Chapter III: Part 3

Papilio Pylades is a species of the Butterfly tribe, of moderate size, in comparison with the generality of those which appertain to the same family, the _Equites Achivi_ of Fabricius. The upper surface exhibits an appearance of much simplicity and elegance: the disk is white, and the broad black limb, or border, by which it is surrounded, is marked with a number of spots and semilunar marks of white disposed with much regularity. The disk of the lower surface is also white, but surrounded with a pale brown, or fulvous limb, and marked with white spots in the same manner as the broad black border on the upper surface. A few of the white spots on this fulvous border are surrounded by black lines and spaces. There is also a red band marked with black and blueish spots, that extends along the main or anterior rib of the upper wings, from the base, as far as the middle of the wing, and a spot of red at the base of the posterior pair.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_14_

_London. Pub^d. as the Act directs by E. Donovan
& Mess.^{rs} Simpkin & Marshall Aug.^{st} 1, 1822._
]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORNITHOLOGY.

PLATE XIV.

AMPELIS CAYANA
PURPLE-THROATED CHATTERER.

PASSERES.

GENERIC CHARACTER.

Bill straight, convex, slightly incurvate: mandibles notched: nostrils covered with bristles: tongue acute, cartilaginous, bifid: middle toe connected at the base to the outer one.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER
AND
SYNONYMS.

Cærulean blue: neck beneath violet: quill and tail feathers black, edged with blue.

AMPELIS CAYANA: nitida cærulea, collo subtus violaceo. _Linn. Syst. 1.
p. 298. 6._—_Gmel. Syst. 1. p. 840._

AMPELIS CAYANA: nitida cærulea, collo subtus violaceo remigibus
rectricibusque nigris cæruleo marginatis. _Lath. Ind. Orn. 1.
365. 3._

Cotinga Cayanensis. _Briss. 2. p. 344. 32. t. 34. f. 3._

Lanius Ococolin. _Klein. av. p. 54. 6._—_Seba. ii. p. 102. t. 96. f. 3._

Cotinga de Cayenne, Quereiva. _Buff. 4. p. 444._—_Pl. Enl. 624._

Purple-Throated Chatterer. _Lath. Syn. 3. p. 95. 3._

* * * * *

The Purple-Throated Chatterer is assuredly one of the most beautiful of the feathered race, at present known; the general colour of the plumage, a blue of most transcendant brightness, and highly changeable, varying from a fine cærulean, or azure, to a green of equal delicacy and beauty. There is an intermixture of black disposed in spots throughout; one half of each feather, from the base, being black, and only the tips blue, so that the plumage appears more or less spotted with black, as the feathers are ruffled or misplaced from their natural position. The region of the chin and throat is of a beautiful crimson purple, whence its name of Purple-Throated Chatterer. The greater wing coverts are black, varied and spotted with blue: the quills and tail black with blue margins: the bill black with the lower mandible rather paler: the legs black.

This brilliant species of the Ampelis tribe has been sometimes denominated the Ultramarine Thrush, and not unfrequently the Ultramarine Starling: its size resembles that of the Starling, and there is also a general similitude in its form and manners, but it is, nevertheless generically distinct.

Inhabits Cayenne, and probably some other parts of South America.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_15_

_London. Published as the Act directs, by E.
Donovan & Mess.^{rs} Simpkin & Marshall Aug.^{st} 1, 1822._
]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCHOLOGY.

PLATE XV.

MUREX FOLIATUS
FOLIATED MUREX
OR, FOLIATED ROCK SHELL.

UNIVALVE.

GENERIC CHARACTER.

Shell spiral, rough with membranaceous sutures: aperture oval, ending in an entire straight or slightly ascending canal.

* Sutures expanding into crisped foliations: beak abbreviated PURPURA _Gmel._

SPECIFIC CHARACTER
AND
SYNONYMS.

Three rows of foliations: aperture one-toothed.

MUREX FOLIATUS: testa trifariam frondosa: apertura unidentata. _Gmel.
Linn. Syst. T. 1. p. 6. 3529. 174._—_Martyn Conch. 2. t. 66._

MUREX Purpura alata, testa triangulari, transversim costata trifariam frondosa, frondibus alatis membranaceis instructa cauda recta clausa, labro latissimo, labio adnato, apertura subovata, fauce alba. _Chemn. Conch. 10. f. 1538._

* * * * *

This is a shell far more remarkable for the singularity of its growth, than for any elegance or beauty of its colouring. The peculiarity of its character consists in the large, erect, and longitudinal foliations, which are disposed in three distinct, and nearly equi-distant series throughout the whole length of the shell: for they appear in continuity upon every whorl, from the base to the apex. It is from this peculiarity that the species has obtained the very appropriate appellation of foliatus, or Foliated Rock Shell.

In point of colour, as before observed, the Murex foliatus is not particularly conspicuous, and they are of a texture so delicate that it almost constantly occurs in a bleached or depauperated state; it is also a very fragile shell, and from this cause very liable to be broken. When in fine condition, as in the example selected, for the representation now before us, the general hue is a lacteal white; the body of the shell, externally, a deep tawny, with the foliations whitish, and the opening, or mouth of the shell, very delicately tinted with a violaceous hue. Sometimes the foliations have the appearance of fine white porcelain.

This is esteemed a scarce shell, and very rarely occurs perfect, or in a living state. Found on the sea coast of North America.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_16_

_London. Published as the Act directs by E.
Donovan & Mess.^{rs} Simpkin, & Marshall, Sept. 1, 1822._
]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCHOLOGY.

PLATE XVI.

MUREX SCORPIO
var MINOR
LEAST STAG’S HORN MUREX.

UNIVALVE.

GENERIC CHARACTER.

Shell spiral, rough with membranaceous sutures: aperture oval, ending in an entire straight, or slightly ascending canal.

* _Sutures expanding into crisped foliations: beak abbreviated._ PURPURA _Gmel._

SPECIFIC CHARACTER
AND
SYNONYMS.

Shell with four rows of foliations: spire capitate: beak truncated.

MUREX SCORPIO: testa quadrifariam frondosa: spira capitata, cauda
truncata. _Mus. Lud. Ulr. 628. n. 296._—_Gmel. Linn. Syst. T. 1.
p. 6. 3529. 14._—_Rumpf. Mus. t. 26. f. D._—_Seba. Mus. 3. tab.
77. fig. 13. 16._

Cochlis volutata muricata parva sex duplici laciniarum serie horrida, spiris quatuor capitatis faucibus, quasi Scorpionum forficulis armatis. _Purpura_ quæ SCORPIO Auctorum. _Chemn._

* * * * *

The extraordinary form of this very rare and singular kind of Murex cannot fail to interest the curious observer. The shell is of the spiral kind, with an oval aperture; the head of the spire large or tumid, and the first or body whorl beset with four distinct longitudinal rows or series of elongated foliations or processes. These last mentioned appendages are flat and somewhat cylindrical from the base nearly to their summits, where they become cleft or furcate, expanding most commonly into two, sometimes three, or rarely four distinct little lobes, and the radiation of these process by which the exterior margin of the aperture is encircled, have a groove or canal extending from the margin of the lip to the cleft or lobate summits.

The learned Seba, to whom this very remarkable shell, it appears, was known, has well observed in speaking of the Murices, which he describes, that this kind is more particularly distinguished by the greater disproportion of those advanced processes in comparison with the size of the body of the shell than any other of his species; so that their superior length in this respect was, in his opinion, to be considered truly characteristic of the species.* It is from these processes it may be also added, that this curious shell has been variously and not unfrequently fantastically designated by appellations that cannot very readily be reconciled in our ideas with any object they have been supposed to resemble, even admitting that latitude of fancy which may be tolerated when we are entirely aware that the assimilation is remote. Thus this shell has obtained in various languages names according with those of the Ragged Spike Whelk, the Stag’s Horn Whelk, the Skeleton, Water Trough, and others of no less vague import. The Least Ragged Whelk is a name assigned to it by our countryman Petiver: the Scorpion Shell is a very old name for it among the early collectors, it is the Murex Scorpio of Rumpfius. In France it was distinguished formerly by the name of _Patte de Crapaud_, (the Toad’s Foot) because, says the author of Davila’s Catalogue, besides the spires on the body, the exterior edge of the lip is bordered with others that are very large and flat at the extremity, and no doubt, for the same reason it is called by Seba _Bufonis Pedes_. It was known at that time also among the collectors in Holland by the name of the Stag’s Horn,[11] from a remote similitude which these processes are supposed to bear to the horns of that quadruped. And lastly, in conclusion it may be added, that for nearly half a century past it has been distinguished among the collectors of this country by a title not less whimsical, namely, the “Water Wheel,” from a fancied similitude the contour of the shell and its verticillation of processes bear to the circle and lamellar appendages or sweeps of a water wheel.

Not one of any of those various appellations, it must be confessed, appear so applicable and well chosen as to supersede the propriety of introducing any other that might be deemed tolerably appropriate, but upon the whole the species and varieties which it embraces have been so long known by the name of the Scorpion Shell, that there can be no great impropriety in allowing it to remain under that name: we have for our example the authority of Rumpfius, and the sanction of Linnæus throughout all his works; and in the Gmelinian System it also stands under the name of Murex Scorpio. The appellation of the Stag’s Horn Murex, in conformity with the epithet assigned to it by the old French writers “_bois de cerf_,” is not altogether inappropriate, the elongated processes have much the appearance of the antlers of the stag, in the first stages of their growth; or considered in the aggregate, the shell presents a number of ramose processes like the horns of the Stag or the Rein Deer, and some other quadrupeds of the Cervine tribe; a characteristic feature that may perhaps justify the appellation.

There are several varieties of this remarkable shell, some of which might at the first view be considered as distinct species, and in reality have been occasionally arranged as such by collectors. These upon the most attentive comparison do not, however, appear to differ specifically, notwithstanding the differences in point of colour are very striking. One variety rather exceeds the rest in size, and is of a deep testaceous or tawny brown colour, or rather inclining to a chesnut hue: we have seen it of a tawny tint with darker splashes upon the transverse ribs, particularly on the body and the tumid whorl of the spire. Occasionally this shell also occurs of a deep or Ethiopian blackness; this kind is extremely rare. The white variety occurs more frequently, but is, nevertheless, uncommon in comparison with the brown or testaceous kind: two examples of the white variety, clouded with yellow, appears to have occurred in the celebrated cabinet of the French collector Davilla, about the year 1776. He distinguishes them by the title of “deux petites _epineuses_,” and tells us they have six longitudinal sides like the “_rameuses_,” which are also named “Pattes de crapaud,” an epithet by which we are well aware the Linnæan Murex Scorpio was discriminated, and which therefore leads to a conclusion that the “epineuses” of a white colour, clouded with yellow, which that cabinet contained, were not specifically distinct from the shell at present under our consideration. When extremely fine the white variety of this shell is usually very delicately tinged with violet in all its shades and transitions of light.

All these varieties, as before observed, are very easily reconciled to the same species; nor is it ourselves alone that are inclined to this opinion. Seba, to whom the larger brown and white variety, were known, admits them as the same without any hesitation.[12] The expression “_Testa alba aut fusca_,” the Linnæan description of this shell in the cabinet of the Queen of Sweden, implies the like persuasion, and the authority of Chemnitz may be adduced still further in support of this opinion: Some modern writers have thought differently, but we must confess the distinctions they assign are by no means satisfactory to us. The larger shell is usually of a brown colour, but we have seen one of the white variety rather larger than any of the brown colour that have occurred to our notice.

The shell we have selected for the figures in the annexed plate is chosen rather for its extreme perfection than the superiority of size; we have observed it larger by nearly one half, but have not in any instance met with one more entirely perfect: it is delineated from the example of this very curious species in the late Leverian Museum.

This species which for a century past or more has maintained its reputation as a rare production is still held in much esteem, and bears a price proportionately considerable: it inhabits the shores of Southern Asia. Gmelin has the expression “_Habitat pretiosus et rarus in_ mari, Asiam australem _alluente_, _&c._” and describes the species as being either white, brown, or black.

-----

Footnote 11:

“Cornua cervina—_bois de cerf_.”—Seba.

Footnote 12:

“Horum processus admodum producti sunt; ut ideo Cornua cervina
appellentur ob qualemcunque similitudinem. Corpus tamen Cochleæ
semper pro ratione ramorum minus est, quam in Muricibus
superioribus.”[12a]—_Seba T. 3. tab. 77. p. 172._

Footnote 12a:

As _Murex ramosus_, of which several varieties are given in the plates
Seba, _Murex Saxatilis_, &c.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_17_

_London. Published as the Act directs, by E.
Donovan & Mess.^{rs} Simpkin & Marshall, Sept.^r 1, 1822._
]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORNITHOLOGY

PLATE XVII.

PSITTACUS GALGULUS
SAPPHIRE CROWNED PARRAKEET.

PICÆ.

GENERIC CHARACTER.

Bill falcated; upper mandible moveable, and in general covered with a cere: nostrils rounded, placed in the base of the bill: tongue fleshy, obtuse, entire: feet formed for climbing.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER
AND
SYNONYMS.

Green: rump and breast scarlet: crown of the male blue.

PSITTACUS GALGULUS: viridis, uropygio pectoreque coccineis, vertice
(maris) cæruleo.—_Linn. Amoen. ac. 4. p. 286._—_Mus. Ad. Fr. ii.
p. 16._—_Osbeck. it. 101._

PSITTACUS GALGULUS: viridis, uropygio pectoreque coccineis, vertice
cæruleo, lunula cervicis lutea, tectricibus caudæ rubris.—_Lath.
Ind. Orn. T. 1. 148. p. 131._

Perruche à tête bleue. _Buff. hist. nat. des. ois. 6. p. 163._

Petite perruche de Pérou. _Buff. pl. enlum. n. 190. f. 2._

Petite perruche de l’isle de Luçon. _Sonner, it. p. 76. t. 33._

Sapphire-Crowned Parrakeet. _Edw. glean. t. 293. f. 2._

* * * * *

This gay little creature is one of the smaller kind of the Psittacus or Parrot tribe, and of that family which is distinguished by having the tail short and equal at the end. Its size is rather less than that of our common house sparrow. The prevailing colour of the plumage a rich vernal green, deepest in its hues on the back and wings, and rather paler or more delicate in its tint beneath; the breast and rump scarlet; the feathers of the latter elongated and extending far over the tail, which is green; the crown of the head a beautiful Sapphirine blue. This appears to be the male bird. That which is considered as the female has a yellow spot upon the throat: it is destitute of any scarlet spot upon the breast, and the Sapphirine colour on the crown of the head is also wanting.

These are the characteristic distinctions observable generally in the species; besides which there are other less material particulars in which these birds are known to differ.

In some birds we find a yellow transverse stripe on the hind part of the neck, varying in colour from luteous to orange, and which is more or less conspicuous in different individuals. Others have a somewhat similar band of yellow, but which is situated at the back of the head instead of the neck. The first of these is distinguished by the name of the Sapphire Crowned Parrakeet, the other by that of the Phillippine Parrakeet. Dr. Latham has endeavoured to establish the characteristic distinctions of these two kinds in his _Index Ornithologicus_: he considers them as permanent varieties, but we must confess we regard them rather as accidental than permanent. The characteristic band of yellow by which they are to be discriminated chiefly, appears to be more or less developed in different birds at different periods of their growth; and in the absence of this character from the back of the head in the Phillippine Parrakeet, or the hind part of the neck in the Sapphire Crowned Parrakeet, the resemblance is so very near as to afford no certain means of distinguishing one from the other.

This bird has been long known in Europe. It appeared in the work of Edwards, the ingenious English Ornithologist, who lived about the middle of the last century. Linnæus describes the species with much critical minuteness in the fourth volume of his _Amoenitates Academicæ_, as PSITTACUS GALGULUS, _brachiurus viridis pectore uropygioque coccineis, vertice cæruleo_; and this description accords so exactly with the bird before us, that no doubt whatever can remain of its being exactly the variety which that eminent Naturalist has described.

Edwards informs us that this bird is a native of Sumatra; Osbeck met with it in Java, where he tells us it is known by the name of Parkicki. The title of Perruche de Pérou which it bears in _Pdl. Enl._ might induce a persuasion of its being an inhabitant of South America, which, however, is not believed among Ornithologists. We have already mentioned that it occurs in the Phillippine Islands, and that from this locality, the particular variety found there has obtained the appellation of the Phillippine Parrakeet.

We are indebted to Osbeck for a concise description of the manners of this interesting species when in a state of captivity, “if put into a cage,” observes this traveller, “it whistles very seldom and commonly grows quite sullen: it hangs itself with its feet so that the back is turned towards the earth, and seldom changes this situation: it is fed with boiled rice; in which manner, in the year 1752, one was brought to Gottenburgh.” It is probably this information to which Linnæus alludes in his Academic paper, delivered in 1760, where in speaking of the manners of this bird, he tells us it sleeps on trees, suspended by one foot with its head downwards, in order to escape the observation of the rapacious birds of night. The nest of these birds are described by Toreen. “We observed,” says this writer, “that their nests were remarkable for their exceeding fine texture, but we did not see the birds. If these nests were differently constructed, the monkies would be very mischievous to them; but now, before they can get to the opening, the lowest part, as the weakest, breaks into pieces, and the visitor falls to the ground without danger to the young birds.”

This bird is observed to be very partial to the fresh juice of the cocoa tree, which flows from the ends of the branches when the fruit has been fresh cut off; and which before it undergoes fermentation is said in taste to resemble new-made cyder.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_18_

_London. Published as the Act Directs, by E.
Donovan, & Mess.^{rs} Simpkin, & Marshall, Sept. 1, 1822._
]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ENTOMOLOGY.

PLATE XVIII.

PAPILIO ACAMAS
ACAMAS BUTTERFLY.

LEPIDOPTERA.

GENERIC CHARACTER.

Antennæ thicker towards the tip, and generally terminating in a knob: wings erect when at rest. Fly by day.

* EQUITES TROJANI.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER
AND
SYNONYMS.

Wings indented, caudated, or ending in a tail; brown, above and beneath the same colour; anterior wings with a yellow band, posterior wings with red, blue and yellow lunules.

PAPILIO ACAMAS: alis dentato caudatis concoloribus fuscis: anticis
fascia flava, posticis lunulis rubris cæruleis flavisque.—_Fabr.
Ent. Syst. T. 3. p. 1. 8. 22._—_Jon. fig. pict. 1. tab. 72._

* * * * *

Papilio Acamas is one among the number of those Papiliones, which, from their magnitude, as well as beauty, constitute the more attractive species of the first family of this interesting tribe, the _Equites Trojani_ of the Fabrician system. Papilio Acamas is scarcely surpassed in size by any other of the Papilio genus, and when it is added, as it may be with confidence, that the figure now presented to the reader is the first that has appeared in elucidation of such a noble species, we cannot doubt that its introduction will be received with pleasure by every Naturalist in this country and throughout Europe.

This fine and very striking species has been long since known by repute to Entomologists; but from the description only which Fabricius had left us in his _Entomologia Systematica_. Those conversant with this work of our author, will be aware, that Papilio Acamas constitutes one of those many species for which Fabricius refers only to the drawings of the late Mr. Jones: the present figure is a faithful copy of that original drawing referred to and described by Fabricius, and as such cannot fail to prove acceptable to every Entomologist. It is certainly the only figure extant by means of which the Fabrician species P. Acamas can be ascertained.

The identity of this species, it will hence appear, does not rest upon opinion or conjecture, and this circumstance must be deemed of no small importance in an enquiry of this nature. In the present instance it may be also added that this identity is essentially material to be considered, because there is another insect of the same tribe, the Papilio Laodocus of the same author, which assimilates so closely with it, that without due attention, the one might readily be confounded with the other. These two butterflies, however, although they appear so nearly allied, present characters which considered accurately, demonstrate very clearly that Fabricius was right in separating them. Fabricius adverting to this close affinity, observes, that in size and appearance Papilio Acamas agrees with Papilio Laodocus. The predominant colour of P. Acamas, he observes, is a dark or fuscous brown, much less inclining to black than P. Laodocus. The anterior wings in both species have a yellow transverse band: this band in P. Acamas extends from the anterior margin almost close to the posterior margin, and touches the posterior rib; in P. Laodocus this yellow band is abbreviated or shorter, of greater breadth, and placed more immediately towards the middle of the wing, the band in P. Acamas being situated rather nearer towards the exterior end of the wing. There is also a marginal series of yellow spots at the extremity of the anterior wings, the form of which is very singular, and affords a striking distinctive character of P. Acamas. There is also a characteristic difference observable in the markings of the posterior wings: in both species, on the upper as well as lower surface, those wings are elegantly marked with a distinct arch of red lunules, posterior to which is another of blue; beyond these in P. Acamas is a third series of lunules, rather larger than either of the former, the colour of which is bright yellow. There is a final or posterior arch of lunules in P. Laodocus, behind the two series of red and blue lunules, similar to those of P. Acamas, but they are smaller, and instead of yellow are white. And lastly, the body in P. Acamas is dark brown above and pale beneath: in P. Laodocus, on the contrary, the body beneath as well as above is black, with a longitudinal line each side the body.

We have been thus minute in pointing out precisely the differences that prevail between these two Papiliones, from a persuasion that they might perhaps be otherwise confounded together, either as the same species, or as varieties of each other. There is assuredly a general approximation in the appearance of those two insects, although they prove so very distinct upon a close and attentive comparison.

Papilio Acamas is a native of Jamaica: Papilio Laodocus of South America. A figure of P. Laodocus occurs in the work of Cramer, under the name of Papilio Glaucus.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_19_

_London. Published as the Act directs, by E.
Donovan & Mess.^{rs} Simpkin & Marshall, Oct.^r 1, 1822._
]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ENTOMOLOGY.

PLATE XIX.

PAPILIO HOMERUS
HOMER’S BUTTERFLY.

ORDER
LEPIDOPTERA.

GENERIC CHARACTER.

Antennæ thicker towards the tip, and generally terminating in a knob: wings erect when at rest. Fly by day.

* EQUITES ACHIVI.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER
AND
SYNONYMS.

Wings caudated or terminating in tails, black with a yellow band; lower ones yellowish beneath, with seven ocellar spots:

PAPILIO HOMERUS: alis caudatis nigris: fascia flava posticis subtus
flavescentibus: maculis ocellaribus septem.—_Fabr. Ent. Syst. T.
3, p. 1. 29. 85._

PAPILIO HOMERUS: _Jon. fig. pict. 1. tab. 8._

Corpus magnum nigrum. Alæ anticæ supra nigræ fascia maculari maculisque apicis flavis. Subtus anticæ concolores, at macula apicis tantum unica, marginalis, albida posticæ fuscæ, fascia media pallida maculis septem ocellaribus, atris iride rufa.

* * * * *

In the present instance, as in many others that will occur during the progress of this undertaking, we have the pleasure of introducing to the attention of the Naturalist, a species of the Papilio tribe, no less distinguished for its beauty than its rarity; and one, moreover, that has never been before depicted in the work of any author.

This magnificent Papilio, for to this appellation it is entitled truly, was one among the number of those rarities of the insect race which Fabricius met with in the Entomological Cabinets of the English Naturalists, when he paid a visit to this country about the year 1792, and the descriptions of which constitute a most invaluable and extensive portion of the work which he published subsequently upon the continent, under the title of _Entomologia Systematica_. Fabricius saw the drawing of this insect in the Collectanea of Paintings formed by the ingenious hand of that indefatigable and liberal Naturalist the late William Jones, Esq. of Chelsea, and was so delighted with its grandeur, as an insect altogether undescribed, that he determined upon assigning to it some name of pre-eminent distinction. The tribe of insects to which it naturally appertains in systematic classification, is that of the _Equites Achivi_; all the species of which are named after the Greeks, and more especially of those commemorated in the Iliad and the Odyssey: the heroes of the Trojan war. This rule determined his choice, and we may readily conceive his admiration of the species from the name selected upon this occasion, _Papilio Homerus_. If Homer had no claim to be considered as a Greek, he had sang the achievements of the Grecian heroes, and had mourned the fall of Troy; and Fabricius disposed alike to compliment the immortal bard, and define the species by an appellation more than usually superlative, has consecrated it to the memory of that ancient poet.

If we advert to the writings of Fabricius, it will be found that this author refers for a figure of this fine Papilio solely to the Paintings of Mr. Jones. The reference is to the eighth drawing of the first volume of his collectanea. This is perfectly correct, the figure occurs in that collection of paintings as Fabricius states, and in the part described. We have not only seen it there with the name assigned to it in _Entomologia Systematica_ PAPILIO HOMERUS inscribed in the hand-writing of Fabricius, but are at this time in possession of an exact copy of that drawing, taken by the express permission of its former very worthy proprietor; and it is from this copy of the original drawing so inscribed by Fabricius himself, that the very beautiful figure is taken which accompanies the present description.

Notwithstanding the general accuracy with which Fabricius has related the local circumstances connected with the history of the insects which he describes, there are occasionally errors in this respect it must be satisfactory to many of our readers to have corrected: errors, which, owing to the lapse of time and death of those distinguished Naturalists which Fabricius had the happiness of meeting with in England, we may venture to presume, without vanity, can be now corrected only through the medium of our assistance. The celebrity of Fabricius throughout Europe as one of the best informed Entomologists of the last century, renders it even of no small importance to correct the most trivial oversights he has committed; and this consideration will, we trust, afford us some apology for that minuteness, if not prolixity with which it may be requisite occasionally to relate particulars of a local nature, in order to correct such errors. An instance of this kind occurs in the note annexed to the Fabrician description of the Papilio now before us; in stating the local circumstances connected with its history, Fabricius says _Habitat in America_. _Dom Latham._ There is obviously an oversight in this passage, for we well know that the Fabrician description of this species was taken from the figure in the series of drawings painted by Mr. Jones, which has been already mentioned; the original of the figure now presented by us to the attention of our readers; and that the specimen of the insect itself from which that painting was taken was preserved at the time Fabricius described it in the celebrated collection of the late Mr. Dru Drury. As we had the pleasure of Mr. Drury’s acquaintance, as well as that of Mr. Jones, and had an unreserved access to the information and cabinets of both, we are enabled to speak upon this circumstance with confidence. The example of Papilio Homerus in the cabinet of Mr. Drury was perfectly familiar to us, it was ourselves who wrote the name _Homerus_, annexed to this insect in that cabinet; and so far as our recollection serves at the distant period of five and twenty years, Mr. Drury stated to us that he had received this individual specimen from the Island of Jamaica. We are in possession of the Entomological manuscripts of this venerable author, but among those we have in vain sought for any positive confirmation of this distant recollection. It appears certain that Mr. Drury had not entered it under the name of _Homerus_ in his catalogue after we had communicated that name to him; and which we did upon the authority of the Fabrician manuscripts annexed to the drawings of Mr. Jones. At the time Mr. Drury received this insect from his correspondent it was assuredly a nameless species, and was probably entered as such, with a number only; such omissions in the nomenclature being, of course, usual when the species proved to be undescribed, till proper names could be assigned to them. A gentleman of the name of Keuchan, and another of the name of Whiting, appear from these entries to be the only correspondents who furnished Mr. Drury with Papiliones of Jamaica; it was probably from the former that he obtained this majestic species; and that Mr. Drury obtained it about the year 1777. This _habitat_ would justify Fabricius in describing the insect as a native of America, although if the conclusion be correct, it might have been stated more distinctly as a native of that island.

At the dissolution of the fine collection of that indefatigable Entomologist, Mr. Drury, which took place by public sale in the month of May, 1805, this beautiful insect was purchased by another very eminent collector, Mr. John Francillon, at the price of _four pounds sterling_,[13] and subsequently at the death of this last mentioned individual, which happened in the year 1817, it passed with many others of the more costly rarities into the cabinet of Alexander Mc’Leay, Esq. S.L.S. &c.

With respect to the Fabrician reference to the cabinet of Dr. Latham, for it is to the cabinet of the venerable Ornithologist of that name the reference applies, we believe it is also in our power to explain its origin, having occasionally, through the kindness of its proprietor, consulted that cabinet, and finally, in conformity with his permission, written a catalogue of its contents. In that cabinet we certainly observed a Papilio allied to P. Homerus, but yet so far remote from it, that we could not venture to pronounce it the same; it may be a variety of the species, but is assuredly not the insect painted by Mr. Jones to which the synonyms of Fabricius allude.

Papilio Homerus is represented in its natural size in the annexed plate. Its colours are various and very beautifully disposed: the ground or prevailing colour is a deep or dark brown with a broad stripe of a yellowish hue across the middle of each wing, forming very nearly a band of that peculiar kind distinguished among Naturalists by the appellation of a common band. There is also a large and somewhat quadrangular spot of the same flavous colour upon the disk within and contiguous to the band, and beyond, towards the apex, a small sub-angular band composed of smaller flavous spots. Behind the yellow band, across the disk of the posterior wings, are a series of blue spots composed of many little shining points, which in the aggregate form a distinct spot of an ovate form, most brilliant towards the centre and paler towards the edge. And finally, there are three distinct sublunate spots of red on each posterior wing, one at the anal angle, and the other two at the posterior margin, one of which is situated on each side near the base of the tail. Beneath, the anterior wings are uniformly dark with a single pale or whitish marginal spot at the tip; the lower wings of a fuscous colour with seven ocellar spots of black, the iris of which are rufous.

-----

Footnote 13:

Lot 305, third day, Saturday, May 25th, 1805.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_20_

_London. Published as the Act directs, by E.
Donovan, & Mess.^{rs} Simpkin & Marshall, Oct.^r 1, 1822._
]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORNITHOLOGY.

PLATE XX.

PIPRA PUNCTATA
DOTTED OR SPECKLED MANAKIN.

PASSERES.

GENERIC CHARACTER.

Bill shorter than the head, strong, hard, nearly triangular at the base and slightly incurvate at the tip: nostrils naked. Feet gressorial: tail short.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER
AND
SYNONYMS.

Cinereous brown, beneath yellow: head, wings, and tail black with white dots: tail coverts red.

PIPRA PUNCTATA: griseo fusca, subtus flava, capite alis caudaque nigris
albo punctatis, tectricibus caudæ rubris.

PIPRA PUNCTATA. Greyish brown, waved with dusky: top of the head and
wings black speckled with white; tail coverts red. SPECKLED
MANAKIN, _Nat. Miscell. 111._

PARDALOTUS (punctatus) _Vieillot. Ornith. Elem. p. 31._

* * * * *

This pretty little species of Manakin is one among the number of those numerous acquisitions in the science of Natural History, for which the Naturalist is indebted to the prolific regions of Australasia. The very close affinity which it bears to the Gmelinian Pipra Nævia, a species described originally by Buffon under the title of _Fourmilier tacheté de Cayenne_, may possibly have occasioned some confusion among authors respecting this individual species, but there are still, if we mistake not, sufficient indications of the two birds being specifically distinct. This was the opinion of the late Dr. Shaw: he constituted a new species of the bird before us under the name of PIPRA PUNCTATA, and the english trivial of SPECKLED MANAKIN, and we are induced to follow that example from a persuasion that his conclusion was correct. Pipra Nævia, to which it is so nearly allied, has the throat and chin black, and the breast spotted with black: Pipra Punctata, on the contrary, has the throat and breast yellow, without any black spots. These differences afford a conspicuous distinction of the two birds, besides which, there are some others of less consideration that will appear upon an attentive comparison.

As a new species, it appears, therefore, pretty certain that we have to acknowledge the late Dr. Shaw as the first author by whom this interesting bird was introduced to the knowledge of the learned world: he describes it, as before observed, under the name of Pipra punctata. M. Vieillot is consequently in an error when he refers to authority of Dr. Latham for this name. The bird was so designated in the first instance, in the work entitled the _Naturalist’s Miscellany_, written by Dr. Shaw; nor was the species mentioned by Dr. Latham either in his Synopsis or his Index Ornithologicus. In a final or second supplement published by Dr. Latham long after the Synopsis, we find the bird mentioned under the name of the _Speckled Manakin_, but only upon the authority of the Naturalist’s Miscellany of Shaw, and a drawing of the bird by General Davies, for at that late period even, the bird appears to be unknown to Dr. Latham, except upon those two authorities. This observation is the more material since the Ornithologist M. Vieillot in dividing the Linnæan Genus Pipra into two Genera, Pardalotus and Pipra, assigns for the type of his genus PARDALOTUS the “_Pipra punctata_” of Latham, at the same time, as we have already shewn, the works of Dr. Latham affords us no such name. The present species was described under the appellation of _Pipra punctata_ only by Dr. Shaw. Dr. Latham does not adopt this name, he records the species only under the trivial english name of the Speckled Manakin, which name had also been assigned before by Dr. Shaw. If, therefore, the name of Pipra punctata had occurred to M. Vieillot, it must have been in the work of Dr. Shaw, and not of Dr. Latham. Perhaps Vieillot had inadvertently imagined this Speckled Manakin to be the same as the Spotted Manakin of Dr. Latham’s Synopsis. If this be really the source of error, it may be added, that this latter bird appears to have been described by Dr. Latham upon the authority only of Planches Enluminées, and is no other than Pipra Nævia of Gmelin, as Dr. Latham has himself pointed out in his Index Ornithologicus.

The description of this bird, as it occurs in the first instance, in the works of Dr. Shaw, is to this effect. PIPRA PUNCTATA (SPECKLED MANAKIN) _grisea_, _fusco undulata_, _vertice alisque nigris_, _albo punctatis tectricibus caudæ rubris_. The notice of the species as before-mentioned in Dr. Latham’s second Supplement is subsequent to this, and appears only under the trivial name of the Speckled Manakin.

In adverting to the separation of the Pipra genus as it occurs in the work of M. Vieillot, it will not be amiss to point out precisely those distinctions, which, according to his mode of classification, constitute the characters of those two genera into which he has divided them. The first of these genera denominated PARDALOTUS comprehends those species of the Pipra genus in which the form of the bill is very short in proportion to its length, a little robust or stout, the base dilated upon the edges, entire, conoid, thick at the point, the upper mandible a little bent, and the lower one convex beneath. Those birds which are allowed to remain in the Pipra genus have the bill conoid, trigonal at the base, compressed at the sides near the end, cut off and curved at the point, the lower mandible turning up at the extremity; and the exterior toes connected rather beyond the middle. It may be added, finally, that Cuvier, on the contrary, in his _Règne Animal_, allows the Manakins (Pipra of Linnæus) to remain united as before. He does not adopt the genus Pardalotus, and this circumstance is the more worthy of note since we have seen the species arranged in our Museums with the synonymous appellation of “PARDALOTUS PUNCTATUS _Cuvier_,” and have observed it designated as the type of Cuvier’s New Genus Pardalotus.

This interesting little creature being represented in its natural size in the plate annexed, it will be perceived to be one of the smaller tribes of the feathered race: we have even few birds in England more diminutive, for in point of magnitude it does not exceed that of our common willow-wren, its length being only about four inches. The elegance of its plumage, is, however, in a peculiar degree attractive, and more than amply compensates for this inferiority in size. The general colour above is cinereous brown, varying to a cinereous purple; the throat and breast a delicate fulvous yellow; the crown of the head black spotted with white; the wings, except the coverts, which are the same colour as the back, are black, and the tip of each of these black feathers are marked with a spot of white. The rump coverts are testaceous, becoming gradually redder towards the end: the tail itself is black, having the base of a fine crimson with some intermixture of yellow; and in general, though not invariably, there is a white dot at the tip of each of the tail feathers; sometimes it is only the outer feather on each side the tail that is marked with a white dot. Beneath, the throat and breast is of a delicate yellow colour; the bill black, and legs brown.

In the plate that accompanies this description, this elegant little bird appears perched upon a sprig of the _ovate leaved Goodenia_, GOODENIA OVATA, a vegetable production of the Australasian regions, that flowered in the month of July, during the present year, in the Royal Gardens, Kew.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_21_

_London. Published as the Act directs, by E.
Donovan & Mess.^{rs} Simpkin & Marshall, Oct.^r 1, 1822._
]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCHOLOGY.

PLATE XXI.

VOLUTA PYRUM
PEAR VOLUTE.

_Front View._
UNIVALVE.

GENERIC CHARACTER.

Spiral; aperture without a beak, and somewhat effuse; pillar twisted or plaited, generally without lips or perforation.

**** FUSIFORM.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER
AND
SYNONYMS.

Shell obovate and slightly tailed with striated whorls on the spire: tip produced and glabrous: pillar with three plaits.

VOLUTA PYRUM: testa obovata subcaudati; spiræ anfractibus striatis;
apice producto glaberrimo, columella triplicata.—_Gmel. Linn.
Syst. Nat. T. 1. p. 6. 3463. 102._—_List. Conch, t. 815. f.
25._—_Bonann. recr et Mus. Kircher. 3. f. 194._—_Knorr. Vergn.
6. f. 39. f. 1._—_Gualt. test. t. 46. f. C._—_Martini. Conch. 3.
t. 95. f. 916. 917._—(B.) _List. Conch. t. 816. f.
26._—_Martini. Conch. 3. t. 95. f. 918. 919._—_Knorr. Vergn. 6.
t. 27. f. 2._—(D.) _Chemn. Conch. 9. t. 104. f. 884. 885._—(8.)
_Chemn. Conch. 9. t. 104. f. 886. 887._

* * * * *

The animal inhabitant of this shell, according to the generical definition of Linnæus, is a kind of Limax; the Limax is one of the Mollusca Tribe, or animals furnished with limbs; the mouth is placed before, it has a lateral perforation, the feelers are four in number, and the vent common with the lateral pore. This is the Linnæan character of the animal inhabitant of the Voluta Genus, and consequently of the species now before us.

It is not to be disputed that the discoveries which have taken place among the vermes of those testaceous bodies since the time of Linnæus, have introduced us to a far more extensive acquaintance with the beings of this nature than Linnæus could have possessed. The term Limax, which Linnæus applied not only to the animal inhabitants of the Voluta family, but also to the Buccinum, the Strombus, the Murex, the Trochus, the Turbo, in short to almost every genus of the Univalves, and some even of the Bivalves could not fail to excite remark. It could scarcely be conceived that in the very ample range of the creation which those genera embraced, such uniformity could prevail, and the subsequent observations of various Naturalists have tended fully to assure us that the Linnæan character of the animal inhabitants of the testaceous tribes was much too vague and comprehensive. There are indeed, it must be confessed, a considerable number of those testaceous bodies, the animals of which are still unknown, and may possibly so remain, but forming our conclusions, from the great multitude that has been recently discovered, and the number of those which have been examined with anatomical attention, we may presume, with safety, that the Linnæan Limaces ought properly to be divided into several distinct genera. How far a methodical distribution of the shells themselves, founded upon the zoological distinctions of the animal inhabitants, may be admissible in our cabinets appears less certain. The greater number of those shells, of which the animals are totally unknown, present insuperable objections; and the attention of collectors in the formation of the Conchological Cabinet, so rarely extend beyond the more obvious characters which the structure of the shells present, that we can scarcely deem it practicable.

The animal of the shell before us, Voluta pyrum, has been ascertained and well described by Lamarck, De Montfort, and other writers; it has the head armed with two obtuse feelers of a club-like form; the eyes advanced and placed at the base, at the outerside of those feelers; the mantle or fleshy covering terminating in an elongation folded into a kind of tube above the head; the foot, or disk, strong and muscular, and armed with a small round horny operculum.

According to the Linnæan classification, the shelly covering of this animal is a Voluta; and so far as the most prominent criterion of the Voluta genus, the folds or plaits upon the pillar lip be considered, this character is unequivocal. Linnæus regarding this as one of its most essential definitions, has overlooked the differences that prevail in the structure of the spire and beaks, or includes them only as distinctions of the different families into which his Volutæ are divided. Later writers differ upon this subject; these differences are considered by many as generical, and thus the Linnæan Volutæ have become separated into several distinct genera. In the shell before us, the beak is lengthened or produced, and canaliculated; and thus constitutes in the classification of Lamarck, a species of his TURBINELLA; and is the shell in particular which he adopts as the type of that genus. The character of that genus, as proposed by this Conchologist, in his work entitled _Animaux sans vertèbres_, is thus expressed, Turbinelle (Turbinella) a shell turbinated or subfusiform, canaliculated to the base, and having upon the column from three to five plaits or folds of a compressed form and placed transversely. Murex scolymus of Martini, Voluta ceramica of Lister, and Voluta capitellum of the same author, are comprehended with the Linnæan Voluta pyrum in this genus Turbinellus.

It has been observed by De Montfort that Lamarck has made a group of those shells which accord with the above character, and which he himself adopts with some small variations: according to this writer, the genus Turbinelle, of which our Voluta Pyrum is considered as the type, has the shell heavy, univalve, with an obtuse spire ending in a nipple; the mouth sloping and lengthened; the pillar denticulated with large equal folds or plaits, the outer lip strait and cut off, and the base lengthened.

After all the pains, however, which Lamarck and other Continental Naturalists have taken to establish the genus Turbinella, Cuvier in his Règne Animal observes that the shells of this genus differ in no other respect from the Conic Volutes than in the prolongation of their opening, forming a kind of canal, and adding that it is not easy to trace the limits between the one and the other.

We have experienced some surprise in observing that while so much attention has been bestowed by writers upon the generical distinctions of Voluta Pyrum, the differences that prevail in its presumed varieties have almost entirely escaped attention. It should be remarked that in the Gmelinian constitution of this species there are no less than four distinct varieties, all which, according to Gmelin, and subsequently to other writers, appertain to the Linnæan species Pyrum. From the synonymous references which Lamarck has brought together in one view, it is obvious that his opinion is the same; his TURBINELLA PYRUM, which is the same as the Linnæan Voluta Pyrum, will be observed to comprehend the several presumed varieties of the species to be found in the works of Martini and Chemnitz, and the same is again observable in the works of Denys de Montfort. There are, however, some Conchologists in England who do not agree in this particular, for they constitute at least three distinct species of the presumed varieties of Voluta Pyrum. This division of the species was first proposed by Dr. Solander, and has been subsequently adopted in several of our English Cabinets. As the particulars of this arrangement may not prove unacceptable, we shall proceed to describe them.

To the _first_ of these new species Dr. Solander retains the Linnæan name of VOLUTA PYRUM, it is that kind which has the beak elongated, and is known by the familiar name of the LONG BEAKED TURNIP SHELL. This is the Voluta rostrata of some Conchologists; Rapum rostratum of the Colonnian Museum; and inhabits the seas of Tranquebar.

As the preceding shell is distinguished by the name of the Long beaked Turnip Shell, in allusion to the elongated structure of the beak, there is another known by the appellation of the High Spired Turnip Shell, in reference to the greater elevation of its spire; this is a _second_ species of Solander, and is called by him VOLUTA PONDEROSA; in the Calonnian Museum it stood under the name of Rapum productum. This shell inhabits the seas of Madagascar, and is the kind which becomes the more immediate object of our consideration as the subject of our present plate.

The _third_ kind of Turnip Shell is from the straits of Malacca, a shell more ponderous than the preceding; of a broader form and having the spire more depressed. This is the common Heavy Turnip Shell of our English Cabinet, Voluta gravis of Solander.

These distinctions proposed by the late Dr. Solander are found conformable, in a particular degree, with the classification observable in the cabinet of M. de Colonne. The shells of M. de Colonne, it appears, were thus arranged by the celebrated Conchologist M. Favanne. They have, nevertheless, we believe, passed unnoticed by any of the modern writers upon this subject. The distinctions are certainly obvious, and might probably fully authorize their separation into species: it must be at least admitted that as varieties of the same species they are strikingly distinct.

Having so far treated upon the generical distinctions of Voluta Pyrum, and pointed out the differences that exist among its principal supposed varieties, we arrive at another point of view in which the history of this shell becomes no less important, or less worthy of our consideration: the sacred character which from some superstitious causes, remote beyond all research of the present race of men, this shell has acquired in the Mythology of the Indian Nations: in the rites and worship of the Indian Brahma. Among these people this shell is called the CHANK, or SACRED CHANK, the emblem of an attribute of the divine power, and is constantly seen in one of the hands of the Indian Deity Vishnu, as a type of the renovation of the earth from the waters of the deluge.—The cause of this catastrophe of the earth, the deluge, they attribute to the wickedness of mankind in remote ages, which incensing the divine Brahma, he caused a flood of the waters to overflow the earth and destroy every vestige of the creation, animate and inanimate, that existed upon its surface. After awhile the supreme Brahma disposed to restore creation, commanded Vishnu to deliver the earth from the flood of waters, and in testimony of its deliverance Vishnu bears in his hand the Chank Shell, the symbol of its renovation.[14]

Without proceding at any considerable length into the history of those mythological persuasions, it may be permitted to observe that as a type of the divine power in relieving the earth from the flood of waters with which it was overwhelmed at the time of the deluge, this shell is held among the Indians of the Brahma persuasion as one of the most sacred emblems of that figurative divinity; and this religion, it will be remembered, extends over no small portion of India and China, and even to part of Russia and Tartary. Vishnu, as one of the three attributes or triad of Brahma, almost invariably appears with this symbol in his hand. Whether in their paintings, sculptures, or carvings, or in the sacred paraphernalia of their temples, the Chank-shell is the customary type of their deity Vishnu, and sometimes it occurs in the hands of the inferior deities,[15] to whom Vishnu is imagined to have confided a portion of his power. If the Chank be the object of their devotion in health, so also it is the object of their superstitions in sickness and in death. The medicine administered by the Priest to his patient in the time of illness, from the spout of one of these shells, is considered of greater efficacy than if taken from any other drinking vessel; that from the spout of a reversed shell has a reputation inestimable. These reversed shells occur so rarely, that if at any time some happy fortunate of the fishing tribe of Hindoos should be so lucky as to find one, he is indeed considered as a mortal favoured by their divinity Vishnu; this treasure of the deep is immediately deposited in one of their pagodas, to the great honour and happiness of the discoverer. A dose of medicine from such a shell is deemed infallible, if the malady of the patient be within the art of medicine to cure; for if this should fail, they rest persuaded nothing else can save the patient from the death awaiting him.