb. ; the Celtic and Gaelic names by Dr E. S. Quiggin, M.A., Ph.D., Fellow and Lecturer in Modern Languages and Celtic of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge; while a list of Scottish Gaelic names have been supplied by Mr C. H. Alston. Valuable assistance has been rendered by Mr M. C. A. Hinton regarding extinct Mammals. ILLUSTRATIONS FULL-PAGE (Coloured and Black and White). Pygmy or Lesser Shrews. (Coloured.) The Mole.—Head and Fore Limbs—(1) Ventral; and (2) Side View. (Magnified.) The Mole.—(1) Left Hand; (2) Foot; and (3) Dorsal View of Tail. (Magnified 14 times.) Diagram of Mole’s Tracks in Snow. (Reduced; after Adams.) FIGURES IN TEXT. Mole heaving up Loose Earth. (Diagrammatic; after Adams.) Skull of Hedgehog, Erinaceus europeus—(a) from above; (4) from below. (Drawn by G. Dollman.) Side View of Teeth of Evinaceus europeus. (Diagrammatic and magni- fied 13 times.) AL ESS 2 AO a4 THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 25 only one instance found a nest in which the component materials were mixed with fur taken from the Mole’s own body.’ He believes that the presence of the fur was accidental, and due to natural moulting of the coat. Sometimes the fur of other animals, or the feathers of birds, especially rooks and fowls, find their way’ into the nest, but it is difficult to decide whether fur or feathers are used knowingly or merely by chance.* ‘Nearly every fortress has a bolt-run, by which the mole can escape when surprised in the nest. This run leads down- wards from the bottom of the nest, and then turns upward and out of the fortress by a tunnel of its own, and is very rarely connected with any of the other numerous exits of the fortress. The only fortresses that I have seen without the bolt-run have been on marshy land, where such a tunnel would have led to water. ~ (See Figs. 9 and 15.’ ‘Occasionally one comes upon a downshaft, leading directly from the nest downwards almost perpendicularly for sometimes nearly three feet. The use of these downshafts is puzzling. Where the land is low-lying and the soil moist they may be intended to drain the nest, but this is inconceivable in the Bunter sandstone on high ground above the level of the highest floods, where I have found them on more than one occasion. It has been stated that they are deliberately sunk as wells to supply the mole with water, a notion which, I imagine, has arisen from a flooded fortress having been explored. Figs. 4, 16, and 17 illustrate such fortresses, which came under my notice, but it is ridiculous to suppose that the mole foresees the possible rise of water from below, and equally ridiculous to suppose that he digs the well through the water when it has risen.” Mr Adams makes the suggestion that these downshafts are abortive bolt-runs, which have been abandoned when it was found that the right point to turn upwards had been missed, a suggestion which he thinks gains probability from the fact that when the downshafts occur the bolt-run is absent. 1 This nest was forwarded for my inspection, but, unfortunately, never reached me. * As reported by W. H. St Quintin, Fze/d, 31st March 1883, 431, a nest contained, besides moss and dried grass, two handfuls of fur and the mutilated body of a recently killed mouse (A/icrotus agrestis). 3 For a description of the actions of a mole when collecting leaves for its nest, see note on p. 43 zara. + Adams. VOL, II. Cc 26 TALPIDA—TALPA It appears that a nest is never resorted to in a second year, but a fresh one is made each year close to the same spot. Thus two or three nests, only one of which is as a rule fresh and inhabited, are frequently found in close conjunction. The new nests are often built on top of the others, and are constructed of fresh material brought in from outside (Figs. 7, 10, 18, 20). Two inhabited nests are very rarely encountered in contiguity, and the most conspicuous instances known to Mr Adams have been those of breeding females. In its choice of a site for a fortress the Mole is influenced by the available supplies of food and water, but probably all other incidents of its surroundings are accidental. In the vast majority of cases the fortress is placed in an open field, but occasionally in a coppice, a hedgebank with an adjoining ditch, a hollow amongst old roots, or under a tree—in the latter case probably without definite choice or intention. The ‘high-road,” although a very important part of the domain of the male, does not differ essentially in its construc- tion from the other routes and excavations, but only in being more frequently used, so that its walls are beaten until they become smooth and compact. It extends from the fortress to a distance in a nearly direct line, forming in fact the main route of communication between the fortress and the different parts of the encampment; and the alleys which lead to the hunting-grounds, or quarries, open into it on each side. All the runs, whether ordinary or high-roads, are large enough to allow two individuals to easily pass each other. It seems likely that they must sometimes do so, although the popular belief is that moles never intrude upon each other’s company, and that, should two of them meet, one must retreat, or a battle to the death ensues. Probably, however, like another burrowing mammal, the Pocket Gopher’ of North America, the Mole also has the power of running backwards tail foremost in its galleries, but only two writers—J. L. Knapp” and Captain Mayne Reid—have mentioned this possibility. It is also very supple, and can easily turn right round in any part of its tunnels. The high-road is probably formed at a 1 Geomys lutescens, C. Hart Merriam, Worth American Fauna, No. 8, 16, 31st Jan. 1895. In this animal the short, nearly naked tail has been developed as an organ of touch. 2 Journal of a Naturalist, ed. 2, 150, 1829. SHREW ESSER Iv OR PYGMY THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 27 greater or less depth from the surface, according to the nature of the soil, its humidity and hardness. Thus, where the soil is soft, it will be found at a depth of about four or five inches ; but where the ground is hard, as under a road or beneath a stream, the earth is left not less than a foot or a foot and a half deep above it. “Tt is truly marvellous,” writes Mr Adams, “ how runs are made at all in such difficult ground as Bunter sandstone, where the spade will hardly penetrate, yet the Mole will make his accustomed runs, and turn out among the heaps of sand stones weighing over 4 0z., which is the maximum weight of a mole. Worms in this ground must be comparatively scarce, and, one would think, mostly found at the roots of the grass at the TU ie WTO UT Wit Fic. 21.—MOoLE HEAVING UP LoosE EARTH (diagrammatic; after Adams). surface, yet in this formation the runs are always very deep, often nearly a foot below the surface, and very wide.”’? It is not quite clear how the soil is pushed out of the ground in making aheap. Mr F. R. Rodd® described the heap as rising very gradually with a motion from the centre exactly as flour does in a pan with yeast, a puzzling process which led him to suppose that the only way the work can be done is either by the animal standing almost on its head, or else throw- ing the earth up with its hands. So far, neither method has 1 R. Kearton’s Wild Life at Home, 1899, 128, contains some remarkable state- ments as to the great strength of the animal. 2 Zoologist, 1872, 3182. 28 TALPIDAZE—TALPA been confirmed by observation, and Mr Adams, following Capt. Mayne Reid, doubts the possibility of the earth being kicked out by the hind legs. After watching captive specimens, he believes that the earth is thrown out by the head, which a digging mole is constantly raising and lowering.’ The swiftness with which a mole will traverse its domain by means of the principal road is illustrated by most writers by reference to the famous, but doubtless exaggerated, story of the “trotting horse,” a test instituted by le Court. Cold truth, however, reduces the rate of progress, often seen at best speed above ground by Mr Adams, to a pace never faster than a slow walk, or about two and a half miles an hour. Even if this, as is probable, can be exceeded in the tunnels, especially under the excitement of a stimulus like le Court’s cvz effroyable, there would still remain much scope for imagination before the animal could be affirmed to rival a horse at full trot. The alleys or galleries are opened from the sides of the high-road in all directions and without definite plan. As already stated, they differ from it only in the fact that they are used less frequently. Mr Adams believes that in forming its runs, or excavating its quarries, the Mole at first simply digs its way through the ground, paying no attention to the loose soil. After a time it retraces its steps, and when returning pushes the loosened earth before it till the accumulation blocks. It then makes its way to the surface through the solid earth, opening a new shaft, over which a hillock is gradually formed by the successive portions of earth which are brought from the scene of its mining operations. But the labours of the animal are not confined to the deep excavations already mentioned. In summer, when land newly sown is consequently light and yielding, and moderate rain 1 The modus operandi of the Pocket Gopher, as observed by Merriam (of. céz. supra) from a captive specimen, is worth noting here. The animal differs, however, from the Mole in being a rodent with large incisors and fore feet of quite distinct type. When constructing a tunnel it uses its incisors as a pick, its fore feet both in digging and in pressing the earth back under the body, and its hind feet for moving the earth still farther backward. When a sufficient quantity of earth has accumulated behind it, it “turns in the burrow and by bringing the wrists together under the chin, with the palms of the hands held vertically, forces himself along by the hind feet, pushing the earth out in front.” When an opening is reached the earth is discharged, but exactly how is not stated. PLATE I. (2) THE MOLE. HEAD AND FoRE LimMBs—(1) Ventral and (2) Side View (magnified). VOL, Il. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 29 has brought the earthworms to the surface, it follows them, and pursues its chase along the superficial layer of the soil, digging a shallow continuous trench, in which work it advances with great rapidity.. This is done by merely forcing its way through the light soil, and thus lifting it up; at such times the mole-catcher steals softly upon it and throws it out of the ground with his paddle. But great quickness is necessary in doing this, for a mole will bury itself again so rapidly as often to escape, even when fairly thrown on to the surface. In these shallow surface-runs the soil falls away on each side, leaving the creature’s back exposed to view. There is no evidence to connect such runs with the gravid female or with the breeding of the animals; they owe their existence rather to the position of worms and grubs and the wetness of the soil. Mr Evans informs me that he has seen and captured a mole when burrowing amongst dead beech leaves, a favourite habitat for certain kinds of worms. In summer the Mole works hard and continuously, and its tell-tale upheaving of soil may be seen at every hour of the day.’ Yet its work is often less conspicuous than in winter, probably because worms are more easily caught and the need of new tunnels to secure them is, therefore, not pressing. In fact, the multitudes of worms on the surface in their pairing season are alone worth hunting, so that the runs are often deserted and the easier pursuit taken up above ground. ‘The animal's thirst, too, must be satisfied when water is scarce. This is the time when its diet is most varied, slugs and snails being frequently captured, with an occasional vertebrate; but the tables are sometimes turned and the Mole itself killed and eaten, especially when it neglects to get below ground before daybreak. Occasionally a mole’s tracks are seen on snow. They resemble the impression that might be made by a rope two and a half inches in diameter dragged along the surface, with the marks made by the hind feet and the claws of the fore feet sometimes visible, to indicate the direction. Such wanderings may be due to movements of worms, in consequence of the hardness of the soil, but certainly not directly to the state of the ground, since Mr Evans has 1 E. D. Cuming, Arcadian Calendar, 17. VOL. II. c2 30 TALPIDA—TALPA watched the heaps being thrown up during times of severe frost. Sometimes a mole passes along the surface of the ground beneath the snow, ‘“ making a sort of gutter of a run.”* The Mole is a capable, if not a willing,” swimmer, and it has many times been observed in water, either escaping from a flood, changing its hunting-ground, or even occasionally enjoying the luxury of a bath.* Sometimes it ventures to face a river or lake,* even when of considerable extent ; but examples which have been encountered swimming in the middle of a loch such as Morar’ in Inverness-shire—traversing an expanse of water a mile and a half wide—must surely have been out of their depth both geographically and hydrographically, or they would never have attempted such a feat. Mr Adams describes a captive as swimming with the entire head and_ back to within half an inch from the tail high out of the water, and the end of the tail protruding above the surface. The movements of the limbs are very rapid, they work downwards and backwards after the manner of a dog, and the animal attains a fair pace in proportion to its size. Like other voracious feeders, it requires to drink frequently, but the belief that its runs are always connected with the nearest ditch or pond for that purpose, is only in part founded on fact, so that it must obtain sufficient water with its food, or, perhaps, by night from the dewy herbage. There can be no doubt that the Mole feeds almost exclusively on invertebrates, and that the principal objects of its search are earthworms. It will consume, however, practically anything living that may come in its way, and mice, birds, lizards, frogs, or snails, if placed within its reach, become speedy victims to its voracity. But it is absurd to think that an animal of 1 Owen Jones, Zhe Scout, 25th February 1911, 488. 2 A. H. Cocks found one with which he experimented only a very poor performer. 3 Bell, ed. 2, 130-131 ; Thomas Southwell, Zoologis?, 1888, 22. 4 E. Parfitt, Zoologist, 1860, 7169 ; S. D. Hine, Fze/d, 24th June, 1876, 729 ; George Hales, Journ. cit., 4th September 1880, 360 ; James Carter, Journ. czz¢., 16th April 1892, 545 ; Riley Fortune, Journ. czt., 23rd April 1892, 585 ; G. Hilland B, F. Edyvean, Journ. cit., 30th April 1892, 625 ; W. Soundy, Jour. cit., 14th May 1892, 704 ; Max Peacock, Naturalist, 1901, 44; W. A. Dutt, Zhe Norfolk Broads, 127 (see Zoologist, 16th May 1904, 186-187) ; G. C. Williams, /ze/d, 29th July 1905, 200, and many other references. 5 A. P. Morres, Zoologist, 1877, 440-441; G. Hill, Fzeld, 30th April 1892, 625. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 31 Pe) such structure could make an habitual practice of pursuing vertebrate animals. Individuals must vary considerably in their habits and practices, since the Rev. A. Woodruffe-Peacock’* informed Mr Adams that he had known moles to seize some young pheasants and a young blackbird by the feet in the shallow runs, and his brother found a hooded crow picked clean, the tracks on frozen snow clearly identifying the diner. Whether, as suggested by Mr C. Witchell,” it is an enemy to snakes or vipers in their winter sleep is, however, quite uncertain. Alston® offered a small toad to a captive mole, but it was rejected after examination; but, as a general rule, toads, as regards edibility, occupy a class entirely by them- selves. To all other creatures, not excepting the weaker of its own species, the Mole exhibits a savage and unreasoning ferocity, and if two be placed together in a box without a plentiful supply of food, the weaker will soon fall a prey to the stronger. No bulldog keeps a firmer hold of the object of its attack than the Mole. The Mole has been accused of feloniously burrowing under the nests of pheasants and partridges, “not by accidentally coming across them in its working, but working up to them to get at them.”* It is probable, however, that the letting down of the eggs is in reality accidental, and that the sole attraction in such cases is the moist soil and plentiful supply of insects. This is the view of Mr Owen Jones, who has had great experience as a gamekeeper, and who writes me that, although he has had any number of nests upset and the eggs let down into the tunnelling, he has never seen any evidence to show that moles directly meddle with them. He once took a clutch of uninjured pheasant’s eggs® from a run underlying the nest; 1 A similar instance is narrated in the Fve/d of 16th February 1901, 226, by C. A. Hamond, 2 Zoologist, 1883, 293-4. 3 Journ. cit., 1865, 9707. 4 C, E. Wright, in Adams ; see also W. S. Medlicott, Fze/d, 29th April 1905, 726 ; and for similar treatment of a partridge’s nest, F. Dent, Journ. czz., 17th August 1901, 312. Dogs are said not to be able to scent sitting birds, but the odour of the nest may be much more perceptible from beneath than from above, and eggs appear to suddenly acquire a strong odour just before the end of incubation (see below, under Hedgehog, pp. 63 and 67). 5 Ten Years of Gamekeeping. 32 TALPIDA—TALPA and the excavations of a mole beneath her caused a woodcock to forsake a clutch of eggs which came under Mr Evans's observation, although they were only moved slightly. In spite of the obviously worm-eating character of the animal, many writers, amongst them le Court himself, have stated that vegetable substances may form no inconsiderable part of its diet. The roots of the artichoke, together with turnips, potatoes, carrots, and the young fibres of trees, have all been mentioned in this connection. Such statements, however, have always been received guardedly, if not incredulously, by naturalists, who have pointed to the extreme gluttony and raging frenzy of a hungry mole as exhibiting none of the characters of a vegetarian or even of a mixed feeder, and have concluded that the vegetable matter discovered in its stomach must have found its way there accidentally during its digging operations. However that may be, the suggestion that it may be partly herbivorous, although improbable, is not absolutely untenable, since we know that other insectivores are certainly in part vegetable feeders.’ Like shrews, adult moles are very impatient of starvation, and die very soon if left without food. Mr Adams states that on one occasion he caught one, vigorous and quite unhurt, and fed him at intervals during the day with about a third of a pint of worms. Having placed a similar quantity in his den (a packing-case with earth at the bottom), he left him for the night. ‘In the morning I found him very feeble, thin and cold. I took him up in my hand and put his nose to some water, which he seemed to enjoy, but he was too feeble to tackle a worm, and presently, after a gentle convulsion, he died in my hand. I found on dissecting him that the stomach was absolutely empty, in spite of the fact that he had eaten 1 This is stated to be true’of the Japanese Mole-Shrew (Uvotrichus talpoides of Temminck ; see Oldfield Thomas, Proc. Zool. Soc. (London), 28th November 190s, 341-342), and of the American short-tailed shrews of the genus Blarina (see C. Hart Merriam, Vertebrates of the Adirondack Region, i\., 71, 1884 ; also E. Thompson Seton, ii., 1126, etc.); the latter will eat beech-mast, oats, and corn meal. North American agriculturists have recently become alive to the fact that the animal which does duty with them for the European Mole (Scalofs aguaticus) may sometimes consume such quantities of corn as to cause considerable damage to farmers. (See R. L., Fzedd, 11th February 1911, 281, where references to some American publications are given, but I have been unable to find the originals.) THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 33 every worm left for him. Baby moles, on the contrary, live a surprisingly long time without food ;* in fact, their capabilities of resisting starvation vary inversely as their size, the irregu- larity being perhaps accounted for by some having fasted longer than others before being taken from the nest.” Although it has been stated above that the Mole makes no provision for the winter, it must not be forgotten that many writers allude to stores of injured or paralysed worms which are supposed to have been collected for future use. The belief is said to be widespread amongst mole-catchers, but, so far as I can gather, appears to have been first printed by Edward Jesse.” An anonymous writer* on the same subject has been often quoted. This writer declared that when in company with a man employed to poison moles, which he did through the medium of earthworms, he observed him obtaining his bait from cavities in the largest molehills of a marsh in Norfolk. The cavities were round and “beaten hard by the mole so as to prevent the escape of the worms.” ‘This story was received with incredulity by Edward Newman,* and doubted by the late Thomas Southwell.° Like many other statements advanced by untrained writers, it would appear to be the result of imagination rather than an invention. Although no trained zoologist has had the good fortune to examine such an undoubted store of worms,°® many have found smaller ‘knots ” or accumulations of them. Southwell believed that such worms are merely indi- viduals which, from one cause or another, have found their way into disused runs from which they have been too feeble to escape. What has been pointed out to him as an injury inflicted in order to disable the worms, has invariably proved to be the series of thickened segments known as the clitellum. The flaccid, unhealthy appearance of such worms, as noticed by Southwell, is independently corroborated by Mr Adams, who sees nothing unusual in the matter, since he has frequently, in digging his garden, come across similar 1 See also H. Laver. 2 Gleanings in Natural Fitstory, 6th ed., 136, 1845. 3 Field, 13th March 1875, 267. 4 Zoologist, 1875, 4493. 5 Journ. cit., 1888, 21. 6 The nearest approach is the statement of a farmer to Adams, that he found “three spadefuls” of dead worms heaped up in the nest-cavity of a fortress. 34 TALPIDA—TALPA knots or bunches of pallid, sickly looking, semi-torpid worms. In early spring he has often found a similar knot of worms, three or four in number, embedded in a semi-torpid state in the solid earth of fortresses, where he believes they had congregated of their own free will. He has never met with knots of worms in the tunnels, and concludes that their presence in a fortress is explained by their having fallen in and been unable to get out again.’ But, although there is thus no trustworthy evidence supporting the theory that moles store up worms, it is in- teresting to find that they possess the instinct todoso. Alston's captive often buried its food, and Mr Adams relates that on one occasion when he had fed one until it could eat no more, it took a worm, bit it with quick bites along its whole length, crammed it into the earth, left it, and turned about to find another.” On receiving one, a large lobworm, it treated it in precisely the same manner, thrusting it into the same hole and straightway covering it up with earth scraped over it with its fore paws. On two other occasions this mole was observed to bury worms, and once a dead mouse, in the same way. On the whole, it seems unlikely, although the Mole may sometimes disable and bury surplus worms, that its victims should when thus treated remain alive for a sufficient length of time to be of use as a reserve of food. There are many errors in the ordinary accounts of the breeding habits of the Mole, the most serious being the belief that males are much more numerous than females. The mistake arose from the fact that, as pointed out by Geoffroy, it requires expert knowledge to distinguish the sexes externally. Mr Adams finds that males and females are about equal in numbers, which fact obviates the necessity for the supposed bloody battles between the superfluous suitors as described in text-books.® There is only one short rutting season. This is, in Stafford- shire, practically confined to the latter part of March, April, and perhaps occasionally the beginning of May. Mr Adams’s 1 This is also the explanation given in an interesting paragraph on this subject in W. A. Dutt’s Wild Life in East Anglia, 183, 1906. 2 Captive shrews act in a similar manner (Cocks, 2 /7z.). 3 A fight between two males took place, according to Mayne Reid (of. cz¢. supra, p. 19), above ground on a 21st December. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 35 earliest personal record for a foetal litter is 13th April, and he has notes of young found in the nest from 24th April (on the authority of a mole-catcher), 4th May (about seven days old, his earliest personal record) to 25th June (his latest record). The latter were almost ready to leave the nest, and were, therefore, at least three weeks old. Practically all the young, therefore, are born within the period commencing about 24th April and ending about 4th June. The fact that the runs made by the two sexes are distinguish- able, shows that they usually live apart ; but during the breeding season the males leave their own long straight runs, and are found in the winding tunnels which are the work of the female. Here, no doubt, pairing takes place; as it may, possibly, also above ground, as once observed by a keeper who informed Mr Adams. Very similar results have been independently obtained by Mr Evans, working in the Edinburgh district, and by Mr Cocks in South Buckinghamshire. Mr Evans found embryos from the 7th April onwards, and, on the 24th May, young which he judged to be about a week old. Mr Cocks reports embryos from 14th April to 20th May. On the 21st May two young ones were captured, of approximately three-quarters full size, so that they were probably born about the rst of May ; and in 1877 two litters (of four and three) were found on the Berkshire side of the Thames at Bisham on 28th April. Mr Cocks remarks that, whereas the embryos examined in April showed only a very little variation in size, some found on 14th May were younger than those of a month earlier, and others found on 20th May only equalled the size of a foetal litter found on 18th April, or over a month previously. Calculating that the period of gestation is four weeks, or rather more, Mr Adams thinks that ‘‘the female would not have time to breed twice within the period mentioned during which young are found, even if she were in condition to do so, which she is not. Moreover, these limits are not those of the same year or locality, so they may be fairly curtailed, and a month of courtship may be presumed to be the limit of the Mole’s capacity.” On the other hand, there may be a few excep- 36 TALPIDAZE—TALPA tional cases, probably of young animals, breeding later, which might account for Mr F. G. Aflalo’s “young in August.” The female constructs a quite separate’ fortress and nest in which to bring forth her young. This is usually, but not always, of simpler construction than the fortress of the male, and seldom possesses a bolt-run. Mr Adams, however, has sent me a description of one—so far unique in his experience— in which there were two bolt-runs. He has also figured a breeding-fortress in which there were two inhabited nests, each with a bolt-run. Although de Vaux says without hesitation that moles live in pairs in the habitation of the male until the female leaves her spouse to prepare her nursery, Mr Adams is by no means convinced that this is the case. He has ‘never been able to trap a female in or close to a male’s fortress, and if we are to judge from the analogy of the rabbit (which makes a separate nursery, presumably to protect her young from the voracious father or fathers), we may suppose the Mole to be polyandrous.” “As far as my information goes,” writes Mr Adams, ‘no mammal prepares a nursery till well advanced in pregnancy ; if this holds good with regard to the Mole, six weeks is nearer the actual period of gestation than one month, as some fortresses from which I have taken the young have been made about one month previously.” ” The average number of young in a litter, according to Mr Adams’s experience, works out at rather more than 33.° To find two is very rare, and he has only in a single instance met with a solitary young one. The greatest number is six, which is also very occasional. He has heard of seven. The following table gives his personal records :— Number of litters containing one . I Number of litters containing four. 31 3) ” 9 two 4 ”» ” ” five = 4 Ry a s three 20 = . + Six": I 1 See Mrs Rose Haig Thomas, Fze/d, 3rd October 1903, 600. 2 Adams has since sent me a note of a nursery made only four days before it was occupied by young. 3 Twenty-one pregnant Scottish females gave Evans an average of 3-86 embryos, and Cocks found an average of (exactly) 4 embryos in nine females, or, including the seven young in two litters mentioned on the previous page, an average of 3:9. PLATE. 1: 3) THE MOLE. (1) Lert HAND AND (2) Foot, AND (3) DorsAL VIEW OF TAIL (magnified 14 times). VOL. II. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 37 The young, which are hairless at birth, grow so rapidly as to double their length within the first ten days of their life. At about the ninth day the advent of the fur is heralded by a change of hue on the back from pink to dull lead colour. On about the fourteenth day the fur begins to make its appearance, and by the twenty-second it is of normal length andcolour. The ears open on about the seventeenth day and the eyes on about the twenty-second day, soon after which the young are nearly as big as their parents. They probably leave the nest in or after the fourth week. Mr Adams’s interesting observations on this point, which are printed above in tabular form on p. 12, were interrupted by the fact that the nests in which he measured young moles were all eventually found empty at various dates before the conclusion of his investigations. The circumstances suggested removal of the young by their mothers. The ancients in general appear to have had but vague notions respecting the habits and structure of animals ; from this charge Aristotle is in an astonishing degree exempt. It has, however, been adduced as an instance of erroneous and super- ficial observation, that he held the Mole to be absolutely blind. In this, however, as has appeared above, he certainly wrote quite correctly of the species found in southern Europe; but Shakespeare! was on more treacherous ground when he laid such stress on this aspect of the animal in describing ‘“‘ The blind Mole” which “casts copp’d hills towards heaven.” Numberless minor superstitions are current concerning the animal: it cannot live where Irish earth has been spread; in Stafford- shire it possesses only one drop of blood;* in Surrey it has but one ear; in Lincolnshire it leaves the ground only once a year to take a little fresh air by daylight ;* in Scotland its burrowing near a house betokens the speedy departure, or even death, of the inhabitants.* In many places people believe, that moles wandering above the earth are *‘moonstruck”;° while it is on record that a mole’s heart swallowed warm and palpitating confers skill in divination, and that a sprinkling of the blood makes a crazy person sane.° It 1 Pericles, i., 1. 2 Adams. 3 Fide C. B. Moffat (zn Zz). 4 A. R. Forbes, Gaelic Names of Beasts, etc., 1905, 188. 6 J. G. Millais. § Cuming, Arcadian Calendar, 182. 38 TALPIDA—TALPA will be appropriate to mention here the picturesque prophecy of the Scottish soothsayers,! that when the moudiewarp has overrun Argyllshire to the Mull of Kintyre, it will drive all the Campbells, the great landowners of the district, from their estates. The Mole has always been the object of the most deter- mined persecution on the part of farmers and gardeners, who accuse it of causing injuries, more or less serious, to the various products of the soil. The truth of each accusation must, as Mr Adams observes, vary with the circumstances, but it cannot be denied that a heavy list of indictments can be registered against it. Even after excluding the assertion that it causes inundations, which can be but seldom; and the somewhat far- fetched suggestion that it encourages mice by leaving them its deserted fortresses ; there remains the destruction of the crops by disturbance, exposure, and severance of their roots, or by their being dug up or scattered and carried off bodily to the fortress to form part of the nest. No part of field, garden, or plantation is exempt from these ravages, and de Vaux estimated the loss to the spring corn in France at not less than one-eighth of the whole crop. Sometimes a field is so extensively mined that the area covered by molehills appears to exceed that of the vegetation, and their presence, even in small quantities, is a great obstruction to mowing. Against accusations such as these the mere condoning of the damage, the suggestion that the contents of molehills spread on the fields afford excellent topdressing, or the assertion that the injuries are counter- balanced by the benefits rendered through aeration of the soil and the destruction of noxious insects, are of little avail. The fact of the devastations cannot be denied, even if the degree and extent of them be incorrectly reported, and few farmers would like to see moles on their land for the sake of any problematical advantages accruing from their presence. The history of the efforts made by farmers to cope with the damage done is probably as old as that of tillage or haymaking. Fanciful hints as to the destruction of the animals were compiled in Latin by Palladius,* probably about the fourth century, and 1 Alston, Zoologist, 1867, 882 ; according to Boyd Watt (1905), the Mole is said to have spread to Campbeltown only recently, and not yet to be known in Southend. 2 Op. cit. supra, p. 6. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 39 Mr J. E. Harting has seen an entry of the wages paid to men who spread molehills in England in 1480." On the other hand, the late Robert Service stated? that mole-catching as a regular trade did not begin in South Scotland until 1797. A minute investigation of the history of mole-catching is here impossible, but reference may be made to Macpherson’s work for an account of it in Lakeland, where the practice was certainly in vogue in 1612. The animal was hunted down either privately, or in some cases by the residents of a locality club- bing together. The mole-catcher was often employed by the parish, so that the amounts which he received appear in the churchwardens’ accounts of most parishes for the seven- teenth century. Generally a penny a head was paid, but at Harrold (Bedfordshire) the mole-catcher’s remuneration was 42a year.* It appears that a mole-catcher was still paid by the Cambridgeshire parish of Dry Drayton in 1880,* but Mr Adams remarks, not without reason, that the whole race would have long since vanished, with the objects of their pursuit, had they directed their attention to the destruction of the young in their nests instead of confining themselves to trapping the adults. So strong is opinion against the Mole, that the humble pro- fession of mole-catcher has become celebrated ; and the followers of this calling are said to earn a considerable income in a season at a trifling sum for each animal captured. One trapper named Jackson, with whom Bell was in communication, declared that he had destroyed from 40,000 to 50,000 moles in thirty-five years. Jonathan Couch informed Bell of another who in Cornwall took no less than 1200 of these animals in six winter months; while, according to Dr Laver, the two brothers Watchem (or Watsham) have secured no less than 1500 fresh skins in a single season at Colchester. But all others must yield to le Court, who in the short space of five months accounted for no less than 6000 moles within a comparatively small district ; and two of his pupils, during the month that they were under his instructions, killed 971. 1 Zoologist, 1887, 445. 2 Ann. Scott. Nat. Hist., 1896, 202. 3 J. Steele Elliott, Zoologist, 1906, 254. * Rev. F. A. Walker, D.D., Journ. ctt., 1891, 392. 40 TALPIDA—TALPA It really seemed as if it were impossible that a mole could escape this extraordinary person; wherever he struck his paddle, he found the mole’s run; wherever he placed his trap, the mole was surely taken. His trap was of simple construction. It consisted of a steel instrument bent on itself like a pair of sugar-tongs, excepting that the branches crossed each other about their mid-length, so that the elasticity of the bend brought the extremities forcibly outwards and towards each other. The branches were held asunder by a square piece of iron with a hole through it, which the slightest touch would displace; and the animal, running along its passage, threw the trigger, as it may be called, and was caught by the branches springing sharply together. This appears to have been a very simple, certain, and effectual instrument; but it has been considerably improved upon in a trap now much employed in this country, in which the hinge, connecting the two branches, is placed in the middle, the spring behind, and the trigger before the hinge. A sort of box-trap has been recommended in some places, but it has the defect of being less certain; and at the same time it is not free from the objection of cruelty, as the animals are taken alive, and when several are confined in the trap together, they fight in the most desperate manner, wounding and even destroying each other. In the centre of England a very effective and simple trap is made by sticking into the ground a hard-wood stick, three or four feet long, to the free end of which a loop of fine brass wire is attached; the stick being bent down, the wire is made to pass through a hole in a small piece of board, into which a peg is introduced from below, to prevent the wire from being withdrawn by the elasticity of the stick. The board is so placed as to form a small portion of the roof of the run, and is firmly kept in position by sticks laid horizontally across it, which are held down at their ends by hooked pegs. The loop of wire passing through the board is opened below, so as to fit the inside of the run; and the peg, which keeps it from being drawn up by the spring-stick, projects downwards into the middle of the run. The mole, passing along, pushes out the peg, whilst its own body is within the wire loop, which is instantly drawn up, and the creature is speedily THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 41 killed. The Scottish mole-catchers, as Mr Evans informs me, use, instead of the board, a tubular piece of wood representing a short section of the run. The Mole, owing to its underground abodes and the greater facility with which other animals which lie above ground can be procured, has, at least in Britain, few enemies. Dogs and foxes occasionally dig it out. Most of the short-winged hawks and owls—as shown by the bones occurring in their pellets— snap one up now and then when venturing above ground. Weasels, and more rarely stoats, have been found or caught in the runs and have been seen carrying dead moles,’ and sometimes they take possession of a fortress. But it does not appear to be proved that any of these animals make a systematic practice of mole-catching,’? and in captivity, as Mr Cocks informs me, they will only eat mole-meat when exceptionally. hungry. Moles have been occasionally kept for a few days in captivity, and they thrive well enough if they are supplied with a warm, dry bed, and if their inordinate hunger and thirst receive the constant attention which is essential. Young ones may be taken from the nest at any age and reared on cow's milk, which they drink readily. Their treatment presents no difficulties to people who are accustomed to look after young animals, so that it need not be described in detail. Alston * wrote a graphic account of one which he kept for nine days. It was the fiercest, boldest, and most voracious of animals. When regaled with the body of a frog it appeared to be possessed of a devil. It literally danced round its victim, worrying and biting at the skin of the belly until it tore it open, after which it feasted sumptuously on the entrails. This mole often carried its food underground; dragging the piece of meat to its heap of soil, it dived beneath it at one side, then turning itself, thrust out its head and pulled down the food after it. When it fed above ground its head was ’ As known to Gilbert White (Letter xl. to Thomas Pennant, 2nd September 1774)— “Weasels prey on moles, as appears by their being sometimes caught in mole-traps.” 2 H. Harden-Simpson, Fve/d, 1st May 1886, 570. 3 A. H. Patterson, Mature in Eastern Norfolk, 311, 1905; also Knapp and Dutt, op. cit. supra, suggest that they do. 4 Zoologist, 1865, 9706-9708, VOL TM, D 42 TALPIDAI—TALPA drawn back, its back arched, and its hands or fore paws turned so as to hold down the fragment, at which it tore with its little sharp teeth. Sometimes it fell asleep over its food, and awoke with renewed appetite; generally, however, it retired underground to sleep, coming out to feed every few hours. ‘The most amusing thing was to see him dive into the earth; first he grubbed a hole with his snout, then a few powerful strokes of his digging paws concealed the fore part of his body, and then his hind feet gave a kick in the air and disappeared.” One which Mr Adams kept alive in good health and vigour until, after eight days, he released it, was an enormous eater. When its food was a worm it would first seize it with its mouth and, holding it down with its paws, would feel the way with its snout to an end, as often one as the other, after which it would consume it from end to end by a series of short, quick jerks, now and then giving it a preliminary brushing with snout and paws to remove the dirt. ‘On one occasion a large lobworm had burrowed nearly out of sight, when the mole came upon it, seized it, but instead of tugging at it furiously, as I had expected, and thereby breaking it, he held it taut, and presently yielding to the gentle tension, it was secured whole. This know- ledge of the fragile nature of a worm, to say nothing of the ultimate consequences of haste and fracture, is remarkable, and the self-restraint on the part of so impetuous a creature is still more so.” Worms were undoubtedly the favourite food of this indi- vidual, but it also ate slugs without hesitation. It was offered freshly killed mice, but would only tackle them when there were no worms available, and then only when slit open. The heart, lungs, and intestines were the only parts touched. Another account of a captive mole by the late Mrs Eliza Brightwen! differs from that of Mr Adams as regards the animal’s method of eating worms. He pounced upon one “with the fury of a tiger, and holding it in his mouth, tore it to pieces with his sharp claws and rapidly devoured all the pieces, and snuffing about to make sure he had quite finished it, he then 1 Wild Nature won by Kindness, 133, 1896. THE COMMON MOLE, MOLDWARP OR WANT 43 darted off to seek another.” This mole kept his velvet coat carefully brushed and licked by a tiny red tongue. It is doubtful if such intelligence as the Mole possesses is, apart from its ordinary routine, of a high character. It seems to know how to avoid anything tainted by the touch of human hands, so that mole-catchers rub the inside of a trap with a dead mole before setting it, but the rapidity with which it becomes indifferent to being handled is suggestive of a dull brain. ‘‘When first caught,” writes Mr Adams, ‘they squeak and bite viciously, but within an hour I have taken them up by the skin of the back without their protesting. I have frequently stroked and tickled my captives while they were engaged in eating, and I have held them up by the tail while they lapped water. I taught my last captive to come blundering along for food when I scratched upon the earth or the side of his box.” When angry or alarmed, moles can squeak’ in a loud, shrill fashion, recalling the voice of a bat or shrew. But they have also other notes, one of which Mr Evans describes as somewhat like the purring of a cat or the distant jarring of a nightjar. Mr Adams is nothing if not thorough in his studies of his favourite animal, so that it is not surprising to find him test- ing the gastronomic qualities of mole-flesh, with the result that he found baby moles excellent eating, ‘‘much like rabbit, the flesh being white and very tender.” Mole-skins were formerly accounted of some value, and even in times of depreciation, according to Mr Henry Poland, several thousands changed hands annually, at a price of about one penny to a penny farthing each, to be made up into waistcoats. One so made was composed of no less than fifty skins, and was highly commended by the editor of the /ze/d for its light- ness and warmth. Of late years, as I am informed on excellent authority, a fluctuating demand has arisen for the skins in the manufacture of ladies’ coats. 1 Alston, Zoologist, 1865, 9708 ; also, R. F. C., Field, 6th May 1876, 501. Note.—Owen Jones has printed (Zen Years of Gamekeeping, 298) the description by an eye-witness of a mole gathering material for its nest :—“I heard a rustling 44 TALPIDA—TALPA quite near me. I thought it must be a mouse. . . . Another rustle, and I saw a dead oak-leaf move. I sank on my knees, and crawled to the spot. Within a yard of my face I saw the pinky snout of a mole: never was more than the snout and head... to be seen: its body remained in one of those shallow surface-runs. With amazing swiftness the snout felt all round, and each dry leaf within reach would be grabbed and drawn under: in about ten seconds the mole would return. When there were no more leaves within reach of one opening, the mole would thrust through the surface in a fresh place, and continue its leaf-gathering with incredible energy.” R. Kearton (Wild Life at Home, 129, 1899) states that he has once or twice seen moles come out for leaves, but he gives no description of their movements. FIG. 21 AA—SKULL OF HEDGEHOG, Lyinaceus europaeus. (2) from above; (4) from below. Drawn by G. Dollman. ERINACHE TD: TRUE HEDGEHOGS. GENUS’ ERINACE US. 1758. ERINACEUS, Carolus Linnzeus, Systema Natura, x., 523; xil., 75, 1766; based on Erinaceus europaeus of Linnzus. 1868. HERINACEUS, Mind Palumbo, “Cat. Mamm. Sicilia, in Ann. Agr. Sic., 2nd ser., xii., 37.” (Not seen; thus quoted by Palmer.) Tus genus, which includes one British species, is of wide distribution, and its many representatives are found numerously throughout Europe, Africa, and the greater part of Asia, but not in America, Madagascar, Ceylon, Burma, Siam, the Malay Peninsula, or Australia. Many of the species are very little known, but there may be mentioned my &. roumanzcus (Matschie’s £. danudzcus), a dusky hedgehog with white breast- spot and peculiar skull characters, ranging from Bohemia and Roumania to Greece; Satunin’s £. fonticus, with a subspecies abasgicus, which I have not been able to examine, described from western Transcaucasia; Schrenck’s amurensis from Amurland; Erxleben’s’§ szdzrzcus from Siberia; Satunin’s ussuriensts from the Ussuri country, Eastern Siberia, and chinensis from Chingan, Tyntza-intza, China; Swinhoe’s dealbatus, a pale form from China (Peking, Chefoo) ; Matschie’s Rreyenbergt, tschifuensis, and hunensis, all from China, and Thomas’s mzodon and hught from Shen-shi, China. Allen’s ortentatis from Vladivostok is said to be externally of ezropeus- like type, but with quite distinct cranial characters (see my paper in Ann. and Mag. Nat. First., April 1900, 360-368). Bate’s Z. neszotes of Crete is a somewhat small insular form. The genus is not represented in America, but Matthew’s erorerix (bull. American Mus...Nat. fcst., xix., 227, fig. -1, 9th May 1903), from the Oligocene beds of South Dakota, was VOL, 11. is D2 46 ERINACEIDA;—ERINACEUS described as indicating a ‘True Hedgehog” of ancestral type, apparently intermediate in form between Erinaceus and Gym- nura of the old world. These were also thought by Trouessart to be connected by his Meotetragus sinensis from western China (Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., October 1909, 389-391), but Thomas has since shown (Proc. Zool. Soc., London, 1911, 162, published March rgrr) that the true affinities of this form are with the gymnurine //y/omys, without any special leaning towards the Erinaceine. Hedgehogs are of considerable antiquity, and date at least from the upper and middle Miocene of European strata. The ancient Egyptians have left drawings of a member of the closely allied Hemzechinus auritus (Nature, 30th June 1904, 208; see also Keller, p. 20, fig. 7). Generic characters:—The true hedgehogs are short-tailed insectivora with rudimentary caudal vertebrz, imperfectly ossified palate, and wide pelvis. The upper surface and sides of the body, but not of the tail and head, are covered with spines, and, by the help of a special development of muscles, the skin of the back can be drawn downwards and forwards over the head and limbs. The animal tucks in its head into the interior of the “ball” thus formed, and is protected on all sides from ordinary attacks. The spines are longitudinally grooved, the intervening ridges being smooth. The hair is harsh. The ears are very short, always less than half the length of the head (Plate V., Fig. 3). There are six to ten paired mamme. In the skull the pterygoid fossze are well developed, with the processes not hollow and taking no part in the osseous bullz ; the postglenoid process is much smaller than the post- mastoid, and its interior is solid, not hollow. There are thirty-six teeth (Fig. 22, p. 54) arranged as— 323°) ES4 3-3. esl ee ee) bia? agree ae 36 The canines and anterior premolars are usually described as single-rooted, but vary very much in this respect. THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 47 Northern forms hibernate, but not those inhabiting southern regions, such as India. The most nearly allied genus is /Vemzechinus, instituted by Fitzinger for hedgehogs having the ridges of the spines tubercled, and recently revived by Satunin (Aux. du Mus. Zool. de l’ Acad. Imper. Sct., St Petersburg, xi, 1906, published 1907), to include ausztus, albulus, and other long-eared forms. THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN. ERINACEUS EUROPUS, Linneus. 1666. Herinaceus & Erinaceus,an Urchin or Hedgehog, Christopher Merrett, Pzzax, 167. 1758. Erinaceus europeus, Carolus Linnzus, Systema Nature, x. 523 Xil, 75, 1766 ; and all British authors, except as below ; described from Wamlingbé, South Gottland Island, Sweden; see Thomas, Proc. Zool. Soc. (London), 1911, 142, published March 1g11. 1803. Erinaceus suillus, Etienne Geoffroy, Catal. Mamm. du Mus. @ Hist. Nat. 67 ; described from France. 1803. Evinaceus caninus, Auct. et op. cit., 68 ; described from France. 1900. Evrinaceus europeus occidentalis, G. E. H. Barrett-Hamilton, Az. and Mag. Nat. Hist, April 1900, 362-363, and Ann. Scott. Nat. Hist, January 1901, 3; described from Innerwick, Haddingtonshire, Scotland (type specimen in British Museum of Natural History). Le Hérisson of the French: der [gel of the Germans. Terminology :—The ordinary name of this animal, of which there are innumerable corruptions, is of a quite obviously English origin, though it does not appear before 1450. It occurs in a famous passage of Shakespeare :—“ Thorny hedgehogs, be not seen” (J/zd- summer Night's Dream, II. iii. 10; see also Tempest, II. ii. 10, quoted below on p. 58, and (metaphorically) in Richard IIL, I. ii. 104). On the other hand, it appears in the form hedgepig in Macbeth, IV. i. 2, in a passage quoted below on p. 74; and as urchin in Titus Andronicus, II. iii. 101 :—“ Ten thousand swelling toads, as many urchins.” But the old English name was none of these, the Anglo-Saxon form being 7/, a contraction of zge/ (compare the modern German zgel, a hedgehog). Urchin is derived from Old North French (ze, Norman or non- Parisian French) Aerichun, a form which appears as hurchin or hyrchoune in Scotland, as in Barbour (Early English Text Society, edited by Skeat, xii, line 353), and has many variants in different counties. The Latin type from which this word is derived was erzctonem, a theoretical 48 ERINACEIDA:—ERINACEUS extended accusative form from Latin ericéws=a hedgehog; itself an extended form of Old Latin é=a hedgehog, cognate with Greek yp. Evricius occurs in the Vulgate, Sex names :—Boar and sow. Local names (non-Celtic) :—/wrse-a-boar, as in South Devon and Cornwall; furze-man-pig of Gloucester; hedge-boar or hedge-pig of Buckinghamshire, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall, South Worcester, and Wiltshire ; szceple, nisbil, and nyse-bill, no doubt from the Anglo- Saxon an zlespil=a hedgehog’s quill (g7/=a dart), are, through popular confusion, employed as variants, as in Pembroke, and are all that now remains to represent the Anglo-Saxon 2/; forpentine, perpynt (2), porcupig, pork-point, and porpin, as in Pembroke and Somerset, being all derivatives of porcupine (itself from porc-espin) ; prickle-back urchin and peggy-urchin are longer forms of urchin, and have similar variants; vock (young) of Somerset ; sharpuazls. (Celtic) :—Irish—grdinedg =“ the horrent one,” from grain =“ loath- ing” or “aversion.” Scottish Gaelic—gradineag. Manx—graynag ; arkan-soney (Cregeen), both only found in dictionaries (Kermode). Welsh—draenog, draened=“ spiny one”; draen y coed=“ spiny of the wood”; sarth (?) armell (Pugh), Cornish—sart, zar¢ ; Mid-Cornish— sort = Welsh sarth. Distribution :—Hedgehogs of this type range from sea-level to at least 8000 feet in the Caucasus (Blasius) ; and from about 63°, 61°, and 59° N. lat. in Skandinavia, Russia, and the Urals respectively, to the Mediter- ranean, including Sicily, Sardinia (Woltterstorff), Crete (Bate), and Asia Minor to Mount Lebanon; thence to Erzerum (Thomas), Trebizond, and probably right through to the Caucasus. West and east they are found from Ireland to Peking (Swinhoe), Aigun on the Amoor (Schrenck), the Ussuri country, and Vladivostok. A number of forms inhabit India, Afghanistan, Transcaspia, and Mesopotamia, in the two last of which, together with Cyprus (Bate), is found Hemzechinus auritus (Gmelin). £. ewropeus is not known from Arabia, Egypt, or Tunis, and in Morocco it is replaced by &. algzrus of Duvernoy, which is also the hedgehog of the Balearics (Thomas and Pocock). An Andalusian specimen of £. algtrus in the British Museum needs confirmation ; perhaps, like a French record, it may have been due to introduction from the Balearics (see Si¢pi, Feuille jeunes nat., Paris, 1909, 24-26). In the British Islands /. eurvopeus is probably common in every part of England and Wales (including Wight and Anglesey), the Low- lands of Scotland, and Ireland, where it has not been specially per- secuted by man. In his first season as keeper in Hampshire, Owen Jones killed about one hundred and forty (Zex Years of Gamekeeping, 1909, 100). It is not particular about its surroundings, and frequents with impartiality the Yorkshire hills to at least 1300 feet (Clarke and THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 49 Roebuck), and the suburban gardens of big towns and cities. In Wales it has been found living at 1684 feet, and its dead carcase at 2500 feet (Forrest); but one said to have been found recently in Kensington Gardens, London (Harding, /ze/d, 8th April 1911, 703), had most probably escaped from captivity. In Man it is now common everywhere, but, having no local names outside of dictionaries, is thought by Kermode to have been introduced early in the nineteenth century. In the Lowlands of Scotland its numbers are certainly not less than in England. Alston, for instance, described it as “ very common” ; in Dumfries, Service has had no less than eight in full view within twenty yards (Aun. Scott. Nat. Htst., 1901, 233); and close on a hundred were killed in 1903 on one estate near Edinburgh (W. Evans). Its status in the mountainous parts of Scotland, although it ranges to the extreme north, is still somewhat obscure, and, now that it has been artificially introduced in many localities, is not likely to be satisfactorily explained. W. Evans collected a number of old records relative to the northern limits of its range at the close of the eighteenth and beginning of the nineteenth century. These are somewhat con- flicting, but this much seems clear, namely, that the animal was at that time found well to the north both of the Forth and of the Tay. As pointed out by Evans, it was recorded for Tillicoultry, Clackmannan, in 1795; Dowally, near Dunkeld, in 1798; Forfarshire in “tolerable plenty ” before 1813; and as far as the Moray Firth by 1828. Harvie- Brown and Buckley’s “Moray” records of 1829, 1844, 1855, and 1862 show clearly that it was locally common in that area in the second quarter of last century. Its general reputation of late years is that of a species with an extending range, a point in regard to which many writers have been, perhaps, too prone to follow the lead of predecessors. In 1880 Alston recorded it as rapidly spreading to the northwards, but as yet unknown in Sutherland. Its status in that county, as well as in Caithness, is complicated by introductions, but there are records of its occurrence in the former by William MacKenzie (Anu. Scott. Nat. Hist., 1897, 191) in 1872 and 1897; and in 1906 F. G. Gunnis wrote that it was increasing at Brora (/ourn. ctt., 1906, 185). In Caithness, Lillie, a correspondent of Evans’s, informed him that he has never seen a hedgehog, but “there have been stories of persons finding them,” and “they are sometimes taken to Caithness from other districts as pets, and may possibly have sometimes escaped.” Bruce, however, on the authority of MacNicol, states that five have been taken in the parish of Reay within the four or five years preceding 1907. There are alsoa few records from other mountainous districts, as East Ross and the adjoining parts of Inverness, where the animal was said to be plentiful in one of the wilder and less frequented glens in 1893 (Harvie-Brown and Buckley); West Ross, where it first appeared in 1890 [and is 50 ERINACEIDA—ERINACEUS supposed to have been imported in bales of hay!] (Hinxman and Eagle Clarke, Journ, ctt., 1903, 70); Argyll (Boyd Watt, Journ. cét., 1901, 233-234; J. M. Campbell, Journ. cet., 1902, 50; and Godfrey, 117); and the Dumbarton side of Loch Long, in 1900 (Evans, zz “7.). From the Scottish islands it is as a rule absent; but it appears in Mull vermin lists of 1825 at a reward of threepence per head (MacLaine of Lochbuie, Journ. czt., 1895, 193); it is common in Bute (Colquhoun, Sporting Days, 101; also Boyd Watt), and has been trapped in the Mull of Kintyre (Harvie-Brown and Buckley). It has been introduced at Loch Tingwall, near Lerwick, Shetland (Millais), as well as in the Orkneys; in the latter it has not been since heard of (Harvie-Brown and Buckley); in the Shetlands it has been found near Cunningsburg, Mossbank and Loch Spiggie, Weisdale and Dale in Delting (Buckley and Evans, Fauna of Shetland, 1899, 57). Ussher found the bleached leg of one at a peregrine’s plucking place on the South Saltee Island, co. Wexford, Ireland (Zoologis¢, 1886,96). It occurs in Jersey and Guernsey, but in each case is said to have “ been introduced ” (Sinel). Distribution in time :—This species is at least of pleistocene age in Britain, although the records are not always clear ; witness Macpherson’s allusions to remains found in the fissures of Helsfel, near Kendal. Andrews identified its bones from the debris of the neolithic lake- village at Glastonbury, Somerset (/dzs, 1899, 358), where it was a con- temporary of Pelecanus crispus, and Jackson has lately obtained a single left upper molar from the cave-earth of Dog Holes, Warton Crags, Lancashire, a deposit of late pleistocene age (Lancashire Naturalist, 1910, 326). Leith Adams’s record from Ballynamintra Cave, Co. Waterford, Ireland (77ans. Roy. Dublin Soc., 2, i., 206, 1881), is stated by Scharff to have been an error. The latter’s description of Ussher’s collections from the Edenvale, Newhall and Barntick Caves of Co. Clare, Ireland (Zvans. Roy. Irish Academy, Feb. 1906, i., 52, 64), are therefore very welcome. In these, hedgehog bones are present in abundance, mostly from the upper and more recent strata, but their position proves nothing, since their appearance was ancient and the superficial stratum of Newhall Cave contained remains of such extinct animals as the Gigantic Irish Deer, Reindeer, Banded Lemming, Bear, and Arctic Fox. Fortunately one distinct “ find” hails from the lower stratum of Newhall Cave, thus placing the pleistocene age of the Hedgehog in Ireland also beyond doubt. The period of gestation is probably seven weeks (Lilljeborg). The rutting season is evidently early, since the young, the number of which, although usually about four, may reach eight, have been found in April. A second litter sometimes appears between the middle of August and the end of September (see also p. 73). The droppings are sometimes very abundant, but are not always THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 51 easy to see except in places where there is no growing vegetation to hide them. They are very distinct in form and texture, of a pointed oblong shape, and a dry, loose texture very different from the strongly cemented droppings of rats or bats, and easily fall to pieces. Frag- ments of the elytra of beetles are generally conspicuous amongst them.! They are not specially odoriferous, but, in the case of captive animals at least, give off a peculiar semi-sweet stink, which is rather stronger than that emitted in the case of carnivores of a similar size. Description :—The general form and appearance of the Hedgehog are typically those of its genus. It is a thick, stumpy animal, with neck and body shorter in proportion to its bulk than any other British mammal. The head is conical; the ear short, broad, and rounded (Plate V., Fig. 3); the eye prominent; the legs short, bringing the animal’s body nearly in contact with the ground when running; the tail a mere stump (Plate V., Fig. 4). The hands and feet have each five toes, all armed with claws, and five pads. Of these, one lies at the base of the second digit, one at the bases of the third and fourth, and one at the base of the fifth. A pair of unequal size lie side by side behind these. The hand is well shown in Plate V., Fig. 1, and needs no further description. The foot is peculiar in the proportion of the digits (Plate V., Fig. 2). No. 1 is short, with a feeble claw; Nos, 2 and 3 are about of equal length, with strong claws, especially the former; No. 4 is shorter and has a smaller claw; No. 5 resembles No. 1, being quite short and with a feeble claw. The fur is harsh and brittle, and is confined to the under surface, except the snout, forehead, cheeks, ears—and, sparsely, the tail. The rest of the body is thickly covered by spines. The spines are arranged in radiating groups, and their most natural position is nearly flat upon the body, but they may be erected at will. They reach a length of about 20 mm., are sharply pointed, hard of texture, with, peripherally, 22 to 24 longitudinal grooves. Each is fixed in the skin by a hemispherical root, above which is a narrow neck bent almost at right angles. Perfect specimens can thus only with difficulty be pulled out from a living animal. On the other hand, pressure or violence applied to the tips is not expended in driving the spines into the body, but in bending the neck, a fact which explains why the animal has no fear of dropping on its back from a height (see Carlier, Journ. Anat. and Phys., xxvii., new series, vii., 1893 ; and, for a popular figure, Knapp, Journal of a Naturalist, ed. ii., 1829, 139). 1 “Tt appears, by the dung that they drop upon the turf, that beetles are no inconsiderable part of their food.”—Gilbert White, Letter xxvii. to Thomas Pennant, 22nd February 1770. For much information on this subject I am indebted to Cocks and Moffat. 52 ERINACEIDA:—ERINACEUS The spines are annulated with an alternation of dark brown or nearly black and white bands, usually three in number, of which the central is dark, leaving the two ends of the spine light. A small dark tip may or may not be present. The haired surfaces vary in colour from dirty brown to dirty white, without discernible pattern. The variation is due to the pro- portions of hairs of these two colours. The majority of individuals are altogether brown, but in others the whitish hairs are numerous, Two small and very light skins in the British Museum were obtained by Ogilvie-Grant in Elgin, Scotland. In these the under side and nose are nearly white, with the exception of a dark, not very well defined breast patch and traces of a mid-ventral darkening. The young, of which Gilbert White (Letter xxvii. to Pennant) noted that they have the eyes closed at birth, the spines white, soft, and flexible, and little hanging ears, are at first quite helpless, Patterson (/77sh Naturalist, 1901, 254) describes an Irish litter, of which the individuals weighed -75 oz. (nearly 21 grms.) and measured 2-5 inches (63-5 mm.) in total length, The ears hung down slightly, and the snouts were short, broad, and unlike those of the adults. The soft, white, very small spines lay close down to the back. There were sharp and well-developed claws on all four feet, but no trace of hair on any part of the body. A deep, narrow groove ran down the centre of the back from head to tail. The colour was grey-blue above, fleshy beneath, the head being fleshy and the nose tipped with grey. I find no trace of moult or seasonal variation, and it is not known whether the spines, which are, physiologically, modified hairs,’ are under normal circumstances shed or renewed. Old spines lose the distinct pattern of their grooving, and their roots, which are quite deep when young, approach the surface (Carlier), when they could easily be thrown off and replaced by new ones; and this suggestion is supported by the fact that Cocks finds stray shed spines in his cages. An instance is on record where a hedgehog confined in a garden shed its spines in mid- winter (Ellen Newman, /ve/d, 24th March 1906, 442). It was sent to the editor of the Fre/d (Journ. ctt., 31st March 1906, 519), and eventually to the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons, London. As an abnormality, the spines may be absent and replaced by hairs (see Cozens, Journ. cét., 17th March 1906, 433; Fritsch, Vatural Science, xiii., 156, plate ii., 1898). In connection with the peculiarly helpless nature of the animal, especially during hibernation, Carlier’s remarks on the skin are of great interest. On the upper surface it is very thick and provided with dense 1 Compare: “One must regard as a kind of hair such prickly hairs as hedgehogs and porcupines carry”—Aristotle, Wzstoria Animalium, ed. Thompson, 1910, I. 6, 4902, 28. THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 53 subepidermic tissue, but is poorly supplied with blood-vessels and without sebaceous and sweat glands. The thickness is no doubt a means of protection, and prevents loss of heat by radiation during hibernation. The skin of the ventral surface is, on the other hand, highly vascular and resembles that of other mammals. Much fat may accumulate on the back, especially in autumn. : In the skull the palate bones have two large unossified spaces, situated in front of a transverse ridge just behind the posterior molars ; the pterygoid fosse are very broad; there is no alisphenoid canal; the mesopterygoid is deep and leads posteriorly into a deep hemispherical excavation lying between the auditory bulle. The sagittal crest may be well developed in specimens so young that the permanent dentition is only just appearing. The shape and extent of the premaxillary frontal processes are subject to much variation. In many specimens they are conspicuous, extend- ing backwards for more than half the length of the nasals and with their posterior terminations not sharp or pointed, but blunt or square. This character was at one time supposed to be constant and of sub- specific value in British specimens, and upon it was based the description of E. europaeus occidentalis, Examination of a larger series shows that this is not always the case (see Lénnberg, Aun. and Mag. Nat. Host, June 1900, 542), but the question cannot yet be regarded as decided. Some of the teeth are quite variable in size, especially the second upper incisor and central upper premolar, the former a point of importance because the lesser dimensions of this tooth were fixed upon by de Winton (Prec. Zool. Soc. (London), 1897, 955-956) as diagnostic of E. algirus. Although usually far larger in Z. ewropeus, this tooth may be occasionally quite small. The central upper premolar is sometimes absent or crowded out of the tooth-line. As regards roots, Hollis (Zoologist, 1910, 325-6), examining eleven specimens, found the third upper incisor invariably single, the upper canine six times double, once single, and four times intermediate, z.2., single but with indications of fusion of two roots. In the upper jaw the central incisors are long and robust, separated and distant throughout their length, their points slightly converging ; the second and third pair, particularly the second, are small and conical, resembling premolars. There is a space between the third and the canine, both of which are usually stated to have single roots, but are very variable in this respect. Of the three premolars, the first two are smaller than the third, which has three roots, and an anterior outer cusp so very large as to resemble the carnassial tooth of a carnivore. The first two molars are large, nearly quadrate, and furnished with strong acute tubercles; the first molar is the largest of all the upper teeth, the third.is small, placed obliquely, and has to some extent a cutting edge. 54 ERINACEIDA—ERINACEUS In the lower jaw the central incisors, which in shape and size resemble those of the upper, are directed nearly horizontally forwards. There foilow three small teeth, obliquely cusped, the second of which is the canine, the third a premolar. Following these, but separated by an interval, is another premolar, a prominent but narrow tooth Fic. 22.—SIDE VIEW (diagrammatic and magnified 14 times) OF TEETH OF Erinaceus europeus. of height equal or superior to that of the molars; it carries externally two principal cusps and an inner rudimentary one. To it succeed the three molars; the first, the largest of all the lower teeth, has five well-marked cusps; the second is smaller, with four sharp cusps and an anterior rudimentary one; the third is smallest, with one pointed inner posterior cusp, and two rudimentary. Individual colour variation runs mainly in the direction of albinism, of which, partial or complete, a number of instances are on record} (see Spicer, Zoologist, 1858, 6058 ; Bainbridge, Fze/d, 13th April 1861, 313; Harding, Zoologist, 1879, 172; Maud Stevenson, /ze/d, 29th September 1888, 476; Evans, Journ. ctt., 6th October 1888, 509; Allenby, Journ. czt., goth November 1889, 667, and 19th April 1890, 587; Hardbottle, Zoologist, 1895, 346-347, and Fzeld, 7th September, 1895, 439; W. J. Clarke, Zoologist, 1903, 387; Reid, Fzeld, 19th December 1908, 1103; and many others). Details are, as usual in such cases, seldom given, but in one instance the sex is said to have been female (Prior, Zoologzst, 1879, 172); in another, ‘a mother and at least one of her young were albinos (exhibition by Earl of Haddington, Proc. Nat. Hust. Soc. (Glasgow), iv., 37, 1878-1880). A true albino recorded by Chapman (Field, 15th August 1903, 327) is stated to have been little more than half grown, but I suspect that some of the juvenile albinos recorded were merely very young ones in which the pigmentation of the spines had not yet made its appearance. A family of milk-white hedgehogs 1 Millais has seen about twenty specimens. THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 55 in Charles Waterton’s park at Walton Hall (Zoolog?st, 1866, 195; see also “Tye (Horsham)”= Bainbridge, F7e/d, 16th August 1862, 161) are stated to have been nearly full grown; their mother was of normal coloration. In one case a hedgehog having white spines was dissected, when the nerves connected with the subcutaneous muscles were stated to have been much diseased (Harper, Zoologzst, 1851, 3022-3023). Geographical variation manifests itself in colour, and, as regards the skull, in the shape of the frontal processes of the premaxilla. My conclusions on the latter point have, however, as has been stated above, been disputed by Léonnberg; but it should be remembered that they were true for the series of specimens at that time in the British Museum, and they may be reinstated when a really satisfactory series becomes available for examination. Southern specimens tend to become white, the extreme being represented by my #£. e. hispanicus of south Spain, a form with inconspicuous frontal processes to the premaxille. My E. e. ttalicus of Italy is not so pale, and in skull agrees with the typical form of Skandinavia, in which the above processes are sharply pointed. My &. e. consoled of Sicily has long thin bristles with broad, white, strongly contrasted, dusky annulations. . e. concolor (Martin) from Trebizond and Mount Lebanon is externally very similar, but may be distinguished by its smaller teeth and skull. I have not examined £&. e. transcaucasicus of Satunin. During hibernation some remarkable changes take place in the tissues, as described by Carlier (of. czt., vide supra, p.51). That they are all altered in constitution, is shown by their being less readily acted upon by staining agents than when the animal is active. At the commencement of hibernation the blood undergoes a profound change, the number of white corpuscles dropping suddenly from about 20,000 or 18,000 to 3000 or even 1000 per cubic millimetre. At this time the white corpuscles seem to invade the connective tissue of the mucous and submucous coats of the intestinal tracts. Their probable function is to devour the bacteria, which, as Bouchard (“ Essai dune théorie de l’infection,” Proc. Tenth Medical Congress, Berlin, 1890) has shown, pass from the alimentary canal through the tissues into the blood of an animal which is cooled or chilled. Their work is soon accomplished, and they degenerate and are removed. The blood then slowly but surely acquires its normal proportion of corpuscles. The lymph-glands also undergo important changes, probably with a view to cleansing the lymph-stream from impurities tending to accumulate during hibernation. A special bilateral organ, the hibernating gland, lobulated in shape and orange-brown in colour, is situated chiefly in the axillary, cervical, and dorsal regions. Apart from differences due to age or nutrition, it 56 ERINACEIDA—ERINACEUS varies greatly in size at different seasons of the year. It is most voluminous in October, and at that time equals about 3-04 per cent. of the animal’s total weight. During the early part of hibernation it rapidly diminishes, and at the beginning of January is only about 1-5 per cent. of the total weight, or, allowing for loss of weight by the whole animal, only -33 of its own original weight. By the end of March it is only -9 per cent. of the total weight; and, continuing to atrophy, is by June reduced to a few fibrous cords. Thenceforward it increases until the commencement of the next hibernation. This gland probably acts as a storehouse for fat, which accumulates in it so long as the animal feeds. During hibernation it gives up the fat and probably becomes transformed, a few cells at a time, into highly nutritive matter, fat alone being not sufficient to sustain life. DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES :— Tail : Head and | (without Bind ay E body. terminal As ay ars hairs). claws). MALEs. 1.* Louth, Lincolnshire, 14th October 1910 . 2 : 210 385 42 35 2% Do. do. (undated) : 3 258 34 48 82 3.* Tetbury, Gloucestershire, 11th November 1910 = 188 22 40 29 ZI DOS do. (undated) . 220 24 42 28 5. Cardiff, Wales, 26th May 1899 (R. Drane ; Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist.) A 263 20 43 22 6. Innerwick, Haddington, Scotland, ‘sth April 1899 (W. Eagle Clarke ; Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist.; type of subspecies occidentalis) . 218 Lid; 42 28 7. Ennis, Co. Clare, Ireland, 21st September. 1893 (Wi Beott; Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist.) . z 252 30 40 Approximate average of seven adult males, as above 230 26 42°5 29 (6 items) FEMALES, 1.* Louth, Lincolnshire, 14th October 1910 . : ; 194 20 87 31 2.* Do: do. (undated) 232 24 42 30 3. Oundle, Northamptonshire, 20th November 1900 (Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist.) . 4 257 31 40 26 4.* Richmond, Surrey, 10th December 1910 . di F 195 18 39 25 5.* Do. do. (same date). 4 . 217 30 36 26 (iis TOURUTYs Gloucestershire, 11th December 1910 - 207 28 36 29 7.* do. (undated) . : 5 230 24 41 29 8. tote. Devon, 21st September 1907 (H. Hollis) 5 212 21 37 20 9. Topham, do, 8th October 1907 (EH. Hollis) . 232 21 38 22 10. Cardiff, Wales, 26th May 1899 (Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist.) . 194 17 34 24 11. Immature, Hardington, Gloucestershire, ‘15th Nov. 1894 (R. Hooper; Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist.) 6 6 179 23 35 21 Approximate average of ten adult females, as above 217 2355 38 26 * Measured by T. V. Sherrin, to whom I am indebted for particulars. The table suggests that males are larger than females; see also the weights given below. Skull :—Greatest length, 55 to 57; basal length in middle line, 53 to 57; palatal length in middle line, 42 to 43; length of upper tooth- series, 28 to 29; same in lower jaw, to tip of incisor, 26; greatest breadth ie a : nda aad: A PLATE III. DIAGRAM OF MOLE’s TRACKS IN SNOW. (Reduced; after Adams.) The tracks made by the hind feet are shown as elongated marks nearer the centre, those of the fore feet as semicircular impressions nearer the margin of the diagram. These tracks were illustrated, but with less detail, by the late Mrs Eliza Brightwen in More A dout Wild Nature, 1892, 117. VOL. ll. THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 57 at zygoma, 34 to 36; posterior breadth, 31; breadth between orbits, 17 to 18; breadth at constriction, 14 to I5. Weight :—The Hedgehog, being a hibernating animal, probably varies considerably in weight at different seasons of the year, being theoretically heaviest just before and lightest some time during hiberna- tion. Although this is probably true, there are no detailed supporting observations. Webb’s results (Zoo/ogzst, 1876, 4824-4825) were vitiated by the fact that the Irish pair which he weighed at weekly intervals throughout the year lived in the partial confinement of a garden, and were fed on bread and milk in winter. He found that the male was nearly always heavier than the female, especially in May and June; he reached his maximum of 2 lbs. 7 oz. in the third week of May, and dropped to his lightest in December and January (1 Ib. 7-5 oz. to 1 lb. 8-5 oz.). The female seemed to follow a different cycle, since, although also lightest in December and January (1 Ib. 6 oz. to 1 lb. 7-5 0z.), the heaviest weight she reached (1 Ib. 15-5 oz.) was in the last week of October, in which week and the previous one, she—for the sole time in the year—was slightly heavier than the male. It would be interesting to correlate the variation in weight with the accumulation of fat, supposed to be greatest in autumn just before hibernation, at which time Webb’s male specimen was steadily losing weight. The extremes of weight, running from 1 Ib. 6 oz. to I lb. 15-5 oz. in the female, and from 1 lb. 7-5 oz. to 2 Ibs. 7 oz. in the male, agree with such isolated records as I have been able to inspect; but the experiment needs confirmation with wild animals, great care being taken that the results should not be upset by irregular feeding. Wadham writes me that he examined a very large Isle of Wight specimen; the weight was 3 lbs. 8 oz, so that it appears to have been an exceptionally heavy animal. Although at first sight deprived by its structure of all means of attacking its enemies, of defending itself by force, or of seek- ing safety in flight, this animal is yet endowed with a tolerably effective safeguard in its close covering of sharp spines. These being hard without being brittle, sufficiently elastic to bear great violence without breaking, and fixed with astonishing firmness in the tough leathery skin, form not only a solid shield-like protection from the effect of blows or falls, but a shirt of prickly mail sufficiently sharp and annoying to deter all but the most resolute of dogs from venturing an attack. The moment a hedgehog is touched, or perceives danger approaching, it rolls itself up into a compact round ball, by the VOL. II, E 58 ERINACEIDAZ:—ERINACEUS contraction of the powerful fibres of the panniculus carnosus muscle which covers the body immediately under the skin; and thus it presents to its enemy an impenetrable panoply, beset by innumerable spines standing out in every direction. The more it is irritated or alarmed, the more firmly it contracts, and the more strongly and stiffly the spines are set; and its appearance at such times did not escape the eye of Shake- speare, who put the following into the mouth of Caliban :— “ Then like hedgehogs, which Lie tumbling in my barefoot way, and mount Their pricks at my footfall.” —The Tempest, Act ii., scene 2, line to. Bell, remarking on the strength and elasticity of this covering, states that he repeatedly saw a domesticated hedgehog run to the wall of an area, and, without hesitation, throw itself over. Contracted into a ball, it fell twelve or fourteen feet, and, immediately afterwards unrolling, ran off unhurt.’ The assertion of Pliny,’ followed by his numerous plagiarists, that the means of defence just described are aided by another of a very different character—the expulsion of the urine, in such a manner that it spreads itself over the whole surface of the skin, and by its odour disgusts and repels an assailant— is doubtless based upon the incontinence of the terrified animals. But it may also have reference, as suggested to me by Mr C. B. Moffat from actual experience in this direction, to a genuine, but not invariably used power of emitting an unpleasant smell under the influence of fright. By the Romans this assertion was doubtless read with reference to a different object—namely, the supposed rendering useless by this defence of the prickly skin, which they used in hackling hemp for the weaving of cloth. Apart, however, from its own unsavouriness, the numerous fleas and other parasites which often make the Hedgehog their host render its examina- tion at close quarters far from pleasant. The suggestion advanced above, that the Hedgehog is 1 And this observation has often been since confirmed, as by R. I. Pocock, who writes me that he has often seen hedgehogs, in dropping from a table, slightly slide off, turning in the air, so as to alight back downwards on the floor. See also below, page 71. 2 viii., Xxxvii. THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 59 capable of emitting an unpleasant smell under the influence of fright, will probably be regarded as controversial. It is so in- teresting, that Mr Moffat’s observations may be given in detail in the hope that further evidence, corroboratory or the reverse, may be forthcoming. The animal is not usually regarded as particularly odoriferous, and its presence may not appeal directly to human nostrils; but there can be no doubt that it does possess a peculiar, definite, and comparatively strong odour, which is so unmistakable that dogs can be readily trained to hunt for it.t~ The possession of a peculiar and unpleasant odour by an animal which is at the same time palatable, painful to handle, and easy to see or find in the open at night, would be a natural combination of characters already shown by Mr Pocock to occur in the somewhat similarly equipped porcupines,’ in which, however, it is accompanied by even more conspicuous coloration. Mr Moffat’s experience was obtained by putting a hedgehog into a water-butt for the purpose of seeing it swim. Imme- diately on finding itself in the water, the animai emitted an effluvium so powerful that he had to run back five or six yards to find an atmosphere in which he could breathe. “It was quite an unpleasant work,” he writes, “afterwards to release the poor creature from its swimming-bath. | He adds that he is not morbidly sensitive to odours, but the result of his experiment as related above beat anything on the part of a live animal that he ever encountered before or since. Mr Moffat subsequently gave another hedgehog a bath to see if it also would act skunk, but he was disappointed to find that it did not. But his previous experience is partially borne out by his observation that a fairly strong odour is sometimes produced when hedgehogs are fighting at night, but this is ‘nothing whatever” to the stench made by the animal that he put into water. It looks as if the animal's general behavour is guided 1 As pointed out by many writers; see Knapp, Journal of a Naturalist, ed. 2. 1829, 135; also, Sir William Jardine’s Supplementary Notes to Jesse’s edition of White’s Selborne, 1854, 404-5. It is “A peculiar, frousty, semi-sweet smell, which also clings to the droppings.”—Cocks, zz zz. 2 Of the genus Aystrix,; see Proc. Zool. Soc. (London), 1906, 902, published April 1907, also 1908, 946, published April 1909 ; and Fée/d, 11th March 1911, 489. — 60 ERINACEIDA—ERINACEUS by its protective coat of prickles, or, as Mr Moffat puts it, that it trusts a good deal in its own comparative immunity from attack. Thus Mr Moffat finds that when moving about by night it does advertise its presence by sounds, making a furious sniffing with its nostrils, and also rustling among the leaves and herbage in a way that no other small animal could do without great unwisdom. ‘One can easily track Hedgehogs—I think from a distance of 40 yards—by the perpetual noise they thus keep up, which tells us both wheve they are and what they are.” Enough has been written above to suggest that the Hedge- hog possesses the attributes both of smelling and self-advertising, but it would be desirable that further observations should be made on so interesting a subject. Some exotic hedgehogs are evidently further advanced on the same path, for their tints are brighter and more nearly approach the category of “ warning coloration,” and, according to Captain T. Hutton,’ an Indian species” makes a grunting sound when irritated, and when touched suddenly, jerks up its back so as to throw its spines forward, making at the same time a noise like a puff from a pair of bellows. This action at once brings it into the same category as a porcupine. Whatever may be thought of the above conclusions, two facts are incontrovertible—viz., firstly, that the Hedgehog is a palatable beast, acceptable, apart from sentimental prejudices, both to man and to carnivorous animals; and secondly, that despite its prickly armour, many animals eat it, especially when it is young and lacks the defence of the adult’s spines. This does not mean that the prickles are not protective, but merely that they can be overcome by an enemy which is so hungry that it will put up with wounds so long as it obtains a meal. Even so, the effect of the prickles is to make carnivorous animals think twice before ‘attacking a hedgehog, and thus to cause them to seek other food first. The flesh is eaten by men in some parts of continental Europe, where the human dietary is wider than in Britain. But even in this country it must have been at one time considered a delicacy by the cultured, since “‘hyrchouns ” * were served at a feast in 1425. 1 In W. T. Blanford. 2 FE. collaris of Gray and Hardwicke. 3 See F. J. Stubbs, Zoologist, 1910, 155. OO THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 61 It is still eagerly sought after by gypsies and others,’ who are very fond of it, but the few refined people who have tried it give very contradictory accounts of its quality. Probably the objections are due to prejudice, for Mr Pocock writes me that he knows hedgehogs to be delicious eating, having supped off them in the Balearic Islands ; and Mr Owen Jones gives directions? for broiling them, taken at first hand from the gypsies; he remarks that you are lucky if you can obtain them in late autumn, for by that time they have encased themselves in fat against the days of their winter sleeping. It is not at all certain how carnivorous mammals over- come the defensive armour, but there can be no question that they do so at least occasionally. It frequently happens also that a well-trained dog is found bold and active enough to “open” a hedgehog, at the expense of a bloody nose and sorely pricked paws. The siege is often of long duration, and Success in some cases probably results rather from relaxation of its guard on the part of the tired victim than from the actual victory of brute force. The smallest grip on the unprotected portions of the body is decisive. A clever plan of campaign is described by Mr J. G. Millais, who once observed a dog kill one of these animals by scratching away with the nails of his fore paws until he had made an entrance large enough to fix one paw against the poor brute’s chest. With the other he drew up the head, forced it back, and a nip on the throat finished the tragedy. The Fox, the Badger,’ and the Polecat are all credited with the power of despatching the Hedgehog, in the last case on the authority of H. A. Macpherson. .He is not, however, very definite, and merely remarks that two of his correspondents 1 As in Essex, fide H. Laver, 2 27. 2 In Woodcraft, 1910, 147; as did F. T. Buckland in Curiosities of Natural History, edition of 1879, series 2, 129, etc. ; and Millais also, from information sup- plied by F. H. Groome. 3 “ Few people are aware probably that its chief enemies are the badger and the fox. Where they dwell hedgehogs are not likely to become too numerous.”—J. E. Harting, Vermin of the Farm, 1892, reprint, 35. There is a remarkable note in the /7ze/d of 23rd March 1875 :—“ The pitiful wail of a hedgehog when caught by a badger is not easily forgotten, for although he will curl himself up and be torn to pieces by a terrier without a cry, the moment a badger approaches him he commences the most piteous cries, and death seems long and painful, for the badger sucks the blood before devouring the body.” VOL. II. | 62 ERINACEIDA—ERINACEUS found the remains of hedgehogs in the Foumart’s larder; but Mr A. H. Cocks finds that captive polecats will consume even the prickly skin, devouring the bristles clean from within. In any case, there can be no doubt that both foxes and badgers eat hedgehogs, both dead and alive, although, finding young ones easier to kill, they probably attack: adults only when they are very hungry. In overcoming the prickly armour, Mr Millais thinks that foxes may possibly use the tactics so successfully pursued by the dog which came under his observation, as already described.1_ Colonel J. S. Talbot writes me, however, that the method employed is to seize the prey before it has had time to completely roll itself up, there being always a moment of hesitation following the first alarm.” Mr Moffat tells me that hedgehogs are eaten by rats,® but it is sometimes uncertain which party is really the aggressor, since hedgehogs are themselves nothing loth to attack rats, and will certainly do so in captivity, as observed by Mr Pocock. They have been seen to do so by a correspondent of Mr G. A. Passingham’s,* and instances are on record’ where they have freed a garden of these rodents. On this point an anecdote of the late J. C. Mansel-Pleydell’s © is illustrative both of the con- flicts which occur between hedgehogs and rats, and of the activity displayed by the former, although apparently so clumsy. He relates that at about eleven o’clock one moonlight night loud cries were heard in the branches of a virginian creeper under the eaves of a house at a height of twenty feet from the ground. The cries gradually came nearer, until a rat and hedgehog fell to the ground together, the latter with visible marks of the rat’s teeth upon its body. Mr Lionel E. Adams also sends me an instance of a hedgehog killing a large rat, but the former itself succumbed to its injuries a day or two later. The above remarks lead to a consideration of the Urchin’s carnivorous propensities. These, unfortunately, 1 For the Hedgehog’s sake it is to be hoped that the plan adopted is not that detailed by Topsel, the nature of which prevents its repetition here. 2 See also article on Fox. 3 See also, for a description of such an encounter, G. C. Green, Fe/d, 9th January ~ 1892, 35. 4 Field, 30th November 1895, 903. ® Lord Lilford, Zoologist, 1890, 453. 6 Field, 16th November 1895, 827. ee Oe THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 63 although often denied by partisan writers, can no longer be glossed over by an impartial historian. The animal has many defenders, but its predilection for eggs, game, and poultry has long stood on record,’ and is supported by the convincing testimony of a host of recent accusers. Details of its exact delinquencies, although some account of its methods of feeding and hunting may be acceptable, would therefore seem to be superfluous. It may be remarked in its favour that its attentions to eggs may in the first instance arise from a love of warmth rather than from malice prepense. An outlying barndoor hen has been found sitting on her uninjured eggs with a hedgehog’s prickly body interposed between her and them!’ No doubt, however, the first breaking of an egg would give the hedgehog, at first innocent, a guilty knowledge of their nature; and the presence of the unwelcome intruder in a pheasant’s or partridge’s nest can be scarcely more conducive to successful hatching than if it destroyed the clutch wilfully and without hesitation.® But, in spite of all that has been said, it is correct to write that its usual aliment consists of beetles, worms, slugs, snails, and various other insects and invertebrates, in search of which it is fond of grubbing in cow-dung. Its fondness for insects makes it a useful pet in the basements of houses where such pests abound, and, were it to restrict its operations to the pursuit of such small game, there is no doubt that it might be set down as a creature useful to the farmer and harmless to the game-preserver. In the neighbourhood of big cities, in market-gardens and pasture- lands, its presence may be entirely beneficial. But the changed conditions brought about by game, 1 See, for instance, Rev. J. C. Atkinson, in Zoologist, 1844, 791; several other letters on the same subject in the Zoo/ogist were collected in Letters of Rusticus, 1849, ITI-I15. 2M. S. Young, Mature Notes, 1901, 16-17. 3 Many individuals seem never to have learnt the nature of the contents of large eggs, and in captivity do not know how to reach them until the shell has been broken (see Atkinson, Joc. cit. supra). Few, if any, mammals, even if otherwise confirmed egg-eaters, recognise cold fresh eggs as eatable, although they will devour them freely when warm, especially if containing a nearly hatched chick. But the five captive hedgehogs of which R. Drane writes me that, even when hungry, they refused eggs, whole or broken, boiled or fresh, must have surely been exceptional. + > coo 1 64. ERINACEIDASK—ERINACEUS the extermination of the carnivorous mammals, and the increase in numbers of helpless game-birds and their eggs, have forced the Hedgehog into a position which it might not otherwise have occupied. Its numbers become excessive, and its dietary consequently enlarged, until it starts poaching and falls under the bann of extermination. F It has often been stated that hedgehogs will eat many vegetable substances, including succulent leaves such as those of the dandelion and lettuce.’ But Mr Cocks informs me that a pair in his possession could not be induced to touch raw vegetables, and it seems likely that such substances would not be highly relished by such a confirmed animal- eater. Its recorded dietary is, however, a wide one, and is said to include acorns, wild fruits, apples, swede turnips, toadstools, bees* (honey * or bumble) and wasps * (which it has been found eating at their nests or hives), frogs,° young or wounded birds, mice, and, when they can be secured, rats and rabbits. All sorts of. offal attract it, and it dalleme victim to baits, such as entrails and flesh or bread and aniseed, intended for the destruction of other very different animals. It has been accused of seizing a hare by the hind leg In fact, it will eat any living creature which it can overpower, and almost any dead one. That it will devour even snakes when opportunity offers, may be taken for granted. But that such a practice is habitual to it may well be doubted, most 6 ! In Cyprus the Long-eared Hedgehog, //emdechinus auritus, feeds on grapes, and the Cretan representative of our own species will eat oats ; see Miss D. M. Bate, Proc. Zool. Soc. (London), published rst April 1904, 343, and 5th April 1906, 317. Gilbert White’s statement that hedgehogs “eat the roots of the plaintain in my grass-walks ” (Letter xxvii. to Thomas Pennant), has been shown to have been an error, the damage having been the work of a caterpillar (see Letéers of Rusticus 1849, 110-115). 2 W. D. Crotch, Zoologist, 1850, 2637 3 William Storey, Wammatls of Upper Nidderdale, 1885, 195. 4 Max Peacock, Waturalist, 1st October 1900, 320. 5 Toads have also been included, but probably in error. Cocks cannot induce any mammals to eat them in captivity: but Pocock writes me that he has seen a tame white rat lapping the blood of a toad which it had wounded. No doubt, but for his'intervention, the rat would have killed the toad. 5 M. A. Matthew, Zoologist, 1887, 233; and William Thompson quotes the Gardener's Chronicle, 1846, 480, for an assault upon a leveret. THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 65 so-called experiments’! having merely shown that when the two animals are confined in a box together the ensuing conflict provides the urchin with its supper. There is usually nothing to show that the conflict was desired by either of the com- batants. The hedgehog’s plan of campaign is to snap quickly, and then instantaneously to present its armoured back to the reptile, which, if poisonous, beats itself to death against the erect spines. This has been observed by several naturalists, as, for instance, by Mr Harting,’ in the case of captive specimens,’ and also by Richard Kearton,* who watched one kill a slow- worm with similar precautions. Mr Pocock also informs me that the same procedure was adopted on one occasion in the case of a rat, the hedgehog approaching the rodent sideways and keeping its spines directed towards it. The battles of hedgehogs and snakes have been recounted with more or less embellishment by many authorities from ancient times. Topsel’s version has at least the virtue of picturesqueness, and on that account alone deserves quoting. “There is,” writes Topsel, ‘‘mortal hatred betwixt the Serpent and the Hedge-hog, the Serpent seeketh out the Hedge-hog’s den, and falleth upon her to kill her, the Hedge- hog draweth it self up together round like a foot-ball, so that nothing appeareth on her but her thorny prickles; whereat the Serpent biteth in vain, for the more she laboureth to annoy the Hedge-hog, the more she is wounded and harmeth herself, yet notwithstanding the height of her minde, and hate of her heart, doth not suffer her to let go her hold, till one or both parties be destroyed. ‘““The Hedge-hog rowleth upon the Serpent, piercing his skin and flesh, (yea many times tearing the flesh from the bones) whereby he scapeth alive and killeth his adversary, carrying the 1 As of Rev. William Buckland, see W. J. Broderip, Zoological Journal, ii., v., 19, published April 1825; also of F. T. Buckland, of. ct, edition of 1879, series 2, ee There is a translation of a French version in Zoologist, 1887, 306 ; and Harting refers me to Le Chasseur Francois (St Etienne), 1st June 1898, and to Chasse et Péche, (Brussels), 24th June 1894, for other recent accounts, but I have been unable to see either journal. 3 Vermin of the Farm, 1892, reprint, 33. 4 The Fairyland of Living Things, 1907, 95. 66 ERINACEIDA—ERINACEUS flesh upon his spears, like an honourable banner won from his adversary in the field.” Before leaving this question it may be well to direct atten- tion to the Urchin’s apparent immunity to snake poison.’ But it is in other respects also abnormal, being in my experience difficult to drown, and it has the reputation of being proof against many poisons. Hedgehogs are dirty feeders, writes Alston,” whose account of the animal is very lively. Like other carnivores, they soil their food and carry parts of it that they cannot eat to their sleeping places, where they are content to repose on a mass of putrify- ing meat. They lap milk like a dog, but bite sideways in pig- like fashion. The contents of eggs are licked out through a hole in the shell, which is kept constantly enlarged as the require- ments of the banquet demand. Portions of the shell may be swallowed, but are not digested. Unlike the weasels, which seize their prey by the back of the head, hedgehogs, like moles, shrews, and rats, attack the abdomen, in order to devour first of all the entrails; if necessary they eat their way into the still-living victim, turning the skin neatly inside out as they proceed. They will crunch the bones of so comparatively large an animal as a mole, but, at least in captivity, seem tc be unable to cut the tough skin with their teeth.* Alston stated that in eating they smack the lips loudly, and undoubtedly they make what Atkinson called ‘‘a singularly harsh sound ” over their meals. But this, as Mr Cocks writes me, is probably due to ‘‘staccato” chopping movements of the teeth. The smaller victims are chewed with cruel deliberation. Leonard Jenyns* has well described how a worm was seized by one extremity and gradually eaten to the other, and Mr Harting’s specimens tore frogs limb from limb.’ There is some difference of opinion as to the treatment meted out to snails. Mr H. L. Orr ° writes, for instance, that they are separated from their shells before being swallowed, whereas Mr Moffat declares that they are crunched up, shells and all. The latter adds that he has seen ! See G. Physalix and G. Bertrand, Revue Scientifique, 8th August 1896, 189. 2 Zoologist, 1866, 58-60 ; Atkinson’s account (of. cit. supra) is also excellent. 3 Fide Adams. 4 Observations on Natural History, 1846, 61. OOD) Cit. 6 Trish Naturalist, 1899, 628. THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 67 wild hedgehogs eat a black slug of a kind which he believes that most birds reject.’ Most authorities agree in stating that shrew-meat is one of the few possible foods that a hedgehog cannot face. Sir Oswald Mosley’ stated that one died under his observation within an hour of its having mouthed a shrew’s carcase, but it must have owed its death to some other cause. It would hardly have been abroad at noon if in good health. Be that as it may, the late Robert Service threw the strong weight of his testimony into the opposite scale, writing me. that he had not the least doubt that the Hedgehog is the principal cause of the mortality which is so well known amongst the shrews at certain seasons. Unfortunately, he was never actually present at such a tragedy, and could not be sure that the supposed victims were ever eaten. It will, therefore, be well to suspend judgment on this point. Service found that hedgehogs destroy a good many eggs of birds nesting on the ground, especially skylarks, but that the destruction is mainly done on the day or evening before the eggs are due to hatch. He believed that, perhaps, the condition of the eggs is recognised by some peculiarity of smell, since in his experience young birds or fresher eggs were rarely taken. Hedgehogs are as quarrelsome as other insectivores. Alston® remarked that his captives, when fighting, tried to seize each other either by a hind leg or by the unprotected skin of the belly, and Service* was much entertained by the encounters of wild ones, apparently all males. On 15th May he found a couple ‘“snuffling” at each other, and they then began a monotonous “mill-wheel walk” with noses opposed. This circling continued for three-quarters of an hour by the watch, and after an absence of twenty minutes they were found sixty yards away, still rolling over and worrying each other as viciously as ever he had seen dogs fighting. Each had hold of the other by a fore paw, and was shaking it as a terrier does a rat, puffing and blowing with the exertion. Sometimes one was uppermost, sometimes 1 Trish Naturalist, 1900, 50. 2 Zoologist, 1854, 4477. 3 Zoologist, 1866, 59. * Ann. Scott. Nat. Hist., 1901, 232-3. 68 ERINACEIDA-—ERINACEUS the other. An incautious approach ended the fight, and they both scuttled into the bushes. They had been tearing at each other for eight minutes in his sight. Mr Moffat writes me in similar strain, but in his experience the combatants are so cautious as rarely to arrive at close quarters. Amongst the ancients the Hedgehog was the subject of many superstitions and prejudices. Not the least curious is that repeated with variations by many authors, and of which Topsel’s version runs :—‘‘ When he findeth apples or grapes on the earth, he rowleth himself upon them, untill he have filled all his prickles, and then carryeth them home to his den, never bearing above one in his mouth.” To this some add the scaling of trees to secure their fruit, and A. R. Forbes quotes the Gaelic legend of the Hedgehog’s hoard, or cnuasachd na graineag, signifying that all things gathered in this world must be left at the grave, just as the Hedgehog has to leave its burden of crab-apples at the narrow entrance of its den. Another example of mediaval natural history may be found in a sixteenth-century treatise on riding,’ by Thomas Blundevill, wherein it is gravely stated that ‘the shirle (z.e., shrill) crye of a hedgeog strayt teyed by the foote under the Horses tayle, is a remedye of like force” for a jibbing horse. An ancient belief which still survives in many country dis- tricts,* namely, that the Urchin sucks the cows during the night, seems at first sight to be in the highest degree improb- able, and was accordingly scoffed at by Bell, who has been followed by most modern writers. But in favour of the prosecution it must in fairness be recorded that there exists a definite signed description of the finding of a hedgehog close to a milch goat in weather so warm as almost to preclude:the suggestion of its having sought the goat for heat’s sake.* Again, the late J. H. Gurney (senior) printed the signed statement of a servant who found two hedge- ' A New Book containing the Art of Riding, published “at the sign of the Hedge- hog, St Paul’s Churchyard,” ed. of 157—. * E.g., Nidderdale, Yorkshire (Storey), and stated by Spicer (Zoologist, 1858, 6058) to be very generally believed by the lower orders of the south of England. 3 A. C. Mackie, Mature Notes, 1901, 136. THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 69 hogs sucking a cow.’ Major John Spicer,*® an acute observer, commenting on the wide prevalence of the belief in milk-sucking, noticed the Hedgehog’s power of stretching out its neck, its love of milk, and the cow’s pleasure at being relieved of it, together with a supposed calf-like cry on the part of the Hedgehog, and confessed that he did not “‘see the great improbability of it.” Lastly, Sir Harry Johnston points out that there is nothing improbable in a hedgehog, from merely seeking the neighbourhood of a cow on account of the insects which accompany her, being attracted to lick and finally to suck the nipples. But careful naturalists, remembering amongst other things, the small size of the Hedgehog’s mouth, will probably await further evidence before they place the suck- ing of cows amongst the habitual accomplishments of the animal; and I am inclined to think that the story may be classed with the many other mythical narratives which make the work of the older naturalists more picturesque than trust- worthy. The crimes of the Hedgehog, supposed or real, have caused this poor animal to be the subject of an unrelenting persecution from time immemorial. It appears in old Church- wardens’ Accounts* amongst the list of outlaws for whose devoted heads a reward was paid. The price in Westmorland was twopence*‘ in the seventeenth century, but in Oxfordshire” and Bedfordshire double that amount in the two following. The pursuit, now abandoned by the churchwardens, has been taken up by the gamekeepers, with the result that the animal’s numbers in any one district depend chiefly on the success which attend its enemies’ efforts to reduce them. In its natural state the Hedgehog is, with exceptions to be noticed below, almost entirely nocturnal. Its gait is quick and shuffling, and it proceeds, as it were, by starts, not continu- * On the authority of T. F. Buxton; see Zoologist, 1853, 4151-4152. Adams also writes me that he once received somewhat similar and unsolicited testimony from a country boy. * Loci ctt., 6057. 3 H. A. Macpherson ; for Buckinghamshire, see Cocks, Zoologist, 1892, 63 ; for Bedfordshire, J. Steele-Elliott, Journ. czt., 1906, 161-167, 253-265. 4 Fixed at that amount by Act of Parliament in 1564, 8 Elizabeth (c. 15). 5 Fide Cocks. Cf. also Rochdale, Lancashire, 1643—“3 hedge hodgs, Is. od.” (Stubbs, Zoologzs?, 380). 70 ERINACEIDA—ERINACEUS ing its course for any considerable distance at a time. Constant interruptions occur while the animal halts to smell and snuff, or root a hole amongst the leaves and grass, then as suddenly it jogs along on its quiet way again.’ Its food is sought chiefly by the sense of scent, which is so keen that Mr William Evans remarks that it will follow up the tracks of a beetle with facility and speed. So engrossed is the animal in its business, that any one who remains moderately still may watch it at work from a distance of a few yards.’ So fearless is it of the quiet proximity of men, that it has been known to lick an observer's boots,’ or to thrust its snout under the instep in search of food.* But on any suspicious movement the hitherto vivacious Urchin becomes motionless, its head dropping between its fore paws preparatory to subsidence, if need be, into a ball of impenetrable bristles. At times hedgehogs, perhaps when unwell, appear abroad by day, but their diurnal movements frequently coincide with times when food is scarce, such as autumn frosts. The increased number of slugs and snails which come out when a good shower succeeds a summer drought are also no doubt the cause of diurnal appearances.° Although at first sight a clumsy and feeble creature, the Hedgehog is in reality possessed of astonishing activity,” even in spheres in which it would have been, perhaps, least expected, namely, as a runner, climber,’ and swimmer. It has no hesitation in ascending to a height, and, provided that the nature of an obstacle is such as to afford it a little assistance, as when the surface of a wall is rough, or there are rain-pipes,° fruit trees,® or creepers,” it will readily make its escape even from enclosed gardens or yards. One which I placed in an enclosure fenced in by two sets of close-meshed netting worked its way 1 See Rev. A. C. Smith, Zoologist, 1853, 4010. 2H. J. J. Brydges, Zoologist, 1847, 1768. Service has had eight in full view within twenty yards on a summer’s evening. 3 Millais, i., 115-116. 4 Fide Moffat. 5 Ibid. 6 Despite its spines it can scratch its own back (Rev. C. A. Bury, Zoologist, 1844, 778). 7 Cocks also writes me that he has often been astonished at the powers of climb- ing exhibited by captives. 8 R. H. Scott, Zoologist, 1886, 242, from Mature. ® O. Grabham, Fze/d, 3rd December 1898, 897. 10 Mansel-Pleydell, Journ. cit., 16th November 1895, 827. +1 Tee THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN ya in between the two and thus clambered out. It seems to have no fear of falling, and alights on its feet in leaping off a table to the ground, with the air and elasticity of an animal thoroughly accustomed to such performances.’ It has even been observed to drop five feet down a bank into a river, across which it proceeded to swim.” As a swimmer its proficiency at least equals its needs, and it must be at times capable of considerable achievements in this direction.2 Mr Cocks once knew one to land at Great Marlow after a swim in the Thames, which must have extended, probably down stream, for some hundreds of yards. Mr Millais has drawn one in the water ; * the animal is immersed deeply, with back, eyes, and snout just above the surface. In the daytime the Hedgehog retires to a warm, soft nest of moss and leaves, where, rolling itself into a compact ball, it sleeps heavily and with much snoring until the approach of night summons it to the outer world. This nest is usually placed in some covered situation, as in the hollow of a tree decayed at the base, or amongst the naked roots from which the earth has been washed away, in holes of rocks, in a dry hedgerow, or under the brushwood in a coppice. The favourite materials are withered leaves, perhaps because they are effective in keep- ing out the wet. There is no definite arrangement of the nest, but the animal is well concealed by a coating of leaves, which, becoming perforated by its spines, often remain attached to it after it has left its bed. The nest is never (in the wild state) encumbered by the stores which provident animals such as rodents lay up for their winter use. Instead, the Hedgehog trusts to hibernation to carry it through the lean months of the year, and then sub- sists on the thick masses of fat which by the onset of autumn have accumulated in its body.? This hibernation, although well known to be extremely irregular in captive animals, had 1 From greater heights it probably alights on its bristles—see above, p. 58, ‘and Atkinson, of. c7#. Moffat has sent me details of a third method of alighting ; he once saw one, before dropping from a height of not more than four feet, spread itself out into “an almost flat” shape, evidently with a view to break the fall. 2-H. J. Charbonnier. 3 See Max Peacock, Naturalist, 1901, 44. 4 The Mammals of Great Britain and Ireland, vol. i., plate facing p. 112. > A male dissected by Robert Patterson on 15th September had the dorsal fat- layer fully a quarter of an inch thick ; see /r7sh Naturalist, 1901, 254. This fat is used by labourers as a salve for rheumatism (Jones, Woodcraft, 1910, 101). 72 ERINACEIDAZE—ERINACEUS never—in this country—been studied in detail until Mr Moffat? undertook the task at Ballyhyland, County Wexford, Ireland. His observations show that the animal is herein no less eccentric than in its appearance and general habits. Watching its haunts regularly throughout a single winter from 26th October to the end of February, he found it abroadon fifteen nights in November, nine in December, four in January, but not at all in February. The hibernation, in so far as it showed a progressive decrease up to February, resembles that of the Pipistrelle, but beyond that point there was no coincidence. The winter appearances of the bats depended entirely on temperature, and they were always active when the weather was mild. On the contrary, there was no evidence that warmth had any effect in waking up the Hedgehog ; indeed, it was almost invariably on the cold nights that it was encountered, as if its winter activity was independent of weather. It is noteworthy that, although in December and January bats were observed on nineteen and hedgehogs on thirteen occasions, yet there were only two nights in December and not one in January on which both were seen abroad simultaneously. Mr Moffat’s remarks can only be regarded as conclusive for a single winter and a particular locality. It is clear that the hibernatory habits of an animal having a wide geographical range must vary considerably, and that for the hedgehogs there will be found many variations between the routine of those southern forms which, according to Blanford, never hibernate, and the more northern, the hibernation of which in Germany is described by Blasius as commencing, apparently irrespective of date, only when the temperature drops to 38°75° or 36°5 F., and terminating in March when the temperature of mid-day rises to 54°5° or 59° F. Evidently extreme eccentricity and uncertainty are the main characteristics of the hibernation of the animal in Ireland, and on this point it is well to remember that Mr Moffat’s notes are supported by the recorded observations of other naturalists, who have remarked on its discontinuity® and upon the un- 1 Irish Naturalist, 1904, 81-87. Moffat has also sent me some MS. notes supple- menting his paper. * Grabham in Yorkshire, Zoolog7st, 1896, 76. ue ‘histories ‘of very. many 1) dbase whieh. were formerly little known, : _ have been fully elucidated, while, speaking generally, an immense increase in our. knowledge on such important subjects as Migra- tion, Distribution, Habits, Nidification, Plumages, has accrued: ' And lastly, a new and important branch of study has been instituted Pe namely, the recognition of the various Racial Forms or Sub- species exhibited by certain birds in the British Islands, on the Continent, and elsewhere. A great advance has also been made towards a more satis- factory system of classification of the Aves—always a difficult subject—and this necessitates departures from the older views. ‘To bring this Standard Work thoroughly abreast of the most recent: knowledge in all these departments is the object of the present work. It should be remarked that while it is not intended to go fully into Synonomy, yet, where changes of nomenclature have been necessary in order to conform with the Law of Priority—the only method by which complete uniformity in nomenclature can ulti- mately be attained—the names used in the Fourth Edition of -Yarrell’s “British Birds” and in Saunders’ ‘“‘Manual,” and the Trinomial Names of the British Racial Forms, and of those - occurring in Britain as visitors from the Continent, will be quoted, as will also the Original Name under which the species was . described. ae $+) requesting Mr Eagle Clarke to undertake the duties of Editorship, the Publishers desire to make it known that they are acting under the advice of the late Mr Howard Saunders, who > placed all his collected notes fora New Edition at Mr Eagle Clarke’s disposal for this purpose. That Mr Eagle Clarke is emin- ently fitted for the work is well-known to all who are interested in ornithological science. Through his investigations of the subject, and contributions to its literature, he has long been recognised as one of the foremost authorities on all that relates to British birds. He has studied our native birds in many portions of the British Islands, and has visited a number of bird-haunts in various parts of Europe in order to become acquainted in their Continental homes with the visitants that seek our shores. . On the important matter of the Migrations performed by British Birds, Mr Eagle Clarke’s knowledge is unrivalled—a material fact, when it is called to mind how little has been said on this most important subject in any published History of _ British Birds. | A new and important feature of the New Work will be a Coloured Plate of each species. These will be reproduced in the best style from original drawings specially executed for the work by Miss Lilian Medland, F.Z.S., an accomplished and well- saianetehin sav artist. GURNEY & JACKSON 10 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, E.C. STUDIES IN nie Observed on the British and Irish Coasts, and Author of its: ‘an yay fini a eatin AY i Hi ti i} } At extended over many years! , during ity aad at opportuniti have been enjoyed for acquiring knowledge on) anh lisinincdi ak generally, and its British aspects in particular, Mh In 1884 Mr Eagle Clarke was elected a member of the British Association Committee on the Migration of Birds, as observed _ enquiry, he was eyed ey by his colleagues bs prepare. the final reports on the results obtained—a difficult and arduous task, which he accomplished in 1903. During the preparation of these reports (five in number), Mr Eagle Clarke became much impressed with the advantages which were likely to accrue from placing a trained ornithologist. Ph a i a number of the most favourably situated observing-stations — around our coasts. If this could be done, he believed that some \ of the difficulties which the phenomena. presented might be solved, and our knowledge regarding the Subject bases considerably advanced. This conviction led him to undertake, by the special permis- sion of the Elder Brethren of the Trinity House and the Commis- sioners of Northern Lighthouses, a series of personal investigations \\ at various light-stations, each of which was selected for a special purpose. In all, Mr Eagle Clarke has resided no fewer than forty- two weeks in hike isolated and remote observatories; the stations — visited being the Eddystone Lighthouse, the Kentish. Knock i! Lightship (33 miles off the Essex coast), the lighthouses on the i Flannan Isles and Suleskerry (both lying far out in the Atlantic), - y and the lighthouse at Fair Isle (the ‘British Heligoland”), He also visited the Island of Ushant—an important station— and Alderney for similar purposes; and is to spend a ‘month or more of the autumn of z910 at St Kilda, for the purpose of carrying the investigations to the outmost fringe of the British area. With these unrivalled experiences for its foundations, the | book should not only prove a valuable contribution to is! igang ii it i pruitnolowienl literature. ely GURNEY & JACKSON 10 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, Nha Oliver and Boyd, Printers, Edinburgh. en a ‘3, A. oe fe R.LA,, a 250 i: DRAWN BY “EDWARD A. WILSON sca M, B. (Cantan,) | GURNEY AND JACKSON j3 RATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, E.C. i IQII In Preparation == ts A NEW AND REVISED EDITION oF uh YARRELL, NEWTON, AND SAUNDERS’ ~ oe i pa eh HISTORY OF BRITISH BIRDS | EDITED BY WILLIAM EAGLE CLARKE, F.R. S. E, F. L s. Keeper of the Natural History Department, The Royal Scottish ‘Miseunas Member of the! his British Association Committee on the Migration of Birds as Observed on the British aint and Irish Coasts; Corresponding Fellow of the American Ornithologists’ Union; Parts Correspondirender Mitglied des Ornithologischen Vereins in Wien; Membre Honoraire du Bureau Central Ornithologique Hongrois ; ‘ne : Member of the British Ornithologists’ Union, etc. BE eae ILLUSTRATED BY ORIGINAL COLOURED PLATES OF EACH SPECIES | SPECIALLY EXECUTED BY Raeeca ett MISS LILIAN MEDLAND. HE publication of Yarrell’s “History of British Birds” was commenced in 1837 and completed in 1843. Its outstanding — merits were at once recognised, and a Second Edition AP ee called for in 1845, followed by a third in 1856. a ity From the issue of the Original Edition down to the seus Ot day, Yarrell’s “History of British Birds” has generally and ) deservedly been regarded as the standard authority on naghiog'! ornithology. In the year 1871 a Fourth Edition was begun, inde ale masterly editorship of Professor Newton—the greatest British | ornithologist of all time. | Unfortunately Professor Newton’s — i official engagements at the University of Cambridge only allowed him to complete the first two volumes; and in 1882 Mr Howard — Saunders was selected to edit the remaining volumes, a task i which he successfully accomplished to the entire satisfaction of a ornithologists in 1885. more than ever in the public and in scientific favour. To its stimulating influence is to be mainly attributed the marvellous and — unprecedented activity which has resulted in those SS apraeaeen advances made in all branches of British ornithology during recent years—advances which have rendered it essential that a RIN new work based upon this classical and comprehensive founda- The many excellences of this last edition advanced the work tion should be issued. Sait During the period alluded to, a considerable number of new ~— and interesting species have been added to our avifauna. . The ; [Continued on Page 3 of Cove: CONTENTS OF PART VIII. ed. ERINACEIDA: (True Hedgehogs)— Genus Arinaceus— Be: fhe Hedgehog or Urchin - SORICID& (Shrews). Genus Sorex The Common Shrew The Pygmy or Lesser Shrew The English local names have been revised in part by Mr W. W., Skeat, M.A. (assisted by Professor W. W. Skeat), and in part by Mr C. M. Drennan, M.A. Lond., late Scholar Emm. Coll. Camb. ; the Celtic and Gaelic names by Dr E.S. Quiggin, M.A., Ph.D., Fellow and Lecturer in Modern Languages and Celtic of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge; while a list of Scottish Gaelic names have been supplied by Mr C. H. Alston. Valuable assistance has been rendered by Mr M. C. A. Hinton regarding extinct Mammals. ILLUSTRATIONS io FULL-PAGE (Coloured and Black and White), q House Mouse. (Coloured.) 4 The Hedgehog. _ The Hedgehog—(1) Left Hand; (2) Left Foot; (3) Left Ear; (4) Dorsal View of Tail. The Shrew— Left Ears of (1) Common ; (2) Pygmy; (3) Water. . he Shrew—Tails of (1) Lesser; (2) Common; (3) Water. ,, ie ; FIGURES IN TEXT. _ Mandibular Articulation of Sorzczne. (Drawn by M. C. A. Hinton.) _ Side View of Teeth of (1) Sorex araneus; (2) Sorex minutus ; (3) Neomys fodtens. q pay a1 A i THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 73 expected appearance of the animal in times of frost and snow.' They thus confirm Spallanzani’s Italian experiment, and in Dum- friesshire Service has encountered individuals perambulating upon an inch of snow on 22nd November and in mild weather on 3rd January.” But, on the other hand, Dr Laver informs me that he is sure that in Essex some individuals sleep right through the winter, and a Manx captive in the possession of Mr P. M. C. Kermode slept from Christmas Eve to 19th April following. It is evident that the relative hiemal activity of the animal should be studied from north to south of the country. After a period of gestation *® which has been variously com- puted at from about four“ to seven weeks,’ the female produces her young at a date which may be in or about April, or between mid-August and the beginning of October.° The number is generally four or five, but varies in exceptional instances between two’ and eight ® or nine®; litters of seven have been recorded by Me Harting (twice)** and Mr F. H. Parrott." The later births are the second litters of the season, and are always separated from those of spring by the interval mentioned above. The newly born young are blind, and the future spines are hardly perceptible; at first these are white, soft, and flexible, but, hardening in the course of a few days, they become first brown, later annulated. The ears, as remarked by Gilbert White,” 1 C. A. Witchell, Journ. cit., 1896, 98 ; Gordon Dalgliesh, Fze/d, 19th November 1904, 908 ; and Zoologist, 1906, 170. 2 Ann. Scott. Nat. Hist., 1901, 79. * The pairing of this animal, either “standing upright because of their spines” (Aristotle, De Generatione Animalium, Arthur Platt’s ed., 1910, i., 5, 717°, 30), “belly to belly” (Aristotle, storia Animalium, D’A. W. Thompson’s ed., 1910, v., 2, 540%, 3), or ventral as in porcupines (Sir Thomas Browne, 311), engaged the curious attention of many ancient and mediaeval writers, It has recently been described by R. Collett, who states that the male may follow the female for several hours, after which the pair wander round each other in a small circle till at last the pairing takes place, the female lying on her back. The latter fact was also given by Lilljeborg. * Flower and Lydekker ; E. L. Trouessart, Histoire naturelle de la France, 1884, 75. ° This figure is probably correct, since it was given by Lilljeborg, a very careful writer. 6 23rd September for Ireland, fide Patterson, /rish Naturalist, 1901, 254; 28th September (recently born), Girvan, Ayrshire, Scotland, James Lumsden, Proc. Nat. flist. Soc. (Glasgow), iii., 187, 27th March 1877; H. E. Forrest observed half-grown young near Shrewsbury in the last week of November 1910 (z7 /#z.). 7 Bell; also Cocks. 8 Blasius. ® Collett. 10 Vermin of the Farm, 1892, reprint, 34. 1 Zoologist, 1887, 424. ® Letter xxvii. to Thomas Pennant, 22nd February 1770. VOL. Il. F 74 ERINACEIDAZA—ERINACEUS at first hang downwards, and the sucklings lack the power of rolling themselves into a ball. But they leave the nest in about a month, and grow so rapidly that those of the spring litters are to all appearances fully grown the same season; those of the autumn remain with their mother until they nearly equal her in size, and they, perhaps, share with her their winter retreat.’ In an interesting article” Major Spicer has described the manner of suckling. The mother “lay at full length on her side, or rather nearly on her back, for their convenience, just like an old sow with pigs in a sty, and the young ones worked away at her paps, smacking their lips, and making almost as much noise about it as young pigs would do: their cry when not suckling is a sort of continuous short whistle or chirp, like the cry of a bullfinch, and more like a small bird than an animal.” * The same mother when confined in a garden with her young ones, which were about the size of small oranges, scratched a hole under the fence and removed them one by one. She carried them by the back of their necks in her mouth, and was strong enough to trot with her burdens raised quite off the ground. Few people seem to have heard a hedgehog utter sounds more distinctive than grunts, snorts, snores, or chuckles* of satisfac- tion. Yet the animal makes a loud noise when in fear or distress, a kind of wail, recalling the cry of a hare when in trouble.® This is probably the same as the shrill cry mentioned by Blundevill in the sixteenth century,° and it is variously described as a ‘whining sound,”’ or as a long succession of screeches or screams.* It was mentioned by Shakespeare in the famous lines °— “Thrice the brinded cat hath mew’d. Thrice ; and once the hedgepig whin’d,” and it probably corresponds to the loud, cat-like squeals of the Eared Hedgehog” described by Miss Bate. 1 Adams in MS., but hibernation is normally solitary. * Zoologist, 1858, 6055-6056. 3 Edward Jesse, ed, Se/borne, 1854, 109, wrote of the young that “the incessant cry they make for their mother when hungry leads to their discovery.” 4 Sir R. Payne-Gallwey, Fze/d, 26th November 1898, 858. ® See above, p. 61, when seized by a badger ; also Jones, Woodcraft, 1910, 15. 8 See above, p. 68. 7 Editor of Fze/d, 26th August 1899, 294. 8 E.g., by Moffat (27 Ztz.). 9 Macbeth, Act iv., sc. 1, line 2. 10 Hemiechinus auritus (Gmelin). — ns Seca en sein THE HEDGEHOG OR URCHIN 7% In some parts of England’ country boys have a way of making the poor brutes scream or wail by drawing a small piece of stick to and fro across one of the hamstrings. Mr Jones, who describes this proceeding,’ thinks that it ‘really tickles the hedgehog, and makes him laugh in his own peculiar way.” Another cry, habitually uttered by animals wandering about at night, has been likened by Major Spicer to the voice of a calf, and is probably the same note which an anonymous writer described as a kind of ‘quack, quack, quack.”*® It was compared by Witchell* rather to a grunt than a quack, and by other writers to a ‘‘quack” or ‘‘crake,” closely resembling the sound made if the thumb nail be drawn slowly along the larger teeth of an ordinary comb. Hedgehogs are easily rendered familiar, and will soon partake without fear of the food of other domestic pets, eating at the same time with them and from the same dish. They do not, however, seem to be long-lived.° They will allow their faces to be rubbed or keep their bristles smooth to be stroked. They have been harnessed to a small toy cart,® and have learnt the meaning of a dinner whistle, running or gambolling up to the call, but retiring with a different air when satisfied. William Thompson of Belfast’ mentions the fact that they will drink beer to intoxication, and Mr Cocks once tamed a newly caught individual by drenching it with beer as it lay rolled up, and stroking it whenever it uncurled. On recovering sobriety, it remained for the rest of its life perfectly tame. Hedgehogs must have been tamed from time immemorial, since Aristotle*® incidentally mentions that those that are kept in domestication shift from one wall to the other, according to the direction of the wind. ' As in Essex, fide Laver (2 /it.). 2 Of. cit. 3 Field, 26th August 1899, 294. 4 Field, 2nd September 1899, 400. ® Captain W. Buckley, however, informed Forrest that he believes they reach an age of at least twenty years. 6 M. J. Simpson, J77sh Naturalist, 1895, 136. 7 Quoting from R. Ball, in The /rish Penny Journal, 1840-41. 8 Historia Animalium, ed. cit., 1x., 6, 612". PORTCI D2. SHREWS. Sub-Family Soricine. RED-TOOTHED SHREWS. SHREWS in outward appearance bear a strong resemblance to mice, but their projecting, proboscis-like snout, minute eyes, and comparatively small front teeth or incisors, are distinctive. The following key will be found helpful :— I, EXTERNAL CHARACTERS :— 1. Colour above not darker than ‘‘clove brown” ; | feet and tail not fringed or keeled; hind } SORAX . i Dawa foot not exceeding 14 mm. (1) pee oe oe hind foot 12 to Gacy) fa ; length of head and body to that Si ‘tail, nearly as 7 to 3.5 (2 to I) (2) Size smaller, hind foot 10 to 11 mm. ; | head and body to tail, about as 6 to 4 S. minutus . . p. 109 (3 to 2) 2. Colour above blackish oe or He Whit fee © Saraneus cas- taneus MNWEOMYS fringed and tail keeled with strong (usually Tee p. tam white) hairs; hind foot averaging 17 mm. . | fodiens’ bicolor ll. SKULLS AND TEETH :— 1. Teeth 32; large upper incisors about equally \ es bicuspid ; lower with three basal knobs : Se Py) (1) Skull larger, greatest length about 19 mm.; posterior lobe of anterior | S. avaneus cas- \ p. 82 upper incisor with basal length about taneus : equal to that of the anterior lobe (2) Skull smaller, greatest length about 16 mm.; posterior lobe of anterior @>. Seopa pear’ Wa p. 109 upper incisor with basal length about half that of the anterior lobe ; 2. Teeth 30; large upper incisors radar \ NEOMYS 124 bicuspid ; lower with one basal knob . J fodiens bicolor : 76 SOREX 77 GENUS SOREX. 1758. SOREX, Carolus Linnzus, Systema Nature, x., 53; xii., 73, 1766; based on S. araneus—type; see Thomas, Proc. Zool. Soc. (London), 1911, 143, published March 1911—and two other species ; not Sorex of Duvernoy, 1835 =CROCIDURA. 1829. OXYRHIN, Jakob Kaup, System der Europdischen Thierwelt, i., 120; based on the indeterminable Sorex constrictus of Hermann in Zimmermann, Geographische Geschichte des Menschen, etc., 1780, sp. 313 ; and Sorex tetragonurus of Hermann in Zimmermann = S. araneus tetragonurus ; both described from Strassburg, Germany. 1835. HYDROSOREX (part), G. L. Duvernoy, Mém. Soc. Mus. a’ Hist. Nat. (Strass- burg), 17th June and 2nd December 1834, 17 and 33, pl. i., figs. 2 and 24, pl. ii., figs. 4 and 5; based on Sorex fodiens, description+S. araneus, figure of skull of ; and S. tetragonurus=S. araneus tetragonurus. 1838. AMPHISOREX, G. L. Duvernoy, L’/mséztut (Paris), Ann. vi., No. 226, 112, April, and Mém. Soc. Mus. @’ Fiist. Nat. (Strassburg), Suppl., 4, 30th January 1838 ; based on S. ¢e¢ragonurus of Hermann, and other species ; preoccupied by Amphz- sorex of Duvernoy, 4/ém. cit. 17th June and 2nd December 1834 (published 1835), 23, pl. i., fig. 14, pl. ii., fig. 6= NEOMYS of Kaup, 1829. 1838. CoRsIRA, J. E. Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. (London), 1837, 123, published 14th June 1838 ; based on S. vulgaris of Linnzeus=S. araneus. 1842. OTISOREX, J. E. de Kay, Zoology of New York, i., Mammals, 22-23, pl. v., fig. 1; based on O. platyrhinus of de Kay = S. Jersnaas of Geoffroy and O. longirostris of de Kay=S. longirostris of Bachman. 1890. HOMALURUS, E. Schultz, Schriften des Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins des Harzes (Wernigerode), v., 28 ; based on S. alpinus of Schinz; ? preoccupied by HOMALURA of Meigen, 1826, a genus of Diptera. Synonymy :—There is in this case fortunately no difference of opinion as to the nomenclature. The genus Sovex, as at present restricted, includes a number of mouse-like forms, all characterised by small size and elongated bodies, and inhabitants of the northern regions of the Old and New Worlds. They are thickly coated with hair, which is changed by a moult in spring and autumn. ‘The long and pointed muzzle, which projects considerably in front of the lower jaw, carries the prominent nostrils at its extremity. The eye is minute, and the sight is probably poor. The ear, although without prominent external parts, is well developed, and the opening is provided with three valves (Plate VI., Figs. 1 and 2), a small one in the position of the tragus, a larger antitragial, and, above the latter, a third, of size similar to the last, situated somewhat in the position of the human antihelix ; the two latter carry tufts of hair. Both hand and foot are simple, formed for running, and each has five well-developed, clawed digits, of which the central is the longest. The tail is long and WOE sIT. F 2 78 SORICIDAX—SOREX moderately hairy (Plate VII., Figs. 1 and 2). The generative organs, which are much enlarged during the breeding season, open separately from the anus; the vagina is imperforate in the young female ; the penis is cylindrical or tapering. There is no cecum; the stomach is elongated pylorically, and is not globular as in Meomys, to be described below (see Jenyns, Ann. and Mag. Nat. Ffrst., June 1841, 267). The mamma, placed inguinally, are normally arranged as three pairs. There is on each side of the body, at a point situated at about one-third of the distance from the elbow to the knee, a lateral gland (see Linde, Gegenbaur’s Morphologische's Jahrbuch, XXxvi., 465, 1907), covered by two rows of coarse hairs. From this exudes a secretion to which shrews owe their peculiarly unpleasant odour; the gland is especially prominent during the breeding season, at which time also there is an enormous development of the generative organs. In the skeleton there is no pubic symphysis, and the tibia and fibula are united. The long and narrow skull tapers markedly to the snout, and is without zygomatic arch, post-orbital process, or tympanic bulla, the tympanum being ring-like. Hinton points out that the mandibular condyle affords good generic characters, which are very useful in determining jaws of fossil shrews or those from owls’ pellets. Shrews are peculiar among mammals in having two articular facets upon the condyle (Fig. 23, Nos. 1 and 3), an upper (s) and a lower one (2), widely separated from each other by a non-articular tract of bone. In Meomys the lower facet (Fig. 23, Nos. 2 and 4), z, is greatly prolonged towards the inner or lingual side, and the non-articular part of the condyle, as seen from behind, is much constricted. In Sovex the lower facet is without the lingual prolongation, and the non-articular part is not constricted. The dental formula is probably— Par ORES Page era: 3-3 |