_J. Gould and H. C. Richter del et lith._ _Hullmandel & Walton Imp._
]
ORIOLUS VIRIDIS.
New South Wales Oriole.
_Gracula viridis_, Lath. Ind. Orn. Supp., p. xxviii.—Shaw, Gen. Zool.,
vol. vii. p. 473.
_Loriot_, Temm. Man. d’Orn., 2nd Edit. p. liv.
_Green Grakle_, Lath. Gen. Syn. Supp., vol. ii. p. 129.—Ib. Gen.
Hist., vol. iii. p. 168.
_Coracias sagittata_, Lath. Ind. Orn. Supp., p. xxvi.—Shaw, Gen.
Zool., vol. viii. p. 400.
_Striated Roller_, Lath. Gen. Syn. Supp., vol. ii. p. 122.—Ib. Gen.
Hist., vol. iii. p. 83.
_Streaked Roller_, Lath. Gen. Hist., vol. iii. p. 84, young.
_Mimetes viridis_, King, Survey of Intertropical Coast of Australia,
vol. ii. p. 419.
_Mimeta viridis_, Vig. and Horsf. in Linn. Trans., vol. xv. p.
326.—Jard. and Selb. Ill. Orn., vol. ii. pl. 61.—G. R. Gray,
List of Gen. of Birds, 2nd Edit. p. 38.
—— _Merulöides_, Vig. and Horsf. in Linn. Trans., vol. xv. p. 327,
young.
_Oriolus viridis_, Vieill., 2nd Edit. du Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat.,
tom. xviii. p. 197.—Ib. Ency. Méth. Orn., part ii. p. 697.
—— _variegatus_, Vieill., 2nd Edit. du Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat., tom.
xviii. p. 196.—Ib. Ency. Méth. Orn., part ii. p. 696.
This bird was first described by Latham, by whom it was placed in the
genus _Gracula_, but it agrees in no respect with the members of that
genus, and “in fact,” says Captain King, “the genus _Oriolus_ is that to
which it bears the closest resemblance in its general appearance. I
would at once refer it to that genus, but that I have some reason to
think that it belongs to the meliphagous birds.... Of the tongue or mode
of feeding I can myself say nothing decisively; but general opinion
places this bird among the groups that feed by suction, and as I have a
second species hitherto undescribed which is closely allied to it, I
prefer forming both provisionally into a new genus” (_Mimetes_) “to
referring them to one, from which, although they agree with it in
external appearance, they may be totally remote in consequence of their
internal anatomy and habits of life. If the tongue be found to accord
with that of the _Orioles_ and not of the _Honey-suckers_, my group of
course must fall.” Messrs. Jardine and Selby took the same view of the
subject when describing and figuring the bird in their “Illustrations of
Ornithology,” and have given a description of the structure of the
tongue, which certainly offers a slight resemblance to that of the true
meliphagous birds; but my own observations of the bird in a state of
nature enable me to affirm that in appearance, habits, economy, and in
the nature of its food it is truly an Oriole, to which group of birds it
was correctly assigned by M. Vieillot in the second edition of the
“Dictionnaire d’Histoire Naturelle,” and that consequently Captain
King’s generic term _Mimetes_ must sink into a synonym of _Oriolus_.
The true and probably the restricted habitat of this species is New
South Wales, where in the months of summer it is tolerably plentiful in
every part of the colony. I frequently observed it in the Botanic Garden
at Sydney, and in all the gardens of the settlers where there were trees
of sufficient size to afford it shelter; the brushes of the country, the
sides of brooks and all similar situations are equally inhabited by it.
I did not find it in South Australia, neither has it been observed to
the westward of that part of the country. That its range extends pretty
far to the northward I have no doubt, as its numbers rather increased
than diminished in the neighbourhood of the rivers Peel and Namoi; and
many persons would, I feel assured, assign to it a much more extended
range by considering it identical with the bird of the same form found
at Port Essington,—an opinion in which I cannot myself coincide,
believing as I do that the latter bird is a distinct species, although
at a hasty glance it would appear to be one and the same; the general
colouring of the two birds is, it is true, very similar, but the
following differences exist and are found to be constant:—The Port
Essington bird (for which the specific term _affinis_ would be an
appropriate appellation) is smaller in the body, has a shorter wing, a
much larger bill, and the white spots at the tip of the lateral
tail-feathers considerably smaller than the bird inhabiting New South
Wales; in other respects they are so precisely alike that it will not be
necessary to figure both.
The following notes descriptive of their habits and economy are equally
applicable to the one and the other.
The bird observed by me in New South Wales was bold and active, and was
often seen in company with the Regent, Satin and Cat Birds, feeding in
the same trees and on similar berries and fruits, particularly the small
wild fig. It possesses a loud pleasing whistling note, which is poured
forth while the bird is perched on a lofty branch. I often observed it
capturing insects on the wing and flying very high, frequently above the
tops of the loftiest trees.
Mr. Gilbert states that the Port Essington bird is “abundant in every
part of the peninsula and the adjacent islands in every possible variety
of situation.” Its native name is _Mur-re-a-̏rwoo_. It possesses a very
loud and distinct note, unlike that of every other bird I have yet
heard; the sound most commonly uttered is a loud clear whistle
terminating in a singular guttural harsh catch, but in the cool of the
evening, when perched on and sheltered in the thick foliage of one of
the topmost branches of a _Eucalyptus_, it pours forth a regular
succession of very pleasing notes.
A nest taken on the 4th of December contained two nearly hatched eggs;
it was attached by the rim to a drooping branch of the swamp
_Melaleuca_, about five feet from the ground; was very deep and large,
and formed of very narrow strips of the paper bark mixed with a few
small twigs, the bottom of the interior lined with very fine wiry twigs.
The eggs, which are large for the size of the bird, are of a beautiful
bluish white, sparingly spotted all over with deep umber-brown and
bluish grey, the latter appearing as if beneath the surface of the
shell; their medium length is one inch and three lines long by eleven
lines broad.
The sexes when fully adult differ so little in colour that they can
scarcely be distinguished; the male is however of a more uniform tint
about the head, neck and throat, and has the yellowish olive of the
upper surface of a deeper tint than the female.
Head and all the upper surface yellowish olive; wings and tail-feathers
dark brown; the outer webs of the coverts and secondaries grey, margined
and broadly tipped with white; all but the two centre tail-feathers with
a large oval-shaped spot of white on the inner, and the extremity of the
outer web white, the white mark gradually increasing in size as the
feathers recede from the centre until it becomes an inch long on the
external one; under surface white, washed with olive-yellow on the sides
of the chest, each feather with an elongated pear-shaped mark of black
down the centre; bill dull flesh-red; irides scarlet; feet lead-colour.
The young bird during the first year has the bill blackish brown instead
of dull flesh-red; the upper surface olive-brown, each feather strongly
streaked down the centre with dark brown; wings brown; under surface of
the shoulder and all the wing-feathers except the primaries margined
with sandy red; the black streaks on the breast more decided, and the
white spot at the tip of the lateral tail-feathers much smaller than in
the adult.
The figures represent the two sexes of the natural size on a plant
gathered in the brushes of New South Wales, the name of which I have not
been able to ascertain.
[Illustration: