Essay on the Theory of the EarthCuvier, Georges, baron
Science
Essay on the Theory of the Earth
Cuvier, Georges, baron
Geology; Paleontology
He had reason not to regard his Pharaoh’s fowl as the ibis; for,
although its description is very imperfect, and although Buffon
fancied he recognised the ibis in it, it is easy to judge, as well
as by what Pokocke says of it, that this bird must be a carnivorous
one; and, in fact, we see from Bruce’s figure (Vol. v. p. 191. of
the French edition), that Pharaoh’s fowl is nothing else than the
_rachama_ or the small white vulture with black wings (_Vultur
perenopterus_, Linn.)--a bird very different from what we have proved
above to be the ibis.
Pokocke says that it appears, from the descriptions which are given
of the ibis, and from the figures which he has seen of it in the
temples of Upper Egypt, that it was a species of Crane. I have seen,
he adds, a number of these birds in the islands of the Nile; they
were for the most part greyish[362]. These few words suffice to prove
that he did not know the ibis better than the others.
The learned have not been more happy in their conjectures than the
travellers. Middleton refers to the ibis, a bronze figure of a
bird, of which the beak is arched, but short, the neck very long,
and the head furnished with a small crest, a figure which never had
any resemblance to the bird of the Egyptians[363]. This figure is,
besides, not at all in the Egyptian style, and Middleton himself
agrees that it must have been made at Rome. Saumaise upon Solinus
says nothing that relates to the present question.
As to the black ibis, which Aristotle places only near Pelusium[364];
it was long thought that Belon alone had seen it[365]. The bird which
he describes under this name is a species of curlew, to which he
attributes a head similar to that of the cormorant, that is to say,
apparently bald, a red beak, and feet of the same colour; but as he
does not speak of the ibis in his journey[366], I suppose that it was
only in France that he made this reference, and by comparison with
mummies of the Ibis. What is certain is, that this curlew, with the
beak and feet red, was not known in Egypt[367], but that our green
curlew of Europe (_Scolopax Falcinellus_, Linn. Pl. Enl. 819.) is
seen very commonly there, that it is even more abundant than the
white numenius[368]; and, as it resembles it in form and size, and,
further, as its plumage may appear black, it can by no means be
doubted that it was the true black ibis of the ancients. M. Savigny
also made a drawing of it in Egypt, but from a young individual
only[369]. Buffon’s figure is from an adult bird; but its colours are
too pale.
The error which prevails at present respecting the white ibis began
with Perrault, who was also the first naturalist who made known the
Tantalus ibis of the present day. This error, adopted by Brisson
and Buffon, passed into the twelfth edition of Linnæus, where it is
blended with that of Hasselquist, which had been inserted in the
tenth, forming with it a compound altogether monstrous.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account