on bird song.



305



song whereas the nightingale’s music is a most finished and exquisite

production. But as we shall presently see, the rook’s simple call

corresponds exactly in its fundamental purpose to the nightingale’s

melody, and if we admit that one is a song, we must equally respect

the more primitive performance. As already stated, both vocal

efforts are of the same value in the bird world, and therefore both

may be reckoned as bird song, as distinct from human song, which

stands quite apart, and must not be compared with the music of

the birds.


Song being therefore the language of the birds, we may expect

to find that as eaoh species differs from the other in form and plumage

and way of life, each species will possess a definite song of its own.

The most casual observer will have recognised, that a thrush’s song

is different to a robin’s, and it is this great variety of bird languages

which lends so much charm and interest to the countryside. Each

species possesses a definite song, peculiar to itself, and the next

question which arises is, how the young bird is able to sing the song

of its species ? Does it learn to sing through individual acquirement,

or through racial preparation, i.e. does each species possess a definite,

congenital song ? This question has long been the subject of

discussion ; the supporters of the first theory base their argument

chiefly on (l) the undoubted capacity of certain birds to learn tunes

when kept in captivity, the bullfinch being a well known example;

and (2) the facility with which some wild birds, notably the starling,

mimic the songs of other species. But if we go direct to nature for

an explanation, what do we find ? That in a small coi'ner of a garden

or strip of woodland, a blackbird, a thrush, a robin, a blackcap, and a

willow-wren are all housekeeping, each have a nest of young, and

each father sings all day long,—“ all spring through till the spring be

done! ’ What is there to prevent the young from assimilating the

notes of the moi’e vociferous individuals of other species, in the

vicinity of their nest, if song is an individual acquirement, a mere

matter of imitation ? Nothing, I think, if the congenital factor is

excluded ; and no doubt the art of mimicry may also be attributed to

this factor, a gift which some birds inherit to a greater or lesser

extent.


We see therefore that each species possesses an inherited song



