Skip to content

Chapter IV: The Relation of Song to the Territory (2)

Text size

Are we then justified in the use of such terms as "warning," "significance," or even "meaning," when it is but a matter of stimulus and response? In what does the impulse to avoid other males consist? There is no reason to suppose that there is any sensation of fear in the first stage, and the course of behaviour demonstrates that there is none in the later stages. But it is difficult to conceive of an impulse which has, as its end, the isolation of the individual from members of its own sex and kind, without some feeling-tone, the reverse of pleasurable, entering into the situation; just as it is difficult to believe that the female experiences no pleasurable sensation when she hears the voice of the male that directs her search. So that the song may be actually repellent in the one case and attractive in the other; and it is none the less repellent when, as in the later stages, it attracts a neighbouring male, for the attraction is then of a different order, determined by the presence of the condition which renders the pugnacious nature susceptible and leads to attack. In a sense, therefore, we can speak of "meaning"--though not perhaps of "significance"--and of "warning," when we refer to the prospective value of the behaviour.

So much for the purpose of "song"; there still remains the more difficult question--the question of origin. Let me make clear what I mean by origin. As we have already seen, there is infinite diversity in the sexual voice of different species; some are harsh and others monotonous, and some strike the imagination by their novelty whilst others are melodious; and to the naturalist each, in its particular way and in a particular degree, probably makes some appeal according to the associations that it arouses. But just why a Marsh-Warbler is gifted with a voice that is so beautiful and varied, whilst the Grasshopper-Warbler must perforce remain content with a monotonous trill; just why the tail feathers of the Snipe have developed into an instrument, whilst the Pied Woodpecker has developed muscles which enable it to make use of a decayed branch as an instrument--we know no more than we do of the nature of the forces which lead the Reed-Warbler to weave its nest to reeds, or the caterpillar of the Elephant Hawk Moth to assume so peculiar an attitude when disturbed. When therefore I speak of the origin, I do not refer to the mode of origin of variation; I take for granted that variations somehow arise, and I seek to ascertain whether there is anything in the phenomena which we have explored which might reasonably be held to determine the survival of this one in preference to that.

When we reflect upon the problem of song and consider the numerous and diverse forms in which it is manifested, we are apt to draw a comparison between the sounds we hear and those produced by musical instruments, and hence to conclude that each bird is gifted with a special instrument in virtue of which it produces its characteristic melody. But there is a very remarkable phenomenon connected with the singing of birds which shows that this is really not the case--I mean the phenomenon of imitation. There are plenty of good imitators amongst our native species, and the power of imitation is not the exclusive property of those which have reached a high degree of vocal development, nor, for the matter of that, of song-birds at all. Even the Jay, than which few birds have a more raucous voice, that "hoots" like the Wood-Owl, or copies the sounds produced by the tail feathers of the Snipe, will occasionally imitate the most melodious strains of some other species; and the Red-backed Shrike, whose sexual call is principally a few harsh notes rapidly repeated, bursts at times into perfect imitations of the song of the Swallow, Linnet, or Chaffinch. Nevertheless it is amongst such typical songsters as the Warblers that we find the greatest volume of imitation, and no limit seems to be placed upon their capacity. The Marsh-Warbler can utter the call of the Green Woodpecker, or sing as the Nightingale does, with as much facility as it sings its own song; and the Blackcap is well-nigh as proficient in copying the cries and melodies of surrounding species--and so, if it were necessary, we might proceed to add to the list.

These examples demonstrate that different songs are not represented by a corresponding number of different physiological contrivances; for if the difference were really attributable to some structural peculiarity, then the range of sounds embraced in the call-notes and the sexual call of any given species, must be the measure of the capacity of its instrument; and no matter how great its power of imitation may be, it follows that it will only be capable of copying those sounds which fall within that range. There is plenty of evidence to show that the power of imitation is almost unlimited, at all events that it is not confined within such narrow limits as are here demanded. Hence it seems clear that the diversity of song is not to be sought in structure, but in some innate capacity to play one tune in preference to another; and if this be so, and if out of the same instrument, which has been primarily evolved to further the biological end of intercommunication, all manner of diverse sounds can be made to proceed, the problem of the origin of song is to that extent simplified.

We must next inquire into the nature of song, and endeavour to ascertain whether all the individuals of a species are alike proficient, or, failing this, whether there is any quality which can be observed to be constant under all conditions. I watch the Reed-Buntings in a marsh and find that there are three males occupying adjoining territories. Two of them are fully mature and their plumage is bright: that is to say the crown is black, the collar and breast are white, the flanks are dull white spotted with black, and the mantle is reddish-brown. The third is immature: the crown, instead of being black, is suffused with brown; the collar, instead of being white, is mottled with brown; and the flanks are more heavily streaked with brown. These three birds take up their positions in February, and, as is their wont, sing incessantly each day at daybreak. The song of the first two is normal, including the usual number of phrases which flow in no definite sequence, but are combined and recombined in different order, and the tone is pure; that of the third, the immature bird, is, however, very different; for just as in comparison its plumage is dull, so the phrases of its song are limited and reiterated with great monotony, the tone is impure, and the whole performance is dull and to our ears unmusical. I watch them from February to June, and observe the order in which they are mated--first a mature male; next, after a short interval, the immature male; and finally, after a still longer interval, the remaining bird gets a mate. As the season advances, still keeping watch on the development of the plumage and of the voice of the immature male, I observe that no very definite change takes place--that the colours remain dull, that there is a conspicuous absence in the song of certain phrases, and that the notes lack purity of tone.

If now, instead of Reed-Buntings in a marsh, I watch Yellow Buntings on a furze-covered common, I find that, establishing themselves early in February, they sing persistently, and in a few weeks are paired. But what arrests my attention more particularly is the quality of the song; for although the voice is unmistakably the voice of the Yellow Bunting, yet it is incomplete and lacks the variety of phrases and musical notation which we customarily associate with the bird. Nevertheless, as the season advances, there is a progressive development in both these directions, and by the end of March or the beginning of April the song possesses all those qualities which appeal to us so forcibly.

There is one other fact to which attention must be drawn--the variation in the song of the same species in different districts. As an illustration let us take the case of the Chaffinch. In Worcestershire the bird sings what I imagine to be a normal song--the notes are clear and the phrases are distinct and combined in numerous ways. With the notes fresh in mind I leave them and go to the west of Donegal, where I am at once conscious of a difference; not a subtle difference that perplexes the mind and is difficult to trace, but a change so remarkable that one is conscious of a passing doubt as to whether after all the voice is the voice of the Chaffinch; the song is pitched in a lower key, certain phrases are absent, the notes lack tone and are sometimes even harsh, and the bird seems wholly incapable of reaching the higher notes to which I am accustomed.

Now the immature Reed-Bunting, though to our ears its song is but a poor representation of that of the adult, gains a mate; the Yellow Bunting pairs, and the discharge of the sexual function may even have taken place before its voice attains what we judge to be its full development; and there are no grounds for supposing that the Donegal Chaffinch, with its less musical notes, has on that account any the less chance of procreating its kind--facts which demonstrate that the biological value of song is neither to be sought in the purity of tone, nor in the variety and combination of phrases, nor, indeed, in any of those qualities by which the human voice gains or loses merit, and which leave us with no alternative but to dismiss from our minds all æsthetic considerations in the attempt to estimate its true significance.

What, then, determines its value? Are there any qualities which, whether the bird is mature or immature, whether it is untrained or has acquired fuller expression by practice, whether it inhabits this district or that, are alike constant? Well, no matter how great the variation, no matter how much this voice falls below or exceeds the standard, judged from the human standpoint, attained by that, even we, with our duller perception, have no difficulty in recognising the species to which the owner of the voice belongs; in other words, the song is always specific, and this is the most noticeable, as it is the most remarkable, characteristic.

There is still, however, another quality to which I would draw attention--that of loudness. The sounds produced are on the whole alike penetrative, and the individuals of any given district, even though the climate by affecting their vocal muscles may have modified the character of the song, are at no disadvantage in this respect; neither are the females on the same account the less likely to hear the undeveloped voice of the immature male.

We have then the following considerations: firstly, there is the widespread and remarkable phenomenon of imitation, from which we can infer that the diversity of song is not due to structural differences but must be sought in some innate capacity to play one tune in preference to another; secondly, not all the individuals of the same species play a similar tune--we find that there is in certain directions a noticeable variation which nevertheless does not seem to affect the question of success or failure in the attainment of reproduction; in the third place, in contrast with this variation, we can observe a striking uniformity in two important particulars, namely in the specific character and penetrative power of the song--qualities which we know are essential for the purposes of "recognition" and "warning"; and finally, from the general course of our investigation, we can infer that if a male had no certain means of advertising its position, the territory would not be brought into useful relation in its life. Have we here sufficient ground on which to construct a theory of origin; in other words, has the evolution of song been incidental to, and contributory to, the evolution of the territory?

We have all along spoken of the song and of the call-notes as if they were manifestations of separate emotional states having their respective and well-defined spheres of usefulness; and while, speaking generally, this is a true statement of the case, there is much evidence to show that the relationship between them is nevertheless very close. There are, for example, quite a number of cases in which a particular call-note is uttered with unusual energy during sexual emotion, and is attached to the song, of which it may be said to form a part; but a still closer connection can be traced in many simple melodies which are merely compositions of social and family calls repeated many times in succession, and even in some of the more complex productions there will be found indications of a similar construction. And since this is so, since moreover, in the seasonal vocal development of such a bird as the Yellow Bunting, we can observe the gradual elaboration from simple to complex--from the repetition of single notes to phrases and from phrases to the complete melody--we have every reason to suppose that it is along these lines that the evolution of the voice has proceeded.

In all probability there was a time when vocal expression was limited to primitive social and family cries which would be called into play with special force during times of excitement, more particularly during the sexual season which is the period of maximum emotional excitement. But the excitement would express itself in all the congenital modes of behaviour peculiar to the season, and thus the repetition of these cries would become associated with combat, with extravagant feats of flight, and with other forms of motor response. Now the more emotional individuals would be the more pugnacious, and all the more likely therefore to secure territory and so to procreate their kind; and, being of an excitable disposition, they would at the same time be the more vociferous. Hence variations of the hereditary tendency to vocal expression, even though in themselves they were not of survival value, would be fostered and preserved, so long as they were not harmful, in virtue of their association with pugnacity. But if, instead of being neutral, they helped to further the biological end of combat, the relationship between the voice and pugnacity would be of a mutually beneficial kind; and those individuals in which variation in both directions happened to coincide, would have a better chance of success in the attainment of reproduction.

A territorial system, closely corresponding to that which we have discussed, forms part of the life behaviour of certain mammals, and of its existence much lower in the scale of life evidence is not wanting; from which we can infer that it is not of recent origin, but that the conditions in the external environment demanded such a system at a remote period of avian development. Now even in its incipient stages the system must have involved a separation of the sexes, and howsoever slight the degree of separation may have been in comparison with that which can be observed to-day, inasmuch as the power of locomotion was then less highly developed, mating could only have proceeded satisfactorily providing that males fit to breed had some adequate means of disclosing their positions. Thus there is reason to think that from the very commencement of the process variations of emotional disposition expressed through the voice would have been of survival value.

But expressed in what direction, in loudness and persistency of utterance, these are the qualities which, I imagine, would have been more likely to have facilitated the search of the female? Yet if she were uncertain as to the owner of the voice, neither loudness nor persistent repetition would avail much; and as species multiplied and the competition for the means of living became increasingly severe, so the necessity of a territory would have become intensified, and so, too, with the extension of range, would the separation of the sexes have been an ever-widening one; and as with their multiplication, irregularities and delays in mating, arising from the similarity of the calls, would have increased in frequency, so a distinctive call, which would have tended to minimise these risks, would have come to possess biological value.

Here we have a theory of origin, but origin of what? Of certain characteristics of song--nothing more; and therefore to suppose that it furnishes a complete explanation, which satisfies all the requirements of scientific logic, of so wonderful an intonation as that, for example, of the Marsh-Warbler, or that no other relationships, except that of the territory, enter into the total emotional complex, simplifying here or elaborating there to meet the exigencies of diverse circumstances--to suppose this would be foolish. That there are many relationships which even to-day are leading to modifications in important particulars, but which at the present time are beyond our cognisance, of this there can be no doubt.

There is one process by which song may have attained a fuller development, and which would account in some measure for the elaboration, inexplicable merely in terms of "recognition." It is this: the effect of the sexual call upon the female cannot well be neutral, it must be either pleasurable or the reverse--it must, that is to say, be accompanied by some suggestiveness, and by suggestion I mean the arousing of some emotion akin to that of the male; and if there are degrees of suggestiveness, which well there may be, some males will mate sooner than others and some will remain mateless--this is the theory of sexual selection. The question to be decided here is whether the biological emphasis is on loudness, or specific distinctness, or pitch, or modulation, or the manner in which the phrases are combined--that is, on some qualities in preference to others--or whether the emphasis is on the whole. We have already seen, and it is well known, that there is much variation in the voices of different individuals of the same species, and thus the first condition of the theory is fulfilled. Now the conditions which lead to variation are threefold--immaturity, seasonal sexual development, and isolation. Of the three, the variation in the case of the immature bird is the most instructive; the tone is not so pure, the combination of phrases is incomplete, and elaboration is imperfect, and yet, notwithstanding all these imperfections, we can observe that the bird pairs as readily as does the adult. But even if we lacked this demonstrative evidence, we should still be justified in assuming that such must be the case, for we know from experience in the preservation of game, where there is no surer way of reducing the stock than by leaving too high a percentage of old cocks, that for the young bird to be at any disadvantage in competition with the adult is detrimental, if not disastrous, to the species. So that while there is plenty of evidence of variation in those particular qualities which appeal to our æsthetic faculties, there is at the same time evidence which demonstrates that such variations exercise no influence on the course of mating; and inasmuch as it is difficult to conceive of any voice departing more from the normal type in these particular qualities than the immature does from the adult, if there be degrees of suggestive influence, we must seek it in some other direction. There remain the two other characteristics which we found to be constant under all circumstances, namely, loudness and specific distinctness; and if, in addition to serving the purpose of disclosing the positions of the males, they serve to evoke some emotion in the female, which helps to further the biological end of mating, so much the more reason is there for their survival.

There can be no question that this ingenious and attractive theory, if it were true in its special application to song, would immensely simplify interpretation, and moreover that preferential mating would contribute not a little to the success of the whole territorial system. No one can deny the strength of the argument: that the sexual instinct, like all other instincts, must require a stimulus of an appropriate kind; that the effect of the sexual call upon the female cannot be neutral; and hence the probability that stimulation varies too; no one, I say, can question the strength of this evidence, and, one might add, of the evidence derived from the analogy of the human voice. But when we have said this, we have said all; and our acceptance of the hypothesis, so far as song is concerned, must remain provisional so long as the evidence remains but secondary evidence.

Comments

Log in to leave a comment.

Territory in Bird LifeChapter IV: The Relation of Song to the Territory (2)

0%15 min left in chapter