Seek areal
ar
t i
fe NK | ig Mp
0
? TE og titre A
uv
1 | Coa
)
i
i
Me. ae a arn LAD to ' ws ae ae I " 7% iy :
7 ans a on “er, a ie | he
gg 7 | 610 Oe, GIS3X A HISTORY His
VV. Di Dirk OF
BRITISH BIRDS,
WITH COLOURED ILLUSTRATIONS
OF THEIR
EGGS. /
BY
HENRY SEEBOHM.
tte
=a Ae
LONDON: PUBLISHED FOR THE AUTHOR k. H. PORTER, 6 TENTERDEN STR
AND
DULAU & CO., SOHO SQUARE, W. 1884.
aes -- gis
PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS,
RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.
CONTENTS OF VOL IL
DOLLOP OPIOIDS LLLP LPIP IU
Plate Page INTRODUCTION (On the Protective Colour of Eggs) ........ = ix Subiamily AMPH LIN AG 20s. couelt- lbs vu. Noa aera i! Eine LUIS eaepe te oh kee 2 Ampelis garrulus. Waxwing ...........00000: ali! 3 Sumbeamalive S UO RINEN AG oon 5 oer dhess sya pele neteloins oe 10 Comat SME LUN US stants Serio « ails oid vel share dv Hig ees 10 Stummus vulgaris. Starline ...54..05 660k. caedkecs 11 12 PTET Se Et IO) Beasts aoa ato} “acs aoey Sig Biel Gael Sleds wresd , oraeaie Wi 5 19 Pastor roseus. Rose-coloured Starling............ gale 20 Snibtaniby. RUN GEELEN AGacinniict) .. ial enenuees we 28 Chemis Oe Meat aara sy cites acite ana ohayn pel A shgie adhe wie geeks a 28 Lowxia curvirostra. Common Crossbill F pss } Bee hoe 13. 30 pityopsittacus. Parrot Crossbill bifasciata. European White-winged Crossbill } 19 37 leucoptera. American White-winged Crossbill enucleator. Pine-Grosbeak ................ 12, 41 Gongs CANPODACUBY . sakes ose o's « Supe cies «aw eee s es ute 45 Carpodacus erythrinus. Scarlet Rose-Finch ...... 12, 46 Eremnee WRU En UAL xs eel et, diiajaie evs geveier aisle ais aes 50 Pyrrhula vulgaris. Bullfinch ....:.....0.+..... 12 51 Genuna COCCOTHRAUSIBS oc. 5666 conte eee a we Ae 56 Coccothraustes vulgaris. Hawfinch ..... ........ 13. 57 Gennes, Se cite Ga is as cadet ieee ceabes a 62 Passer domesticus. House-Sparrow ...........005 13. 63 montanus, Tree-Sparrow .......6-.s6sec0e 13. 69 Ay,
CONTENTS.
Plate Page CF eriTIs ERIN GLA opis oe eee oitinis io Gers aide sVarvion acne Tonee ae 73 Fringilla chloris. Greenfinch .................. 12, 74 a= CONT. “GONE. cieterse son eens a Se 12: 79 serumus. ‘Sevin Binch) (4: -97-6 foee 2 ese ia s 12. 83 === porauens. ‘Goldiinch: "5.22.4 scene oe 12. 87 SPUlUs.), SISK ey cree eee ei e Bee eee ene 12. 92 montifringilla. Brambling ................ 13. 96 celebs.. Chattineh ..... ..25.04 nes -o mate eee 13. 100 cannabing. TLammet 2250.0. .eenen eas 6 ates 13. 106 flamimostris) (MEWALC. UI... eh betas seit Nee aie 13. 111 rufescens. Lesser Redpole .... linaria. Mealy Redpole eWevietctog te 12. 115 hornemanni. Greenland Redpole Gone Me NEBECIZA® Ou Proce ca) aes ater tise ie eee ae ete nt 123 Emberiza nivalis. Snow-Bunting................ 15. 125 lapponica. Lapland Bunting .............. 15. 131 scheniclus. Reed-Bunting ...........-..+- 15. 135 rustica, Rustic Bumtime : . 27. eee ce see 15. 140 pusilla: StattlesBumtane) yeni crt oe ee ee 15. 144 novara. “Com-=Bunting 226.0055 oss er 13. 148 hortulana. Ortolan Bunting ............. 15. 153 cirlus: Cir] Bunter nee cies oe creo ee 13. 156 ctrmella. Yellow Hammer. .23.0.2..-....- 13. 160 melanocephala. Black-headed Bunting ...... 15. 165 Subfamily HIRUNDININAE .... 1. cece eee eee ees oe 169 Genus TR UINDO Aer onc os S scieetenn eters Avmeammcaremn oer ae 169 Hirundo rustica, | Swallow? 72)... us chee eee 17, 17. wroica. HMouse-Martwl. ine ce eae kre 178 riparia. Sand-Mantin | 200. eines eee ate ike 184 GenupPROGNE ie: .cdsicseics eyes mage ee ees cate oe He 188 Progne purpurea. Purple Martin................ 18. 189 Subfamily MOTACILLINAL ......-: sie eeceeeaees ie 192 Genus: MODPACELGA. «5: sonata ature em eee) ee eee ae 192 Motacilla yarrellii. Pied Wagtail.............. ~~ CO, 194 ailoa., White. Waste a: <a <= atte s stain a etal a 14. 199 sulphurea. Grey Wagtail ................ 14. 203 flava. Blue-headed Wagtail .............. 14. 208
FON. Mellow Weta mctaceeis ee sucess ses se 14. 212
CONTENTS. Vv Plate Page
Gertis ANTEBUS: coe cs x eens a S00 neo oipibetslians sin ah bs 217 Anthus arboreus. Tree-Pipit......... seer renee 14. 219 pratensis. Meadow-Pipit.........-++++++:- 14. 224
cervinus. Red-throated Pipit ..........+--- 14. 229
richardi. Richard’s Pipit...........++++++: 14. 233
— campestris, Tawny Pipit.........+++s+e:- 14. 239 obscurus. Rock-Pipit .....-.-.+eee ee eeee: 14. 244 spinoletta. Alpine Pipit .......-++-+s++ee: 14. 248 Subfamily ALAUDINE ....--+- 11s errr eee eens fi 253 Gorn NGAUS 2 bcc sen wines ss oe ee yer es tate os ae 253 Alauda arborea. Wood-Lark ...........0ee eee 15. 256 cristata. Crested Lark.........--+.s seers 15. 261
arvensis. Sky-Lark ......... 0 .+ se eset cess 15. 266 brachydactyla. Short-toed Lark............ 15. 274
sibirica. White-winged Lark ...........+.: 15, = ° 278
alpestris. Shore-Lark ........-. ok ca otisras 15. 284
Family CYPSELIDA ............ hye a NN a Sages
Grontin ONE Sila Sipe cite e sacete es ae ecshehesrern alals ea alee i 290 Oypselus apus. Common Swift........-..++++-: 18. 292 mclaa Alpige Swifts G1... c++ se we ene te 18. 297
Groniiia) © CAE WA me crsa ore won: etevsnia tere ersh ote ose2 hob astnt foe a 302 Chetura caudacuta. Needle-tailed Swift ........ Wes 308
Family CAPRIMULGID.................... . 307
Genus GAPBIMULGUS, . 25.5 cccee cena ss eae tee as 308 Caprimulgus ewropeus. Common Nightjar........ ive 309 ——- egyptius. Isabelline Nightjar ............ Ee 315
eamily MEROPEDAS ..<.c/0s.s.8b..\ it. Prrc
rons eM ROPRS <= 56 ce ce bee ces con simeee be wea a 319 Merops wpiaster. Common Bee-eater .........--: ES: 321 Genus CORAGEAS: 2 inca ere foie s cee tesa oe dimes Bf 326
Coracias garrula, Common Roller ,............- 18. 327
vi CONTENTS.
Plate Page
Peamitly POP UD AG tie sac ee A 332
Gonus BUPA ass caret hose Oran eaoete Meike locke ae os 332 Upupacepops: TOOpGG®, cep srusiaene teat iens is ate ek 15. 334
amily “ALCEDINIDA. «00 rn 339
Genus ALCHDO! A. Mes vs ce.cio Meo Get Pre Rae ie 339 Alcedo ispida, Common Kingfisher.............. 18. 341 Gengis (CHR WOE) 2 le te ee Ay 347 Ceryle aleyon. Belted Kingfisher................ 18. 348
amily PLC UD AN... cc... eee ee, ee : 352
Genus FRICUS 9 on is cate ke aeons aOR ae aK 352 Picus major. Great Spotted Woodpecker ........ 18. 354 minor. Lesser Spotted Woodpecker ........ hs 359
Gronis (GMC INIUS sare. sicereaee tse oe oer eee eee eee oa 363 Gecinus viridis. Green Woodpecker ............ 18. 364 Gents TVINING foot. onc tots Fete a etalon tone Wt ee ar anee tee ee eee oe 371 Tyne: torquilla. Wryneck...........0.0.. 000008 18. 372
Family CUCULIDE |... cece. We
Genus CUCUHUS Wwaociasce tan eda cu here Rees a 376 Cuculus canorus., ‘Cuckoo... \.00.2 7 eee eee 20. 378
- glandarius. Great Spotted Cuckoo.......... 68. 386
Genus COCCYAUS. |... 3.0. saeco een ee ee eee he 389 Coccyzus americanus. Yellow-billed Cuckoo ...... 68. 390
Family COLUMBIDZ........ eee ee: gh
Genns-COLUMBA.. ws .00 eee ee eee 4 395 Columba palumbus. Ring-Dove ................ Ihe 396 @nas.. stock=Dove... heen eee ee eee : Ly. 401
luna; “Rock-Dove acece eee ye 405
Geng ZNO: 3. Sr ee eee ee ee. sp 410
Turtur auritus. Turtle-Dove ...............5.. ive All
CONTENTS. vii
Plate Page
Family PHASIANIDE .................... 416 Gems, Sere eet Ate eB. Wer hh ees ob ah aiecenekele hola oh ba 85 417 Syrrhaptes paradowus. Pallas’s Sand-Grouse...... 20. 419 OIE Dro U ARO. cpa sir ndcs Pana 6 bet Mahe week ees oc. <- 423 Tetrao mutus. Common Ptarmigan.............. 20. 424 SOLUS = HOOlGLOUSE an cea a ctsee< Sere ee 20. 428
Lelpimen Dacha Grouse! t0. ha, 4 Se Halacha eae 20. 435
urogallus. Capercaillie .................. 21. 440
Crema eeu AS AUN Snes. crc goa c ona 2 eerscoe ln acenvaGeane’ ce 444 Phasianus colchicus. -Pheasant......¢... 000.000: PAL 445 Sevres! 12] Od Pd OD. ee, i eee i Be ee Ak Sys 451 Perdix cinerea. Common Partridge.............. 21. 452
. rufa. Red-legged Partridge .............. 20. $457 ern se OO) 1 EUINITE NG ee ee re indice She ain < 461 OCoturnix communis. Common Quail ............ 20. 462
Family PEUARGIDAG ...000000.. 022202. ie 466
Rens RAS a 5 ohare « ace a cls ea wariirold oe can Les 467 Ardea cinerea. Common Heron ................ 38. 468 purpureg., Lurple;Heron. <1... 12a aes 38. 473
aléa. Great White Beret ............00e, 38. 477
garacea.. “TittiGnBerege tated cna oe 38. 481
comata.. Squacco Heron .............0...- 38. 486
bubulcus. Buff-backed Heron.............. 38. 492
Germs NP Keele MO OMGACNS ho ac bs! wel o stu a's Sow wee eee a 495 Nycticorax nycticorax. Night-Heron ............ 38. 496
ever tpe nO) ee i Wed aca cet <ist u's re owas = genie ins eae i 502 Batpurus stellanis:. Bittern... < «osu. oS ve Sea 39. 503 lentigunosus. American Bittern ............ 39. 506 minutus. Little Bittern. .........8c. cas. u. 38. 510
Gensie IMAUIVAUIBVAG, ccaptteh fcer cis) sacl scan, 1 SR een ee “fe 513 Platiteasteucoradia. Spoonbill... ... Jas.se6s. 37. 514 (Gents UE ere te ioe, suc si ofl bea Sale erate mae a. 519
Ibes falewmellus, Glossy Tbis...... 05.00.00. eee 38. 520
vill CONTENTS.
Plate Gonus CICONLA <<... 5.086506 conus Meds Ce Eee r Giconiaaiva. White Stork). one nee or 37. nigra. Black Stork’...........+---+.0008- 37. Mamily RADUIDA ...,....0.. jeer eee Genus “CREX 5.00se6 ba oo are sud Gale a eee ee Orex pratensis. Corm-Crake. ... iy.) sie aeisteee 23. porzana. Spotted Crake ...........20-+en0> 23. battlon?. Baillon’s Crakeii ans mee . eels 23: parva. little Crake 2.2. tos er ee 23. Gens (RA LEUS i. SO eee eee ee Ce ence a Ratlus aquaticus. Water-Rail............).....- 23 Genus: GALLINUDA. «5 2s sel ee ee ee Gallinula chloropus. Waterhen ........-....... 23. Genus Se UGG A ee een eon Oe ee Rae eee Fulica atra. Coramon-Coot:..:0..5. 0.050. ae eee 23! Family GRUIDE 0.0.0... ccccceceeceeeee Genus GRU Seti sittin aoe see chs a ee ea Grus cinerea. Common Crane.................. 36. virgos, Demoiselle/Crane. ....)..... 2.6m 36. Family OTIDIDA..0..00..00.ccccccceccecceeee GemisvO TL SF «cows eed aad eee ee ee Oistarde.., ‘Great Bustard) seh). Gee nee Pape (Gina Little Busvards Haeneeittee eae By, —— macqueent. Macqueen’s Bustard .......... ill Genus CE DICNE MUS: < fe. 6 oe ee eee oe eee
Page 524
525 529
533 533
5390 540 543 547
551 552
556 557
563 564
568
568
570 575
579 580
581 587 591
595 596
INTRODUCTION.
ON THE PROTECTIVE COLOUR OF EGGS.
[THis chapter has been written for me by Mr. Cuaruxs. Drxon, and is sufficiently elaborated to post my readers up in the questions which have arisen on this subject since it has been regarded from the evolutionist point of view. It is, of course, partly based upon Darwin (‘ Descent of Man,’ ii. p. 166) and Wallace (‘ Natural Selection,’ pp. 211,231), who have endeavoured to explain, by the laws of Natural Selection, the facts (long ago remarked by Gloger* and others) respecting the colour of eggs.
The results of the investigation are not quite so satisfactory as might have been expected. There are so many cases which cannot be explained by protective selection, that the student, not being able in this instance to fall back upon sexual selection, is obliged to assume that many effects are the results of extinct causes. To my mind they are
suggestive rather of other powerful factors in addition to protective and sexual selection.— ES: ]
Ootoey has until lately been a much neglected science. Looked upon as an occupation which has for its object the mere collecting, labelling, and arranging in a cabinet the eggs of birds, or threading them on strings like beads, or, worse still, sticking them on cards in all kinds of fantastic patterns, egg-collecting has long been regarded as a schoolboy’s hobby, and quite beneath the dignity of the man of science. But since the great discoveries of those illustrious naturalists Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace have placed the study of natural history on a different basis, and completely revolutionized scientific research, oology may be said to have slowly risen from a schoolboy’s pastime or a collector’s craze to a science so fascinating and so instructive as to claim the careful attention of many of our ablest naturalists. Such hitherto despised objects as birds’ eggs have a tale to tell quite as interesting as that of any other object in the organic world; they have a history to reveal which assists in pointing out the line of march which organic life has taken from its earliest dawn to its present endiess and varied ramifications. But a study of eggs cannot be made satisfactorily without including the birds; the two subjects are inseparably linked together, and it is necessary to have the bird and its life-history before us when studying the egg with its
* In the ‘ Edinburgh Journal of Natural and Geographical Science’ (i. p. 303), published in 1880, a short résumé of Gloger’s paper of the previous year is given, translated from the ‘Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft naturforschender Freunde in Berlin.’
VOL. II. ; b
x INTRODUCTION.
varied markings, and the nest which contains it with its infinite diversity of structure and position.
Until very recently the great variety of colour in the plumage of birds was looked upon as so much ornament of no particular use to the species, but for the sole purpose of gratifying the eye and adding to the general harmony of animated nature. Within the last thirty years scientific research has shown that many of the beautiful colours on the plumage of birds materially affect not only their welfare, but, as will shortly be seen, that of their young, and consequently the very existence of their species. This beauty is not given aimlessly, it has a fixed and definite object—the benefit of the species acquiring and possessing it. The student of birds must therefore view each varied tint on their plumage not as so much mere ornament, but as a factor which is or has been essential to the safety or well-being of the species possessing it, which has had its origin in the struggle for existence to which each bird is subject, either through natural or sexual selection. In like manner the infinite variation of colour, and to some extent of form, in the eggs of birds and the endless diversity of their nests have had their origin in the subtle laws of variation and inheritance, aided by natural selection and the survival of the fittest.
No writer has investigated this interesting subject so closely as Mr. Wallace ; and the views he has taken, together with the conclusions at which he has arrived, are probably well known to most of our readers. Mr. Wallace’s theory of birds’ nests is said to be far too sweeping and arbitrary ; and certainly it does not explain all the facts. He divides birds into two great classes—one in which the sexes are alike and of conspicuous or showy colours, and which nidificate in a covered site; and the other in which there is a marked difference between the colour of the sexes, the male being showy and the female sombre, and which nidificate in an open site. Nearly all known birds are supposed to come into one or the other of these two groups. In each of these great divisions, however, there are almost as many exceptions as there are cases that conform to the rule; and this has been taken advantage of by Mr. J. A. Allen, the well-known American ornithologist, who endeavours, by a critical study of the nidifi- cation of North-American birds, to overthrow the whole theory (Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, 1878, p. 23). In treating the subject so far as birds and their nests are concerned, I propose to divide birds into the same two great groups as Mr. Wallace ; but I shall subdivide them into several mimor groups, which will include all the “exceptions” to either great rule. I purpose specially to take examples of each, as far as possible, from birds inhabiting our own islands, as being most interesting to the student of British oology. In the birds belonging to the class which build open nests we will notice as the first group
Birds in which the plumage of the male is bright and conspicuous
INTRODUCTION. xi
in colour, and that of the female dull and sombre, and which nidifi- cate in open sites.—The merest tyro in ornithology is aware that the plumage of the female bird is in a great many cases far more sombre than that of the male. Until comparatively recently the cause of this pheno- menon was never dreamed of. It is an ascertained fact that the colour of many female birds is connected in no small degree with their mode of nidification, and that the sitting bird is protected by the harmony which exists between its own sober plumage and the colour of the surroundings of its nesting-site. Let us glance over the nesting-habits of some of our best-known birds, and learn the working of this law. The males of many of our common birds possess extreme brilliancy of plumage, whilst their females are of such dull and inconspicuous colours that an inexperienced person would suppose them to belong to different species. The gorgeous Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus), for instance, has a mate whose garb is dingy and subdued in the extreme. Her sober plumage, however, is of the greatest importance ; for on this cirenmstance in part depends the very existence of her species. She builds her slight nest on the ground, and her plumage harmonizes with the dead bracken and dry herbage around, and most effectually conceals her from her enemies. A still more striking instance is to be found in the Black Grouse (Tetrao tetrix). The male bird is dressed in a rich garb of purplish black, but his mate does not resemble him in the least degree ; indeed, so widely does she differ in the colour of her plumage as to defy even the most expert ornithologist unacquainted with the matter, so far as outward appearances go, to class her as the same species as her mate, her plumage being mottled brown of various shades. But this diversity of plumage between the sexes serves the great purpose of shielding the female during the season of nidification on the brown heathery wastes where she rears her young. Take another instance. The Mallard, or Wild Duck (Anas boschas), exhibits such brilliant tints as to render him one of the showiest of our native birds; but his mate is of dull and inconspicuous colours, which harmonize closely with the tints of her nesting-site, which is an open and exposed one. Again, the male Teal (Anas crecca) is richly adorned, but his mate is so dull in plumage as to suggest the idea of their being distinct species. By this great differ- ence in the sexes the same end is served; for the female Teal builds an open nest, and the safety of that nest and its eggs depends on her dull and sober plumage. Amongst our smaller birds we have many instances : the Blackbird (Merula merula) mated to a dull brown spouse, who sits in an open nest, and the Ring-Ouzel (M. torquata) may be cited. The male of the latter species is showy, rich black and grey, with a snow-white band across the breast; the female is brown, and the band across the breast is dull—a plumage in harmony with the brown tints of the moorland, where
she sits upon her open nest comparatively safe. The male Chaffinch 62
xil INTRODUCTION.
(Fringilla celebs) and the Bullfinch (Pyrrhula vulgaris) are showy birds ; their mates are more sombre in appearance, and they build open nests, where conspicuous or showy plumes would only lead to their destruction. The charming Stonechat (Pratincola rubicola), in his garb of chestnut, black, and white, is mated to a dull unassuming spouse, who derives her chief safety during the trying period of nidification from the dull and sombre hues with which she is arrayed. Our second group consists of
Birds in which the plumage of both sexes is showy or brilliant in colour, and which nidificate in open nests.—This group forms one of those exceptions which, at first sight, appears seriously to affect the validity of the whole theory; but I think it can be shown that the birds included in it may possibly secure their safety in other ways. It is unfair to suppose that every species is equally liable to the attacks of enemies. Some gaily attired female birds may have no special enemies against which to guard— their brilliant or showy dress is no disadvantage to them, as is the case with many conspicuous insects; and this fact may in itself explain why it is that they have assumed such tints. Again, as some female birds became more brilliant through natural selection, it is very possible that they gradually altered the form of their nests (from an open one to a covered one), or if the acquisition of a showy dress did not render them more liable to the attacks of any special enemy (and we know that many animals are singularly free from persecution), no change in the manner of nesting would be required ; and this would explain many of the apparent exceptions to the gencral rule that gaily dressed female birds sit in covered nests. We must also take into consideration what colours are showy in certain haunts. Bright colours that would be very conspicuous in some places may be specially protective in others. Take the case of the Tiger’s stripes, conspicuous enough in the open or the green forest, but blending beauti- fully with the jungle; the light sand-coloured plumage of many desert- birds would be conspicuous enough in fertile districts, but on the burning sands it is invisible ; many other brightly plumaged birds are safe enough in the localities where they build their nests or deposit their eggs; but these facts are too often overlooked for want of careful investigation. Again, aud most important of all, the colour of the eggs in many cases plays a prominent part ; for the moment danger threatens, the ever-watchful and conspicuously coloured female quits her charge and seeks her own safety in flight, leaving her eggs or young to the safety which their tints insure.
In this group may be instanced the Orioles, represented in this country by the Golden Oriole (Oriolus galbula). All these birds build open nests, the sexes are almost alike in colour and of brilliant tints; but they conceal their nests amongst the thickest foliage, and, as Mr. Wallace states, protect their offspring by incessant anxious watching.
To this group also belong the Jays, the Crows, the Birds of Prey, the
INTRODUCTION. Xlll
Gulls, the Herons, and many other large birds, all of which are more or less conspicuous and make open nests. In most of these cases, however, the birds are well able to defend themselves and their nests from enemies ; but the more helpless species (as, for instance, the Sandpipers) seek safety for themselves in flight, relying wpon the protective tints of their eggs or young. I shall, however, return more specially to this group of birds when I treat on that part of the subject which concerns eggs and young birds. We now notice a small group of
Birds in which the male is less brilliant than the female, and which nidificate in open nests.—The birds in this group are exceedingly few in number, but are nevertheless very interesting. Let us take, for instance, the Dotterel (Eudromias morinellus) ; although the differences between the sexes of this species are not very striking, they exist, and the female »
‘is more showy than her mate: or, better still, take as examples several
of the Phalaropes (Phalaropus), where the females are more brilliant in their nuptial dress than the males, the Common Cassowary (Casuarius bennettii) or the Emu (Dromeus irroratus), a Carrion-Hawk (Milvago leucurus) from the Falkland Islands, an Australian Creeper (Climacteris erythrops), and an Australian Goatsucker (Ewrostopodus albogularis), in all of which the females are of more decidedly conspicuous colours than the males, and the nests are open and exposed. Curiously enough we find in all these cases that the male bird performs the duties of incu- bation, and in several instances is known to show much more solicitude than the female for the young! We have, however, an exception to this in the African Ostrich, where the male is more showy than the female ; nevertheless he performs the duties of incubation (Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1863, p. 233). The Ostrich has few enemies; and this fact, together with that of its peculiar manner of nidification, is probably the reason that its plumes have had no check to their present development. It is also worthy of remark that the young of probably all these birds, instead of resembling the females, as is the case with most species, more closely resemble the males, a circumstance which seems to prove abso- lutely that sexual selection has been exclusively confined to the female in these cases.
Having now treated of those birds which rear their young in open nests we pass on to the second great group, in which the nests are concealed, first on our list being
Birds in which both sexes are brightly coloured and which rear their young in holes or covered nests.—QOne of the most striking instances in our, for the most part, dull-plumaged northern birds is that of the Kingfisher (Alcedo ispida). The male and female are exactly alike in colour, and both are adorned with the same refulgent dress. But how does Nature shield the sitting bird during the nesting-period ? Why has
XIV INTRODUCTION.
she allowed such brilliant tints to be developed in the female? By sending the Kingfisher to a hole in a bank to lay her eggs and rear her young in darkness, Nature provides most admirably a means of safety for this bird, one of the brightest of her gems. The gaily dressed Woodpeckers ( Picide) have the sexes nearly alike, and the females nest shielded from view in holes of trees. The Tits (Parine) are another mstance. Both sexes in this group of birds are alike, and generally gaily attired; they lay their eggs and rear their young in holes of trees, stumps, and walls, where the beautiful but conspicuous plumage of the female does not affect the safety of her brood. In the delicate and somewhat showy Goldcrests (Regulus) the sexes are but slightly different in colour, and the female hides her showy crest in a well-concealed nest. The homely Starling (Sturnus vulgaris) is another instance where the sexes are similarly adorned with bright and showy tints, and, as is well known, it nests in holes well concealed from view. The showy Swallows and Martins also have the sexes alike, and build covered nests in which the brightly adorned females are protected. The gaudy Rollers and brilliant Bee-eaters (Meropide) have both sexes similarly bright and conspicuous, and they nest in holes. The showy Hoopoe (Upupa) and charming Wall-Creeper (Tichodroma) and Nuthatch (Sitta) have the sexes almost alike in colour, and rear their young in holes. The Common Sheldrake is another instance, from a widely different group of birds *.
It has been urged by Mr. Allen (in his article already mentioned) that many domed nests, in which the showy parent bird is concealed from view whilst incubating, are in reality not so safe as many open, but better con- cealed, nests. But this I think cannot be regarded as an objection. Among North-American birds that build purse-shaped or pensile nests may be cited the American Orioles (Icteridz), which construct a nest, Mr. Allen says, “most illy adapted for protection from the most dangerous foes of the species, the predatory Crows, Jays, and Cuckoos, being often a conspicuous object, with, so far as the United States species are concerned, no com- pensating feature of security.” But I venture to assert that these pendent purse-shaped structures, which are built by so many birds in the tropics, are very secure from such enemies, and even more so from snakes, weasels, monkeys, wild cats, and other animals. ‘They are often hung at the ex- tremity of long slender branches, in many cases over water, or the nest itself is suspended by a long neatly-woven cord, or, in some cases, a narrow
* It is worthy of remark that the brilliantly dressed males of so many of the Ducks assume a dull inconspicuous garb during the period when the young are being reared. These birds have probably acquired this peculiarity through the fact of their young being yeared in the open. Showily dressed polygamous males desert the female during this anxious period; others, which are not polygamous, in the majority of cases, rear their young in covered nests.
/INTRODUCTION. XV
tube. In Australia there is a very conspicuous black-and-white Pigeon (Carpophaga luctuosa) which always, it is said, prefers to build its slight nest on a branch over water. How is it possible for even winged enemies to take such a citadel by storm, or harm the parent safely swinging in her wonderful cradle? ‘This is undoubtedly the true reason that these nests are hung so conspicuously ; the eggs, the young, and the brooding (often brightly coloured) parent are all equally safe in such a structure, where concealment could serve no special end in shielding them from their natural enemies. It seems also a most interesting fact that these domed pensile nests are not always so conspicuous as might be imagined. As an example, I will take the by no means brilliantly arrayed little Sericornis citreogularis of Australia, whose nest is built in the dense and humid forests, where the trees are covered with moss, often accumulated in large masses at the extremities of the drooping branches. In these masses of moss, or suspended to them, the little bird places its nest with so much skill that it is impossible to say which are really nests, and which are mere festoons of moss, until each is minutely examined. Our next group consists of
Birds in which both sexes are dull in colour, and which build covered nests from motives of safety other than concealment.—|[ do not think that the fact of dull-coloured females sitting in covered nests can be taken as a serious objection to the law of bright-coloured females sitting in covered nests; for, as Darwin remarks (‘ Descent of Man, ii. p. 168), other advantages may be gained irrespective of concealment, such as shelter, greater warmth, or in hot countries protection from the sun, or sudden changes of temperature, or, in the case of many domed pensile nests built on slender branches, protection from certain enemies, as is the case with the Indian Ploceus baya, which makes the entrance to its bottle- shaped pendulous nest inverted, so as to baffle the approaches of tree- snakes and other enemies. Another explanation may be that these plain- coloured birds of both sexes are the descendants of some showy ancestor that built in a covered nest ; and this peculiarity has been transmitted to an entire genus, and retained, even in cases where the plumage of the bird has assumed a more sombre tint, through the laws of Inheritance. It is easy to believe that if no direct and special cause for a change arises, the nesting-economy will remain unchanged even if the plumage of the bird or of any of its descendants changes to less showy tints.
The Swift (Cypselus apus) and the Sand-Martin (Hirundo riparia) are both dull-coloured birds, the sexes are alike, and they build nests concealed in holes. But in these cases the colour of the plumage does not influence the conditions of nidification. The Swift makes its rude nest in a hole, it has, so far as we can determine, no means of protecting itself or its eggs from enemies, and consequently retires to such a site where it can rear its
XV1 INTRODUCTION.
young in comparative safety. Soin like manner the sombre Sand-Martin, for a similar reason, seeks the sand-banks. Sparrows (Passer domesticus) do not nest in holes because the plumage of the female demands concealment during the nesting-season, but from other motives, perhaps the result of a deeply rooted habit acquired during different conditions of life or inherited from a common ancestor of far more brilliant tints requiring concealment during the nesting-season. Again, we have the case of the Wren (Tro- glodytes parvulus), which builds a domed nest, and is yet one of the most soberly arrayed of our native birds. But this is undoubtedly from other motives of safety than concealment ; for from the peculiar structure of her nest few enemies indeed are able to storm her little citadel. Weak and defenceless as this little creature is, she attains by subtlety what she would fail to procure by prowess. The Dipper (Cinclus aquaticus) builds a domed nest, possibly for the purpose of shielding her eggs and young from the spray which so often surrounds them in her rock-bound watery haunts, as is also the case with a little dull-coloured Australian bird (Origma rubricata) which also frequents rocky streams and gullies. The Willow-Warblers (Phylloscopus) build domed or partially domed nests, perhaps because a remote ancestor built a domed nest, but more probably to shield their tender offspring from the moisture which surrounds their usual nesting-places amongst herbage or tall vegetation. The Willow- Warblers are an Arctic group of birds breeding in a climate subject to sudden changes of temperature; and this, I think, may explain their domed nests. As another instance we have the Owls (Strigidz), which, as a rule, rear their young in holes in buildings, rocks, or trees, from no motive of safety, but simply because they dislike the light of day, and naturally breed in situations which are their daily haunts. Our next group consists of
Birds in which the female is duller in colour than the male, and which nidificate in covered nests.—This group is one of the most in- teresting, and furnishes convincing proofs of the truth of the theory of sexual selection. We will take as our first example the gay little Redstart (Ruticilla phenicurus). The female of this bird is dull indeed in com- parison with the male, yet the young are reared in all cases in a concealed nest in a wall, tree, or the crevice of a rock; but I can assert from personal observation that the bright-plumaged male assists im no small degree in the duties of incubation. The Pied Flycatcher (Muscicapa atri- capilla) is a similar instance. Others may be found in the Rock-Thrushes (Monticola), the Chats (Saxicola), and the Robin Chats (Thamnobia), in most of the species of which genera the female is far less brilliant than the male; nevertheless she sits in a covered nest, although we cannot. see any valid reason why she should require concealment during the period of incubation; in all cases her colours are dull and well adapted for
INTRODUCTION. xvil / safety in an open nest. One of the most striking instances is to be found in the birds forming the genus Malurus. The males are often of the most gorgeous tints, which are assumed exclusively in the nuptial season ; and in many cases, at least, it is known that they do not assist in incubation. There are several possible explanations of these interesting facts. The domed nests may be for the purpose of shielding the sitting bird and its charge from cold, or rain, or from some special enemies. It must also be borne in mind that throughout this group the eggs are conspicuous, and this may to some extent influence the mode of nidification. If we grant that these domed nests are built for other purposes than the concealment of the sitting female, it is easy to explain the great difference of colour between the sexes. The more brilliant colours of the males have been obtained by sexual selection ; for in genera nearly allied to Malurus, such as Séipiturus, Dasyornis, Spheneacus, the sexes are alike and dull in colour, but the nests are always domed and the eggs more or less con- spicuous—a convincing proof, I think, that the nests are not so built to conceal any showy colours in the parent birds. As previously stated, in many cases the showy male bird of many of the species belonging to this group assists in incubation, the domed nest allowing him to do so with safety. It is necessary now briefly to notice those Birds which do not hatch their own eggs.—The birds that come into this division may be divided into two groups: of one our Common Cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) is a good example, and the other contains the Megapodes (Megapodidz) or Mound-birds of the Australian Region. The former group will be more fully discussed in the article on the Cuckoo ; and of the latter so little is known that to Gould’s and Hume’s interesting descriptions little more can be added. It is a wonderful instinct for a bird to bury its eggs in the sand or amongst decaying vegetable matter, and leave them to be hatched by the heat of the sun or the warmth generated by putrefaction. The young, when hatched, are said to break out of their prison and to be able to take care of themselves almost directly afterwards. May not this singular habit, which so closely resembles the mode of propagation of the Turtles and Snakes, be an unchanged inheritance from some semi-reptilian ancestor?* Let us now glance briefly at Birds’ Nests.—These structures have long been regarded as one of the most convincing proofs of an instinctive power, a power which is popularly supposed to be almost supernatural, of spontaneous origin, and nearly infallible. Such a belief, as Mr. Wallace very justly remarks, one would naturally expect to find supported by incontestable facts ; but little or nothing can be brought forward in its favour, and the evidence in support
* Lizards’ eggs have been taken from these mounds by Davison (‘ Stray Feathers,’ ii. p- 278).
Xvili INTRODUCTION.
of blind Instinct* being solely employed in the fabrication of birds’ nests is not supported by one particle of proof. I do not for one moment deny the existence of true instinct in some cases; but so far as birds’ nests are concerned, no powers are revealed in their fabrication beyond those which we ourselves possess in a higher or lower degree. A young Duck taking to the water or a nestling Plover crouching to the earth and remaining motionless are good examples of true instinct, or action performed without instruction, experience, or previously acquired knowledge. In the same manner a bird’s impulse to build a nest is instinctive; but the means it adopts to carry out such an impulse are controlled by similar mental faculties to those possessed by man. Mr. Wallace’s theory that birds do not make their nests instinctively, but by imitating the nests in which they were reared—that if they never saw or were not brought up in a nest peculiar to their species they would be unable to construct one for them- selves similar in position, form, and materials—is probably the true solution of this interesting problem.
The question arises, How do birds build their nest, and especially their first nest? is it by blind Instinct or by other mental faculties? To credit the bird with such instinct, which because it seems so self-evident is taken to be matter of fact, is to admit that it possesses intellectual powers infinitely superior to those of man; whilst the evidence that can be gathered on the subject all goes to show that its intellectual powers are of precisely the same kind as man’s, but some of them, of course, are infinitely inferior in degree, whilst others are unquestionably superior. Reason in birds can only be regarded as rudimentary, though there is undoubted evidence of its existence. The faculties a bird brings into play in nest-building are probably these: the one that plays the greatest part is imitation, and the next important faculty of the mind is memory, both of which are distinct from what is popularly cailed reason, which together with hereditary habit play the minor parts. All these powers are found in man, but, with the exception of reason, in a much less pronounced degree, especially in civilized man, in whom it has to a large extent replaced the lower faculties ; for the
[(* Iam not able to understand what Mr. Dixon means by Instinct, and therefore do not agree with his remarks on this faculty in various parts of the chapter. I regard the word Instinct as the popular term for the mysterious impulses which scientific men call Hereditary Habit; and I think that it plays a great part, an overwhelmingly great part, not only in Bird-nest building, but in every other action of every animal, man included. Whether the explanation of Hereditary Habit be that it is transmitted unconscious memory (see Butler’s ‘Life and Habit,’ p. 198) is another question, All one can say is, that this isa plausible hypothesis which, in the entire absence of any other, may provisionally be accepted. If Hereditary Habit have the lion’s share in the production of a bird’s nest, we must also allow that Memory, Imitation, and a rudimentary form of Reason also play their subordinate parts.—H. 8.]
INTRODUCTION. xix
more reason is developed the less are the other powers employed ; conse- quently, so far as man is concerned, they have lost much of their force through disuse. To credit birds with such a marvellous power as blind and infallible instinct in building their nests would be to place them far beyond man himself in intelligence, and allot to them a faculty which is super- human. The evidence that we are able to collect all tends to disprove such a mysterious power. Birds brought up in confinement do not make a nest typical of their species, and in most cases content themselves with forming the merest rudiments of a nest, merely heaping a lot of material together on which they lay their eggs ; and in some cases they do not make even this slight provision. This may be Instinct (or, more properly speaking, Hereditary Habit)—the blind impulse to make a nest ; but with- out tuition, or some standard to work by, it is a failure. The same remarks apply to man ; for with all his boasted reason he is equally as incapable of building a habitation peculiar to his race, if he has not seen one or been initiated in the secrets of its construction. Savage man neither alters nor improves any more than the birds; and each of his great races has a peculiar style of architecture. The Arab and the American Indian dwell in tents, the negro builds a hut, and the bushman lives in caves, whilst the Malay erects his house on posts. Transfer an infant of any one of these races of men, say to civilized Europe, and is it conceivable that when grown up to manhood he would set to work to build a tent, a hut, or a house on posts, according to the particular race to which he belongs, instinctively, and with no instruction? If man is so helpless in such a case, why should not the bird be the same ? Why should a creature infinitely below man in so many of its intellectual attributes be so far in advance of him in this particular respect? ‘The same remarks equally apply to a bird’s song and to the language of mankind—each have to be learnt. A bird’s intellectual powers advance towards maturity much more quickly than in the human species. A young bird three or four days old is capable of considerable powers of memory and observation, and during the time that elapses in which it is in the nest it has ample opportunity of gaining an insight into the architecture peculiar to its species. It sees the position of the uest, it notes the materials, and when it requires one for itself, is it so very extraordinary that, profiting by such experience, it builds one on the same plan? Again, birds often return to the place of their birth the following season, and possibly see the old home many times ere they want one for themselves. This, aided by the strong hereditary impulse to build a nest similar to the one in which they were born, inherited from their parents, aids them in their task. Further, we know that some birds do not breed for several seasons after they are hatched, and consequently see the older birds at work and profit by the experience. The nests they build may, and do often, vary from the original type in many slight particulars ; and
XX INTRODUCTION.
it is by these slight variations, which, when beneficial, are preserved by natural selection, that birds adapt themselves to any changed conditions of life.
With birds, as with man, “ when once a particular mode of building has been adopted and has been confirmed by habit and by hereditary custom it will be long retained, even when its utility has been lost through changed conditions ” (Wallace). Although many habits have long since ceased to be of any service, they are retained. Witness the fact of the hole-building Ducks covering their eggs like their congeners nesting in the open; the Jackdaws often elaborate a nest in a position where one even of the slightest description is of small necessity ; and our domestic Swan adds to its nest (undoubtedly a habit originally acquired for its protection from floods) when that nest is far removed from the waters. Neither birds nor men can change old habits suddenly. Witness how we still retain the side-straps and the arms in our first-class railway carriages (a custom handed down from the old coaching days), or the buttons on the backs of our coats (which were formerly used to fasten up the long tails), and many other cases which are now quite as useless as the instances noticed among birds. Another instance, the Apteryx of New Zealand (Apteryx australis) when it sleeps goes through the formality of placing as much of its head as possible under its rudimentary wings*. With regard to birds, however, these superfluous actions are in no way injurious to the species performing them—were they so, natural selection would assert its influence and would eliminate those individuals who did not conform to their changed conditions of life.
It is thought a remarkable fact by some naturalists that species of very wide range should build typical nests throughout their distribution. But surely there is nothing extraordinary in this if the area of distribution is continuous! Cetti’s Warbler (Cettia cetti) is a good instance. This bird breeds from Spain and Algeria to Turkestan, and examples of its nest almost from these two extremes do not differ in the least in their con- struction ; but I do not see any thing remarkable in this, even though this bird is not migratory, for it breeds “ along the whole line,” and there is nothing to prevent one style of architecture being common to the speciest. The Woodchat Shrike (Lanius rufus) is another good instance.
One of the great points brought forward in favour of instinct is the uniformity of the nests of the birds of each species, even though they be
* Trans. New Zealand Institute, ii. p. 75 (1869).
+ It would be very interesting to know if those non-migratory species that are separated by discontinuous areas of geographical distribution build typical nests throughout. This is a subject of which we possess no information, and is well worthy the attention of those observers suitably situated for studying this interesting question,
INTRODUCTION. a
widely spread, in localities where they are subjected to various conditions. If this was strictly true, I think it would go far to prove the existence of instinct ; but it is not; for birds, even within the memory of living men, have been known to change and improve their nests under the influence of altered conditions. If a bird built by instinct, it is fair to assume that that instinct is unchangeable, and only allows the bird to build on a certain plan. Instinct practically remains stationary ; reason, however, advances. What proof have we of this? Swallows are a most interesting instance, they having partially ceased to build on rocks or in caves, choosing houses and sheds instead. Starlings and many other birds will readily take advantage of a box placed on the house-side for them, and abandon their hole in the trees for the new quarters. The House-Sparrow is another instance of a recently changed mode of nest-building ; so is the Waterhen, which often builds in trees in districts liable to sudden floods. Another instance: the Penguins on the Tristan d’Acunha group of islands have changed their mode of nesting from an open to a covered site, in conse- quence of the incessant persecution of the recently introduced wild pigs with which these islands now abound*. Many other instances might be cited all tending to prove that birds take advantage of any favourable circumstances to alter and improve their nests—a fact which can only be accounted for by the direct influence of their reasoning faculties. What may be regarded as direct evidence of a reasoning power employed by birds in making their nests may be seen in the wonderful way that many species assimilate their nests so closely to surrounding objects as to render their discovery very difficult, and the admirable plan on which some nests, especially of tropical species, are constructed. A good example is to be seen in the nest of the Common Tailor-bird of India (Orthotomus longi- cauda). This bird selects a broad leaf and draws the edges together with fibres, lining the cone, thus formed, with fine grass and vegetable down, and the ends of the fibres with which it is sewn are knotted as a tailor knots his thread !
I do not think, however, that Mr. Wallace is correct in all his details respecting the manner in which nests are built. I think we should be very careful in imputing the various apparent imperfections (and the per- fection, too) in the architectural qualities of birds’ nests to the appliances or tools with which they are constructed. To far more important causes I believe the many differences in these structures may be safely attributed ; and instead, therefore, of viewing the Swift’s rude nest, or the Ring-Dove’s wicker cradle as the inevitable results of imperfect natural appliances, they should be viewed as structures made perfect for the purpose they serve, and completely in harmony with the requirements of their builders. Instead of viewing the nests of the Chaffinch and the Wren as mere structures the
* Notes by a Naturalist on the ‘Challenger,’ p. 125,
XXll INTRODUCTION.
paragon of perfection and architectural skill, the results of perfect natural tools, they should be regarded as nests, the only object their beauty and perfection serves beinga useful and protective one.
A bird’s beak and its legs and feet are the tools with which its nest is made; yet neither on the form, the length, or any other peculiarity of these parts does the comparative beauty and perfection of the nest depend. The Wren has a finely pointed bill and long legs: with these tools she builds a well-made nest which seems to owe its perfect form and well-wove walls to the little creature’s natural nest-building tools. But the Chaffinch, with her comparatively clumsy bill and short legs, also makes a nest equally well woven, and even rivalling in its external appearance the Wren’s abode. The Tits, with their short bills and clumsy legs, build nests in holes in trees and walls—structures so poorly made that it is impossible to remove them entire. But the Long-tailed Tit (Acredula caudata and its allies), we know, with similar tools builds a nest in the branches the para- gon of beauty and well-wove perfection! The Dipper is another instance. The Swift, with its weak bill and short legs, seems unable to make an elaborate nest; but we know it seeks a hole for its purpose from other motives than its seeming inability to make one, and, as is the case with nearly all hole-building birds, irrespective of their natural tools, it is poorly made. ‘The Swallows and the Martins possess similar tools to those of the Swift, yet they build weli-made structures, either fastened to the eaves of buildings or on the beams and ledges in sheds and chimneys. The deli- cate Warblers (as, for instance, the Blackcap, the Whitethroat, and the Garden-Warbler), all with appliances similar to those of the Wren, make slight net-like nests; whilst the Finches (as, for instance, the Goldfinch, the Bullfinch, the Redpole, and the Chaffinch), with clumsy beaks and some- what short legs, weave nests well made and beautifully adapted to the purposes they serve.
The Jay and most birds of the Crow tribe, particularly the Magpie (whose well-made and intricately woven nest is a masterpiece of nest-build- ing art), have powerful and somewhat clumsy bills and feet; yet we know their nests can compare favourably with those of any other class of birds. Many of the clumsy-billed Gulls with webbed feet make well-made nests ; as also do certain Raptores, Herons, the Coot, the Moorhen, the Grebes, the Ducks, and the Swans—nests that exhibit the same principles as those of the smaller birds, but of course carried out on a much larger scale. Again, what difference is there between the nest-building tools of the Sparrow-Hawk and the Kestrel? None whatever; yet the one builds a fairly made nest, and the other never makes a nest at all, and rears its young either in the deserted nests of other birds or on the ledges of the beetling cliffs, on no other resting-place than the bare rocks or the refuse of its food. The Woodpeckers, the Kingfisher, the Starling, and sometimes the
INTRODUCTION. Xxill
Jackdaw, well provided with the requisite appliances for building an elabo- rate nest, rear their young in structures poorly fabricated in the holes of trees, rocks, banks, or buildings, or do not make a nest at all. From the above-mentioned facts I think that we are perfectly justified in drawing the inference that birds are in no way influenced by the appliances they possess in building their nests. We have seen that birds are capable, quite irrespective of the form of their bills and feet, of making elaborate nests of matchless beauty, or poorly fabricated and very plain in appearance, respectively, and according to circumstances ; and we may therefore ‘rest assured that the nest-building capabilities of birds are not in any way subordinate to their natural appliances or tools for making their nests, but are regulated by, and subordinate to, the various conditions under which their young are produced, and especially by the colour of the eggs. Why does each species build a different kind of nest? Iam at present quite unable to say what influences birds in the choice of their materials. Mr. Wallace says that birds select those materials which are nearest to hand and easiest to obtain. He may be right; but when we find very differently constructed nests in the same localities, almost side by side, this explanation does not seem reasonable or sufficient. ‘The above re- marks on the nests of birds naturally draw our attention to
Birds’ eggs studied in relation to their colour.—In these objects the chief peculiarity which claims our notice is their beautiful ground- colours and varied markings. Why, we naturally ask, do these eggs exhibit such diversity of colour? Why are some eggs white, whilst others are painted in tints rich and beautiful? or why are some spotless and others thickly marked? Some persons may urge that these colours are deve- loped for no object beyond that of adding to the beauty and harmony of Nature’s works, as they similarly urge the colours of the plumage of the birds themselves ; but let us see what an important part the colouring- matter of birds’ eggs plays in the economy of the birds—let us see how their complex and ever varying colours conform to the subtle influence of Law. ‘The colouring-matter of birds’ eggs is influenced by the bird’s mode of nidification, and is partly subordinated to the colours of the parents’ plumage. For convenience of treatment it is advisable to divide birds’ eggs into two great classes, quite irrespective of the affinities of the birds themselves, but solely in accordance with the fact of their being coloured or uncoloured, spotted or unspotted. Each of these great groups may be further subdivided into two subgroups which will include the exceptional cases to each. As regards white eggs, our first division will be
White eggs laid in covered nests.—I think we must start with the very probable supposition that the eggs of the earliest forms of bird-life were white. Colour is a development for protective purposes, and to that cause alone must be ascribed all the wonderful and beautiful diversity of
XXIV INTRODUCTION.
tints with which so many birds’ eggs are now adorned. In most birds where the eggs are hid from sight, either in domed nests or in nests in holes, we never find their eggs exhibiting much colouring-matter—it is not required, therefore it is not developed. Eggs brought to maturity in such places are mostly pure white or pale blue, and only in the minority of cases more or less faintly spotted. As instances coming into this particular group we have the eggs of the Woodpeckers, the Kingfishers, the Rollers, Bee-eaters, Tits, Willow-Warblers, Wrens, nearly all the Owls, and the Martins, all of which are pure white or, in some few cases, sparsely spotted, and are laid in covered nests. ‘This law is almost universal, and, curiously enough, white eggs are correlated to a great extent with the brilliant plumage of the bird; for we have already seen how so many of. these showy birds breed in covered nests. Indeed it may almost be laid down as an axiom in oology that brilliant birds do not lay handsome eggs, and most of the finest marked eggs are laid by species of dull and sombre plumage. Every rule, however, has its exceptions; and we now have to notice
White eggs laid in open nests.—If these examples are sufficiently numerous to merit the importance of a separate group, the existence of any laws of colour might be doubted by the casual observer. These instances are both striking and numerous; but when we come to study and investigate them, we find that they only tend to prove the-existence of such laws in a very marked degree. The Ducks all lay spotless eggs, light in colour, greenish white, cream-colour, and pure white, and as they lay in the nest are very conspicuous and readily seen at long distances. The Pheasant and the Partridge also lay eggs of colours not much aiding in their concealment. The Grebes may also be cited as instances. But all these birds possess the singular habit of covering their eggs with materials similar in colour to surrounding objects when they leave their nests. Take, as an instance, the Little Grebe. The nest of this bird is rarely indeed placed far from the water, to which the sitting bird instantly retires on the approach of danger. The eggs of this bird are very conspicuous ; but the moment danger threatens she adroitly covers them over with the materials around ere she glides hurriedly away. So perfect is this decep- tion that the nest is often passed by as a mere mass of reeds and rubbish, yet under it les the treasure she has so cleverly concealed. This little bird is ever on the alert for enemies; her mate also gives the signal of alarm, and so quickly does she accomplish her purpose that rarely indeed are her eggs seen exposed, except when the full complement is not laid. It has been urged, and several accomplished naturalists are still of the opinion, that birds do not cover their eggs for concealment, but for warmth. The Pheasant covers her eggs when she leaves them; but the Grouse is never known to do so. Now the former bird’s eggs are certainly
INTRODUCTION. XXV
conspicuous in an open nest, and those of the latter are well adapted by their colour to harmonize with surrounding tints. If warmth is required in the one case, certainly it should be in the other also. Again, I have known the Wild Duck cover her eggs so completely as almost to defy detection, and that, too, long before she had commenced to sit, and when no warmth was required. I think, therefore, that there can be little doubt that it is solely from motives of concealment that these conspicuous eggs are covered. Stevenson, in his ‘ Birds of Norfolk’ (11. p. 417), also confirms this opinion, and says that (in the case of the Moorhen) the pre- caution of covering the eggs is more particularly adopted when the nest is in an exposed situation.
“But we find many conspicuous eggs laid in bare open places that are not concealed in such a cunning manner. We can take as an instance the Short-eared Owl, who lays her white eggs on the open fens and marshes, or many of the Goatsuckers, who deposit their white eggs in flimsy open nests, or certain Ground-Pigeons (Geophaps) of Australia, who lay their buffish-white eggs on the bare ground. How are such eggs protected ? In this manner :—The plumage of all these birds is remarkably protective and assimilates very closely with the surroundings; moreover, they possess the habit of sitting very closely, conscious that they resemble the ground or branches and cannot readily be seen; and so they brood over their conspicuous eggs, shielding them by their sober plumage until almost trodden upon, ere they rise from them. We might also notice another rather puzzling instance belonging to this group, and that is to be found amongst the Pigeons. The nests of nearly all these birds are remarkably similar—platforms of twigs built in trees, rocks, or on the ground ; and the eggs are in all cases, so far as is known, white, or nearly so, and spotless. Pigeons’ nests are very slight and inconspicuous, and, as a rule, built in the dense cover ; moreover, the birds themselves are exces- sively wary. Again the very fact that these birds are so abundant and so widely spread over the world, notwithstanding their open nests and white eggs, is, in itself, strong evidence that these birds and their eggs are not much exposed to enemies or are well able to elude them, and also shows us how cautious we should be in looking upon such facts as serious objec- tions opposed to laws of nidification and colour. As an instance of how complex this subject is, we might take the great family of the Goatsuckers. Some of these birds (Aigotheles, or Owlet Nightjars of Australia) lay white eggs in holes of trees; others, as the Frog-mouths (Podargide), build a Pigeon-like nest on a branch and lay white eggs, depending for safety on the protective colours of their own plumage ; whilst the true Goatsuckers, of which our Common Nightjar may be taken as an example, lay eggs on the bare ground of protective tints, as well as depending on the sober colours of their plumage for safety. It remains now but to notice in this group
VOL. II. c
XXV1 INTRODUCTION.
~such birds as the Herons, the Cormorants, Pelicans, and Storks, all of which lay conspicuous eggs in an open nest. It is quite evident in these cases that the birds by their own prowess alone shield their eggs from danger; besides, most of these birds are gregarious, and are well able to beat off any enemy that is likely to approach, if not singly, by uniting for the purpose, so that it is of no special advantage for them to conceal their eggs. We must also remember that these birds may have descended from a hole-building ancestor—most probably from an ancestor that laid colourless eggs. The coloration of eggs is characteristic in many groups of birds; and in these instances the eggs of the various species conform to those colours peculiar to their special~group, although they depend upon other sources for the requisite amount of protection than those which a remote ancestor practised. We now come to our second great division, in which the eggs are beautifully adorned with various hues; and, as our first group, we will take
Spotted eggs laid in open nests,—As our first instances we notice two birds nesting on sandy shores, the Lesser Tern and the Ringed Plover. Both these birds lay eggs more or less sand-coloured, which circumstance effectually conceals them from view. A still more detailed account of the nesting of these two birds will serve to show even more closely the import- ance of this fact. The Ringed Plover’s eggs are far more minutely speckled than those of the Lesser Tern, and as a consequence we find them laid on the finest sand; but the Lesser Tern’s are more richly and elaborately marked, and they are only found amongst the coarser shingle, where their larger markings harmonize with surrounding tints most effectually. Take another instance. The Common Sandpiper’s eggs assimilate so closely with the tints around them as to make their discovery a matter of no small difficulty, as every oologist can testify who has searched for them. The Peewit’s eggs, dark in ground-colour and boldly marked, are in strict harmony with the sober tints of moor and fallow, and on this circumstance alone their concealment and safety depend. Another instance may be found in the eggs of the Dotterel, far up the hillsides, amongst the inces- sant mists, where their rich brown markings and stone-coloured ground- tints harmonize closely with the colours of their mountain resting-place. The Diver’s eggs furnish another example of protective colour; they are generally laid close to the water’s edge, amongst drift and shingle, where their dark tints and black spots conceal them by harmonizing closely with surrounding objects. The Snipes and the great army of Sandpipers furnish instances innumerable of protectively coloured eggs. In all the instances given the sitting bird invariably leaves the eggs uncovered when it quits them, and consequently their safety depends solely on the colours which adorn them. A passing word should here be given to the eggs of the Gulls. Some of these species depend for the safety of their eggs upon
INTRODUCTION. XXVil
the colours which adorn them ; but some species do not require such pro- tection, the birds being well able to guard them from any enemies by their own prowess. The law of imheritance explains this:—The Gulls have descended from a common ancestor—a form probably intermediate between a Gull and a Plover, which depended on the colour of its eggs for their safety ; and consequently we find a certain type of eggs peculiar to the whole group, of benefit to the majority of species, of little or no service to a few, but still retained by the law of inheritance.
Those birds building open nests amongst the foliage of trees and shrubs, as a rule, lay eggs more or less of a green colour. The Crows in the top- most branches, the Thrushes in the lower shrubs, and many of the Warblers in the dense undergrowth may be cited as instances. Again, the Bullfinch and the Greenfinch lay bluish-white eggs, spotted with red, in open nests ; but these birds build in the darkest thickets and hedgerows and amongst evergreens.
A word as to the marvellous variation and beautiful colours of the eggs of the Guillemot. The extraordinary amount of variation in the colour of these eggs appears to be a grave difficulty, and one which utterly refuses to conform to those laws that govern the tints with which so many birds’ eggs are adorned. It is one of those very few instances where Nature has seemingly run riot in her variations, in a similar manner to those which occur in domesticated animals; for once let the checks to variation be removed, and its ramifications are infinite and endless in a few generations. Why, we are apt to ask, do the Guillemot’s eggs vary so considerably ? Why are they allowed to present such diversity of colour whilst the eggs of most other birds are strictly confined to certain tints? We may attri- bute the vast variation in the colouring of their eggs to the comparatively easy conditions under which they are brought to maturity. The birds’ haunts are practically inaccessible ; they have few enemies of their eggs and young, and the variations which occur in their eggs are consequently of small moment. Each variety, according to the Guillemot’s present con- ditions of life, has no more favour than the other; but should the conditions of their existence change, should their eggs be exposed to some new danger, the variety best suited to those changed conditions would doubtless be most favoured—the others not so suitably coloured would, in the course of time, ultimately be weeded out by a rigorous selection, and the colours would most probably be confined to certain uniform protective tints. The colour of birds’ eggs is hereditary. A Guillemot that lays a green egg, always lays a green egg, and it will transmit. the faculty of laying a green egg to its offspring. This circumstance is not peculiar to the Guillemot, but is common to all birds; and the variation we see in every species is the produce of certain individuals and is transmitted to their young. Hence it is easy to imagine how thé Guillemot’s eggs would soon revert to a
XXVill INTRODUCTION.
uniform and protective tint were their conditions of life to demand it; birds laying eggs unadapted in colour to their changed conditions of life would have small chance of transmitting those injurious colours to pos- terity, would soon die out completely; and the birds that laid eggs most suitable to the changed conditions and in harmony with them would in- crease and multiply, and the colours on their eggs be preserved. This, I believe, is how all eggs have got their beautiful tints, and how they are preserved or changed as circumstances arise.
Again, the young birds of many species absolutely depend for safety on the colour of their down. The Lapwing is arrayed in tints that put us in mind of the tropics; the sexes are alike; yet they build an open nest on the bleak common, moor, or pasture, where sometimes not a shrub or heath-tuft affords a haven of safety. Both birds lack weapons of defence ; but note how the safety of their young is insured: their sombre plumage of brown effectually conceals them from view. Upon the least alarm the brightly-coloured parents leave their helpless young, who instantly crouch to the ground and remain motionless ; their colour so closely harmonizes with surrounding tints as to hide them effectually from the enemy that menaces them. The young of the Game Birds, all the Sandpipers, and many sea-birds might also be given as instances, all of which (where the parents’ plumage is conspicuous and dangerous to the welfare of their eges or young, and which nest in an open site) have young of protective tints. As our last group we notice
Spotted eggs laid in covered nests.—As we found the anomaly of white eggs in open nests, so we also find that of spotted and highly-coloured eges in covered nests. We will first notice a few instances amongst British birds. We take as our first example the Jackdaw, whose eggs are spotted and coloured in a remarkable manner, considering they are laid in a covered nest. The Chough is another instance, and the Magpie a third. I am inclined to believe that ‘these three birds have changed the form or position of their nest from an open to a covered one, and the eggs are consequently gradually losing their colours. The eggs of the birds just noticed are generally much paler than the eggs of the Crows laying in open nests, and they seem slowly reverting to a colourless type. When once any particular development ceases to be of any service, its tendency is gradually to die out; and this, I think, is the reason that so many birds nesting in covered sites lay eggs only slightly spotted, or, as in many cases, when compared with the eggs of the family. of birds to which they belong, show a marked decrease of coloration. The Robin’s eggs, as compared with those of its ally the Bluethroat (Hrithacus cerulecula), furnish another instance. The Robin’s nest is well concealed and often built in holes, and its eggs are often white or only faintly spotted; the Blue-
INTRODUCTION. | Xxix”
throat’s nest is open and more or less exposed, and its eggs are dark green and protective in colour.
One of the best examples coming into the present group that I know of is to be found in the Grass- Warbler (Cisticola cursitans). This bird builds a purse-shaped nest amongst the grass, in which the eggs are hidden from view; and these eggs exhibit several very distinct types—white or blue spotted with rufous, and sometimes unspotted blue or white. Another instance may be found in the Australian genus Chthonicola, i which the nest is domed and the eggs are red or chocolate in colour.
What do these facts teach us? I think that their explanation is to be found in the fact that these domed nests have only comparatively recently been adopted by these species, and the eggs have not yet lost their colour. These coloured eggs show a changed mode of nesting. Their colour remains unchanged, or alters very slightly; and we know many other contrivances are retained long after their direct use has passed away, because they are not in any way injurious to the welfare of the species, yet they have always a tendency to die out; in the case of eggs this, I think, is shown in such instances as Cisticola, in which we so often find a colourless or plain type. We may rest assured that these ‘colours have not been acquired since the nest has been covered; they are a previous development, most probably destined in time to pass completely away if the present conditions under which the eggs are brought to maturity remain unchanged for any length of time.
From a study of all these interesting facts we learn that birds’ eggs ex- hibit such great diversity of colour for other and far more important ends than that of mere beauty; and their varied tints must be viewed (with all other beauty of colour in nature) as an object by means of which great ends are attained. A few words should now be given to
Generic types of eggs, and what they teach.—The true relationship of birds is often demonstrated by a study of their eggs. The family like- ness of birds, which extends through an entire natural group, is stamped indelibly on their eggs. Thus the experienced oologist, guided by their pecu- liar characteristics, is able to separate at a glance the eggs of the Shrikes, the Crows, the Snipes, the Birds of Prey, or those of any other large natural group of birds. ‘This is almost as apparent in shape as in colour. Snipe’s and Plover’s eggs are extremely pyriform; Kingfisher’s and Roller’s are round ; Pigeon’s, Goatsucker’s, and Sand-Grouse’s are oval; Grebe’s are pointed at each end. We find these characters constant in each group respectively. Take, for instance, the great family of the Ducks (Anatide), numbering nearly two hundred species distributed throughout the world. All their eggs possess certain characteristics which enable us readily to identify them. The same remarks apply to the Sandpipers (Scolopacidz)
XXX INTRODUCTION.
and the Plovers (Charadriide), each of which great natural groups numbers upwards of a hundred species, which are as cosmopolitan as the Ducks ; and the eggs of both are so characteristic that a glance is sufficient to recognize them. Take, as another instance, the eggs of the great cosmopolitan family Laridz: those of the Gulls (Larinz) most nearly resemble those of the Sandpipers in colour, whilst those of the Terns (Sternine) show more affinity to the true Plovers ; and this may probably be accounted for by the nidification of each group resembling most closely that to which the eggs are allied in general appearance. The Game Birds are also another instance. So far as I know, the eggs of these birds never have any underlying mark- ings, all the colour is on the surface; and this is one great reason why the aberrant Hemipodes (Turnix) should be excluded from this group of birds, for their eggs possess both characters of markings, and therefore show the birds’ affinity to the Rails, the Plovers, or the Bustards*. Canon Tristram is probably right when he says that the style of architecture and coloration and form of the egg cast as much light on the true grouping of species and the arrangement of genera in the great subfamily of the Warblers (Sylviinze) as in any other class of birds. I think that it is even a better generic character than any the birds themselves are known to possess. This group of birds exhibits in a wonderful manner certain distinct types of eggs, a study of which alone will place the birds in almost the same position as that to which they have been assigned by the best systematists. Details cannot well be given here, but the remarks on this subject by Canon Tristram (‘ Ibis,’ 1867, p. 74) are worthy the perusal of all inter- ested in oology: it has been briefly noticed in the present work (vol. i. p. 373). The subfamily of the Thrushes (Turdine) is another remarkable instance, and might almost be split up into fairly natural genera by the coloration of the eggs alone.
It is also very remarkable how the eggs of some birds resemble those of species belonging to very distantly related groups, where the conditions of nidification are similar; and this I think is one of the strongest proofs of a universal law of colour governing these objects. The Sand-Martin and the Woodpecker, or the Dipper and the Weaver-bird are good examples in which a covered nesting-site is peculiar to each and the eggs are uniformly white. In cases where the eggs differ considerably from those typical to the group, we generally find that the mode of nidification adopted by the species is from some cause different and aberrant too.. Take, for imstance,, the eggs of the American Quail (Ortyx virginianus), which are white and laid in a domed or covered nest, whilst those of the allied Plumed Quail (Lophortyx gambeli) are normally spotted and blotched, and, it is needless to say, laid in an open nest.
* Conf. Hume, ‘ Nests and Eggs of Indian Birds,’ p. 554.
INTRODUCTION. XXxl
What do we infer from these interesting facts? What do they teach us ? I think they show beyond the possibility of doubt the more or less close relationship of one bird to another, and prove the community of origin of birds in each great natural group, in each family, and in many genera, Again, I feel convinced that community of origin and inheritance will account for, if it does not fully explain, much of the difficulty one meets with in a scientific study of oology.
Concluding Remarks.—We have thus seen that birds, aided by a rigorous natural selection, strive to the utmost of their ability, in many different ways, to insure the protection of their eggs and young from danger until they reach maturity—
“ Hach its well-chosen site selects where Nature To its best concealment aids and favours it.”
Enemies numerous and deadly continually surround them—the prying Magpies and Jays, the subtle snakes and lizards, the active field-mice, rats, aud weasels are all passionately fond of eggs and search incessantly for them. We have seen that all the wiles birds display during the period of nidification, all or nearly all the beauty in their nests, all or nearly all the beauty in the colouring of their eggs and in much of the old and young birds’ plumage (in the former through the subtle working of sexual selection) are subservient to the conditions of reproduction, and may safely be attributed to a one great Protective Cause.
The instances adduced in this paper in support of the laws of Inheritance and Bird-nidification have chiefly been selected from the birds of our own land. But were we to seek instances from other climes, where bird-life under favourable conditions exists on a much wider and more comprehen- sive basis, stil] more startling would our proofs become. As regards eggs, perhaps, but little more could be said; but as regards the plumage of birds and their nests—say in the Tropics—instances almost innumerable might be found showing how universal are those laws which govern the nidification of birds. Sufficient, however, I think has been said to show what an important part Colour plays in the nidification of birds, and that this part of their economy is governed most closely by law. If I have succeeded in showing, in this meagre paper, that Birds’ Eggs and Nests are not the unimportant objects they are so popularly believed to be, and that.a careful study of them, in conjunction with the birds themselves, helps to elucidate some of the grandest questions affecting organic life, my end has been amply attained. For no matter how unimportant an object or a series of facts may seem, we must not despise them and pass them by. Nature’s system is one mass of intricate complexity, becoming more evi- dent the more we study it ; and the only means of gaining an insight as to how that system works is by dealing with each phenomenon, not separately,
xxxii INTRODUCTION.
but as a relative part which assists in forming an almost perfect and har- monious whole. In the words of the illustrious Darwin :—“ When we no longer look at an organic being as a savage looks at a ship, as something wholly beyond his comprehension, when we regard every production of Nature as one which has had a long history, when we contemplate every complex structure and instinct as the summing-up of many contrivances, each useful to the possessor, in the same way as any great mechanical invention is the summing-up of the labour, the experience, the reason, and even the blunders of numerous workmen; when we thus view each organic being, how far more interesting (I speak from experience) does the study of natural history become ! ”
Oology, as a science, is almost virgin ground for research, and its import- ance in elucidating much that is strange in the economy of birds is great. It is when Oology becomes more generally and comparatively studied, and an interchange of observations by oologists in various parts of the world effected, that the importance of protective colouring, mimicry, bird archi- tecture, &c. will become manifest, the present insufficiency of data bearing on the subject being a very great obstacle to its scientific progress. Every little detail, however insignificant it may seem, must be recorded ere we can gain a complete knowledge of this interesting branch of research; and - the remote history of a species must not be neglected where it can be traced with reasonable certainty.
I hope to return to this fascinating subject at no distant date, treating it on a wider basis by including the nests and eggs of birds from all parts of the world. I shall be extremely obliged for any notes from any part of the world bearing on the subject of Birds’ Nests, Eggs, and Nidification ; for Iam convinced that it is only by collecting an immense variety of such facts that the subject can be successfully investigated.
XXXII
ADDENDUM.
Page 142. Since writing the article on the Rustic Bunting, in which I copied the descrip- tion of the supposed eggs of this species given by Dresser in his ‘ Birds of Europe,’ I |have seen three clutches of eggs, said to be of this species, also collected in the neighbourhood of Archangel. As they agree with each other and differ from eggs of any other North-Russian species, it seems probable that they may be genuine eggs of the Rustic Bunting, though this cannot be regarded as proved until properly authenticated eges have been taken. The ground-colour varies from greenish white to bluish white, and the over- lying spots are greenish brown and the underlying spots greyish brown. The spotting is very profuse and more or less confluent at the large end of the egg; but there are no streaks, the character of the ege being that of a Sparrow rather than that of a Bunting. In this respect they show an affinity with the eggs of Emberiza melanocephala and E. luteola, and, to some extent, with those of Z. nivalis, though the latter often have some small streaks. They vary in length from ‘86 to ‘76 inch, and in breadth from ‘6 to ‘56 inch. The egg figured on Plate 15 is probably that of EF. dwteola, and those described by Dresser are probably eggs of FE, pusilla. I intend to figure one of these eggs on Plate 68.
oh wt, a
= ere on =
7 A t 5 ‘ + A \ : — = 4 ? ah. - 7 i ‘ r <, 74 . - - : > as , i‘ 7 : = eat ‘ . a : a % s2 - 4 > A = = = Z ; s @ re <A ‘ 4 AM — . RK fd = hs = . - i 7 - : 4 “ 4 1 For ns vi hs ? ; 4 : im »* y ¢ > se i >| 4 , r . ik % = {sed 5S , = Ee 1: = .
! - : ‘ i ‘ : - . a1 : - os : : ;| = i ¥ = . i 5 - = i :
me EST ORY
OF
Bee boleh S Fe BARDS
Subfamily AMPELIN A, on WAX WINGS.
Tue Waxwings are a very small subfamily, consisting of birds having the wing of a Starling, the foot of a Shrike, and a bill intermediate between that of a Shrike and a Swallow. They are probably most nearly allied to the Shrikes and the Starlmgs: from the former they may at once be distinguished by the minuteness of their bastard primary, their short tarsus, and their nearly obsolete rictal bristles. Although they agree with the Starlings in having their bastard primary very small and their second primary long, combined with a short even tail and almost obsolete rictal bristles, ornithologists are perhaps justified in placing them in a distinct subfamily, in consequence of the shortness of their tarsus, their shorter, wider, and notched beak, and the presence of small bristles which cover the nostrils. The Waxwings only moult once in the year, in autumn. The young in first plumage differ from their parents in many respects, and are streaked on the underparts ; but this plumage is moulted during their first autumn.
The Ampeline were in all probability originally an arctic group of birds, of which only eight species are at present known to exist. One of these is cireumpolar, one is confined to Japan, whilst a third inhabits the temperate portions of the Nearctic Region. The remaining five species inhabit the Neotropical portion of North America; only one species is European.
MOL LL. B
2 BRITISH BIRDS.
Genus AMPELIS.
In the tenth edition of the ‘Systema Nature’ of Linneus, published in 1758, the Waxwings were included in the genus Lanius. In 1760 Brisson, in his ‘ Ornithologia,’ placed them in the genus Turdus; but in 1766, in the twelfth edition of his great work (1. p. 297), Linneeus associated them with half a dozen very distantly allied birds in a new genus, Ampelis. These strangers were subsequently removed to other genera by later writers, leaving the Common Waxwing as the type.
In the birds of the genus Ampelis the shafts of the secondaries are either prolonged into wax-like appendages, or each feather has a red terminal spot to the outside web; the tail-feathers are broadly tipped either with yellow or red; and the throat, lores, and the feathers behind the eyes are black. They have also a well-developed crest. This genus contains only three species, one of which is confined to North America, one to Japan and the adjoin- ing mainland, whilst the third is circumpolar ; the latter is the only species found in Europe, and is an irregular winter visitor to the British Islands.
In many of their habits the Waxwings resemble very closely the Rose- coloured Starling. They are very erratic in their migrations, and appear irregularly in certain districts often in considerable numbers. They chiefly frequent pine- and larch-woods; but when wandering far from their breeding-grounds in winter, they seem to have no preference for any particular haunt. They are comparatively tame birds, and resemble the Titmice somewhat in their actions. They possess scarcely any song. Their food consists of fruit, berries, and insects. They build open cup-shaped nests placed in the branches of trees, and made of twigs, moss, feathers, lichens, &c. Their eggs are from five to seven in number, varying from French white to sea-green in ground-colour, spotted, blotched, and speckled with deep brownish black and pale underlying markings of lilac.
WAXWING. 3
AMPELIS GARRULUS.
WAXWING. (Puatre 11.)
Turdus Bombycilla bohemica, Briss. Orn. ii. p. 333 (1760).
Ampelis garrulus, Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 297 (1766); et auctorum plurimorum— Bonaparte, Temminch, (Keyserling § Blasius), Degland, Salvadori, Baird, Ridg- way, Dresser, Newton, &e.
Bombyciphora polioccelia, Meyer, Vog. Liv- u. Esthi. p. 104 (1815).
Bombycivora garrula (Linn.), Temm. Man. d@ Orn. p. 77 (1815).
Bombycilla garrula (Linn.), Vieill. N. Dict. d’ Hist. Nat. Xvi. p. 523 (1817).
Parus bombycilla, Pall. Zoogr. Rosso-Asiat, i. p. 048 (1826),
This charming and interesting bird may be regarded as an irregular winter visitor to Great Britain, having been met with in almost every county, in some years in considerable numbers. It was first made known as a British bird by Lister in the ‘Philosophical Transactions’ (1685, no. 75, p. 1161, fig. 9), from specimens shot at York in January 1681. From this early date down to the present day the Waxwing has occurred almost yearly in some parts of Great Britain. Among the years when it appeared in extraordinary numbers may be cited the winters of 1830-31, 1834-35, 1849-50, and 1866-67. This latter will long be remembered by British ornithologists as one of the great Waxwing seasons. The whole of 1866 (the year of the eattle plague) was wet, the mild winter at each end being scarcely distinguishable from the cold Summer between. On New-Year’s day frost and heavy snow set in. Early in November great numbers of the Bohemian Waxwing made their appearance. The largest flocks were seen in Norfolk; but north of that county many birds were shot at Scarborough, Newcastle, Berwick, up to Aberdeen and Inverness, and to the south they were obtained as far as Dover and Rye.
It is of far more frequent occurrence in the eastern counties than in the midland and western; this is doubtless because the birds are so eagerly sought after and shot upon their arrival on our eastern coasts that comparatively few succeed in reaching the more distant parts of the king- dom. In Scotland the Waxwing is almost as well known as it is in England as an uncertain and irregular winter guest. It has not been obtained in the Outer Hebrides, but has occurred on Skye and the Orkney, Shetland, and Faroe Islands. In Ireland, as might be expected, it is of much less frequent occurrence, most probably for the reasons above cited.
The Waxwing is almost a circumpolar bird, breeding in the pine-regions of both hemispheres at or near the Arctic circle. It is common, though very local, in Lapland ; and most of the eggs of this bird in collections have
B2
I BRITISH BIRDS.
been obtained there. I have seen it in its breeding-season in the valleys of the Petchora and the Yenesay; and Middendorff met with it during winter on the shores of the Sea of Ochotsk. Mr. Dall states that its eggs have been obtained near Fort Yukon in Alaska; and it has been found during the breeding-season in the valley of the Anderson River, north of the Great Bear Lake. It possibly may not breed further east in America ; but very little is known of the arctic regions of either continent, and the Waxwing is so erratic in its habits, breeding in enormous numbers in a certain district for some seasons and then almost deserting it for several years, that it may easily have been overlooked.
The Waxwing is as erratic in its choice of winter-quarters. It is a very irregular migrant, wandering southwards on the approach of cold weather, and revisiting the north whenever a thaw of sufficient length occurs. Throughout Central Europe it isa tolerably regular winter visitor. It occurs accidentally on Heligoland, and occasionally strays as far west as France and as far south as Lombardy and Turkey, but has not yet been recorded from Spain or Greece. It winters in South Siberia, occasionally straying as far as Turkestan, Mongolia, North China, and the north island of Japan. In America its winter range extends as far south as Lakes Michigan and Erie ; but it appears to be only an accidental straggler further east, and it is doubtful if it has ever occurred west of the Rocky Mountains.
One of the nearest allies of the Waxwing is the Japanese Waxwing (A. phenicoptera), which breeds in Japan and wanders in winter to the valley of the Lower Amoor and North China, and occasionally to Formosa. This species may be easily distinguished from its arctic ally by having the yellow at the tip of the tail replaced by red, and by having no “ wax ” tips to the secondaries, the white tips on their outside webs being replaced by red. A still nearer ally is the American Waxwing or Cedar-bird, A. cedrorum, which is said to inhabit the whole of North America as far north as lat. 52°, extending southwards to Guatemala, Jamaica, and Cuba in winter. This bird is somewhat less than the northern species, and like it has the “wax” tips to the secondaries and the yellow tips to the tail, but is without the white on the wing. The Cedar-bird has been erroneously included in the British list, in several cases skins of this species having been substituted by dishonest bird-stuffers for specimens of the Waxwing shot in this country.
I was fortunate enough to meet with a small party of Waxwings as IT was walking down the Glossop Road to business into Sheffield on the morning of the 29th of December, 1866. My attention was arrested by three or four birds which flew across the road and alighted in a Jaburnum tree in Miss Ray’s garden. I imagined from their flight that. they must be Starlings; but fancying that they showed white marks on the
WAXWING. 5
wing, I had the curiosity to step across the road to get a nearer view of them. The tree on which they alighted was only a few yards from the road, and I watched them over the wall for some time. I recognized them at once by their crests. The yellow markings on the wings and tail were very conspicuous, and I fancied I could distinguish the red wax-like appendages. They were very active, putting themselves in all sorts of posi- tions, and did not seem at all disturbed by my scrutiny ; and when at las: they flew away, and I turned round to continue my walk, I found that quite a small crowd had collected behind me, one of whom (probably a Sheffield grinder, and consequently well up in pigeons, dogs, and other branches of sporting zoology) volunteered the information that they were French Starlings. I sent a short notice of the appearance of these illus- trious strangers in our town to one of the local papers ; and the followmg day more than one gentleman assured me that birds agreeing with my description had been seen in Broomhall Park, and on the 31st two speci- mens were shot there by the gardener of Mr. Willis Dixon; so that it is probable that the flock continued in the neighbourhood for some days. A few months afterwards I bought a pair of these birds and kept them in a cage for some time. They were most voracious eaters, and the cage required cleaning several times a day. They were very active and restless, and even when perched at rest seemed to be continually moving their heads. If alarmed they would stretch out their necks to almost double the usual length. They were remarkably silent birds; the only note I heard was a cir-ir-ir-ir-re, very similar to a well-known note of the Blue Tit. Occasionally this succession of notes was repeated so rapidly as to form a trill like the song of the Redpole. The Waxwing is almost omni- vorous. Mr. Gunn, of Norwich, through whose hands more than a hundred birds passed in the winter of 1866-67, found their food to consist of the berries of the guelder-rose, dog-rose, whitethorn, and privet ; those of the dog-rose, being too large for one mouthful, were picked to pieces. Collett, who dissected birds shot at their breeding-grounds in Finmark in July, found the stomachs filled almost exclusively with entire or dismem- bered bodies of a species of crane-fly allied to our ‘Tommy long-legs.”’ One of the males had some juniper-berries in his gullet. Other ornitholo- gists have found various berries and insects in the stomachs of these birds; and in confinement they feed greedily on bread and carrots.
The Waxwing is generally very fat in winter, and is highly esteemed as an article of food. Hundreds are sold in the frozen market of St. Peters- burg at three-halfpence each.
Although this bird has been well known to ornithologists for some centuries, its breeding-grounds were only discovered as recently as 1856. Before that date various legendary stories of its breeding in holes of trees and amongst rocks were recorded; and, incredible as it may seem, were
6 BRITISH BIRDS.
repeated as late as 1870 in what professed to be a scientific work on the History of British Birds. The merit of the discovery belongs to John Wolley. This indefatigable ornithologist spent five consecutive summers, and two out of the four intervening winters, in Lapland in searching for the eggs of this and other rare birds; but, owing to the erratic habits of this species, he did not succeed in his object until the fourth summer. Like the Rose-coloured Starling, the Waxwing continually changes its breed- ing-grounds. These two birds breed in enormous colonies in localities which they probably choose from year to year, in places where an abundant supply of food can be obtained. Wolley’s headquarters were at Muoniovara, a Swedish village on the river Muonio, opposite the Russian village of Muonioniska, about halfway between the Gulf of Bothnia and the southern extremity of the Porsanger fjord. During the first three summers, although he was very successful in obtaining eggs of many birds of which authenticated specimens were then unknown, it was not until the summer of 1856 (his fourth season) that the nests of the Waxwing were obtained by his faithful servant Ludwig Matthias Knoblock. Six nests were brought in to him, but he himself did not see one én situ. In 1857 he succeeded in finding a nest, which had been deserted a day or two before, and beneath which the broken eggs were lying on the ground ; but during that season eight nests were brought to him. The followiig summer this district was apparently chosen by the Waxwings as their headquarters ; and Wolley’s collectors obtained nearly a hundred and fifty nests containing nearly seven hundred eggs, most of which were sent to him in England, he having visited Iceland that year in search of the Great Auk. On his return from this expedition his health began to fail, and in November 1859 British Ornithology lost its most promising student at the early age of thirty-five.
The first discovery of the nest of the Waxwing was made in the valley of the Kemi in Russian Lapland. Ludwig made an expedition to the Kittila river early in June, having in some places to wade up to his middle in snow. Arrived at Sardio, where he had apparently commissioned the natives to search for him, he found, as would naturally be the case whilst the snow was in process of melting, every one at home “ deep in dirt and laziness.” He soon ascertained from them that a pair of Waxwings had been seen in the neighbourhood ; and accordingly he started off at once into the forest, and there he saw a bird which he took to be a Waxwing, but he was not quite sure, for in the sunshine the end of its tail looked white, instead of yellow as in the picture with which Wolley had provided him. On the following day it was cloudy, and Ludwig saw the yellow on the tail, and had no longer any doubt. He engaged the Russian boys by the day, telling them that they must search, even if it were for a week, till they had found the nest. They sought all that night and the next day till
WAXWING. 7
about noon, when a lad called out that he had found the nest ; and there it was, about nine feet high on the branch of a spruce. Ludwig succeeded in snaring the old bird, a beautiful cock, at the end of five days, and packed up the nest, eggs, and bird in a strong box until Wolley’s arrival. Wolley writes :—‘‘ You can fancy how eagerly I waited for Ludwig to produce the eggs. With a trembling hand he brought them out—but first the nest beautifully preserved ; it is made principally of black ‘tree-hair’ (lichen), with dried spruce-twigs outside, partially lined with a little sheep’s grass and one or two feathers—a large deep nest. The eggs—beautiful !— magnificent !!—just the character of the American bird. An indescribable glow of colour about them! ..... Almost every day (and it is now the sixth since that of my arrival here) Ludwig has told me the whole story of the Sidensvan’s nest, and I am never tired of hearing it :—how the season was very backward ; how in their expedition he and Piko Heiki were getting very much out of spirits at the little success they met with; how he saw the bird in the sunshine; how, when at last the nest was found, he could scarcely believe his eyes; how he went to it again and again, each time convinced when at the spot, but believing it all a dream as soon as he was at a distance; the rising and falling of the crest of the bird; its curious song or voice. All he is eager to tell over and over again ; and I have the fullest version, with all the ‘I said,’ ‘ Heiki said,’ ‘ Michel said,’ ‘ Ole said,” &c. Since Wolley’s great discovery many other nests of the Wax- wing have been obtained by various ornithologists. In 1857 Dr. Nylander obtained a nest with five eggs from the island of Ajos at the head of the Gulf of Bothnia, off the coast of Finland. In 1858 Dresser obtained a nest with unfledged young from the island of Sanden, twenty-seven miles from Uleaborg, a little to the south of the previous locality. In 1862 Wheelwright obtained a nest with two eggs near Quickiock ; in 1868 Nordvi procured its eggs in north-east Norway; and in 1872 Mr. Berlin discovered two nests containing eggs in the same district.
A nest of the Waxwing, which Mr. Nordvi procured for me from Muonioniska, is a large and very compact structure. The outside diameter is seven inches, and the inside four inches. It is about four inches high outside, and nearly two inches deep. The foundation is made of twigs of the spruce-fir and reindeer-moss. The nest itself is composed of feathers and black hair-lichen, interwoven together with very slender twigs and a little moss and inner bark, the feathers being most numerous in the lining. Five or six, and occasionally seven, is the number of eggs laid. Newton (in whose collection the greater part of the enormous series obtained by Wolley still remains) describes them as measuring from 1:11 to ‘82 in length by ‘73 to ‘64 inch in breadth. He writes :—“ The ground is most generally of a delicate sea-green, sometimes fading to French white, but very often of a more or less pale olive, and occasionally of a dull
8 BRITISH BIRDS.
purplish grey. On this are almost always bold blotches, spots, and specks of deep brownish black, though sometimes the edges are blurred. Beneath these stronger markings there is nearly always a series of blotches or streaks of greyish lilac, and among them well-defined spots or specks of yellowish brown are interspersed. In some eggs the darkest markings are quite wanting, in others the ground is of a deep olive-colour.”
The adult male Waxwing is an exquisitely beautiful bird. The upper parts are a delicate vinaceous brown, gradually shading into chestnut on the forehead, and into pale slate-grey or dove-colour on the rump and upper tail-coverts. A narrow frontal band, the lores, and the feathers behind the eyes are black. The quills and tail-feathers are dark brown, nearly black, varied with a broad yellow band across the tips of the tail- feathers, and a narrow band of the same colour on the outside webs of the primaries at the tip, and a white band across the tips of the primaries on the inside webs, and on the outside webs of the secondaries at the tips. The primary-coverts are tipped with white, and the shafts of the secondaries are prolonged and flattened into scarlet tips. A similar development of the shafts of the tail-feathers frequently occurs. The underparts are vinaceous brown on the breast and flanks, shading into greyish white on the centre of the belly and into chestnut on the cheeks. At the base of the lower mandible on each side is a white streak. The chin and upper throat are black, and the under tail-coverts chestnut. Bill nearly black, paler at the base; legs, feet, and claws black ; irides hazel.
The difference in plumage between the sexes of the Waxwing is still a disputed question amongst ornithologists. A great proportion of males have large wax-like appendages to the tips of the secondaries, broad bright yellow tips to the tail-feathers, and have the bright yellow tips of the out- side web of the primaries connected with a white tip at the end of the inside web, making the marking on the primaries V-shaped. Most of the females have the wax-like appendages smaller, the tips of the tail-feathers narrower and paler, and the tips of the outside webs of the primaries pale and entirely wanting at the end of the inside webs, thus causing the markings on the primaries to be I-shaped. Males of the year generally are indistinguishable from females, but frequently are slightly intermediate between the two sexes when adult in one or all of the points alluded to. The presence of wax on the tail-feathers and on the eighth secondary, which is without the white stripe on the outside web, is apparently a question of vigour or age, and not of sex. The richness of the chestnut of the under tail-coverts and of the black of the throat appears to be a question of age. The Waxwing is most brilliant in plumage immediately after the autumn moult, which takes place late in October. I have an example in my collection in full moult obtained at Krasnoyarsk on the 3rd of November ; examples from the same locality in May are already considerably faded.
WAXWING. 2
The alleged females in collections with V-shaped markings on the primaries are so rare that we may suppose them to be old and barren females which have assumed the male plumage, or it is possible that a mistake in the sexing or labelling may have occurred. Young in first plumage resemble females, but are paler in colour, and are without the black on the throat ; the underparts are streaked, and the wax-like appendages to the secondaries are few and small.
10 BRITISH BIRDS.
Subfamily STURNIN A&A, on STARLINGS.,
The minute bastard primary and the great length of the second primary, which is the longest in the wing, together with the absence of the nasal bristles and of scutellations at the back of the tarsus, are characters which diagnose the Starlings from the other subfamilies of the Passeride. The tarsus is moderately long and scutellated in front, and the bill is straight, slender, and unfurnished with rictal bristles. The Starlings moult once a year in autumn, the spring plumage being attained by casting the ends of the feathers. The young in first plumage differ considerably from their parents, being a nearly uniform brown more or less streaked on the underparts ; but this plumage is lost by the first autumn moult.
The Sturnine are an Old-World group of birds, found in every part of the eastern hemisphere, except in the arctic and antarctic regions and on the continent of Australia. Wallace includes 124 species in this group of birds. Four only are found in Europe, of which one is a resident in the British Islands and a second is a rare straggler to our shores.
Genus STURNUS.
Linneeus included the genus Sturnus in the 12th edition of his ‘ Systema Nature,’ published in 1766 (vol.i. p. 290). The Common Starling, because it is the Sfurnus sturnus of Brisson, has indisputable claims to be considered the type.
The most striking peculiarity in the Starlings is the metallic tint of their plumage—purple, green, and bronze. This character is sufficient, in conjunction with their size, to distinguish them from all other European birds. The rictal bristles are obsolete, and the nostrils are bare of feathers, but half-covered with a-soft horny operculum. The forehead is very depressed ; and the feathers on the head, throat, ant breast are Ego gated something like the hackles of a Cock.
The genus Sturnus contains about eight or nine species and aes confined to the central and southern portions of the Palearctic Region and the extreme north of the Oriental Region.
In their habits the Starlings are gregarious. They frequent pastures,
STURNUS. 11
where they are very fond of closely attending cattle while feeding, and almost every other kind of haunt, both mland and on the coast, notably near houses and ruins. Their food consists of insects, worms, grubs, fruit, berries, and various kinds of seeds. Their call-notes are harsh; but they have considerable powers of song, and in confinement readily learn to imitate different tunes and even words. Their flight is very strong and powerful, and on the ground they walk orrun. They build bulky slovenly nests of grass, straws, roots, feathers, and almost every kind of material to hand, placing them in holes of walls, rocks, trees, or buildings. Their eges are from four to six in number, greenish blue in ground-colour, without any markings.
12 BRITISH BIRDS.
STURNUS VULGARIS. STARLING. (Pirate 11.)
Sturnus sturnus, Briss. Orn. il. p. 489 (1760).
Sturnus vulgaris, Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 290 (1766); et auctorum plurimorum— Gmelin, Latham, Scopoli, Bonaparte, Salvadori, Degland § Gerbe, Newton, Dresser, &c.
Sturnus varius, Wolf, Taschenb. i. p. 208 (1810).
Turdus solitarus, Lath. apud Montagu, Orn. Dict. Suppl. (1818).
Sturnus solitarius (Lath.), apud Leach, Syst. Cat. Mamm. Sc. Brit. Mus, p.18 (1816).
Sturnus guttatus, Macgill. Brit. B. i. p. 595 (1837).
Sturnus europeeus, Linn., fide Blasius, Journ. Orn. 1863, Bericht, p. 60.
Sturnus faroensis, Feilden, Zoologist, 1872, p. 3257.
The Starling is one of the commonest and most widely distributed of our indigenous birds. It is of less frequent occurrence in the breeding- season in Wales and in Cornwall; but otherwise nests commonly in almost every county of England. In Scotland it has considerably increased in numbers within the last half-century. According to Mr. Gray, thirty years ago it was comparatively a scarce bird throughout the Scottish mainland, although in the Western Isles, Orkney, and Shetland it appears to have always been a common resident. At the present time, however, it is aresident bird near all the large Scotch towns, generally distributed over the cultivated districts, and breeds in almost every county. In Ireland the Starling is not so widely distributed, and is best known as a winter visitor, its breeding-places being somewhat local. On the Faroes it is a common and resident bird; and a specimen was sent from Greenland by Holbdéll to Copenhagen in 1851; but it does not appear to have ever been noticed in Iceland. The Starling has been introduced into New Zealand ; and being such a hardy and favourite cage-bird, its colonization in other parts of the world is probably only a question of time.
The Starling breeds throughout Europe north of lat. 44°, and is a resident in the Azores. In Scandinavia it is found as far north as lat. 69°, in Sweden and Finland up to lat. 65°, and in the Urals only up to lat. 57°, which also appears to be its northern limit in Asia, The European birds that are migratory winter in the south of France, the Spanish peninsula, Italy, Greece, North Africa, and Palestine. In Asia it. breeds in South Siberia, Persia, and Turkestan, ranging as far east as the sources of the Amoor, passing through Mongolia on migration, and wintering in India.
The Starling has two very near allies. In eastern Asia Minor, where it is probably a resident, and in Turkestan and Afghanistan, whence it
STARLING. 13
migrates in autumn to the Punjaub and North-west India, Sturnus purpu- rascens occurs, distinguished by its bronze-coloured wings and flanks, and, on an average, longer beak. In Sindh, Cashmere, and Nepal S. indicus is a resident, distinguished by its small size, the wing measuring from 4°25 to 4°75 inch (the wing of S. vulgaris measures from 4°85 to 5°3). In all these species the colour occasionally changes from green to purple, according to the position in which the bird is held as regards the light ; they are also probably subject to some slight local variations in colour.
The Starling is almost as closely associated with man as the Sparrow ; but, unlike that bird, it seems to have a peculiar way of accommodating itself to its surroundings with the greatest ease. Thus we sce it almost everywhere and in every variety of scenery. It will share the eaves and the dovecot with the Sparrows and Pigeons; it will nestle in the hollow trees far away from houses, or make its home just as easily in the sides of the stupendous ocean-cliffs in company with the noisy crowd of sea-birds, or on the limestone rocks further inland. After the breeding-season the Starling becomes even more widely distributed, and from August until the following spring haunts fields and marshes, commons, gardens, and the low-lying shores, as its food-supply may be the most abundant. The Starling is a gregarious bird at all seasons of the year; but this habit is most marked after the nesting-season, for in spring the scarcity of suitable breeding-places usually disperses them.
Early in the year, sometimes as soon as the middle of January, the Starling returns almost daily to its old nesting-place, and in a week or so the male begins his unpretentious song. He usually sings when perched on a chimney or on the eaves near his nesting-hole, or on the tree-tops near at hand; and his song is warbled forth as he ruffles the feathers of his head and throat and shakes and droops his wings, as though full of nervous excitement. Although many of the Starling’s notes are harsh, still some of them are very full and pleasing, and heard as they are, at a season when every sign of returning spring is eagerly looked for and welcomed, are certainly one of the most cheerful sounds that greet the ear. Each note is uttered in seeming caprice; the harsh ones are mingled with the sweet ones with no approach to order. It is indeed a strange song, and cannot be mistaken for that of any other British bird, the Rose- coloured Starling excepted. The Starling’s alarm-notes are very harsh and rapidly repeated, resembling somewhat those of the Missel-Thrush. Its call-note is a clear long-drawn piping cry.
Karly in April, sometimes not until the beginning of May, the Starlings have mostly mated and gone to their breeding-holes. Previous to this, however, much quarrelling goes on for the choice of suitable sites ; the strong gain the best located holes, whilst the weak seek quarters elsewhere. The Starling will build its nest almost everywhere, and it needs but slight
14 BRITISH BIRDS.
encouragement to take up its quarters in any suitable hole or box placed for its reception. It will even dislodge large tiles and burrow considerable distances under the eaves; and its bulky nest often stops up some spout, to the dismay of the householder. A hole in the gable or inside the dovecot are also favourite places, whilst its partiality for holes in trees is none the less. It also commonly breeds in ruins, churches, and old masonry of every description. In the wilder portions of the country the Starling selects a hole either in a tree or rock for its purpose; and it will often breed in great numbers in caves or in the crevices of the ocean- cliffs. The nest is sometimes but a few inches from the entrance to the hole, at others it is several feet, and in many cases, especially in trees and rocks, is absolutely inaccessible. In the Outer Hebrides, where trees are absent, the Starling breeds, according to Mr. Gray, under the stones on the beach, in disused rat-holes, in turf-dykes, and in holes in walls. Saxby states that in Shetland it breeds in peat-stacks and rabbit-holes. It has also been known in one or two instances to build an open and exposed nest in trees, to rear its young in a hole in the ground, and to share the same nest with a Magpie.
The Starling’s nest is a somewhat slovenly structure, made of straw, dead grass, and rootlets, sometimes a twig or two, and is lined with a few feathers, a little wool, or even a scrap or two of moss, paper, rag, or twine. In many cases the birds do not trouble about a lining at all; and the cup of the nest is entirely composed of straws, arranged very evenly and smoothly, but with a lot of straggling bents around it. The nest is in some cases much more elaborately made than in others ; and in some holes the dry and powdered wood at the bottom almost does sole duty for a bed. With great perseverance the Starling will continue to build in the same hole, although its nest is repeatedly removed, and each year the birds will return to their old quarters.
The eggs of the Starling are from four to seven in number, six being an average clutch. They are slightly elongated and rough in grain, but very highly polished, and are a delicate greenish blue, sometimes very pale bluish white. They vary in length from 1:25 to 1°] inch, and in breadth from *88 to ‘80 inch. From the eggs of the Rose-coloured Starling, those of the present species may always be distinguished by their greenish or bluish tints ; those of the former are shining white, almost like a Woodpecker’s. The Starling, in most cases, rears two broods in the year, sometimes three, though this has been denied. As soon as the young of the first broods can shift for themselves they are abandoned and roam about in flocks, and their parents go off to their nesting-holes again. As is usual with life-paired birds, the Starling will continue to lay in its old nest, although its eggs are repeatedly taken. Dixon, in a single season, has taken from a nest of this bird as many as forty eggs; and he has every
STARLING.. 15
reason to believe that they were laid by one pair of birds. In the Starling’s laying-season, as most egg-collectors are probably aware, the bird often drops an egg upon the fields. During the hatching-period the female, who sits very closely, is fed assiduously by the male. Dixon has known this bird remove its eggs from a hole from which they were con- stantly being taken. Few birds are more noisy than young Starlings; and throughout the rearing-period their nest-hole is betrayed to any passer- by by the clamouring young within, who greet their parents’ arrival with a chorus of cries. But far different is the case with the old birds, who are usually very wary, and always silent at the nest.
As previously stated, the Starling is gregarious. It looks a remarkably handsome bird as it wanders about the grass-plot or the meadows, pro- gressing with slow and regular pace, every now and then stopping to pull up aworm or dislodge a beetle from the little heaps of manure. It is also very fond of searching the ground where cattle are feeding, and may repeatedly be seen perched on the backs of sheep, which it rids of various vermin. If alarmed, the whole of the flock generally take wing simultaneously, and alight in the nearest tree-tops, where they keep up an incessant chorus of mixed harsh and musical notes. The flight of the Starling is very rapid and well-sustained, performed by a series of rapid beatings, occasion- ally varied by smooth gliding motions with the wings expanded. As a proof of the Starling’s great powers of wing may be mentioned the fact that it may very often be seen high in the air coursing about in search of insects, like the Swallows and Swifts. It will sometimes mount to a great height and perform evolutions which we are apt to think astonishing from any bird save those just mentioned. When in the air thus, the bird seldom utters a note, and it will often keep flying about for an hour or more.
The food of the Starling is for the most part of the year composed of worms, slugs, and beetles; but in winter these birds are often seen to feed on grain aud seeds. In autumn they are very fond of fruit and berries. Elderberries are part of their favourite food, and soon the trees, which had previously bent under the weight of their clustering branches of black fruit, will be totally denuded. In severe weather they will sometimes feed on hips and haws; and are often seen on the low- lying coasts searching for sand-worms and various small mollusks. The Starling, like most other birds, has not escaped a certain amount of persecution, and is charged with several offences. The gardener says it robs his fruit-trees ; the farmer, that it destroys his Pigeons’ eggs; whilst very recently the poor bird was accused of eating Larks’ eggs to such an extent as to cause a perceptible decrease of those fine choristers in certain districts! To the former of these charges the bird must perhaps plead guilty, but its depredations are small and amply repaid by
16 BRITISH BIRDS.
its good offices for the rest of the year; whilst of that of egg-stealing, there can be little doubt that it is most wrongfully accused. Gray and Saxby bring forward very conclusive evidence of this bird’s evil propen- sities, but such instances are only exceptional. Waterton’s defence of the Starling leaves no room for further remark.
In autumn, when the young are all reared and family cares are over for the year, the habits of the Starling are the most interesting and easiest to observe. ‘The birds are now at liberty to follow their gregarious instincts to the full, and the size of the flocks is sometimes almost beyond belief. The smaller flocks, chiefly composed of young birds, join together; the old birds unite with them, until each district possesses its flock. In the daytime they may be seen on the fields and marshy lands in search of food, or on the tree-tops, which they almost blacken with their numbers, keeping up an incessant babel of sounds. Their evolutions in the air at this period are also highly interesting, especially at nightfall, ere they finally settle down to roost. It is astonishing how regular the flock will wheel and gyrate in the air, as though moved by one common impulse. They appear like a huge net as it hovers for a moment above the reed-bed where they roost—now the horizon seems clouded with their numbers as they turn full towards the observer; the next moment they will turn rapidly, seeming to disappear; then appear again in a clustering mass, to turn and poise, spread, close up, rise, and descend ere alighting. Regularly each night the birds repair to certain roosting-places. Some- times the flock will divide into several portions, each to seek a different roosting-place, uniting again at dawn. These clouds of Starlings often assume various shapes as they pass through the air, sometimes like huge balloons, then changing to a spiral, or spread out like a net, and some- times like a thin indistinct wreath of smoke. Sometimes a flock will roost in a large wood, a plantation, or more frequently in a low shrubbery. These places are a common rendezvous for all the birds in the district ; flock joins flock; and their aerial movements and babel of cries make the place, ornithologically, a most interesting one. At this season of the year Starlings often congregate with Rooks and Jackdaws on the pastures, and later in the year with Redwings. When alarmed, the Starlings, as if to a bird obeying a commander’s voice, fly off in a compact mass, and if the danger soon passes they will wheel and return again in the greatest order. The Rooks and Daws will scurry off in all directions, and the Redwings will seek the nearest trees in a long straggling train, but the Starlings seem to act under one common impulse. During the whole winter Starlings are very erratic in their movements; they lead a nomad kind of life, wandering about the country in search of food, or even extending their journeys across the sea if the winter be severe. A few individuals, who prefer to lead a hermit-life instead of joiming the bustle of “ Society,’ may almost
STARLING. 17
always be seen, no matter how hard the frost; but the great majority of birds retreat before it.
In this country the Starling may be fairly considered a resident bird ; but there is no doubt that it receives large additions to its numbers from Northern Europe every season. It is also a well-known bird at Heligo- land, and passes that isolated rock yearly on its migrations. Flocks of Starlings are also believed to cross over from the south-west of Scotland to Ireland, where, as previously stated, the bird is best known as a winter visitor. On our coasts during the period of migration the Starling is often seen at the lighthouses, and numbers perish by dashing against the lantern, dazzled by its glare.
The adult male Starling in full breeding-plumage is a very handsome bird. Almost all the small feathers are dark metallic purple or green, those on the upper parts below the nape having arrow-shaped buff tips, most conspicuous on the sides of the rump, but almost obsolete on the centre of the back. The underparts are unspotted, but the under tail- coverts have broad buff edges. The wings and tail-feathers are brown, with broad glossy black margins. The distribution of the purple and green on the small feathers is subject to some variation; but generally the entire head except the ear-coverts, the nape, upper breast and upper back, and the flanks are purple—the ear-coverts, scapulars, lower back, rump and upper tail-coverts, the lower breast, and belly being green; but by altering the position in which the bird is held, green reflections to a limited extent may often be seen on the purple feathers and purple re- flections on the green ones. Examples, however, occur, even in the British Islands, in which this distribution of colour is exactly reversed, except that the greater and median wing-coverts always show some green reflections. The wing-coverts occasionally show bluish-purple reflections, but are never iridescent bronze like those of S. purpurascens. There seems to be no reason to suppose that any of these variations in the colour of the plumage are produced by interbreeding with the latter species, as they appear to occur irrespective of geographical distribution. The Starling’s bill is lemon- yellow; legs and feet reddish brown; irides hazel. After the autumn moult, the bird presents quite a different appearance. All the metallic colours of the plumage are half concealed, in consequence of each feather of the upper parts having a buff tip and those of the underparts a white tip, whilst the wing and tail-feathers have buff margins; the bill has changed to dark brown. As the spring approaches, these margins are almost entirely cast from the head of the male, and usually completely so from the underparts. The female somewhat closely resembles the male ; but the tints are usually not so purple, the spots are much larger and do not abrade so much, and the long hackle-like feathers on the throat are less developed. In the female the bill is yellow, tipped with blackish brown.
VOL. II. c
18 BRITISH BIRDS.
The young differ still more in appearance from their parents-—so much so that they have been erroneously described as a distinct species under the name of Turdus solitarius. They have the general colour greyish brown, much paler on the margins of the feathers of the throat and belly ; the quill- and tail-feathers have ight brown margins. This brown plumage is changed during the first autumn for the showy dress of the parents ; and in the moult, when the feathers are in process of being changed, these young birds present a very singular piebald appearance.
PASTOR. 19
Genus PASTOR.
The Rose-coloured Starling was included by Linneus and Brisson in the genus Turdus. Scopoli removed it into the genus Sturnus; but in 1815 Temminck somewhat unnecessarily placed it in a separate genus. In the first edition of his ‘ Manuel d’Ornithologie,’ p. 83, he invented the genus Pastor, where the Rose-coloured Starling reigns supreme as the typical and only species. The characters which distinguish this genus from Sturnus are of the most frivolous kind: the upper mandible is not quite as straight, the nostrils are rather more concealed by feathers, and the head is furnished with a crest. In its habits, food, and nidification the Rose-coloured Starling differs very little from the so-called true Starlings.
The Rose-coloured Starling is confined to the southern portions of the South Palearctic Region during the breeding-season ; but in winter wanders into the Oriental Region.
20 "BRITISH BIRDS.
PASTOR ROSEUS.
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING. (Puate 11.)
Turdus merula rosea, Briss. Orn. ii. p. 250 (1760).
Turdus roseus, Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 294 (1766); et auctorum plurimorum— (Scopoli), Latham, Gmelin, (Bonaparte), (Temminck), (Degland § Gerbe) (Salvadori), (Newton), (Dresser), &e.
Sturnus roseus (Linn.), Scop. Ann. I. Hist. Nat. p. 180 (1769).
Turdus seleucis, Forskal, Descr. Animal. p. vi. no. 16 (1775).
Sturnus asiaticus, Wirsing fide Lath. Ind. Orn, i, p. 844 (1790).
Pastor roseus (Linn.), Temm. Man. d’ Orn, p. 83 (1815).
Psaroides roseus (Linn.), Vierll. Analyse, p. 42 (1816).
Merula rosea (Linn.), Koch, Syst. baier. Zool. p. 242 (1816).
Acridotheres roseus (Linn.), Ranz. Elementi di Zoolog. iii. pt. v. p. 177 (1828).
Gracula rosea (Linn.), Cuv. Regne Anim. i. p. 378 (1829).
Pastor peguanus, Less. Bélanger’s Voy. Ind. Orient., Zool, p. 268 (1834).
Pecuarius roseus (Linn.), Temm. Man. @’ Orn, iii. p. 76 (1835).
Thremmaphilus roseus (Linn.), Macgill. Brit. B. i. p. 613 (1837).
Nomadites roseus (Linn.), Petenis fide Bonap. Cat. Met. Uc, Eur. p. 44 (1842).
Although this handsome bird has been often shot in our islands, it can only be looked upon as an accidental visitor of frequent occurrence. The Rose-coloured Starlings which reach our shores are principally birds of the year on their first autumn migration, who have lost their way, and have wandered into Western Europe instead of migrating eastwards into India. Willughby and Ray were apparently unacquainted with the occa- _ sional visits of this bird to our islands, and copy the account given of — it by Aldrovandus. ‘The first British-killed example of which we have any record was the one described by Edwards in 1743, which was killed at Norwood, uear London, and was figured in his ‘ Natural History’ (i. p. 20, pl. xx.).. He quaintly tells us that ““we may see this bird very perfect, curiously stuffed and set on a perch at Salter’s coffee-house in Chelsea.” It is unnecessary to enumerate the many examples that have since wan-
. dered to our shores. It has occurred in almost every county of England, principally in those bordering the east coast ; but examples have repeatedly been obtained in the extreme west, in Wales, in Cornwall, and the Scilly Isles. In Scotland, although it has not yet been noticed in the outer islands, it appears to have occurred in almost every county from Wigtown- shire to Sutherland in the west, and from the Orkneys and Shetland to Berwickshire in the east. In Ireland the bird, although quite as un- certain in its appearance as in England, has nevertheless been met with in most parts of the country, even in the extreme western districts. Muller
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING. 21
states that it has twice been killed on the Faroes; but its occurrence in Iceland has not yet been noticed.
Like the Waxwing, the Rose-coloured Starling is preeminently gre- garious in the breeding-season; and, like that bird, it seems to vary its nesting-locality according to the abundance of food, generally selecting some district where locusts and grasshoppers abound. It breeds more or less regularly in Asia Minor and on the western shores of the Black Sea. The most westerly recorded instance of its breeding in large numbers is in Lombardy. At Villafranca, near Verona, in 1875 great numbers bred in the castle, having followed in the wake of a flight of locusts. They have not been known to breed in Palestine; but Tristram describes enormous numbers passing through on their spring migration. Eastwards they breed in South Russia and the Caucasus, Turkestan, and South Siberia, as far east as Lake Saisan. They have also been observed in North-west Persia and Afghanistan in spring. They winter in India in enormous numbers, and are occasionally found as far south as Ceylon. The most easterly locality recorded of this bird is the Andaman Islands, where flocks were seen by Col. Tytler in January (‘ Ibis,’ 1867, p. 331). At this season of the year, and on the spring and autumn migrations, they have occurred in almost every country of Hurope, from Spain in the west to Sweden in the north, and have been known to stray as far south as North Africa, one or two examples having been recorded from Egypt and Algeria.
The Rose-coloured Starling, like the Black-headed Bunting, is one of the few birds which migrate east in autumn. The natural inference to be drawn from this fact is that when its habits of migration were formed it was exclusively an Asiatic species, which has gradually extended its breeding-range westward in comparatively modern, that is in post-glacial, times. Amongst Arctic birds, the Petchora Pipit (Anthus gustavi) and the Arctic Willow-Wren (Phylloscopus borealis) migrate in the same direction, probably from similar causes. The Rose-coloured Starlings are very late breeders. They seldom arrive at their breeding-quarters before the end of May, and do not begin to breed until the middle of June. They migrate in enormous flocks. During his last visit to Palestine Canon Tristram had the good fortune to cross the line of migration of these interesting birds. His party were travelling in a north-easterly direction across the plains of Syria, in the valley of the Orontes ; and for three days, during the last week in May, flock after flock of Rose-coloured Starlings passed them, flying due west. They chattered incessantly as they flew; and sometimes the noise of the myriads of voices, as the flock passed over, was quite deafening. They fly in dense clouds like Starlings, and Canon Tristram describes them as forming into a balloon before alighting. The party had just crossed some acres of young locusts, which “ rose at every
22 BRITISH BIRDS.
step of their horses, like sand-lice on the sea-shore from a piece of seaweed left by the tide.” After they had passed they saw “a great globe in the air, which suddenly turned, expanded, and, like a vast fan, descended to the ground,” which was in a few seconds covered with a moving black mass, dappled with pink. After watching them for some minutes, the party turned back and rode up to them. They rose quietly, but not till they were close on them. So eager had the birds been in search of their prey that not a locust was to be seen. At another place the party came suddenly, after mounting a gentle ascent, on the crater of an extinct voleano, full of water, and surrounded with basalt boulders. As they approached, their attention was attracted by one of these flights of Rose- coloured Starlings, which had alighted to drink, and which rose in alarm and darkened the air overhead. At another place a solitary tree over a well was so covered with them that the colour of the tree changed from black to green as they approached and frightened the birds away. The natives all declared the visits of these birds to be most uncertain and occa- sional, and said that they had not met with them for three years. They only see them on the spring migration, when their flight is always from east to west. Canon Tristram adds that they were all apparently in full breeding-plumage.
The mystery which for some time shrouded the breeding of the Rose- coloured Starling has been at length completely dispelled. The old stories of their breeding in hollow trees, and the modern Greek or Bulgar fables of their boring holes in banks like Sand-Martins, are entirely unsupported by evidence. The Rose-coloured Starling is essentially a Rock-Starling in its breeding-habits. When I was in the Dobrudscha in the spring of 1883, I visited a village about three miles north of Kustendji, where these birds had bred in great numbers the preceding year. They had occupied a pile of rough building-stone, most of which was, unfortu- nately, removed during the following winter. A small heap near a cottage still remained, and I was informed by the peasant who lived there that it had been full of nests. After removing a few stones from the top I soon came upon the old nests. They were more carefully made than those of the Starling, and might easily have been mistaken for nests of the Ring- Ouzel; they were chiefly composed of dry grass, but in several of them a few feathers were interwoven. Mr. Barkley, in his ‘ Bulgaria before the War,’ describes two similar breeding-places between Rustchuk and Varna, where thousands took possession of a mound of broken stone and rock thrown out of a cutting on the railway. In several parts of the Dobrudscha I met German emigrants from Bessarabia who told me that the Rose-coloured Starling not unfrequently bred in thousands in the peasants’ gardens, which are surrounded by rough stone walls, in the holes of which the nests are made. These birds also often breed between
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING. 23
Tchernavoda and Kustendji; but I had the misfortune to drop upon a blank year. The railway from Tchernavoda to Medjidi is across a series of swamps full of reeds some twelve feet high. Ducks and Geese come down here to feed, and the Great Reed-Warbler and the Bearded Tit make the reeds their home. Now and then a Purple Heron, a Stork, or a Demoiselle Crane gets up, and Marsh-Harriers range over the swamp. On the out- skirts of the reed-bed luxurious grass grows, leading up to perpendicular cliffs from 50 to 100 feet high. Some of these are white chalk, and some consist of a buff calcareous conglomerate ; but most of the cliffs are sandy earth, full of Bee-eaters’ holes. The valley is about a mile wide, and has evidently within a comparatively recent date, geologically speaking, been the main mouth of the Danube. The lakes north and south of Kustendji are as evidently the silted-up mouths of the various arms of the river which formed the ancient delta of the Danube, which was probably destroyed by the drifting sand driven by the east winds from the shores of the Black Sea. Where the cliffs are rock the action of the water, and possibly of the ice, has hollowed them into caverns and ledges and _ holes, usually tenanted by Jackdaws, Starlings, Tree-Sparrows, and Rollers, and every two or three years by Rose-coloured Starlings. In driving across the steppes between the Danube and the Black Sea we now and then came upon small flocks of these birds. At a distance they are indistinguishable from Common Starlings; they run along the ground in’the same way, they have the same rapid straight flight, and the same habit of clustering together. On the ground they feed with the same eager anxiety, but frequently perch on the stunted bushes, when their pink colour is very conspicuous. ‘The notes of this bird are almost exactly the same as those of the Starling, they chatter together in the same way ; and in confinement the low warble mixed with the chatter is very similar in both species. In most places where this bird breeds it is protected on account of the enormous number of locusts it devours. In autumn it takes its toll on the fruit (mulberries, cherries, &c.) ; but its usefulness in spring is so apparent, that the Greeks and Turks do not begrudge it so small a trifle. In Asia Minor, as in the Dobrudscha, I had the misfortune to arrive the day after the fair. Dr. Kriiper and I were informed by our friend Guido von Gonzenbach that the Rose-coloured Starlings had bred in the previous spring (1871) in enormous numbers in the neighbourhood of Smyrna, and had devoured the grubs and locusts to the admiration of the peasantry. They fixed upon some village unknown as a central breeding-place, and more than 200 of their eggs were brought in to Mr. Gonzenbach ; but all his information being Greek, he was unable to find the locality. After many inquiries we succeeded in discovering it amongst the hills. It appeared to be deserted, not a soul could we find ; everybody was down in the valley harvesting. At last we met an old man travelling with a mule,
24: BRITISH BIRDS.
buying up fleeces of sheep from the peasants. He told us that he had travelled all the country round, and could assure us that there was not a bird to be found of the kind we sought. He told us that last year the birds swarmed in thousands in the valley below, and had built nests like Blackbirds’ in the clefts of the rocks and on the stony ground on the steep hill-sides. That year (1872) he said that they had arrived in great numbers, but at the expiration of a week had suddenly disappeared. A very inter- esting account of the breeding of these birds in the same district sixteen years previously is to be found in the ‘Zoologist’ for 1857, p. 5668, translated from an article in ‘Naumannia’ by the Marquis O. Antinori. He and Mr. Gonzenbach did not discover the locality until the young had left the nests. The birds arrived during the last week of May, and fresh eggs must have been laid about the 10th of June; but by the end of that month the young had left the nest, and by the middle of July both old and young had left the locality. The breeding-place was a rocky mountain-side, and long before it was reached they noticed that every rock .and stone was covered with the white droppings of the birds. The nests were in thousands, some quite open and uncovered, others so concealed amongst the blocks of stone that it was necessary to turn the rocks over to find them. Some were more than a foot below the surface, and others beyond arm’s length. The nests were often so close together as to touch one another ; they were carelessly made of dry stalks and leaves, occa- sionally lined with fine grass. Many eggs were laid on the bare ground. The great number of birds naturally attracted many enemies; and the remains of birds were lying about in all directions which had fallen a prey to jackals, martens, wild cats, rats, &c. In these ravines the oleander is very common ; and a small flock of Rose-coloured Starlings often suddenly becomes invisible as it drops on one of these shrubs, the pink backs and breasts of the Starlmgs being scarcely distinguishable from the pink flowers of the oleander. During the breeding-season the females of the Rose-coloured Starling sit very close and are assiduously fed by the males ; and during the short time that the young are in the nest they are most carefully tended by both parents. They are said to take pleasure in killing locusts even when their appetites are satisfied.
In the ‘ Zoologist’ for 1878, p. 16, is a most interesting account of the visit of these birds in 1875 to Villafranca, translated from the Italian of Edoardo de Betta. About four o’clock in the afternoon of the 8rd of June about a score Rose-coloured Starlings arrived at the castle, and were followed in about half an hour by a much larger flock of perhaps a hundred birds. ‘Towards evening some thousands arrived, and at dusk dispersed in flocks over the country. The next day the numbers increased to about fourteen thousand ; and they soon ejected the Common Starlings, Swallows, Sparrows, and Pigeons from the holes in the battlements of the
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING. 25
castle. The following day these holes were cleaned out, and nest-building began on the 5th. It was not until the 17th that it was ascertained for certain that eggs had been laid ; but by the 14th of July the young were seen migrating with their parents, and soon afterwards the birds had all disappeared. The nests were described as roughly composed of small sticks, little branches, straws, hay, grasses, and other dry herbs disposed in a shapeless mass, with a limited hollow space in the middle to contain the eggs, and irregularly lmed with herbaceous fibres, leaves, mosses, and feathers. ‘The males went out to feed in small parties, returning together,
The Rose-coloured Starling arrives in India early in August, and appears in some districts in such numbers as to be injurious to the crops of white “ Jowaree,’ and before it leaves in spring it feeds on the fruit of the mul- berry. During the cold season it eats insects of various kinds, the seeds of grasses and plants, and any kind of fruit it can obtain.
The eggs of this bird vary from five to seven in number, and are so pale a grey in colour as to be scarcely distinguishable from white; they are very fine-grained, smooth, and glossy, and vary in length from 1°15 to 1:07 inch, and in breadth from ‘83 to ‘8 inch.
The male Rose-coloured Starling is a very conspicuous bird, with the head, neck and breast, wings and wing-coverts, axillaries, tail, upper and under tail-coverts, and thighs glossy black, the head, neck, and breast with purple reflections, and the wings and tail with green reflections, the rest of the upper and underparts being a delicate rose or salmon-colour. Beak rose-coloured, dark at the base; legs, feet, and claws dull brown ; irides rich brown. The female is everywhere dullerin colour. This bird only moults once in the year, in autumn, when almost every feather is margined with pale brown, so that the whole bird looks brown, with black wings and tail. The breeding-plumage is assumed by casting the brown margins of the feathers. Young in first plumage are very similar to adults in autumn, but have paler wings and tail, and are without the concealed black or rose-coloured bases to the feathers ; they are very similar to the young of the Common Starling, but are much paler in colour. The adult plumage is assumed in the first September by a moult.
Three species belonging to the subfamily Icterine have been known to visit this country. This subfamily is intermediate between the Sturninze and the Fringillinz, and is strictly confined to the American continent. Of the first of these, the Red-winged Starling or Red-winged Oriole ( Ageleus pheniceus), nearly a dozen examples have occurred in the British Islands; but as it is a very common cage-bird, it is probable that most of them had escaped from confinement. This species appears to be found throughout North America as far north as the Great Slave Lake. In the south it is a resident, but in the north it is a migratory bird, and it is
26 BRITISH BIRDS.
possible that occasional examples may have gone astray on migration and wandered as far as Europe. In winter they are gregarious, but in spring they pair and separate for breeding-purposes. The nest is usnally placed on low bushes, but occasionally in high trees and sometimes on the ground. It is pensile, the framework, usually made of rushes and the strong leaves of the iris, being carefully and strongly interwoven with the adjacent twigs. The inner nest is composed of grass and sedges. The number of eggs is said to be five, varying considerably in size from 1-08 to “9 inch in length, and from *82 to “65 inch in breadth. The ground-colour varies from greyish white to pale greenish blue, sparingly but generally very boldly blotched and streaked, principally at the large end, with very dark brown; the underlying spots are very indistinct (Plate 11). In summer these birds feed principally on insects, but in autumn they commit great havoe amongst the grain-crops. Wilson describes their notes as “ not remarkably various, but very peculiar; the most common one resembles the syllables conk-quer-ree, others the shrill sounds produced by filing a saw, some are more guttural, and others remarkably clear. The usual note of both male and female is a single chuck.” 'The male Red-winged Oriole is black, with crimson shoulders and lesser wing-coverts ; the female is brown, streaked on the upper parts with buff and on the lower parts with white.
Of the second species, the Rusty Grakle (Scolecophagus ferrugineus), a single example was obtained near Cardiff on the 4th of October 1881 (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1881, p. 968). This species breeds in the arctic regions of America up to the limit of forest-growth. It passes through the Northern States on spring and autumn migration, where a few remain to breed, and winters in the Southern States. In its habits, food, and mode of constructing its nest it is said to resemble very closely the Red- winged Oriole. The eggs are light bluish green in ground-colour, spotted and blotched with purplish brown of various shades, and very rarely streaked with rich brown (Plate 11) ; they measure from 1:02 to °98 inch in length, and from ‘82 to *75 inch in breadth. The notes of this bird are said to be musical and more melodious than those of the allied species. The male Rusty Grakle has the general colour black, with green and purple reflections. After the autumn moult the broad brown margins to the feathers give the bird a very dingy appearance. The female is blackish grey, the wings and tail sometimes having a greenish tinge.
Of the third species, the American Meadow-Starling (Sturnella magna), one was seen in Norfolk in October 1854, and another was shot in Suffolk in March 1860, whilst a third was obtained near Cheltenham. It is common in the Eastern States of North America, being migratory in the north and more or less gregarious in winter. In the west it is represented by a nearly allied form, which is only subspecifically distinct, S. magna, var.
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING. Q7
neglecta. It frequents pasture-lands, being very rarely found in woods. It is celebrated for the sweetness of its song. The nest is domed, and always built on the ground. This bird lays four or five eggs, white in ground-colour, spotted all over, but principally at the large end, with conspicuous reddish-brown blotches ; the underlying spots are generally somewhat indistinct, but occasionally they form an important feature in the egg and are slate-grey (Plate 11). They vary in length from 1°2 to °95 inch, and in breadth from ‘9 to ‘68inch. It is said to feed both on insects and seeds. The male Meadow-Starling is pale brown, spotted and barred with dark brown and reddish brown; the lores, the breast, and belly are yellow, with a conspicuous black crescent below the throat. The female is slightly duller in colour.
28 BRITISH BIRDS.
Subfamily FRINGILLIN&, or FINCHES.
The Finches form a large group of birds, which may at once be distin- euished from all the other subfamilies of the Passeride by their combina- tion of a stout conical bill with the entire absence of a first primary. The wings are long and pointed, the second, third, and fourth primaries being nearly equal in length. The tarsus is short and scutellated in front, but not at the back.
The Finches only moult once in the year, in autumn. The spring plumage, where it differs from that of autumn, is attained by casting the ends of the feathers and the small, so to speak, pmnules of the leaflets or pinnz, and sometimes by a simultaneous increase of brilliancy im the colour of the feather itself. The plumage of the young is more spotted and streaked than that of adults, but is moulted in the first autumn.
The Fringilline are almost cosmopolitan, beg found throughout the world except in the Australian Region, where they are represented by the Weaver-birds (Ploceine), which are also found throughout the tropical regions of the Old World. There are upwards of 500 species of Finches, which have been divided by ornithologists into upwards of seventy genera. The characters of most of these are, however, of such a trivial nature that to retain many of them, even as a matter of courtesy to their founders, would only bring the science of ornithology into contempt. In the present neglected state of this group of birds it is impossible to form any key to the genera. Sixty species of Finches are found in Europe, of which half are included in the British list.
Genus LOXIA.
The genus Lovia is recognized by Linnzus in the twelfth edition of his ‘Systema Nature,’ i. p. 299, and consequently dates from 1766. The Common Crossbill (L. eurvirostra) has by common consent been accepted as the type. It is the Lowia loxia of Brisson, and the first species named by Linneeus, though the Hawfinch, the Grosbeak, the Bullfinch, and other more distantly allied birds are included in the same genus.
LOXIA. 29
The chief characteristic in the present group of birds is their parrot-like ‘bill, the upper mandible being curved to such an extent that it overlaps
the under mandible at the point, in some species crossing its point. An almost equally important character is the change which takes place in the colour of the plumage from the young to the adult, beginning with green and passing through yellow into red.
This genus probably contains only four well-defined species, several of which are, however, subject to considerable local variation. The range of this genus is principally confined to the Paleearctic and Nearctic Regions, extending in the former to the Himalayas and in the latter to the Mexican plateaux.
The Crossbills frequent fir-, pine-, and larch-forests during the breeding- season ; but at other times of the year they frequently haunt gardens, orchards, deciduous woods, and small plantations and shrubberies. After the breeding-season they are more or less gregarious and often associate with other birds. Their song is low and somewhat sweet, and their call- notes are harsh, but sometimes more musical. They breed very early, often before the snow is melted. Their nests are open and cup-shaped, made of twigs, moss, rootlets, wool, &c., and placed at various heights in conifer trees. Their eggs are five or six in number, white or bluish white in ground-colour, spotted and blotched with reddish brown of different shades. Their food consists of seeds, fruits, berries, and insects of different kinds.
30 BRITISH BIRDS.
LOXIA CURVIROSTRA ann LOXIA PITYOPSITTACUS.
COMMON CROSSBILL and PARROT CROSSBILL. (Puate 13.)
English ornithologists, having voluntarily cramped their ideas by putting on the straight jacket of a binomial nomenclature, have for the most part treated the Common and Parrot Crossbills as distinct species. The facts of nature do not warrant such a conclusion in the least. A large series of examples from Europe, Siberia, China, Canada, and Mexico show some differences in size, especially in the bill, which varies almost as much as that of the Lesser Redpole or the Reed-Bunting. Crossbills from the pine-forests of Europe have the largest bills ; those from Mexico have nearly as large bills, but the upper mandible is slightly weaker. Ex- amples from the larch- and spruce-forests of Europe and Asia have both mandibles weaker; whilst those from Canada have still smaller bills, and approach very near to the Himalayan Crossbill in this respect. The length of wing varies much less, being as under :—
Length of wing. Height of bill. L. pityopsittacus . . 4°3 to 4:0 inches. ‘6 to ‘5 mech. emecwcana . a 2 Al ew 5; (DD ay) mes L. curvirositra. . . 39 ,, 37 ,, ess ee lene L. americana. . . 35 ,,33 _,, SOG (8 yas L. himalayana . . 3'1,,30 ,, 500) By (Ors
It is probable that in a sufficiently large series the measurements of each of these supposed species would be found to overlap that next to it, and that all these forms are conspecific and nothing but local races. It is not known that they differ in colour or in any other respect except in size, thickness of bill, and choice of food. The two last- named peculiarities are probably cause and effect. In ‘ Naumannia’ for 1853, p. 78, is a plate of twenty bills of Crossbills to illustrate a paper by Brehm, who attempts to discriminate between six species of Parrot Crossbill and eight or more species of Common Crossbill. Scotch examples are intermediate between the Parrot and Common Crossbills of the continent; they probably feed on both kinds of cones. The fact that the tropical form of the Old World is a small weak-billed race, whilst that of the New World is larger and stronger-billed than its northern representative, is probably also merely a question of food. The synonymy of the two forms which are found in our islands is as follows :—
COMMON CROSSBILL AND PARROT CROSSBILL. dl
LOXIA CURVIROSTRA. ComMMOoN CROSSBILL.
Loxia loxia, Briss. Orn. iii. p. 829 (1760).
Loxia curvirostra, Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 299 (1766); et auctorum plurimorum— Gmelin, Scopoli, Latham, Bonaparte, Schlegel, Degland § Gerbe, Temminck, Newton, Dresser, Sc.
Crucirostra europea, Leach, Syst. Cat. Mamm. Sc. Brit. Mus. p. 12 (1816).
Crucirostra abietina, Meyer, Vig. Liv- u. Esthl. p. 72 (1815).
Loxia europea (Leach), Macgill. Hist. Brit. B. i. p. 417 (1837).
Crucirostra curvirostra (Linn.), var. balearica, Homeyer, Journ. Orn. 1862, p. 256.
Crucirostra balearica (Homeyer), Homeyer, Journ. Orn. 1864, p. 224.
Loxia balearica (Homeyer), Newton, Zool. Record, 1864, p. 84.
Loxia albiventris, Swinhoe, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1870, p. 437.
LOXIA CURVIROSTRA, var. PITYOPSITTACUS. PaRRoT CROSSBILL.
Loxia curvirostra, var. y, Gmel. Syst. Nat. i. p. 843 (1788).
Loxia pityopsittacus, Bechst. Orn. Taschenb. p. 106 (1802); et auctorum pluri- morum—Temminck, Bonaparte, Salvadori, Degland § Gerbe, Dresser, Newton, &e.
Crucirostra pinetorum, Meyer, Vog. Liv- u. Esthl. p. 71 (1815).
Crucirostra pityopsittacus (Bechst.), Brehm, Vog. Deutsch. p. 241 (1831).
The Common Crossbill is a somewhat rare and local resident in our islands, but is best known as an irregular winter visitor, often appearing in large flocks ; and at this season of the year 1t has either been obtained or seen in every county. In Scotland it is a resident in some districts, and, according to Mr. Gray, breeds most numerously in the central counties. It is also well known as a winter visitor, often appearing in immense flocks, although it is not known to have visited any of the outer islands. In Orkney it is less regular in its appearance; but in the Shetlands, especially of late years, it has been frequently seen in large numbers, and was said by Saxby to have visited the islands every year between May and December during his residence at Unst. Of its breeding in England much has been recorded; and nests have so fre- quently been discovered in various parts of the country, that it is needless to enter into a detailed account of them. It has been known to breed in Devonshire, Somerset, Hants, Sussex, Kent, Surrey, Essex, Herts, Bed- ford, Norfolk, Suffolk, Gloucester, Yorkshire, Durham, Northumberland, and Cumberland. In Ireland, according to Thompson, the bird has long been known as an occasional visitor in late autumn or winter, leaving again early in the spring. He also states that it has bred there.
The Parrot Crossbill was first noticed as a British bird by Pennant in
Sone BRITISH BIRDS.
1766, in his ‘ British Zoology’ (p. 106). He received a male and female “out of Shropshire.” Upwards of a score examples of this bird have since Pennant’s day been taken in our islands. Most of these specimens have been captured in England, a few in Scotland, and one in Wales.
The typical form of the Crossbill breeds in most of the pime-forests of the Palearctic Region, in Norway occasionally ranging north of the Arctic circle, but in North Russia not ranging above lat. 64°, and in Asia probably not above lat. 62°. It breeds in the Pyrenees, the Alps, and the Carpathians, and probably also in the Urals; but it has not been recorded from the Caucasus. It is said to be a resident in the Balearic Islands, and in the Atlas Mountains m Algeria. It has not been recorded from Persia or Turkestan, nor did Finsch or Tancré’s coHector find it in the Altai Mountains. It certainly breeds in Kamtschatka, and probably also in other pine-regions in Eastern Siberia. In winter it is a very irregular migrant to most parts of Europe, having been obtained in Denmark, Holland, Belgium, France, Spain, Italy, and Greece; but Sharpe and Dresser’s statement, which Newton * appears to have copied, that Dr. Kriiper found its nest in the Parnassus, is probably based on a mis- translation. Eastwards it winters in South Siberia, North China, and Japan, in which islands it is said to be very abundant; but ornithologists have omitted to say at what season of the year.
The large form of the Common Crossbill, generally known as the Parrot Crossbill, breeds principally in Scandinavia, the Baltic provinces, and North Germany. It does not appear to wander far in winter; but at this season it occasionally visits Denmark, Holland, France, Southern Germany, Switzerland, and Italy.
The Crossbill is one of the few migratory birds which do not wander further from home in winter than the inclemency of the season or the scarcity of food compels them. They have consequently been called gipsy migrants—irregular visitors who may be very common one year and very rare the next, sometimes coming early, sometimes late, and sometimes not at all. They are preeminently gregarious birds. In winter they wander about in large flocks ; and even in the breeding-season small parties of males may be seen seeking food in company. They are very early breeders; and fresh eggs are usually found in February and March. Eggs have been taken in April and May; but these are probably laid by birds whose first nests have been destroyed by their numerous enemies or by heavy falls of snow, and are not second broods, as some ornithologists have supposed. If these birds are successful in rearing a brood, the family-party appear at once to commence their gipsy life. If
* Professor Newton appears also to have copied Sharpe and Dresser’s assertion that
Swinhoe found the Crossbill on the island of Formosa, a statement for which I am unable to find any authority.
COMMON CROSSBILL AND PARROT CROSSBILL. 33
they meet a similar family-party they appear to fraternize at once, and form the nucleus of a flock, which is sometimes seen far from home as early as June, wandering in search of food. It is a very pretty sight to see these flocks feeding upon the berries of the mountain-ash, or stripping the larch or spruce trees of their cones. In winter they are exceedingly tame, and will allow the observer to approach very near and watch them without showing any signs of alarm. They are very active, and when busily engaged in feeding place themselves in all sorts of positions, like a Tit or a Willow-Wren. They pass from tree to tree with strong but undulating flight, continually calling to each other. In late winter or early spring the males have a low warbling song, which reminds one somewhat of that of the Starling. The female is said also to sing nearly as well as the male.
The note is short and clear, aloud shrill ¢tstp, tsip, tsip, far louder than the similar notes of the Chaffinches and Linnets by which it is surrounded ; it is subject to slight modulations, occasionally sounding almost like. ¢sup, and sometimes like ¢sop. This note is principally uttered when the birds are on the wing, and is apparently the common call-note by which the flock is kept together. The call-note of the male to the female is quite as loud, but more prolonged; it may be represented by the word ftso, occasionally modified almost to ¢sow on the one hand and to ¢soo on the other. I hav: generally heard this note when the bird was sitting alone on or near the top of a pine tree. The valleys of the Upper Engadine are an excellent locality in which to watch the habits of the Crossbill; they lie about six thousand feet above the level of the sea, and are hemmed in by mountains which rise to twice that height. Whenever the ground is smooth enough it is used as meadow, and where it is rocky it is covered up to the mouth of the glaciers with larch trees intermixed with a few spruce-firs and Siberian cedars (Pinus cembra). It is impossible to walk through the forest from Pontresina to St. Moritz, even in August and September (a time of the year when birds are most skulking in their habits and almost silent), without seeing many birds specially interesting to the British ornithologist. At first, perhaps, the forest may look empty, not a bird to be seen or heard ; for at this season forest-birds are not only gre- garious but social, and you may perhaps have to walk a mile before you meet with the flock. Then all at once you hear the call-notes of Titmice and distinguish the Crested Tit and the continental variety of the Marsh- Tit. Amongst them may be a few Chaflinches and Mealy Redpoles, and almost certainly a pair of Nuthatches and Creepers. The main flock will consist of Thrushes, principally Missel-Thrushes, feeding on the bilberries and other ground-fruit, and rising one by one from the ground as you disturb them. Then you may come across a small party of Nutcrackers, which are not nearly so shy as the Thrushes, and may be seen both in the
VOL. II. D
34 BRITISH BIRDS.
trees, on the rocks, and on the ground. At last the loud ¢sip of the Cross- bills is heard, and a small compact party of perhaps a dozen birds, con- spicuous amongst the Thrushes by their smaller size and shorter tails, pass by, and you may remark the brick-red of the rumps of many of them, which glisten in the sun as they fy away. However tame the Crossbills may be in our country in winter (and I have approached them within a few feet and watched them feeding undisturbed), in the Engadine in their summer-quarters they are wild enough. They associate with the Thrushes as Starlings do with Rooks, in a flock within a flock, and like them cover square yards of ground, whilst their companions spread over acres. Some- times I saw an isolated male or two flying over the trees with rapid steady flight, but broken by continual short pauses, giving it an undulatory character. I found them extremely shy; and although I could slowly follow a flock of Thrushes for a mile, I never came again upon a flock of Crossbills when I had once put them up. I only once observed them on the ground; and this was in an open space in the forest abounding with ripe bilberries, upon which they probably had been feeding.
The bill of the Crossbill has become specially adapted for extracting the seeds from the cones of the larch and various species of pine. The strongest- billed birds, to which the name of Parrot Crossbill has been applied, form a local race which live in the pine-forests and feed principally on the cones of the Scotch fir (Pinus sylvestris). The more slender-billed birds choose localities where spruce-fir and larch cones are obtainable ; they range further north durmg the breeding-season than their thicker-billed cousins—not because they are able to withstand a greater degree of cold but because the trees whose fruit form their favourite food are found further north. In the valley of the Yenesay the larch and spruce range to lat. 69°, whilst the Scotch fir only grows as far north as lat. 624°. The Crossbill breaks off the cone with his beak and flies with it to a thick bough. The cone is held firmly against the bough with one claw, exactly as a Raptorial bird holds its prey, and the cone is torn to pieces and the seed extracted with the bill, the outside covering or shell being removed and the kernel only eaten. The Crossbill also feeds on many other seeds, and is very fond of apples. Meves found them feeding in South Sweden on the caterpillar and chrysalis of a small green moth (Yortrix viridana) which is very destructive to oak trees, and it is said that the Crossbill generally feeds its young upon insects.
The nest is generally placed in a pine tree of some kind, occasionally not more than five feet from the ground, but more often at a much greater elevation. ‘The favourite position seems to be almost at the top of the tree in the cup formed by the forking of the branches ; but it is not un- frequently built on a horizontal branch at some distance from the trunk. It is formed on the same model as the nest of the Bullfinch, an outside
COMMON CROSSBILL AND PARROT CROSSBILL 35
nest of sticks, and an inside nest of soft material, the latter rising some- what higher than the former. - The outside nest is made of twigs of Scotch fir, about 3, of an inch thick, somewhat loosely interlaced together, and has an inside diameter of four inches, and an outside diameter of six ches or more. The inside nest is composed of dry grass and hair-lichen, with occasionally a little moss or wool or a few feathers in the lining ; the cup has a diameter of 23 inches, and is about 1g inch deep. The usual number of eggs is four, but five are sometimes found ; they vary in length from ‘95 to ‘85 inch, and in breadth from ‘7 to ‘65*. Eggs of the Parrot Crossbill do not differ in size from those of the Common Crossbill. The ground-colour of the eggs varies from pale greenish blue to almost white. The overlying spots are dark brown, principally at the large end, most of them very small, but some as large as No. 10 shot, and many elongated into streaks; the underlying spots are pale reddish brown, but do not differ in size, shape, or distribution from the overlying spots.
The female sits very close, and is fed on the nest by the male. In confinement these birds are very amusing, climbing about their cages, both with claws and bill, like Parrots.
The general colour of the adult male Crossbill is intermediate between scarlet and crimson, somewhat shaded with brown on the back, and most brilliant on the rump. The wings, tail, longest tail-coverts, and hindmost ear-coverts are brown. ‘The centre of the belly and the under tail-coverts are pale grey, the latter with dark centres. Bull, legs, feet, and claws brown; irides dark hazel. The adult female differs from the male in having the red replaced by greenish yellow. Males of the year are inter- mediate in plumage between adult males and females ; in some examples the red feathers predominate, and in others the yellow feathers. Females of the year only differ from adult females in having much less yellow on the plumage. Young in first plumage of both sexes are plain brown, each of the small feathers having a dark centre; they moult in the first autumn into their respective plumage ‘of males and females of the year.
The variation in the plumage of the Crossbill is a question upon which great difference of opinion has existed, and, strange to say, still exists amongst ornithologists who have had the best opportunities of forming a judgment on the matter. Bechstein and Hancock describe the males of the year as red, which gradually changes to yellowish green as in the adult and immature female. Wheelwright thinks that the red plumage of the male is only assumed after the second moult, but he looks upon it as an intermediate stage, though lasting through several seasons, between the mixed plumage of birds of the year and the yellow plumage of what he considers to be fully adult males. Naumann, Brehm, Wolley, Meves,
* Abnormally small eggs may measure *73 by ‘57 (fide Newton), but the eggs measuring
1 inch by *75 (see Dresser) are larger than any I have ever seen.
D2
36 BRITISH BIRDS.
and others hold an intermediate view, which appears to me to be the correct one. It cannot, however, be denied that, in confinement, red males change to yellow after their first moult, and only differ from females in not being quite so green ; they never reassume the red plumage. Yellow
males occasionally occur in a wild state, and are possibly old and barren birds.
il = pH \ | he
fy it Hana
WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILLS. 37
LOXIA BIFASCIATA ann LOXIA LEUCOPTERA.
EUROPEAN WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL and AMERICAN WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL.
(PLatE 19.)
The two White-winged Crossbills are so nearly allied that many ornitho- logists have considered them to be specifically identical. The points relied upon to distinguish them are as follows :—The birds of the Old World are said to be larger and to have a stouter bill. This is, on an average, un- doubtedly the case. European examples vary in length of wing from 3°8 to 3°4, whilst those from America only measure 3°5 to 3:2 inches. The average height of the bill in European examples is ‘4 and that of American examples ‘3 inch. The scapulars and the middle of the back of European examples are dark red with brown centres in the adult male, whilst the same feathers are nearly uniform very dark brown in American examples. European examples are said to have the tail less forked than in American birds ; but I cannot find the slightest difference in this respect. Our birds are also said to have more distinct white edges to the tail-feathers ; but, so far as my observations go, I find that newly moulted birds from both localities have equally white edges, which disappear in both forms before the next autumn. It is also stated that the red of the adult male inclines to scarlet in the European bird and to crimson in the American; but this appears to be an unreliable character, the former being probably younger or less vigorous birds. It is not known that there is any difference whatever in the notes or habits of the two forms, and it will perhaps be best to treat them as local races of a common species. The synonymy of the two races is as follows :—
LOXIA BIFASCIATA,
EUROPEAN WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILUL.
Crucirostra bifasciata Brehm, Isis, 1827, p. 714; et auctorum plurimorum— Bonaparte, Degland § Gerbe, Taczanowsky, Newton, Dresser, &c.
Crucirostra tenioptera (Giloger), Brehm, Isis, 1827, p. 716.
Loxia teenioptera, Gloger, Isis, 1827, p. 419.
Loxia bifasciata (Brehm), Selys-Longch. Faun. Belge, p. 76 (1842).
Loxia leucoptera, Gmel, apud Middendorff, Schrenck, Radde, &c.
LOXIA LEUCOPTERA.
AMERICAN WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL.
Loxia leucoptera, G'mel. Syst. Nat. i. p. 844 (1788); et auctorum plurimorum— Temminck, Audubon, Bonaparte § Schlegel, ( Wilson), (Baird), Gould, Newton, &c,
38 BRITISH BIRDS.
Loxia falcirostra, Lath. Ind. Orn. i. p. 871 (1790). Curvirostra leucoptera (Gmel.), Wils. Am. Orn. iv. p. 48, pl. xxxi. fig. 3 (1811). Crucirostra leucoptera (Gmel.), Brehm, Isis, 1827, p. 720.
The first record of the occurrence of the European White-winged Crossbill in the British Islands is that of Templeton, who, in a communi- cation to the Linnean Society, stated that a specimen had been shot at Grenville, near Belfast, on the 11th of May, 1802. Although the speci- men has apparently been lost, a coloured drawing of it is still in existence, and assisted Thompson in his identification of the species. In 1848 Mr. Rodd records, in the ‘Zoologist’ for that year (p. 142), a second specimen killed a few years previously at Larrigan, in Cornwall.
In the autumn of 1845 there appears to have been a remarkable migration of European White-winged Crossbills to this country; for a female was shot out of a flock of about fifteen near Brampton, Cumberland, in November, and two or three others were killed about the same time and place (Hancock, Cat. Birds Northumb. and Durh. p. 50). They appear to have remained in this country during the winter; for in May 1846 a flock was seen at Thetford, in Norfolk, and one specimen was killed, whilst a second was obtained in the neighbourhood of Bury St. Edmunds *.
Another specimen, a young bird, is recorded by Yarrell as having been shot about this time by Doubleday in his garden at Epping. A second example occurred in Ireland in 1868, and was mentioned in the ‘ Zoologist ’ for that year (p. 1876) by Mr. Blake Knox. It was obtained in county Dublin in July or August. The occurrence of this species in Scotland is very doubtful, as the “ White-winged Crossbills” which have at various times been obtained there have not been sufficiently well identified.
Owing to the imperfect identification of the species, it 1s difficult to determine the exact number of specimens of the American form of the White-winged Crossbill which have found their way to our shores. As this species is said to be common throughout the year in Newfoundland, and is occasionally found in Greenland, it may reasonably be expected to visit our northern coasts. The earliest known instance of its occurrence in the British Islands is that of a female now in the Strickland collection, Cambridge, and which was obtained near Worcester in 1838 (Salvin, Cat. B. Strickl. Coll. p. 203). In 1845 Mr. E. B. Fitton exhibited, at a meeting of the Zoological Society, a second example, an adult male found by him on the shore at Exmouth on the 17th of September of that year. <A third specimen, a female, was caught in the rigging of a ship which came into
* The occurrence of several examples of this species at Drinkston, in Suffolk, in 1849 (Bree, ‘ Zoologist,’ 1849, p. 2419), quoted by Harting in his ‘ Handbook of British Birds,’
p. 116, is a myth, the record probably referring to the birds mentioned above as killed in that district in 1846,
WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILLS. 39
the port of Yarmouth, and was bought alive by Mr. G. H. Gurney in October 1872. Gray, in his ‘ Birds of the West of Scotland,’ mentions a specimen shot, in February 1841, near Jedburgh, and also the occurrence of a great number, “ twelve or fifteen years ago,” at sea, seen by Dr. Dewar “ crossing the Atlantic before a stiff westerly breeze.” Many alighted on the steamer when about 600 miles east of Newfoundland, and several were captured and brought to this country. In addition to these occurrences, Saxby, in his ‘ Birds of Shetland,’ states that he shot two Crossbills at Halligarth on the 4th of September 1859, which he refers to the American species.
The European White-win ged Crossbill appears to have a somewhat more northerly breeding-range than the Common Crossbill. Henke records it as a common resident near Archangel, and it probably breeds in the Urals. Middendorff says that it is especially common in the valley of the Yenesay, and was the only Crossbill observed between lat. 63° and the Arctic circle. Dybowsky is satisfied that it breeds in the mountains near Lake Baikal; Middendorff met with it on the Pacific coast in lat. 55°, in June. In winter it wanders into South Sweden, Denmark, Poland, Ger- many, and has been recorded from Holland, Normandy, Switzerland, the Tyrol, Lombardy, and Hungary.
The American White-winged Crossbill breeds across that continent from Alaska to Labrador. It has been obtained in Greenland, and occasionally winters in the northern States. It has never been found in Europe, except in the British Islands, and possibly in Heligoland.
The history of the White-winged Crossbill, so far as it is known, is a repetition of that of the Common Crossbill. Like its near ally, it isa very early breeder, and collects into flocks in summer, which wander south in winter. It feeds principally on the cones of larch and spruce, but in confinement is very fond of apples. In a cage they are described as clinging to the sides and top with their feet, and as apparently enjoying to walk with their heads downwards. Both male and female sing well; their note is said to be very plaintive, and to resemble the call of the Bullfinch.
Very little appears to be known respecting the nidification of this bird. A nest of the American form, obtained by Dr. A. Adams at Fredericton, New Brunswick, in 1868, is described by Messrs. Baird, Brewer, and Ridgway as “deeply saucer-shaped, and composed of a rather thin wall of fibrous pale-green lichens encased on the outside with spruce-twigs and thinly lined with coarse hairs and shreds of inner bark. Its external diameter is a little less than four inches, the rim being almost perfectly circular; the cavity is an inch and a half deep by two and a half broad. The one egg is pale blue, the large end rather thickly spattered with black and ashy lilac, is regularly or rather slightly elongate oval, the
40 BRITISH BIRDS.
small end rather obtuse. It measures ‘8 inch in length by ‘56 in breadth.” A nest of the European species, obtained through Mr. Craemers at Archangel, is described by Dresser as closely resembling that of the Common Crossbill, but smaller and somewhat slighter in structure. He also remarks that the eggs are rather darker in ground-colour than those of that species, and are smaller in size, but otherwise closely resemble them.
The White-winged Crossbill is specifically distinct from the Common Crossbill, though its only difference appears to consist in having the greater and median wing-coverts broadly tipped with white. The difference between the sexes is alike in both species, and the males of both appear to change colour with age in exactly the same way.
- PINE-GROSBEAK. 41
LOXIA ENUCLEATOR. PINE-GROSBEAK.
(Pirate 12.)
Coccothraustes canadensis, Briss. Orn. iii, p. 250, pl. xii. fig. 3 (1760),
Loxia enucleator, Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 299 (1766) ; et auctorum plurimorum— Gmelin, (Bonaparte), (Temminck), (Degland § Gerbe), (Salvadorr), (Newton), (Dresser), &e.
Loxia flamengo, Sparrm. Mus. Carls. no. 17 (1786).
Pinicola rubra, Vietll, Ors. d’Am. Sept. i. p. iv (1807).
Fringilla enucleator (Linn.), Meyer, Vog. Liv- u. Esthl. p. 74 (1815).
Strobiliphaga enucleator (Linn.), Vieill. N. Dict. d’ Hist. Nat. ix. p. 609 (1817).
Corythus enucleator (Linn.), Cuv. Regne An. i. p. 391 (1817).
Pyrrhula enucleator (Zinn.), Temm. Man. d’Orn. i. p. 333 (1820).
Loxia psittacea, Pall, Zoogr. Rosso-Asiat. ii. p. 5 (1826).
Corythus enucleator (Linn.), Fleming, Brit. An. p. 76 (1828).
Corythus angustirostris, Brehm, Vog. Deutschi. p. 247 (1831).
Pinicola enucleator (Linn.), Cab. Ersch. § Grub. Encycl. 1. p. 279 (1849),
Pinicola americana, Cab. fide Bonap. Consp. i. p. 528 (1850).
Pinicola canadensis (Sriss.), Cab. Mus. Hein, i. p. 167 (1851).
The Pine-Grosbeak is a very rare winter visitor to the British Islands, which lie beyond its usual winter range. It is one of those gipsy mi- grants which flock together in winter and lead a roving life, not going further from their breeding-grounds than the severity of the season com- pels them to wander in search of food. Their range of migration is conse- quently very irregular; and in very hard winters they cross the sea into Denmark, and occasionally wander as far as Heligoland and the shores of Britain. There is no satisfactory evidence of the occurrence of the Pine- Grosbeak in Scotland or Ireland; and of the five occurrences in England three of them, all females, were on the east coast—one near Newcastle in 1831, one near Yarmouth in 1845, and one near London at a still earlier date. In 1845 a male was shot near Rochdale, and in 1854 a second male near Exeter. Details of these captures, as well as of many other alleged occurrences of this species, may be found in the ‘Zoologist’ for 1877, p. 242.
The Pine-Grosbeak is a cireumpolar bird, breeding in the forests at or near the Arctic circle. It is common in Norwegian Lapland, Archangel, and the valleys of the Petchora and the Yenesay; Dybowsky obtained it in Kamtschatka in November, and also says that it breeds in the pine-regions of the mountains near Lake Baikal. On the American continent it is found from Alaska in the west to Labrador in the east, and
A2 BRITISH BIRDS.
wanders into the northern States in winter. In the Old World it winters in South Scandinavia, Denmark, and South Siberia, and occasionally ~ throughout North Germany. It has also occurred at this season in Holland, France, Bohemia, and Hungary. In the Himalayas the Pine- Grosbeak is represented by a much smaller species, Loxia subhimachalus, which differs in being smaller, richer-coloured, and in having no white on the wing.
The summer home of the Pine-Grosbeak is a very picturesque country. Almost all the forest districts of Siberia are hilly, and in the north as the trees become smaller they are also more thinly scattered over the ground, and the interminable extent of wood is broken by occasional flat open marshes, which become gay with flowers as soon as the snow melts. The scenery is more park-like than further south, and birds are much more plentiful and more easily seen.
The Pine-Grosbeaks arrive at their breeding-grounds in small flocks in April, and continue to be gregarious until summer comes, when they disperse for the purpose of building their nests. They appear to be some- what shy and retiring birds, because they do not frequent the roads like the Bullfinches, the Snow-Buntings, and the Mealy Redpoles, who feed largely on the droppings of the horses; but this is by no means the case ; they confine themselves principally to the woods, where they are not diffi- cult to approach, even when the sportsman is obliged to hunt them in snow-shoes six feet long to support his weight on the untrodden surface. In the large pine-forests they prefer the banks of the rivers or the out- skirts of some open place, and may often escape detection from their habit of frequenting the tops of the trees. On the Arctic circle many of the trees are small, and on the hilly ground they are scattered im small clumps, or sometimes in isolated trees, the drooping boughs of the spruce-firs looking very graceful on the white snow. In places like these the Pine-Grosbeak may often be seen perched conspicuously on the top of a spruce-fir twenty or thirty feet from the ground, but looking so much like the last spike of the tree as frequently to escape notice. The first time that Harvie-Brown and I met with these birds in the valiey of the Petchora was on the 24th of May, eight days after our arrival, in lat. 655°. They had probably been there some weeks, as in the valley of the Yenesay I found them on the 23rd of April in lat. 664°, and was assured by the sailors that they had been in the forests a long time. We had no difficulty im shooting as many as we required, and once as we were lunching under the shade of a spruce-fir one or two of these fine birds came close to us. We generally saw them on or near the tops of the trees; but on one occasion we shot one from a fallen tree stump. They very rarely visit the ground ; but I once saw one hopping along like a Thrush under a fir tree. The call-note is a plaintive single note somewhat like that of our Bullfinch, but incapable of being
PINE-GROSBEAK. 43
expressed on paper. The song is very melodious, not very loud or long, but flute-like. When I first heard it I took it for the song of some rare Siberian Thrush, and was quite disappointed when I shot the bird to find it only a Pine-Grosbeak. The flight is undulating and powerful. We found several nests which could only have belonged to birds of this species ; but our search for eggs was unsuccessful. The breeding-season is said to be the end of May or beginning of June. The nests are generally placed in a spruce-fir tree ten or twelve feet from the ground on a thick branch close to the main stem. The nest is made on the same model as that of the Hawfinch and Bullfinch, but of coarser materials. The outside is a framework of slender fir-twigs ; and the inside, which projects above the outside, is composed of roots, fine grass, and a lichen which grows on the branches of the trees, and might easily be mistaken for hair. The first clearly identified eggs of the Pine-Grosbeak which came to this country were those obtained by John Wolley near Muonioniska in 1855, and seven years later Wheelwright found five nests near Quickiock. The number of eggs varies from three to four; they measure from 1:07 to °97 inch in length and from ‘74 to °7 in breadth. They may be described as large handsome Bullfinch’s eggs. The ground-colour is pale greenish blue, boldly spotted, principally at the larger end, with surface-spots varying from rich brown to almost black, and with underlying spots of greyer brown. Some eggs are also profusely speckled with very small spots, and occasionally a Chaffinch-like streak is seen on the large end. On some eggs the spots are so large and numerous as to be more or less confluent.
In winter the Pine-Grosbeak is much easier of approach than it is in summer, and it is said that it may even be caught by a snare fastened to the end of arod. It feeds upon the buds of various forest trees, the seeds of pine and fir cones, and the berries of various shrubs, especially those of the southernwood.
The adult male Pine-Grosbeak is a very handsome bird; the general colour of the plumage is dull slate-grey, darker and browner on the wings and tail, and paler on the under tail-coverts. The wing-coverts, innermost secondaries, and upper tail-coverts have broad white margins, and every feather, except those of the belly and under tail-coverts, is fringed with rose-red. Bill dark brown; legs, feet, and claws nearly black; irides hazel. The rose-red is very brilliant after the autumn moult, but fades during winter to some extent. In spring the colour appears to intensify, although there is no change of feather.
The changes of plumage of this species have been the subject of much needless controversy. A series of skins of these birds shot during the breeding-season is easily divided into three groups. Most of the feathers are grey, those of the adult males fringed with rose-red, and those of the adult females with golden yellow. Immature females scarcely differ from
At BRITISH BIRDS.
adults, except that fewer of the feathers have the golden-yellow fringes. The third group, which consists of the immature males, is quite distinct. In these birds the fringes are dull reddish orange, but there is a consider- able individual variation. In some the orange is very yellow, in others very red, and occasionally both colours are found on the same bird. The Pine-Grosbeak only moults once a year, in autumn, and consequently the adult plumage is not assumed until the second autumn ; but it is said that immature males have been found breeding in their first spring. The con- fusion on this question has arisen from the fact that in confinement the adult males lose the red plumage after the first moult, and remain ever afterwards in the orange or immature plumage. It is possible that very old males may reassume the immature plumage in a wild state, as cage- birds always do ; and it may also be possible that very vigorous young birds may moult from their first plumage direct into the red adult dress, or they may assume the red adult dress in their first spring by a change of colour of the feather without a moult. These possibilities are, however, by no means proved, and, even if they do occur, are probably very exceptional.
CARPODACUS. 45
Genus CARPODACUS.
The Rose-Finches appear to have been unknown to Brisson and Linnzus, and, after they were discovered, were placed by different writers with the Crossbills, the Hawfinches, the Bullfinches, &c., until, in 1828, Brehm established the genus Hrythrina for their reception (Isis, 1828, p. 1276). This name, however, may be rejected, on the ground that it had already been applied in 1767 by Linneeus, in his ‘Systema Nature,’ 1. p. 473, to a genus of plants. In 1829 Kaup established the genus Carpodacus, mn his ‘ Natiirliches System,’ p. 161, making C. erythrinus the type.
The Rose-Finches resemble the birds in the preceding genus in the general distribution of their colour, and ought never to have been generi- cally separated from them. The name Carpodacus, however, has been so extensively applied to them that it may be retained, to avoid unnecessary change. They may be distinguished by the shape of the upper mandible, which in its profile shows an even curve meeting the point of the lower mandible, instead of a curve somewhat suddenly bent or hooked over the latter.
The geographical distribution of the birds in this genus is precisely similar to that in the preceding one. They are confined to the Palzearctic and Nearctic Regions, extending in the former into the Himalayas and in the latter into the tablelands of Mexico. They number about twenty species, only four of which are found in the western portions of the Pale- arctic Region. One of these is an accidental visitor to the British Islands.
In their habits the Rose-Finches do not differ much from the allied species. Their haunts are very similar to those of the birds in the pre- ceding genus ; but the birds do not appear to be so much confined to the conifer growth, and breed in cultivated districts and amongst deciduous trees. In winter, when they are more or less gregarious, their haunts are much more varied than in summer, their choice being influenced only by the presence of the food-supply. They possess considerable powers of song. Their nests are open, resembling those of their allies; and their eggs are five or six in number, blue of different shades, spotted with blackish brown. Their food consists of buds, seeds, and insects of various kinds.
46 BRITISH BIRDS.
CARPODACUS ERYTHRINUS.
SCARLET ROSE FINCH. (Piate 12.)
Pyrrhula erythrina, Pall. N. Comm. Acad. Sct. Imp. Petrop. xiv. p. 587, tab. 23. fig. 1 (1770) ; et auctorum plurimorum—WNaumann, Temminck, (Bonaparte), (Degland § Gerbe), (Salvadori), (Dresser), (Newton), &e.
Loxia rosea, Vieill. Ois. Chant. pl. lxv. (1805).
Loxia erythrea, Endler § Scholtz, Schl. Nat.i. p. 17, pl. 5; ii. p. 185, pl. 77 (as09- -10).
Fringilla erythrina (Pall.), Meyer, Vig. Liv- u. Esthl. p. 77 (1815).
Coccothraustes rosea, Vieill, N. Dict. d’ Hist. Nat. xiii. p. 589 (1817).
Linaria erythrina (Paill.), Bove, Isis, 1822, p. 554.
Coceothraustes erythrina (Pall.), Bonn. et Vieill. Enc. Méth. p. 1003 (1823).
Carpodacus erythrinus (Pall.), Kaup, Natiirl. Syst. p. 161 (1829).
Erythrospiza erythrina (Pall.), Bonap. Comp. List B. Eur. & N. Amer. p. 35 (1888).
Heemorrhous roseus (Vietll.), Jerd. Madr. Journ. p. 36 (1840).
Erythospiza rosea (Vieill.), Blyth, Journ. As. Soc. Beng. xi. p. 461 (1842).
Propasser sordida, Hodgs. Gray’s Zool. Miscel. p. 84 (1844).
Pyrrhulinota rosecolor, Hodgs. Gray's Zool. Miscel. p. 85 (1844).
Pyrrhulinota rosea (Vieill.), Hodgs. Gray's Zool. Miscel. p. 85 (1844).
Pyrrhulinota roseata, Hodgs. Proc. Zool. Soc. 1845, p. 36.
The claim of the Scarlet Rose-Finch to be considered a British bird rests upon the occurrence of two examples on our shores. The first specimen was captured near Brighton, on the downs, during the last week of September 1869, and was recorded by Mr. Wonfor in the ‘ Zoologist ’ for that year (p. 1918), under a wrong name, which was afterwards cor- rected by Mr. Bond in the same periodical for 1870 (p. 1984). It was a female, and was kept alive for some time by Mr. Swaysland, of Brighton ; it afterwards came into the possession of Mr. Monk, in whose aviary it lived several years. A second example, also a female, was recorded by Mr. Bond in the ‘ Zoologist’ for 1870 (p. 2383). It was taken near Caen Wood, Hampstead, by a bird-catcher, on the 5th of October of that year, and is now in the above-named gentleman’s collection. The Scarlet Rose- Finch breeds throughout North Europe and Siberia, from the Baltic to the Pacific. The western limit of its breeding-range appears to be Finland, the Baltic provinces of Russia, and Poland*. It passes through South
* The statement of Sharpe and Dresser, repeated by Newton, that Naumann found this bird breeding on the island of Sylt, is not strictly correct. Naumann saw a cock bird in full song on the 7th of June, probably just arrived, as this bird does not reach the Baltic Provinces before the second week in May, and the eggs are not laid before the first week in June. An old nest was pointed out to him as the nest of the bird, and the female and young were said to be in the neighbourhood; but it is not clear that he saw them himself.
SCARLET ROSEH-FINCH. 47
Russia on migration, but breeds in Asia Minor, on the Caucasus up to 10,000 feet above the level of the sea, and on the Ural Mountains. To the north it ranges slightly beyond the Arctic circle ; and to the south it breeds throughout Turkestan, Gilgit, Cashmere, and Mongolia. Dybowsky found it in Kamtschatka ; but it has not been recorded from Japan. Great numbers pass through North China on migration, a few remaining to breed in the mountains near Pekin. Its principal winter-quarters appear to be Northern and Central India and the Burma peninsula; but it occa- sionally strays into Europe as far west as France and Italy. It appears also to be an accidental visitor to Persia and Scinde. There are several allies of this bird in Palestine, the Caucasus, Turkestan, South Siberia, the Himalayas, and North America. One of the American species (C. purpureus) approaches very near to our bird, and may prove to be only subspecifically distinct from it, but may be distinguished by the more carmine (less scarlet) tint of the plumage.
The Scarlet Rose-Finch is not particularly interesting at its breeding- grounds. Such a fine-looking bird, perching so conspicuously as it does, is sure to attract attention; but I did not observe any thing in its habits to distinguish it from other Finches which was worthy of note. North of lat. 68°, when the trees began to diminish in size, it disappeared. The call-note is very similar to that of the Canary. In autumn these birds collect into flocks, and are amongst the first birds to migrate southwards before the approach of winter.
The migrations of the Scarlet Rose-Finch are very interesting. It ap- pears probable that all the migrants of this species to Hurope, from the Baltic to the Ural Mountains, winter in India. This fact alone suggests the theory that it is only a recent emigrant to our continent; and even within ornithologically historic times it is said to have become common in Finland and the Baltic Provinces. Another fact which supports this theory may be found in the dates of its migrations. ‘Taczanowsky says that in Warsaw this bird does not arrive before the middle of May; and this is confirmed by Russow, who says that in the Baltic Provinces it is one of the latest summer visitors, arriving trom the 8th to the 10th of May. On the other hand, in Siberia, where birds usually arrive much later than in Western Kurope, the Scarlet Rose-Finch is recorded at considerably earlier dates. Eversmann says that they arrive in the Southern Ural early in April. Radde says he observed them at Tarei-nor, in Dauria, on the 7th of April, and near Lake Baikal on the 26th of that month. Middendorff obtained one on the shores of the Pacific, in lat. 55°, about the same date ; and I first saw them on the Arctic circle, in the valley of the Yenesay, on the 6th of June, almost at the northern limit of their range, in the first of the three great weeks of migration. It is only fair, however, to mention that Dybowsky did not see them at Lake Baikal until after the middle of
48 BRITISH BIRDS.
May, and suggests that Middendorff and Radde confounded this species with the Rosy Bullfinch, which arrives earlier.
The song of the Scarlet Rose-Finch is a very striking one, and not to be confused with that of any other bird. It is a loud, clear whistle— tii-whit', ti-tu'-i. It does not require a great stretch of imagination to fancy the bird says, “I’m pleased’ to see' you;” the word “see” being strongly accented and slightly prolonged. ‘This song is never varied, but is sometimes repeated twice in rapid succession. When it is heard, the bird may usually be seen perched conspicuously on the top of a bush or low tree. The marshy forest-banks of the great Siberian rivers are a very favourite resort of this bird; and in the Baltic Provinces, where it is common, and in the valley of the Upper Volga, it is described as fre- quenting willows and other low trees in marshy districts.
The food of this bird consists of seeds of various kinds, grain, and the buds of trees. In spring it eats insects, and in autumn berries and other fruit.
The nest of the Scarlet Rose-Finch is built in the fork of a small bush, or amongst climbing plants not far from the ground. It bears little resem- blance to the nest of a Finch, and might easily be mistaken for that of a Warbler. It is composed of dry grass-stalks and lined with horsehair. It is rather deep, and very neatly and carefully made, although it is so slender as to be semitransparent when held up to the light. The mside diameter is two inches and a quarter. Five is the usual number of eggs ; but sometimes only four are laid, and occasionally as many as six. They vary in length from ‘9 to *73, and in breadth from °63 to ‘55. The ground- colour is greenish blue, not so pale as that of the eggs of the Bullfinch ; the spots are also fewer, smaller, and blacker than in typical eggs of the latter species. ‘They are smaller than the eggs of the Bullfinch, and are not likely to be mistaken for the eggs of any other bird.
In the winter the Scarlet Rose-Finch ranges over the plains of India, sometimes in large flocks, but more generally in small parties, frequenting alike the groves, the gardens, and the jungle. At this season of the year its habits much resemble those of the true Finches. In Gilgit they breed at an elevation of 10,000 feet above the level of the sea, and fresh eggs have been obtained there in the second half of July. Early in September they leave the hills and come down into the valley, and soon migrate to their winter-quarters. Captain Butler, describing its habits in Rajpootana, west of Scinde, says that it is very fond of the watery nectar contained im the flower of the Indian coral-tree (Erythrina indica), wpon which tree the bird is always found when it is in blossom.
The adult male Scarlet Rose-Finch is a very brilliant bird, but he is almost as much crimson as scarlet. The colour is most brilliant on the head, rump, throat, and breast. The wings and tail are brown, each
SCARLET ROSE-FINCH. 49
feather obscurely margined with crimson. The underparts below the breast gradually fade into buffish white on the under tail-coverts. Bill, legs, feet, and claws brown; irides hazel. The female is a very plain- looking bird, not unlike a small hen Sparrow. The general colour is a neutral brown, darkest on the wings, tail, and the centres of the feathers of the head, nape, throat, and breast, palest on the tips of the wing-coverts, the margins of the innermost secondaries and of the throat and breast- feathers, and on the rest of the underparts. The back and rump are slightly suffused with olive.
The changes of plumage in this species have never been clearly described. The female in first winter plumage is very brown, and has the dark centres of the feathers much developed. In this stage it bears a striking resemblance to the cross between the Linnet and the Greenfinch (Fringilla cannabina x chloris) ; but the latter may at once be distinguished by the obscureness of its wing-bars and by the shape of its bill. Seen from above, the bill of the Carpodacus is a cone with convex sides, whilst that -of the Fringilla is a cone with concave sides. The female in first summer plumage is scarcely distinguishable from the adult; the brown centres of the feathers appear to fade or bleach, and the pale margins to abrade, so that the streaks are much less conspicuous. No further change takes place in the plumage of the female beyond the faded and abraded appearance of the feathers just before the autumn moult.
Males in first winter plumage are scarcely distinguishable from adult females, and even in first summer plumage are sometimes indistinguishable from them. I shot one of these males in the plumage of the female in the valley of the Yenesay on June 20, which I sexed myself; and Major Biddulph obtained several near Gilgit in July, which were evidently breeding. Probably no males attain more than an occasional faint rosy tinge until after their second autumn moult. If this be so, the adult plumage is not assumed until after the third autumn moult, and males of the second year may be recognized by the almost entire absence of the crimson on the back and underparts below the breast. The fully adult male retains his brilliant livery throughout the year, some allow- ance being made for wear and tear, which is only very apparent in late summer, just before the autumn moult.
If this explanation of the difference in the plumages of the Scarlet Rose-F inch be the true one, Jerdon’s theory that the winter plumage is duller than that of summer, and Dresser’s theory that the summer plumage is more brilliant than that of spring, fall to the ground. Newton does not refer to the subject.
VOL, II. 0)
50 BRITISH BIRDS.
Genus PYRRHULA.
The Bullfinches were included by Linnzeus in his genus Lowia, where it is a great pity that they were not allowed to remain; but Brisson having in 1760, in his ‘ Ornithologia,’ ii. p. 308, already established the genus Pyrrhula for their reception, it has been almost universally accepted by ornithologists. The Common Bullfinch, the Pyrrhula pyrrhula of Brisson, is the type. .
The chief characters by which the Bullfinches may be distinguished from the rest of the Finches are the convex profile of the bill, the metallic blue-black wings and tail, and the white rump. The latter character is perhaps the most conspicuous; but unfortunately in one species, P. awran- tiaca from the Himalayas, the white is suffused with yellow, and in another, P.murina from the Azores, it is so much suffused with brown as to be scarcely distinguishable from the back. The black wings and tail are also more or less common to the genus Coccothraustes, though in most of the species in this genus there is a considerable amount of white either on the one or the other. These two genera are so closely connected, that it is impossible to decide to which Pyrrhula nipalensis should be assigned. In its general appearance it is undoubtedly a Bullfinch; but the rump is almost concolorous with the back, and it agrees with Coccothraustes personatus and C. melanurus in the eccentric character of its tail.
This genus has a more restricted range than any other in this subfamily, being almost confined to the Palearctic Region, extending as far north as the Arctic circle, as far south as the southern slopes of the Himalayas, and eastwards across Behring’s Straits into Alaska. About a dozen species have been described, of which several are only worthy of subspecific rank. Only one species is found in the British Islands, which is repre- sented in Eastern Europe by a larger form. No other species occur in the Western Palearctic Region except the one already alluded to, which inhabits the Azores.
The Bullfinches inhabit well-wooded districts, and frequent shrubberies, gardens, forests, hedges, and groves. In their habits, local distribution, and food they resemble very closely the Rose-Finches, but are not so gregarious in winter and are more retiring, especially in the breeding- season. Their nests are open and do not differ materially from those of the Crossbills and Grosbeaks, nor is it known that there is any charac- teristic difference in the colour or number of their eggs.
BULLFINCH, 51
PYRRHULA VULGARIS.
BULLFINCH. (Puate 12.)
Pyrrhula pyrrhula, Briss. Orn, iii. p. 8308 (1760).
Loxia pyrrhula, Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 300 (1766).
Fringilla pyrrhula (Briss.), Temm. Man. d’ Orn, p. 200 (1815).
Pyrrhula europea, Vieill. N. Dict. d’ Hist. Nat. iy. p. 286 (1816).
Pyrrhula rufa, Koch, Syst. baier. Zool. i. p. 227 (1816).
Pyrrhula vulgaris, Temm. Man.d’ Orn. i. p. 838 (1820); et auctorum plurimorum —Degland, Gerbe, Savi, Doderlein, Meyer, Bolle, Bideker, Dubos, Naumann, Bonaparte, Brehm, Blasius, Homeyer, Droste, Goebel, Stevenson, Gray, Fritsch, Thompson, Cabanis, Harting, Russow, Seebohm § Harvie-Brown, Severtzow, Cordeaux, Sharpe, Lilford, Schlegel, Sachse, Finsch, Crown Prince Rudolf, New- ton, Brandt, Schalow, Blyth, Gould, Giglioli, Godman, &c.
Pyrrhula pileata, Macgill, Brit. B. i. p. 407 (1837),
The Bullfinch is one of the best known of our smaller birds, and one that from its tame and confiding nature is easily kept in confinement. From its love of dense thickets and its retiring habits it is apt to be regarded as much rarer than it really is. It is found commonly, although more or less locally, in all the wooded portions of Great Britain, and occasionally breeds in the Channel Islands. It does not appear to visit the Hebrides, these islands probably being too bare and treeless for such a species. An example was obtained in Orkney in 1809; and in Shetland a female was shot in 1863 at Halligarth. In Ireland the Bullfinch is said not to be so common as in England, nevertheless it is to be met with throughout the country.
The Bullfinch breeds throughout North Europe and Asia, not extending much beyond the Arctic circle. In South Europe, Turkestan, and South Siberia it is principally known as a winter visitor, occasionally straying as far south as Algeria and Asia Minor; but a few remain to breed in the mountains of North Portugal and Spain, North Italy, the Carpa- thians, and the Caucasus.
Throughout its extensive range the Bullfinch shows some slight varia- tions both of size and colour. In Europe west of Poland and south of Norway the birds are the smallest, the grey of the back is slightly the darkest, the red of the underparts is least brilliant, and the tips of the greater wing-coverts are grey. The extreme eastern form from Kamtschatka is slightly larger, especially in the bill, the grey of the upper parts is paler and brighter, and the tips of the greater wing-coverts are pure white ; there is no red on the outside web of the first innermost secondary, and the outside tail-feather has a white streak on the middle of
E2
52 BRITISH BIRDS.
the inner web next the shaft. This form has been named P. kamtschatica by Taczanowsky. In the intervening localities intermediate forms occur ; examples from Asia Minor are intermediate in the colour of the back, but are darker than examples from Krasnoyarsk. One example from Kamts- chatka has the white on the outside tail-feathers, and an example from the Ussuri river, though it has the white on the outside tail-feathers, has also the red on the innermost secondary. These intermediate forms are known by the name of P. mayor; but there can be no doubt that neither of these two eastern forms are specifically distinct from the Common Bullfinch ; and if we accept the western form as the typical one, the Pyr- rhula vulgaris of Temminck (the Pyrrhula pyrrhula of Brisson), the eastern form must bear the name of P. vulgaris, var. major. Examples of the latter form occasionally occur in winter in Eastern Germany, and the Bullfinches found in Greece and Asia Minor also belong to this variety. The Bullfinch has several allies in the Himalayas, East Siberia, China, and Japan, but none of them have the black head combined with the red breast as in the males of our bird.
The Bullfinch is one of our most retirimg birds, especially in summer, and seeks at this season the seclusion of the woods and dense shrubberies to rear its young. In autumn and winter its range is considerably wider, and it may then be seen in fields and gardens, in small plantations where the undergrowth is dense, and in matted hedgerows where tall herbaceous plants and brambles struggle through and hang over whitethorn and hazel bushes. In winter, especially just before spring, the Bullfinch is very commonly seen in large gardens and orchards. It very rarely visits the wilder portions of the country, and where there are no trees there will be no Bullfinches.
The habits of the Bullfinch are so quiet and retiring that it is only when the leaves are off the trees that we have much opportunity of studying them. It is not by any means a gregarious bird, nor does it usually evince any partiality for the company of other birds, as is the case with so many Finches, and generally it is only accompanied by its mate. In late autumn, however, Bullfinches are sometimes seen in little parties composed of the young of the year and their parents. In winter it is by no means a shy bird, and will allow the observer to approach it quite closely and watch its restless actions as it skips from twig to twig searching for berries and seeds. The Bullfinch is rarely seen on the ground in this country; but in the forests of Siberia it is glad enough to make friends with the Snow-Buntings, Mealy Redpoles, and Siberian Jays, and feed on the droppings of the horses on the snow. ‘The call-note of the Bullfinch to his mate is a full, rich, but low piping whistle, very monotonous and plaintive, and sounds like dyw, dy; and his song, which is usually uttered in so low a tone as to be scarcely audible at a distance, as if he were
BULLFINCH. 53
fearful of being discovered in the act, is very pleasing and mellow. Usually it is warbled as he sits bolt upright, and every now and then jerks his wings and tail and turns his head from side to side, as if about to take wing. The female also sings; but her performance is much inferior to that of the male. The Bullfinch is in great request as a cage-bird, from the readiness with which it will learn to whistle various tunes, and from its docile and confiding disposition.
There can be little doubt that Bullfinches mate for life. At all seasons of the year they may be observed in pairs, and even in midwinter marks of affection may be constantly seen passing between them. In early spring the male retires with his mate to the haunts he loves best, and in which he seems most at home, to the dense shrubberies and thickets, amongst a superabundance of verdure of all descriptions, where the young can be reared in seclusion. So retiring is he, that during the breeding-season he is very rarely seen, and seldom, indeed, betrays the whereabouts of his nest; im fact, at this time of the year the Bullfinch is one of the most silent of birds ; for its bridal song is only heard at intervals in early spring. It usually commences to build its nest about the middle of April, and eggs may be found by the latter end of that month. The site for the nest is chosen in a low tree or bush; very often some species of evergreen is selected, as a holly or a yew, and always in a dense situation. Plantations of young firs are very often selected by the Bullfinch, and its nest is frequently placed in the branches of a small spruce. A whitethorn hedge near a plantation or a thick wood is also a favourite place. The nest of the Bullfinch can readily be told from that of almost every other British bird. It is a very beautiful structure, the framework almost entirely composed of slender twigs, and is very flat, not unlike a