I imagine that the daily entry will read somewhat as follows:—

8 a.m.—(One hour after sunrise) woke up.

8—8.30—Pruned my feathers.

8.30—Flew to my fishing ground.

8.32—Settled there for the day.

8.40—9—Caught a few water insects for breakfast.

9—10—Had a nap.

10.30—Caught a frog.

10.32—12—Had a nap.

12.15—Caught another frog.

12.17—2—Had a nap.

2.20—Caught a third frog.

2.22—Walked three yards.

2.24—4—Had a nap.

4.40—Caught a fourth frog.

5—6—Had a nap.

6.15—6.30—Caught and ate my supper.

6.30—Flew to roost.

6.35—40—Had a row with a neighbour who had taken my private roosting

site.

7 p.m. onwards—Slept the sleep of the just.

The above is not a statement of actual fact. Like many scientific

productions it is based on imagination and not observation. I have not

yet devoted a whole day to the paddy bird. I have, however, spent an

hour at a pond heron’s dormitory and record in the next chapter what I

saw there.

At the nesting season the paddy birds awake from their habitual

lethargy. Towards the end of June they begin to make a collection of

sticks and pile these together on a forked branch high up in some tree.

When the pile has reached a magnitude sufficient to support four or five

eggs the paddy bird flatters itself that it has built a fine nest and

forthwith proceeds to stock it with eggs. This species usually nests in

colonies, sometimes in company with night herons (_Nycticorax griseus_),

and occasionally with crows. Seen from below the nursery looks rather

like an old crow’s nest. The eggs are a beautiful pale green. They are

most jealously watched by the parents; one or other always remaining on

guard, and, every now and then, gurgling with delight.

The youngsters hatch out in a comparatively advanced condition. A baby

pond heron about a week old is a most amusing object. It has a long,

narrow, pinkish beak, quite unlike the broad triangle that does duty for

a mouth in passerine birds. Its neck is disproportionately long, while

its green legs are many sizes too big for it. Downy feathers are

scattered irregularly over the body, and add to the absurdity of its

appearance. The eye is bright yellow and gives its possessor a very

knowing look.

Most birds when they have young work like slaves to procure sufficient

food for them. Not so the paddy bird. He knows a trick worth two of

that. He is a past master in the art of loafing. He does not feed his

offspring on tiny insects, dozens of which are required to make a decent

meal; he forces whole frogs down the elastic gullet of the nestling. Now

the most ravenous and greedy young bird cannot negotiate very many frogs

per diem; hence the feeding of their young is not a great tax upon paddy

birds.

XIX

PADDY BIRDS AT BEDTIME

The paddy bird (_Ardeola grayii_) is at all times and all seasons as

solemn as the proverbial judge; hence at bedtime, when all other birds

are hilarious and excited, he is comparatively sedate.

Paddy birds, in common with the great majority of the feathered kind,

roost in company. At sunrise, the company separates. Each goes his own

way to his favourite river, paddy-field, tank, pond or puddle, as the

case may be, and spends the day in morose solitude. At sunset he rejoins

his fellow pond herons.

Growing out of the water in a small tank near the railway station at

Fyzabad are three trees, one of which is quite small, while the other

two are about the size of well-grown apple trees. This description is

perhaps as vague as saying of an object that it is as big as a piece of

chalk. I am sorry. I cannot help it. I know of no accurate method of

judging the size of a tree that is surrounded by dirty, slimy water. On

one of these trees, like unto an apple tree, over fifty paddy birds

spend the night.

One might have thought that this was a very fair load for an average

tree. This, however, is not the opinion of the feathered folk. Some 300

or 400 mynas also utilise this tree as a dormitory. The mynas occupy the

higher branches, and the paddy birds the lower ones.

As every one knows, the roosting place of a company of mynas is a

perfect pandemonium. For thirty or forty minutes before going to sleep

each individual bird shouts at every other individual with truly

splendid energy. If man could but devise some means of harnessing this

energy, every station in India might be lighted with electric light at a

very small cost. As things are, all this energy is dissipated in the

form of sound, with the result that the noise made by 300 starlings can

be heard at a distance of half a mile.

One might reasonably suppose that a quiet, sedate bird like _Ardeola

grayii_ would be greatly disgusted at the din that emanates from the

throats of mynas at bedtime, and would refrain from selecting as his

dormitory a tree that literally quivers with the shoutings of mynas. It

is, however, not so. Birds rarely do what one would expect. I know

hundreds of ideal sites for birds’ nests that are never utilised. _Per

contra_, I have met with numbers of nests situated in the most

uncomfortable and evil-smelling places. Paddy birds obviously do not

suffer from nerves.

For about fifteen minutes before and fifteen minutes after sunset the

tree in which all these birds roost presents an animated appearance. One

or two paddy birds are the first to arrive, and they settle on one or

other of the lower branches which almost touch the water. Nearly all

birds, on approaching the tree in which they roost, literally throw

themselves into the foliage, they plunge into it at headlong speed.

Needless to say, the paddy bird does nothing so reckless as this;

nevertheless, when approaching the tree in which he intends to spend the

night he travels faster than at any other time, except, of course, when

he is being chased by a falcon. The advance-guard of the mynas arrives

very shortly after the first _bagla_. The mynas belong to two

species—the common and the bank mynas (_Acridotheres tristis_ and _A.

ginginianus_). They come in squads of twenty or thirty. The various

squads arrive in rapid succession. Then the uproar begins and continues

to swell in volume as the numbers in the tree increase.

The paddy birds come in ones and twos, and, as stated, invariably alight

on one of the lower branches. They usually select a branch so thin that

it would be impossible for so large a bird to obtain a foothold on it

did not the claws of that bird grip like a vice; and even so it is not

without much flapping of their white wings that the pond herons manage

to reach a state of equilibrium.

If, when a paddy bird has succeeded in steadying itself on a slender

branch two feet or so above the level of the water, another feckless

fellow elects to alight on the selfsame branch, there follows trouble

compared to which the Turco-Italian War is, as the babu says, a mere

storm in a teapot; both birds seem in danger of taking a bath. On such

occasions, the bird first on the tree greets the new-comer with gurgles

of protest, there is much flapping of white wings, and eventually one or

both the birds have to leave the branch.

But it is not until the tree is filled with birds that the real fun

begins. When about forty paddy birds are squatting on the lower branches

and over 300 mynas on the upper ones, it will be well understood that

there is not much accommodation available for new arrivals. When a

belated myna appears on the scene and plunges into the midst of his

brother starlings, he is greeted with such a torrent of abuse that,

although, in the gathering gloom, one cannot see what is going on amid

the foliage, one feels convinced that the abuse is backed up by assault

and battery. If, on the other hand, the luckless myna pitches into the

tree at a lower elevation, he is liable to find himself transfixed by

the stiletto-like beak of the nearest paddy bird, the savage thrust

being accompanied by a lugubrious croak which seems to be the only note

of the paddy bird. Nine out of ten mynas prefer incurring the wrath of

their own kind to bringing down upon themselves the less noisy but more

formidable anger of the pond heron.

If the mynas are packed like sardines in a box, the paddy birds lower

down are not much more comfortable. It is true that the paddy birds are

not squeezed together after the manner of the mynas, for the simple

reason that if more than two of them attempted to squat on any but the

stoutest of the branches they would all find themselves immersed in the

slimy, unsavoury water beneath. The discomfort of the paddy birds is of

another kind. Each one is balancing himself on an insecure perch and

lives in momentary terror of being displaced by the advent of some other

_bagla_. Hence, when the tree contains about forty herons, every fresh

arrival is greeted with croaks the most sepulchral, and there is much

shaking of branches and flapping of wings before he can find a spot on

which he is able to maintain himself in a state of unstable equilibrium.

I watched the tree in question one evening in order to ascertain how

many paddy birds roosted in it. I was able to count fifty-four by

enumerating the birds as they arrived. I may have missed a few. But this

is a mere detail. The lower branches carried all the paddy birds they

were capable of bearing with safety. A few of the paddy birds had to be

content with berths in a neighbouring tree, which grew out of the water

at a distance of a few feet.

Some time after the sun had set one of the overflow party decided to try

his luck in the main tree, and this resulted in such croaking and

fluttering of wings on the part of his fellow paddy birds that for a few

seconds the din of the mynas was drowned.

By the time it is really dark every bird, be he myna or pond heron, is

sufficiently satisfied to hold his tongue. From then until an hour

before sunrise not a sound emanates from the sleeping population of some

400 mynas and 50 paddy birds, who have elected to spend the night amid

the unwholesome vapours that emanate from the water below. Birds are

evidently mosquito proof.

XX

MERLINS

Merlins are pigmy falcons. Like falcons, they are reclaimed for hawking

purposes, but are regarded as mere toys by those who indulge in “the

sport of kings.”

In the days when falconry was a fashionable pastime in England nearly

every lady of quality possessed a merlin, which was often as much of a

companion as a dog is nowadays. The exquisite little bird of prey would

accompany its mistress on her rides or her walks, flying overhead and

coming to the glove when called. This species, being the only kind of

merlin found in England, is popularly called the merlin (_Æsalon

regulus_), even as _Cuculus canorus_ is always known as the cuckoo, as

though it were the only cuckoo in the world.

The merlin when trained for falconry is usually flown at the skylark.

There are few prettier sights than that presented by a contest between a

merlin and a skylark. Both know that the merlin can do nothing until it

gets above its quarry; hence the contest at first resolves itself into

one for supremacy of position. The adversaries often fly upwards in

spirals until they almost disappear from view. When once the merlin does

succeed in getting above the lark it makes swoop after swoop until it

strikes its quarry.

In India the merlin is often trained to fly at the hoopoe. This contest

is of a nature very different from that just described. The hoopoe does

not rely on speed. It trusts to its truly marvellous power of timing the

onslaught of the merlin and swerving at the critical moment, so that the

merlin misses it by a hair’s breadth. So great a master of aerial

manœuvre is the hoopoe that two merlins working together are required to

accomplish its downfall.

As the plumage of _Æsalon regulus_ has the nondescript colouring that

characterises most birds of prey, no useful purpose will be served by an

attempt to describe it. The merlin is a winter visitor to India, and

visits only the Punjab and Sind.

There is, however, another species of merlin which is a permanent

resident in and distributed throughout India, viz. the red-headed merlin

(_Æsalon chicquera_) or turumti as the bird is popularly called. Like

the common merlin it is one of the smaller pirates of the air, being no

larger than a myna, but it is the very quintessence of ferocity, and it

knows not what fear is. Hence it is a terror to many creatures of

greater magnitude than itself. The red-headed merlin is comparatively

easy to identify, because it has some distinctive colouring, in the

shape of a chestnut-red head and neck. The remainder of the upper

plumage is French grey, marked with fine brown cross-bars. There is a

broad black band with a white edge across the end of the tail. The chin,

throat, and under parts are white, with brown spots, which become less

plentiful as the individual grows older. This disappearance with age of

the markings on the lower parts is very common among birds of prey, and

is one of the many problems of animal colouring that do not appear to be

explained by the theory of natural selection.

The hen turumti is about fourteen inches in length, of which six consist

of tail. The cock, as is usual among raptores, is somewhat smaller than

the hen.

The red-headed merlin occurs only in India. It is an evil manufactured

for the sole benefit of the small birds of Hindustan. The turumti does

not appear to undergo any periodical migration. It preys chiefly upon

small birds. Social larks, little ringed plovers and sparrows are its

commonest victims. But it is not afraid to tackle larger birds.

Frequently it attacks mynas, starlings, quails, and doves. Indeed the

usual lure bird for a red-headed merlin is a myna. This is tethered to a

stick stuck into the ground, and in front of it is stretched a net

attached to upright posts. The first turumti to observe this swoops down

at the myna to find itself hopelessly entangled in the net. Hume once

saw a red-headed merlin strike a pigeon and kill it with the first blow.

Turumtis do not confine their attention to birds. The alert little palm

squirrel is often victimised, as are sometimes those bats that are so

unwary as to venture forth before the merlins go to bed.

When pursuing their operations in the open turumtis frequently hunt in

couples, and, as they fly exceedingly swiftly, no matter how speedy the

quarry be or how adept in swerving in the air, it is rarely able to

escape from the concerted attack of a pair of these little furies.

Red-headed merlins are addicted to perching on the telegraph wires that

are stretched alongside railway lines. They do this in order to pounce

down into the midst of a flock of small birds alarmed by the noise of a

passing train. The turumti, like the sparrow hawk, is a sprinter rather

than a long-distance flier, and hence is able to secure its quarry in

gardens, groves, and other comparatively confined places. It is fond of

gliding with great rapidity along some hedgerow or bank and swooping

down on any small bird feeding in the vicinity.

The turumti is not often used for purposes of falconry, which is

somewhat surprising, seeing that it affords better sport than does the

shikra, because it does not give up the chase so readily. When trained

it is usually flown at the blue jay or roller (_Coracias indica_). “In

pursuit of this quarry,” writes Jerdon, “the falcon follows most closely

and perseveringly, but is often baulked by the extraordinary evolutions

of the roller, who now darts off obliquely, then tumbles down

perpendicularly, screaming all the time and endeavouring to gain the

shelter of the nearest grove or tree. But even here he is not safe; the

falcon follows him from branch to branch, and sooner or later the

exhausted quarry falls a victim to the ruthless bird of prey.”

Very different is the behaviour of the shikra; he makes a dash at the

quarry, and, if he fail to seize it at once, gives up the chase.

The red-headed merlin is thrown from the hand in the same way as the

shikra. According to Mr. R. Thompson, the turumti affords peculiar sport

with the spotted dove (_Turtur suratensis_), “striking at the quarry

several times, and even often losing it altogether, owing partly to the

softness of the dove’s feathers, which give way at the least touch, and

partly to its rapid dodging flight.”

Turumtis breed from February to June, earlier in South India than in the

Punjab and the Himalayas. The nest is usually built in a fork near the

top of a tree—a tamarind or a mango for preference. In size and

appearance the nest resembles that of a crow. It consists of a

conglomeration of twigs, forming a platform of which the diameter

measures about a foot. In the middle is a depression, lined with fine

twigs, roots, feathers, or other convenient materials, in which the eggs

are placed. Both sexes take part in nest building, which they appear to

consider a very difficult and arduous task, judging by the fuss they

make over the placing of every twig brought to the nest. The eggs are

reddish white, very thickly speckled with brownish red. Turumtis are

exceedingly pugnacious at the nesting season, and are as resentful as

king-crows at any kind of intrusion; hence they are kept busy in giving

chase to crows _et hoc genus omne_, who seem to take a positive delight

in teasing fussy birds with nests.

XXI

THE COMMON WRYNECK

I leave it to anatomists to determine whether wrynecks are woodpeckers

that are turning into other birds, or other birds that are changing into

woodpeckers. Certain it is that they are closely allied to woodpeckers.

Only four species of wryneck are known to exist, and, of these, three

are confined to the Dark Continent, while the fourth is a great

traveller. It is the bird which is frequently seen in India during the

winter, and is well known in England as the “cuckoo’s mate,” because it

migrates every year to Great Britain at the same time as the cuckoo.

Ornithologists call this bird _Iynx torquilla_, plain Englishmen usually

term it the wryneck, as though there were only one species in the world.

From their insular point of view they are quite right because it is the

only wryneck they ever see unless they leave their island. One

convenience of living in a country, like England, poor in species, is

that to particularise a bird is rarely necessary; it is sufficient to

speak of the cuckoo, the swallow, the kingfisher, the heron. On the

other hand, we who dwell in this country of many species, if we would

not be misunderstood, usually have to particularise the cuckoo, the

kingfisher, or the swallow of which we are speaking. However, as regards

wrynecks, India is no better off than England. One species only visits

that country; hence Indians may indulge in the luxury of speaking of it

as the wryneck. This is a bird not much larger than a sparrow and

attired as plainly as the hen of that species. But here the resemblance

ends. The wryneck is as retiring in disposition as the sparrow is

obtrusive. I defy any one to dwell a week in a locality that boasts of a

pair of sparrows without noticing them, but many a man spends the

greater part of his life in India without once observing a wryneck. The

greyish-brown plumage of the wryneck, delicately mottled and barred all

over with a darker shade of brown, harmonises very closely with the

trunks of trees or the bare earth on which it spends so much of its

time, and thus it often eludes observation.

The wryneck, like its cousins the woodpeckers, feeds almost exclusively

on insects which it secures by means of the tongue. This wormlike

structure is several inches in length and is hard and sharp, barbed at

the tip and covered elsewhere with very sticky saliva. It can be shot

out suddenly to transfix the bird’s quarry, and then as rapidly

retracted. The tongue is so long that when retracted it coils up inside

the head. Although wrynecks feed a good deal on trees, they are far less

addicted to them than woodpeckers are. The latter sometimes feed upon

the ground, but this is the exception rather than the rule, while with

the wryneck the reverse holds good. Once, at Lahore, I nearly trod upon

a wryneck that was feeding on the ground. It flew from between my boots

to a low bush hard by; then it descended to the ground and began to feed

in the grass. I crept towards the place where it was feeding, and it did

not again take to its wings until I was close up to it. This time it

flew to a branch of a tree about ten feet above the level of the ground.

I again followed up the wryneck. This time it allowed me to walk right

up under it, and study the dark cross-bars on its tail feathers. After a

little time it betook itself to a bunker on the golf links, from off

which it began to pick insects. Then it flew to a low bush, and from

thence dropped to the ground. I again followed it up, and, as I

approached, it quietly walked away. Other naturalists have found the

wryneck in India equally tame. Mr. Blyth says of it: “Instinctively

trusting to the close resemblance of its tints to the situations on

which it alights, it will lie close and sometimes even suffer itself to

be taken by the hand; on such occasions it will twirl its neck in the

most extraordinary manner, rolling the eyes, and erecting the feathers

of the crown and throat, occasionally raising its tail and performing

the most ludicrous movements; then, taking advantage of the surprise of

the spectator, it will suddenly dart off like an arrow.”

At most seasons of the year the wryneck is a remarkably silent bird. I

do not remember ever having heard one utter a sound in India. When,

however, it first arrives in England it has plenty to say for itself.

“In one short season,” says an anonymous writer in England, “we hear its

singular monotonous notes at intervals through half the day. This

ceases, and we think no more about it, as it continues perfectly mute;

not a twit or a chirp escapes to remind us of its sojourn with us,

except the maternal note or hush of danger, which is a faint, low,

protracted hissing, as the female sits clinging by the side or on the

stump of a tree.”

The wryneck is not singular among birds in uttering its note only at

certain seasons of the year. Very few of the song birds pour forth their

melody all the year round. This fact bears powerful testimony to the

view I have frequently enunciated as to the nature of birds’ song. There

is nothing conversational in it, nothing in the nature of language; it

is merely the expression of superabundant vitality which fills most

birds at certain seasons of the year.

Like very many other migrants, the wryneck does not appear to be

powerful on the wing. Its flight has been well described as “precipitate

and awkward.”

The wryneck derives its name from a curious habit it has of twisting its

neck as it seeks for insects on a tree-trunk or mound.

Wrynecks are very rarely seen in cages or aviaries, probably because

they are not songsters and because their habits are not such as to

render them attractive in an aviary. Nevertheless, wrynecks thrive in

captivity. Bishop Stanley records an instance of a wryneck which “lived

for a year and a half in a cage, and never appeared to show impatience

during its confinement; it was observed always to take its food by

throwing out its long tongue.”

During the winter the wryneck seems to visit all parts of India, except

possibly the Malabar coast, and it is sufficiently common in South India

to have a Tamil name—_Moda nulingadu_.

The wryneck breeds neither in the plains of India nor, I believe, in the

Himalayas, but its nest has been recorded in Kashmir. It busies itself

with parental duties in the summer—in May and June in England—laying its

glossy white eggs in a hollow in a tree. Unlike the woodpecker the

wryneck does not hollow out its hole for itself. It is sensible enough

not to undertake that which can be equally well done by others. In this

respect, as in so many others, it differs from the woodpeckers proper.

XXII

GREEN PIGEONS

Green birds are comparatively few in number, but nearly all of those

that do exist are very beautiful objects. Green is a colour which is

rarely found alone in birds. The fowls of the air of which the plumage

is mainly green almost invariably display patches of other colour. In

the familiar green parrots red, pink, blue, and black occur; the green

coppersmith flaunts the most gaudy hues of red, crimson, and yellow; the

emerald merops adorns itself with gold and turquoise ornaments; while

green pigeons are birds which display the whole spectrum of colours,

each in a subdued form. In the common Indian species the forehead is

greenish yellow; the nape and sides of the head French grey; the chin

and neck are old gold shading off into olive; the body is greenish

olive; the shoulder is washed with lilac. The primary wing feathers are

dark grey, while the secondaries are similarly coloured, but have pale

yellow tips. The tail is slate-coloured, becoming greenish yellow at the

base. The feathers under the tail are a dark claret colour with creamy

bars. The lower parts are slate-coloured tinged with green, save for the

feathers of the thigh, which are canary yellow. The legs are orange

yellow. The eye is blue, with an outer ring of carmine. Yet,

notwithstanding all this show of colour, there is nothing gaudy about

the green pigeon. Every tint is most delicately laid on, and each hue

blends into the surrounding ones in a truly exquisite fashion, so that

it is no exaggeration to call the green pigeon a vision of perfect

loveliness.

In the unlikely event of any one taking the trouble to compare the above

description with those given in the fauna of British India for _Crocopus

phœnicopterus_ (the Bengal green pigeon) and _C. chlorogaster_ (the

Southern green pigeon), that person will observe that it does not tally

exactly with either of them. Nevertheless, my description is taken from

a specimen shot by me in the Basti district of the United Provinces. The

fact of the matter is that in places where the Bengal form meets the

southern species the two interbreed, as, I believe, do all, or nearly

all, allied species at the point of junction. And, in such cases, the

hybrid birds appear to be perfectly fertile and to thrive equally with

the parent species; neither of which would be the case were facts in

accordance with the Wallaceian theory. But, as we shall see later, green

pigeons seem to lay themselves out to destroy the biological orthodoxy

of to-day.

Green pigeons appear to live exclusively on fruit. They go about in

small flocks, seeking out trees of which the fruit is ripe; when they

hit upon such a tree they behave as if they were schoolboys let loose in

a tuck shop!

The Hindustani name for the green pigeon is _Harrial_. The natives, or

at any rate some of them, assert that the bird never descends to the

ground, because when its foot touches the earth the bird loses a pound

in weight, in other words, shrivels up into nothingness! If asked how it

drinks, they will reply that it settles on a reed which bends with its

weight, so that it is able to partake of the water beneath without

touching the earth. In the absence of a conveniently situated reed, the

green pigeon overcomes the difficulty by carrying a twig in its feet. It

would be interesting to discover the origin of this story, which is on a

par with that which asserts that the red-wattled lapwing (_Sarcogrammus

indicus_) sleeps on its back with its legs in the air, in order to be

ready to catch the sky on its feet if ever this should fall! As a matter

of fact green pigeons are very arboreal in their habits. I do not

remember ever having seen one of them on the ground.

The note of the green pigeons is not a coo, but a pleasant whistle. The

birds are sometimes caged on account of their song. But they are

uninteresting pets. In captivity they soon lose their beauty, because

they are so gluttonous as to smear the head and neck with whatever fruit

be given them to eat.

Green pigeons are said to be far less obtrusive in their courtship than

the majority of their kind. The male does not puff himself out after the

manner of other cock pigeons, but is content to bow before his lady love

and in this attitude move his expanded tail up and down.

There are few birds that assimilate so closely to their surroundings as

green pigeons. Fifty of them may be perched in a pipal tree, and a man

on the look-out for them may fail to detect a single individual until

one of the birds moves. They are thus excellent examples of protectively

coloured birds. Their green livery undoubtedly affords them a certain

amount of protection, and so may perhaps be considered a product of

natural selection. Be this as it may, a consideration of the details of

the colouring of their plumage shows that many of these, as, for

example, the lilac on the wing, are quite unnecessary for the

concealment of the bird. The eastern and the southern species which

occur together in certain places and the hybrids produced by the

interbreeding of these are all equally difficult to distinguish from the

surrounding leaves, notwithstanding the fact that their plumage differs

in details, e.g. the breast and the abdomen are greenish yellow in the

southern and ashy-grey in the eastern form, while there is green in the

forehead and tail of the latter, but not of the former. Thus we have two

species of green pigeon, of which at least one has not originated by

natural selection. Facts such as these, however, do not prevent Dr.

Wallace, Sir E. Ray Lankester, and Professor Poulton continually

proclaiming from the housetops that every existing species owes its

origin to natural selection and nothing but natural selection!

There are several genera of green pigeons, and all of them are

characterised by short legs and broad toes. These are adaptations to the

arboreal habit, in the formation of which natural selection has, in all

probability, played an important part. The habits of all the genera are

identical. They, one and all, build the rough-and-ready shakedowns which

do duty for nests amongst the _Columbidæ_. All lay the inevitable two

white eggs. Yet the sexes of the genus _Crocopus_ are alike in external

appearance, while those of the genera _Osmosteros_, _Sphenocercus_, and

_Treron_ exhibit considerable dimorphism. Again in the genus _Butreron_

the sexual differences displayed are inconsiderable. These facts, of

themselves, are quite sufficient to disprove the theory that sexual

dimorphism in birds is due to the hen’s greater need of protection. Cock

green pigeons assimilate so well to their leafy environment that there

cannot possibly be any necessity for their wives to be differently

dressed. Further, it is worthy of note that the most flourishing of the

genera of green pigeons is that in which the sexes dress alike.

XXIII

BULBULS’ NESTS—I

In May, 1911, a pair of red-whiskered bulbuls (_Otocompsa emeria_) took

up their residence in my verandah at Fyzabad, that is to say, they spent

the greater part of the day there in constructing a nest in a croton

plant. The nest of the bulbul is a shallow cup, formed of bast, roots,

twigs, and grass, loosely worked together. Sometimes dead leaves, pieces

of rag and other oddments are woven into the fabric of the nest. The

pair of bulbuls of which I write did not, however, indulge in any of

these luxuries; they were content with a rudely constructed nursery.

When the nest was nearly complete the owners deserted it. Why they acted

thus I have not been able to discover.

The bulbuls absented themselves for a few days. When they returned they

frequented another portion of the verandah, and their fussiness betrayed

the fact that they were working at another nest. Several days passed

before I found time to look for their nest, and I then discovered it in

an aralia plant growing in the verandah, in a large pot placed at the

right-hand side of one of the doors leading into my office room. The

site chosen was the more remarkable in that it was within ten feet of

the carpet on which the _chaprassis_ sit when not engaged in active

work. This nest was of even rougher design than the first one, and was

equally devoid of decoration. So carelessly had it been constructed

that, to use a nautical expression, it had a distinct list. I found in

the nest three pinkish eggs, mottled and blotched with purplish red.

They had been laid some time before I first saw them. This was

demonstrated by the reluctance of the hen to leave the nest when I

approached. Among birds the parental instinct increases as incubation

proceeds. On one occasion the bird sitting on the nest in question

allowed me to stroke its tail. This organ projects upwards like a

semaphore, the nest not being sufficiently large to accommodate it.

It was not until the 15th July that I had leisure to watch these bulbuls

closely. Up to that time I had merely noticed that both birds incubate,

and that both sexes, and not the cock alone, as some writers assert,

have the red “whiskers,” or feathers, on the cheeks.

The weather being warm, it was not necessary for the birds to sit

continuously, and the eggs were frequently left for ten minutes or

longer at a time. On the morning of the 15th July, I found that two of

the young birds had hatched out. Both parents were feeding them.

Birds are creatures of habit. Each parent bulbul had its own way of

approaching the nest and of perching when tending the nestlings, so

that, although I was not able to say for certain which of the pair was

the cock and which the hen, I could distinguish one individual from the

other. For brevity I will call them A and B, respectively.

Both birds, before flying to the nest, used to alight on the stem of a

palm standing in the verandah. From this point their manœuvres differed.

Individual A invariably flew to a stout vertical branch of the aralia,

remained there for a second or two, flitted to a second vertical branch,

and from thence hopped on to the edge of the nest, so that its face when

there pointed to the east. This individual always showed itself the

bolder spirit of the two. The other bird, B, used to fly from the palm

to a slender leafy branch of the aralia, and thus cause considerable

commotion among the leaves; from thence it jumped on to the edge of the

nest, where it perched with its face pointing to the north. The _modus

operandi_ of A was the superior. The verandah faces the east, so that

when A wished to leave the nest, it had but to jump across it into the

space beyond, and then wing its way ahead, while B had to turn round

before it could fly off. The neatness and address with which A used to

leap across the nest into the air baffles description.

The 16th July fell on a Sunday. I therefore determined to devote some

hours to studying the ways of those bulbuls at the nest. Every

naturalist has his own method of prying into the ways of the fowls of

the air or the beasts of the field. Some expose themselves to the Indian

sun at midday in May, others will squat for hours in feverish swamps.

People who do these things are worthy of all praise. I prefer less

heroic methods. Accordingly, I had the pot containing the nest-bearing

plant moved a distance of rather less than a yard, so that it stood in

the middle of the door-way. I then had an easy chair placed in the

office room at a distance of some four feet from the nest. Finally, I

removed such of the leaves as tended to obstruct my view. Thus, I was

able to watch the bulbuls through the _chik_ in comfort, reclining in

the easy chair.

Both parent birds were present when the plant was being moved. They

looked rather alarmed, but raised no outcry. They did not seem eager to

approach the nest after the position of the aralia had been changed.

Evidently they did not understand the meaning of what they had seen.

Eventually bulbul A summoned sufficient courage to visit the nest, and

must have been highly gratified to find the two youngsters and the egg

safe. While perching on the nest it kept its eye on me, having espied

me, notwithstanding the fact that there was a _chik_ between me and it.

While eyeing me it cocked its head on one side and half opened its bill.

The opening of the bill is an expression of anger. The bulbul’s crest

was also folded back, but this does not necessarily denote anger. The

crest invariably assumes this attitude when the bulbul is incubating, or

brooding, or feeding its young. It was some time before bulbul B could

bring itself to visit the nest. It made at least six abortive attempts

before it reached the edge of the nest, and then perched only for a

second before flying off with every sign of trepidation. And for the

whole of that day it showed itself nervous, whereas A soon came quite

boldly to the nest. The difference in temperament between the two birds

was most marked.

The parent birds did not come to the nest with the bill very full. They

were usually content to bring one succulent grub or insect at a time.

In the earliest stages of their existence bulbul nestlings are so small

that one caterpillar satisfies their hunger completely for some little

time. So that it often happened that one of the parents arrived with

food for which neither of the young birds was ready. Under such

circumstances, the parent, after trying to force the food into the mouth

of each nestling, remained on the rim of the nest waiting patiently

until one of the youngsters lifted up its head for food. The baby

bulbuls did not display at this early stage of their existence that

eagerness for food, amounting almost to greediness, that characterises

nestlings when they grow a little older.

On arrival with food the adult bird invariably uttered a couple of

tinkling notes as if to inform its offspring that it had brought food.

No sound emanated from the young birds during the first two or three

days of their existence. When it had disposed of the food it had

brought, the parent bird usually looked after the sanitation of the nest

by picking up and eating the excreta. The parent birds did not appear

ever to bring water to the nestlings. The succulent food probably

supplies the requisite moisture. About midday on the 16th July the third

young bird hatched out. The egg was intact at 10 a.m., but by a few

minutes after midday the youngster had emerged, and half the shell was

still in the nest. Thus the latest arrival made his appearance at least

twenty-eight hours after either of his brethren.

I watched carefully in order to ascertain how the parent birds got rid

of the egg-shell. Presently bulbul A came to the nest with food. When it

had disposed of this, it began pecking in the nest, and appeared to be

eating up the shell, but in reality it was cleaning the nest. After

being thus engaged for a couple of minutes it flew off, carrying the

half egg-shell in its beak. It flew to a distance with this, so that I

did not see what became of it. This explains why broken egg-shells are

seldom found lying on the ground below a nest. On the following day I

placed a small piece of paper in the nest. This was carried off by the

first parent bird to visit the nest, but not before the bird had fed its

young. Shortly afterwards I placed a sheet of thick paper over the top

of the nest so as to completely cover it. This nonplussed both parents.

They made no attempt to insert their heads underneath it, but hopped

about near the nest looking very disconsolate. I therefore removed the

obstruction.

Young bulbuls when first hatched out are almost lost in the nest, taking

up very little more room than the eggs that contained them; but they

grow at an astonishing rate. By the time the oldest was six days old the

three young birds almost filled the nest. From the fourth day the heads

of the nestlings went up, and the mandibles vibrated rapidly whenever a

parent approached; previously the young birds did not seem to hear the

approach of the old birds. On the sixth day of their existence the

youngsters first began to call for food, and for a time the sounds they

emitted were very feeble. On the sixth day their eyes began to open, the

opening at first being a tiny slit.

The parents were not always judicious in selecting food for their babes.

I saw a bulbul bring a large insect with gauzy wings to a six-day-old

nestling. The bird succeeded in ramming about one-third of it into the

gaping mouth of the young one. The latter then made frantic efforts to

swallow its prize. After struggling for the greater part of a minute it

rested for a few seconds with half an inch of insect projecting from its

bill. When at last it did succeed in swallowing it, the young bulbul

fell back with neck stretched out and appeared to be in a thoroughly

exhausted condition.

A triple tragedy has now to be related. Tragedies, alas! are very common

among the bulbul community. On several occasions have I watched the

nesting operations of these birds, but never yet have I seen a single

young one reach maturity. When the eldest of the nestlings was seven

days old I noticed that the list on the nest had become very marked, and

on examining the nursery I found it empty. I then saw two of the young

bulbuls lying on the floor of the verandah. The third was nowhere to be

seen. Having rectified the position of the nest, I replaced the two

nestlings, which the parents continued to feed. They did not seem to

notice that one of their babes was missing.

On the following morning I found the nest half torn from its holdings,

and saw the two youngsters on the earth near the roots of the aralia.

Some leaves were strewn on the ground. Apparently a cat, a mongoose, or

other predaceous creature had attempted to capture the parent bird

during the night when it was sitting on the nest. It had not succeeded

in the attempt, for both the old birds were hale and hearty;

nevertheless, the fall had killed one of the youngsters. I placed the

nest higher up in the aralia, in what I considered a safer situation,

wedging it tightly between some branches, and then replaced the

remaining nestling. This the parents continued to feed, although they

seemed to find the nest difficult of access in its new position. The

next morning I found the young bird alive and well in the nest, but this

latter was now a lower branch of the aralia, to which it had been tied

by string. Some officious _chaprassi_ had doubtless done this. He had

probably found the nest pulled down as I had found it on the previous

day. Our efforts, however, were of no avail. On the following morning I

again found the nest torn down, and this time the young bird was lying

lifeless on the ground. The parents were somewhat disconsolate, and hung

about for a little with food in their bills. But they soon seemed to

realise that it was useless to bring food to a little bird that would

not open its mouth. So they went off. They are, I believe, looking out

for a suitable nesting site at the opposite end of my verandah. Bulbuls

are as philosophical as they are foolish.

Glimpses of Indian Birds · 第 8 / 21 题