TiTMOL'SK. INSESSORES. PARUS. 239 



COLE TITMOUSE. 



Parvs ater, Linn. 

 PLATE LI. Fig. 3. 



Parus ater, Linn. Syst. 1. p. 341 Gmel. Syst. 1. p. 1009. sp. 7 — Lath. Syn. 



Ornith. v. 2. p. 564. 8 Raii Syn. p. 73. A. 2.— Will. p. 175. t. 43. 



Parus atricapillus, Briss. 3. p. 551. 5. 



La Petite Charbonniere, Buff. Ois. v. 5. p. 400. 



Mesange petite Charbonniere, Temm. Man. d'Ornith. 1. p. 288. 



Tannemeise, Bechst. Naturg. Deut. v. 3. p. 853 — Meyer, Tasschenb. Deut. 

 V. 1. p. 268. 



Cole-Mouse, Br. Zool. 1. No. 164. t. 57. f. 3 — Arct. Zool. 2. No. 327 — 



Will. (Ang.) p. 241. t. 43 Lath. Syn. 4. p. 540. 7 — Lewin's Br. Birds, 



3. t. 180 Mont. Ornith. Diet Id. Supp.—Pult. Cat. Dorset, p. 10 — 



Don, Br. Birds, 4. t. 79 Bewick's Br. Birds, v. 1. p. t. 241 — Shaw's 



Zool V. 10. p. 56. t. 6. 



The Cole Titmouse is not so frequently met with as either 

 of the two preceding species in England, where its appearance 

 is confined to woods and extensive plantations. — In Scotland, 

 I have found it abundantly in all the pine forests, which seem 

 to be its appropriate and favourite habitat, to the compara- 

 tive exclusion of the other species. In these extensive tracts, 

 covered by the natural growth of the country, or planted by 

 the great landed proprietors, it has both a secure retreat and 

 a constant supply of food ; consisting of the aphides, larvae, Food. 

 and others of the insect tribe, that are peculiar to the differ- 

 ent species of fir, together with the seeds and berries of va- 

 rious evergreens. It is very hvely in all its motions, and 

 rivals the Blue Titmouse in the attitudes it assumes in quest 

 of its prey, amid the higher branches of the pines. Its note 

 is shriller and more pleasing than in the other species, and 

 tends much to break the gloomy solitude of the tracts it fre- 

 quents. r)r Latham (in common with some other writers) 

 appears to have doubted the specific distinction between the 

 Cole and Marsh Titmouse, and inclines to the opinion that 

 the latter is but the female of the former bird. I am per- 



