Produced by Charlene Taylor, Leonard Johnson and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)
NOTES AND LETTERS
ON THE
NATURAL HISTORY OF NORFOLK
[Illustration: SIR THOMAS BROWNE TO DOCTOR CHRISTOPHER MERRETT.
MS. RAWLINSON D. cviii., FOL. 105. --_See p. 80._]
Notes and Letters
ON THE
Natural History of Norfolk
MORE ESPECIALLY ON THE
BIRDS AND FISHES
FROM THE MSS. OF
SIR THOMAS BROWNE, M.D.
(1605-1682)
IN THE SLOANE COLLECTION IN THE LIBRARY OF THE BRITISH
MUSEUM AND IN THE BODLEIAN LIBRARY, OXFORD
WITH NOTES BY
THOMAS SOUTHWELL, F.Z.S.
_Member of the British Ornithologists' Union; Vice-President of the
Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society_
LONDON
JARROLD & SONS, 10 & 11, WARWICK LANE, E.C.
[ALL RIGHTS RESERVED]
1902
* * * * *
OBSERVATIONS
ON THE
FAUNA OF NORFOLK,
AND MORE PRACTICALLY ON
The Popular District of the Broads of Norfolk and Suffolk,
BY THE LATE
REV. RICHARD LUBBOCK, M.A.
_New Edition, 6s.; Half Roxburgh, 7s. 6d._
WITH ADDITIONS FROM UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPTS OF THE AUTHOR, AND NOTES BY
THOMAS SOUTHWELL, F.Z.S.,
ALSO A MEMOIR BY
HENRY STEVENSON, F.L.S.,
AN APPENDIX CONTAINING NOTES ON HAWKING IN NORFOLK, BY
ALFRED NEWTON, M.A., F.R.S., ETC.,
AND ON THE DECOYS, REPTILES, SEA FISH, LEPIDOPTERA,
AND BOTANY OF THE COUNTRY.
"In addition to the intrinsic merits of the book, of which we can
personally speak in the superlative degree as one of the most
pleasantly-written of the many pleasant natural history books our
language is so rich in--describing, as it does, the 'Broad
District'--a country unlike any other part of England, and a very
paradise to the Botanist, Entomologist, and Ornithologist. This
new edition is edited by Mr. Thomas Southwell, the active
Secretary of the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society, whose
full and accurate knowledge of the natural history of Norfolk
better fits him for the task than any other man we know
of."--_Science Gossip._
"The book in its original form is well known to naturalists, and
it would be difficult to find another volume of its size which
conveys in so agreeable a manner so much accurate and trustworthy
information on the subject of which it treats. We promise to
those who have never yet read this book a rare treat from its
perusal."--_Zoologist._
* * * * *
SUPPLEMENT
TO THE
FLORA OF NORFOLK,
BY
REV. KIRBY TRIMMER, A.B.
_Crown 8vo. Cloth 6s._
The Supplement to the "Flora of Norfolk" is a record of
additional localities of many of the plants contained in that
publication, and an entry of some other plants new in the
country.
LONDON: JARROLD AND SONS, 10 AND 11, WARWICK LANE, E.C.
* * * * *
THE OFFICIAL GUIDE
TO THE
NORWICH CASTLE MUSEUM,
_With an Account of its Origin and Progress_,
BY
THOMAS SOUTHWELL, F.Z.S.,
_Member of the British Ornithologists' Union, Vice-President of the
Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society, etc._:
ALSO AN HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE CASTLE KEEP BY
REV. WM. HUDSON, M.A.,
_Hon. Sec. Norfolk and Norwich Archaeological Society:_
AND A GUIDE TO THE COLLECTION OF PICTURES, WITH SOME ACCOUNT OF
THE "NORWICH SCHOOL" OF ARTISTS BY
G. C. EATON, ESQ.,
_Late Hon. Sec. Norfolk and Norwich Museum._
(Published under the Special Sanction of the Castle Museum Committee.)
_Profusely Illustrated, 1 6. Abridged Edition, 6d._
"Mr. Southwell is himself an authority on natural history, and he
has contrived to invest his description of the various specimens
with a liveliness and vigour, as well as a scientific accuracy.
He has taken care to include every object of importance, and his
work should at once take its place as the popular guide to the
Museum."--_Bookseller._
"An interesting and useful guide to the collection in the Museum.
It is not merely a catalogue, but a popular natural history, in
which the specimens in the cases are used as illustrations.
Sightseers will pleasantly acquire a knowledge of the leading
characteristics of the different groups of animals, and students
will gain a large amount of sound instruction."--_Nature._
"There is an abundance of useful information confined in a small
compass, while there are many capital illustrations."--_The
Record._
"Its collections are of interest not only to the antiquarian and
to the geologist, but also to the ornithologist; and the picture
gallery is worth a visit."--_Daily Telegraph._
"Visitors will find this cheap, handy, well-filled volume of much
service."--_The Guardian._
LONDON: JARROLD AND SONS, 10 AND 11, WARWICK LANE, E.C.
* * * * *
CONTENTS.
PAGE
INTRODUCTION vii
NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS FOUND IN NORFOLK 1
NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC., FOUND IN NORFOLK 31
LETTERS TO MERRETT 57
APPENDIX A. 86
APPENDIX B. 90
APPENDIX C. 95
APPENDIX D. 96
INDEX 99
INTRODUCTION.
"Every kingdom, every province, should have its own
monographer."--_Gilbert White. Seventh Letter to Barrington._
The excellent Memoir of Sir Thomas Browne, in Wilkin's Edition of his
works, renders it unnecessary here to repeat what has already been so
well done; suffice it to say that he was born in London on the 19th of
October, 1605; he was educated at Winchester School and entered at
Broadgates Hall (now Pembroke College), Oxford, in 1623; graduated B.A.
31st January, 1626-7, and M.A. 11th June, 1629. About the year 1633 he
was created Doctor of Physick at Leyden. In 1636 he took up his
residence in Norwich, in 1637 was incorporated Doctor of Physic in
Oxford, and in 1665 was chosen an Honorary Fellow of the College of
Physicians. In 1671 Browne was knighted at Norwich by Charles II., and
after a useful and honourable career died on his seventy-sixth birthday,
the 19th of October, 1682, and his body lies buried in the church of St.
Peter Mancroft, Norwich.
Browne in early life travelled much and was a voluminous writer; he made
many friendships with men celebrated in his day, and his advice and
assistance were sought and gratefully acknowledged by Dugdale, Evelyn,
Ray and Willughby, Merrett, Sir Robert Paston (afterwards Earl of
Yarmouth), Ashmole, Aubrey, and others; but his general correspondence
does not now concern us, my object being to supply in a convenient form
what I believe will be acceptable to modern naturalists, namely, an
accurate transcript of his notes and letters on the "Natural History of
the County of Norfolk."
These notes and letters were first published by Simon Wilkin in his
Edition of Sir Thomas Browne's Works in 1835, but they were not treated
from a naturalist's point of view, and in some places were not correctly
transcribed, added to which, in the vast mass of matter contained in
Wilkin's four large volumes (or in the closely printed three volumes of
Bohn's Edition), these interesting passages are in danger of being
overlooked or are inconvenient for reference. Two letters, moreover,
were needed to make the correspondence with Merrett complete, and these
I have been enabled to supply. I hope also that my explanatory notes,
which I trust will not be deemed too voluminous, will be found more
useful than the necessarily brief notes furnished by Wilkin and his
collaborators. Furthermore, I think that the retention of the original
spelling and punctuation may lend a charm to the quaintness of the
language which is in a measure destroyed by any attempt at modernising.
There is much that is interesting bearing upon Natural Science scattered
throughout Browne's writings, especially in his _Pseudodoxia Epidemica_,
or inquiries into Vulgar and Common Errors, first published in 1646, and
the reader cannot fail to be impressed not only with the extent of his
classical knowledge but also with the shrewdness with which he pursued
his original investigations; but here it is only proposed to deal with
certain manuscript notes and a series of rough notes for, or copies of,
letters addressed to Dr. Christopher Merrett, the author of the _Pinax
Rerum Naturalium Britannicarum_. These, as remarked by their editor,
with regard to some other manuscripts published[A] in 1684, under the
title of "Certain Miscellany Tracts," were doubtless "rather the
_diversions_ than the _Labours_ of his Pen; and ... He did, as it
were, drop down his Thoughts of a sudden, in those spaces of vacancy
which he snatch'd from those very many occasions which gave him hourly
interruption;" but I cannot in this instance agree with the conclusion
arrived at by the same writer that it "seemeth probable that He designed
them for publick use," for they appear to be the rough drafts or
memoranda used in the production of the finished letters (which are
unfortunately not forthcoming), and were never intended for publication
in their present crude form, thus rendering pardonable such annotations
as I have ventured to add. But before proceeding further it is necessary
to consider briefly the time and circumstances under which they were
written, and the state of what passed for Natural Science at that
period.
[A] The "Miscellany Tracts" were put forth by "Tho. Tenison"
(1636-1715), who afterwards became Archbishop of Canterbury, but
was then the Rector of a London parish, St. Martin-in-the-Fields.
He had been a Norwich school-boy, and subsequently minister of St.
Peter's Mancroft. He was doubtless well acquainted with Browne and
his family, and hence his reference in the preface quoted to "the
_Lady_ and _Son_ of the excellent Authour," who, he says,
"deliver'd" the papers to him.
Browne wrote early in the second half of the seventeenth century, during
a period of great awakening in the study of Nature. Hitherto it could
hardly be said that a direct appeal to the works of Nature had been the
prevailing method. Aristotle was still the established authority, and
commentaries on his works occupied the minds of men to the exclusion of
original investigation, notwithstanding that this great philosopher had
himself, both by precept and example, urged the importance of direct
observation and inquiry; the Mediaeval school of thought still prevailed
and cramped every effort at progress. How keenly Browne lamented this
spirit of slavish adherence to tradition may be judged from a passage in
one of his Essays in the "Vulgar Errors" condemning the obstinate
adherence unto antiquity; he writes, "but the mortallist enemy unto
knowledge, and that which hath done the greatest execution upon truth,
hath been a peremptory adhesion unto authority; and more especially the
establishing of our belief upon the dictates of antiquity. For (as every
capacity may observe) most men of ages present, so supersticiously do
look upon ages past, that the authorities of one exceed the reason of
the other." In another place he argues that the present should be the
age of authority, seeing that we possess all the wisdom of the ancients
which has come down to us, with that of our own times added. In fact,
Browne's motto appears to have been "prove all things and hold fast
only to that which is good."[B]
[B] There was one form of ancient authority before which Browne
bowed down with absolute and unquestioning submission--the
authority of the Scriptures. In all secular matters he was ever
ready to point the lance and do battle, but all that appealed to
him on what he regarded as divine authority was beyond the pale,
and it never entered into his mind to submit it to the test of
reason. In the "Religio Medici" he declares his devoted adherence
first to the guidance of Scripture, and secondly to the Articles of
the Church, "whatsoever is beyond, as points indifferent, I observe
according to the rules of my private reason;" and again, "where the
Scripture is silent, the Church is my text; where that speaks 'tis
but my comment; where there is a joint silence of both I borrow not
the rules of my religion from Rome or Geneva, but the dictates of
my own reason." This implicit adherence to the literal text of
Scripture led to his--shall I say active belief in, or passive
acceptance of, the existence of Witchcraft, and thus to the only
act in an otherwise blameless life which we must regard with regret
and astonishment. I refer to the consenting part he took in the
doing to death of two poor women at Bury St. Edmund's in the year
1664. It is my business to act as Browne's exponent, not as his
apologist, but it must be borne in mind that in his day the "higher
criticism" was a thing unheard of, and that the literal sense of
the English translation of the Bible was accepted as binding not
only by him but by the vast majority of the people, including the
most learned men of the time. "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to
live" was a plain command, and given a witch the believer's duty
was also plain; that there _had_ been witches there was ample
scriptural evidence, but there was none that the days of witchcraft
had passed away. Browne only shared this belief with his pious
friend, the venerable Bishop Hall, and many men equally devout
according to their lights; he makes no secret of the fact and acts
in accordance with his convictions and the plain authority of
Scripture. Thus it came about that these conscientious but mistaken
men were induced to render possible, if not actually to
countenance, the fiendish cruelties perpetrated by their
unscrupulous allies. In matters which he considered less
authoritative his views were so liberal as to gain for him the
stigma of infidel or heretic; but let a man govern his thoughts and
actions by the private rules Browne laid down for his own guidance
(vol. iv., p. 420), and it would be hard to regard him as otherwise
than a God-fearing man, striving to live up to his profession.
Aristotle, whose works on Natural History have descended to us in a very
imperfect condition, lived in 385-322 B.C., and it was not till A.D. 79
that the _Historia Naturalis_ of Pliny the Elder the next great work,
which has survived till our days, was completed, and by some of those
most competent to form a judgment the additions which he made were not
in all cases improvements. Other writers followed, but their productions
were of little value, and it was not till the year 1544 that William
Turner published at Cologne what Professor Newton describes as "the
first commentary on the birds mentioned by Aristotle and Pliny conceived
in anything like the spirit that moves modern Naturalists." Turner's
book is very rare and unfortunately at present beyond the reach of most
modern students. No attempt at systematic arrangement, as now
understood, was made until the _Histoire de la Nature des Oyseaux_ of
Pierre Belon (Bellonius) appeared at Paris in 1555, for the much greater
work of Conrad Gesner, being the third book of his _Historia Animalium_,
which was published at Zurich in the same year, and treated of Birds,
followed, more or less closely, an alphabetical plan which brought upon
him the censure of Aldrovandus, three of whose sixteen folio volumes
forming the _Historia Naturalium_ bore the title of _Ornithologiae hoc
est de Avibus Historiae, Libri XII._, and were brought out at Bologna
between the years 1599 and 1603. The _Historia Naturalis_ of John
Jonston, or "Jonstonus" (1603-1675), originally published in four
sections between the years 1649 and 1653, ran through several editions,
and was a popular book in the seventeenth century; it is frequently
referred to by Browne, but is a work of very little originality. Though
all these authors undoubtedly influenced their successors, it may be
fairly said that it was Browne's contemporaries and fellow-countrymen,
Francis Willughby and John Ray, who laid the first solid foundation of
systematic zoology in their _Ornithologia_ and _Historia Piscium_,
published in 1676 and 1686 respectively; but dying in 1682, Browne was
indebted to neither of them, though he doubtless exercised much
influence over them, and he had to use the clumsy descriptive
terminology then in vogue.[C] Let me illustrate this by a single
example. In one of his letters to Merrett he names a "little elegant
sea plant" (probably _Halecium halecinum_, a species of Hydroid
Zoophyte), "_Fucus marinus vertebratus pisciculi spinum referens
ichthyorachius_, or what you think fit." On another occasion Merrett
thus expresses his approval of Browne's efforts in this direction: "You
have very well named the _rutilus_ and expressed fully the cours to bee
taken in the imposition of names, viz: the most obvious and most
peculiar difference to the ey or any other sens." We can hardly conceive
the difficulties these pioneers of Natural Science had to contend with;
the works of their predecessors were so indefinite as to be of little
value in determining species; they had to depend upon the vague
descriptions of fowlers and others; the same bird would probably be
known in half a dozen different localities by as many different names,
and since no satisfactory mode of preserving specimens had then been
discovered, examples for comparison were not available. If inextricable
confusion arose with regard to such a bird as the Osprey, well might
Browne write with regard to those less readily characterized, "I confess
for such little birds I am much unsatisfied on the names given to many
by countrymen, and uncertaine what to give them myself, or to what
classis of authors cleerly to reduce them. Surely there are many found
among us which are not described; and therefore such which you cannot
well reduce, may (if at all) be set down after the exacter nomination of
small birds as yet of uncertain class of knowledge."
[C] In 1735 appeared the first edition of the _Systema Naturae of
Linnaeus_ which, meagre as it was, ushered in a more definite system
of classification, whilst his invention of the binomial method of
nomenclature, first used by him in the tenth edition of that work
published in 1758, contributed not a little in reducing to order
what had hitherto been a chaos, although in his classification of
birds he for the most part followed his predecessor Ray.
I must ask pardon for this digression, but my object has been to show
the difficulties Browne had to contend with and to emphasise the
originality which pervades all his observations, a characteristic so
conspicuously absent in the work of most of his predecessors. I should
like also to call attention to his references to the migratory habits of
many species of birds, a phenomenon attracting little notice in his day,
but one which can be so readily observed on the coast of Norfolk. These
remarks were penned at a time when hibernation in a state of torpidity
was thoroughly believed in--an idea of which even Gilbert White a
hundred years later could not thoroughly divest himself. In his tract on
"Hawks and Falconry," Browne further says: "How far the hawks, merlins,
and wild-fowl which come unto us with a north-west [east?] wind in
Autumn, fly in a day, there is no clear account: but coming over the sea
their flight hath been long or very speedy. For I have known them to
light so weary on the coast, that many have been taken with dogs, and
some knocked down with staves and stones." Further than this, he knew
the seasons of their appearing--the Hobby "coming to us in the spring,"
the Merlin "about autumn." His frequent mention of anatomical
peculiarities and of his dissections of many birds and beasts clearly
prove his passion for original research, and the frequent records of the
contents of the stomachs of the birds which he had the opportunity of
examining was a mode of obtaining exact information as to the nature of
their food, which I imagine was not common in those days.
How highly Browne was esteemed by his contemporaries may be judged from
the acknowledgments of his assistance by Dugdale, Evelyn (who visited
him in Norwich in 1671), and others; and Ray especially mentions his
indebtedness to "the deservedly famous Sir Thomas Browne, Professor of
Physic in the City of Norwich." His letters to his son, Dr. Edward
Browne, are full of instructions as to the course of study he should
pursue, and subsequently, when the latter became celebrated and was
appointed Physician to St. Bartholomew's Hospital, it was still to his
father that he looked for advice in his hospital practice and in the
preparation of his lectures. Browne was proud of his adopted county, a
feeling evidently shared by his son, and I trust I may be pardoned for
quoting the concluding passage of the latter's account of a tour into
Derbyshire, wherein he expresses a sentiment which survives with
undiminished force in the breast of many a Norfolk man in the present
day. There is a very interesting account of his crossing the Wash on
leaving Lynn for Boston, but on his return to Norwich in September,
1662, he thus concludes his journal: "Give me leave to say this much:
let any stranger find mee out so pleasant a country, such good way
[roads], large heath, three such places as Norwich. Yar [Yarmouth] and
Lin [Lynn], in any county of England, and I'll bee once again a vagabond
to visit them."
The manuscripts of which the following selection forms a part are
contained, with a few exceptions to be named hereafter, in the Sloane
Collection in the Library of the British Museum, consisting of nearly
one hundred volumes, numbered 1825 to 1923 both inclusive. A catalogue
is given by Simon Wilkin[D] (himself a Norfolk man), by whom Browne's
collected writings were first published in a connected form, as already
mentioned, under the title of "Sir Thomas Browne's Works, including his
Life and Correspondence, edited by Simon Wilkin, F.L.S. London, William
Pickering. Josiah Fletcher, Norwich, 1836." 4 volumes, 8vo; the first
volume only is dated 1836, Vols. 2, 3, and 4 being dated 1835.[E] It was
here that the Notes and Letters were first given to the public. A second
edition of the "Works," also edited by Wilkin, in three closely printed
volumes, was issued in Bohn's Antiquarian Library in 1852. In the first
edition the Notes on the Birds and Fishes will be found in Vol. IV., pp.
313 to 336, and the letters to Merrett in Vol. I., pp. 393 to 408. In
the second edition both are in Vol. III., pp. 311 to 335 and pp. 502 to
513 respectively. The references here, as a rule, will be made to the
1836 edition, when otherwise Bohn's edition will be specified.
[D] _Simon Wilkin_ (1790-1862), the able editor of Sir Thomas
Browne's collected works, was born at Costessey near Norwich, in
the year 1790. He came to Norwich after his father's death in 1799,
taking up his temporary abode with his guardian, Joseph Kinghorn, a
Baptist minister of note and a prominent member of a literary
circle then existing in Norwich, by whom his education was
superintended. On arriving at man's estate and being at that time
possessed of ample means, he devoted himself to the study of
Natural History, especially to Entomology, and was the possessor of
a large collection of insects which, in the year 1827, was
purchased for the Norwich Museum at a cost of one hundred guineas,
a large sum in those days. He was one of the founders and the first
librarian of the Norfolk and Norwich Literary Institution in 1822,
also of the Norfolk and Norwich Museum in 1825, both of which
institutions (the former reunited to its parent Library, founded in
1784) are still flourishing. Wilkin was a Fellow of the Linnean
Society, also a Member of the Wernerian Society of Edinburgh. In
later years the loss of the bulk of his property by a commercial
failure necessitated his turning his attention to some means of
earning a livelihood, and he established himself in Norwich as a
printer and publisher; later in life he removed to Hampstead, where
he died on 28th July, 1862, and was buried in his native village of
Costessey.
[E] Some copies of this Edition have a title-page, bearing the name
of H. G. Bohn as publisher, and the date of 1846, but differing
only in that respect.
The foot-notes in Wilkin's edition, many of them very curious,
initialled "Wr.," are by Dr. Christopher Wren, Dean of Windsor (father
of the Architect of St. Paul's Cathedral), and were found on the margins
of a copy of the first edition of the _Pseudodoxia_ now preserved in the
Bodleian Library at Oxford; those initialled "G." were written for
Wilkin's first edition by the late Miss Anna Gurney, of Northrepps, near
Cromer, Norfolk.
The first papers to which I shall refer are a series of rough notes
contained for the most part in volume 1830 of the Sloane MSS., the first
portion being devoted to _Birds_ found in Norfolk, followed by a similar
series relating to marine and freshwater _Fishes_, including a few
marine invertebrata and plants. They are written on one side only of
foolscap paper, the portion relating to Birds occupying folios 5 to 19
inclusive, folios 1 to 4 consist of two inserted letters from Merrett
to Browne (see Appendix A.), which are printed by Wilkin in his first
edition, Vol. I., pp. 442-5. The notes on Fishes are in the same volume
of manuscripts, folios 23 to 38; but there are some irregularities which
will be explained as they occur. The whole of the notes are very roughly
written, and present the appearance of a commonplace book, in which the
entries were made as the events occurred to the writer, being quite
devoid of any system or arrangement. The entries doubtless extend over
several years, but it is impossible to fix the dates on which they were
made, the only internal evidence I can find being that speaking of the
occurrence of a certain shark he states it was taken "this year, 1662,"
and on the next page of the MS. there is the record of the occurrence of
a sun-fish in the year 1667; this latter, however, is evidently an
interpolation. A few pages further on there is the record of what he
calls a large mackerel, "taken this year, 1668," but this also is an
addition. We may take it, I think, that most of the notes were made
about the year 1662, but that they were added to on various occasions up
to 1668, in which year his first letter to Merrett is dated. It has been
suggested that these notes were prepared in the interest of Dr. Merrett
for his use in an enlarged edition of his _Pinax_, but the remark in his
first letter to this correspondent, "I have observed and taken notice of
many animals in these parts whereof 3 years agoe a learned gentleman of
this country wished me to give him some account, which while I was doing
ye gentleman my good friend died," clearly shows that they were
originally prepared for another purpose, although they eventually
furnished the materials for his letters to Merrett, but who his deceased
friend was it seems now useless to conjecture, although it would be
interesting to know. The notes were certainly never intended to appear
in their present form, and failing their use by Merrett which never took
place, the information they contained was, as we know, of great service
to Ray and Willughby.
Browne's correspondent, Dr. Christopher Merrett, was born at Winchcomb,
in Gloucestershire, on the 16th of February, 1614. He graduated B.A. at
Oriel College, Oxford, about the year 1635; M.B. 1636; M.D. 1643. Was
elected Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians in 1651, and was made
first Keeper of the Library and Museum; he was Censor of the College
seven times. Having entered into litigation with the College with
regard to his appointment, which was considered by that body to have
terminated when the Library was destroyed by the great fire, he was
defeated, and in 1681 expelled from his fellowship. He died in London in
1695. ("Dict. of Nat. Biog.") Merrett was the author of several works on
various subjects, as well as of the _Pinax_, and a translation of the
"Art of Glass" referred to further on. His _Pinax Rerum Naturalium
Britannicarum_, said to have been brought out in 1666, contained the
earliest list of British Birds ever published, but it is little more
than a bare list. Copies bearing the date of 1666 are very rare, and it
is believed the edition was burned in a fire at the publishers; but
Professor Newton ("Dict. of Birds," Introduction, p. xviii.) says that
in 1667 there were two issues of a reprint; one, nominally a second
edition, only differs from the others in having a new title-page, an
example doubtless of what Wilkin severely condemns as "that contemptible
form of lying under which publishers have endeavoured to persuade the
public of the rapidity of their sales." Merrett was contemplating a new
and improved edition of his work when, as Wilkin happily puts it, "in an
auspicious moment he sought the assistance of Browne, whose liberal
response is evidenced in the [drafts of the] letters still fortunately
extant, but either superseded by the more learned labours of Willughby
and Ray, or laid aside on account of the perplexities in which Merrett
became involved with the College of Physicians, the _Pinax_ never
attained an enlarged edition. Had Browne completed and published his own
'Natural History of Norfolk,' he might have contended for precedency
among the writers of County Natural Histories with [his friend] Dr.
Robert Plot,[F] who published the earliest of such works--those of
Oxford and Staffordshire, in 1677 and 1686 respectively. He seems,
however, to have preferred contributing to the labours of those whom he
considered better naturalists than himself; and in his third attempt
thus to render his observations useful he had somewhat better success.
He placed his materials, including a number of coloured drawings, at
the disposal of Ray, the father of systematic Natural History in Great
Britain, who has acknowledged the assistance he derived from him in his
editions of Willughby's 'Ornithology' and 'Ichthyology,' especially in
the former. But Browne, it seems, found it more easy to lend than to
recover such materials; for he complains, several years afterwards, that
these drawings, of whose safe return he was assured, both by Ray and by
their mutual friend, Sir Philip Skippon, had not been sent back to
him."[G]
[F] Dr. Robert Plot (1640-1696) was born at Sutton Barne, Kent, in
1640; he graduated M.A. in 1664, and D.C.L. at Oxford in 1671. He
was chiefly noted as an antiquary, and was Secretary of the Royal
Society from 1682 to 1684, also the first custodian of the
Ashmoleian Museum and Professor of Chemistry at Oxford. In 1677 he
published his "Natural History of Oxfordshire," the first local
work of the kind which appeared; it was illustrated by sixteen
plates. In 1686 he also published "The Natural History of
Staffordshire," and subsequently many other books and papers. He
was evidently acquainted with most of the learned men of his time.
Plot died at his family estate Sutton Barne, on the 30th of April,
1696, and was buried at Borden in Kent. Dr. Plot was a friend of
Browne's, and his companion in a tour in England in 1693.--"Dict.
Nat. Biog."
[G] See letter to his son, Dr. Edward Browne (Wilkin, i., p. 337),
also Appendix C.
I have endeavoured to reproduce as accurately as possible the text of
the notes and letters, which, as will be seen from the example
photographed for the frontispiece of this volume, was often very
difficult to decipher. The originals of the notes and of seven of the
nine letters to Merrett, as also the two letters in Appendix A., are in
the Sloane Collection of MSS. in the British Museum Library; those
numbered vii. and viii., as well as two letters in Appendix D., which
have not hitherto been printed, are in the Bodleian Library; and the
letter to Dugdale in Appendix B. is extracted from the "Eastern
Counties Collectanea." All the MSS. in the Sloane Collection I have
transcribed myself; of those in the Bodleian Library, No. vii. is from a
photograph, the remainder were copied for me by a person recommended as
being highly reliable. I thought it best to retain all the erasures and
interlineations in order to show as much as possible what was passing in
their author's mind: in the foot-notes I have sought to acknowledge _in
situ_ the valuable help I received from numerous correspondents to whom
my best thanks are due, but I owe a special debt of gratitude to
Professor Newton, at whose instigation the work was undertaken, for his
kind assistance and for the loan of scarce books which it was necessary
to consult in the interesting investigations needful to elucidate, if
possible, some of the obscure passages in the text, a task in which if
with the best intentions should I have sometimes failed, I must ask the
reader's indulgence.
It may be truly said of Sir Thomas Browne that a prophet hath no honour
in his own country; the writings of this remarkable man are little known
in the city of his adoption, and a recent movement to erect a monument
to his memory has hitherto met with feeble support.
T. S.
_Norwich, December, 1901._
Notes and Letters
ON THE
Natural History of Norfolk.
NOTES[H] ON CERTAIN BIRDS FOUND IN NORFOLK.
[H] The heading adopted by Wilkin, for which I cannot find that he
had any authority, is certainly misleading, for the brief and
fragmentary notes which follow, although of great interest, can
hardly be called "An Account of the Birds (or Fishes) found in
Norfolk," as there are many species of each inhabiting or visiting
the county which must have been well-known to Browne, but of which
we find no mention.
[MSS. SLOAN. 1830. FOL. 5-19. AND 31.]
[The first four pages in the volume of Manuscript consist of two
inserted letters from Merrett to Browne (see Appendix A.); these
are on ordinary letter paper 6-1/4 inches by 7 inches. The notes
commence on folio 5 and are continued to folio 19; one leaf,
containing an account of the Roller (numbered 31), is bound up
with the notes on the Fishes, &c., which are numbered
consecutively with the Birds; the paper of the volume is
foolscap, 11-1/2 by 7-1/2 inches, and written, with a few
exceptions, which appear to be subsequent additions, on the
right-hand opening only. There are four folios after the Birds,
the first of which is blank; the others, numbered 20, 21, and
22, contain rough memoranda on the Birds and Fishes, the
substance of which is embodied in the other notes; the Fishes
commence on folio 23. There are many erasures, interlineations,
and substituted words which indicate hasty writing, and the
alterations are not in all cases complete, thus rendering the
sense occasionally obscure; these emendations I have thought it
best to preserve as indicating the author's line of thought. In
the foot-notes which follow I have endeavoured to identify the
species treated of. This, notwithstanding the kind assistance of
the friends whose help I gratefully acknowledge, I may not in
all cases have successfully accomplished; the conclusions
arrived at are occasionally only conjectural, and it may be that
in some instances I have erred. Should such be the case I must
plead in excuse the difficulty arising from vagueness of
description, the frequent use of vernacular names which have
long since become obsolete (_see Note_ 22), and the imperfection
of the record. This especially applies to the Marine Animals,
and one of my correspondents rightly remarks that "the early
accounts of marine beasts are so vague, and the figures (where
referred to) so incomplete and often fanciful, that it is
difficult even to make out the family, to say nothing of genera
and species." Any assistance or correction in this respect would
be gladly received by me.]
[_Fol. 5._] I willingly obey your comands[1] in setting down such birds
fishes & other animals wch for many years I have observed in Norfolk.
[1] With regard to the probable origin of these notes (see
"Introduction," p. xxi.). The opening passage was probably
addressed to the deceased correspondent who had asked his
assistance, whereas his first letter to Merrett seems to indicate
that the offer of help to him came spontaneously from Browne ("I
take ye boldness to salute you," &c.), and was not in response to
Merrett's request.
Beside the ordinarie birds which keep constantly in the country many are
discouerable both in winter & summer wch are of a migrant nature &
exchange their seats according to the season.[2] those wch come in the
spring coming for the most part from the southward those wch come in the
Autumn or winter from the northward. so that they are obserued to come
in great flocks with a north east wind & to depart with a south west.
nor to come [in _struck out_] only in flocks of one kind butt teals
woodcocks felfars thrushes & small birds to come & light together. for
the most part some hawkes & birds of pray attending them.
[2] Browne seems to have had on the whole a fairly correct idea
with regard to the migratory movements of the birds on the Norfolk
coast where peculiar facilities exist for such observations, but of
course he could have formed no notion of the extent to which they
prevail, perhaps no species being altogether sedentary. The general
line of the autumn migration for those which spend their summer in
Northern Europe is south or south-west, returning in the spring by
the reverse route; those which visit us in spring from Western
Europe, or countries lying still more to the eastward, adopt what
is known as the east to west route, and reverse the direction in
the autumn; but this latter is as nothing compared with the vast
number of immigrants by both routes in the early autumn, at which
time, especially, the movements are so exceedingly complex that it
would be impossible here to attempt to explain them, and the reader
must be referred to Mr. Eagle Clarke's digest of the Reports of the
Migration Committee of the British Association ("Report Brit. Ass.
for 1876," pp. 451-477).
The great & noble kind of Agle calld Aquila Gesneri[3] I have not seen
in this country but one I met with [with _crossed out_] in this country
brought from ireland wch I [presented unto _struck out_] kept 2 yeares,
feeding it with whelpes cattes ratts & the like. in all that while not
giving it any water wch I afterwards presented unto the [colledge of
physitians at London _struck out_] my worthy friend Dr Scarburgh.
[3] The "Aquila" of Gesner here referred to is evidently the Golden
Eagle, which species Browne is careful to mention that he had not
met with in this county, and that the specimen he sent to Dr.
Scarburgh, more than once mentioned, was brought from Ireland. This
bird has never been recorded alive in Norfolk. Immature
White-tailed Eagles, the "Halyaetus" of the text, still occur almost
every autumn or winter on this coast, but no mature example has
hitherto been killed. Browne's friend, Sir Charles Scarburgh
(1616-1694), was born in London, and is buried at Cranford, in
Middlesex. He seems to have been greatly distinguished as an
anatomist and physician. He was a friend of William Harvey, whom he
succeeded as Lumleyan Lecturer at the College of Physicians (of
which he was elected a fellow in 1650). Harvey, out of regard for
his "lovinge friend" Dr. Scarburgh, bequeathed to him his "little
silver instruments of surgerie" and his velvet gown. ("Dict. of
Nat. Biog.") The Golden Eagle sent him by Browne was kept in the
College of Physicians in Warwick Lane for two years.
of other sorts of Agles there are severall kinds especially of the
Halyaetus or fenne Agles some of 3 yards & a quarter from the extremitie
of the wings. whereof one being taken aliue grewe so tame that it went
about the yard feeding on fish redherrings flesh & any offells without
the least trouble.
There is also a lesser sort of Agle called an ospray[4] wch houers about
the fennes & broads & will dippe his [foot _crossed out_] claws & take
up a fish oftimes for wch his foote is made of an extraordinarie
roughnesse for the better fastening & holding of it & the like they will
do unto cootes.
[4] This species is a not unfrequent autumn visitor to the Broads
and Rivers of Norfolk. Browne names it correctly, but there was
much confusion with regard to this species in the minds of the old
authors. Willughby knew the bird and calls it the "Bald Buzzard,"
but in describing its nesting site and eggs (probably not on his
own authority,) evidently confounds it with the Marsh Harrier, for
he says that "it builds upon the ground among reeds, and lays three
or four large white eggs of a figure exactly elliptical, lesser
than hens' eggs." _See Note_ 6.
[_Fol._ 6.] Aldrovandus takes particular notice of the great number of
Kites[5] about London & about the Thames. wee are not without them heare
though not in such numbers. there are also the gray & bald Buzzard[6]
[wch the all wth _crossed out_] of all wch the great number of broad
waters & warrens makes no small number & more than in woodland counties.
[5] The Glede, or Puttock, of Turner, once so plentiful, is now
only an extremely rare visitor to Norfolk. In 1815, it appears from
Hunt ("British Ornithology"), not to have been uncommon, but the
same authority in his list of Norfolk Birds contributed to Stacey's
"History" of that County, speaks of the Kite as having in 1829
become extremely rare. It probably ceased to nest in this County
about the year 1830, or perhaps a little later. Browne's reason for
its comparative scarcity about the City of Norwich, viz., the
abundance of Ravens mentioned at p. 27 _infra_, is very interesting
to us in the present day when Kites and Ravens are almost equally
rare.
[6] It seems likely that Browne here refers to two species of
Harrier, the Grey Buzzard being the male of the Hen Harrier
(including of course Montagu's Harrier which was not discriminated
till long after) in its grey adult plumage, whereas the Marsh
Harrier, with its light yellow head, to which the word "bald" as
then used might well be applied, would stand for the "Bald
Buzzard." The Harriers, which were till long after the time he
wrote extremely numerous, are generally called "Buzzards" by the
natives, and it will be noticed at p. 15 _infra_, that what is
doubtless intended for the Marsh Harrier is spoken of as an enemy
to the Coots; also at p. 56, it is said that young Otters "have
been found in the Buzzards nests," a very likely circumstance with
so fierce a bird, and one of which I have an impression I have
heard in recent years. The Hen Harrier is now an extremely rare
bird with us; the Marsh Harrier still occasionally nests in the
Broads, and Montagu's Harrier now and then attempts to rear a
brood, but even should the parents succeed in escaping it is very
seldom they carry their young with them. Professor Newton has
kindly favoured me with the following additional interesting note
on this bird. "The Marsh Harrier is certainly the 'Balbushardus' of
Turner (1544), which, though he says it is bigger and longer than
the ordinary _Buteo_, has a white patch on the head and is
generally of a dark brown (_fuscus_) colour, hunting the banks of
rivers, pools, and marshes, living by the capture of Ducks, and the
black birds which the English call Coots (_Coutas_). This he,
Turner, has himself very often seen, and he describes its habits
correctly; adding that it also takes Rabbits occasionally. Gesner,
1555, quotes Turner, but refers the Bald Buzzard to the Osprey
(which he figures), and so the mistake began. Certainly Willughby's
Bald Buzzard is the Osprey, but his book was not published when
Browne wrote."
Cranes[7] are often seen here in hard winters especially about the
champian & feildie part it seems they have been more plentifull for in a
bill of fare when the maior entertaind the duke of norfolk I meet with
Cranes in a dish.
[7] In the present day the Crane is only a rare straggler to this
country generally at the seasons of its migration; that it was in
times past abundant in suitable localities there is ample evidence;
that it also bred in the fens of the Eastern Counties there is no
reason to doubt, but very little direct evidence is forthcoming,
therefore every fact bearing upon this point is of value. Had Sir
Thomas Browne written with the intention of publishing his
observations he would doubtless have told us much about this grand
bird, which would have been of the greatest interest to modern
ornithologists, but even the above brief remarks, as will be seen,
are worthy of note.
With regard to the occurrence of the Crane in the fens of East
Anglia we have the following evidence; its fossil remains have been
found in the peat at Burwell, in Cambridgeshire, and in excavating
the docks at Lynn. Turner, in his "Avium Historia," Coloniae, 1544,
speaks of having seen young Cranes in this country, and as he
passed fifteen years at Cambridge, it was probably in that
neighbourhood that he met with them; then again there is the Act of
Parliament, passed in 1534 (25th Hen. VIII. c. ii.), prohibiting
the taking of their eggs (amongst those of other species) under a
penalty of twenty pence. All this is well known, but being desirous
to ascertain whether any reference to the Crane was to be found in
the records of the Corporation of Norwich, Mr. J. C. Tingey,
F.S.A., the custodian of the Muniment Room, at my request, most
kindly searched the accounts of the City Chamberlain between the
years 1531 and 1549. He there found numerous entries of sums
expended in the purchase of cranes, swans, porpoises, &c., as
presents to the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk and others, and
amongst them, on the 6th of June, 1543, a charge for a "yong pyper
crane" from Hickling, which appears conclusive evidence of the
breeding of this bird near Norwich at that time. (See "Transactions
of the N. and N. Nat. Soc.," vii., pp. 160-170.)
In Wilkin's Edition of the Notes the statement, "I met" with Cranes
in a dish should be, "I meet with," &c., as it is in the original.
The occasion referred to was probably an entertainment given by the
Mayor of Norwich, on the Guild day in 1663, which in that year fell
on the 19th June; at this banquet Henry, Duke of Norfolk and the
Hon. Henry Howard were present, and the latter presented to the
City a silver basin and ewer of the value of L60. Can it be that
even at that time young Cranes were to be obtained? otherwise the
middle of June seems a most unseasonable time for such a dish; for
in a copy of a curious old manuscript, dated 1605, and published in
the 13th Volume of "Archaeologia" (p. 315), entitled "A Breviate
touching the Order and Government of a Nobleman's house," &c.,
there is a "Monthlie Table, for a Diatorie" for each month in the
year, and the Crane appears only in the tables from November till
March inclusive. The modern gourmet would view with disgust some of
the dishes included in this "diatorie" if set before him--only to
mention among birds, auks, stares, petterells, puffines, didapers,
and martins. The crane being "in the dish" must not be subjected to
the vulgar process of "kervyng," but in the stilted heraldic
language of the day must be "desplayed," whereas a heron must be
"dismembered" and a bittern "unjointed." The price of a crane
varied from 3_s._ 4_d._ to 5_s._, and a fat swan from 3_s._ to
4_s._ The sum of 6_d._ mentioned in the le Strange Household-book,
in the year 1533 (see "Archaeologia," vol. xxv., p. 529), quoted in
Yarrell's "British Birds," iii., p. 180, was only the reward for
bringing in a crane killed on the estate. That Cranes must at times
have been numerous in Norfolk in the sixteenth century is evident,
for in an account of the presents sent to William Moore, Esq., of
Loseley, on the occasion of the marriage of his daughter, on 3rd
November, 1567, Mr. Balam, "out of Marshland in Norfolk," sent him
nine cranes, nine swans, and sixteen bitterns, with a large number
of other wild-fowl. "Archaeologia," vol. xxxvi., p. 36.
In hard winters elkes[8] a kind of wild swan are seen in no small
numbers. in whom & not in co[=m]on swans is remarkable that strange
recurvation of the windpipe through the sternon. & the same is also
obseruable in cranes. tis probable they come very farre for all the
northern discouerers have [ha _struck out_] obserued them in the
remotest parts & like diuers [&] other northern birds if the winter bee
mild they co[=m]only come no further southward then scotland if very
hard they go lower & seeke more southern places. wch is the cause that
sometimes wee see them not before christmas or the hardest time of
winter.