GREEN WOODPECKER. 461 



in the summer a cry like one of those uttered by the Kestrel 

 is often heard, proceeding presumably from the young, and 

 occasionally diversified by a loud chunk, chunk. 



The explanation or derivation of the common names of 

 our birds is nearly always a matter of much interest, and 

 those by which the present species is known invite attention, 

 the more so since in former Editions of this work they were 

 treated at some length.* " Rain-bird " has been already 

 noticed, but it may be remarked that this name, as well as 

 " Pick-a-tree," is stated by Wallis in his ' Natural History 

 of Northumberland ' (i. p. 321) to have been used in that 

 county when he wrote (1769). " Wood- Speight " (often 

 erroneously written " Woodspite ") or simply " Speicht," as 

 Hollyband had it in 1593 (Diet. Fr. and Engl, sub voce Pic), 

 is cognate with the German Specht, and the French Epeiche, 

 equivalent to Woodpecker, and it will be directly shewn 

 that the prefix does not mean icoad as has been suggested. 

 " Yaffil " or '' Yaffingale " refers to the bird's common cry, 

 which has been well compared by Gilbert White and many 

 others to the sound of laughter, and in the once-popular 

 poem of the ' Peacock at Home ' we have : — 



*' The Skylark in ecstasy sang from a cloud, 

 And Chanticleer crow'd, and the Yaffil laugL'd loud." 



In some counties a Woodpecker is called a " Whetile," and 

 in others a " Woodwale " — two words which seem to have 

 the same derivation. The first has been supposed to be 

 merely a corruption of whittle — a knife — formerly written 

 iLihytel ; but a still more ancient form of this word is thivitel 



capacity of birds for forecasting changes of the weather, it is thought inexpedient 

 here to reprint the notes inserted by the Author of this work in his Second and 

 Third Editions, taken from the writings of Mr. Scrope, Mr. A. Young and Sir 

 H. Davy — particularly since none of them refer to birds. 



* The derivations before given were supplied to Mr. Yarrell by " a learned 

 friend at Cambridge " whom the Editor has not been able to identify. They 

 were, according to modern investigations, extremely erroneous, though the less 

 blame is to be on that account attached to them when it is remembered how 

 very crude were the methods adopted by many etymologists of those days, before 

 the study of philology was placed on any secure basis. It is to be hoped that the 

 aid the Editor has received on the present occasion from his learned friends Prof. 

 Skeat, Mr. Bradshaw and Mr. Aid is Wright may be more successful. 



