I have purposely left to the last the one point about parrots which

most often attracts the attention of the young, the gay, the giddy, and

the thoughtless: I mean their power of mimicry in human language. And I

believe I am justified in passing it over lightly. For in fact this

power is but a very incidental result of the general intelligence of

parrots, combined with the other peculiarities of their social life and

forestine character. Dominant woodland animals, indeed, like monkeys,

parrots, toucans, and hornbills, at least if vegetarian in their

habits, are almost always gregarious, noisy, mischievous, and

imitative. And the imitation results directly from the unusual

intelligence; for, after all, what is the power of learning itself--at

least, in all save its very highest phases--but the faculty of

accurately imitating another? Monkeys for the most part imitate action

only, because they haven't very varied or flexible voices. Parrots and

many other birds, on the contrary--like the starling and still more

markedly the American mocking-bird--being endowed with considerable

flexibility of voice, imitate either songs or spoken words with great

distinctness. In the parrot the power of attention is also very

considerable, for the bird will often try over with itself repeatedly

the lesson it has set itself to learn. But people too generally forget

that at best the parrot knows only the general application of a

sentence, not the separate meanings of its component words. It knows,

for example, that 'Polly wants a lump of sugar' is a phrase often

followed by a present of food. But to believe it can understand an

abstract expression, like the famous 'By Jove! what a beastly lot of

parrots!' is to confound learning by rote with genuine comprehension. A

careful review of all the evidence makes almost every scientific

observer conclude that at most a parrot knows a word of command as a

horse knows 'Whoa!' or a dog knows the order to hunt for rats in the

wainscot.

HIGH LIFE.

Everybody knows mountain flowers are beautiful. As one rises up any

minor height in the Alps or the Pyrenees below snow-level, one notices

at once the extraordinary brilliancy and richness of the blossoms one

meets there. All nature is dressed in its brightest robes. Great belts

of blue gentian hang like a zone on the mountain slopes; masses of

yellow globe-flower star the upland pastures; nodding heads of

soldanella lurk low among the rugged boulders by the glacier's side. No

lowland blossoms have such vividness of colouring, or grow in such

conspicuous patches. To strike the eye from afar, to attract and allure

at a distance, is the great aim and end in life of the Alpine flora.

Now, why are Alpine plants so anxious to be seen of men and angels? Why

do they flaunt their golden glories so openly before the world, instead

of shrinking in modest reserve beneath their own green leaves, like the

Puritan primrose and the retiring violet? The answer is, Because of the

extreme rarity of the mountain air. It's the barometer that does it. At

first sight, I will readily admit, this explanation seems as fanciful

as the traditional connection between Goodwin Sands and Tenterden

Steeple. But, like the amateur stories in country papers, it is

'founded on fact,' for all that. (Imagine, by the way, a tale founded

entirely on fiction! How charmingly aerial!) By a roundabout road,

through varying chains of cause and effect, the rarity of the air does

really account in the long run for the beauty and conspicuousness of

the mountain flowers.

For bees, the common go-betweens of the loves of the plants, cease to

range about a thousand or fifteen hundred feet below snow-level. And

why? Because it's too cold for them? Oh, dear, no: on sunny days in

early English spring, when the thermometer doesn't rise above freezing

in the shade, you will see both the honey-bees and the great black

bumble as busy as their conventional character demands of them among

the golden cups of the first timid crocuses. Give the bee sunshine,

indeed, with a temperature just about freezing-point, and he'll flit

about joyously on his communistic errand. But bees, one must remember,

have heavy bodies and relatively small wings: in the rarefied air of

mountain heights they can't manage to support themselves in the most

literal sense. Hence their place in these high stations of the world is

taken by the gay and airy butterflies, which have lighter bodies and a

much bigger expanse of wing-area to buoy them up. In the valleys and

plains the bee competes at an advantage with the butterflies for all

the sweets of life: but in this broad sub-glacial belt on the

mountain-sides the butterflies in turn have things all their own way.

They flit about like monarchs of all they survey, without a rival in

the world to dispute their supremacy.

And how does the preponderance of butterflies in the upper regions of

the air affect the colour and brilliancy of the flowers? Simply thus.

Bees, as we are all aware on the authority of the great Dr. Watts, are

industrious creatures which employ each shining hour (well-chosen

epithet, 'shining') for the good of the community, and to the best

purpose. The bee, in fact, is the _bon bourgeois_ of the insect world:

he attends strictly to business, loses no time in wild or reckless

excursions, and flies by the straightest path from flower to flower of

the same species with mathematical precision. Moreover, he is careful,

cautious, observant, and steady-going--a model business man, in fact,

of sound middle-class morals and sober middle-class intelligence. No

flitting for him, no coquetting, no fickleness. Therefore, the flowers

that have adapted themselves to his needs, and that depend upon him

mainly or solely for fertilisation, waste no unnecessary material on

those big flaunting coloured posters which we human observers know as

petals. They have, for the most part, simple blue or purple flowers,

tubular in shape and, individually, inconspicuous in hue; and they are

oftenest arranged in long spikes of blossom to avoid wasting the time

of their winged Mr. Bultitudes. So long as they are just bright enough

to catch the bee's eye a few yards away, they are certain to receive a

visit in due season from that industrious and persistent commercial

traveller. Having a circle of good customers upon whom they can depend

with certainty for fertilisation, they have no need to waste any large

proportion of their substance upon expensive advertisements or gaudy

petals.

It is just the opposite with butterflies. Those gay and irrepressible

creatures, the fashionable and frivolous element in the insect world,

gad about from flower to flower over great distances at once, and think

much more of sunning themselves and of attracting their fellows than of

attention to business. And the reason is obvious, if one considers for

a moment the difference in the political and domestic economy of the

two opposed groups. For the honey-bees are neuters, sexless purveyors

of the hive, with no interest on earth save the storing of honey for

the common benefit of the phalanstery to which they belong. But the

butterflies are full-fledged males and females, on the hunt through the

world for suitable partners: they think far less of feeding than of

displaying their charms: a little honey to support them during their

flight is all they need:--'For the bee, a long round of ceaseless toil;

for me,' says the gay butterfly, 'a short life and a merry one.' Mr.

Harold Skimpole needed only 'music, sunshine, a few grapes.' The

butterflies are of his kind. The high mountain zone is for them a true

ball-room: the flowers are light refreshments laid out in the

vestibule. Their real business in life is not to gorge and lay by, but

to coquette and display themselves and find fitting partners.

So while the bees with their honey-bags, like the financier with his

money-bags, are storing up profit for the composite community, the

butterfly, on the contrary, lays himself out for an agreeable flutter,

and sips nectar where he will, over large areas of country. He flies

rather high, flaunting his wings in the sun, because he wants to show

himself off in all his airy beauty: and when he spies a bed of bright

flowers afar off on the sun-smitten slopes, he sails off towards them

lazily, like a grand signior who amuses himself. No regular plodding

through a monotonous spike of plain little bells for him: what he wants

is brilliant colour, bold advertisement, good honey, and plenty of it.

He doesn't care to search. Who wants his favours must make himself

conspicuous.

Now, plants are good shopkeepers; they lay themselves out strictly to

attract their customers. Hence the character of the flowers on this

beeless belt of mountain side is entirely determined by the character

of the butterfly fertilisers. Only those plants which laid themselves

out from time immemorial to suit the butterflies, in other words, have

succeeded in the long run in the struggle for existence. So the

butterfly-plants of the butterfly-zone are all strictly adapted to

butterfly tastes and butterfly fancies. They are, for the most part,

individually large and brilliantly coloured: they have lots of honey,

often stored at the base of a deep and open bell which the long

proboscis of the insect can easily penetrate: and they habitually grow

close together in broad belts or patches, so that the colour of each

reinforces and aids the colour of the others. It is this cumulative

habit that accounts for the marked flowerbed or jam-tart character

which everybody must have noticed in the high Alpine flora.

Aristocracies usually pride themselves on their antiquity: and the high

life of the mountains is undeniably ancient. The plants and animals of

the butterfly-zone belong to a special group which appears everywhere

in Europe and America about the limit of snow, whether northward or

upward. For example, I was pleased to note near the summit of Mount

Washington (the highest peak in New Hampshire) that a large number of

the flowers belonged to species well known on the open plains of

Lapland and Finland. The plants of the High Alps are found also, as a

rule, not only on the High Pyrenees, the Carpathians, the Scotch

Grampians, and the Norwegian fjelds, but also round the Arctic Circle

in Europe and America. They reappear at long distances where suitable

conditions recur: they follow the snow-line as the snow-line recedes

ever in summer higher north toward the pole or higher vertically toward

the mountain summits. And this bespeaks in one way to the reasoning

mind a very ancient ancestry. It shows they date back to a very old and

cold epoch.

Let me give a single instance which strikingly illustrates the general

principle. Near the top of Mount Washington, as aforesaid, lives to

this day a little colony of very cold-loving and mountainous

butterflies, which never descend below a couple of thousand feet from

the wind-swept summit. Except just there, there are no more of there

sort anywhere about: and as far as the butterflies themselves are

aware, no others of their species exist on earth: they never have seen

a single one of their kind, save of their own little colony. One might

compare them with the Pitcairn Islanders in the South Seas--an isolated

group of English origin, cut off by a vast distance from all their

congeners in Europe or America. But if you go north some eight or nine

hundred miles from New Hampshire to Labrador, at a certain point the

same butterfly reappears, and spreads northward toward the pole in

great abundance. Now, how did this little colony of chilly insects get

separated from the main body, and islanded, as it were, on a remote

mountain-top in far warmer New Hampshire?

The answer is, they were stranded there at the end of the Glacial

epoch.

A couple of hundred thousand years ago or thereabouts--don't let us

haggle, I beg of you, over a few casual centuries--the whole of

northern Europe and America was covered from end to end, as everybody

knows, by a sheet of solid ice, like the one which Frithiof Nansen

crossed from sea to sea on his own account in Greenland. For many

thousand years, with occasional warmer spells, that vast ice-sheet

brooded, silent and grim, over the face of the two continents. Life was

extinct as far south as the latitude of New York and London. No plant

or animal survived the general freezing. Not a creature broke the

monotony of that endless glacial desert. At last, as the celestial

cycle came round in due season, fresh conditions supervened. Warmer

weather set in, and the ice began to melt. Then the plants and animals

of the sub-glacial district were pushed slowly northward by the warmth

after the retreating ice-cap. As time went on, the climate of the

plains got too hot to hold them. The summer was too much for the

glacial types to endure. They remained only on the highest mountain

peaks or close to the southern limit of eternal snow. In this way,

every isolated range in either continent has its own little colony of

arctic or glacial plants and animals, which still survive by

themselves, unaffected by intercourse with their unknown and

unsuspected fellow-creatures elsewhere.

Not only has the Glacial epoch left these organic traces of its

existence, however; in some parts of New Hampshire, where the glaciers

were unusually thick and deep, fragments of the primæval ice itself

still remain on the spots where they were originally stranded. Among

the shady glens of the white mountains there occur here and there great

masses of ancient ice, the unmelted remnant of primæval glaciers; and

one of these is so large that an artificial cave has been cleverly

excavated in it, as an attraction for tourists, by the canny Yankee

proprietor. Elsewhere the old ice-blocks are buried under the _débris_

of moraine-stuff and alluvium, and are only accidentally discovered by

the sinking of what are locally known as ice-wells. No existing

conditions can account for the formation of such solid rocks of ice at

such a depth in the soil. They are essentially glacier-like in origin

and character: they result from the pressure of snow into a crystalline

mass in a mountain valley: and they must have remained there unmelted

ever since the close of the Glacial epoch, which, by Dr. Croll's

calculations, must most probably have ceased to plague our earth some

eighty thousand years ago. Modern America, however, has no respect for

antiquity: and it is at present engaged in using up this palæocrystic

deposit--this belated storehouse of prehistoric ice--in the manufacture

of gin slings and brandy cocktails.

As one scales a mountain of moderate height--say seven or eight

thousand feet--in a temperate climate, one is sure to be struck by the

gradual diminution as one goes in the size of the trees, till at last

they tail off into mere shrubs and bushes. This diminution--an old

commonplace of tourists--is a marked characteristic of mountain plants,

and it depends, of course, in the main upon the effect of cold, and of

the wind in winter. Cold, however, is by far the more potent factor of

the two, though it is the least often insisted upon: and this can be

seen in a moment by anyone who remembers that trees shade off in just

the self-same manner near the southern limit of permanent snow in the

Arctic regions. And the way the cold acts is simply this: it nips off

the young buds in spring in exposed situations, as the chilly

sea-breeze does with coast plants, which, as we commonly but

incorrectly say, are "blown sideways" from seaward.

Of course, the lower down one gets, and the nearer to the soil, the

warmer the layer of air becomes, both because there is greater

radiation, and because one can secure a little more shelter. So, very

far north, and very near the snow-line on mountains, you always find

the vegetation runs low and stunted. It takes advantage of every crack,

every cranny in the rocks, every sunny little nook, every jutting point

or wee promontory of shelter. And as the mountain plants have been

accustomed for ages to the strenuous conditions of such cold and

wind-swept situations, they have ended, of course, by adapting

themselves to that station in life to which it has pleased the powers

that be to call them. They grow quite naturally low and stumpy and

rosette-shaped: they are compact of form and very hard of fibre: they

present no surface of resistance to the wind in any way; rounded and

boss-like, they seldom rise above the level of the rooks and stones,

whose interstices they occupy. It is this combination of characters

that makes mountain plants such favourites with florists: for they

possess of themselves that close-grown habit and that rich profusion of

clustered flowers which it is the grand object of the gardener by

artificial selection to produce and encourage.

When one talks of the 'the limit of trees' on a mountain side, however,

it must be remembered that the phrase is used in a strictly human or

Pickwickian sense, and that it is only the size, not the type, of the

vegetation that is really in question. For trees exist even on the

highest hill-tops: only they have accommodated themselves to the

exigencies of the situation. Smaller and ever smaller species have been

developed by natural selection to suit the peculiarities of these

inclement spots. Take, for example, the willow and poplar group. Nobody

would deny that a weeping willow by an English river, or a Lombardy

poplar in an Italian avenue, was as much of a true tree as an oak or a

chestnut. But as one mounts towards the bare and wind-swept mountain

heights one finds that the willows begin to grow downward gradually.

The 'netted willow' of the Alps and Pyrenees, which shelters itself

under the lee of little jutting rocks, attains the height of only a few

inches; while the 'herbaceous willow,' common on all very high

mountains in Western Europe, is a tiny creeping weed, which nobody

would ever take for a forest tree by origin at all, unless he happened

to see it in the catkin-bearing stage, when its true nature and history

would become at once apparent to him.

Yet this little herb-like willow, one of the most northerly and hardy

of European plants, is a true tree at heart none the less for all that.

Soft and succulent as it looks in branch and leaf, you may yet count on

it sometimes as many rings of annual growth as on a lordly Scotch

fir-tree. But where? Why, underground. For see how cunning it is, this

little stunted descendant of proud forest lords: hard-pressed by

nature, it has learnt to make the best of its difficult and precarious

position. It has a woody trunk at core, like all other trees; but this

trunk never appears above the level of the soil: it creeps and roots

underground in tortuous zigzags between the crags and boulders that lie

strewn through its thin sheet of upland leaf-mould. By this simple plan

the willow manages to get protection in winter, on the same principle

as when we human gardeners lay down the stems of vines: only the willow

remains laid down all the year and always. But in summer it sends up

its short-lived herbaceous branches, covered with tiny green leaves,

and ending at last in a single silky catkin. Yet between the great

weeping willow and this last degraded mountain representative of the

same primitive type, you can trace in Europe alone at least a dozen

distinct intermediate forms, all well marked in their differences, and

all progressively dwarfed by long stress of unfavourable conditions.

From the combination of such unfavourable conditions in Arctic

countries and under the snow-line of mountains there results a curious

fact, already hinted at above, that the coldest floras are also, from

the purely human point of view, the most beautiful. Not, of course, the

most luxuriant: for lush richness of foliage and 'breadth of tropic

shade' (to quote a noble lord) one must go, as everyone knows, to the

equatorial regions. But, contrary to the common opinion, the tropics,

hoary shams, are not remarkable for the abundance or beauty of their

flowers. Quite otherwise, indeed: an unrelieved green strikes the

keynote of equatorial forests. This is my own experience, and it is

borne out (which is far more important) by Mr. Alfred Russel Wallace,

who has seen a wider range of the untouched tropics, in all four

hemispheres--northern, southern, eastern, western--than any other man,

I suppose, that ever lived on this planet. And Mr. Wallace is firm in

his conviction that the tropics in this respect are a complete fraud.

Bright flowers are there quite conspicuously absent. It is rather in

the cold and less favoured regions of the world that one must look for

fine floral displays and bright masses of colour. Close up to the

snow-line the wealth of flowers is always the greatest.

In order to understand this apparent paradox one must remember that the

highest type of flowers, from the point of view of organisation, is not

at the same time by any means the most beautiful. On the contrary,

plants with very little special adaptation to any particular insect,

like the water-lilies and the poppies, are obliged to flaunt forth in

very brilliant hues, and to run to very large sizes in order to attract

the attention of a great number of visitors, one or other of whom may

casually fertilise them; while plants with very special adaptations,

like the sage and mint group, or the little English orchids, are so

cunningly arranged that they can't fail of fertilisation at the very

first visit, which of course enables them to a great extent to dispense

with the aid of big or brilliant petals. So that, where the struggle

for life is fiercest, and adaptation most perfect, the flora will on

the whole be not most, but least, conspicuous in the matter of very

handsome flowers.

Now, the struggle for life is fiercest, and the wealth of nature is

greatest, one need hardly say, in tropical climates. There alone do we

find every inch of soil 'encumbered by its waste fertility,' as Comus

puts it; weighed down by luxuriant growth of tree, shrub, herb,

creeper. There alone do lizards lurk in every hole; beetles dwell

manifold in every cranny; butterflies flock thick in every grove; bees,

ants, and flies swarm by myriads on every sun-smitten hillside.

Accordingly, in the tropics, adaptation reaches its highest point; and

tangled richness, not beauty of colour, becomes the dominant note of

the equatorial forests. Now and then, to be sure, as you wander through

Brazilian or Malayan woods, you may light upon some bright tree clad in

scarlet bloom, or some glorious orchid drooping pendant from a bough

with long sprays of beauty: but such sights are infrequent. Green, and

green, and ever green again--that is the general feeling of the

equatorial forest: as different as possible from the rich mosaic of a

high alp in early June, or a Scotch hillside deep in golden gorse and

purple heather in broad August sunshine.

In very cold countries, on the other hand, though the conditions are

severe, the struggle for existence is not really so hard, because, in

one word, there are fewer competitors. The field is less occupied; life

is less rich, less varied, less self-strangling. And therefore

specialisation hasn't gone nearly so far in cold latitudes or

altitudes. Lower and simpler types everywhere occupy the soil; mosses,

matted flowers, small beetles, dwarf butterflies. Nature is less

luxuriant, yet in some ways more beautiful. As we rise on the mountains

the forest trees disappear, and with them the forest beasts, from bears

to squirrels; a low, wind-swept vegetation succeeds, very poor in

species, and stunted in growth, but making a floor of rich flowers

almost unknown elsewhere. The humble butterflies and beetles of the

chillier elevation produce in the result more beautiful bloom than the

highly developed honey-seekers of the richer and warmer lowlands.

Luxuriance is atoned for by a Turkey carpet of floral magnificence.

Science in Arcady · 第 6 / 20 段