Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 14.djvu/93

K I N K I N 81

by loud and shrill cries. Oil these occasions it may be that the King-bird displays the emblem of his dignity, which is commonly concealed; for, being otherwise rather plainly coloured – dark ashy-grey above and white beneath – the erectile feathers of the crown of the head, on being parted, form as it were a deep furrow, and reveal their base, which is of a bright golden-orange in front, deepening into scarlet, and then passing into silvery-white. This species seems to live entirely on insects, which it captures on the wing, and is in bad repute with bee-masters,^[1] though, according to Dr Coues, it "destroys a thousand noxious insects for every bee it eats." It builds, often in an exposed situation, a rather large nest, coarsely constructed outside, but neatly lined with fine roots or grasses, and lays five or six eggs of a pale salmon colour, beautifully marked with blotches and spots of purple, brown, and orange, generally disposed in a zone near the larger end.

King-Bird.

Nearly akin to the King-bird is the Petchary or Chicheree, so called from its loud and petulant cry, T. dominicensis, or T. griseus, one of the most characteristic and conspicuous birds of the West Indies, and the earliest to give notice of the break of day. In habits, except that it eats a good many berries, it is the very counterpart of its congener, and is possibly even more jealous of any intruder. At all events its pugnacity extends to animals from which it could not possibly receive any harm, and is hardly limited to any season of the year.

In several respects both of these birds, with several of their allies, resemble some of the Shrikes; but it must be clearly understood that the likeness is but of analogy, and that there is no near affinity between the two Families Laniidæ and Tyrannidæ, which belong to wholly distinct sections of the great Passerine Order; and, while the former is a comparatively homogeneous group, much diversity of form and habits is found among the latter. Similarly many of the smaller Tyrannidæ bear some analogy to certain Muscicapidæ, with which they were at one time confounded (see FLYCATCHER, vol. ix. p. 351); but the difference between them is deep seated.^[2] Nor is this all, for out of the seventy genera, or thereabouts, into which the Tyrannidæ have been divided, comprehending perhaps three hundred and fifty species, all of which are peculiar to the New World, a series of forms can be selected which find a kind of parallel to a series of forms to be found in the other group of Passeres; and the genus Tyrannus, though that from which the Family is named, is by no means a fair representative of it; but it would be hard to say which genus should be so accounted. The birds of the genus Muscisaxicola have the habits and almost the appearance of Wheatears; the genus Alectorurus calls to mind a Water-Wagtail; Euscarthmus may suggest a Titmouse, Elainea perhaps a Willow-Wren; but the greatest number of forms have no analogous bird of the Old World with which they can be compared; and, while the combination of delicate beauty and peculiar external form possibly attains its utmost in the long-tailed Milvulus, the glory of the Family may be said to culminate in the king of King-birds, Muscivora regia. (A. N.)

KINGFISHER – Königsfischer, Germ.^[3]; Roi-péheux (=pêcheur), Walloon – the Alcedo ispida of ornithologists, one of the most beautiful and well-known of European birds, being found, though nowhere very abundantly, in every country of this quarter of the globe, as well as in North Africa and South-Western Asia as far as Sindh. Its blue-green back and rich chestnut breast render it conspicuous as it frequents the streams and ponds whence it procures its food, by plunging almost perpendicularly into the water, and emerging a moment after with the prey – whether a small fish, a crustacean, or an aquatic insect – it has captured. In hard frosts it resorts to the sea-shore, but a severe winter is sure to occasion a great mortality in the species, for many of its individuals seem unable to reach the tidal waters where only in such a season they could obtain sustenance; and to this cause rather than any other (though, on account of its beauty and the utility of its feathers in making artificial flies, it is shot and netted in great numbers) is perhaps to be ascribed its general scarcity. Very early in the year it prepares its nest, which is at the end of a tunnel bored by itself in a bank, and therein the six or eight white, glossy, translucent eggs are laid, sometimes on the bare soil, but often on the fishbones which, being indigestible, are thrown up in pellets by the birds; and, in any case, before incubation is completed these rejectamenta accumulate so as to form a pretty cup-shaped structure that increases in bulk after the young are hatched, but, mixed with their fluid excretions and with decaying fishes brought for their support, soon becomes a dripping fetid mass.

The Kingfisher is the subject of a variety of legends and superstitions, both classical and mediæval. Of the latter one of the most curious is that having been originally a plain grey bird it acquired its present bright colours by flying towards the sun on its liberation from Noah's ark, when its upper surface assumed the hue of the sky above it and its lower plumage was scorched by the heat of the setting orb to the tint it now bears.^[4] More than this, the Kingfisher was supposed to possess many virtues. Its dried body would avert thunderbolts, and if kept in a wardrobe would preserve from moths the woollen stuffs

1. It is called in some parts the Bee-Martin.
2. This is not the place to dwell upon the essential nature of the difference; but two easy modes of discriminating them externally may be mentioned. All the Laniidæ and Muscicapidæ have but nine primary guides in their wings, and their tarsi are covered with scales in front only; while in the Tyrannidæ there are ten primaries, and the tarsal scales extend the whole way round. The more recondite distinction in the structure of the trachea seems to have been first detected by Macgillivray, who wrote the anatomical descriptions published in 1839 by Audubon (Orn. Biography, v. pp. 421, 422); but its value was not appreciated till the publication of Johannes Müller's classical treatise on the vocal organs of Passerine Birds (Abhandl. k. Akad. Wissensch. Berlin, 1845, pp. 321, 405).
3. But more commonly called Eisvoyel, which finds its counterpart in the Anglo-Saxon Isern or Isen.
4. Rolland, Faune populaire de la France, ii. p. 74.