390 REPOUT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893. 



The similarity of the rattling sound to that of certain grasshoppers 

 has been commented on by many writers both befoie and since, and is 

 indeed in many cases astonishingly deceptive; but there are several 

 great dithculties about this theory, chief of wliich are tliat birds seem 

 to form a very small i)orti()n of the Kattlesnake's diet, and that on the 

 other hand the birds do not seem to rely princiipally on their ear in 

 hunting grasshoppers. 



F*rof. F. W. Putnam (op. cif., pp. 693-004) took issue with Prof. Shaler, 

 and suggested that the true function of the rattle is most likely to serve 

 to call the sexes together. This theory received shortly after valuable 

 supi)ort from an observation made by Prof. Samuel Aughey, who 

 recorded* his experience while surveying in July, 1869, along the Logan 

 Eiver in Wayne County, Nebraska. 



While washing a collection of iiuios at the water's edge [lie writes] 1 heard the 

 familiar rattle of the Massasauga ( Crotalophoriis tergiminus [^^^Sistruriis catenating] ). I 

 quickly crept up the hauk and cautiously looking over the level bottom I saw, at 

 the distance of about 30 feet, a rattlesnake coiled up with the head erect and gazing 

 in an opposite direction from my position. Every three oT five minutes the snake 

 would cease rattling for a minute or more and then commence again. In al»outhalf 

 an hour from the time that I first saw the snake I observed another Rattlesnake 

 approach the first one. Closer and closer the second one approached, until at length 

 they met and indulged in asexual embrace. I watched them for at least an hour and 

 left them at last without disturbing them. 



He also related an instance where three Rattlesnakes made their 

 appearance on the scene of a battle between hogs and another Rattle- 

 snake, apparently called in by the rattling of the latter. 



The same observer also hints at another use of the rattle, suggesting 

 that the noise may possibly frighten and thus paralyze the victim into 

 submission, at the same time explaining the phenomena which by other 

 observers have been attributed to a peculiar "charmiug" power sup- 

 posed to be possessed by these reptiles, and of which we shall hear 

 more further on. 



The theory which appears most commonly accepted nowadays is one 

 which was elaborated by J. G. Henderson, in a reply t to Shaler's arti- 

 cle above referred to. He advanced the idea that the sounding of the 

 rattle, so far from inviting the destruction of the snake, 



is one of the most effective means of self-protection, and is as useful to it in the 

 race for life as is the growl of the tiger when threatened with danger. The snake 

 does not sound its rattles until it considers itself discovered, and not then unless it 

 apprehends danger. It throws itself in positiou to strike and says in unmistakable 

 language, "Look out, I am ready for you!" If pushed upon, it makes its leap at its 

 antagonist, and again throws itself in positiou to renew the conflict, and again 

 sounds the note of defiance. * * * The ability of the snake to defend itself does 

 not consist in its strength or size, or in its power of overcoming its adversary by a 

 prolonged conflict, for most of its enemies are its superior in size and strength. Nor 

 does its deadly poison act quickly enough to secure its own safety when it is 



* American Naturalist, vii, 1873, pp. 85-86. 



t Useof the Rattle of the Rattlesnake. American Naturalist, vi, 1872, pp. 260-2G3. 



