ORNITHOLOGY. 



609 



Kasnres. Of the numerous benefits which the goodness of God 

 — — v— -^ has enabled man to derive from the wide circle of the 

 feathered race, there is probably none which surpasses, 

 either in extent or utility, the domestication of these most 

 familiar birds. Of so long standing, however, has been the 

 subservience of the race to man, that no authentic tradi- 

 tionary traces now remain of its original introduction to any 

 of the more ancient kingdoms of the earth, — its existence 

 under human guardianship seeming indeed coeval with 

 the most antique records. It may therefore be regarded 

 as one of those particular and providential gifts, which, 

 like the faithful and accommodating dog, was at an early 

 period of the world added to the fortunes of the first fa- 

 milies of the human race, and has since followed man in 

 his wonderful and far-spread migrations through every 

 clime and country. For some thousand years the observ- 

 ers of nature were ignorant of any wild species which, even 

 in a remote degree, resembled any variety of the domes- 

 tic breed, — and from the era of Herodotus to that of Son- 

 nerat, the domestic cock and hen might have been re- 

 garded as birds, the living analogues of which were no 

 longer known to exist in a natural and unsubdued condi- 

 tion. 



In consequence of the remote obscurity in which the 

 subject is thus involved, few points in natural history have 

 occasioned more inconclusive speculation, or are even now 

 more difficult to solve with certainty, than the source 

 from which we have primarily derived our different races 

 of domestic poultry. That they came originally from Per- 

 sia, has been inferred from the circumstance of Aristo- 

 phanes calling the cock " the Persian bird." Such an 

 origin, however, is improbable, when we consider that the 

 researches of modern travellers, and indeed of all who 

 have visited that country since the revival of learning, 

 have failed to discover there any species of wild poul- 

 try, — no gallinaceous bird being found in Persia more 

 nearly allied to the genus Gallus, than a species of Lo- 

 plwphorus. If, however, it is merely meant that the Greeks, 

 during the intercourse, hostile or otherwise, which existed 

 between them and the Persian nation, may have obtained 

 a breed previously domesticated, the idea is less objec- 

 tionable ; for it is known that in a domestic state poultry 

 have existed in Persia from a very remote antiquity. 



It appears from an ingenious dissertation by the late 

 Dr Scot of Corstorphine, to have been the opinion of that 

 learned Hebraist, that poultry were unknown to the Jews, 

 or at least that they are not distinctly alluded to in the 

 Old Testament. It cannot, however, admit of a doubt, 

 that they were well known over many parts both of Eu- 

 rope and Asia for several hundred years before the Chris- 

 tian era. When Themistocles took the field to combat 

 the Persians, he alluded, while haranguing his troops, to 

 the invincible courage of the feathered biped. " Observe 

 with what intrepid valour he fights, inspired by no other 

 motive than the love of victory ; whereas you have to con- 

 tend for your religion and your liberty, for your wives and 

 children, for the tombs of your ancestors ;" and it was on 

 this occasion that the Athenians achieved one of the most 

 memorable victories recorded in history. According to 

 ./Elian, it was in commemoration of this signal event, and 

 of the ornithological image by which the courage of the 

 soldiery had been excited and sustained, that the Athe- 

 nians instituted those annual games of which cock-fighting 

 formed so conspicuous a feature. Now Themistocles died 

 in the sixty-fifth year of his age, and about the 449th 

 year preceding the Christian era, and must consequently 

 have been contemporary with Nehemiah the prophet ; and 

 as the Old Testament history does not conclude till about 

 twenty years after the death of Themistocles, it may be 



inferred, that if the later of the sacred historians do not E-asores. 

 mention poultry, it must be from some other cause than s- ™" -v~~ 

 ignorance of their existence, — seeing that as the early 

 Greek nations had received them prior to that period, 

 either from Persia or the more south-eastern countries of 

 Asia, they could scarcely have remained unknown in the 

 intermediate regions inhabited by the Jews. For these and 

 other reasons, which it would here be tedious to detail, we 

 do not agree with Dr Scot. 



In regard to the natural origin of these domestic birds, 

 the first approximation to the truth (and we deem it but 

 an approximation) resulted from the discovery by Son- 

 nerat of a species of wild poultry native to the mountains 

 of the Ghauts, in India. This is the Gallus Sonneratii of 

 systematic naturalists, better known to British residents 

 by the now familiar name of jungle-cock. Our knowledge 

 of gallinaceous birds, however, has so greatly increased 

 during recent years, and so many additional species have 

 been discovered, that we are able to proceed upon much 

 more certain ground than were the naturalists of the last 

 century. The jungle-cock is not only no longer the only 

 claimant to the long dormant title which, under whatever 

 name of honour, may be due to the species so greatly be- 

 neficial to the human race, but other aspirants have come 

 forward with such better-founded claims, that his may 

 fairly be regarded as altogether set aside. In fact, seve- 

 ral important characters of the jungle-cock have never 

 been traced in any of the domestic varieties, and many of 

 these latter present features which, if not incompatible 

 with, at least bear no resemblance to any attributes of 

 the supposed original. We may here observe, that the 

 natural form and structure of any portion of the animal or- 

 ganization are much less easily effaced or altered than the 

 more superficial character of colour ; and hence, if a par- 

 ticular species of bird be naturally distinguished by a pe- 

 culiar consistence as well as colour of plumage, the influ- 

 ence of those causes which produce variation less fre- 

 quently affect the former than the latter. Reasoning 

 therefore a priori, it would be more natural to expect 

 that if the jungle-cock were the parent of our domestic 

 breeds, such breeds, however they might vary in the co- 

 louring of their plumage, would at least at times exhibit 

 those marked and peculiar characters of form and struc- 

 ture by which the feathers of the supposed original are 

 distinguished. This, however, is not the case. Amid the 

 infinite varieties which occur among our domestic poultry, 

 the plumage of none is found characterized by those horny 

 laminae, or expansions of the shaft, which form so marked 

 a feature in the plumage of the jungle-cock, and which 

 assuredly would have either continued a permanent fea- 

 ture, or been occasionally manifested in one or other of 

 our domestic breeds, had these been derived from the spe- 

 cies in question. We may mention another circumstance 

 on which we believe we were ourselves the first to insist. 1 

 The native tribes of Indians inhabiting the districts where 

 the jungle-cock abounds rear a breed of poultry which 

 differs as much from the supposed original as our own, and 

 which never intermingles with the forest brood. 



According to M. Temminck (and in this we quite agree 

 with that industrious and observant naturalist), the species 

 to which our domestic races are most nearly allied, are 

 the Jago cock of Sumatra {Gallus giganteus), a wild spe- 

 cies of great size, and the Bankiva cock of Java, another 

 primitive species, which occurs in the forests of the last- 

 named island (see Plate CCCXCVIII. figs. 3 and 3 a. There 

 are several circumstances which render the claims of these 

 two birds much stronger than those of the jungle-cock. 1st, 

 Their females bear a strong resemblance to our domestic 

 hens ; 2dly, the common village cock, in its most ordi- 



! See our Essay " On the Origin of Domestic Poultry," in the Wsrncrian Memoirs, vol. vi. p. 402 



