DOMESTIC PIGEONS.
ENUMERATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL BREEDS--INDIVIDUAL
VARIABILITY--VARIATIONS OF A REMARKABLE NATURE--OSTEOLOGICAL
CHARACTERS: SKULL, LOWER JAW, NUMBER OF VERTEBRAE--CORRELATION OF
GROWTH: TONGUE WITH BEAK; EYELIDS AND NOSTRILS WITH WATTLED
SKIN--NUMBER OF WING-FEATHERS, AND LENGTH OF WING--COLOUR AND
DOWN--WEBBED AND FEATHERED FEET--ON THE EFFECTS OF DISUSE--LENGTH OF
FEET IN CORRELATION WITH LENGTH OF BEAK--LENGTH OP STERNUM, SCAPULA,
AND FURCULA--LENGTH OF WINGS--SUMMARY ON THE POINTS OF DIFFERENCE IN
THE SEVERAL BREEDS
I have been led to study domestic pigeons with particular care, because the
evidence that all the domestic races have descended from one known source
is far clearer than with any other anciently domesticated animal. Secondly,
because many treatises in several languages, some of them old, have been
written on the pigeon, so that we are enabled to trace the history of
several breeds. And lastly, because, from causes which we can partly
understand, the amount of variation has been extraordinarily great. The
details will often be tediously minute; but no one who really wants to
understand the progress of change in domestic animals will regret this; and
no one who has kept pigeons and has marked the great difference between the
breeds and the trueness with which most of them propagate their kind, will
think this care superfluous. Notwithstanding the clear evidence that all
the breeds are the descendants of a single species, I could not persuade
myself until some years had passed that the whole amount of difference
between them had arisen since man first domesticated the wild rock-pigeon.
I have kept alive all the most distinct breeds, which I could procure in
England or from the Continent; and have prepared skeletons of all. I have
received skins from Persia, and a large number from India and other
quarters of the {132} world.[275] Since my admission into two of the London
pigeon-clubs, I have received the kindest assistance from many of the most
eminent amateurs.[276]
The races of the Pigeon which can be distinguished, and which breed true,
are very numerous. MM. Boitard and Corbie[277] describe in detail 122
kinds; and I could add several European kinds not known to them. In India,
judging from the skins sent me, there are many breeds unknown here; and Sir
W. Elliot informs me that a collection imported by an Indian merchant into
Madras from Cairo and Constantinople included several kinds unknown in
India. I have no doubt that there exist considerably above 150 kinds which
breed true and have been separately named. But of these the far greater
number differ from each other only in unimportant characters. Such
differences will be here entirely passed over, and I shall confine myself
to the more important points of structure. That many important differences
exist we shall presently see. I have looked through the magnificent
collection of the Columbidae in the British Museum, and, with the exception
of a few forms (such as the Didunculus, Calaenas, Goura, &c), I do not
hesitate to {133} affirm that some domestic races of the rock-pigeon differ
fully as much from each other in external characters as do the most
distinct natural genera. We may look in vain through the 288 known
species[278] for a beak so small and conical as that of the short-faced
tumbler; for one so broad and short as that of the barb; for one so long,
straight, and narrow, with its enormous wattles, as that of the English
carrier; for an expanded upraised tail like that of the fantail; or for an
oesophagus like that of the pouter. I do not for a moment pretend that the
domestic races differ from each other in their whole organisation as much
as the more distinct natural genera. I refer only to external characters,
on which, however, it must be confessed that most genera of birds have been
founded. When, in a future chapter, we discuss the principle of selection
as followed by man, we shall clearly see why the differences between the
domestic races are almost always confined to external, or at least to
externally visible, characters.
Owing to the amount and gradations of difference between the several
breeds, I have found it indispensable in the following classification to
rank them under Groups, Races, and Sub-races; to which varieties and
sub-varieties, all strictly inheriting their proper characters, must often
be added. Even with the individuals of the same sub-variety, when long kept
by different fanciers, different strains can sometimes be recognised. There
can be no doubt that, if well-characterized forms of the several Races had
been found wild, all would have been ranked as distinct species, and
several of them would certainly have been placed by ornithologists in
distinct genera. A good classification of the various domestic breeds is
extremely difficult, owing to the manner in which many of the forms
graduate into each other; but it is curious how exactly the same
difficulties are encountered, and the same rules have to be followed, as in
the classification of any natural but difficult group of organic beings. An
"artificial classification" might be followed which would present fewer
difficulties than a "natural classification;" but then it would interrupt
many plain affinities. Extreme forms can readily be defined; but
intermediate and troublesome forms {134} often destroy our definitions.
Forms which may be called "aberrant" must sometimes be included within
groups to which they do not accurately belong. Characters of all kinds must
be used; but as with birds in a state of nature, those afforded by the beak
are the best and most readily appreciated. It is not possible to weigh the
importance of all the characters which have to be used so as to make the
groups and sub-groups of equal value. Lastly, a group may contain only one
race, and another and less distinctly defined group may contain several
races and sub-races, and in this case it is difficult, as in the
classification of natural species, to avoid placing too high a value on
characters which are common to a large number of forms.
In my measurements I have never trusted to the eye; and when speaking of a
part being large or small, I always refer to the wild rock-pigeon (_Columba
livia_) as the standard of comparison. The measurements are given in
decimals of an inch.[279]
I will now give a brief description of all the principal breeds. The
following diagram may aid the reader in learning their names and seeing
their affinities. The rock-pigeon, or _Columba livia_ (including under this
name two or three closely-allied sub-species or geographical races,
hereafter to be described), may be confidently viewed, as we shall see in
the next chapter, as the common parent-form. The names in italics on the
right-hand side of the table show us the most distinct breeds, or those
which have undergone the greatest amount of modification. The lengths of
the dotted lines rudely represent the degree of distinctness of each breed
from the parent-stock, and the names {135} placed under each other in the
columns show the more or less closely connecting links. The distances of
the dotted lines from each other approximately represent the amount of
difference between the several breeds.
[Illustration: Fig. 17.--The Rock-pigeon, or Columba livia.[280] The
parent-form of all domesticated Pigeons.]
{136}
COLUMBA LIVIA or ROCK-PIGEON
GROUP I. GROUP II.
1. SUB- 2. 3. 4.
. GROUPS. .
. Kali-Par
. .
. .
. ...Murassa
. .
. .
. Bussorah
. .
. ....................
. . . . .
. . Bagadotten . .
. . . . .
. . Scanderoon . .
. . . . .
. . . Tronfo .
. . . .
German P. . . .
. Lille P. . . .
. . Dragon Pigeon .
. . . Cygne .
Dutch P. . . . .
. . . . .
....... . . .
. . . .
English English Runt. Barb.
Pouter. Carrier.
GROUP III. GROUP IV.
5. 6. 7. 8. 9. SUB- 10. 11.
. . . . . GROUPS. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . Persian . . . . . . . . .
. . Tumbler . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . Lotan . . . . . . . . .
. . Tumbler . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . Common . . . . . . . . .
. . Tumbler . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
Java . . . . . . . . . . .
Fantail . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. Turbit . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . Trumpeter. . . . . . .
. . . . . Laugher. . . . . .
. . . . . English Frill-back. . . . .
. . . . . Nun. . . .
. . . . . Spot. . .
. . . . . Swallow. .
. . . . . Dove-cot pigeon.
Fantail. African Short- Indian Jacobin.
Owl. faced Frill-
Tumbler. back.
{137}
GROUP I.
This group includes a single race, that of the Pouters. If the most
strongly marked sub-race be taken, namely, the Improved English Pouter,
this is perhaps the most distinct of all domesticated pigeons.
[Illustration: Fig. 18.--English Pouter.]
RACE I.--POUTER PIGEONS. (Kropf-tauben, German. Grosses-gorges, or boulans,
French.)
_Oesophagus of great size, barely separated from the crop, often inflated.
Body and legs elongated. Beak of moderate dimensions._ {138}
_Sub-race I._--The improved English Pouter, when its crop is fully
inflated, presents a truly astonishing appearance. The habit of
slightly inflating the crop is common to all domestic pigeons, but is
carried to an extreme in the Pouter. The crop does not differ, except
in size, from that of other pigeons; but is less plainly separated by
an oblique construction from the oesophagus. The diameter of the upper
part of the oesophagus is immense, even close up to the head. The beak
in one bird which I possessed was almost completely buried when the
oesophagus was fully expanded. The males, especially when excited, pout
more than the females, and they glory in exercising this power. If a
bird will not, to use the technical expression, "play," the fancier, as
I have witnessed, by taking the beak into his mouth, blows him up like
a balloon; and the bird, then puffed up with wind and pride, struts
about, retaining his magnificent size as long as he can. Pouters often
take flight with their crops inflated; and after one of my birds had
swallowed a good meal of peas and water, as he flew up in order to
disgorge them and thus feed his nearly fledged young, I have heard the
peas rattling in his inflated crop as if in a bladder. When flying,
they often strike the backs of their wings together, and thus make a
clapping noise.
Pouters stand remarkably upright, and their bodies are thin and
elongated. In connexion with this form of body, the ribs are generally
broader and the vertebrae more numerous than in other breeds. From their
manner of standing their legs appear longer than they really are,
though, in proportion with those of _C. livia_, the legs and feet are
actually longer. The wings appear much elongated, but by measurement,
in relation to the length of body, this is not the case. The beak
likewise appears longer, but it is in fact a little shorter (about .03
of an inch), proportionally with the size of the body, and relatively
to the beak of the rock-pigeon. The Pouter, though not bulky, is a
large bird; I measured one which was 341/2 inches from tip to tip of
wing, and 19 inches from tip of beak to end of tail. In a wild
rock-pigeon from the Shetland Islands the same measurements gave only
281/4 and 143/4. There are many sub-varieties of the Pouter of different
colours, but these I pass over.
_Sub-race II. Dutch Pouter._--This seems to be the parent-form of our
improved English Pouters. I kept a pair, but I suspect that they were
not pure birds. They are smaller than English pouters, and less well
developed in all their characters. Neumeister[281] says that the wings
are crossed over the tail, and do not reach to its extremity.
_Sub-race III. The Lille Pouter_--I know this breed only from
description.[282] It approaches in general form the Dutch Pouter, but
the inflated oesophagus assumes a spherical form, as if the pigeon had
swallowed a large orange, which had stuck close under the beak. This
inflated ball is represented as rising to a level with the crown of the
head. The middle toe alone is feathered. A variety of this sub-race,
called the claquant, is described by MM. Boitard and Corbie; it pouts
but little, and is characterised {139} by the habit of violently
hitting its wings together over its back,--a habit which the English
Pouter has in a slight degree.
_Sub-race IV. Common German Pouter._--I know this bird only from the
figures and description given by the accurate Neumeister, one of the
few writers on pigeons who, as I have found, may be always trusted.
This sub-race seems considerably different. The upper part of the
oesophagus is much less distended. The bird stands less upright. The
feet are not feathered, and the legs and beak are shorter. In these
respects there is an approach in form to the common rock-pigeon. The
tail-feathers are very long, yet the tips of the closed wings extend
beyond the end of the tail; and the length of the wings, from tip to
tip, and of the body, is greater than in the English Pouter.
GROUP II.
This group includes three Races, namely, Carriers, Runts, and Barbs, which
are manifestly allied to each other. Indeed, certain carriers and runts
pass into each other by such insensible gradations that an arbitrary line
has to be drawn between them. Carriers also graduate through foreign breeds
into the rock-pigeon. Yet, if well-characterised Carriers and Barbs (see
figs. 19 and 20) had existed as wild species, no ornithologist would have
placed them in the same genus with each other or with the rock-pigeon. This
group may, as a general rule, be recognised by the beak being long, with
the skin over the nostrils swollen and often carunculated or wattled, and
with that round the eyes bare and likewise carunculated. The mouth is very
wide, and the feet are large. Nevertheless the Barb, which must be classed
in this same group, has a very short beak, and some runts have very little
bare skin round their eyes.
RACE II.--CARRIERS. (Tuerkische Taube: Pigeons Turcs: Dragons.)
_Beak elongated, narrow, pointed; eyes surrounded by much naked, generally
carunculated skin; neck and body elongated._
[Illustration: Fig. 19.--English Carrier.]
_Sub-race I. The English Carrier._--This is a fine bird, of large size,
close feathered, generally dark-coloured, with an elongated neck. The
beak is attenuated and of wonderful length: in one specimen it was 1.4
inch in length from the feathered base to the tip; therefore nearly
twice as long as that of the rock-pigeon, which measured only .77.
Whenever I compare proportionally any part in the carrier and
rock-pigeon, I take the length of the body from the base of the beak to
the end of the tail as the standard of comparison; and according to
this standard, the beak in one {140} Carrier was nearly half an inch
longer than in the rock-pigeon. The upper mandible is often slightly
arched. The tongue is very long. The development of the carunculated
skin or wattle round the eyes, over the nostrils, and on the lower
mandible, is prodigious. The eyelids, measured longitudinally, were in
some specimens exactly twice as long as in the rock-pigeon. The
external orifice or furrow of the nostrils was also twice as long. The
open mouth in its widest part was in one case .75 of an inch in width,
whereas in the rock-pigeon it is only about .4 of an inch. This great
width of mouth is shown in the skeleton by the reflexed edges of the
ramus of the lower jaw. The head is flat on the summit and narrow
between the orbits. The feet are large and coarse; the length, as {141}
measured from end of hind toe to end of middle toe (without the claws),
was in two specimens 2.6 inches; and this, proportionally with the
rock-pigeon, is an excess of nearly a quarter of an inch. One very fine
Carrier measured 311/2 inches from tip to tip of wing. Birds of this
sub-race are too valuable to be flown as carriers.
_Sub-race II. Dragons; Persian Carriers._--The English Dragon differs
from the improved English Carrier in being smaller in all its
dimensions, and in having less wattle round the eyes and over the
nostrils, and none on the lower mandible. Sir W. Elliot sent me from
Madras a Bagdad Carrier (sometimes called khandesi), the name of which
shows its Persian origin; it would be considered here a very poor
Dragon; the body was of the size of the rock-pigeon, with the beak a
little longer, namely, 1 inch from the tip to the feathered base. The
skin round the eyes was only slightly wattled, whilst that over the
nostrils was fairly wattled. The Hon. C. Murray, also, sent me two
Carriers direct from Persia; these had nearly the same character as the
Madras bird, being about as large as the rock-pigeon, but the beak in
one specimen was as much as 1.15 in length; the skin over the nostrils
was only moderately, and that round the eyes scarcely at all wattled.
_Sub-race III. Bagadotten-Tauben of Neumeister_ (Pavdotten or
Hocker-Tauben).--I owe to the kindness of Mr. Baily, jun., a dead
specimen of this singular breed imported from Germany. It is certainly
allied to the Runts; nevertheless, from its close affinity with
Carriers, it will be convenient here to describe it. The beak is long,
and is hooked or bowed downwards in a highly remarkable manner, as will
be seen in the woodcut to be hereafter given when I treat of the
skeleton. The eyes are surrounded by a wide space of bright red skin,
which, as well as that over the nostrils, is moderately wattled. The
breast-bone is remarkably protuberant, being abruptly bowed outwards.
The feet and tarsi are of great length, larger than in first-rate
English Carriers. The whole bird is of large size, but in proportion to
the size of the body the feathers of the wing and tail are short; a
wild rock-pigeon, of considerably less size, had tail-feathers 4.6
inches in length, whereas in the large Bagadotten these feathers were
scarcely over 4.1 inches in length. Riedel[283] remarks that it is a
very silent bird.
_Sub-race IV. Bussorah Carrier._--Two specimens were sent me by Sir W.
Elliot from Madras, one in spirits and the other skinned. The name
shows its Persian origin. It is much valued in India, and is considered
as a distinct breed from the Bagdad Carrier, which forms my second
sub-race. At first I suspected that these two sub-races might have been
recently formed by crosses with other breeds, though the estimation in
which they are held renders this improbable; but in a Persian
treatise,[284] believed to have been written about 100 years ago, the
Bagdad and Bussorah breeds are described as distinct. The Bussorah
Carrier is of about the same size with the wild rock-pigeon. The shape
of the beak, with some little carunculated skin over the nostrils,--the
much elongated eyelids,--the {142} broad mouth measured
internally,--the narrow head,--the feet proportionally a little longer
than in the rock-pigeon,--and the general appearance, all show that
this bird is an undoubted Carrier; yet in one specimen the beak was of
exactly the same length as in the rock-pigeon. In the other specimen
the beak (as well as the opening of the nostrils) was only a very
little longer, viz. by .08 of an inch. Although there was a
considerable space of bare and slightly carunculated skin round the
eyes, that over the nostrils was only in a slight degree rugose. Sir W.
Elliot informs me that in the living bird the eye seems remarkably
large and prominent, and the same fact is noticed in the Persian
treatise; but the bony orbit is barely larger than that in the
rock-pigeon.
Amongst the several breeds sent to me from Madras by Sir W. Elliot
there is a pair of the _Kala Par_, black birds with the beak slightly
elongated, with the skin over the nostrils rather full, and with a
little naked skin round the eyes. This breed seems more closely allied
to the Carrier than to any other breed, being nearly intermediate
between the Bussorah Carrier and the rock-pigeon.
The names applied in different parts of Europe and in India to the
several kinds of Carriers all point to Persia or the surrounding
countries as the source of this Race. And it deserves especial notice
that, even if we neglect the Kala Par as of doubtful origin, we get a
series broken by very small steps, from the rock-pigeon, through the
Bussorah, which sometimes has a beak not at all longer than that of the
rock-pigeon and with the naked skin round the eyes and over the
nostrils very slightly swollen and carunculated, through the Bagdad
sub-race and Dragons, to our improved English Carriers, which present
so marvellous a difference from the rock-pigeon or _Columba livia_.
RACE III.--RUNTS. (Scanderoons: Die Florentiner-Taube and Hinkel-Taube of
Neumeister: Pigeon Bagadais, Pigeon Romain.)
_Beak long, massive; body of great size._
Inextricable confusion reigns in the classification, affinities, and
naming of Runts. Several characters which are generally pretty constant
in other pigeons, such as the length of the wings, tail, legs, and
neck, and the amount of naked skin round the eyes, are excessively
variable in Runts. When the naked skin over the nostrils and round the
eyes is considerably developed and wattled, and when the size of body
is not very great, Runts graduate in so insensible a manner into
Carriers, that the distinction is quite arbitrary. This fact is
likewise shown by the names given to them in different parts of Europe.
Nevertheless, taking the most distinct forms, at least five sub-races
(some of them including well-marked varieties) can be distinguished,
which differ in such important points of structure, that they would be
considered as good species in a state of nature.
_Sub-race I. Scanderoon of English writers_ (Die Florentiner and
Hinkel-Taube of Neumeister).--Birds of this sub-race, of which I kept
one alive {143} and have since seen two others, differ from the
Bagadotten of Neumeister only in not haying the beak nearly so much
curved downwards, and in the naked skin round the eyes and over the
nostrils being hardly at all wattled. Nevertheless I have felt myself
compelled to place the Bagadotten in Race II., or that of the Carriers,
and the present bird in Race III., or that of the Runts. The Scanderoon
has a very short, narrow, and elevated tail; wings extremely short, so
that the first primary feathers were not longer than those of a small
tumbler pigeon! Neck long, much bowed; breast-bone prominent. Beak
long, being 1.15 inch from tip to feathered base; vertically thick;
slightly curved downwards. The skin over the nostrils swollen, not
wattled; naked skin round the eyes, broad, slightly carunculated. Legs
long; feet very large. Skin of neck bright red, often showing a naked
medial line, with a naked red patch at the distant end of the radius of
the wing. My bird, as measured from the base of the beak to the root of
the tail, was fully 2 inches longer than the rock-pigeon; yet the tail
itself was only 4 inches in length, whereas in the rock-pigeon, which
is a much smaller bird, the tail is 4-5/8 inches in length.
The Hinkel or Florentiner-Taube of Neumeister (Table XIII., fig. 1)
agrees with the above description in all the specified characters (for
the beak is not mentioned), except that Neumeister expressly says that
the neck is short, whereas in my Scanderoon it was remarkably long and
bowed; so that the Hinkel forms a well-marked variety.
_Sub-race II. Pigeon Cygne and Pigeon Bagadais of Boitard and Corbie_
(Scanderoon of French writers).--I kept two of these birds alive,
imported from France. They differed from the first sub-race or true
Scanderoon in the much greater length of the wing and tail, in the beak
not being so long, and in the skin about the head being more
carunculated. The skin of the neck is red; but the naked patches on the
wings are absent. One of my birds measured 381/2 inches from tip to tip
of wing. By taking the length of the body as the standard of
comparison, the two wings were no loss than 5 inches longer than those
of the rock-pigeon! The tail was 61/4 inches in length, and therefore 21/4
inches longer than that of the Scanderoon,--a bird of nearly the same
size. The beak is longer, thicker, and broader than in the rock-pigeon,
proportionally with the size of body. The eyelids, nostrils, and
internal gape of mouth are all proportionally very large, as in
Carriers. The foot, from the end of the middle to end of hind toe, was
actually 2.85 inches in length, which is an excess of .32 of an inch
over the foot of the rock-pigeon, relatively to the size of the two
birds.
_Sub-race III. Spanish and Roman Runts_.--I am not sure that I am right
in placing these Runts in a distinct sub-race; yet, if we take
well-characterized birds, there can be no doubt of the propriety of the
separation. They are heavy, massive birds, with shorter necks, legs,
and beaks than in the foregoing races. The skin over the nostrils is
swollen, but not carunculated; the naked skin round the eyes is not
very wide, and only slightly carunculated; and I have seen a fine
so-called Spanish Runt with hardly any naked skin round the eyes. Of
the two varieties to be seen in England, one, which is the rarer, has
very long wings and tail, {144} and agrees pretty closely with the last
sub-race; the other, with shorter wings and tail, is apparently the
_Pigeon Romain ordinaire_ of Boitard and Corbie. These Runts are apt to
tremble like Fantails. They are bad flyers. A few years ago Mr.
Gulliver[285] exhibited a Runt which weighed 1 lb. 14 oz.; and, as I am
informed by Mr. Tegetmeier, two Runts from the south of France were
lately exhibited at the Crystal Palace, each of which weighed 2 lbs. 21/2
oz. A very fine rock-pigeon from the Shetland Islands weighed only 141/2
oz.
_Sub-race IV. Tronfo of Aldrovandi_ (Leghorn Runt?).--In Aldrovandi's
work published in 1600 there is a coarse woodcut of a great Italian
pigeon, with an elevated tail, short legs, massive body, and with the
beak short and thick. I had imagined that this latter character, so
abnormal in the group, was merely a false representation from bad
drawing; but Moore, in his work published in 1735, says that he
possessed a Leghorn Runt of which "the beak was very short for so large
a bird." In other respects Moore's bird resembled the first sub-race or
Scanderoon, for it had a long bowed neck, long legs, short beak, and
elevated tail, and not much wattle about the head. So that Aldrovandi's
and Moore's birds must have formed distinct varieties, both of which
seem to be now extinct in Europe. Sir W. Elliot, however, informs me
that he has seen in Madras a short-beaked Runt imported from Cairo.
_Sub-race V. Murassa (adorned Pigeon) of Madras._--Skins of these
handsome chequered birds were sent me from Madras by Sir W. Elliot.
They are rather larger than the largest rock-pigeon, with longer and
more massive beaks. The skin over the nostrils is rather full and very
slightly carunculated, and they have some naked skin round the eyes:
feet large. This breed is intermediate between the rock-pigeon and a
very poor variety of Runt or Carrier.
From these several descriptions we see that with Runts, as with
Carriers, we have a fine gradation from the rock-pigeon (with the
Tronfo diverging as a distinct branch) to our largest and most massive
Runts. But the chain of affinities, and many points of resemblance,
between Runts and Carriers, make me believe that these two races have
not descended by independent lines from the rock-pigeon, but from some
common parent, as represented in the Table, which had already acquired
a moderately long beak, with slightly swollen skin over the nostrils,
and with some slightly carunculated naked skin round the eyes.
RACE IV.--BARBS. (Indische-Taube: Pigeons Polonais.)
_Beak short, broad, deep; naked skin round the eyes, broad and
carunculated; skin over nostrils slightly swollen._
[Illustration: Fig. 20.--English Barb.]
Misled by the extraordinary shortness and form of the beak, I did not
at first perceive the near affinity of this Race to that of Carriers
until the fact was pointed out to me by Mr. Brent. Subsequently, after
examining {145} the Bussorah Carrier, I saw that no very great amount
of modification would be requisite to convert it into a Barb. This view
of the affinity of Barbs to Carriers is supported by the analogical
difference between the short and long-beaked Runts; and still more
strongly by the fact, that young Barbs and Dragons, within 24 hours
after being hatched, resemble each other much more closely than do
young pigeons of other and equally distinct breeds. At this early age,
the length of beak, the swollen skin over the rather open nostrils, the
gape of the mouth, and the size of the feet, are the same in both;
although these parts afterwards become widely different. We thus see
that embryology (as the comparison of very young animals {146} may
perhaps be called) comes into play in the classification of domestic
varieties, as with species in a state of nature.
Fanciers, with some truth, compare the head and beak of the Barb to
that of a bullfinch. The Barb, if found in a state of nature, would
certainly have been placed in a new genus formed for its reception. The
body is a little larger than that of the rock-pigeon, but the beak is
more than .2 of an inch shorter; although shorter, it is both
vertically and horizontally thicker. From the outward flexure of the
rami of the lower jaw, the mouth internally is very broad, in the
proportion of .6 to .4 to that of the rock-pigeon. The whole head is
broad. The skin over the nostrils is swollen, but not carunculated,
except slightly in first-rate birds when old; whilst the naked skin
round the eye is broad and much carunculated. It is sometimes so much
developed, that a bird belonging to Mr. Harrison Weir could hardly see
to pick up food from the ground. The eyelids in one specimen were
nearly twice as long as those of the rock-pigeon. The feet are coarse
and strong, but proportionally rather shorter than in the rock-pigeon.
The plumage is generally dark and uniform. Barbs, in short, may be
called short-beaked Carriers, bearing the same relation to Carriers
that the Tronfo of Aldrovandi does to the common Runt.
GROUP III.
This group is artificial, and includes a heterogeneous collection of
distinct forms. It may be defined by the beak, in well-characterised
specimens of the several races, being shorter than in the rock-pigeon, and
by the skin round the eyes not being much developed.
RACE V.--FANTAILS.
_Sub-race I. European Fantails_ (Pfauen-Taube; Trembleurs). _Tail expanded,
directed upwards, formed of many feathers; oil-gland aborted; body and beak
rather short_.
[Illustration: Fig. 21.--English Fantail.]
The normal number of tail-feathers in the genus Columba is 12; but
Fantails have from only 12 (as has been asserted) up to, according to
MM. Boitard and Corbie, 42. I have counted in one of my own birds 33,
and at Calcutta Mr. Blyth[286] has counted in an _imperfect_ tail 34
feathers. In Madras, as I am informed by Sir W. Elliot, 32 is the
standard number; but in England number is much less valued than the
position and expansion of the tail. The feathers are arranged in an
irregular double row; their permanent expansion, like a fan, and their
upward direction, are more remarkable characters than their increased
number. The tail is capable of the same movements as in other pigeons,
and can be depressed so as to sweep the ground. It arises from a more
expanded basis than in {147} other pigeons; and in three skeletons
there were one or two extra coccygeal vertebrae. I have examined many
specimens of various colours from different countries, and there was no
trace of the oil-gland; this is a curious case of abortion.[287] The
neck is thin and bowed {148} backwards. The breast is broad and
protuberant. The feet are small. The carriage of the bird is very
different from that of other pigeons; in good birds the head touches
the tail-feathers, which consequently often become crumpled. They
habitually tremble much; and their necks have an extraordinary,
apparently convulsive, backward and forward movement. Good birds walk
in a singular manner, as if their small feet were stiff. Owing to their
large tails, they fly badly on a windy day. The dark-coloured varieties
are generally larger than white Fantails.
Although between the best and common Fantails, now existing in England,
there is a vast difference in the position and size of the tail, in the
carriage of the head and neck, in the convulsive movements of the neck,
in the manner of walking, and in the breadth of the breast, the
differences so graduate away, that it is impossible to make more than
one sub-race. Moore, however, an excellent old authority,[288] says,
that in 1735 there were two sorts of broad-tailed shakers (_i.e._
fantails), "one having a neck much longer and more slender than the
other;" and I am informed by Mr. B. P. Brent that there is an existing
German Fantail with a thicker and shorter beak.
_Sub-race II. Java Fantail._--Mr. Swinhoe sent me from Amoy, in China,
the skin of a Fantail belonging to a breed known to have been imported
from Java. It was coloured in a peculiar manner, unlike any European
Fantail, and, for a Fantail, had a remarkably short beak. Although a
good bird of the kind, it had only 14 tail-feathers; but Mr. Swinhoe
has counted in other birds of this breed from 18 to 24 tail-feathers.
From a rough sketch sent to me, it is evident that the tail is not so
much expanded or so much upraised as in even second-rate European
Fantails. The bird shakes its neck like our Fantails. It had a
well-developed oil-gland. Fantails were known in India, as we shall
hereafter see, before the year 1600; and we may suspect that in the
Java Fantail we see the breed in its earlier and less improved
condition.
RACE VI.--TURBIT AND OWL. (Moeven-Taube: Pigeons a cravate.)
_Feathers divergent along the front of the neck and breast; beak very
short, vertically rather thick; oesophagus somewhat enlarged._
[Illustration: Fig. 22.--African Owl.]
Turbits and Owls differ from each other slightly in the shape of the
head, in the former having a crest, and in the curvature of the beak,
but they may be here conveniently grouped together. These pretty birds,
some of which are very small, can be recognised at once by the feathers
irregularly diverging, like a frill, along the front of the neck, in
the same manner, but in a less degree, as along the back of the neck in
the Jacobin. This bird has the remarkable habit of continually, and
momentarily inflating the upper part of the oesophagus, which causes a
movement in the frill. {149} When the oesophagus of a dead bird was
inflated, it was seen to be larger than in other breeds, and not so
distinctly separated from the crop. The Pouter inflates both its true
crop and oesophagus; the Turbit inflates in a much less degree the
oesophagus alone. The beak of the Turbit is very short, being .28 of an
inch shorter than that of the rock-pigeon, proportionally with the size
of their bodies; and in some owls brought by Mr. E. Vernon Harcourt
from Tunis, it was even shorter. The beak is vertically thicker, and
perhaps a little broader, in proportion to that of the rock-pigeon.
{150}
RACE VII.--TUMBLERS. (Tuemmler, or Burzel-Tauben: Culbutants.)
_During flight, tumble backwards; body generally small; beak generally
short, sometimes excessively short and conical._
This Race may be divided into four sub-races, namely, Persian, Lotan,
Common, and Short-faced Tumblers. These sub-races include many
varieties which breed true. I have examined eight skeletons of various
kinds of Tumblers: excepting in one imperfect and doubtful specimen,
the ribs are only seven in number, whereas the rock-pigeon has eight
ribs.
_Sub-race I. Persian Tumblers._--I have received a pair direct from
Persia, from the Hon. C. Murray. They were rather smaller birds than
the wild rock-pigeon, being about the size of the common
dovecot-pigeon, white and mottled, slightly feathered on the feet, with
the beak just perceptibly shorter than in the rock-pigeon. H.M. Consul,
Mr. Keith Abbott, informs me that the difference in the length of beak
is so slight, that only practised Persian fanciers can distinguish
these Tumblers from the common pigeon of the country. He informs me
that they fly in flocks high up in the air and tumble well. Some of
them occasionally appear to become giddy and tumble to the ground, in
which respect they resemble some of our Tumblers.
_Sub-race II. Lotan, or Lowtun: Indian Ground Tumblers._--These birds
present one of the most remarkable inherited habits or instincts which
have ever been recorded. The specimens sent to me from Madras by Sir W.
Elliot are white, slightly feathered on the feet, with the feathers on
the head reversed; and they are rather smaller than the rock or dovecot
pigeon. The beak is proportionally only slightly shorter and rather
thinner than in the rock-pigeon. These birds when gently shaken and
placed on the ground immediately begin tumbling head over heels, and
they continue thus to tumble until taken up and soothed,--the ceremony
being generally to blow in their faces, as in recovering a person from
a state of hypnotism or mesmerism. It is asserted that they will
continue to roll over till they die, if not taken up. There is abundant
evidence with respect to these remarkable peculiarities; but what makes
the case the more worthy of attention is, that the habit has been
strictly inherited since before the year 1600, for the breed is
distinctly described in the 'Ayeen Akbery.'[289] Mr. Evans kept a pair
in London, imported by Captain Vigne; and he assures me that he has
seen them tumble in the air, as well as in the manner above described
on the ground. Sir W. Elliot, however, writes to me from Madras, that
he is informed that they tumble exclusively on the ground, or at a very
small height above it. He also {151} mentions another sub-variety,
called the Kalmi Lotan, which begins to roll over if only touched on
the neck with a rod or wand.
_Sub-race III. Common English Tumblers._--These birds have exactly the
same habits as the Persian Tumbler, but tumble better. The English bird
is rather smaller than the Persian, and the beak is plainly shorter.
Compared with the rock-pigeon, and proportionally with the size of
body, the beak is from .16 to nearly .2 of an inch shorter, but it is
not thinner. There are several varieties of the common Tumbler, namely,
Baldheads, Beards, and Dutch Rollers. I have kept the latter alive;
they have differently shaped heads, longer necks, and are
feather-footed. They tumble to an extraordinary degree; as Mr. Brent
remarks,[290] "Every few seconds over they go; one, two, or three
summersaults at a time. Here and there a bird gives a very quick and
rapid spin, revolving like a wheel, though they sometimes lose their
balance, and make a rather ungraceful fall, in which they occasionally
hurt themselves by striking some object." From Madras I have received
several specimens of the common Tumbler of India, differing slightly
from each other in the length of their beaks. Mr. Brent sent me a dead
specimen of a "House-tumbler,"[291] which is a Scotch variety, not
differing in general appearance and form of beak from the common
Tumbler. Mr. Brent states that these birds generally begin to tumble
"almost as soon as they can well fly; at three months old they tumble
well, but still fly strong; at five or six months they tumble
excessively; and in the second year they mostly give up flying, on
account of their tumbling so much and so close to the ground. Some fly
round with the flock, throwing a clean summersault every few yards,
till they are obliged to settle from giddiness and exhaustion. These
are called Air Tumblers, and they commonly throw from twenty to thirty
summersaults in a minute, each clear and clean. I have one red cock
that I have on two or three occasions timed by my watch, and counted
forty summersaults in the minute. Others tumble differently. At first
they throw a single summersault, then it is double, till it becomes a
continuous roll, which puts an end to flying, for if they fly a few
yards over they go, and roll till they reach the ground. Thus I had one
kill herself, and another broke his leg. Many of them turn over only a
few inches from the ground, and will tumble two or three times in
flying across their loft. These are called House-tumblers, from
tumbling in the house. The act of tumbling seems to be one over which
they have no control, an involuntary movement which they seem to try to
prevent. I have seen a bird sometimes in his struggles fly a yard or
two straight upwards, the impulse forcing him backwards while he
struggles to go forwards. If suddenly startled, or in a strange place,
they seem less able to fly than if quiet in their accustomed loft."
These House-tumblers differ from the Lotan or Ground {152} Tumbler of
India, in not requiring to be shaken in order to begin tumbling. The
breed has probably been formed merely by selecting the best common
Tumblers, though it is possible that they may have been crossed at some
former period with Lotans.
[Illustration: Fig. 23.--Short-faced English Tumbler.]
_Sub-race IV. Short-faced Tumblers._--These are marvellous birds, and
are the glory and pride of many fanciers. In their extremely short,
sharp, and conical beaks, with the skin over the nostrils but little
developed, they almost depart from the type of the Columbidae. Their
heads are nearly globular {153} and upright in front, so that some
fanciers say[292] "the head should resemble a cherry with a barley-corn
stuck in it." These are the smallest kind of pigeons. Mr. Esquilant
possessed a blue Baldhead, two years old, which when alive weighed,
before feeding-time, only 6 oz. 5 drs.; two others, each weighed 7 oz.
We have seen that a wild rock-pigeon weighed 14 oz. 2 drs., and a Runt
34 oz. 4 drs. Short-faced Tumblers have a remarkably erect carriage,
with prominent breasts, drooping wings, and very small feet. The length
of the beak from the tip to the feathered base was in one good bird
only .4 of an inch; in a wild rock-pigeon it was exactly double this
length. As these Tumblers have shorter bodies than the wild
rock-pigeon, they ought of course to have shorter beaks; but
proportionally with the size of body, the beak is .28 of an inch too
short. So, again, the feet of this bird were actually .45 shorter, and
proportionally .21 of an inch shorter, than the feet of the
rock-pigeon. The middle toe has only twelve or thirteen, instead of
fourteen or fifteen scutellae. The primary wing-feathers are not rarely
only nine instead of ten in number. The improved short-faced Tumblers
have almost lost the power of tumbling; but there are several authentic
accounts of their occasionally tumbling. There are several
sub-varieties, such as Baldheads, Beards, Mottles, and Almonds; the
latter are remarkable from not acquiring their perfectly-coloured
plumage until they have moulted three or four times. There is good
reason to believe that most of these sub-varieties, some of which breed
truly, have arisen since the publication of Moore's treatise in
1735.[293]
Finally, in regard to the whole group of Tumblers, it is impossible to
conceive a more perfect gradation than I have now lying before me, from
the rock-pigeon, through Persian, Lotan, and Common Tumblers, up to the
marvellous short-faced birds; which latter, no ornithologist, judging
from mere external structure, would place in the same genus with the
rock-pigeon. The differences between the successive steps in this
series are not greater than those which may be observed between common
dovecot-pigeons (_C. livia_) brought from different countries.
RACE VIII--INDIAN FRILL-BACK.
_Beak very short; feathers reversed._
A specimen of this bird, in spirits, was sent to me from Madras by Sir
W. Elliot. It is wholly different from the Frill-back often exhibited
in England. It is a smallish bird, about the size of the common
Tumbler, but has a beak in all its proportions like our short-faced
Tumblers. The beak, measured from the tip to the feathered base, was
only .46 of an inch in length. The feathers over the whole body are
reversed or curl backwards. Had this bird occurred in Europe, I should
have thought it only a monstrous variety of our improved Tumbler; but
as short-faced Tumblers are not known in India, I think it must rank as
a distinct breed. Probably {154} this is the breed seen by Hasselquist
in 1757 at Cairo, and said to have been imported from India.
RACE IX.--JACOBIN. (Zopf or Peruecken-Taube: Nonnains.)
_Feathers of the neck forming a hood; wings and tail long; beak moderately
short._
This pigeon can at once be recognised by its hood, almost enclosing the
head and meeting in front of the neck. The hood seems to be merely an
exaggeration of the crest of reversed feathers on the back of the head,
which is common to many sub-varieties, and which in the Latz-taube[294]
is in a nearly intermediate state between a hood and a crest. The
feathers of the hood are elongated. Both the wings and tail are
likewise much elongated; thus the folded wing of the Jacobin, though a
somewhat smaller bird, is fully 11/4 inch longer than in the rock-pigeon.
Taking the length of the body without the tail as the standard of
comparison, the folded wing, proportionally with the wings of the
rock-pigeon, is 21/4 inches too long, and the two wings, from tip to tip,
51/4 inches too long. In disposition this bird is singularly quiet,
seldom flying or moving about, as Bechstein and Riedel have likewise
remarked in Germany.[295] The latter author also notices the length of
the wings and tail. The beak is nearly .2 of an inch shorter in
proportion to the size of the body than in the rock-pigeon; but the
internal gape of the mouth is considerably wider.
GROUP IV.
The birds of this group may be characterised by their resemblance in all
important points of structure, especially in the beak, to the rock-pigeon.
The Trumpeter forms the only well-marked race. Of the numerous other
sub-races and varieties I shall specify only a few of the most distinct,
which I have myself seen and kept alive.
RACE X.--TRUMPETER. (Trommel-Taube; Pigeon tambour; glougou.)
_A tuft of feathers at the base of the beak curling forward; feet much
feathered; voice very peculiar; size exceeding that of the rock-pigeon._
This is a well-marked breed, with a peculiar voice, wholly unlike that
of any other pigeon. The coo is rapidly repeated, and is continued for
{155} several minutes; hence their name of Trumpeters. They are also
characterised by a tuft of elongated feathers, which curls forward over
the base of the beak, and which is possessed by no other breed. Their
feet are so heavily feathered, that they almost appear like little
wings. They are larger birds than the rock-pigeon, but their beak is of
very nearly the same proportional size. Their feet are rather small.
This breed was perfectly characterised in Moore's time, in 1735. Mr.
Brent says that two varieties exist, which differ in size.
RACE XI.--_Scarcely differing in structure from the wild Columba livia._
_Sub-race 1. Laughers. Size less than the Rock-pigeon; voice very
peculiar._--As this bird agrees in nearly all its proportions with the
rock-pigeon, though of smaller size, I should not have thought it
worthy of mention, had it not been for its peculiar voice--a character
supposed seldom to vary with birds. Although the voice of the Laugher
is very different from that of the Trumpeter, yet one of my Trumpeters
used to utter a single note like that of the Laugher. I have kept two
varieties of Laughers, which differed only in one variety being
turn-crowned; the smooth-headed kind, for which I am indebted to the
kindness of Mr. Brent, besides its peculiar note, used to coo in a
singular and pleasing manner, which, independently, struck both Mr.
Brent and myself as resembling that of the turtle-dove. Both varieties
come from Arabia. This breed was known by Moore in 1735. A pigeon which
seems to say Yak-roo is mentioned in 1600 in the 'Ayeen Akbery,' and is
probably the same breed. Sir W. Elliot has also sent me from Madras a
pigeon called Yahui, said to have come from Mecca, which does not
differ in appearance from the Laugher; it has "a deep melancholy voice,
like Yahu, often repeated." Yahu, yahu, means Oh God, Oh God; and
Sayzid Mohammed Musari, in the treatise written about 100 years ago,
says that these birds "are not flown, because they repeat the name of
the Most High God." Mr. Keith Abbott, however, informs me that the
common pigeon is called Yahoo in Persia.
_Sub-race II. Common Frill-back_ (Die Strupp-Taube). _Beak rather
longer than in the Rock-pigeon; feathers reversed._--This is a
considerably larger bird than the rock-pigeons and with the beak,
proportionally with the size of body, a little (viz. by .04 of an inch)
longer. The feathers, especially on the wing-coverts, have their points
curled upwards or backwards.
_Sub-race III. Nuns_ (Pigeons-coquilles).--These elegant birds are
smaller than the rock-pigeon. The beak is actually .17, and
proportionally with the size of the body .1 of an inch shorter than in
the rock-pigeons, although of the same thickness. In young birds the
scutellae on the tarsi and toes are generally of a leaden-black colour;
and this is a remarkable character (though observed in a lesser degree
in some other breeds), as the colour of the legs in the adult state is
subject to very little variation in any breed. I have on two or three
occasions counted thirteen or fourteen feathers in the tail; this
likewise occurs in the barely distinct breed called Helmets. {156} Nuns
are symmetrically coloured, with the head, primary wing-feathers, tail,
and tail-coverts of the same colour, namely, black or red, and with the
rest of the body white. This breed has retained the same character
since Aldrovandi wrote in 1600. I have received from Madras almost
similarly coloured birds.
_Sub-race IV. Spots_ (Die Blass-Taube: Pigeons heurtes).--These birds
are a very little larger than the rock-pigeon, with the beak a trace
smaller in all its dimensions, and with the feet decidedly smaller.
They are symmetrically coloured, with a spot on the forehead, with the
tail and tail-coverts of the same colour, the rest of the body being
white. This breed existed in 1676;[296] and in 1735 Moore remarks that
they breed truly, as is the case at the present day.
_Sub-race V. Swallows._--These birds, as measured from tip to tip of
wing, or from the end of the beak to the end of the tail, exceed in
size the rock-pigeon; but their bodies are much less bulky; their feet
and legs are likewise smaller. The beak is of about the same length,
but rather slighter. Altogether their general appearance is
considerably different from that of the rock-pigeon. Their heads and
wings are of the same colour, the rest of the body being white. Their
flight is said to be peculiar. This seems to be a modern breed, which,
however, originated before the year 1795 in Germany, for it is
described by Bechstein.
* * * * *
Besides the several breeds now described, three or four other very
distinct kinds existed lately, or perhaps still exist, in Germany and
France. Firstly, the Karmeliten, or Carme Pigeon, which I have not
seen; it is described as of small size, with very short legs, and with
an extremely short beak. Secondly, the Finnikin, which is now extinct
in England. It had, according to Moore's[297] treatise, published in
1735, a tuft of feathers on the hinder part of the head, which ran down
its back not unlike a horse's mane. "When it is salacious it rises over
the hen and turns round three or four times, flapping its wings, then
reverses and turns as many times the other way." The Turner, on the
other hand, when it "plays to the female, turns only one way." Whether
these extraordinary statements may be trusted I know not; but the
inheritance of any habit may be believed, after what we have seen with
respect to the Ground-tumbler of India. MM. Boitard and Corbie describe
a pigeon[298] which has the singular habit of sailing for a
considerable time through the air, without flapping its wings, like a
bird of prey. The confusion is inextricable, from the time of
Aldrovandi in 1600 to the present day, in the accounts published of the
Draijers, Smiters, Finnikins, Turners, Claquers, &c., which are all
remarkable from their manner of flight. Mr. Brent informs me that he
has seen one of these breeds in Germany with its wing-feathers injured
from having been so often struck together; but he did not see it
flying. An old stuffed specimen of a Finnikin in the British Museum
presents no well-marked character. Thirdly, a singular pigeon {157}
with a forked tail is mentioned in some treatises; and as
Bechstein[299] briefly describes and figures this bird, with a tail
"having completely the structure of that of the house-swallow," it must
once have, existed, for Bechstein was far too good a naturalist to have
confounded any distinct species with the domestic pigeon. Lastly, an
extraordinary pigeon imported from Belgium has lately been exhibited at
the Philoperisteron Society in London,[300] which "conjoins the colour
of an archangel with the head of an owl or barb, its most striking
peculiarity being the extraordinary length of the tail and
wing-feathers, the latter crossing beyond the tail, and giving to the
bird the appearance of a gigantic swift (Cypselus), or long-winged
hawk." Mr. Tegetmeier informs me that this bird weighed only 10 ounces,
but in length was 151/2 inches from tip of beak to end of tail, and 321/2
inches from tip to tip of wing; now the wild rock-pigeon weighs 141/2
ounces, and measures from tip of beak to end of tail 15 inches, and
from tip to tip of wing only 263/4 inches.
I have now described all the domestic pigeons known to me, and have added a
few others on reliable authority. I have classed them under four Groups, in
order to mark their affinities and degrees of difference; but the third
group is artificial. The kinds examined by me form eleven races, which
include several sub-races; and even these latter present differences that
would certainly have been thought of specific value if observed in a state
of nature. The sub-races likewise include many strictly inherited
varieties; so that altogether there must exist, as previously stated, above
150 kinds which can be distinguished, though generally by characters of
extremely slight importance. Many of the genera of the Columbidae, which are
admitted by ornithologists, do not differ in any great degree from each
other; taking this into consideration, there can be no doubt that several
of the most strongly characterised domestic forms, if found wild, would
have been placed in at least five new genera. Thus, a new genus would have
been formed for the reception of the improved English Pouter: a second
genus for Carriers and Runts; and this would have been a wide or
comprehensive genus, for it would have admitted common Spanish Runts
without any wattle, short-beaked Runts like the Tronfo, and the improved
English Carrier: a third genus would have been termed for the Barb: a
fourth for the Fantail: and lastly, a fifth for the short-beaked,
not-wattled pigeons, such as Turbits {158} and short-faced Tumblers. The
remaining domestic forms might have been included in the same genus with
the wild rock-pigeon.
_Individual Variability; Variations of a remarkable nature._
The differences which we have as yet considered are characteristic of
distinct breeds; but there are other differences, either confined to
individual birds, or often observed in certain breeds but not
characteristic of them. These individual differences are of importance, as
they might in most cases be secured and accumulated by man's power of
selection; and thus an existing breed might be greatly modified or a new
one formed. Fanciers notice and select only those slight differences which
are externally visible; but the whole organisation is so tied together by
correlation of growth, that a change in one part is frequently accompanied
by other changes. For our purpose, modifications of all kinds are equally
important, and, if affecting a part which does not commonly vary, are of
more importance than a modification in some conspicuous part. At the
present day any visible deviation of character in a well-established breed
is rejected as a blemish; but it by no means follows that at an early
period, before well-marked breeds had been formed, such deviations would
have been rejected; on the contrary, they would have been eagerly preserved
as presenting a novelty, and would then have been slowly augmented, as we
shall hereafter more clearly see, by the process of unconscious selection.
I have made numerous measurements of the various parts of the body in
the several breeds, and have hardly ever found them quite the same in
birds of the same breed,--the differences being greater than we
commonly meet with in wild species. To begin with the primary feathers
of the wing and tail; but I may first mention, as some readers may not
be aware of the fact, that the number of the primary wing and tail
feathers in wild birds is generally constant, and characterises, not
only whole genera, but even whole families. When the tail-feathers are
unusually numerous, as for instance in the swan, they are apt to be
variable in number; but this does not apply to the several species and
genera of the Columbidae, which never (as far as I can hear) have less
than twelve or more than sixteen tail-feathers; and these numbers
characterise, with rare exception, whole sub-families.[301] The wild
rock-pigeon has twelve tail-feathers. With {159} Fantails, as we have
seen, the number varies from fourteen to forty-two. In two young birds
in the same nest I counted twenty-two and twenty-seven feathers.
Pouters are very liable to have additional tail-feathers, and I have
seen on several occasions fourteen or fifteen in my own birds, Mr. Bult
had a specimen, examined by Mr. Yarrell, with seventeen tail-feathers.
I had a Nun with thirteen, and another with fourteen tail-feathers; and
in a Helmet, a breed barely distinguishable from the Nun, I have
counted fifteen, and have heard of other such instances. On the other
hand, Mr. Brent possessed a Dragon, which during its whole life never
had more than ten tail-feathers; and one of my Dragons, descended from
Mr. Brent's, had only eleven. I have seen a Baldhead-Tumbler with only
ten; and Mr. Brent had an Air-Tumbler with the same number, but another
with fourteen tail-feathers. Two of these latter Tumblers, bred by Mr.
Brent, were remarkable,--one from having the two central tail-feathers
a little divergent, and the other from having the two outer feathers
longer by three-eighths of an inch than the others; so that in both
cases the tail exhibited a tendency, but in different ways, to become
forked. And this shows us how a swallow-tailed breed, like that
described by Bechstein, might have been formed by careful selection.
With respect to the primary wing-feathers, the number in the Columbidae,
as far as I can find out, is always nine or ten. In the rock-pigeon it
is ten; but I have seen no less than eight short-faced Tumblers with
only nine primaries, and the occurrence of this number has been noticed
by fanciers, owing to ten flight-feathers of a white colour being one
of the points in Short-faced Baldhead-Tumblers. Mr. Brent, however, had
an Air-Tumbler (not short-faced) which had in both wings eleven
primaries. Mr. Corker, the eminent breeder of prize Carriers, assures
me that some of his birds had eleven primaries in both wings. I have
seen eleven in one wing in two Pouters. I have been assured by three
fanciers that they have seen twelve in Scanderoons; but as Neumeister
asserts that in the allied Florence Runt the middle flight-feather is
often double, the number twelve may have been caused by two of the ten
primaries having each two shafts to a single feather. The secondary
wing-feathers are difficult to count, but the number seems to vary from
twelve to fifteen. The length of the wing and tail relatively to the
body, and of the wings to the tail, certainly varies; I have especially
noticed this in Jacobins. In Mr. Bult's magnificent collection of
Pouters, the wings and tail varied greatly in length; and were
sometimes so much elongated that the birds could hardly play upright.
In the relative length of the few first primaries I have observed only
a slight degree of variability. Mr. Brent informs me that he has
observed the shape of the first feather to vary very slightly. But the
variation in these latter points is extremely slight compared with what
may often be observed in the natural species of the Columbidae.
In the beak I have observed very considerable differences in birds of
the {160} same breed, as in carefully bred Jacobins and Trumpeters. In
Carriers there is often a conspicuous difference in the degree of
attenuation and curvature of the beak. So it is indeed in many breeds:
thus I had two strains of black Barbs, which evidently differed in the
curvature of the upper mandible. In width of mouth I have found a great
difference in two Swallows. In Fantails of first-rate merit I have seen
some birds with much longer and thinner necks than in others. Other
analogous facts could be given. We have seen that the oil-gland is
aborted in all Fantails (with the exception of the sub-race from Java),
and, I may add, so hereditary is this tendency to abortion, that some,
although not all, of the mongrels from the Fantail and Pouter had no
oil-gland; in one Swallow out of many which I have examined, and in two
Nuns, there was no oil-gland.
The number of the scutellae on the toes often varies in the same breed,
and sometimes even differs on the two feet of the same individual; the
Shetland rock-pigeon has fifteen on the middle, and six on the hinder
toe; whereas I have seen a Runt with sixteen on the middle and eight on
the hind toe; and a short-faced Tumbler with only twelve and five on
these same toes. The rock-pigeon has no sensible amount of skin between
its toes; but I possessed a Spot and a Nun with the skin extending for
a space of a quarter of an inch from the fork, between the two _inner_
toes. On the other hand, as will hereafter be more fully shown, pigeons
with feathered feet very generally have the bases of their _outer_ toes
connected by skin. I had a red Tumbler, which had a coo unlike that of
its fellows, approaching in tone to that of the Laugher: this bird had
the habit, to a degree which I never saw equalled in any other pigeon,
of often walking with its wings raised and arched in an elegant manner.
I need say nothing on the great variability, in almost every breed, in
size of body, in colour, in the feathering of the feet, and in the
feathers on the back of the head being reversed. But I may mention a
remarkable Tumbler[302] exhibited at the Crystal Palace, which had an
irregular crest of feathers on its head, somewhat like the tuft on the
head of the Polish fowl. Mr. Bult reared by accident a hen Jacobin with
the feathers on the thigh so long as to reach the ground, and a cock
having, but in a lesser degree, the same peculiarity: from these two
birds he bred others similarly characterised, which were exhibited at
the Philoperisteron Club. I bred a mongrel pigeon which had fibrous
feathers, and the wing and tail-feathers so short and imperfect that
the bird could not fly even a foot in height.
There are many singular and inherited peculiarities in the plumage of
pigeons: thus Almond-Tumblers do not acquire their perfect mottled feathers
until they have moulted three or four times: the Kite-Tumbler is at first
brindled black and red with a barred appearance, but when "it throws its
nest feathers it becomes almost black, generally with a bluish tail, and a
reddish colour on the inner webs of the primary wing feathers."[303] {161}
Neumeister describes a breed of a black colour with white bars on the wing
and a white crescent-shaped mark on the breast; these marks are generally
rusty-red before the first moult, but after the third or fourth moult they
undergo a change; the wing-feathers and the crown of the head likewise then
become white or grey.[304]
It is an important fact, and I believe there is hardly an exception to the
rule, that the especial characters for which each breed is valued are
eminently variable: thus, in the Fantail, the number and direction of the
tail-feathers, the carriage of the body, and the degree of trembling are
all highly variable points; in Pouters, the degree to which they pout, and
the shape of their inflated crops; in the Carrier, the length, narrowness,
and curvature of the beak, and the amount of wattle; in Short-faced
Tumblers, the shortness of the beak, the prominence of the forehead, and
general carriage,[305] and in the Almond Tumbler the colour of the plumage;
in common Tumblers, the manner of tumbling; in the Barb, the breadth and
shortness of the beak and the amount of eye-wattle; in Runts, the size of
body; in Turbits, the frill; and lastly in Trumpeters, the cooing, as well
as the size of the tuft of feathers over the nostrils. These, which are the
distinctive and selected characters of the several breeds, are all
eminently variable.
There is another interesting fact with respect to the character of the
different breeds, namely, that they are often most strongly displayed in
the male bird. In Carriers, when the males and females are exhibited in
separate pens, the wattle is plainly seen to be much more developed in the
males, though I have seen a hen Carrier belonging to Mr. Haynes heavily
wattled. Mr. Tegetmeier informs me that, in twenty Barbs in Mr. P. H.
Jones's possession, the males had generally the largest eye-wattles; Mr.
Esquilant also believes in this rule, but Mr. H. Weir, a first-rate judge,
entertains some doubt on the subject. Hale Pouters distend their crops to a
much greater size than do the females; I have, however, seen a hen in the
possession of Mr. Evans which pouted excellently; but this is an unusual
circumstance. Mr. Harrison Weir, a successful breeder of prize {162}
Fantails, informs me that his cock birds often have a greater number of
tail-feathers than the hens. Mr. Eaton asserts[306] that, if a cock and hen
Tumbler were of equal merit, the hen would be worth double the money; and
as pigeons always pair, so that an equal number of both sexes is necessary
for reproduction, this seems to show that high merit is rarer in the female
than in the male. In the development of the frill in Turbits, of the hood
in Jacobins, of the tuft in Trumpeters, of tumbling in Tumblers, there is
no difference between the males and females. I may here add a rather
different case, namely, the existence in France[307] of a wine-coloured
variety of the Pouter, in which the male is generally chequered with black,
whilst the female is never so chequered. Dr. Chapuis also remarks[308] that
in certain light-coloured pigeons the males have their feathers striated
with black, and these striae increase in size at each moult, so that the
male ultimately becomes spotted with black. With Carriers, the wattle, both
on the beak and round the eyes, and with Barbs that round the eyes, goes on
increasing with age. This augmentation of character with advancing age, and
more especially the difference between the males and females in the
above-mentioned several respects, are highly remarkable facts, for there is
no sensible difference at any age between the two sexes in the aboriginal
rock-pigeon; and rarely any such difference throughout the whole family of
the Columbidae.[309]
[Illustration: Fig. 24.--Skulls of Pigeons, viewed laterally, of natural
size. A. Wild Rock-pigeon, _Columba livia_. B. Short-faced Tumbler. C.
English Carrier. D. Bagadotten Carrier.]
_Osteological Characters._
In the skeletons of the various breeds there is much variability; and
though certain differences occur frequently, and others rarely, in certain
breeds, yet none can be said to be absolutely characteristic of any breed.
Considering that strongly-marked domestic races have been formed chiefly by
man's power {163} of selection, we ought not to expect to find great and
constant differences in the skeleton; for fanciers can neither see, nor do
they care for, modifications of structure in the internal framework. Nor
ought we to expect changes in the skeletons from hanged habits of life; as
every facility is given to the most distinct breeds to follow the same
habits, and the much modified races are never allowed to wander abroad and
procure their own food in various ways. Moreover, I find, on comparing the
skeletons of _Columba livia_, _oenas_, _palumbus_, and _turtur_, which are
ranked by all systematists in two or three distinct though allied genera,
that the differences are extremely slight, certainly less than between the
skeletons of some of the most distinct domestic breeds. How far the
skeleton of the wild rock-pigeon is constant I have no means of judging, as
I have examined only two.
_Skull._--The individual bones, especially those at the base, do not
differ in shape. But the whole skull, in its proportions, outline, and
relative direction of the bones, differs greatly in some of the breeds,
as may be seen by comparing the figures of (A) the wild rock-pigeon,
(B) the {164} shortfaced tumbler, (C) the English carrier, and (D) the
Bagadotten carrier (of Neumeister), all drawn of the natural size and
viewed laterally. In the carrier, besides the elongation of the bones
of the face, the space between the orbits is proportionally a little
narrower than in the rock-pigeon. In the Bagadotten the upper mandible
is remarkably arched, and the premaxillary bones are proportionally
broader. In the short-faced tumbler the skull is more globular; all the
bones of the face are much shortened, and the front of the skull and
descending nasal bones are almost perpendicular; the maxillo-jugal arch
and premaxillary bones form an almost straight line; the space between
the prominent edges of the eye-orbits is depressed. In the barb the
premaxillary bones are much shortened, and their anterior portion is
thicker than in the rock-pigeon, as is the lower part of the nasal
bone. In two nuns the ascending branches of the premaxillaries, near
their tips, were somewhat attenuated, and in these birds, as well as in
some others, for instance in the spot, the occipital crest over the
foramen was considerably more prominent than in the rock-pigeon.
[Illustration: Fig. 25.--Lower jaws, seen from above, of natural size. A.
Rock-pigeon. B. Runt. C. Barb.]
[Illustration: Fig. 26.--Skull of Runt, seen from above, of natural size,
showing the reflexed margin of the distal portion of the lower jaw.]
In the lower jaw, the articular surface is proportionally smaller in
many breeds than in the rock-pigeon; and the vertical diameter more
especially of the outer part of the articular surface is considerably
shorter. May not this be accounted for by the lessened use of the jaws,
owing to nutritious food having been given during a long period to all
highly improved pigeons? In runts, carriers, and barbs (and in a lesser
degree in several breeds), the whole side of the jaw near the articular
end is bent inwards in a highly remarkable manner; and the superior
margin of the ramus, beyond the middle, is reflexed in an equally
remarkable manner, as may be seen in the accompanying figures, in
comparison with the jaw of the rock-pigeon. This reflexion of the upper
margin of the lower jaw is plainly connected with the singularly wide
gape of the mouth, as has been described in runts, carriers, and barbs.
The reflexion is well shown in fig. 26 of the head of a runt seen from
above; here a wide open space may be observed on each side, between the
edges of the lower jaw and of the premaxillary {165} bones. In the
rock-pigeon, and in several domestic breeds, the edges of the lower jaw
on each side come close up to the premaxillary bones, so that no open
space is left. The degree of downward curvature of the distal half of
the lower jaw also differs to an extraordinary degree in some breeds,
as may be seen in the drawings (fig. A) of the rock-pigeon, (B) of the
short-faced tumbler, and (C) of the Bagadotten carrier of Neumeister.
In some runts the symphysis of the lower jaw is remarkably solid. No
one would readily have believed that jaws differing so greatly in the
several above-specified points could have belonged to the same species.
[Illustration: Fig. 27.--Lateral view of jaws, of natural size. A.
Rock-pigeon. B. Short-faced Tumbler. C. Bagadotten Carrier.]
_Vertebrae._-- All the breeds have twelve cervical vertebrae.[310] But in
a Bussorah carrier from India, the twelfth vertebra carried a small
rib, a quarter of an inch in length, with a perfect double
articulation.
The _dorsal vertebrae_ are always eight. In the rock-pigeon all eight
bear ribs; the eighth rib being very thin, and the seventh having no
process. In pouters all the ribs are extremely broad, and, in three out
of four skeletons examined by me, the eighth rib was twice or even
thrice as broad as in the rock-pigeon; and the seventh pair had
distinct processes. In many breeds there are only seven ribs, as in
seven out of eight skeletons of various tumblers, and in several
skeletons of fantails, turbits, and nuns. In all these breeds the
seventh pair was very small, and was destitute of processes, in which
respect it differed from the same rib in the rock-pigeon. In one
tumbler, and in the Bussorah carrier, even the sixth pair had no
process. The hypapophysis of the second dorsal vertebra varies much in
development; being sometimes (as in several, but {166} not all
tumblers) nearly as prominent as that of the third dorsal vertebra; and
the two hypapophyses together tend to form an ossified arch. The
development of the arch, formed by the hypapophyses of the third and
fourth dorsal vertebrae, also varies considerably, as does the size of
the hypapophysis of the fifth vertebra.
The rock-pigeon has twelve _sacral vertebrae_; but these vary in number,
relative size, and distinctness in the different breeds. In pouters,
with their elongated bodies, there are thirteen or even fourteen, and,
as we shall immediately see, an additional number of caudal vertebrae.
In runts and carriers there is generally the proper number, namely
twelve; but in one runt, and in the Bussorah carrier, there were only
eleven. In tumblers there are either eleven, twelve, or thirteen sacral
vertebrae.
The _caudal vertebrae_ are seven in number in the rock-pigeon. In
fantails, which have their tails so largely developed, there are either
eight or nine, and apparently in one case ten, and they are a little
longer than in the rock-pigeon, and their shape varies considerably.
Pouters, also, have eight or nine caudal vertebrae. I have seen eight in
a nun and jacobin. Tumblers, though such small birds, always have the
normal number seven; as have carriers, with one exception, in which
there were only six.
The following table will serve as a summary, and will show the most
remarkable deviations in the number of the vertebrae and ribs which I
have observed:--
+----------+-------------+--------------+-----------------+-------------+
| | Rock |Pouter, | Tumbler, | Bussorah |
| | Pigeon. |from Mr. Bult.| Dutch Roller. | Carrier. |
+----------+-------------+--------------+-----------------+-------------+
|Cervical | | | | |
|Vertebrae | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 |
| | | | | The 12th |
| | | | | bore a |
| | | | | small rib. |
|Dorsal | | | | |
|Vertebrae | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| | | | | |
|Dorsal | | | | |
|Ribs | 8 | 8 | 7 | 7 |
| |The 6th pair |The 6th & 7th | The 6th & 7th |The 6th & 7th|
| | with | pair with | pair without |pair without |
| | processes, | processes. | processes. | processes. |
| |the 7th pair | | | |
| | without a | | | |
| | process. | | | |
| | | | | |
|Sacral | | | | |
|Vertebrae | 12 | 14 | 11 | 11 |
|Caudal | | | | |
|Vertebrae | 7 | 8 or 9 | 7 | 7 |
| +-------------+--------------+-----------------+-------------+
|Total | | | | |
|Vertebrae | 39 | 42 or 43 | 38 | 38 |
+----------+-------------+--------------+-----------------+-------------+
The _pelvis_ differs very little in any breed. The anterior margin of
the ilium, however, is sometimes a little more equally rounded on both
sides than in the rock-pigeon, The ischium is also frequently rather
more elongated. The obturator-notch is sometimes, as in many tumblers,
less developed than in the rock-pigeon. The ridges on the ilium are
very prominent in most runts.
In the bones of the extremities I could detect no difference, except in
their proportional lengths; for instance, the metatarsus in a pouter
was 1.65 inch, and in a short-faced tumbler only .95 in length; and
this is a greater difference than would naturally follow from their
differently-sized bodies; but long legs in the pouter, and small feet
in the tumbler, are selected points. In some pouters the _scapula_ is
rather straighter, and in some {167} tumblers it is straighter, with
the apex less elongated, than in the rock-pigeon: in the woodcut, fig.
28, the scapulae of the rock-pigeon (A), and of a short-faced tumbler
(B), are given. The processes at the summit of the _coracoid_, which
receive the extremities of the furcula, form a more perfect cavity in
some tumblers than in the rock-pigeon: in pouters these processes are
larger and differently shaped, and the exterior angle of the extremity
of the coracoid, which is articulated to the sternum, is squarer.
[Illustration: Fig. 29.--Furculae, of natural size. A. Short-faced
Tumbler B and C. Fantails. D. Pouter.]
The two arms of the _furcula_ in pouters diverge less, proportionally
to their length, than in the rock-pigeon; and the symphysis is more
solid and pointed. In fantails the degree of divergence of the two arms
varies in a remarkable mariner. In fig. 29, B and C represent the
furculae of two fantails; and it will be seen that the divergence in B
is rather less even than in the furcula of the short-faced, small-sized
tumbler (A); whereas the divergence in C equals that in a rock-pigeon,
or in the pouter (D), though the latter is a much larger bird. The
extremities of the furcula, where articulated to the coracoids, vary
considerably in outline.
In the _sternum_ the differences in form are slight, except in the size
and outline of the perforations, which, both in the larger and lesser
sized breeds, are sometimes small. These perforations, also, are
sometimes either nearly circular, or elongated, as is often the case
with carriers. The posterior perforations occasionally are not
complete, being left open posteriorly. The marginal apophyses forming
the anterior perforations vary greatly in development. The degree of
convexity of the posterior part of the sternum differs much, being
sometimes almost perfectly flat. The manubrium is rather more prominent
in some individuals than in others, and the pore immediately under it
varies greatly in size.
_Correlation of Growth._--By this term I mean that the whole organisation
is so connected, that when one part varies, other {168} parts vary; but
which of two correlated variations ought to be looked at as the cause and
which as the effect, or whether both result from some common cause, we can
seldom or never tell. The point of interest for us is that, when fanciers,
by the continued selection of slight variations, have largely modified one
part, they often unintentionally produce other modifications. For instance,
the beak is readily acted on by selection, and, with its increased or
diminished length, the tongue increases or diminishes, but not in due
proportion; for, in a barb and short-faced tumbler, both of which have very
short beaks, the tongue, taking the rock-pigeon as the standard of
comparison, was proportionally not shortened enough, whilst in two carriers
and in a runt the tongue, proportionally with the beak, was not lengthened
enough. Thus, in a first-rate English carrier, in which the beak from the
tip to the feathered base was exactly thrice as long as in a first-rate
short-faced tumbler, the tongue was only a little more than twice as long.
But the tongue varies in length independently of the beak: thus, in a
carrier with a beak 1.2 inch in length, the tongue was .67 in length;
whilst in a runt which equalled the carrier in length of body and in
stretch of wings from tip to tip, the beak was .92 whilst the tongue was
.73 of an inch in length, so that the tongue was actually longer than in
the carrier with its long beak. The tongue of the runt was also very broad
at the root. Of two runts, one had its beak longer by .23 of an inch,
whilst its tongue was shorter by .14 than in the other.
With the increased or diminished length of the beak the length of the slit
forming the external orifice of the nostrils varies, but not in due
proportion, for, taking the rock-pigeon as the standard, the orifice in a
short-faced tumbler was not shortened in due proportion with its very short
beak. On the other hand (and this could not have been anticipated), the
orifice in three English carriers, in the Bagadotten carrier, and in a runt
(_pigeon cygne_), was longer by above the tenth of an inch than would
follow from the length of the beak proportionally with that of the
rock-pigeon. In one carrier the orifice of the nostrils was thrice as long
as in the rock-pigeon, though in body and length of beak this bird was not
nearly double the size of the {169} rock-pigeon. This greatly increased
length of the orifice of the nostrils seems to stand partly in correlation
with the enlargement of the wattled skin on the upper mandible and over the
nostrils; and this is a character which is selected by fanciers. So again,
the broad, naked, and wattled skin round the eyes of carriers and barbs is
a selected character; and in obvious correlation with this, the eyelids,
measured longitudinally, are proportionally more than double the length of
those of the rock-pigeon.
The great difference (see woodcut No. 27) in the curvature of the lower jaw
in the rock-pigeon, the tumbler, and Bagadotten carrier, stands in obvious
relation to the curvature of the upper jaw, and more especially to the
angle formed by the maxillo-jugal arch with the premaxillary bones. But in
carriers, runts, and barbs the singular reflexion of the upper margin of
the middle part of the lower jaw (see woodcut No. 25) is not strictly
correlated with the width or divergence (as may be clearly seen in woodcut
No. 26) of the premaxillary bones, but with the breadth of the horny and
soft parts of the upper mandible, which are always overlapped by the edges
of the lower mandible.
In pouters, the elongation of the body is a selected character, and the
ribs, as we have seen, have generally become very broad, with the seventh
pair furnished with processes; the sacral and caudal vertebrae have been
augmented in number; the sternum has likewise increased in length (but not
in the depth of the crest) by .4 of an inch more than would follow from the
greater bulk of the body in comparison with that of the rock-pigeon. In
fantails, the length and number of the caudal vertebrae have increased.
Hence, during the gradual progress of variation and selection, the internal
bony frame-work and the external shape of the body have been, to a certain
extent, modified in a correlated manner.
Although the wings and tail often vary in length independently of each
other, it is scarcely possible to doubt that they generally tend to become
elongated or shortened in correlation. This is well seen in jacobins, and
still more plainly in runts, some varieties of which have their wings and
tail of great length, whilst others have both very short. With jacobins,
the remarkable length of the tail and {170} wing-feathers is not a
character which is intentionally selected by fanciers; but fanciers have
been trying for centuries, at least since the year 1600, to increase the
length of the reversed feathers on the neck, so that the hood may more
completely enclose the head; and it may be suspected that the increased
length of the wing and tail-feathers stands in correlation with the
increased length of the neck-feathers. Short-faced tumblers have short
wings in nearly due proportion with the reduced size of their bodies; but
it is remarkable, seeing that the number of the primary wing-feathers is a
constant character in most birds, that these tumblers generally have only
nine instead of ten primaries. I have myself observed this in eight birds;
and the Original Columbarian Society[311] reduced the standard for
bald-head tumblers from ten to nine white flight-feathers, thinking it
unfair that a bird which had only nine feathers should be disqualified for
a prize because it had not ten _white_ flight-feathers. On the other hand,
in carriers and runts, which have large bodies and long wings, eleven
primary feathers have occasionally been observed.
Mr. Tegetmeier has informed me of a curious and inexplicable case of
correlation, namely, that young pigeons of all breeds, which when mature
become white, yellow, silver (_i.e._ extremely pale blue), or dun-coloured,
are born almost naked; whereas other coloured pigeons are born well clothed
with down. Mr. Esquilant, however, has observed that young dun carriers are
not so bare as young dun barbs and tumblers. Mr. Tegetmeier has seen two
young birds in the same nest, produced from differently coloured parents,
which differed greatly in the degree to which they were at first clothed
with down.
I have observed another case of correlation which at first sight appears
quite inexplicable, but on which, as we shall see in a future chapter, some
light can be thrown by the law of homologous parts varying in the same
manner. The case is, that, when the feet are much feathered, the roots of
the feathers are connected by a web of skin, and apparently in correlation
with this the two outer toes become connected for a considerable space by
skin. I have observed this in very many {171} specimens of pouters,
trumpeters, swallows, roller-tumblers (likewise observed in this breed by
Mr. Brent), and in a lesser degree in other feather-footed pigeons.
The feet of the smaller and larger breeds are of course much smaller or
larger than those of the rock-pigeon; but the scutellae or scales covering
the toes and tarsi have not only decreased or increased in size, but
likewise in number. To give a single instance, I have counted eight
scutellae on the hind toe of a runt, and only five on that of a short-faced
tumbler. With birds in a state of nature the number of the scutellae on the
feet is usually a constant character. The length of the feet and the length
of the beak apparently stand in correlation; but as disuse apparently has
affected the size of the feet, this case may come under the following
discussion.
* * * * *
_On the Effects of Disuse_.--In the following discussion on the relative
proportions of the feet, sternum, furcula, scapulae, and wings, I may
premise, in order to give some confidence to the reader, that my
measurements were all made in the same manner, and that all the
measurements of the external parts were made without the least intention of
applying them to the following purpose.
I measured most of the birds which came into my possession, from the
feathered _base_ of the beak (the length of beak itself being so
variable) to the end of the tail, and to the oil-gland, but
unfortunately (except in a few cases) not to the root of the tail; I
measured each bird from the extreme tip to tip of wing; and the length
of the terminal folded part of the wing, from the extremity of the
primaries to the joint of the radius. I measured the feet without the
claws, from the end of the middle toe to the end of the hind toe; and
the tarsus together with the middle toe. I have taken in every case the
mean measurement of two wild rock-pigeons from the Shetland Islands, as
the standard of comparison. The following table shows the actual length
of the feet in each bird; and the difference between the length which
the feet ought to have had according to the size of body of each, in
comparison with the size of body and length of feet of the rock-pigeon,
calculated (with a few specified exceptions) by the standard of the
length of the body from the base of the beak to the oil-gland. I have
preferred this standard, owing to the variability of the length of
tail. But I have made similar calculations, taking as the standard the
length from tip to tip of wing, and likewise in most cases from the
base of the beak to the end of the tail; and the result has always been
closely similar. To give an example: the first bird in the table, being
a short-faced tumbler, {172} is much smaller than the rock-pigeon, and
would naturally have shorter feet; but it is found on calculation to
have feet too short by .11 of an inch, in comparison with the feet of
the rock-pigeon, relatively to the size of the body in these two birds,
as measured from the base of beak to the oil-gland. So again, when this
same tumbler and the rock-pigeon were compared by the length of their
wings, or by the extreme length of their bodies, the feet of the
tumbler were likewise found to be too short in very nearly the same
proportion. I am well aware that the measurements pretend to greater
accuracy than is possible, but it was less trouble to write down the
actual measurements given by the compasses in each case than an
approximation.
TABLE I.
_Pigeons with their beaks generally shorter than that of the Rock-pigeon,
proportionally with the size of their bodies._
+-----------------------------------------+--------+-------------------+
| | | Difference |
| | | between |
| | | actual and |
| | | calculated |
| | | length of |
| Name of Breed. | Actual | feet, in |
| | length | proportion to |
| | of | length of |
| | Feet | feet and size |
| | | of body in the |
| | | Rock-pigeon |
| | +-------------------+
| Wild rock-pigeon (mean measurement) | 2.02 |Too short|Too long |
| | | by | by |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+---------+---------+
| Short-faced Tumbler, bald-head | 1.57 | 0.11 | .. |
| " " almond | 1.60 | 0.16 | .. |
| Tumbler, red magpie | 1.75 | 0.19 | .. |
| " red common (by standard | | | |
| to end of tail) | 1.85 | 0.07 | .. |
| " common bald-head | 1.85 | 0.18 | .. |
| " roller | 1.80 | 0.06 | .. |
| Turbit | 1.75 | 0.17 | .. |
| " | 1.80 | 0.01 | .. |
| " | 1.84 | 0.15 | .. |
| Jacobin | 1.90 | 0.02 | .. |
| Trumpeter, white | 2.02 | 0.06 | .. |
| " mottled | 1.95 | 0.18 | .. |
| Fantail (by standard to end of tail) | 1.85 | 0.15 | .. |
| " " " | 1.95 | 0.15 | .. |
| " crested var. " | 1.95 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Indian Frill-back | 1.80 | 0.19 | .. |
| English Frill-back | 2.10 | 0.03 | .. |
| Nun | 1.82 | 0.02 | .. |
| Laugher | 1.65 | 0.16 | .. |
| Barb | 2.00 | 0.03 | .. |
| " | 2.00 | .. | 0.03 |
| Spot | 1.90 | 0.02 | .. |
| " | 1.90 | 0.07 | .. |
| Swallow, red | 1.85 | 0.18 | .. |
| " blue | 2.00 | .. | 0.03 |
| Pouter | 2.42 | .. | 0.11 |
| " German | 2.30 | .. | 0.09 |
| Bussorah Carrier | 2.17 | .. | 0.09 |
| +--------+---------+---------+
| Number of specimens | 28 | 22 | 5 |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+---------+---------+
{173}
TABLE II.
_Pigeons with their beaks longer than that of the Rock-pigeon,
proportionally with the size of their bodies._
+--------------------------------------+----------+---------------------+
| | | Difference |
| | | between |
| | | actual and |
| | | calculated |
| | | length of |
| Name of Breed. | Actual | feet, in |
| | length | proportion to |
| | of | length of |
| | Feet | feet and size |
| | | of body in the |
| | | Rock-pigeon |
| | +----------+----------+
| Wild rock-pigeon (mean measurement) | 2.02 | Too short| Too long |
| | | by | by |
+--------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
| Carrier | 2.60 | .. | 0.31 |
| " | 2.60 | .. | 0.25 |
| " | 2.40 | .. | 0.21 |
| " Dragon | 2.25 | .. | 0.06 |
| Bagadotten Carrier | 2.80 | .. | 0.56 |
| Scanderoon, white | 2.80 | .. | 0.37 |
| " Pigeon cygne | 2.85 | .. | 0.29 |
| Runt | 2.75 | .. | 0.27 |
| +----------+----------+----------+
| Number of specimens | 8 | .. | 8 |
+--------------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+
In these two tables we see in the first column the actual length of the
feet in thirty-six birds belonging to various breeds, and in the two
other columns we see by how much the feet are too short or too long,
according to the size of bird, in comparison with the rock-pigeon. In
the first table twenty-two specimens have their feet too short, on an
average by a little above the tenth of an inch (viz. .107); and five
specimens have their feet on an average a very little too long, namely,
by .07 of an inch. But some of these latter and exceptional cases can
be explained; for instance, with pouters the legs and feet are selected
for length, and thus any natural tendency to a diminution in the length
of the feet will have been counteracted. In the swallow and barb, when
the calculation was made on any standard of comparison excepting the
one above used (viz. length of body from base of beak to oil-gland),
the feet were found to be too small.
In the second table we have eight birds, with their beaks much longer
than in the rock-pigeon, both actually and proportionally with the size
of body, and their feet are in an equally marked manner longer, namely,
in proportion, on an average by .29 of an inch. I should here state
that in Table I. there are a few partial exceptions to the beak being
proportionally shorter than in the rock-pigeon: thus the beak of the
English frill-back is just perceptibly longer, and that of the Bussorah
carrier of the same length or slightly longer, than in the rock-pigeon.
The beaks of spots, swallows, and laughers are only a very little
shorter, or of the same proportional length, but slenderer.
Nevertheless, these two tables, taken conjointly, indicate pretty
plainly some kind of correlation between the length of the beak and the
size of the feet. Breeders of cattle and horses believe that there is
an analogous connection between the length of the limbs and head; they
assert that a race-horse with the head of a dray-horse, or a {174}
greyhound with the head of a bulldog, would be a monstrous production.
As fancy pigeons are generally kept in small aviaries, and are
abundantly supplied with food, they must walk about much less than the
wild rock-pigeon; and it may be admitted as highly probable that the
reduction in the size of the feet in the twenty-two birds in the first
table has been caused by disuse,[312] and that this reduction has acted
by correlation on the beaks of the great majority of the birds in Table
I. When, on the other hand, the beak has been much elongated by the
continued selection of successive slight increments of length, the feet
by correlation have likewise become much elongated in comparison with
those of the wild rock-pigeon, notwithstanding their lessened use.
As I had taken measures from the end of the middle toe to the heel of
the tarsus in the rock-pigeon and in the above thirty-six birds, I have
made calculations analogous with those above given, and the result is
the same,--namely, that in the short-beaked breeds, with equally few
exceptions as in the former case, the middle toe conjointly with the
tarsus has decreased in length; whereas in the long-beaked breeds it
has increased in length, though not quite so uniformly as in the former
case, for the leg in some varieties of the runt varies much in length.
As fancy pigeons are generally confined in aviaries of moderate size,
and as even when not confined they do not search for their own food,
they must during many generations have used their wings incomparably
less than the wild rock-pigeon. Hence it seemed to me probable that all
the parts of the skeleton subservient to flight would be found to be
reduced in size. With respect to the sternum, I have carefully measured
its extreme length in twelve birds of different breeds, and in two wild
rock-pigeons from the Shetland Islands. For the proportional comparison
I have tried with all twelve birds three standards of measurement,
namely, the length from the base of the beak to the oil-gland, to the
end of the tail, and from the extreme tip to tip of wings. The result
has been in each case nearly the same, the sternum being invariably
found to be shorter than in the wild rock-pigeon. I will give only a
single table, as calculated by the standard from the base of the beak
to the oil-gland; for the result in this case is nearly the mean
between the results obtained by the two other standards.
_Length of Sternum._
+--------------------+-------+-------+-------------------+-------+------+
| |Actual | Too | |Actual | Too |
| Name of Breed. |Length.| Short | Name of Breed. |Length.| Short|
| |Inches.| by | |Inches.| by |
+--------------------+-------+-------+-------------------+-------+------+
| Wild Rock-pigeon | 2.55 | .. | Barb | 2.35 | 0.34 |
| Pied Scanderoon | 2.80 | 0.60 | Nun | 2.27 | 0.15 |
| Bagadotten Carrier | 2.80 | 0.17 | German Pouter | 2.36 | 0.54 |
| Dragon | 2.45 | 0.41 | Jacobin | 2.33 | 0.22 |
| Carrier | 2.75 | 0.35 | English Frill-back| 2.40 | 0.43 |
| Short-faced Tumbler| 2.05 | 0.28 | Swallow | 2.45 | 0.17 |
+--------------------+-------+-------+-------------------+-------+------+
{175}
This table shows that in these twelve breeds the sternum is on an
average one-third of an inch (exactly .332) shorter than in the
rock-pigeon, proportionally with the size of their bodies; so that the
sternum has been reduced by between one-seventh and one-eighth of its
entire length; and this is a considerable reduction.
I have also measured in twenty-one birds, including the above dozen,
the prominence of the crest of the sternum relatively to its length,
independently of the size of the body. In two of the twenty-one birds
the crest was prominent in the same relative degree as in the
rock-pigeon; in seven it was more prominent; but in five out of these
seven, namely, in a fantail, two scanderoons, and two English carriers,
this greater prominence may to a certain extent be explained, as a
prominent breast is admired and selected by fanciers; in the remaining
twelve birds the prominence was less. Hence it follows that the crest
exhibits a slight, though uncertain, tendency to become reduced in
prominence in a greater degree than does the length of the sternum
relatively to the size of body, in comparison with the rock-pigeon.
I have measured the length of the scapula in nine different large and
small-sized breeds, and in all the scapula is proportionally shorter
(taking the same standard as before) than in the wild rock-pigeon. The
reduction in length on an average is very nearly one-fifth of an inch,
or about one-ninth of the length of the scapula in the rock-pigeon.
The arms of the furcula in all the specimens which I compared, diverged
less, proportionally with the size of body, than in the rock-pigeon;
and the whole furcula was proportionally shorter. Thus in a runt, which
measured from tip to tip of wings 381/2 inches, the furcula was only a
very little longer (with the arms hardly more divergent) than in a
rock-pigeon which measured from tip to tip 261/2 inches. In a barb, which
in all its measurements was a little larger than the same rock-pigeon,
the furcula was a quarter of an inch shorter. In a pouter, the furcula
had not been lengthened proportionally with the increased length of the
body. In a short-faced tumbler, which measured from tip to tip of wings
24 inches, therefore only 21/2 inches less than the rock-pigeon, the
furcula was barely two-thirds of the length of that of the rock-pigeon.
We thus clearly see that the sternum, scapulae, and furcula are all reduced
in proportional length; but when we turn to the wings we find what at first
appears a wholly different and unexpected result. I may here remark that I
have not picked out specimens, but have used every measurement made by me.
Taking the length from the base of beak to the end of the tail as the
standard of comparison, I find that, out of thirty-five birds of various
breeds, twenty-five have wings of greater, and ten have them of less
proportional length, than in the rock-pigeon. But from the frequently
correlated length of the tail and wing-feathers, it is better to take as
the standard {176} of comparison the length from the base of the beak to
the oil-gland; and by this standard, out of twenty-six of the same birds
which had been thus measured, twenty-one had wings too long, and only five
had them too short. In the twenty-one birds the wings exceeded in length
those of the rock-pigeon, on an average, by 1-1/3 inch; whilst in the five
birds they were less in length by only .8 of an inch. As I was much
surprised that the wings of closely confined birds should thus so
frequently have been increased in length, it occurred to me that it might
be solely due to the greater length of the wing-feathers; for this
certainly is the case with the jacobin, which has wings of unusual length.
As in almost every case I had measured the folded wings, I subtracted the
length of this terminal part from that of the expanded wings, and thus I
obtained, with a moderate degree of accuracy, the length of the wings from
the ends of the two radii, answering from wrist to wrist in our arms. The
wings, thus measured in the same twenty-five birds, now gave a widely
different result; for they were proportionally with those of the
rock-pigeon too short in seventeen birds, and in only eight too long. Of
these eight birds, five were long-beaked,[313] and this fact perhaps
indicates that there is some correlation between the length of the beak and
the length of the bones of the wings, in the same manner as with the feet
and tarsi. The shortening of the humerus and radius in the seventeen birds
may probably be attributed to disuse, as in the case of the scapulae and
furcula to which the wing-bones are attached;--the lengthening of the
wing-feathers, and consequently the expansion of the wings from tip to tip,
being, on the other hand, as completely independent of use and disuse as is
the growth of the hair or wool on our long-haired dogs or long-woolled
sheep.
To sum up: we may confidently admit that the length of the sternum, and
frequently the prominence of its crest, the length of the scapulae and
furcula, have all been reduced in size in comparison with the same parts in
the rock-pigeon. And I {177} presume that this may be safely attributed to
disuse or lessened exercise. The wings, as measured from the ends of the
radii, have likewise been generally reduced in length; but, owing to the
increased growth of the wing-feathers, the wings, from tip to tip, are
commonly longer than in the rock-pigeon. The feet, as well as the tarsi
conjointly with the middle toe, have likewise in most cases become reduced;
and this it is probable has been caused by their lessened use; but the
existence of some sort of correlation between the feet and beak is shown
more plainly than the effects of disuse. We have also some faint indication
of a similar correlation between the main bones of the wing and the beak.
_Summary on the Points of Difference between the several Domestic Races,
and between the individual Birds._--The beak, together with the bones of
the face, differ remarkably in length, breadth, shape, and curvature. The
skull differs in shape, and greatly in the angle formed by the union of the
premaxillary, nasal, and maxillo-jugal bones. The curvature of the lower
jaw and the reflexion of its upper margin, as well as the gape of the
mouth, differ in a highly remarkable manner. The tongue varies much in
length, both independently and in correlation with the length of the beak.
The development of the naked, wattled skin over the nostrils and round the
eyes varies in an extreme degree. The eyelids and the external orifices of
the nostrils vary in length, and are to a certain extent correlated with
the degree of development of the wattle. The size and form of the
oesophagus and crop, and their capacity for inflation, differ immensely.
The length of the neck varies. With the varying shape of the body, the
breadth and number of the ribs, the presence of processes, the number of
the sacral vertebrae, and the length of the sternum, all vary. The number
and size of the coccygeal vertebrae vary, apparently in correlation with the
increased size of the tail. The size and shape of the perforations in the
sternum, and the size and divergence of the arms of the furcula, differ.
The oil-gland varies in development, and is sometimes quite aborted. The
direction and length of certain feathers have been much modified, as in the
hood of the Jacobin and the frill of the Turbit. The wing and tail feathers
generally vary in {178} length together, but sometimes independently of
each other and of the size of the body. The number and position of the
tail-feathers vary to an unparalleled degree. The primary and secondary
wing-feathers occasionally vary in number, apparently in correlation with
the length of the wing. The length of the leg and the size of the feet,
and, in connection with the latter, the number of the scutellae, all vary. A
web of skin sometimes connects the bases of the two inner toes, and almost
invariably the two outer toes when the feet are feathered.
The size of the body differs greatly: a runt has been known to weigh more
than five times as much as a short-faced tumbler. The eggs differ in size
and shape. According to Parmentier,[314] some races use much straw in
building their nests, and others use little; but I cannot hear of any
recent corroboration of this statement. The length of time required for
hatching the eggs is uniform in all the breeds. The period at which the
characteristic plumage of some breeds is acquired, and at which certain
changes of colour supervene, differs. The degree to which the young birds
are clothed with down when first hatched is different, and is correlated in
a singular manner with the future colour of the plumage. The manner of
flight, and certain inherited movements, such as clapping the wings,
tumbling either in the air or on the ground, and the manner of courting the
female, present the most singular differences. In disposition the several
races differ. Some races are very silent; others coo in a highly peculiar
manner.
Although many different races have kept true in character during several
centuries, as we shall hereafter more fully see, yet there is far more
individual variability in the truest breeds than in birds in a state of
nature. There is hardly any exception to the rule that those characters
vary most which are now most valued and attended to by fanciers, and which
consequently are now being improved by continued selection. This is
indirectly admitted by fanciers when they complain that it is much more
difficult to breed high fancy pigeons up to the proper standard of
excellence than the so-called toy pigeons, which differ from {179} each
other merely in colour; for particular colours when once acquired are not
liable to continued improvement or augmentation. Some characters become
attached, from quite unknown causes, more strongly to the male than to the
female sex; so that we have, in certain races, a tendency towards the
appearance of secondary sexual characters,[315] of which the aboriginal
rock-pigeon displays not a trace.
* * * * *
{180}