Belon, 1555
Let’s come further back to
the past, again to 1555. Pierre Belon, wasn’t a typical naturalist of
his time. He did one of the firsts scientific trips in history, to the Eastern
Mediterranean and Middle East, including Greece ,
Turkey , Palestine ,
Arabia , Egypt … between 1546 and 1549.
He was killed in Bois
de Boulogne, in Paris , when he was returning to Chateau
de Madrid, where he lived.
L'Histoire de la nature des oyseaux is a great work but, unfortunately outshined by its contemporary and more complete Historia animalium by Conrad Gesner.
He describes the cormorant very clearly, giving data
on its behaviour and habitat. For instance, he mentions that it is among the
few web-footed birds that can roost on a branch. Nevertheless, the illustration
cannot be more confusing.
.
Posture is atypical for a cormorant or any related
species, but, more importantly, it has no webbed toes. Besides the lack of
feather tuft, it resembles a compact NBI. However, Belon says: Phalacrocorax & Coroni
thalassios en Grec, Corvus aquaticus en Latin, Cormarant en Francoys. That
is, bald raven (phalacrocorax) and sea crow (coroni thalassios)
became synonyms to cormorant. There was always some confusion, apparently,
between descriptions of Northern Bald Ibis and Cormorant, which caused,
apparently, the transfer of the name Phalacrocorax
from the one to the other. Some authors, like Gesner, or later, Aldrovandi, tried
to clarify, but the statement by Belon started a deeper confusion.
Aldrovandi tried to correct the incongruence between
the description and the image and “retouched” the illustration, with a position
closer to a cormorant, and new legs and feet. If we reverse the plate, we can
see that the head is almost identical with the body just in a different in
position..
So, what is Phalacrocorax
bellonii? A chimera, a hybrid animal with parts of several different birds? But, which bird is depicted in the original
plate by Belon? Probably, this author was over confident with the identity of
the two separate species and he therefore took an image of a bald ibis and removed
the tuft which he maybe assumed to be just an embellishment.
Jonston, 1657
He published Historiae
naturalis de avibus libri VI cum aeneis figuris in
Again a virtual library, in this case from Strasbourg
Universities, allows us to see the whole text. |
On this detail from plate 47 we can see, again, the
images taken from Gesner and Aldrovandi. Both are taken from the originals (and
both are mirror images from the original prints). The text confirms the
confusion. Aldrovandi’s bird is described as if it was a cormorant, even though
it does not have webbed feet, and Jonston accepts to include it among
web-footed birds. He also criticised the
inclusion of Gesner’s bird among web-footed species, even though it remains
there.
There is a short text in French, probably also
included in one French edition of Historiae naturalis (up to the 18th
century). If checked carefully, we can see that the copper plates have been
retouched or even redone, because there are some minor differences in feather
detail.
Whoever prepared the plates, added between both NBI
drawings, the name Corbeau Hupe (in
current French would be corbeau huppe, crested raven). Maybe the author could identify both images as the same
species? The first name given by Linnaeus to Northern bald ibis was Upupa eremita. As Upupa are hoopoes,
maybe the author of the short text was familiar with Systema naturae, or maybe the Swedish naturalist just took a
popular name for the bird.
A whole century later, a curious François-Alexandre
Aubert de La Chesnaye des Bois was
devoted to compiling and publishing a large number of works in different fields. His Dictionnaire
raisonné universel des animaux, ou le règne animal, consistant en quadrupèdes,
cétacés, oiseaux, reptiles, poissons, insectes, vers, etc. published in 1759 includes corbeau
de bois, forest raven, and records, almost verbatum, previous authors. His corbeau
hupé (that
is, crested crow) is not the same that appears in the Recueil. There are no images, but the description is unmistakable.
He mentions the confusion of some concerning
this species and former authors’ Phalacrocorax..
Read part 3
Read part 3
No comments:
Post a Comment