212 ORCHARD ORIOLE. 



and the distance of Europeans from the country they inhabit. 

 Catesby, it is true, while in Carolina, described and figured the 

 Baltimore, and perhaps was the first who published figures of 

 either species; but he entirely omitted saying any thing of the 

 female; and instead of the male and female of the present spe- 

 cies, as he thought, he has only figured the male in two of his 

 different dresses; and succeeding compilers have followed and 

 repeated the same error. Another cause may be assigned, viz. 

 the extreme shyness of the female Orchard Oriole, represented 

 at fig. 1. This bird has hitherto escaped the notice of European 

 naturalists, or has been mistaken for another species, or perhaps 

 for a young bird of the first season, which it almost exactly re- 

 sembles. In none of the numerous works on ornithology has it 

 ever before appeared in its proper character; though the male 

 has been known to Europeans for more than a century, and has 

 usually been figured in one of his dresses as male, and in another 

 as female; these varying according to the fluctuating opinions 

 of different writers. It is amusing to see how gentlemen have 

 groped in the dark in pairing these two species of Orioles, of 

 which the following examples may be given: 



Buffon's and Latham's 1 Male Male Baltimore. 



Baltimore Oriole, j Female Male Orchard Oriole, fig. 4. 

 Spurious Baltimore of") Male Female Baltimore 



Ditto. J Female Male Orchard Oriole, fig. 2. 



T> +? -R u- n 1 Male Male Baltimore. 



Pennant'sBalt,moreO. 



Spurious 0. of Ditto. 1 ^-Male Orchard Q. fig. 4. 

 J Female Ditto, ditto, fig. 2. 



Catesby >, Baltimore 0. ^ e T M e Baltimore 

 9 J Female Not mentioned. 



G v 10 TI f TV** 1 Male Male Orchard 0. fig. 2. 

 Spurious B. of Ditto, j Female _ miOy ditto? % { 



Among all these authors, Catesby is doubtless the most inex- 

 cusable, having lived for several years in America, where he 

 had an opportunity of being more correct; yet when it is con- 

 sidered, that the female of this bird is so much shyer than the 



