I Ufi J 



fowl from Rhodes, whilft Varro and Columella likewife recom- 

 mend the forts which came from Africa and Media. 



Another circumftance which inclines me to think that our 

 Guiney hens were little known to the ancients, is that neither 

 the mod: difagreeable noife, which they are perpetually making, 

 nor their moft envious and quarrelfome difpofition, are noticed 

 by any of the writers who may be fuppofed to have alluded to them.. 



Pliny fpeaks twice of the Meleagris, which he fays were not 

 foon introduced to the Roman tables, propter ingratum virus.. 

 We know, however, of no difagreeable- or poifonous tafte in 

 the Guiney hen at prefent,. but, on the contrary, efieem it to be 

 a bird of excellent flavour. 



In his thirty-feventh Book, and fecond Chapter, the lame natura- 

 lift cites Ctefias for faying, that near a place called Sicyone in Africa, 

 and the river of Crathis, which empties itfelf into the ocean, there 

 were birds called Meleagrides and Penelopes 1 ; whilft a few lines 

 afterwards . he referrs to Sophocles the Tragedian, for laying that 

 amber is made by the tears of the Meleagrides beyond India. There 

 feems, therefore, to be as little agreement amongft the ancient 

 Romans about the place thefe birds were brought from, as in. 

 their defcription of them. 



It appears from this great uncertainty in defcribing the Melea- 

 gris by the Roman writers, that, if known at all by them, it was 

 not confidered as poultry, becaufe, if that was the cafe, they 

 muft have continued in Italy till the fixteenth century, when 

 they were firft: introduced from Africa" 1 , and as I fhould fuppofe 

 from the Coaft of Guiney, according to their Englifh name. 

 Nor can I hear that they are at prefent found in a wild ftate 



1 Ariftotle confiders the bird of this name, as a fea eagle. L. viii. c. 3. 

 w We are informed likewife by Margrave, that they were firft brought 

 to Brafil from the fame quarter, 



6 upon. 



