74. THE NATURAL HISTORY OF SELBORNE. 
and freer from errors, than more general writers; and so by 
degrees may pave the way to an universal correct natural 
history. Not that Scopoli is so circumstantial and attentive 
to the life and conversation of his birds as I could wish: he 
advances some false facts ; as when he says of the Azrundo 
urbica that “it does not feed its young after they leave the 
nest.” This assertion I know to be wrong from repeated 
observation this summer; for house-martins do feed their 
young, flying, though it must be acknowledged not so commonly 
as the house-swallow ; and the feat is done in so quick a man- 
ner as not to be perceptible to indifferent observers. He also 
advances some (I was going to say) improbable facts ; as when 
he says of the woodcock that “it carries its young in its beak 
as it flies from its enemies.” But candor forbids me to say 
absolutely that any fact is false because I have never been 
witness to such a fact. I have only to remark that the long 
unwieldy bill of the woodcock is perhaps the worst adapted of 
any among the winged creation for such a feat of natural 
affection. 
LETTER XXXII. 
SELBORNE, October 29th, 1770. 
After an ineffectual search in Linnzus, Brisson, etc., I begin 
to suspect that I discern my brother’s Airundo hyberna in 
Scopoli’s new-discovered Hirundo rupestris. His description : 
“Above it is of a mouse-color, below whitish; the guiding feathers 
have an oval white spot on the inner side; the feet are bare and 
black, the beak black, the wing feathers duskier than those of 
the back, the guiding feathers of the same color as the wings ; 
the tail well-defined, but undivided” — agrees very well with 
the bird in question; but when he comes to advance that it is 
“ of the size of the house-martin,” and that “the description of 
. 
a ee 
