The Natural History of Selborne, 1879/Letter 32
LETTER XXXII.
Dear Sir,—After an ineffectual search in Linnæus, Brisson, etc., I begin to suspect that I discern my brother's hirundo hyberna in Scopoli's new discovered hirundo rupestris, p. 167. His description of "Supra murina, subtus albida; rectrices maculâ ovali albâ in latere inferno; pedes nudi, nigri; rostrum nigrum; remiges obscuriores quam plumæ dorsales; rectrices remigibus concolores; caudâ emarginatâ, nec forcipatâ;" agrees very well with the bird in question: but when he comes to advance that it is "statiira hirundinis urbicæ," and that "definitio hirundinis ripariæ Linnæi huic quoque convenïit," he in some measure invalidates all he has said; at least he shows at once that he compares them to these species merely from memory: for I have compared the birds themselves, and find they differ widely in every circumstance of shape, size, and colour. However, as you will have a specimen, I shall be glad to hear what your judgment is in the matter.
Whether my brother is forestalled in his non-descript or not, he will have the credit of first discovering that they spend their winters under the warm and sheltry shores of Gibraltar and Barbary.
Scopoli's characters of his ordines and genera are clear, just, and expressive, and much in the spirit of Linnæus. These few remarks are the result of my first perusal of Scopoli's "Annus Primus."
The bane of our science is the comparing one animal to the other by memory: for want of caution in this particular Scopoli falls into errors: he is not so full with regard to the manners of his indigenous birds as might be wished, as you justly observe: his Latin is easy, elegant, and expressive, and very superior to Kramer's.[1]
I am pleased to see that my description of the moose corresponds so well with yours.
- ↑ See his "Elenchus Vegetabilium et Animalium per Austriam Inferiorem, etc."