The Ornithology of Shakespeare Part 28

The c.o.c.k and Pye (_i.e._ Magpie) was an ordinary ale-house sign, and may thus have become a subject for the vulgar to swear by. Douce, however, ascribes to it a less ign.o.ble origin, and his interpretation is too ingenious to be pa.s.sed over in silence:--"It will no doubt be recollected that in the days of ancient chivalry it was the practice to make solemn vows or engagements for the performance of some considerable enterprise. This ceremony was usually performed during some grand feast or entertainment, at which a roasted peac.o.c.k or pheasant being served up by ladies in a dish of gold or silver, was thus presented to each knight, who then made the particular vow which he had chosen with great solemnity. When this custom had fallen into disuse, the peac.o.c.k nevertheless continued to be a favourite dish, and was introduced on the table in a pie, the head, with gilded beak, being proudly elevated above the crust, and the splendid tail expanded. Other birds of less value were introduced in the same manner, and the recollection of the old peac.o.c.k vows might occasion the less serious, or even burlesque, imitation of swearing not only by the bird itself, but also by the _pye_; and hence, probably, the oath 'by c.o.c.k and pye,' for the use of which no very old authority can be found."

_Shallow._ "By c.o.c.k and pye, sir, you shall not away to-night."--_Henry IV._ Part II. Act v. Sc. 1.

[Sidenote: c.o.c.k-FIGHTING.]

The pastime of c.o.c.k-fighting, to which Shakespeare has alluded in _Antony and Cleopatra_, is no doubt of some antiquity. Strutt, in his "Sports and Pastimes of the People of England," does not give any history of its introduction, but quotes from Burton (1660), and Powell (1696), to show that the sport was well known at those dates. It was much in vogue in Shakespeare's day, and the great dramatist is probably not wrong in leading us to suppose that it was first introduced by the Romans:--

"His c.o.c.ks do win the battle still of mine, When it is all to nought."

_Antony and Cleopatra_, Act ii. Sc. 3.

"c.o.c.k-fighting took place generally between August and May. Six weeks before a battle, the champions were confined in separate pens, and fed with bread. Their spurs were then wrapped in leather, and they were allowed to spar, and sweated in straw baskets, and fed with sugar-candy, chopped rosemary, and b.u.t.ter, to strengthen them and give them wind.

Roots dipped in wine, and oatmeal kneaded with ale and eggs, were also allowed them, as purges and diaph.o.r.etics. Every day the feeder had to lick his bird's eye, and lead and encourage him to pursue a dunghill fowl which he held in his arms, and ran with before him. The last fortnight the sparring was discontinued, and four days next allowed before the bird was brought into the pit, and always fasting.

"In matching birds, it was necessary to consider their strength and length--the weak, long bird rising with more ease, and the short, strong bird giving the surer and deadlier blow.

"The game c.o.c.ks were prepared for battle by cutting off the mane all but a small ruff, and clipping off the feathers from the tail. The wings were cut short, and sharp points left, to endanger the eye of the antagonist. The spurs were sc.r.a.ped and sharpened, but steel spurs were not used at this early period, though the sport was as old as the Athenians. The preparation was completed by removing all the feathers from the crown of the head. The feeder, then licking his pupil all over, turned him into the pit, to win his gold and move his fortune.

"The birds were generally brought into the arena in linen bags, in which they came from Norwich or Wisbeach.

"They began the combat by whetting their beaks upon the ground, and continued the fight till they were both blind, or faint from loss of blood. The feeder had to suck the wounds of the living bird, and powder them with dust of the herb Robert. If the eye were hurt, the c.o.c.ker chewed ground ivy, and applied the juice to the wound."[92]

[Sidenote: ANCESTRY OF DOMESTIC c.o.c.k.]

Whether the various breeds of domestic fowls have diverged by independent and different roads from a single type, which is most probable, or whether they have descended from several distinct wild species, as some naturalists maintain, is a question which can scarcely be answered in the present treatise. A separate volume might be written on the subject. Nevertheless, the general opinion is that all the various breeds have descended from a common wild ancestor--the _Gallus bankiva_ of India. This species has a wide geographical range. It inhabits Northern India as far west as Scinde, and ascends the Himalaya to a height of 4,000 feet. It is found in Burmah, the Malay Peninsula, the Indo-Chinese countries, the Philippine Islands, and the Malayan Archipelago, as far eastward as Timor. Mr. Darwin has shown[93] that it varies considerably in the wild state, and observes[94] that "from the extremely close resemblance in colour, general structure, and especially in voice, between _Gallus bankiva_ and the game-fowl; from their fertility, as far as this has been ascertained, when crossed; from the possibility of the wild species being tamed, and from its varying in the wild state, we may confidently look at it as the parent of the most typical of all the domestic breeds, namely, the game-fowl. It is a significant fact that almost all the naturalists in India, namely, Sir W. Elliot, Mr. S. N. Ward, Mr. Layard, Mr. T. C. Jerdon, and Mr. Blyth, who are familiar with _Gallus bankiva_, believe that it is the parent of most or all of our domestic breeds."

[Sidenote: THE PEAc.o.c.k.]

Another species of Eastern origin noticed by Shakespeare is the Peac.o.c.k (_Pavo cristatus_):--

"Let frantic Talbot triumph for awhile, And, like a peac.o.c.k, sweep along his tail; We'll pull his plumes and take away his train."

_Henry VI._ Part I. Act iii. Sc. 3.

And elsewhere--

"Why, he stalks up and down like a peac.o.c.k,--a stride and a stand."--_Troilus and Cressida_, Act iii. Sc. 3.[95]

aelian says peac.o.c.ks were brought into Greece from some barbarous country, and were held in such estimation that a pair was valued at Athens at 1,000 drachmae, or 32 5_s._ 10_d._ Peac.o.c.ks' crests in ancient times were among the ornaments of the Kings of England.

Ernald de Aclent paid a fine to King John in 150 palfreys, with sackbuts, lorains, gilt spurs, and peac.o.c.ks' crests, such as would be for his credit.

Whether our birds are descended from those introduced into Europe in the time of Alexander, or have been subsequently imported, is doubtful. They vary but little under domestication, except in sometimes being white or piebald.[96]

[Sidenote: ITS INTRODUCTION.]

A curious fact with respect to the peac.o.c.k may here be noticed, namely, the occasional appearance in England of the "j.a.panned" or "black-shouldered" kind. This form has been regarded by Mr. Sclater as a distinct species, under the name of _Pavo nigripennis_, and he believes it will hereafter be found wild in some country, but not in India, where it is certainly unknown.[97] These j.a.panned birds differ conspicuously from the common peac.o.c.k, and can be propagated perfectly true.

Nevertheless, Mr. Darwin gives it as his opinion that "the evidence seems to preponderate strongly in favour of the black-shouldered breed being a variation, induced either by the climate of England, or by some unknown cause, such as reversion to a primordial and extinct condition of the species."[98]

Formerly the peac.o.c.k was in much request for the table, but now-a-days the species appears to be preserved for ornament rather than use.

According to the "Northumberland Household Book," the price of a peac.o.c.k for the table in 1512 was twelvepence; but we must recollect that this was a much larger sum in those days than it is now considered to be.

[Sidenote: THE TURKEY.]

Shakespeare has committed a curious anachronism in introducing the domestic Turkey in the play of _Henry IV._, the species being unknown in England until the later reign of Henry VIII. The pa.s.sage referred to runs thus:--

_First Carrier._ "'Odsbody! the turkeys in my pannier are quite starved. What, ostler!"--_Henry IV._ Part I. Act ii. Sc. 1.

[Sidenote: ITS INTRODUCTION INTO ENGLAND.]

The turkey was imported into Spain by the Spanish discoverers in the New World, early in the sixteenth century, its wild prototype being the _Gallipavo Mexicana_ of Gould, and from Spain it was introduced into England in 1524. In 1525 a rhyme was composed, celebrating the introduction of this bird, as well as other good things, into this country:--

"Turkies, carps, hoppes, piccarell, and beere, Came into England all in one yeare."[99]

A writer in the "Encyclopaedia Britannica" says:--

"This fowl was first seen in France in the reign of Francis I., and in England in that of Henry VIII. By the date of the reigns of these monarchs, the first turkies must have been brought from Mexico, the conquest of which was completed A.D. 1521."[100]

"These facts," observes Mr. Blyth,[101] "are generally known, but not the fact for which there is abundant evidence, that the _domestic_ turkey was introduced _from Europe_ into the North American colonies, where a kindred wild species abounded in the forest."

[Sidenote: TURKEY-FOWL AND GUINEA-FOWL.]

The origin of the English name turkey, as applied to a bird indigenous to America, has provoked much discussion. The best explanation is that given by Mr. Blyth, in the work last quoted[102]:--

"It is certain," he says, "that the _Guinea-fowl_ was commonly termed the _Turkey-hen_ in former days, and hence a difficulty sometimes in knowing which bird is meant by sundry old authors. As the Portuguese discoveries along the west coast of Africa preceded those of the Spaniards in America, there is reason to infer that our British ancestors became acquainted with the guinea-fowl prior to their knowledge of the turkey; and the English trade being then chiefly with the Levantine countries, our ancestors may well have fancied that it came from thence. Referring to a curious old dictionary in my possession (published in 1678) for the word _Melcagris_, I find it translated 'a Guinny or Turkey Hen:' _Gallinae Africanae sen Numidicae_, Var. 'sine quae vulgo Indicae' (_Coq d'Inde_ of the French, corrupted into _Dinde_ and _Dindon_!). Again, _Numidica guttata_ of Martial is rendered 'a Ginny or Turkey Hen.' Looking also into an English and Spanish Dictionary of so late a date as 1740, I find _Gallipavo_ rendered 'a Turkey or Guinea c.o.c.k or Hen.' Well, it is known that our British forefathers originally derived the domestic turkey from Spain, and meanwhile they are likely to have obtained a knowledge of the true _habitat_ of the guinea-fowl, and therefore may very probably have supposed the former to be the real _turkey_-fowl, as distinguished from the _guinea_-fowl; and if the word 'fowl' be dropped in the one instance and not in the other, be it remembered that there was another special meaning for the word _Guinea_, having reference to the Gold Coast, otherwise the bird might have come to be known as the 'guinea,' as the bantam-fowl is now currently designated the 'bantam,' and the canary-bird as the 'canary,' or the turkey-fowl the 'turkey.' The Latin-sounding name _Gallipavo_ seems to be of Spanish origin, and obtains among the Spaniards to this day; but their earliest name for it was '_Pavon de las Indias_,' 'c'est-a-dire,'

as Buffon remarks, '_Paon des Indes Occidentales_;' which explains the reference to India perpetuated in '_Dindon_.'"

The turkey is again mentioned by Shakespeare in _Twelfth Night_, where Fabian, speaking of Malvolio to Andrew Aguecheek, says:--

"Contemplation makes a rare turkey-c.o.c.k of him: how he jets under his advanc'd plumes!"--_Twelfth Night_, Act ii. Sc. 5.

[Sidenote: THE PIGEON:]

The Pigeon and the Dove are repeatedly mentioned in the works of Shakespeare, although on different grounds. The former bird is noticed as a letter-carrier (_t.i.tus Andronicus_, Act iv. Sc. 3), as an article of food (_Henry IV._ Part II. Act v. Sc. 1), and as an example of conjugal fidelity and attachment to offspring (_As You Like It_, Act i.

Sc. 2, and Act iii. Sc. 3). The latter is alluded to as the emblem of peace (_Henry IV._ Part I. Act iv. Sc. 1.; _Henry VIII._ Act iv. Sc. 1), modesty (_Taming of the Shrew_, Act iii. Sc. 2), patience (_Hamlet_, Act v. Sc. 1), innocence (_Henry VI._ Part II. Act iii. Sc. 1), fidelity (_Troilus and Cressida_, Act iii. Sc. 2; _Winter's Tale_, Act iv. Sc.

3), and love (_Venus and Adonis_; _Henry VI._ Part I. Act ii. Sc. 2; _Romeo and Juliet_, Act ii. Sc. 5).

In one pa.s.sage only is the word "dove" used synonymously for "pigeon."

In _Romeo and Juliet_ we are told of the nurse "sitting in the sun under the _dove_-house wall" (Act i. Sc. 3).

[Sidenote: ITS EARLY DOMESTICATION.]

The practice, here alluded to, of keeping pigeons in a domesticated state is of very ancient date. Mr. Darwin has been at considerable pains to collect information upon this point, and in his admirable work "On the Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication," he gives the following results:--

[Sidenote: PIGEON-FANCIERS.]

"The earliest record, as has been pointed out to me by Professor Lepsius, of pigeons in a domesticated condition, occurs in the fifth Egyptian dynasty, about 3000 B.C.; but Mr. Birch, of the British Museum, informs me that the pigeon appears in a bill of fare in the previous dynasty.[103] Domestic pigeons are mentioned in Genesis, Leviticus, and Isaiah. In the time of the Romans, as we hear from Pliny, immense prices were given for pigeons; 'nay, they are come to this pa.s.s, that they can reckon up their pedigree and race.' In India, about the year 1600, pigeons were much valued by Akber Khan: 20,000 birds were carried about with the court, and the merchants brought valuable collections. 'The monarchs of Iran and Turan sent him some very rare breeds. His Majesty,' says the courtly historian, 'by crossing the breeds, which method was never practised before, has improved them astonis.h.i.+ngly. Akber Khan possessed seventeen distinct kinds, eight of which were valuable for beauty alone. At about this same period of 1600, the Dutch, according to Aldrovandus, were as eager about pigeons as the Romans had formerly been. The breeds which were kept during the fifteenth century in Europe and in India, apparently differed from each other. Tavernier, in his 'Travels,' in 1677, speaks as does Chardin, in 1735, of the vast numbers of pigeon-houses in Persia; and the former remarks, that as Christians were not permitted to keep pigeons, some of the vulgar actually turned Mahometans for this sole purpose. The Emperor of Morocco had his favourite keeper of pigeons, as is mentioned in Moore's treatise, published 1737. In England, from the time of 1678 to the present day, as well as in Germany and in France, numerous treatises have been published on the pigeon. In India, about a hundred years ago, a Persian treatise was written; and the writer thought it no light affair, for he begins with a solemn invocation, 'In the name of G.o.d, the gracious and merciful.' Many large towns in Europe and the United States now have their societies of devoted pigeon-fanciers: at present there are three such societies in London. In India, as I hear from Mr. Blyth, the inhabitants of Delhi and of some other great cities are eager fanciers. Mr. Layard informs me that most of the known breeds are kept in Ceylon. In China, according to Mr. Swinhoe of Amoy, and Dr. Lockhart of Shanghai, carriers, fantails, tumblers, and other varieties are reared with care, especially by the bonzes, or priests.

"The Chinese fasten a kind of whistle to the tail-feathers of their pigeons, and as the flock wheels through the air, they produce a sweet sound.[104] In Egypt, the late Abbas Pacha was a great fancier of fantails. Many pigeons are kept at Cairo and Constantinople, and these have lately been imported by native merchants, as I hear from Sir W. Elliot, into Southern India, and sold at high prices.