In a sense this criticism is well-founded. Popular books on Indian 

 ornithology resemble one another in that a ripple of humour runs through 

 each. But the critics err when they attempt to explain this similarity by 

 asserting that Anglo-Indian writers model themselves, consciously or un- 

 consciously, on Phil Robinson, or that they imitate one another. 



The mistake made by the critics is excusable. When each successive 

 writer discourses in the same peculiar style the obvious inference is that 

 the later ones are guilt}' of more or less conscious plagiarism. But such an 

 inference is drawn only by those who have not enjoyed the advantage of 

 meeting our Indian birds in the flesh. To those who do possess this advan- 

 tage it is clear that the birds themselves are responsible for our writing 

 being funny. We naturalists merely describe what we see. 



The avifauna of every country has a character of its own. Mr. John 

 Burroughs has remarked that American birds as a whole are more gentle, 

 more insipid than the feathered folk of the British Isles. Still greater is 

 the contrast between English and Indian birds. The latter are to the 

 former as wine is to water. 



India is peculiarly rich in birds of character. It is the happy hunting 

 ground of that unique fowl, Corvus splemiens — the Splendid Crow — splendid 

 in sagacity, resource, adaptiveness, boldness, cunning, and depravity — a 

 veritable Machiaveli among birds. I might almost say a super-bird. 



The King Crow (Dururus ater) is another creature which can be des- 

 cribed only by superlatives. He is the Black Prince of the bird kingdom — 

 the embodiment of pluck. The thing in feathers of which he is afraid has 

 yet to be evolved. Like the mediaeval knight, he goes about seeking those 

 upon whom he can perform some small feat of arms. In certain parts of 

 India he is known as the Kotival— the official who to many stands forth as 

 the embodiment of the might and majesty of the British raj. 



When we turn to consider the more outward characteristics of birds, 

 the Peacock [Pavo cristatus), the Monal Pheasant (Lop/iaphorus refulgent), 

 the so-called Blue Jay (Coracias indica), the Oriole {Oriolus kundoo), the 

 White-breasted Kingfisher (Halcyon smyi iteusis), the Sunbird (Arachnechthra 

 zeylonica), the little Green Bee-eater (Dlerops viridis), and a host of others 

 rise up before us. Of these some, showily resplendent, compel attention 

 and admiration ; others, of quieter hues, possess a beauty which cannot be 

 appreciated, unless they be held in the hand and minutely examined, for 

 each of their feathers is a poem of exquisite beaut} - . 



At the other extreme stands the superlative of avine hideousuess, the 

 ugliest bird in the world — Neophron ginginanus, the scavenger vulture. 

 The bill, the naked face, and the legs of this creature are a sickly yellow. 

 Its plumage is dirty white, with the exception of the ends of the wing 

 feathers, which are shabby black. Its shape is displeasing to the eye ; its 

 gait is an ungainly waddle. Nevertheless, such is the magic of wings, even 

 this fowl looks almost beautiful as it sails, on outstretched pinions, high in 

 the heavens. 



