336 
WILD TURKEY. 
Panama, south of which it is not to be found, notwithstanding 
the statements of authors, who have mistaken the curassow for 
doubt that Great Britain is indebted, in a secondary way, for the introduction 
of these valuable domestic birds ; and I have added the observations of Mr Bennet, 
on the subject of its original introduction, from the Gardens and Menagerie of 
the Zoological Societj^ 
“ The turkey domesticated by the Spaniards, seems to have found its way 
to England almost immediately. This fact may be easily accounted for 
by the extensive intercourse subsisting between the two great maritime na- 
tions at that early period ; but it is somewhat singular that no traces of its trans- 
mission from Spain should remain, either in the name of the bird, or in popular 
tradition. On the other hand, it is barely possible that it may have been brought 
directly from America to England by Chabot, who made such extensive disco- 
veries on the coast of the newly found continent. According to a popular rhyme, 
quoted by Baker, in his Chi’onicle, 
‘ Turkeys, carps, lioppes, pinaret, and beer. 
Came into England all in one year.’ 
Which remarkable year is said to have been about the 15th of King Henry the 
Eighth, or 152L. Barnaby Googe, an old writer on husbandry, who published 
in 161 4i, speaking of ‘ those outlandish birds called ginny-cocks and turkey- 
cocks,’ says, that ‘ before the yeare of our Lord 1530, they were not seene with 
us but in this he merely translates from Heresbach, a German author, whose 
treatise forms the basis of his work. A more positive authority is Hakluyt, 
who, in certain instructions given by him to a friend at Constantinople, bearing 
date in 1582, mentions, among other valuable things introduced into England 
from foreign parts, ‘ turkey cocks and hennes,’ as having been brought in 
* about fifty years past.’ We may therefore fairly conclude, that they became 
known in this country about the year 1530. Why they were denominated tur- 
keys, an appellation which bears no resemblance to their name in any other lan- 
guage, we have no probable grounds even for conjecture. Willughby supposes 
the name to be derived from a notion that they were brought from Turkey. 
Such an erroneous opinion may possibly have arisen from that confusion which 
appears to have at first existed between them and the Guinea-fowls, the latter 
being probably commonly obtained from the Levant ; and being also, in the six- 
teenth century, exceedingly rare in England. 
The turkey, on the contrary, speedily became a common inhabitant of our poul- 
try yai’ds, and a standing dish at all festivals. So early as the year 1541, we find 
it mentioned in a constitution of Archbishop Cranmer, published in Leland’s 
Collectanea^ by which it was ordered, that of such lai’ge fowls as cranes, swans, 
and turkey-cocks, ‘ there should be but one in a dish.’ The serjeants-at-law, 
created in 1555, provided, according to Dugdale, in his Origines Juridicales, for 
their inauguration dinner, among other delicacies, two turkeys, and four tui’key 
2 
