NATURAL |
ae

SIR THOS:

 

 

ionese;
Nees)
CORNELL
UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

 
DATE DUE

 

  
 

&
eed
| 5

a

2

mA

4

m

o

z

iS

4

>

GAYLORD

 

“HN
22
Pas

“>.
a S
oS

IS) -
,

; 104
hfe pg bl fof typ

eee feria ee Aug Te |

Apis en Gorm) Efe
Ca? Fidentia

bn venk ve eed : ey a 2 |
pte A ae) )

 

M1., FOL. 105.—See p. 80,
Notes and Letters

ON THE

Natural History of Norfolk

MORE ESPECIALLY ON THE

BIRDS AND FISHES

FROM THE MSS. OF

SIR THOMAS BROWNE, M.D.
(1605-1682)

IN THE SLOANE COLLECTION IN THE LIBRARY OF THE BRITISH
MUSEUM AND IN THE BODLEIAN LIBRARY, OXFORD

WITH NOTES BY
THOMAS SOUTHWELL, F.Z.S.

Member of the British Ornithologists’ Union; Vice-President of the
Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists Society

LONDON
JARROLD & SONS, 1o & 11, WARWICK LANE, E.C.

[ALL RIGHTS RESERVED]

ve
@.
Bee

A. FY¥2067
CONTENTS.

PAGE
INTRODUCTION - - - vii

NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS FOUND IN NORFOLK I

NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC., FOUND IN NORFOLK 31

LETTERS TO MERRETT 57
APPENDIX A. - - 86
APPENDIX B. go
APPENDIX C. 95
APPENDIX D. - - 96

INDEX 99
INTRODUCTION.

“Every kingdom, every province, should have its own
monographer.”—Gilbert White. Seventh Letter to Barrington.

THE excellent Memoir of Sir Thomas Browne,
in Wilkin’s Edition of his works, renders it
unnecessary here to repeat what has already
been so well done; suffice it to say that he
was born in London on the roth of October,
1605; he was educated at Winchester School
and entered at Broadgates Hall (now Pembroke
College), Oxford, in 1623; graduated B.A.
31st January, 1626-7, and M.A. rith June, 1629.
About the year 1633 he was created Doctor of
Physick at Leyden. In 1636 he took up his
residence in Norwich, in 1637 was incorporated
Doctor of Physic in Oxford, and in 1665 was
chosen an Honorary Fellow of the College of
Physicians. In 1671 Browne was knighted at
Norwich by Charles IJ., and after a useful
and honourable career died on his seventy-
sixth birthday, the 19th of October, 1682, and
his body lies buried in the church of St. Peter
Mancroft, Norwich.
viii INTRODUCTION.

Browne in early life travelled much and
was a voluminous writer; he made many
friendships with men celebrated in his day, and
his advice and assistance were sought and grate-
fully acknowledged by Dugdale, Evelyn, Ray
and Willughby, Merrett, Sir Robert Paston
(afterwards Earl of Yarmouth), Ashmole, Aubrey,
and others; but his general correspondence
does not now concern us, my object being to
supply in a convenient form what I believe
will be acceptable to modern naturalists, namely,
an accurate transcript of his notes and letters
on the “Natural History of the County of
Norfolk.”

These notes and letters were first published
by Simon Wilkin in his Edition of Sir
Thomas Browne’s Works in 1835, but they
were not treated from a naturalist’s point of
view, and in some places were not correctly
transcribed, added to which, in the vast mass of
matter contained in Wilkin’s four large volumes
(or in the closely printed three volumes of Bohn’s
Edition), these interesting passages are in
danger of being overlooked or are inconvenient
for reference. Two letters, moreover, were
needed to make the correspondence with Mer-
rett complete, and these I have been enabled to
supply. I hope also that my explanatory notes,
INTRODUCTION. ix

which I trust will not be deemed too volumi-
nous, will be found more useful than the
necessarily brief notes furnished by Wilkin and
his collaborators. Furthermore, I think that the
retention of the original spelling and punctu-
ation may lend a charm to the quaintness of
the language which is in a measure destroyed
by any attempt at modernising.

There is much that is interesting bearing
upon Natural Science scattered throughout
Browne’s writings, especially in his Pseudo-
doxia Epidemica, or inquiries into Vulgar
and Common Errors, first published in
1646, and the reader cannot fail to be
impressed not only with the extent of his
classical knowledge but also with the shrewd-
ness with which he pursued his original
investigations; but here it is only proposed
to deal with certain manuscript notes and a
series of rough notes for, or copies of, letters
addressed to Dr. Christopher Merrett, the
author of the Pinax Rerum Naturalium
Britannicarum. These, as remarked by their
editor, with regard to some other manuscripts
published* in 1684, under the title of ‘Certain

 

* The ‘‘ Miscellany Tracts” were put forth by ‘“‘ Tho. Tenison” (1636-
1715), who afterwards became Archbishop of Canterbury, but was then
the Rector of a London parish, St. Martin-in-the-Fields. He had been a
x INTRODUCTION,

Miscellany Tracts,” were doubtless “rather the
diversions than the Ladbours of his Pen; and
. . . He did, as it were, drop down his
Thoughts of a sudden, in those spaces of
vacancy which he snatch’d from those very
many occasions which gave him hourly inter-
ruption ;” but I cannot in this instance agree
with the conclusion arrived at by the same
writer that it ‘‘seemeth probable that He de-
signed them for publick use,” for they appear
to be the rough drafts or memoranda used in
the production of the finished letters (which are
unfortunately not forthcoming), and were never
intended for publication in their present crude
form, thus rendering pardonable such annota-
tions as I have ventured to add. But before
proceeding further it is necessary to consider
briefly the time and circumstances under which
they were written, and the state of what passed
for Natural Science at that period.

Browne wrote early in the second half of
the seventeenth century, during a period of
great awakening in the study of Nature.
Hitherto it could hardly be said that a direct
appeal to the works of Nature had _ been

 

Norwich school-boy, and subsequently minister of St. Peter’s Mancroft.
He was doubtless well acquainted with Browne and his family, and hence
his reference in the preface quoted to ‘‘the Lady and Son of the excellent
Authour,” who, he says, ‘‘ deliver’d ” the papers to him.
INTRODUCTION. xi

the prevailing method. Aristotle was still
the established authority, and commentaries on
his works occupied the minds of men _ to
the exclusion of original investigation, notwith-
standing that this great philosopher had himself,
both by precept and example, urged the
importance of direct observation and inquiry ;
the Medizval school of thought still prevailed
and cramped every effort at progress. How
keenly Browne lamented this spirit of slavish
adherence to tradition may be judged from a
passage in one of his Essays in the ‘“ Vulgar
Errors” condemning the obstinate adherence
unto antiquity; he writes, ‘‘but the mortallist
enemy unto knowledge, and that which hath
done the greatest execution upon truth, hath
been a peremptory adhesion unto authority ;
and more especially the establishing of our belief
upon the dictates of antiquity. For (as every
capacity may observe) most men of ages
present, so supersticiously do look upon ages
past, that the authorities of one exceed the
reason of the other.” In another place he
argues that the present should be the age of
authority, seeing that we possess all the wisdom
of the ancients which has come down to us,
with that of our own times added. In fact,
Browne’s motto appears to have been ‘‘prove
xii INTRODUCTION.

all things and hold fast only to that which
is good.”*

Aristotle, whose works on Natural History
have descended to us in a very imperfect con-
dition, lived in 385-322 B.c., and it was not till
A.D. 79 that the Historia Naturalis of Pliny the
Elder, the next great work, which has survived
till our days, was completed, and by some of
those most competent to form a judgment the

 

* There was one form of ancient authority before which Browne bowed
down with absolute and unquestioning submission—the authority of the
Scriptures. In all secular matters he was ever ready to point the lance
and do battle, but all that appealed to him on what he regarded as
divine authority was beyond the pale, and it never entered into his mind
to submit it to the test of reason. In the ‘‘ Religio Medici” he declares
his devoted adherence first to the guidance of Scripture, and secondly to the
Articles of the Church, ‘‘ whatsoever is beyond, as points indifferent, I
observe according to the rules of my private reason ;” and again, ‘‘ where the
Scripture is silent, the Church is my text; where that speaks ’tis but my
comment: where there is a joint silence of both I borrow not the rules of my
religion from Rome or Geneva, but the dictates of my own reason.” This
implicit adherence to the literal text of Scripture led to his—shall I say
active belief in, or passive acceptance of, the existence of Witchcraft, and
thus to the only act in an otherwise blameless life which we must regard
with regret and astonishment. I refer to the consenting part he took in the
doing to death of two poor women at Bury St. Edmund’s in the year 1664.
It is my business to act as Browne’s exponent, not as his apologist, but it
must be borne in mind that in his day the ‘‘ higher criticism” was a thing
unheard of, and that the literal sense of the English translation of the Bible
was accepted as binding not only by him but by the vast majority of the
people, including the most learned men of the time. ‘‘ Thou shalt not suffer
a witch to live” was a plain command, and given a witch the believer’s
duty was also plain; that there fad been witches there was ample
scriptural evidence, but there was none that the days of witchcraft had
passed away. Browne only shared this belief with his pious friend, the
venerable Bishop Hall, and many men equally devout according to their
lights ; he makes no secret of the fact and acts in accordance with his
convictions and the plain authority of Scripture. Thus it came about that
these conscientious but mistaken men were induced to render possible, if
INTRODUCTION, xiii

additions which he made were not in all
cases improvements. Other writers followed,
but their productions were of little value,
and it was not till the year 1544 that
William Turner published at Cologne what
Professor Newton describes as ‘the first
commentary on the birds mentioned by
Aristotle and Pliny conceived in anything like
the spirit that moves modern Naturalists.”
Turner's book is very rare and unfortunately
at present beyond the reach of most modern
students. No attempt at systematic arrange-
ment, as now understood, was made until the
fTistotre de la Nature des Oyseaux of Pierre
Belon (Bellonius) appeared at Paris in 1555,
for the much greater work of Conrad Gesner,
being the third book of his Hzstorza Animalium,
which was published at Zurich in the same
year, and treated of Birds, followed, more or
less closely, an alphabetical plan which brought
upon him the censure of Aldrovandus, three
of whose sixteen folio volumes forming the
fiistoria Naturalium bore the title of Ovrnz-

 

not actually to countenance, the fiendish cruelties perpetrated by their
unscrupulous allies. In matters which he considered less authoritative his
views were so liberal as to gain for him the stigma of infidel or heretic;
but let a man govern his thoughts and actions by the private rules Browne
laid down for his own guidance (vol. iv., p. 420), and it would be hard to
regard him as otherwise than a God-fearing man, striving to live up to his
profession.
xiv INTRODUCTION.

thologie hoc est de Avibus FAitstorie, Libri XIL,,
and were brought out at Bologna between
the years 1599 and 1603. The Azstorza
Naturalis of John Jonston, or ‘“ Jonstonus”
(1603-1675), originally published in four sections
between the years 1649 and 1653, ran through
several editions, and was a popular book in the
seventeenth century; it is frequently referred
to by Browne, but is a work of very little
originality. Though all these authors un-
doubtedly influenced their successors, it may
be fairly said that it was Browne's contem-
poraries and _ fellow-countrymen, Francis
Willughby and John Ray, who laid the first
solid foundation of systematic zoology in
their Ovrnzthologea and Afistorta Piscium,
published in 1676 and 1686 respectively ; but
dying in 1682, Browne was indebted to neither
of them, though he doubtless exercised much
influence over them, and he had to use
the clumsy descriptive terminology then in
vogue.* Let me illustrate this by a single
example. In one of his letters to Merrett he

 

* In 1735 appeared the first edition of the Systema Nature of Linnaeus
which, meagre as it was, ushered in a more definite system of classifi-
cation, whilst his invention of the binomial method of nomenclature, first
used by him in the tenth edition of that work published in 1758, con-
tributed not a little in reducing to order what had hitherto been a chaos,
although in his classification of birds he for the most part followed his
predecessor Ray.
INTRODUCTION. XV

names a “little elegant sea plant” (probably
flalecitum halecinum, a species of Hydroid
Zoophyte), “ Mucus marinus vertebratus pisciculi
spinum referens ichthyorachius, or what you
think fit.” On another occasion Merrett thus
expresses his approval of Browne’s efforts in
this direction: “You have very well named
the rutzlus and expressed fully the cours to
bee taken in the imposition of names, viz:
the most obvious and most peculiar differ-
ence to the ey or any other sens.” We
can hardly conceive the difficulties these
pioneers of Natural Science had to contend
with; the works of their predecessors were so
indefinite as to be of little value in determining
species; they had to depend upon the vague
descriptions of fowlers and others; the same
bird would probably be known in half a dozen
different localities by as many different names,
and since no satisfactory mode of preserving
specimens had then been discovered, examples for
comparison were not available. If inextricable
confusion arose with regard to such a bird as
the Osprey, well might Browne write with regard
to those less readily characterized, ‘‘I confess
for such little birds I am much unsatisfied on
the names given to many by countrymen, and
uncertaine what to give them myself, or to what
xvi INTRODUCTION.

classis of authors cleerly to reduce them. Surely
there are many found among us which are not
described; and therefore such which you cannot
well reduce, may (if at all) be set down after
the exacter nomination of small birds as yet
of uncertain class of knowledge.”

I must ask pardon for this digression, but my
object has been to show the difficulties Browne
had to contend with and to emphasise the origi-
nality which pervades all his observations, a
characteristic so conspicuously absent in the
work of most of his predecessors. I should
like also to call attention to his references to
the migratory habits of many species of birds,
a phenomenon attracting little notice in his day,
but one which can be so readily observed on the
coast of Norfolk. These remarks were penned at
a time when hibernation in a state of torpidity
was thoroughly believed in—an idea of which
even Gilbert White a hundred years later
could not thoroughly divest himself. In _ his
tract on ‘Hawks and Falconry,” Browne
further says: ‘‘How far the hawks, merlins,
and wild-fowl which come unto us with a
north-west [east?] wind in Autumn, fly in
a day, there is no clear account: but coming
over the sea their flight hath been long
or very speedy. For I have known them
INTRODUCTION. xvii

to light so weary on the coast, that many
have been taken with dogs, and some
knocked down with staves and _ stones.”
Further than this, he knew the seasons of
their appearing—the Hobby “coming to us in
the spring,” the Merlin “about autumn.” His
frequent mention of anatomical peculiarities
and of his dissections of many birds and beasts
clearly prove his passion for original research,
and the frequent records of the contents of the
stomachs of the birds which he had the oppor-
tunity of examining was a mode of obtaining
exact information as to the nature of their
food, which I imagine was not common in those
days.

How highly Browne was esteemed by his
contemporaries may be judged from _ the
acknowledgments of his assistance by Dugdale,
Evelyn (who visited him in Norwich in
1671), and others; and Ray especially mentions
his indebtedness to ‘the deservedly famous
Sir Thomas Browne, Professor of Physic in
the City of Norwich.” His letters to his
son, Dr. Edward Browne, are full of instruc-
tions as to the course of study he should
pursue, and subsequently, when the latter
became celebrated and was appointed Physician

to St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, it was still to
B
Xviil INTRODUCTION.

his father that he looked for advice in his
hospital practice and in the preparation of his
lectures. Browne was proud of his adopted
county, a feeling evidently shared by his son,
and I trust I may be pardoned for quoting the
concluding passage of the latter’s account of a
tour into Derbyshire, wherein he expresses a
sentiment which survives with undiminished
force in the breast of many a Norfolk man in
the present day. There is a very interesting
account of his crossing the Wash on leaving
Lynn for Boston, but on his return to Norwich
in September, 1662, he thus concludes his
journal: “Give me leave to say this much:
let any stranger find mee out so pleasant a
country, such good way [roads], large heath,
three such places as Norwich, Yar [Yarmouth]
and Lin [Lynn], in any county of England, and
I'll bee once again a vagabond to visit them.”

The manuscripts of which the following
selection forms a part are contained, with a
few exceptions to be named hereafter, in the
Sloane Collection in the Library of the British
Museum, consisting of nearly one hundred
volumes, numbered 1825 to 1923 both inclusive.
A catalogue is given by Simon Wilkin*

 

* Stmon Wilkin (1790-1862), the able editor of Sir Thomas Browne’s
collected works, was born at Costessey near Norwich, in the year 1790.
INTRODUCTION. XIX

(himself a Norfolk man), by whom Browne’s
collected writings were first published in a
connected form, as already mentioned, under
the title of “Sir Thomas Browne’s Works,
including his Life and Correspondence, edited
by Simon Wilkin, F.L.S. London, William
Pickering. Josiah Fletcher, Norwich, 1836.”
4 volumes, 8vo; the first volume only is
dated 1836, Vols. 2, 3, and 4 being dated
1835.* It was here that the Notes and
Letters were first given to the public. A
second edition of the ‘ Works,” also edited by
Wilkin, in three closely printed volumes, was
issued in Bohn’s Antiquarian Library in 1852.

 

He came to Norwich after his father’s death in 1799, taking up his tempo-
rary abode with his guardian, Joseph Kinghorn, a Baptist minister of note
and a prominent member of a literary circle then existing in Norwich, by
whom his education was superintended. On arriving at man’s estate and
being at that time possessed of ample means, he devoted himself to the
study of Natural History, especially to Entomology, and was the possessor
of a large collection of insects which, in the year 1827, was purchased for
the Norwich Museum at a cost of one hundred guineas, « large sum in
those days. He was one of the founders and the first librarian of the
Norfolk and Norwich Literary Institution in 1822, also of the Norfolk
and Norwich Museum in 1825, both of which institutions (the former re-
united to its parent Library, founded in 1784) are still flourishing. Wilkin
was a Fellow of the Linnean Society, also « Member of the Wernerian
Society of Edinburgh. In later years the loss of the bulk of his property
by a commercial failure necessitated his turning his attention to some
means of earning a livelihood, and he established himself in Norwich as a
printer and publisher; later in life he removed to Hampstead, where he
died on 28th July, 1862, and was buried in his native village of Costessey.

* Some copies of this Edition have a title-page, bearing the name of
H. G. Bohn as publisher, and the date of 1846, but differing only in that
respect.
XX INTRODUCTION.

In the first edition the Notes on the Birds and
Fishes will be found in Vol. IV., pp. 313 to
336, and the letters to Merrett in Vol. I., pp.
393 to 408. In the second edition both are
in Vol. IIL, pp. 311 to 335 and pp. 502 to
513 respectively. The references here, as a
rule, will be made to the 1836 edition, when
otherwise Bohn’s edition will be specified.

The foot-notes in Wilkin’s edition, many of
them very curious, initialled ‘Wr.,” are by
Dr. Christopher Wren, Dean of Windsor
(father of the Architect of St. Paul's Cathedral),
and were found on the margins of a copy of
the first edition of the Pseudodoxia now
preserved in the Bodleian Library at Oxford ;
those initialled ““G.” were written for Wilkin’s
first edition by the late Miss Anna Gurney,
of Northrepps, near Cromer, Norfolk.

The first papers to which I shall refer are a
series of rough notes contained for the most
part in volume 1830 of the Sloane MSS., the
first portion being devoted to Szrds found in
Norfolk, followed by a similar series relating
to marine and freshwater Fvshes, including a
few marine invertebrata and plants. They are
written on one side only of foolscap paper,
the portion relating to Birds occupying folios
5 to ig inclusive, folios 1 to 4 consist of two
INTRODUCTION. xxi

inserted letters from Merrett to Browne (see
Appendix A.), which are printed by Wilkin in
his first edition, Vol. I, pp. 442-5. The
notes on Fishes are in the same volume of
manuscripts, folios 23 to 38; but there are
some irregularities which will be explained as
they occur. The whole of the notes are very
roughly written, and present the appearance of
a commonplace book, in which the entries
were made as the events occurred to the
writer, being quite devoid of any system or
arrangement. The entries doubtless extend
over several years, but it is impossible to fix
the dates on which they were made, the. only
internal evidence I can find being that speaking
of the occurrence of a certain shark he states
it was taken ‘‘this year, 1662,” and on the
next page of the MS. there is the record of
the occurrence of a sun-fish in the year 1667;
this latter, however, is evidently an interpolation.
A few pages further on there is the record of
what he calls a large mackerel, ‘taken this
year, 1668,” but this also is an addition. We
may take it, I think, that most of the notes
were made about the year 1662, but that they
were added to on various occasions up to 1668,
in which year his first letter to Merrett is
dated. It has been suggested that these notes
XXii INTRODUCTION.

were prepared in the interest of Dr. Merrett
for his use in an enlarged edition of his
Pinax, but the remark in his first letter to this
correspondent, “I have observed and taken
notice of many animals in these parts whereof
3 years agoe a learned gentleman of this
country wished me to give him some account,
which while I was doing ye gentleman my good
friend died,” clearly shows that they were
originally prepared for another purpose, although
they eventually furnished the materials for his
letters to Merrett, but who his deceased friend
was it seems now useless to conjecture, although
it would be interesting to know. The notes
were certainly never intended to appear in
their present form, and failing their use by
Merrett which never took place, the information
they contained was, as we know, of great
service to Ray and Willughby.

Browne’s correspondent, Dr. Christopher Mer-
rett, was born at Winchcomb, in Gloucestershire,
on the 16th of February, 1614. He graduated
B.A. at Oriel College, Oxford, about the year
1635; M.B. 1636; M.D. 1643. Was elected
Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians in
1651, and was made first Keeper of the Library
and Museum; he was Censor of the College
seven times. Having entered into litigation
INTRODUCTION. xxiii

with the College with regard to his appointment,
which was considered by that body to have
terminated when the Library was destroyed by
the great fire, he was defeated, and in 1681
expelled from his fellowship. He died in
London in 1695. (Dict. of Nat. Biog.”)
Merrett was the author of several works on
various subjects, as well as of the Pzzax, and
a translation of the “Art of Glass” referred to
further on. His Pinax Rerum Naturalium
Lritannicarum, said to have been brought out in
1666, contained the earliest list of British Birds
ever published, but it is little more than a bare
list. Copies bearing the date of 1666 are
very rare, and it is believed the edition was
burned in a fire at the publishers; but Pro-
fessor Newton (‘“ Dict. of Birds,” Introduction,
p. xviii.) says that in 1667 there were two
issues of a reprint; one, nominally a second
edition, only differs from the others in having
a new title-page, an example doubtless of what
Wilkin severely condemns as “that contemptible
form of lying under which publishers have
endeavoured to persuade the public of the
rapidity of their sales.” Merrett was con-
templating a new and improved edition of his
work when, as Wilkin happily puts it, “in an
auspicious moment he sought the assistance of
XXIV INTRODUCTION.

Browne, whose liberal response is evidenced in
the [drafts of the] letters still fortunately extant,
but either superseded by the more learned
labours of Willughby and Ray, or laid aside
on account of the perplexities in which Merrett
became involved with the College of Physicians,
the Pixax never attained an enlarged edition.
Had Browne completed and published his own
‘Natural History of Norfolk,’ he might have
contended for precedency among the writers
of County Natural Histories with [his friend]
Dr. Robert Plot,* who published the earliest of
such works—those of Oxford and Staffordshire,
in 1677 and 1686 respectively. He seems,
however, to have preferred contributing to the
labours of those whom he considered better
naturalists than himself; and in his third
attempt thus to render his observations useful
he had somewhat better success. He _ placed

his materials, including a number of coloured

 

* Dr. Robert Plot (1640-1696) was born at Sutton Barne, Kent, in 1640;
he graduated M.A. in 1664, and D.C.L. at Oxford in 1671. He was
chiefly noted as an antiquary, and was Secretary of the Royal Society from
1682 to 1684, also the first custodian of the Ashmoleian Museum and
Professor of Chemistry at Oxford. In 1677 he published his ‘‘ Natural
History of Oxfordshire,” the first local work of the kind which appeared ;
it was illustrated by sixteen plates. In 1686 he also published ‘‘ The Natural
History of Staffordshire,” and subsequently many other books and papers.
He was evidently acquainted with most of the learned men of his time.
Plot died at his family estate Sutton Barne, on the 30th of April, 1696,
and was buried at Borden in Kent. Dr. Plot was a friend of Browne’s,
and his companion in a tour in England in 1693.—‘ Dict. Nat. Biog.”
INTRODUCTION. XXV

drawings, at the disposal of Ray, the father
of systematic Natural History in Great Britain,
who has acknowledged the assistance he derived
from him in his editions of Willughby’s ‘Orni-
thology’ and ‘Ichthyology,’ especially in the
former. But Browne, it seems, found it more
easy to lend than to recover such materials ;
for he complains, several years afterwards, that
these drawings, of whose safe return he was
assured, both by Ray and by their mutual
friend, Sir Philip Skippon, had not been sent
back to him.”*

I have endeavoured to reproduce as accu-
rately as possible the text of the notes and
letters, which, as will be seen from _ the
example photographed for the frontispiece of
this volume, was often very difficult to decipher.
The originals of the notes and of seven of the
nine letters to Merrett, as also the two letters
in Appendix A., are in the Sloane Collection
of MSS. in the British Museum Library ;
those numbered vii. and viii., as well as two
letters in Appendix D., which have not hitherto
been printed, are in the Bodleian Library ;
and the letter to Dugdale in Appendix B.
is extracted from the ‘Eastern Counties

 

* See letter to his son, Dr. Edward Browne (Wilkin, i., p. 337), also
Appendix C.
XXVi INTRODUCTION.

Collectanea.” All the MSS. in the Sloane
Collection I have transcribed myself; of those
in the Bodleian Library, No. vii. is from a
photograph, the remainder were copied for me
by a person recommended as being highly reliable.
I thought it best to retain all the erasures and
interlineations in order to show as much as
possible what was passing in their author's mind:
in the foot-notes I have sought to acknowledge
tz situ the valuable help I received from
numerous correspondents to whom my _ best
thanks are due, but I owe a special debt of
gratitude to Professor Newton, at whose instiga-
tion the work was undertaken, for his kind
assistance and for the loan of scarce books
which it was necessary to consult in the
interesting investigations needful to elucidate,
if possible, some of the obscure passages in
the text, a task in which if with the best
intentions should I have sometimes failed, I
must ask the reader’s indulgence.

It may be truly said of Sir Thomas Browne
that a prophet hath no honour in his own
country; the writings of this remarkable man
are little known in the city of his adoption, and
a recent movement to erect a monument to his
memory has hitherto met with feeble support.

Norwich, December, 1901. T. S.
Notes and Letters

ON THE

Natural History of Norfolk.

NOTES* ON CERTAIN BIRDS FOUND
IN NORFOLK.

[MSS. SLOAN. 1830. FOL. 5-19, AND 31.]

[THE first four pages in the volume of Manuscript consist of
two inserted letters from Merrett to Browne (see Appendix A.);
these are on ordinary letter paper 6} inches by 7 inches. The
notes commence on folio 5 and are continued to folio 19; one
leaf, containing an account of the Roller (numbered 31), is bound
up with the notes on the Fishes, &c., which are numbered con-
secutively with the Birds; the paper of the volume is foolscap,
114 by 73 inches, and written, with a few exceptions, which appear
to be subsequent additions, on the right-hand opening only.
There are four folios after the Birds, the first of which is blank;
the others, numbered 20, 21, and 22, contain rough memoranda
on the Birds and Fishes, the substance of which is embodied in
the other notes; the Fishes commence on folio 23. There are
Many erasures, interlineations, and substituted words which
indicate hasty writing, and the alterations are not in all cases
complete, thus rendering the sense occasionally obscure; these
emendations I have thought it best to preserve as indicating the
author’s line of thought. In the foot-notes which follow I have

 

* The heading adopted by Wilkin, for which I cannot find that he had
any authority, is certainly misleading, for the brief and fragmentary notes
which follow, although of great interest, can hardly be called ‘‘An
Account of the Birds (or Fishes) found in Norfolk,” as there are many
species of each inhabiting or visiting the county which must have been
well-known to Browne, but of which we find no mention.
2 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

endeavoured to identify the species treated of. This, notwith-
standing the kind assistance of the friends whose help I grate-
fully acknowledge, I may not in all cases have successfully
accomplished ; the conclusions arrived at are occasionally only
conjectural, and it may be that in some instances I have erred.
Should such be the case I must plead in excuse the difficulty
arising from vagueness of description, the frequent use of
vernacular names which have long since become obsolete (see
Note 22), and the imperfection of the record. This especially
applies to the Marine Animals, and one of my correspondents
rightly remarks that ‘‘the early accounts of marine beasts are
so vague, and the figures (where referred to) so incomplete and
often fanciful, that it is difficult even to make out the family,
to say nothing of genera and species.’ Any assistance or
correction in this respect would be gladly received by me.]

[Fol.5.] I willingly obey your comands! in setting
down such birds fishes & other animals wch for many
years J have observed in Norfolk.

Beside the ordinarie birds which keep constantly in
the country many are discouerable both in winter &
summer wch are of a migrant nature & exchange
their seats according to the season.” those wch come in

 

1 With regard to the probable origin of these notes (see ‘‘ Introduction,”
p. xxi.). The opening passage was probably addressed to the deceased
‘correspondent who had asked his assistance, whereas his first letter to
Merrett seems to indicate that the offer of help to him came spontaneously
from Browne (‘‘I take ye boldness to salute you,” &c.), and was not in
response to Merrett’s request.

2 Browne seems to have had on the whole a fairly correct idea with
regard to the migratory movements of the birds on the Norfolk coast where
peculiar facilities exist for such observations, but of course he could have
formed no notion of the extent to which they prevail, perhaps no species
being altogether sedentary. The general line of the autumn migration for
those which spend their summer in Northern Europe is south or south-
west, returning in the spring by the reverse route; those which visit us in
spring from Western Europe, or countries lying still more to the eastward,
adopt what is known as the east to west route, and reverse the direction in
the autumn ; but this latter is as nothing compared with the vast number
of immigrants by both routes in the early autumn, at which time, especially,
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 3

the spring coming for the most part from the southward
those wch come in the Autumn or winter from the
northward. so that they are obserued to come in great
flocks with a north east wind & to depart with a south
west. nor to come [in struck out] only in flocks of one
kind butt teals woodcocks felfars thrushes & small birds
to come & light together. for the most part some
hawkes & birds of pray attending them.

The great & noble kind of Agle calld Aquila Ges-
neri® I have not seen in this country but one I met with
[with crossed ou¢] in this country brought from ireland
wch I [presented unto struck out] kept 2 yeares, feeding it
with whelpes cattes ratts & the like. in all that while not
giving it any water wch I afterwards presented unto
the [colledge of physitians at London struck out] my
worthy friend Dr Scarburgh.

of other sorts of Agles there are severall kinds
especially of the Halyztus or fenne Agles some of

the movements are so exceedingly complex that it would be impossible
here to attempt to explain them, and the reader must be referred to Mr.
Eagle Clarke’s digest of the Reports of the Migration Committee of the
British Association (‘‘ Report Brit. Ass. for 1876,” pp. 451-477).

3 The ‘‘ Aquila” of Gesner here referred to is evidently the Golden
Eagle, which species Browne is careful to mention that he had not met
with in this county, and that the specimen he sent to Dr. Scarburgh, more
than once mentioned, was brought from Ireland. This bird has never been
recorded alive in Norfolk. Immature White-tailed Eagles, the ‘‘ Halyzetus ”
of the text, still occur almost every autumn or winter on this coast, but no
mature example has hitherto been killed. Browne’s friend, Sir Charles
Scarburgh (1616-1694), was born in London, and is buried at Cranford, in
Middlesex. He seems to have been greatly distinguished as an anatomist
and physician. He was a friend of William Harvey, whom he succeeded
as Lumleyan Lecturer at the College of Physicians (of which he was elected
a fellow in 1650). Harvey, out of regard for his ‘‘ lovinge friend” Dr.
Scarburgh, bequeathed to him his ‘‘little silver instruments of surgerie”’
and his velvet gown. (‘‘Dict. of Nat. Biog.”) The Golden Eagle sent
him by Browne was kept in the College of Physicians in Warwick Lane
for two years.
4 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

3 yards & a quarter from the extremitie of the wings.
whereof one being taken aliue grewe so tame that it
went about the yard feeding on fish redherrings flesh &
any offells without the least trouble.

There is also a lesser sort of Agle called an ospray‘
wch houers about the fennes & broads & will dippe his
[foot crossed out] claws & take up a fish oftimes for wch
his foote is made of an extraordinarie roughnesse for
the better fastening & holding of it & the like they will
do unto cootes.

[Fol. 6.] Aldrovandus takes particular notice of the
great number of Kites’ about London & about the
Thames. wee are not without them heare though not
in such numbers. there are also the gray & bald
Buzzard® [wch the all wth crossed out] of all wch the

 

4 This species is a not unfrequent autumn visitor to the Broads and
Rivers of Norfolk. Browne names it correctly, but there was much con-
fusion with regard to this species in the minds of the old authors.
Willughby knew the bird and calls it the ‘* Bald Buzzard,” but in describ-
ing its nesting site and eggs (probably not on his own authority,) evidently
confounds it with the Marsh Harrier, for he says that ‘‘it builds upon the
ground among reeds, and lays three or four large white eggs of figure
exactly elliptical, lesser than hens’ eggs.” See Note 6.

5 The Glede, or Puttock, of Turner, once so plentiful, is now only an
extremely rare visitor to Norfolk. In 1815, it appears from Hunt (‘‘ British
Omithology’”’), not to have been uncommon, but the same authority in his
list of Norfolk Birds contributed to Stacey’s ‘‘ History” of that County,
speaks of the Kite as having in 1829 become extremely rare. It probably
ceased to nest in this County about the year 1830, or perhaps a little later.
Browne’s reason for its comparative scarcity about the City of Norwich,
viz., the abundance of Ravens mentioned at p. 27 t#/ra, is very inter-
esting to us in the present day when Kites and Ravens are almost equally
rare.

* It seems likely that Browne here refers to two species of Harrier, the
Grey Buzzard being the male of the Hen Harrier (including of course
Montagu’s Harrier which was not discriminated till long after) in its
grey adult plumage, whereas the Marsh Harrier, with its light yellow head,
to which the word ‘‘bald” as then used might well be applied, would
stand for the ‘‘Bald Buzzard.” The Harriers, which were till long after
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 5

great number of broad waters & warrens makes no
small number & more than in woodland counties.
Cranes’ are often seen here in hard winters especially

 

the time he wrote extremely numerous, are generally called ‘‘ Buzzards”
by the natives, and it will be noticed at p. 15 z/ra, that what is doubtless
intended for the Marsh Harrier is spoken of as an enemy to the Coots;
also at p. 56, it is said that young Otters ‘‘ have been found in the Buzzards
nests,” a very likely circumstance with so fierce a bird, and one of which
T have an impression I have heard in recent years. The Hen Harrier is
now an extremely rare bird with us; the Marsh Harrier still occasionally
nests in the Broads, and Montagu’s Harrier now and then attempts to rear
a brood, but even should the parents succeed in escaping it is very seldom
they carry their young with them. Professor Newton has kindly favoured
me with the following additional interesting note on this bird. ‘‘The
Marsh Harrier is certainly the ‘ Balbushardus’ of Turner (1544), which,
though he says it is bigger and longer than the ordinary Azteo, has
a white patch on the head and is generally of a dark brown (,fuscus)
colour, hunting the banks of rivers, pools, and marshes, living by the cap-
ture of Ducks, and the black birds which the English call Coots (Cozfas).
This he, Turner, has himself very often seen, and he describes its habits
correctly; adding that it also takes Rabbits occasionally. Gesner,
1555, quotes Turner, but refers the Bald Buzzard to the Osprey (which he
figures), and so the mistake began. Certainly Willughby’s Bald Buzzard
is the Osprey, but his book was not published when Browne wrote.”

7 In the present day the Crane is only a rare straggler to this country
generally at the seasons of its migration ; that it was in times past abundant
in suitable localities there is ample evidence ; that it also bred in the fens
of the Eastern Counties there is no reason to doubt, but very little direct
evidence is forthcoming, therefore every fact bearing upon this point is of
value. Had Sir Thomas Browne written with the intention of publishing
his observations he would doubtless have told us much about this grand
bird, which would have been of the greatest interest to modern ornithologists,
but even the above brief remarks, as will be seen, are worthy of note.

With regard to the occurrence of the Crane in the fens of East Anglia we
have the following evidence ; its fossil remains have been found in the peat
at Burwell, in Cambridgeshire, and in excavating the docks at Lynn.
Turner, in his ‘‘ Avium Historia,” Coloniz, 1544, speaks of having seen
young Cranes in this country, and as he passed fifteen years at Cambridge,
it was probably in that neighbourhood that he met with them ; then again
there is the Act of Parliament, passed in 1534 (25th Hen. VIII. c. ii.),
prohibiting the taking of their eggs (amongst those of other species) under a
penalty of twenty pence. All this is well known, but being desirous to
ascertain whether any reference to the Crane was to be found in the records
6 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

about the champian & feildie part it seems they have
been more plentifull for in a bill of fare when the maior
entertaind the duke of norfolk I meet with Cranes in a
dish.

 

of the Corporation of Norwich, Mr. J. C. Tingey, F.S.A., the custodian of
the Muniment Room, at my request, most kindly searched the accounts of
the City Chamberlain between the years 1531 and 1549. He there found
numerous entries of sums expended in the purchase of cranes, swans,
porpoises, &c., as presents to the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk and others,
and amongst them, on the 6th of June, 1543, a charge for a ‘‘ yong pyper
crane” from [Hickling, which appears conclusive evidence of the breeding
of this bird near Norwich at that time. (See ‘Transactions of the N. and
N. Nat. Soc.,” vii., pp. 160-170.)

In Wilkin’s Edition of the Notes the statement, ‘‘I met” with Cranes ina
dish should be, ‘‘I meet with,” &c., as it is in the original. The occasion
referred to was probably an entertainment given by the Mayor of Norwich,
on the Guild day in 1663, which in that year fell on the 19th June ; at this
banquet Henry, Duke of Norfolk and the Hon. Henry Howard were
present, and the latter presented to the City a silver basin and ewer of the
value of £60. Can it be that even at that time young Cranes were to be
obtained ? otherwise the middle of June seems a most unseasonable time for
such a dish; for in a copy of a curious old manuscript, dated 1605, and
published in the 13th Volume of ‘‘ Archzeologia ” (p. 315), entitled “A
Breviate touching the Order and Government of a Nobleman’s house,”
&c., there is a ‘‘ Monthlie Table, for a Diatorie’”’ for each month in the
year, and the Crane appears only in the tables from November till March
inclusive. The modern gourmet would view with disgust some of the
dishes included in this ‘‘diatorie” if set before him—only to mention
among birds, auks, stares, petterells, puffines, didapers, and martins. The
crane being ‘‘in the dish” must not be subjected to the vulgar process of
“‘kervyng,” but in the stilted heraldic language of the day must be
“desplayed,” whereas u heron must be ‘‘ dismembered” and a bittern
“unjointed.” The price of a crane varied from 3s. 4d. to 55., and a fat
swan from 3s. to 4s. The sum of 6d. mentioned in the le Strange House-
hold-book, in the year 1533 (see ‘‘ Archzologia,” vol. xxv., p. 529),
quoted in Yarrell’s ‘‘ British Birds,” iii., p. 180, was only the reward for
bringing in a crane killed on the estate. That Cranes must at times
have been numerous in Norfolk in the sixteenth century is evident, for in
an account of the presents sent to William Moore, Esq., of Loseley, on
the occasion of the marriage of his daughter, on 3rd November, 1567,
Mr. Balam, ‘‘out of Marshland in Norfolk,” sent him nine cranes, nine
swans, and sixteen bitterns, with a large number of other wild-fowl.
“* Archeologia,” vol. xxxvi., p. 36.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 7

In hard winters elkes* a kind of wild swan are seen in
no small numbers. in whom & not in comon swans is
remarkable that strange recurvation of the windpipe
through the sternon. & the same is also obseruable in
cranes. tis probable they come very farre for all the
northern discouerers have [ha struck out] obserued them
in the remotest parts & like diuers [&] other northern
birds if the winter bee mild they comonly come no
further southward then scotland if very hard they go
lower & seeke more southern places. wch is the cause
that sometimes wee see them not before christmas or
the hardest time of winter.

A white large & strong billd fowle called a Ganet?

 

® The ‘‘ Elke ” is an obsolete name for the Wild Swan (Cygnus musicus),
which occurs in the present day in the same numbers and under precisely
similar circumstances as Browne describes; but of course this was the
only species of wild swan known to him. The remarkable recurvation of
the trachea within the keel of the sternum, which also prevails to a greater
or less degree in four out of the five or six species of Cygnus found in the
Northern Hemisphere, did not escape Browne’s notice, although he was not
the first to describe it, and he rightly observes that this peculiarity is absent
in the Mute Swan (C. olor), but exists in a different and even more
exaggerated form in the Crane. He, however, was mistaken as to the
extreme northerly range which he assigns to this species. So markeda
feature as the absence of the ‘‘ berry” on the beak of this species did not
escape Browne’s observation, and he refers to it in the eighth letter to
Merrett, who in his second letter to Browne remarks “the difference in
the elk’s bill by you signified is remarkable to distinguish it from others
of its kind,” indicating that this distinction was previously unknown
to him.

® As a rule the Gannet does not approach the shore, except to breed,
but follows the shoals of fish far out at sea. The circumstance mentioned by
Browne is by no means singular, and several such instances of storm-driven
Gannets being captured far inland are recorded. The ‘‘ Scotch Goose,
Anser scoticus,” mentioned further on (p. 13 2#/ra), is also in all probability
intended for the Gannet; it is the Axser Bassanus sive Scoticus of
Jonston, The ‘‘Marshland” here mentioned is a tract of country
reclaimed in ancient times from the sea, lying to the west of the town of
Lynn, of some 57,000 acres in extent, and bordering upon the estuary of
the Wash.

Cc
8 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

which seemes to bee the greater sort of Larus. whereof I
met with one kild by a greyhound neere swaffam
another in marshland while it fought & would not bee
forced to take wing another intangled in an herring net
wch taken aliue was fed with herrings for a while it may
be named Larus maior Leucophzopterus as being white
& the top of the wings browne.

[Fol. 7.]| In hard winters I have also met with that
large & strong billd fowle wch clusius describeth by the
name of Skua Hoyeri” [fr struck out] sent him from the
faro Island by Hoierus a physitian. one whereof was
shot at Hickling while 2 thereof were feeding upon a
dead horse.

As also that [strong struck out] large & strong billd
fowle [Clusius nameth s¢ruck out] spotted like a starling
wch clusius nameth Mergus maior farrcensis!! as fre-
quenting the faro islands seated above shetland. one
whereof I sent unto my worthy friend Dr Scarburgh.

Here is also the pica marina” or seapye many sorts of

 

10 Willughby (‘‘ Ornithology,” English Ed., p. 348) gives a good
description of the Great Skua (Stercorarius catarrhactes) under the name
of Catarracta, a skin of which he says was sent him by Dr. Walter
Needham, and rightly identified it with the Skua which Hoier sent to
Clusius, but his figure is evidently drawn from a skin of the Great Black-
backed Gull. Hoier, whose name so often occurs about this time in
connection with birds from the north, was « physician, living at Bergen
in Norway. The Great Skua still breeds in sadly reduced numbers on the
Shetland and Faroe Islands, but us is rarely met with in Norfolk.

1. The bird here mentioned is doubtless the Great Northern Diver.
In another place Browne again refers to it as Mergus maximus Farrensts,
Colymbus glactalis, which Clusius (‘* Exotic.,” p. 102) calls Mergus maximu,
a name used by Willughby as a synonym for his ‘‘Greatest Speckled
Diver or Loon” (p. 341). This bird is known to our fishermen as the
Herring Loon, the Red-throated and perhaps also the Black-throated
Divers being called Sprat Loons. It is a pity Browne’s “‘ draught” is not
forthcoming.

2 The Oyster Catcher, or Sea Pie, is found in greater numbers on the
north-west portion of the County of Norfolk than on the eastern shore ; it
FOUND IN NORFOLK, 9

Lari,® seamewes & cobs. the Larus maior in great
abundance [about struck out] in [written above] herring
time about yarmouth.

 

breeds occasionally about Wells, where it is universally known as the
“* Dickey-bird.”

18 Browne here refers to the family in general terms. The various
species of Gulls in their different stages of plumage were very puzzling to
the Ornithologists of the last century, and it is often extremely difficult to
say to what individual species they refer. By Larus major he would
probably mean the Black-backed and Herring Gulls which are found
on the shore all the year round, most frequently in the immature
plumage, but they most abound ‘in herring time.” By far the commonest
species at all times is Browne’s Larus alba or Puet, the Black-headed
Gull. Large flocks of this species and Z. canus frequent Breydon and
the tidal shores, especially the young birds of the year. There are now
two large breeding-places of the Black-headed Gull in Norfolk, a very old-
established one at Scoulton Mere, and a more recent colony at Hoveton
Broad. The former extensive gullery at Horsey, mentioned by Browne,
has long since been banished by the drainage of the marsh they frequented,
and it is probable that a small colony which bred on Ormesby Broad some
forty years ago, owed its origin to their banishment from Horsey. They,
in their turn, deserted Ormesby on the erection of the works for supplying
Yarmouth with water about the year 1855, and fixed upon Hoveton as their
new home, in which place, as at Scoulton, they are carefully preserved,

Professor Newton has been kind enough to furnish me with the following
note on the Terns. ‘“‘ Larus cinereus of Aldrovandus (and afterwards of
Jonston), is said to be of three kinds: one with red legs, apparently the
Black-headed Gull, and figured by Jonston, the second with yellow legs
and a slender curved black bill, the third with a pointed scarlet bill. Both
these last were most likely Terns—and all these were grey above and
white below. Gesner quotes Turner for Sterna, and there is no doubt
that his bird of that name was a Black Tern; but Gesner says that it is the
Stirn of the Frisians, and figures a white and grey bird with a black head
only (most likely a Common Tern, but possibly one of the larger species),
as Sterna, thus using the word in 4 more general sense, and it may have
been so used in Browne’s time. I see no impossibility in people having
thought of eating Terns in those days [as to that see Wote 7, p. 6 ante].
The Common Tern was most likely very abundant, and we know that the
Black Tern was exceedingly common in certain reed-beds, as stated by
Turner, and noisy beyond measure.” The Great and Lesser Terns still nest
in one or two localities on our coast, although as the result of great
persecution in very reduced numbers. The Black Tern, or Mire Crow, has

quite ceased to do so.
Io NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

Larus alba or puets in such plentie about Horsey that
they sometimes bring them in carts to norwich & sell
them at small rates. & the country people make use of
their egges in puddings & otherwise. great plentie
thereof haue bred about scoulton [mere struck out]
meere, & from thence sent to London.

Larus cinereus greater & smaller, butt a coars meat.
commonly called sternes.

Hirundo marina or sea swallowe a neat white & forked
tayle bird butt longer then a swallowe.

The ciconia or stork“ I have seen in the fennes &
some haue been shot in the marshes between this
and yarmouth. [See also third letter to Merrett and
Appendix D.]

[Fol. 8.] The platea or shouelard,” wch build upon
the topps of high trees. they haue formerly built in the
Hernerie at claxton & Reedham now at Trimley in
Suffolk. they come in march & are shot by fowlers not
for their meat butt the handsomenesse of the same,

 

14 Although it has been met with in Norfolk, more frequently than
perhaps in any other part of England, the Stork was never other than a
rare spring and autumn visitor to Norfolk. Turner writes of it in 1544 as
unknown in England, save as a captive, and Merrett a hundred years later
says it rarely flies hither, which is equally true at the present time. Hewit-
son (‘‘ Eggs of Brit. Birds,” Ed. 3, ii., p. 309; under Crane) was evidently
misled by some remarks made by Evelyn, who visited Sir Thomas Browne
in Norwich in October, 1671, and says in his diary that he saw Browne’s
** Collection of the eggs of all the fowl and birds he could procure ; that
country, especially the promontory of Norfolk, being frequented, as he
said, by several birds which seldom or never go further into the land—
as cranes, storks, eagles, and a variety of water-fowl.” From this
Hewitson infers that the Stork bred in Norfolk, a construction which the
somewhat ambiguously worded passage will certainly not bear. I imagine
collections of eggs were not very common in Browne’s time.

15 This interesting record has recently been supplemented by a much
earlier record of the breeding of the ‘‘ Popeler,” or Shovelard, in Norfolk.
Professor Newton (‘‘ Transactions of N. and N. Nat. Soc.,” vi., p.
158) has called attention to an ancient document bearing date A.D. 1300,
FOUND IN NORFOLK. II

remarkable in their white colour copped crowne &
spoone or spatule like bill.

corvus marinus. cormorants. building at Reedham
upon trees from whence King charles the first was wont
to bee supplyed. beside the Rock cormorant wch breed-
eth in the rocks in northerne countries & cometh to us
in the winter, somewhat differing from the other in
largenesse & whitenesse under the wings.

 

instituting a commission to inquire into the harrying of the eyries of
these and other birds, &c., at Cantley and other places in Norfolk.
Documents also exist, showing that in 1523 they nested at Fulham
in Middlesex, and in 1570 in West Sussex, as pointed out by Mr. Harting
in the ‘‘Zoologist” for 1877, p. 425, and 1886, p. 81, in each case
constructing their nests in trees. At what precise date this bird ceased to
breed in Norfolk and Suffolk is unknown, but Sir T. Browne’s statement
that they were ‘‘shot by fowlers not for their meat, butt the hand-
somenesse of the same,” probably explains the circumstances which
brought about that event. The Spoonbill visits Norfolk regularly every
spring in small parties now more numerously than a few years since, which
possibly may be accounted for by the destruction of nearly all its breeding-
places in Holland, and it is possible that with due encouragement it might
again be induced to breed in some of the localities in the Broads still
suitable for the purpose.

16 The Cormorant continued to nest in the trees on the shore of Fritton
Lake for many years after Sir T. Browne’s time. A manuscript note in a
copy of Berkenhout’s ‘‘ Natural History of Great Britain and Ireland,”
published in 1769, is descriptive of a Cormorant killed at Belton Decoy
(near the same lake) on the 11th September, 1775, and also states that
‘*a vast number of these birds, even to some thousands, roost every night
upon the trees,” being in the neighbourhood of the decoy they are
never shot, and ‘‘build their nests upon the top of these trees.”
According to Mr. Lubbock (‘‘ Fauna of Norf.,” Ed. 2, p. 174), ‘in
1825 there were many nests at Herringfleet, also on Fritton Lake, and in
1827 not one.” We may therefore assume that they ceased to nest at
Herringfleet in 1825 or 1826. It will be noticed that Browne made free
use of young Cormorants in his experiments as to the properties of certain
drugs (cf. Wilkin, iv., p. 452), which would seem to indicate that he could
obtain a plentiful supply of these birds. When the Cormorants ceased to
breed at Reedham is unknown. They are not unfrequently seen now,
generally in spring and autumn. The Rock Cormorant was possibly the
Crested Cormorant or Shag.
12 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

A sea fowl called a shearwater,” somewhat billed like
a cormorant butt much lesser a strong & feirce fowle
houering about shipps when they [clense struck out]
cleanse their fish. 2 were kept 6 weekes craming them
with fish wch they would not feed on of themselues. the
seamen told mee they had kept them 3 weekes without
meat. & I giuing ouer to feed them found they liued 16
dayes without [any hin s¢ruck out] taking any thing.

Barnacles® Brants Branta [wer struck out] are comon

 

W Willughby’s first acquaintance with the adult Manx Shearwater
(‘‘ Ornithology,” p. 334) was from a drawing sent him by Sir T. Browne,
who describes the bird, as above, under the accepted name of Shearwater,
and Willughby’s excellent figure on plate Ixvii. (which plate I believe is not
to be found in some copies of the ‘‘ Ornithology,” and to which there is no
reference in the text) has all the appearance of having been drawn from life.
The drawing here referred to is mentioned by Ray in his ‘‘ Collection of
English Birds not generally known,” as having been received, with others,
from the “learned and deservedly famous Sir Thomas Browne, of Norwich.”
George Edwards (‘‘ Gleanings of Nat. Hist.,” vii., p. 315), prior to 1764,
says that he went to the British Museum and examined Browne’s “old
draught,” but I could not find it among any of the papers examined. In
Browne’s fourth letter to Merrett, by an error in the transcription, he is made
by Wilkin to say that he kept twenty of these birds alive for five weeks ;
in the MS. it is clearly only two.

18 Barnacle and Brent Geese as we know them, the first by no means
common here; the Wild Goose, probably Azser cinereus ; the Scotch
Goose (see Note 9), probably the Gannet ; and the Bergander, an old
name for the Sheld-drake, as used by Turner in 1544, and derived from the
Dutch Berg-eende, German Bergente (‘‘ Dict. Birds,” p. 835). Browne’s
statement that this bird formerly bred about Northwold, or as it is even
now occasionally called by the natives, ‘‘ Norrold,” some twenty miles from
the sea; or, as he says, in the fourth letter to Merrett, ‘‘ abounding in vast
and spatious commons,” is very interesting, although not a solitary instance,
for I am informed that this bird breeds in the present day on the Gull
Lake, Twig Moor, in Lincolnshire ; but that it should have chosen such a
nesting site is not more surprising than the fact of the Ring Plover, quite as
strictly a marine species, frequenting the extensive sandy warrens about
Thetford and Brandon, near the centre of the county, for the same
purpose, as they still continue to do. But for Browne’s mention of the
circumstance we should not have been aware of this singular departure
from the normal nesting habits of the Sheld-duck, as no tradition I believe
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 13

sheldrakes sheledracus jonstoni

Barganders a noble coloured fowle vulpanser wch breed
in cunny burrowes about norrold & other places.

[Fol.9.] Wild geese Anser ferus.

scoch goose Anser scoticus.

Goshander.® merganser.

Mergus acutirostris speciosus or Loone an handsome
& specious fowle cristated & with diuided finne feet
placed very backward and after the manner of all such
wch the Duch call [Assf struck ou¢] Arsvoote.” they
haue a peculiar formation in the leggebone wch hath a
long & sharpe processe extending aboue the thigh bone
[it struck out] they come about April & breed in the
broad waters so making their nest on the water that
their egges are seldom drye while they are sett on.

Mergus acutarostris cinereus [another d s¢rvuck out] wch
seemeth to bee a difference of the former.

Mergus minor the smaller diuers or dabchicks in riuers
& broade waters.

Mergus serratus the saw billd diuer bigger & longer
than a duck distinguished from other diuers by a notable
sawe bill to retaine its slipperie pray as liuing much
upon eeles whereof we haue seldome fayled to find some
in their bellies.

Diuers other sorts of diuefowle more remarkable the

 

exists on the subject, and at present it only nests in the sand-hills in some
parts of the coast of N.W. Norfolk.

18 This evidently refers to the Goosander, which as he says in another
place most answers to the Merganser.

20 This well describes the Great-crested Grebe, which Browne rightly
says comes to us about the month of April. Browne notices the peculiar
formation of the tibia in this family of birds, but it had long been known.
The next, named Mergus acutirostris cinereus, is most likely the same
species in winter plumage. The other birds mentioned are Mergus
minor, the Little Grebe or Dabchick, and J. serratus, the Red-breasted
Merganser, even now known as the ‘‘ Saw-bill.”
14 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

mustela fusca & mustela variegata™ the graye dunne &
the variegated or partie coloured wesell so called from
the resemblance it beareth vnto a wesell in the head.

[fol 12.*] many sorts of wild ducks” wch passe under
names well knowne unto the fowlers though of no great
signification as smee [wige struck out] widgeon Arts
ankers noblets.

the most remarkable are Anas platyrinchos [szc] a
remarkably broad bild duck.

And the sea phaysant holding some resemblance unto
that bird [in the tayle crossed out] in some fethers in the
tayle.

Teale Querquedula. wherein scarce any place more
abounding. the condition of the country & the very
many decoys [mo struck out] especially between Nor-
wich and the sea making this place very much to
abound in wild fowle.

* Fols. 10 and 11 are (10 written on both sides) on the “ Ostridge,”
wide Wilkin, Vol. 4, p. 337-9. The paper is a different size, 11} by 73,
and the article is evidently bound out of place.

 

2 The Smew, male and female, or either in the immature plumage are
here referred to.

22 The local names of the various Ducks are simply legion and differ
both in time and place, not to mention the confusion occasioned by sex
and season when these birds were not so well understood as at
present. Many such names are quite lost, as ‘‘ Ankers” and ‘‘ Noblets,”
but the following are a few examples: Adult Smew, White Nun ; female or
immature Smew, Wesel Coot; the Wigeon was known as the Smee,
Whewer, or Whim ; the Tufted Duck, Arts or Arps; the Gadwall, Grey
Duck or Rodge; the Pochard, Dunbird; the Shoveller, Beck or Kert-
lutock (Hunt), Pintail, Sea Pheasant or Cracker; Long-tailed Duck,
Mealy Bird; Golden Eye, Morillon or Rattle-wing ; Scaup, Grey-back,
and on Breydon White-nosed Day Fowl; Scoter, Whilk; Velvet Scoter,
Double Scoter (Hunt); Teal, Crick; Garganey, Summer Teal, Pied
Wigeon, Cricket Teal ; other names might be mentioned, and some will be
found in the notes which will follow. Aas platyrhincus here mentioned
is the Shoveller. It may seem strange that the abundance of Teal should
in any way be attributed to the number of Decoys, but such was really the
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 15

fulicee cotte cootes” in very great flocks upon the
broad waters. upon the appearance of a Kite or buzzard
I have seen them vnite from all parts of the shoare in
strange numbers when if the Kite stoopes neare them
they will fling up [and] spred such a flash of water up
with there wings that they will endanger the Kite. & so
[es struck out] keepe him of [in of struck out] agayne
& agayne in open opposition. & an handsome prouision
they make about their nest agaynst the same bird of
praye by bending & twining the rushes & reeds so about
them that they cannot stoope at their yong ones or the
damme while she setteth.

Gallinula aquatica™ more hens.

And a kind of Ralla aquatica or water Rayle.

 

case, the quiet and shelter afforded by these extensive preserves being very
favourable to the increase of all the members of the Duck family, especially
to those breeding in their immediate neighbourhood. In the returns of the
old Decoys, Teal figured largely ; in the present day they form a very much
smaller proportion of the spoils.

28 In the present day the Coots have nothing to fear from Kites and
little from Moor Buzzards ; it may be that it is in consequence of this that
they have discontinued the practice of twining the rushes and reeds above
their nests in the manner mentioned above as being an unnecessary pre-
caution. I have, however, in some cases noticed some approach to this
practice. The Coot, although fairly numerous on the Broads, appears to
be far less so than formerly. Lubbock, in his ‘‘ Fauna of Norfolk,” says on
asking a Broadman how many Coots there were on Hickling Broad, his
reply was, ‘‘ About an acre and a half,” referring to their practice of
swimming evenly at regular distances from each other without huddling
together in dense masses, like wild-fowl.

I am indebted to Professor Newton for the following additional note on
the Coot. He says ‘‘ Turner, and after him Gesner, was puzzled as to
what was the Fu/ica of classical writers (Virgil and others), and thought it
to be some kind of Gull; but the Fudzca of later authors was certainly
the Coot, as shown by Gesner’s figure.”

24 Moor-hens are of course numerous in all suitable localities, and the
Water Rail is still fairly common, but its eggs have a market value and are
(or were) sadly stolen; a few years ago a London dealer is said to have
received over 200 eggs of this bird in one season from Yarmouth.
16 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

[Fo/. 13.] An onocrotalus or pelican® shott upon
Horsey fenne 1663 May 22 wch stuffed and cleansed I

 

°5 There is every reason to believe that a species of Pelican, probably
from its size P. crispus, was formerly an inhabitant of the East Anglian
Fens ; its bones have been found in the peat on three occasions, one of
these being the bone of a bird so young as to show that it must have been
bred in the locality, and therefore that the species was a true native and
not a casual visitant. Bones of a species of Pelican have also been found
in the remains of lake-dwellings at Glastonbury, in Somersetshire.

With regard to the species of the bird recorded by Browne and its origin,
he is careful to point out that a Pelican had about that time escaped from
the King’s collection in St. James’ Park, and to surmise that it might be the
same bird; from what follows this seems probable, but as P. onocrotalus is
believed to stray occasionally into the northern parts of Germany and
France (‘‘ Dict. of Birds,” p. 702) the occurrence of that species on the
East Coast of Britain, where, even at present, it would find a state of things
in every way suited to its requirements (guns excepted), would not be very
extraordinary. Browne’s Pelican was killed in May, 1663, and although
Dr. Edward Browne visited St. James’ Park in February, 1664, and saw
*‘many strange creatures,” including the Stork with the wooden leg (men-
tioned by Evelyn), he says nothing of the Pelicans, still it may be that it
was from him that his father heard of the escape. Evelyn, in his Diary,
mentioned that he visited St. James’ Park on February 9th, 1665, and
speaks of only one Pelican, which he states was brought from Astrakan
by the Russian Ambassador as a present to the King; Willughby says
distinctly that the Emperor of Russia sent the King two Pelicans, and
further, that he took the description in his ‘‘ Ornithology ” from a bird in
the Royal Aviary, St. James’ Park, near Westminster; it seems therefore
highly probable that Browne’s bird was one of these which had escaped
from confinement. But a rather curious circumstance arises out of this,
the bird described by Willughby does not appear to be P. oxocrotalus, but
a similar species, P. voseus, found chiefly in Indio-China and westward
to South-eastern Europe, but occurring as far west as the River Volga
(‘*Cat. of Birds,” B. M., xxvi., p. 466). In this Mr. Ogilvie Grant, the
author of that section of the Catalogue, whom I consulted, agrees with me,
and the locality whence the birds were derived, mentioned by Willughby,
renders not unlikely. Onocrotalus in Browne’s time was a general term
for ‘‘the Pelican,” and he probably knew but one species and one
individual, the escaped bird from Charles II.’s Aviary. Browne’s very
miscellaneous collection was destroyed by the authorities at the time of the
plague (see ninth letter to Merrett), and probably he remains of this
Pelican perished with the rest.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 17

yet retaine it was 3 yards & half between the ex-
tremities of the wings the chowle & beake answering the
vsuall discription the extremities of the wings for a
spanne deepe browne the rest of the body white a
fowle [not found struck out] wch none could remember
upon this coast. about the same time I heard one of the
kings pellicans was lost at St James’, perhaps this
might bee the same.

Anas Arctica clusii wch though hee placeth about
the faro Islands is the same wee call a puffin comon
about Anglisea in wales & sometimes [for struck out]
taken upon our seas not sufficiently described by the
name of puffinus the bill being so remarkably differing
from other ducks & not horizontally butt meridionally
formed to feed in the clefts of the rocks of insecks, shell-
fish & others.

The great number of riuers riuulets & plashes of water
makes hernes [to abound in these struck oud] & herneries
to abound in these parts. yong hensies being esteemed
a festiuall dish & much desired by some palates.

The Ardea stellaris botaurus, or bitour* is also comon
& esteemed the better dish. in the belly of one I found
a frog in an hard frost at christmas. another I kept ina
garden 2 yeares feeding it with fish mice & frogges. in
defect whereof making a scrape for sparrowes & small
birds, the bitour made shifft to maintaine herself upon
them.

 

% This is one of the birds once common enough in Norfolk, which in the
present day is only a winter and spring migrant. The last eggs of the
Bittern were taken in this county on 30th of March, 1868; the last
“boom” of a resident was heard in May, 1886, in the August of which
year a young female was killed at Reedham with down still adhering to its
feathers ; this was probably the last Norfolk-bred Bittern. In the ‘‘ Vulgar
Errors,” book 3, chapter xxvii., section 4, is a discourse on the ‘‘ mugient
noise” of the Bittern and the mode of its production, and in a foot-note
in the same place is a curious anecdote illustrating the difficulty of
18 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

[Fol 14.] Bistardze or Bustards” are not vnfrequent
in the champain & feildie part of this country a large
Bird accounted a dayntie dish, obseruable in the strength

 

detecting a wounded Bittern, even when marked down in short, recently
mown grass and flags. The spring cry of the Bittern is mentioned by Robert
Marsham in his unpublished journal nineteen times, between the years
1739 and 1775, as first heard at Stratton Strawless, generally between the
15th of March and the 15th of April; and it was on the 14th of the latter
month that Benjamin Stillingfleet records it in the ‘‘ Calendar of Flora”
as heard in the same locality in 1755. He does not describe the note, but
uses the words ‘‘ makes a noise.” Marsham, however, on one occasion,
in 1750, a very early year, records it on the 20th of February. As a once
familiar sound, but one which will probably never again be heard here
under purely normal conditions, these dates seem worthy of recording.

21 The last of the Norfolk and therefore certainly the last of the
British-bred Bustards, was killed in May, 1838; those which have since
‘occurred in this country were Continental immigrants. An exhaustive
history of the extinction of this bird will be found in Stevenson’s ‘‘ Birds
of Norfolk,” vols. 2 and 3. The Bustard, although found in some num-
bers, associated in small flocks or ‘‘ droves” in the few localities which it
frequented in Great Britain, was probably never a very numerous species.
The following extract from one of Browne’s letters to his son Edward,
dated April 30th, and written probably in 1681, shows that he was
on the verge of discovering an anatomical peculiarity in this family
of birds, which in after years gave rise to much controversy. He says,
“‘yesterday I had a cock Bustard sent me from beyond Thetford. I
never did see such a vast thick neck: the crop was pulled out, butt as [a]
turkey hath an odde large substance without, so hath this within the inside
of the skinne, and the strongest and largest neckbone of any bird in
England. This I tell you, that if you meet with one you may further
observe it.” The presence of a gular pouch in the Bustard was first
demonstrated by James Douglas, a Scotch Physician, in 1740, and it
appears to be fully developed only in the adult male bird, and at the
breeding season. Hence, although it has undoubtedly been found on several
occasions, the frequent unsuccessful searches for it under unfavourable
conditions led to much scepticism as to its existence. The use of this
singular appendage is still a moot point, but it seems probable that it has
to do with ‘‘voice production,” and assists in the remarkable ‘‘ showing
off” exhibited by the male bird in the breeding season. Pennant, in his
“British Zoology,” 1768, i., p. 215, gives a sentimental account of its use,
and an exaggerated estimate of its proportions. Inthe Tables of Dietary
referred to at p. 6 (note) ae, the Bustard is mentioned as in season from
October to May.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 19

of the brest bone & short heele layes an egge much
larger then a Turkey.

Morinellus or Dotterell*® about Thetford & the cham-
pain wch comes vnto us in september & march staying
not long. & is an excellent dish.

There is also a sea dotterell somewhat lesse butt
better coloured then the former.

Godwyts taken chiefly in marshland, though other
parts not without them accounted the dayntiest dish in
England & I think for the bignesse, of the biggest price.

Gnatts or Knots [only so far on p. 14, but as follows on
fol. 13 verso].

Gnats or Knots a small bird which taken with netts
grow excessively fatt. If [by mew struck out] being
mewed & fed with corne a candle lighted in the roome
they feed day & night, & when they are at their
hight of fattnesse they beginne to grow lame & are then
killed or [else they will fall aw struck out] as at their
prime & apt to decline.

[resume p. 14.] Erythropus or Redshanck a bird comon
in the marshes & of comon food butt no dayntie dish.

A may chitt® a small dark gray bird litle bigger then
a stint of fatnesse beyond any. it comes in may into

 

28 The Dotterel visits us much as in Sir T. Browne’s time, but in
decreased numbers. The Sea Dotterel which Wilkin supposes to be the
Ring Plover, is undoubtedly the Turnstone. Willughby says, ‘‘ Our
honoured Friend, Sir Thomas Browne, of Norwich, sent us the picture
of this bird by the title of the Sea Dotterel.” This is also mentioned in
the fifth letter to Merrett. See ‘‘ Birds of Norfolk,” ii., p. 82, for an inter-
esting account of Dotterel hawking near Thetford by James I. in the year
1610. ,

29 Mr. Stevenson, ‘‘ Birds of Norfolk,” ii., p. 233, gives his reasons for
coming to the conclusion that the Sanderling (Ca/ddris avenaria) is here
referred to, which the absence of a hind toe (see third letter to Merrett) tends
to confirm. The ‘‘ Churre” is only a variant of the name ‘‘ Purre,” by
which the next species, the Stint, is commonly known, and the Greex
Plover, now applied to the Lapwing, is an old name for the Golden Plover,
which he rightly says [p. 20] does not breed in Norfolk.
20 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

marshland & other parts & abides not aboue a moneth
or 6 weekes.

[fol. 13 verso.] Another small bird somewhat larger
than a stint called a churre & is comonly taken amongst
them.

[resume fol. 14.] Stints in great numbers about the
seashore & marshes about stifkey Burnham & other
parts.

Pluuialis or plouer green & graye in great plentie
about Thetford & many other heaths. they breed not
with us butt in some parts of scotland, and plentifully
in Island [Iceland].

[Fol. 15.] The lapwing or vannellus comon ouer all
the heaths.

Cuccowes” of 2 sorts the one farre exceeding the other
in bignesse. some have attempted to keepe them in
warme roomes all the winter butt it hath not succeeded.
in their migration they range very farre northward
for in the summer they are to bee found as high as
Island.

Avis pugnax. Ruffes* a marsh bird of the greatest

 

80 The circumstance which gave rise to the idea that there were two
kinds of Cuckoos, differing only in size, might possibly be discovered were
it worth the research ; possibly it would be found that the second species
was of foreign origin. Aldrovandus, as quoted by Willughby, says, ‘‘ Our
Bolognese Fowlers do unanimously affirm, that there are found a greater
and a lesser sort of Cuckows; and besides, that the greater are of two
kinds, which are distinguished one from the other by the only difference of
colour : but the lesser differ from the greater in nothing else but magnitude.”
Perhaps it was Browne’s latent respect for antiquity which led him to
mention the tradition.

81 Tt is only necessary to add to Browne’s interesting account of this
remarkable bird that it lingered longer in Norfolk as a breeding species
than in any other part of Britain, but that although it still visits us in
spring it is doubtful whether it has bred in the one favourite locality to
which it clung so tenaciously for the last few years. The ‘‘ Marshland,”
here referred to as explained in a previous note, is a tract of country situated
in north-west Norfolk, near King’s Lynn.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 21

varietie of colours euery one therein somewhat varying
from other. The female is called a Reeve without any
ruffe about the neck, lesser then the other & hardly to
bee got. They are almost all cocks & putt together fight
& destroy each other. & prepare themselues to fight like
cocks though they seeme to haue no other offensive part
butt the bill. they loose theire Ruffes about the Autumne
or beginning of winter as wee haue obserued [they
struck out] keeping them in a garden from may till the
next spring. they most abound in Marshland butt are
also in good number in the marshes between norwich
& yarmouth.

Of picus martius” or woodspeck many kinds. The
green the Red the Leucomelanus or neatly marked [red
crossed out] black & white & the cinereus or dunne calld
[a re struck out] little [bird calld written above] a
nuthack. remarkable in the larger are the hardnesse of
the bill & skull & the long nerues wch tend vnto the
tongue whereby it strecheth out the tongue aboue an
inch out of the mouth & so [lik crossed out] licks up
insecks, they make the holes in trees without any
consideration of the winds or quarters of heauen butt as
the rottenesse thereof best affordeth conuenience.

 

32 Picus marttus is here used, as it is by Sibbald, and all preceding
writers, in a general sense for all birds commonly called ‘‘ Woodpeckers,”
and does not imply that the Great Black Woodpecker (P2cus niger maxt-
mus, of Ray’s Synopsis), to which species the name was restricted by
Linnzus, is found here, and Browne goes on to mention the three British
Woodpeckers, the Green, the Red, by which the Great Spotted Wood-
pecker is intended, and the Leucomelanus, or Lesser-spotted Woodpecker.
He also includes the Nuthatch, which was at that time (as well as the
Wryneck) called a ‘‘ Woodpecker.” In this passage Browne, in making
a correction, does not seem to have proceeded far enough, the word which
Wilkin has rendered ‘‘dun-coloured,” is certainly ‘‘dunne calld” in the
MS. ; but there are two alterations in the passage, and there is little doubt
that he intended to write ‘“‘dunne cull’d” (or coloured), which would make
it read as Wilkin has printed it, The use of the word ‘‘nerve,” for tendon
or ligament, was in accordance with the phraseology of the time.
22 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

[fol. 15 verso.] black heron® black on both sides
the bottom of the neck neck [szc] white gray on the
outside spotted all along with black on the inside a
black coppe of small feathers some a spanne long. bill
poynted and yallowe 3 inches long

back heron coloured intermixed with long white
fethers

the flying (?) fethers black

the brest black & white most black

the legges & feet not green but an ordinarie dark
cork [?] colour.

{#ol. 16.] The number of riuulets becks & streames
whose banks are beset with willowes & Alders wch
giue occasion of easier fishing & slooping to the water
makes that [bir crossed out| handsome coulered bird
abound wch is calld Alcedo Ispida or the King fisher.
they bild in holes about grauell pitts [have their nests
very full crossed out| wherein [are crossed out] is [above]
to bee found great quantitie of small fish bones. & lay [a
crossed out| very handsome round & as it were polished
egges,

An Hobby bird™ so calld becaus it comes in ether
with or a litle before the Hobbies in the spring. of the

 

83 This passage is not part of the original MS., but is written on a
separate slip of paper and pasted on the left-hand side of the opening
(p. 15 verso). I doubt whether it is more than a casual memorandum,
descriptive possibly of the plumage of the Purple Heron, but not
intended to apply to any Norfolk bird. The Black Heron of Willughby
is the Glossy Ibis, a bird which is said to have been known to the West
Norfolk gunners as the ‘‘ Black Curlew.”

84 This is evidently the Wryneck, which we now call the ‘‘Cuckoo’s
Mate,” probably for the same reason that Browne associates it with the
Hobby. It may be that the Hobby having become comparatively scarce,
it was necessary to find another travelling companion for this bird, and
that the Cuckoo was chosen as the most suitable. Old Norfolk names
are Emmet-eater, and in one old book it is called Turkey-bird ina MS.
note.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 23

bignesse of a Thrush coloured & paned* like an hawke
maruellously subiet to the vertigo & and are sometimes
taken in those fitts,

Upupa or Hoopebird® so named from its note a
gallant marked bird wch I have often seen & tis not
hard to shoote them.

Ringlestones” a small [bird crossed out] white & black
bird like a wagtayle & seemes to bee some kind of mota-
cilla marina comon about yarmouth sands. they lay
their egges in the sand & shingle about june and as the
eryngo diggers tell mee not sett them flat butt upright
likes [szc] egges in [a crossed out] salt.

The Arcuata or curlewe frequent about the sea
coast.

[Fol. 17.] There is also an handsome tall bird
Remarkably eyed and with a bill not aboue 2 inches long

* That is marked with a barred or checkered pattern.

 

85 The Hoopoe would seem from this note to have been of more
frequent occurrence than in the present day, see also in his answer to
““Certain Queries” (Tract iv., Wilkin iv., p. 183), in which he says of
this bird, ‘‘ though it be not seen every day, yet we often meet with it in
this country.”

8° The Ring Plover is evidently the bird here referred to, but I have
never known the name of Ringlestone applied to this species in Norfolk,
nor have I met with it elsewhere. The Eringo is now no longer an article
of commerce, and its diggers are extinct, but not their tradition as to the
position in which the eggs of this bird are said to be placed—a ‘‘ vulgar
error” which does not accord with the writer’s experience. When the full
complement of four eggs is laid, they are arranged with their pointed ends
towards the centre of the nest, which is a slight hollow in the soil. The
concavity of the nest therefore, as well as the disproportionate size of the
larger end, gives the eggs somewhat the appearance of being placed in
the position referred to, but the small end of the egg is always visible.
Sir Thomas Browne does not seem to have been aware of the remarkable
fact of this essentially marine bird habitually nesting on the sandy warrens
about Thetford in the south-west of Norfolk, far from the sea, which it
still does, though in reduced numbers, and is there known as the Stone-
hatch, from its habit of paving its nest with small stones.

D
24 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

comonly calld a stone curlewe” butt the note thereof
more resembleth that of a green plouer [it crossed out] &
breeds about Thetford about the stones & shingle of the
Riuers.

Auoseta® calld [I thinck a Barker crossed out] shoohing-
horne [written above] a tall black & white bird with
a bill semicircularly reclining or bowed upward so that
it is not easie to conceiue how it can feed answerable
vnto the Auoseta Italorum in Aldrovandus a summer
marsh bird & not unfrequent in Marshland.

[A bird calld Barker from the note it hath crossed out]

A yarwhelp® so thought to bee named from its note a

 

87 This characteristic Norfolk bird is still far from rare in the locality
named by Browne, and is found in several other parts of the county.
Willughby says, ‘‘ The learned and famous Sir Thomas Brown, Physician
in Norwich,” informed him to the same effect, and repeats that its note
(one of the most charming sounds uttered on the wild trackless heath on a
summer’s night) resembles that of the Green (z.¢e., Golden) Plover, but in
the ear of the writer it is even more musical. In the third letter to
Merrett, Browne says that he has kept the Stone Curlew (not “four
Curlews,” as Wilkin has it,) in large cages.

% The Avoset is another bird which formerly frequented the marshy
districts of Norfolk at the breeding time, but which has now been lost to
us except as a very rare passing migrant in the spring. It probably
ceased to breed in this county in or about the year 1818, and is said to
have been exterminated in consequence of the demand for its feathers for
the purpose of dressing artificial flies. It was called ‘‘ Shoeing-horn,”
from the peculiar form of its beak, which, however, rather resembles the
bent awl used by shoemakers. Girdlestone, who knew the bird well in its
breeding haunts at Salthouse and Horsey, called it ‘* Shoe-awl,” a much
more appropriate name. In his third letter to Merrett, Browne again men-
tions this bird, and applies to it the name of ‘‘ Barker” (which he had
crossed out in the above note), remarking that it was so called from its
barking note. Jonston figures this bird twice; once in Tab. 48 under the
name of Avosetta Italor., z.e., the Avosetta of the Italians, and again in
Tab. 54 under the second name Avoselte species, an obvious error.

89 This paragraph is written on the back of fol. 16. The Yarwhelp is
the name by which the Black-tailed Godwit, a species which formerly
nested in abundance in the marshes about Ilorsey and some adjacent local-
ities in the Broads, was known. It virtually ceased to nest here sometime
between the years 1829 and 1835, but perhaps an instance or two may have
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 25

gray bird intermingled with some yellowish [whitish
written above] fethers [the bill crossed out] somewhat
long legged & the bill about an inch & half. esteemed a
dayntie dish.

Loxias or curuirostra a bird a litle bigger than a
Thrush of fine colours & prittie note [the m crossed out]
differently from other birds, the [lower crossed out] upper
& lower bill crossing each other. of a very tame nature,
comes about the beginning of summer. I have known
them kept in cages butt not to outliue the winter.

A kind of coccothraustes calld a [cobble crossed out]
coble bird® bigger than a Thrush, finely coloured &
shaped like a Bunting [it comes crossed out] it is [some-
times crossed out] chiefly [written above] seen [about
crossed out] in sumer about cherrie time.

[fol. 16 verso.] A small bird of prey" [some-
thing smeared out here] calld a birdcatcher about
the bignesse of a Thrush and linnet coloured with a
longish white bill & sharpe of a very feirce & wild

 

occurred rather later. It was also known as the ‘‘Shrieker.” Browne
again refers to this bird in the fourth letter to Merrett, where he calls it
‘* barker” (a name which he had no doubt erroneously previously applied
to the Avoset), or ‘*Latrator, a marshbird, about the bigness of a
Godwitt,” and once again under the name of ‘‘ Yare-whelp, or barker,”
in his fifth letter ; it may be that the name ‘‘ barker” was applied indis-
criminately to either species. As Lubbock names this bird as one of the
“© five species in particular ” which ‘‘ used formerly to swarm in our marshes ”
(** Fauna of Norfolk”), one would have thought Browne would have been
better acquainted with it than seems to have been the case from the
hesitating way in which he uses the vernacular name.

40 The Hawfinch was evidently not a very well-known bird in Browne’s
time, either to himself or Willughby ; the latter says, ‘‘it is said to build
in holes of trees.” It has steadily increased in frequency as a breeding
species with us for the last twenty years.

41 This paragraph is written on the back of fol. 16. The Red-backed
Shrike, Lanius collurio, is the only species of Lanius mentioned by
Browne ; it is singular that he omits all mention of another bird, and that
an essentially Norfolk species which would have been new to the Pixax—
26 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

nature though kept in a cage & fed with flesh. [Added
after in same hand but fresher ink] a kind of Lanius
{Lanius crossed out and written more distinctly under].

[p. 17 resumed.] A Dorhawke® or kind of Accipiter
muscarius conceiued to haue its name from feeding upon
flies & beetles. of a woodcock colour but paned like an
Hawke a very litle poynted bill. large throat. breedeth
with us & layes a maruellous handsome spotted egge.
Though I haue opened many I could neuer find any-
thing considerable in their mawes. caprimulgus.

[Fol. 18.] Auis Trogloditica* or Chock - small bird
mixed of black & white & breeding in cony borrouges

 

the Bearded Titmouse, afterwards known to Edwards as the Least Butcher
Bird. Browne certainly sent a drawing of this bird to Ray, who in his
‘“Collection of English words not generally used” (1674), as pointed
out by Mr. Gurney, mentions it as a ‘little Bird of a tawny colour on the
back, and a blew head, yellow bill, black legs, shot in an Osiar yard,
called by Sr. Tho. for distinction sake silerella,” the drawing of which he
acknowledges he had received. Pennant, 1768 (‘‘ Brit. Zool.,” i., p. 165),
follows Edwards (‘‘ Nat. Hist. of Birds,” &c., 1745), who classes it with
the Laniidse, and it was not till long after, and as the result of much dis-
cussion, that it was finally established as the only representative of a new
genus under the name of Panurus biarmicus. The local name is Reed
Pheasant, but Browne’s name of Silerella seems an exceedingly appropriate
one.

42 Browne seems to have been much interested in this remarkable bird,
and mentions it again in his second and third letters to Merrett, especially
in the latter; he calls it Caprimulgus, but conceives it to be a kind of
Accipiter, zscarius, or cantharophagus, ‘‘in brief” [?] ‘‘ ands rostratula
gutturosa, quast coxans, scarabeis vescens, sub vesperam volans, ovum
speciossisimum excludens,” a fair specimen of the descriptive method of
the time. Although he used the name Caprimulgus, it will be observed
that he does not mention the ‘‘ vulgar error”’ which led to its being so
called. Merrett includes this species in the P:z2x under the name of
‘*Caprimulgus, or the Goat-sucker,” but in a letter to Browne tells him he
knows no Hawk called a Dorhawk.

48 The Wheatear is here referred to; the name ¢roglodt/ica would seem
to be more appropriate in this country, having reference to its habits of
nesting in ‘*‘ Cony borroughs,” than that of exanthe, as applied to it by
those who knew it as frequenting the Continental vineyards. A name
still, or recently in use in West Norfolk, is Cony-chuck.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 27

whereof the warrens are full from April to September.
at which time they leaue the country. they are
taken with an Hobby and a net and are a very good
dish.

Spermologus. [sc] Rookes wch by reason of the
[in reason of crossed out] great quantitie of corn feilds &
Rooke groues are in great plentie the yong ones are
comonly eaten sometimes sold in norwich market &
many are killd for their Liuers in order to cure of the
Rickets.

Crowes“ as euerywhere and also the coruus variegatus
or pyed crowe with dunne & black interchangeably
they come in the winter & depart in the summer &
seeme to bee the same wch clusius discribeth in the faro
Islands from whence perhaps these come. [they are
crossed out} and I have seen them [w~rztten above] very
comon in Ireland, butt not known in many parts of
England.

Coruus maior Rauens in good plentie about the citty
wch makes so few Kites to bee seen hereabout. they
build in woods very early & lay egges in februarie.

Among the many monedulas or Jackdawes I could
neuer in these parts obserue the pyrrhocorax or cornish
chough with red leggs & bill to bee comonly seen in
Cornwall. & though there bee heere very great [num
crossed out| store of partridges yet [not crossed out] the

 

44 The Crow (Corvus corone) is much less common in Norfolk than
formerly, but it still nests here in a few scattered localities. C. cornix, the
Hooded, Norway, Danish, or ‘‘ Royston”’ Crow, is an autumn immigrant as
of yore, but not especially from the Farée Islands ; both species (or forms as
by some regarded) are immigrants from the east, but the latter, as a rule,
occupies a more northern range than the former. The Raven (C. corax) is
now a very rare visitor to Norfolk ; it is probable that it last nested in this
county in the year 1859. The Jackdaw, or Caddow, is common enough,
but the Chough (Pyrrhocorax graculus) is quite unknown in Norfolk.
Although the Magpie must have been well known to Browne I find no
mention of it in these notes.
28 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS

french Red leggd partridge“ is not to bee met with
[heere crossed out]. the Ralla or Rayle* wee haue counted
a dayntie dish. as also no small number of Quayles.
the Heathpoult” comon in the north is vnknown heere
as also the Grous. though I haue heard some haue
been seen about Lynne. the calandrier or great [Fo/. 19]
great [szc] crested lark Galerita I haue not met with
heere though with 3 other sorts [of Larkes written
above] the ground lark woodlark & titlark.

Stares or starlings in great numbers. most remark-
able in their [great crossed out] numerous [written
above] flocks [about the crossed out] wch I haue
obserued about the Autumne when they roost at night
[up crossed out] in the marshes in safe places upon
reeds & alders. wch to obserue | went to the marshes
about sunne set. where standing by their vsuall place

 

46 The Red-legged Partridge is now common enough ; it was introduced
into the Eastern Counties at Sudbourne and Rendlesham, in East Suffolk,
in or about the year 1770, by both the Marquis of Hertford and Lord
Rendlesham. How quickly they established themselves may be judged
from the fact that in the season of 1806-7 of 1,927 Partridges killed at
Rendlesham 112 were Red-legs, but they do not seem to have spread very
far. A second introduction, this time into West Suffolk, much nearer to
the Norfolk border, at and about Culford, was effected in the year 1823, and
from this centre they rapidly spread into Norfolk, in which county also
others were imported by the resident proprietors.

4% The Land Rail (Crex pratensis) or Daker hen, is doubtless here
referred to, as the Water Rail has already been mentioned (p. 15 az/e) as
‘a kind of Raila aguatica.” This bird isa summer visitor, by no means
common and very uncertain in itsnumbers. The same applies to the Quail,
which appears to be less frequent than formerly, no doubt from the great
destruction on the Mediterranean coast in spring of the birds migrating to
England. In the summer and autumn of 1870 we had an unusual influx
of these latter birds.

47 How far the indigenous race of Blackgame, which undoubtedly
lingered for many years about Wolferton and Sandringham, still exists, it is
difficult to say; examples turn up occasionally, but so many of these birds
have been introduced and turned off in different parts of the county in the
course of the past forty years, that it is impossible to speak with certainty.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 29

of resort I obserued very many flocks flying from all
quarters. wch in lesse than an howers space came
all in & settled in innumerable [quantitie crossed out]
numbers [zritten below] in a small compasse.

Great varietie of finches® and other small birds
whereof one very small [one crossed out] calld a whinne
bird marked with fine yellow spotts & lesser than a
wren, there is also a small bird called a chipper some-
what resembling the former wch comes in the spring &
feeds upon the first buddings of birches & other early
trees.

A kind of Anthus [or crossed out] Goldfinch [written
above] or fooles coat comonly calld a drawe water.
finely marked with red & yellowe & a white bill. wch
they take with trap cages in norwich gardens & fastning
a chaine about them tyed to a box of water it makes a
shift with bill and legge to draw up the water unto it
from the litle pot hanging [abot the length of crossed
out| by the chaine about a foote [downe crossed out]
belowe.

 

48 In his fifth letter to Merrett Browne says, ‘‘I confess for such little
birds I am much unsatisfied on the names given to many by countrymen
and uncertain what to give them myself.” This is painfully apparent in
the cases of the two little birds here referred to as the ‘* Whinne-bird ” and
the ‘‘ Chipper.” From the description of the former, ‘‘ marked with fine
yellow spots and lesser than a Wren,” also with a ‘‘ shining yellow spot on
the back of the head,” it seems likely that the Gold-crested Wren is
intended. The Chipper, he says, ‘‘ comes in the spring and feeds upon the
first buddings of birches and other early trees ;” he also calls it ‘‘ Betule
carptor,” and says that he sends a drawing to Merrett ; a third mention is
as follows: ‘That which I called a Betule carptor, and should rather have
called it Alnz carptor . . . it feeds upon alder buds, nucaments, or
seeds, which grow plentifully here: they fly in little flocks.” I can only
suggest that this bird may be the Siskin, which fairly answers the description,
It visits us in small flocks on its way north very early in the year, feeding
upon the seeds of the alder, birch, and larch trees. One would however
have thought that the Siskin would have been well known to Browne, as
it evidently was to Turner, Willughby, and Ray. Merrett mentions it
under Turner’s name of ‘* Luteola.”
30 NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS FOUND IN NORFOLK.

[The account of the Roller, which is written on smaller
paper, will be found improperly inserted among the
Fishes, between pp. 30 and 32 as follows :—]

[Fo/. 31.] On the xiiii of May 1664 a very rare bird
was sent mee kild about crostwick wch seemed to bee
some kind of Jay.” the bill was black strong and
bigger then a Jayes somewhat yellowe clawes tippd
black. 3 before and one clawe behind the whole bird
not so bigge as a Jaye [the crossed out.]

The head neck & throat of a violet colour the back
upper parts of the wing of a russet yellowe the fore
& part of the wing azure succeeded downward by a
greenish blewe then on the flying feathers bright blewe
the lower parts of the wing outwardly of a browne
[the crossed out] inwardly of a merry blewe the belly a
light faynt blewe the back toward the tayle of a purple
blewe the tayle eleuen fethers of a greenish coulour the
extremities of the outward fethers thereof white wth an
eye* of greene. Garrulus Argentoratensis [the name
added in a different ink and pen].

* Tinge, shade, particularly a slight tint.—‘‘ Imp. Dict.”

 

49 This note is interesting as the first record of the occurrence of the
Roller in Britain, to which country it is a rare wanderer. Although it had
long been known on the Continent, its identity seems to have puzzled
Browne, and he imagines (as did others, both before and after him,) it to be
some kind of Jay ; later, in his second letter to Merrett (January, 1668),
he says that it answers to the description of Garrulus argentoratensis
(the name given by Aldrovandus to whom it was known), and calls it ‘‘ the
Parrot-jay.” This is five years after the original note was made, and
we find that the words Garrulus argentoratensts, written by the same
hand but with a different pen and ink, have been added subsequently,
doubtless as the result of further information. In another letter
he mentions having sent the bird to Merrett, but adds, ‘“‘If you have
it before I should bee content to have it againe otherwise you may please
keep it.”
NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES
AND MARINE ANIMALS FOUND IN
NORFOLK.

[Ms. SLOAN. 1882. FOL. 145-146. ALTERED TO 21 AND
22, AND 1830 FOL. 23-30 AND 32-38.]

{The introductory remarks, paragraphs one to three, will
be found in the volume of the Sloane MSS. numbered 1882
(labelled ‘‘ Notes on Generation”’), on pages 145 and 146, which are
altered to 21 and 22. They were placed in their present position
by Wilkin, but although appropriate, there is nothing to show
that they belong to the set of notes here reproduced, and they
may form memoranda for the beginning of some essay never
completed. The contents of the volume in question are of a
very miscellaneous character, and consist of fragmentary notes,
which appear to be memoranda jotted down at random.]

[Fol. 22;.] -It may well seeme no easie matter to
giue any considerable account of fishes and animals of
the sea wherein tis sayd that there are things creeping
innumerable both small and great beasts because they
liue in an element wherein they are not so easely dis-
couerable notwithstanding probable it is that after this
long nauigation search of the ocean bayes creeks
Estuaries and riuers that there is scarce any fish butt
hath been seen by some man for the large & breathing
sort thereof do sometimes discouer themselues aboue
water and the other are in such numbers that some at
one time or other they are discouered and taken euen
the most barbarous nations being much addicted to
fishing and in America and the new discouered world
the people were well acquantd with fishes of sea and
riuers, and the fishes thereof haue been since described
by industrious writers.
32 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC.,

Pliny seemes to short in the estimate of their number
in the ocean, who recons up butt one hundred &
seventie six species. butt the seas being now farther
known & searched [275 verso] Bellonius much enlargeth.

and in his booke of Birds thus deliuereth himself
allthough I think it impossible to reduce the same vnto
a certain number yet I may freelie say that tis beyond
the power of man to find out more than fiue hundred
sorts [kinds wrztéen above] of fishes three hundred sorts
of birds more than three hundred sorts of fourfoted
animalls and fortie diversities of serpents.”

[SLOANE MSS. 1830, FOL. 23-38.]

[ol. 23.] Of fishes sometimes the larger sort are
taken or come ashoar. A spermaceti whale” of 62 foote
long neere Welles. another of the same kind 20 yeares
before at Hunstanton. & not farre of 8 or nine came

 

50 This estimate of the number of species of birds and fishes existing is
amusing in the light of the present knowledge of the subject. Of course
any such estimate can only be approximate, and open to constant emenda-
tion ; but according to a statement in the ‘‘ Zoological Record” of 1896,
it was believed that there were something like 386,000 described species :
2,500 of which are mammals, 12,500 birds, 4,400 reptilia and batrachia,
12,000 fishes, 50,000 mollusca, 20,000 crustacea, and 250,000 insecta; the
smaller divisions I have omitted. And whereas only about 10,000 species
of plants were known to Linnzeus, Professor Vines in his address to the
Botanical section at the Bradford meeting of the British Association, 1900,
states that the approximate number of recognised plants at present existing
is 175,596; but this is far short of the total of existing species. Professor
Saccardo states that there are 250,000 fungi alone, and that the number of
existing species in other groups would bring the total up to over 400,000.

51 In the muniment room at Hunstanton Hall there exists a book of
MSS. notes relating to their estates, kept by Sir Hamon and Sir Nicholas
le Strange, between the years 1612 and 1723. From this book Mr.
Hamon le Strange has been good enough to send me an extract containing
the full particulars of the stranding and disposal of a Sperm Whale 57 feet
long, which came ashore on their Manor of Holme, on the 6th December,
1626, the skull of which is still in the courtyard at Hunstanton Hall.

Browne had not come to reside in Norwich at that time, and the chapter
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 33

ashoare & 2 had yong ones after they were forsaken by
ye water.

A grampus aboue 16 foot long taken at yarmouth
[3 or crossed out] 4 yeares agoe.

 

on the Spermaceti Whale in his Psexdodoxia Epidemica, was inspired by a
subsequent occurrence of the same kind, for, as appears from the above
note, a larger individual, 62 feet long, came ashore at Wells 20 years later,
which he says led him to further inquiry. This would indicate about the
year 1646 as the date of the latter occurrence, whereas in his third letter
to Merrett, written in 1668, he states that it happened ‘‘about 12 years
ago,” or in 1656. There is probably an error in one of these dates.

Another example seems to have been found at Yarmouth about the year
1652, for we find Browne writing in that year for particulars of its ‘‘ cutting
up.” (See Appendix B.)

In the postscript to a letter also in the muniment room at Hunstanton,
dated June 11th, 1653, written to Sir Hamon le Strange, who had been
consulting him professionally, Browne says : ‘‘I pray you at your leisure doe
mee the honor to informe mee how long agoe the Spermaceti Whale was cast
upon your shoare & whether you had any spermm with in any other part
butt the head.” It will be noticed that in both the letters referred to he is
anxious to ascertain in what part of the body the ‘‘sperm” was situated,
doubtless for the purpose of confuting the ‘‘vulgar conceit” as to the
origin of the ‘‘sperm ” referred to in the second paragraph of his treatise
in the Pseudodoxia. is investigations also probably first led to a certain
knowledge as to the nature of the food of this animal.

These, -however, although the first to be recorded in this county, were
not the first or only occurrences of the kind, for there is in the parish
church of Great Yarmouth the base of the skull of a Sperm Whale, used
as a chair, for the painting of which a charge of five shillings appears in
the churchwardens’ accounts for the year 1606; many such events in
European waters are to be found recorded.

But the most interesting circumstance with regard to these whales
is the statement that ‘‘ two had yong ones after they were forsaken by the
water.” This event renders it highly improbable that they were Sperm
Whales, for the stragglers of that species which have been met with in our
waters, and indeed in the northern seas generally, have been almost
invariably solitary males, or, in one or two instances ‘‘schools” of young
males. In the only instance in which both sexes were found, the school
was composed I believe of immature individuals. (Vzde J. Anderson,
‘¢ Nachrichten von Island, Grénland, und der Strasse Davis,” Frantfurt
(1747), p. 248.) Moreover, this view is confirmed by a letter which will
be found in Appendix B., where the following passage occurs :—‘‘ And
not only whales, but grampusses have been taken in this Estuarie . . .
34 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC.,

The Tursio or porpose is comon the Dolphin® more
rare though sometimes taken wch many confound with
the porpose. butt it hath a more waued line along the
skinne sharper toward ye tayle the head longer and
nose more extended wch maketh good the figure of
Rondeletius. the flesh more red & [fa crossed out] well
cooked of very good taste to most palates & exceedeth
that of porpose.

 

and about twenty years ago four were run ashore near Hunstanton, and
two had young ones after they had come to land.” A so-called Grampus
which came ashore on the 21st July, 1700, was from a description and
drawing in the le Strange MS. above quoted, a male Ayperoodon rostratus,
apparently nearly adult. '

The Grampus (Orca gladiator) (mentioned in the next paragraph) is
frequently met with in the British seas, and has repeatedly occurred on the
Norfolk coast. Some early occurrences are on record, for instance in
Mackerell’s ‘‘ History of Lynn,” twelve are said to have come ashore near
that town in 1636, and another in 1680. Two very juvenile examples were
taken off Yarmouth in November. 1894.

*2 There can be no doubt hat the Common Dolphin (De/phinus
delphis) is here referred to, and indeed this species might reasonably be
expected to be met with on our coast, as its range extends at least as far to
the north as the Scandinavian waters, but so far as the writer is aware
Browne’s is the only record of its having been met with in Norfolk. The
White-beaked Dolphin (D. adirostris) is not unfrequent, but it is clear
that Browne does not refer to that species.

In the ‘‘ Vulgar Errors,” Browne devotes a whole chapter (chapter ii. of
the fifth book) toa learned treatise on the ‘‘ Picture of Dolphins,” and in
one of the letters to his son Edward (Sloane MSS., 1847), dated June
14th [1676 ?], he writes feelingly as an anatomist, evidently fearing that a
specimen then available might be wasted, instead of being reserved for
scientific purposes ; for, says he, ‘‘if the dolphin were to be showed for
money in Norwich, little would bee got ; if they showed it in London they
are like to take out the viscera, and salt the fish, and then the dissection
will be unconsiderable.” He then refers to the dolphin ‘‘ opened when
the King was here,” and describes its anatomical peculiarities, adding that
Dame Browne cooked the flesh ‘‘so as to make an excellent savory dish of
it,” and that “collars” thereof (steaks cut transversely) being sent to the
King, who was then at Newmarket, for his table, they ‘‘were well liked

f.” It is evident therefore that he was present at the dissection of two
f these animals.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. ac

The vitulus marinus® seacalf or seale wch is often
taken sleeping on the shoare [4 crossed out] 5 [written
above] yeares agoe one was shot in the riuer of norwich
about surlingham [wh crossed out] ferry having con-
tinued in the riuer for diuers moneths before being an
Amphibious animal it may bee caryed about aliue &
kept long if it can bee brought to feed some haue been
kept many moneths in ponds. the pizzell the bladder
the cartilago ensiformis the figure of the Throttle the
clusterd & racemous forme of the kidneys [Fo/. 24] the
flat & compressed heart are remarkable in it. in
stomaks of all that I have opened I have found many
[short crossed out] wormes.

I haue also obserued a scolopendra cetacea* of about
ten foot long answering to the figure in Rondeletius wch
the mariners told me was taken in these seas.

 

58 There is in the present day a considerable number of Common
Seals inhabiting the sand-banks of the Wash between the Norfolk and
Lincolnshire coasts, and they are frequently captured by the fishermen ;
nor has the habit of straying into fresh-water deserted them, for in recent
years they have been taken in the River Ouse at Bluntisham, forty miles
from the sea. Three other species of Seal have been taken on the Norfolk
coast, viz., Phoca hispida, P. barbata, and Halicherus gryphus.

*4 A Scolopendra, ten feet long, is at first rather startling, but on
referring to Rondeletius’s Librd de pisctbus Marints (lib. xvi. p. 488),
I find that under the name ‘‘Scolopendra” he includes at least three
distinct forms—i., S. /errestris, a centipede ; li., S. 7arzza, certain species
of Neridiform polychaet worms; iii., Scolopendra cetacea, regarded as a
Cetacean and figured with a Cetacean blow-hole. With regard to this
remarkable figure my friend, Dr. S. F. Harmer, has favoured me with the
following note :—‘‘In the account given Rondeletius is evidently writing
from report; the figure is also no doubt borrowed, and may have been
‘improved’ when redrawn; it seems to me that it is based upon some
kind of Tunny, although he figures a Tunny earlier in the book (lib. viii.
p. 249). The idea of the lateral appendages might have been derived
from the dorsal and ventral finlets of a Tunny ; but the first four finlets on
each side are imaginary structures, and in a wrong position. I can offer
no opinion with regard to the nasal appendages.” Jonston (De
piscibus, p. 156, Tab. xliv.) also gives a similar figure of Scolopendra
36 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC.,

A pristes or serra [written above] saw fish® taken
about Lynne comonly mistaken for a [sha crossed out]
sword fish & answers the figure in Rondeletius.

A sword fish or Xiphias or Gladius intangled in the
Herring netts at yarmouth agreable unto the Icon in
Johnstonus with a smooth sword not vnlike the Gladius
of Rondeletius about a yard & half long, no teeth [n
crossed out| eyes very remarkable enclosed in an hard
cartilaginous couercle about ye bignesse of a good apple.
ye vitreous humor plentifull the crystalline larger then
a nutmegge [cleare crossed out] remaining cleare sweet
& vntainted when the rest of the eye was vnder a deepe
corruption wch wee kept clear & limpid many moneths
vntill an hard frost split it & manifested the foliations
thereof.

It is not vnusuall to take seuerall sorts of canis or

 

Cetacea, which appears to be a further modification of Rondeletius’s
figure ; here it has teeth, shown like those of the Sperm Whale, and
an extra dorsal-fin is added; the number of lateral appendages is the
same, and a column of water proceeding from the blow-hole is falling
gracefully forward. It is worthy of notice that Rondeletius also figures
the Saw-fish (Pristis) with a blow-hole.

*§ In the ‘* Transactions of the Linnean Society,” ii., p. 273, is an essay
by Latham ‘On the various species of Sawfish,” but he does not mention
any British locality. So far as am aware Browne’s is the only record of
the occurrence of this southern species in British waters, with the exception
of a note in Fleming’s ‘‘ British Animals,” p. 164, where it is stated on the
authority of the late Dr. Walker’s MS. ‘‘ Adversaria” for 1769, that
Pristis antiguoram is ‘found sometimes in Loch Long,” but Fleming adds
that he has met with no other proof of its ever having visited the British
shores. Browne mentions in his eighth letter to Merrett that he sends
him a ‘‘figure in little” of a Pristzs which he received of a Yarmouth
seaman, and is so precise in his statement that his fish was Prasczs
serra (the Prist?s antiquorum of Cuvier), that his record cannot be dis-
regarded. Te specially guards against its being mistaken for the Sword-
fish (Xzphias gladius), which has been taken on several occasions in
vur waters, and of which he gives some interesting particulars,
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 37

doggefishes® great and small wch pursue the shoale of
herrings and other fish butt this yeare 1662 one was
aken intangled in the Herring netts about 9 foot in
length, answering the last figure of Johnstonus lib 7
vnder the name of canis carcherias alter & was by the
teeth & 5 gills one kind of shark particularly [Fo/ 25]
remarkable in the vastnesse of the optick nerves & 3
conicall hard pillars wch supported the extraordinarie
elevated nose wch wee haue reserued with the scull the
seamen calld this kind a scrape.

Sturio or Sturgeon so comon on the other side of the
sea about the mouth of the elbe come seldome into our
creekes though some haue been taken at yarmouth &
more in the great [owse crossed out] Owse by Lynne
butt their heads not so sharpe as represented in the
Icons of Rondeletius & Johnstonus.

 

86 Various species of Dog-fish are frequent off the Norfolk coast as else-
where. The name ‘‘Sweet William” is applied to the larger fish of this
kind, especially to the Tope; this appears also to have been the case in
Pennant’s time, for alluding to this vernacular name he supposes it was
applied in ironical allusion to the offensive smell of their flesh and skin.
They are objects of great aversion among the fishermen, owing to the disturb-
ance they create among the shoals of fish, and the damage they do to both nets
and the enclosed fish. Scarcely a season passes but one or more specimens
of Browne’s Cants carcharias, or, as modern Ichthyologists call it, Lamna
cornubica, the Porbeagle, being entangled in the drift nets and landed with
the herrings. One lies on the fish-wharf at Lowestoft as I write this note
on the 19th of October, 1900, measuring 7 feet 10 inches in length.
Jonston’s figure referred to by Browne is evidently intended for this
species, but he makes a slight error in the reference to the Hastorza
Naturalis (De Piscrbus et Cetrs) ; it occurs in book v., and the figure is
fig. 6 on Tab. vi., and it is marked Candzs carcharias alius (not alter).

51 So great is the variation in the snout of the Sturgeon, that Dr.
Parnell in his excellent essay on ‘‘ The Fishes of the District of the Forth,”
describes the Sharp-nosed Sturgeon as a distinct species under the name of
Acipenser sturio, and the broad-nosed form he calls A. datzrostrzs. His
views, however, have not been generally accepted, and only one British
species is recognised. The Sharp-nosed variety has been taken here, but
the normal form is much more frequent.
38 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC,

Sometimes wee meet with a mola or moonefish® so
called from some resemblance it hath [from crossed out]
of a crescent in the extreme part of the body from one
finne unto another one being taken neere the shoare at
yarmouth before breake of day seemed to shiuer &
grunt like an hogge as Authors deliuer of it the flesh
being hard & neruous it is not like to afford a good dish
butt from the Liuer wch is [white cvossed out] large white
& tender somewhat [wee crossed out] may bee expected
[for crossed out] the gills of these fishes wee found thick
beset with a kind of sealowse. [Added subsequently]
in the yeare 1667 a mola was taken at monsley wch
weighed 2 [p crossed out] hundred pound.

The Rana piscatrix or frogge fish” is sometimes found
in a very large magnitude & wee haue taken the [paynes
crossed out| care [written above] to haue them clend
& stuffed. wherein wee obserued all the appendices
whereby the[y] cach fishes butt much larger then are
discribed in the Icons of Johnstonus tab xi fig 8.

[Fol. 26.] The sea [wollf crossed out] wolf or Lupus
nostras of Schoneueldus remarkable for its spotted
skinne & notable teeth incisors Dogteeth & grinders
the dogteeth [in the crossed out] both in the jawes &
palate scarce answerable by any fish of that bulk for
[strength crossed out] the like disposure strength &
soliditie.

 

58 This fish (Orthagordscus mola), which we know as the Sun-fish,
has been repeatedly taken here. For an account of its parasites see
Cobbold on the ‘‘Sun-fish as a host,” ‘‘ Intellectual Observer,” ii., p. 82;
also Day, ‘‘ Brit. Fishes,” ii., p. 275. According to Dr. Spencer Cobbold
the Sun-fish is infested by nine species of Helminths, three of which are
mostly found attached to the gills, while a fourth adheres to the surface of
the body.

59 Both this species and the Wolf-fish are well known upon our
coast.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 39

Mustela marina” called by some a wesell ling wch
salted & dryed becomes a good Lenten dish.

A Lump or Lumpus Anglorum so named by
Aldrouandus by some esteemed a festiuall dish though
it affordeth butt a glutinous jellie & the skinne is beset
with stony knobs after no certaine order ours most
answereth the first figure in the xiii table of Johnstonus
butt seemes more round & arcuated then that figure
makes it.

Before the herrings there comonly cometh a fish about
a foot long by the fishman called an horse’ resembling
in all poynts the Trachurus of Rondeletius of a mixed
shape between a mackerell & an herring. obseruable
from [an oblique bo crossed out] its greene eyes rarely
skye colored back after it is kept a day & an oblique
bony line running on ye outside from the gills vnto ye
tayle. a drye & hard dish butt makes an handsome
picture.

The Rubelliones or Rochets® butt thinly met with on
this coast. the gornart cuculus or Lyre species more
often wch they seldome eat butt bending the back &
sprdding the finnes into a liuely posture do hang them
up in their howses.

 

60 Some member of the family Gadide is here referred to, probably the
five-bearded Rockling, MJotel/a mustela, or Brown Whistle-fish of Pennant,
which is occasionally taken by our fishermen, but is by no means common.

61 This is the Horse Mackerel, or Scad, Caranx trachurus ; a handsome
fish and common enough, especially off Sheringham, but not much
esteemed for the table.

62 Fish of the Gurnard kind are here referred to. The Rochet of
Pennant is the Red Gurnard, 7rigla cuculus ; he calls 7. dyra the Piper.
Large numbers of various species of Gurnard are brought in by our
trawlers and sell readily, especially the Sapphirine Gurnard, or Tub-fish
(7. hirundo), which is known as the ‘* Lachet” on our coast ; it reaches a
large size, and seems to be much in demand for the table.- In spring the
colours are very brilliant, and they are frequently seen on the fish stalls
with their pectoral fins extended as Browne describes.

E
40 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC.,

[Fo/. 27.] Beside the comon mullus® or mullet there
is another not vnfrequent wch some call a cunny fish
butt rather a red muellett of a flosculous redde & some-
what rough on the scales answering the discription of
[Rond crossed out] Icon of Rondeletius vnder the name
of mullus ruber asper [no crossed out] butt not the tast
of the vsually knowne mullet as [being butt crossed
out] affording butt a drye & leane bitt.

Seuerall sorts of fishes“ there are wch [bear crossed
out] do [written above] or may beare the names of
seawoodcocks as the Acus maior scolopax & saurus.
the saurus wee sometimes meet with yonge. Rondeletius
confesseth it a very rare fish somewhat resembling the
Acus or needlefish before & a makerell behind. wee
have kept one dryed many yeares agoe.

The Acus maior calld by some a garfish & greenback
answering ye figure of Rondeletius under the name of

 

68 The Common Mullet I take to be the Grey Mullet (A/ugzl cafito),
which is at times plentiful on our coast, coming into Breydon and the
mouths of the rivers, but the Red Mullet (A@wllus barbatus) is far less
frequently met with. In his third letter to Merrett, Browne says,
“There is of them mazor and minor,” the latter probably being the
variety known as the Surmullet, by far the most frequently met with here.

64 The Saurus of Rondeletius appears to be the Skipper or Saury-pike
(Scombresox saurus) of modern authors. Acus major is the Gar-fish or
Greenback (Belone vulgaris); this is the Acus primus of Rondeletius.
Dr. Harmer has been good enough to send me the following note
on Rondeletius’s figures :—‘‘ De Acus secunda specie’? (lib. viii. p. 229).
**Two species are figured; the upper figure appears to represent Szpho-
nostoma typhle, and the lower one S.acus. Gunther (‘Brit. Mus. Cat.,’
viii. p. 157) gives a reference to Rondeletius in his synonyms of S. acer
without indicating that the latter figures two species. Under 5S. typhie
(p. 154) he gives the synonym Syngnathus rondeletii, De la Roche. A
reference to Delaroche (‘ Ann. Mus. Hist. Nat., Paris,’ xili. 1809 p. 324,
Pl. xxi. fig. 5) shows that S. rondeletdé is identified with the first figure
on p. 229 of Rondeletius; and it may thus be concluded that Gunther
agrees with this conclusion. It seems therefore probable that Browne’s
Acus of Aristotle refers to S. ¢yphile.”
‘ FOUND IN NORFOLK. 4!

Acus prima species remarkable for its quadrangular
figure and verdigreece green back bone.

* A lesser sort of Acus [wee crossed out] maior or
prime speczei wee meet with [answering the saurus of
Rondeletius crossed out] much shorter then the comon
garfish & in taking out the spine wee found it not green
as in the greater & much answering the saurus of
Rondeletius.

A scolopax” or sea woodcock of Rondeletius was
giuen mee by a seaman of these seas. about 3 inches
long & seemes to bee one kind of Acus or needlefish
answering the discription of Rondeletius.

The Acus of Aristotle [see Mote 64] lesser thinner
corticated & sexangular by diuers calld an addercock
& somewhat resembling a snake ours more plainly finned
then Rondeletius discribeth it.

A little corticated fish® about [4 inches crossed out] 3 or
4 inches long [several words smeared out] ours answering
that wch is named piscis octangularis by wormius,
cataphractus by Schoneueldeus. octagonius versus
caput, versus caudam hexagonius.

[Foé, 28.] The faber marinus” sometimes found very
large answering ye figure of Rondeletius. which though
hee mentioneth as a rare fish & to be found in the
Atlantick & Gaditane ocean yet wee often meet with
it in these seas comonly calld a peterfish hauing [a crossed

* This and the next paragraph on the back of Fol. 26 are in different

ink and smaller writing though in the same hand, and appear to have been
added subsequently. The first paragraph is omitted by Wilkin.

 

65 The Scolopax, or Sea Woodcock, is clearly Cestréscus scolopax, a very
rare fish in the British seas, and it would have been well had Browne given
a more precise account of thé origin of his specimen.

66 Doubtless the Armed Bull-head, or Pogge, Agonus cataphractus. A
MS. note in Berkenhout says it was called at Lowestoft a Beetle-head (1769).

87 Zeus faber, the Dory. Many, usually.small ones, are brought in by
our fishermen.
42 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC,

out] one [written above] black spot on ether side
the body conceued the perpetuall signature from the
impression of St Peters fingers or to resemble the 2
peeces of money wch St Peter tooke out of this fish
remarkable also from its disproportionable mouth & many
hard prickles about other parts.

A kind of scorpius marinus® a rough prickly &
monstrous headed fish 6 8 or 12 inches long answerable
vnto the figure of Schoneueldeus.

A sting fish® wiuer or kind of ophidion or Araneus
slender, narrowe headed about 4 inches long wth a
sharpe small prickly finne along the back which often
venemously pricketh the hands of fishermen.

Aphia cobites marina” or sea Loche.

Blennus a sea millars thumb.

Funduli marini sea gogions.

Alosz or chads to bee met with about Lynne.

Spinachus or smelt” in greatest plentie about Lynne
butt [comon on yarmouth coast crossed out] where they
haue also a small fish calld a primme answering in [all

 

88 Cottus scorpius, Father Lasher, commonly taken by the shrimpers.

69 Probably from its size the Lesser Weever, Zvrachinus vipera,
as also the Draco minor of Jonstoni. A common fish in our waters.
Large numbers of the Greater Weever, 7. draco, are brought in by the
trawlers.

7 One of the Gobies. Day, ‘‘ Brit. Fishes,” i., p. 169, supposes the
Aphya cobites of Rondeletius (p. 20) to be the White Goby, 4. pellucida ;
Pennant has 4. cobétes as a synonym for the Spotted Goby (G. minutus)
and the Sea Gudgeons, Black Gobies (G. zger), but at that time there
was no very nice distinction of the members of this genus. The Sea
Miller’s Thumb is probably the Shanny (Blennius pholis). Alosa, is the
Allis Shad (Cz/fea a/osa, L.), not uncommon (see Mote 74).

7 The Smelt, Osmerus eperlanus, is abundant in the shallow waters and
estuaries on the Norfolk coast in spring, ascending the fresh-water rivers to
spawn. The small fish called a Primme by Browne, may be the Atherine
(Atherina presbyter), which is also found in our waters, where it is often
mistaken for the Smelt, but I have not heard it called by the former name.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 43

crossed out] tast & shape a smelt & perhaps are butt the
yonger sort thereof.

[Fod. 29.] Aselli or cods of seuerall sorts. Asellus
albus or whitings in great plentie. Asellus niger
carbonarius or [col crossed out] coale fish. Asellus
minor Schoneueldei callarias pliny or Haydocks with
many more also a weed fish somewhat like an haydock
butt larger & dryer meat. A Basse also much
resembling a flatter kind of Cod.”

Scombri are makerells” in greate plentie a dish much
desired butt if as Rondeletius affirmeth they feed upon
sea starres & squalders (see Mote 90) there may bee some
doubt whether their flesh bee without some ill qualitie
sometimes they are of a very large size & one was taken
this yeare 1668 wch was by measure an ell long and of
ye length of a good salmon, at Lestoffe.

Herrings departed sprats or sarde not long after
succeed in great plentie wch are taken with smaller
nets [& dryed crossed out] & smoakd & dryed like
herrings become a [daint crossed out] sapid bitt &
vendible abroad.

Among these are found Bleakes or bliccze™ a thinne
herring like fishe wch some will also think to bee young

 

72 The first three fishes named in this paragraph need no comment ; the
Weed-fish is doubtless a local name, but for what species I cannot discover.
The Bass, Labvax lupus (Cuv.), is, as might be expected from the nature
of our coast, by no means common here.

7 The latter part of this paragraph, beginning, ‘‘ Sometimes they are
of a very large size,” is written on the left-hand side of the opening, and is
evidently a subsequent addition. One would be inclined to think from the
great size of the fish here recorded (3 ft. 9 in.), that it may have been a
species of Tunny, or even a Bonito, both of which have been taken on the
Norfolk coast. Seventeen inches is a large mackerel.

74 It is quite evident that the fish referred to here, and again in the sixth
letter to Merrett, is not the true Bleak (A/burnus luctdeus) of our fresh-
waters. It seems that the young of some species of Clupeoid was thus
known, for I find it stated in a MS. note in a copy of Berkenhout’s
44 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC.,

herrings. And though the sea aboundeth not with
pilchards, yet they are comonly taken among herrings.
butt few esteeme thereof or eat them.

Congers are not so comon on these coasts as on many
seas about England. butt are often found upon the
north coast of Norfolk. & in frostie wether left in
pulks & plashes upon the ebbe of the sea.

[Fo/. 30.] The sand eels Anglorum of Aldrouandus,
or Tobianus of Schoneueldeus comonly called smoulds
taken out of the sea sands with forks & rakes about
Blakeney and Burnham a small round slender fish about
3 or 4 inches long as bigge as a small Tobacco pipe a
very dayntie dish.

Pungitius marinus” or sea bansticle hauing a prickle
one each side the smallest fish of the sea about an inch
long sometimes drawne ashoare with netts together with
weeds & pargaments* of the sea.

* This word which Wilkin renders ‘‘ fragments,” is doubtless from the
Latin Zergamentum, and it seems likely that Browne had in view certain
sea-weeds, possibly Laminaria or Ulva which, especially when dry,
present somewhat the appearance and texture of parchment.

 

‘*Outlines of the Natural History of Great Britain,” (1769), in the
possession of Mr. T. E. Gunn, that the Bleak and the Sprat are
often caught together in the sea at Aldeburgh (Suffolk) in November,
and the writer of the note adds, ‘‘the Bleak is larger than the Sprat,
its eyes are larger, and the upper part of its belly serrated.” I think
from this description and from Browne’s remarks, that the young of a
species of Shad must have been mistaken for the Bleak, which although
found low down in our rivers almost to where the salt tide mingles with
the fresh, does not I believe enter the salt water.

7 The smallest of the genus Gasterosteus, or Stanstickles, is G. pungitius,
the ten-spined Stickleback, but this fish is two inches long when full grown.
All the species seem to be more or less indifferent to the salinity of the
water. The fifteen-spined Stickleback, G. sfinachia, is also sometimes
taken by the shrimpers, and is the most truly marine species, but is by no
means ‘‘ the smallest fish of the sea.”
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 45

Many sorts of flat fishes” The pastinaca oxyrinchus
with a long & strong aculeus in the tayle conceuud of
speciall venome & virtues.

Severall sorts of Raia’s skates & Thornebacks the
Raia clauata oxyrinchus, raia oculata, aspera, spinosa
fullonica.

The great Rhombus or Turbot aculeatus & leuis.

The passer or place.

Butts of various kinds.

The passer squamosus Bret Bretcock” & skulls
comparable in taste and delicacy vnto the soale.

The Buglossus solea or soale® plana & oculata as
also the Lingula or small soale all in very great plentie.

Sometimes a fish aboue half a yard long like a butt”
or soale called asprage wch I haue known taken about
Cromer.

[Fol. 31.] [See Roller ante p. 30.]

[Fol 32.] Sepia or cuttle fish® [smear] & great
plentie of the bone or shellie substance which sustaineth

 

78 Pastinaca oxyrinchus appears to be the Sting Ray (Zygon pastinaca) ;
Raia clavata, the Thornback ; #. oculata, the Spotted Ray (2. maculata) ;
R. aspera, the Shagreen Ray? (R. fullonica).

7 The Brill, Rhombus levis (Lin.), Passer asper squamosus, Rondl.,
formerly known as the Brett, Bretcock, Skull, or Pearl.

78 Solea vulgaris, the Common Sole. The ‘‘ Ziwgula, or small Sole,”
is probably the Solea variegata, Flem., the S. parva sive Lingula of Rond.
Jonston figures ‘‘ Sola lingulata,” Tab. xx., fig. 12, but I am uncertain
what species is intended. It is possible that Browne may have Latinised
the trade name by which small Soles are known in the market as ‘‘slips”
and “tongues.” What other species he may have wished to indicate as
“plana” and ‘‘oculata” it is difficult to determine.

7 The “ asprage” (or it may be ‘‘a sprage ”) may possibly be the Dab,
Pleuronectes limanda, which Rondeletius calls Passer asper. I do not find
that species mentioned otherwise, and a great many are taken by the Cromer
and Sheringham fishermen.

®0 Of the various species of the Cephalopoda, Sepza officénaiis, is more
often represented by its calcareous dorsal plate than by the entire animal,
46 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC.,

the whole bulk of that soft fishe found commonly on the
shoare,

The Loligo sleue or calamar found often upon the
shoare from head to tayle [such crossed out] sometimes
aboue an ell long, remarkable for its parretlike bill, the
gladiolus or calamus along the back & the notable
crystallyne of the eye wch equalleth if not exceedeth
the lustre of orientall pearle.

A polypus another kind of the mollia* sometimes wee
haue met with.

Lobsters in great number about sheringham and
cromer from whence all the country is supplyed.

Astacus marinus pediculi [marini written above] facie™
found also in that place. with the aduantage of ye long
foreclawes about 4 inches long.

Crabs large & well tasted found also in the same
coast.

Another kind of crab® taken for cancer fluuiatilis
litle slender & of a very quick motion found in the
Riuer running through yarmouth. [added subsequently]
& in bliburgh riuer.

[ol. 33.] Oysters exceeding large about Burnham
and [Huns crossed owt] Hunstanton like those of poole

* By mollza is meant all soft-bodied shell-less animals.

 

for large numbers of these “‘ cuttle-bones” are sometimes strewed along the
shore for miles. The Squid, Loligo vulgaris, is often met with, sometimes
of considerable size. The horny ‘‘pen” resembles a short leaf-shaped
Roman sword, and Browne’s term, ‘‘ Gladiolus,” is quite as appropriate as
that of ‘‘Calamus.” His Polyps is probably Octopus vulgaris, but it is
rarely met with on the Norfolk coast.

81 Probably Mephrops norvegicus, the Norway Lobster, called at Lowes-
toft a Crayfish or Prawn. They are sometimes brought in in large numbers
by the steam trawlers, but the precise locality in which they are captured I
am unable to say; the fishermen say the ‘‘ North Sea,” which is rather a
vague address, but others say between the Texel and Heligoland.

88 Cancer menas, the Shore-crab, a very common species on the Norfolk
coast is here intended.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 47

St Mallowes or ciuita [vech crossed out] vechia whereof
[some crossed out] many are eaten rawe the shells being
broakin with [cle crossed out] cleuers the greater part
pickled & sent weekly to London & other parts.

Mituli or muscles in great quantitie as also chams or
cochles about stiskay [szc] & ye northwest coast.

Pectines pectunculi varij or scallops of the lesser sort.

Turbines or smaller wilks, leues, striati. as also
Trochi, Trochili, or scaloppes finely variegated &
pearly. [as also crossed out.| Lewise [sic] purpure
minores, nerites, cochlez, Telline.

Lepades, patella: Limpets, of an vniualue shell wherein
an animal like a snayle cleauing fast unto the rocks.

Solenes cappe lunge venetorum comonly a razor fish
the shell thereof dentalia

[The MS. breaks off here, and the next paragraph
appears to be an interpolation. ]

Dentalia by some called pinpaches because pinmeat
thereof is taken out with a pinne or needle.”

 

83 Mussels and Cockles are very abundant all along the shallow shores
of North-west Norfolk, as well as Clams, Aya arenaria. ‘‘ Scallops of the
lesser sort” are probably Pecten opercularius and P. varius. The Whelk,
Buccinum undatum, is also very numerous, and forms the staple of a
considerable industry at Sheringham; the lesser, or Dog-Whelk, Wassa
reticulata, as well as Purpura lapillus and several sorts of Trochus, are
commonly met with. The genus Nerita was a very comprehensive one in
Browne’s time, and included many species of Littorina, of which the well-
known Periwinkle, Z. /z/oréa, is the most numerous here. No true Nerita
is now recognised as British, although in the warmer seas the genus is a
very numerous one. The most common Tellina here is Z. ¢enuzs.
Lepades patelle are of course the common Limpet (Patella vuleata), and
of the Solen, or Razor Shell, which Gwyn Jeffreys says in the time of
Aldrovandus was called by the Venetians ‘‘ cappa longa,” we have two
species found on the sandy portions of the coast. Here some confusion
exists in the MS., after the words, ‘‘the shell thereof dentalia,” the note
ends abruptly, and is followed by an interpolation which seems quite
irrelevant, as Dentalia have surely never been called ‘‘ Pin-patches” (the
vernacular name for Lz¢tortna Litoria), nor is it probable that, like that
48 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC,

Cancellus Turbinum et neritis* Barnard the Hermite
of Rondeletius a kind of crab or astacus liuing in a
forsaken wilk or nerites.

echinus echinometrites® sea hedghogge whose neat
shells are common on the shoare the fish aliue often
taken [with crossed out] by the dragges among the
oysters.

[This and the next paragraph on fol. 33 verso.]

Balani® a smaller sort of vniualue growing comonly in
clusters. the smaller kinds thereof to bee found oftimes
upon oysters wilks & lobsters.

Concha anatifera or Ansifera or Barnicleshell whereof
about 4 yeares past were found upon the shoare no
small number by yarmouth hanging by slender strings of
a kind of Alga vnto seuerall splinters or [clefts crossed out]
cleauings of firre boards vnto wch they were seuerally
fastned & hanged like ropes of onyons: their shell flat
& of a peculiar forme differing from other shelles, this
being of four diuisions. containing a small imperfect
animal at the lower part diuided into many shootes or
streames wch prepossed [imag crossed out] spectators

 

common univalve, they were ever taken out of their shells with a pin or
needle. Dentalia are mentioned on two other occasions as of doubtful
occurrence and Dentalium entalis has slight claim to be a native of
Norfolk ; the only recorded specimen I know of was picked up in 1890 by
Mr. Mayfield, from the drift on the beach between Wells and Holkham.

® Hermit Crabs are here referred to, the larger, Pagurus bernhardus,
found very frequently inhabiting the shells of the Whelk, and a smaller
species which takes up its abode in those of a Trochus.

% Dead Echinz are very common on the sea-shore, and many living ones
are dredged by the shrimpers. Zchinus sphera is the most common on
the Norfolk coast; £. mz/zaris, a small species, is also very abundant
about Cromer.

86 The species of Cirripeds referred to are probably the common Acorn
Barnacle (Balanus porcatus) and the Goose Barnacle (Lepas anatifera), the
latter occasionally found on ships’ bottoms and drift-wood, probably carried
by favourable currents from warmer seas than our own.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 49

fancy to bee the rudiment of the tayle of some goose or
duck to bee [expute crossed out] produced from it.
some whereof in ye shell & some taken out & spred
upon paper wee shall [still?] keepe by us.

[Fo2. 34.] Stelle marine” or sea starres in great
plentie especially about yarmouth. whether they bee
bred out of the [vrticas crossed out] vrtice squalders or
sea gellies as many report wee cannot confirme butt the
squalderes in the middle seeme to haue some lines or
first draughts not unlike. our starres exceed not 5
poynts though I haue heard that some with more haue
been found about Hunstanton and Burnham. where
are also found stelle marinz testacee or handsome
crusted & brittle sea [stars crossed out] starres much
lesse.

The pediculus® and culex marinus the sea lowse &
flie are [are crossed out] also no strangeres.

Physsalus Rondeletij® or eruca marina physsaloides
according to the icon of Rondeletius of very orient
green & purple bristles.

Urtica marina® of diuers kinds some whereof called
squalderes. of a burning and stinging qualitie if rubbed

 

8? The Five-finger (Asterias rubens, L.) is a very numerous species on our
coast and very destructive. Brittle Stars (Ophzocoma sp ?) are as Browne
states most frequent about Hunstanton, Burnham, and Cromer. So/aster
papposa is also found in the same localities.

88 The Pediculus, or Sea Louse, is probably Zadétras locusta, the Sand-
hopper ; what may be intended by Culex marinus it is difficult to say. A
species of gnat is at times very numerous on the wet sand just above the
water-line. See also Notes 110 and 115, on a kindred subject.

® The Sea Mouse, Aphrodite aculeata. This is referred to again in the
Letters to Merrett.

Mr. E. T. Browne, of the Zoological Laboratory of University College,
London, has kindly furnished me with the following notes on this subject :
“*Jonston (1657) gives figures of Anemones and large Medusae under the
name of Urtica. On Tab. xviii. he figures Anemones and other beasts, but
not medusae. The medusae are on the next Tab. (xix.). Uvtica marina
50 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC.,

in the hand. the water thereof may afford a good
cosmetick.

[The next paragraph on folio 33 verso is evidently
added subsequently. ]

Another elegant sort that is often found cast up by
shoare in great numbers about ye bignesse of a button
cleere & welted & may bee called fibula marina
crystallina.

hirudines marini or sea Leaches.”

vermes marini very large wormes digged a yarde deepe

 

includes both Anemones and certain Scyphomedusae (not Pu/mo). Under
‘some . . . called Squalders of a burning and stinging quality,’ I
think Browne must refer to our common stinging Scyphomedusae belong-
ing to the genus Chrysaora or Cyanaea, of which there are three species.

‘*The vague description of what he calls ‘sea buttons’ [see below, also
second letter to Merrett] would suit either a Medusa ora Ctenophore. The
additional note, ‘two small holes in the ends,’ rather upsets matters, but I
think he must refer to some sort of jelly-fish, probably damaged, which is
usually the case when cast up on the shore. If the buttons worn in those
days were like filbert-nuts or eggs, I am inclined to think that the reference
must be to a Ctenophore, genus Pleurobrachia, but if flat, then to one of
the Hydromedusae. It would be safe to say, ‘ probably a kind of jelly-fish,’
which is about as vague as the reference.” See also Dr. Reuben Robinson’s
description of ‘‘ Squalders” in a letter to Browne (Wilkin i., pp. 422-424).
It seems probable that the gelatinous masses referred to in the early part
of this letter, which Dr. Robinson says were ascribed by Dr. Charleton to
‘the nocturnall pollution of some plethorick or wanton starr: or rather
excrement blowne from the nosthrills of a rheumatick planett,” were the
remains of the undeveloped spawn of frogs, the bodies of which had been
eaten by rats, crows, or herons, and had become swollen by exposure to
moisture.

91 It is difficult to determine the species of marine Annelids referred to
by Browne; the Sea Leech is probably Pontobdella levis. The ‘‘large
wormes” digged for bait, mentioned more than once, are Lug-worms,
Arenicola prscatorum ; the Vermes in tubulis testacet may be tube-worms of
the genus Terrebella, or a species of Serpula. Tethya or ‘‘Sea dugge”
(not ‘Sea dogs,” as Wilkin has it) might very well apply to Asczdza or
one of the allied genera. Simple Ascidians, generally known as Sea-squirts,
are common littoral forms; the animals figured by Rondeletius under the
heading ‘‘De Tethyis” (p. 127) are simple Ascidians. The ves¢carza marina,
or ‘‘fanago,” might well refer to the egg capsules of the common Whelk
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 51

out of the sands at the ebbe for bayt. tis known where
they are to bee found by a litle flat ouer them on ye
surface of ye sand. as also vermes in tubulis testacei.
Also Tethya or sea dugges some whereof resemble
fritters [and crossed out] the vesicaria marina also & [see
Note 91] fanago sometimes very large conceaued to
proceed from some testaceous animals. & particularly
[Fod. 35] from the purpura butt [in crossed out] ours
more probably from other testaceous wee hauing not
met with any large purpura upon this coast.

[A blank space.]

Many riuer fishes also and animals. Salmon® no
comon fish in our riuers though many are taken in the
owse. in the Bure or north riuer, in ye waueney or
south riuer, in ye [yare or crossed out] norwich riuer butt

 

(Buccinum undatum), which are very commonly found in masses on the
shore. In his sixth letter to Merrett, Browne mentions two kinds of
“*fanago,” the first which I take to be the egg capsules of the Whelk,
resembling the ‘‘husk of peas;’ the smaller that of ‘‘ barley when the
flower [awn?] is mouldered away,” may possibly be the egg capsules of
Purpura lapillus, or of some species of Natica, which bear a fanciful
resemblance to grains of barley. See also Merrett’s second letter in
Appendix A., in which he describes the Vesicaria found on oyster-shells
as resembling flowers of Ayacinthus botryoides, which is not a bad
description of the form of the egg capsules of P. dapillus.

9 The Salmon (Sa/mo salar) is at the present day very rarely found in
our rivers, and those met with are, as a rule, male Kelts which have strayed
into unsuspected situations after floods; a singular exception occurred on
the 20th May, 1897, when one weighing 6 Ibs. was taken on a fly in the
river above Stoke Holy Cross Mill; this fish is preserved in the Norwich
Museum. Another curious capture of which I heard (but did not see the
fish) occurred on the 1st August, 1898, when a salmon, also of 6 Ibs. weight,
jumped into a small boat towed behind a yacht which was sailing across
Breydon Water. That the salmon was at one time a recognised visitor to
our rivers is evident from the following extract from the Norwich Court of
Mayoralty Book under date 2 Novr. 1667: ‘‘It is ordered that the bell
man give notice that if any person shall take any Salmons from the
Nativity of our Lady unto St. Martin’s day, or destroy any young Salmons
by netts or other ingens from the midst of April until the Nativity of St.
52 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC,

seldome and in the winter butt 4 yeares ago 15 were
taken at Trowes mill [ab crossed out] in Xtmas. whose
mouths were stuck with small wormes or horsleaches no
bigger than fine threads some of these I kept in water 3
moneths if a few drops of blood were putt to the water
they would in a litle time looke red. they sensibly grewe
bigger then I first found them and were killed by an
hard froast freezing the water. most of our Salmons
haue a recurued peece of flesh in ye end of the lower
iawe wch when they shutt there mouths deepely enters
the upper. as Scaliger hath noted in some.

The Riuers lakes & broads” abound in [the Lucius
or added above] pikes of very large size where also is
found the Brama or [breme crossed out] Breme large &
well tasted the Tinca or Tench the Rubecula Roach as
also Rowds and Dare or Dace perca or pearch great &
small. whereof such [as] are are in Braden on this

 

John Baptist shall be punished according to the law.” The Salmon is the
host of several parasites both internal and external. Fresh run Salmon are
generally infested with a ‘‘ Sea-louse,” which quickly perishes in fresh-
water; not so, however, with the troublesome worm-like creature, the
subject of Browne’s experiments ; it is known as Lern@a salmonis, and is
only found on the gill-covers of spent Kelts ; it is not got rid of till the fish
returns to the salt water. Browne may be excused being rather sceptical
as to the identity of the clean run Salmon and the spent Kelt, for
no greater contrast can be imagined than that which exists between the
two—the male in the ‘‘redding” season develops the unsightly hooked
mandible, which so puzzled the worthy doctor, and both in colour and
form is as hideous an object as can be imagined. Bécard Gallorum (not
Beccard gallorus), t.e., the fish called ‘‘ Bécard” by the French (see second
letter to Merrett), refers to the use of a name still applied in France to a
large Cock Salmon, and ‘‘ Anchorago” is the name under which the fish
was described by Scaliger, whose book I have not seen. Dr. Giinther
tells me that Artedi, ‘‘Ichthyologia,” Pt. v., p. 23, quotes this name as a
synonym of the Salmon.

93 The freshwater fishes named in the next three paragraphs are so well
known as to require few remarks. The Bream in our rivers and broads
are very numerous and reach a large size, but of their esculent qualities
I have had no personal experience ; not so, however, with the Perch, which
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 53

side yarmouth in the mixed water [are gen crossed out}
make a dish very dayntie & I think scarce to bee
bettered in England. butt the Blea[k] [Fo/. 36] the
chubbe the barbell [I haue not obserued in these riuers
crossed out] to bee found in diuers other Riuers in
England I haue not obserued in these. As also fewer
mennowes then in many other riuers.

The Trutta or trout the Gammarus or crawfish [no
crossed out| butt scarce in our riuers butt frequently
taken in the Bure or north riuer & in the seuerall
branches thereof. & very remarkable large crawfishes
to bee found in the riuer wch runnes by castleaker &
nerford.

The Aspredo perca minor™ and probably the cernua
of Cardan comonly called a Ruffe in great plentie in

 

quite deserve Browne’s high encomium. It is well known here that this
fish shows no aversion of a certain admixture of salt and fresh water, and
Mr. Lubbock (‘‘ Fauna of Norfolk”) says, ‘‘the point in Norfolk rivers
where the largest are taken with most certainty is where water begins
to turn brackish from the influence of the ocean;” in autumn the very
finest are taken by angling with a shrimp, a favourite bait in the lower
parts of the Yare and Waveney. In such localities a small shrimp
(Pandalus varius, Leach) abounds, and it is to this favourite food that
Mr. Lubbock attributes the excellence of these Perch. Roud is the
local name of the Rudd (Leuczscus erythropthalmus). The River Nar is
still perhaps the best Trout stream in the county, and the Crawfish is found
in most of the rivers but not abundantly.

% Merrett calls the Ruff Cernua fluviatilis, and mentions its abundance
in the River Yare at Norwich, which he (no doubt inadvertently) assigns to
the County of ‘‘ Essex” ; from this locality Caius obtained the specimen, a
drawing of which he sent to Gesner under the name of 4Aspredo. Camden
assigns this fish also to Norwich, and Spencer, in his ‘‘ Marriage of the
Thames and Medway,” writes of the Ruff :—

‘* Next cometh Yar, soft washing Norwich walls,
And with him bringeth to their festival
Fish whose like none else can show,
The which men Ruffins call.”

This county seems to have been assigned an exclusive proprietorship in the
Ruff, to which, as Browne rightly points out, it had no just claim.
54 NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES, ETC.,

norwich Riuers & euen in ye streame of the citty. which
though camden appropriates vnto this citty yet they are
also found in the riuers of oxforde [&] Cambridge.

Lampetra Lampries great & small” found plentifully in
norwich riuer & euen in the Citty about may [some
crossed out} whereof some are very large & well cooked
are counted a dayntie bitt collard up butt especially
in pyes.

Mustela fluuiatilis or eele poult® to bee had in norwich
riuer & [in thalso crossed out| between it & yarmouth
as also in the riuers of marshland resembling an eele &
a cod. a very good dish & the Liuer thereof well
answers the commendations of the Ancients.

[Fol. 37.] Godgions or funduli fluuiatiles, many
whereof may bee taken within the [citty crossed out]
Riuer in the citty:

Capitones fluuiatilis or millers thumbs, pungitius
fluuiatilis or stanticles. Aphia cobites fluuiatilis or
Loches. in norwich riuers in the runnes about
Heueningham heath in the north riuer & streames
thereof.

Of eeles” the comon eele & the glot wch hath some-
what a different shape in the bignesse of the head & is
affirmed to have yong ones often found within it. & wee
haue found a vterus in the same somewhat answering
the icon thereof in Senesinus.

 

% Both the Sea Lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) and the Lampern (P.
fluviatilis) axe found in the Norfolk rivers.

% The Burbot, or Eel Pout (Zo/a velgaris), called by Merrett a Coney-
fish, from its habit of concealing itself in holes in the river banks. It is not
sufficiently numerous now to form an article of diet, and I imagine there
are few living who could bear testimony as to the esculent qualities of its
“* Liver.”

97 The coarse variety of the Eel, known as the ‘‘ Glout,” or Broad-nosed
Eel, is believed to be the barren female ; Browne’s informants were doubt-
less misled by the presence of certain thread-worms (Mematoxys) in the
abdomen of the eels, which they mistook for young ones.
FOUND IN NORFOLK. 55

Carpiones carpes plentifull in ponds & sometimes
large ones in broads [smear] 2 the largest I euer beheld
were [found crossed out] taken [added above] in Norwich
Riuer.

[A whole line is smeared out, and a break occurs in the
MS. after the observation on the Carp; it then proceeds
to notice some other inhabitants of the county which
perhaps Browne had difficulty in classifying. ]

Though the woods and dryelands about [abound ?]
with adders and vipers® yet are there few snakes about
our riuers or meadowes more to bee found in Marsh land
butt ponds & plashes abound in Lizards or swifts.

 

%8 Both Vipers (or Adders) and Snakes, the latte in particular, are, I
imagine, much less abundant than formerly, but the few species of Lizards
and Newts (Swifts) are still probably in undiminished numbers; the Mole
Cricket (Gryllotalpa vulgaris) is rare with us; Horse-leeches (Azlostoma
gulo) are frequent, and also ‘‘ Periwinkles,” which I take to be various
species of freshwater Molluscs, possibly of Zémnea. The Hard-worm (or
Hair-worm), Gordius aquaticus, which refused to be generated from
‘*horsehayres,” is still an object of wonder to the unlearned, and the Great
Black Water-Beetle (Hydrophilus piceus) is found ; but forficala and corcu-
Zumt were a puzzle, as it is evident from their association they must be
aquatic forms (and the Earwig certainly does not take to the water volun-
tarily), till my friend, Mr. C. G. Barrett, referred me to the following passage
in Swammerdam’s ‘‘ Book of Nature,” p. 93: ‘‘This is most certain that
the Forficula aquatica of Jonston is the true nymph of the Mordella, or
Dragon-fly,”* Dr. Charleton in his ‘‘ Onomasticon,” p. 57, has ‘* Corculus,
the Water-beetle, resembling an heart ;” not very definite, but probably the
Whirligig Beetle, Gyrznus natator, is intended ; it is also an appellation
given by some authors to ‘‘a small species of cordiformis, or heart-shell,
of a rose colour,” doubtless a Cyclas or a Pisidium. Squilla is the Fresh-
water Shrimp (Gammarus pulex), and Notonecta glauca, the Water-
boatman ‘‘ which swimmeth on its back,” is well known.

Otters are still numerous in the broads and reed-margined rivers, and so
tong as these natural fastnesses endure in their present condition they are
likely to continue so.

* On reference to Jonston (Historie Naturalis de Insectis Lib. iv., ‘ De Insectis
aquaticis” i., p. 189, Tab. xxvii.), I find that under the name of “‘ Forficule aquat
[ice]. M [oufet],” he has two figures, the first of which is possibly a Dytiscus larva,
the second that of some form of Dragon-fly, which however is imperfect.

F
56 NOTES ON FISHES FOUND IN NORFOLK.

The Gryllotalpa or fencricket comon in fenny places
butt wee haue met with them also in dry places dung-
hills & church yards of this citty.

Beside horseleaches & periwinkles in plashes &
standing waters we haue met with vermes setacei or
hardwormes butt could neuer conuert horsehayres into
them by laying them in water as also the [Fo/. 38] the
(dts) great Hydrocantharus or black shining water
Beetle the forficula, sqilla, corculum and notonecton that
swimmeth on its back.

Camden [smear] reports that in former time there
haue been [otters crossed out] Beuers in the Riuer of
Cardigan in wales. this wee are to sure of that the
Riuers great Broads & carres afford great store of otters
with us, a [des crossed out] great destroyer of fish as
feeding butt from ye vent downewards. [a prey crossed
out| not free from being a prey it self for their yong
ones haue been found in Buzzards nests. they are
accounted no bad dish by many are to bee made very
tame and in some howses haue [semed crossed out]
serued for turnespitts.

[Blank space. ]

Note.—Although Browne’s account of the Fishes is doubtless
derived from his personal observation, I have found it very diffi-
cult in some families, such as the Cods, Rays, Gurnards, Flat-
fishes, and Gobies to identify them with the species as at present
known; in fact, they were at that time very imperfectly differ-
entiated, and the figures in the old authors are generally so inexact
as not to be recognisable. Ray, in 1674 (‘English Words not
generally known,” p. 101), thus writes of the sea fishes, ‘several
of them, we judge, not yet described by any Author extant in
print: indeed the writers of Natural History of Animals living far
from the Ocean, and so having never had opportunity of seeing
these kind of fishes . . . . write very confusedly and obscurely

concerning them,” a remark which I have found abundantly
verified.
LETTERS TO MERRETT.
[MS. SLOANE, 1833. FOL. 14.]

No. I.

“My father to Dr. Meret July 13, 1668.”

Most honourd Sir,

[YoZ. 14.] I take ye boldnesse to salute you as a
person of singular worth & learning and whom I very
much respect & honour. I presented my service to you
by my sonne some months past, and had thought before
this time to have done it by him again, but the time of
his returne to London being yet uncertaine, I would not
deferre these at present unto you. I should be very .
glad to serve you by any observations of mine against
yr. second edition of your Pinax” which I cannot suff-
ciently commende. I have observed and taken notice of
many animals in these parts whereof 3 years agoe a
learned gentleman of this country desired me to give
him some account, which while I was doing ye gentle-
man my good friend died. I shall only at this time
present and name some few unto you which I found not

 

%9 It is evident that Merrett was collecting a considerable amount of
materials for an enlarged edition of his Pimax Rerum Naturalium
Britannicarum, on behalf of which Browne seems, by this introductory
letter, to have tendered his assistance, but the contemplated edition,
probably for reasons which I have mentioned elsewhere, never appeared ;
happily, these rough drafts have been preserved, although it seems not
unlikely that the letters themselves, should they ever be found, would

differ from them in some respects.
58 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

in your catalogue. A Trachurus [see Mote 61] which
yearly cometh before or in ye head of ye herrings called
therefore an horse. Stella marina testacea [see Mote 87]
which I have often found upon the sea-shoare, an
Astacus marinus pediculi marini facie [see Note 81]
which is sometimes taken with the lobsters at Cromer in
Norfolck. a pungitius marinus [see Note 75] wereof I
have known many taken among weeds by fishers who
drag by ye Sea-shoare on this coast. A Scarabzus
capricornus odoratus™ which I take to be mentioned by
Moufetus fol. 150. I have taken some abroad one in
my Seller which I now send he saith xucem moscha-
tam et cinamomum vere Spirat to me it smelt like
roses santalum & Ambegris. I have thrice met with
Mergus maximus Farensis Clusij, [see Mote 11] and
have a draught thereof. they were taken about the
time of herring fishing at yarmouth one was taken upon
the shoare not able to fly away about ten yeares agoe I
sent one to Dr. Scarborough. Twice I have met with a
Skua Hoyeri [see Mote 10] the draught whereof I also
have. one was shot in a marsh which I gave untoa
gentleman which [szc] I can sende you another was killd
feeding upon a dead horse neere a marsh ground.
Perusing your catalogue of Plants. upon Acorus verus,™
I find these wordes found by Dr. Browne neere Lin.

 

100 Scarabeus capricorinus odoratus. The Musk Beetle, Aromia mos-
chata, L.

101 Acorus calamus, the Sweet Flag, is still found in plenty in various
localities in the county, but it does not appear to develop its curious ‘‘julus”’
every year. It was very abundant at Heigham, a suburb of Norwich, on the
site now occupied by the goods yard of the Midland and Great Northern
Railway, and it was probably from this spot that the supply was obtained for
the purpose of littering the floor of the old parish church. Mr. Vaux, in his
** Church Folk-Lore,” p. 264, says that up to the passing of the Municipal
Reform Bill the Town Clerk of Norwich was accustomed to pay the sub-
sacrist of the cathedral an amount of one guinea for strewing the floor with
rushes on the Mayor’s Day. The custom is said to have been adopted ‘‘as
well for coolness as for pleasant smell.” The pleasant cinnamon-like scent
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 59

wherein probably there may be some mistake, for I
cannot affirme nor I doubt any other yt. is found there-
about. Some 25 yeares ago I gave an account of this
plant unto [this crossed out] Mr. Goodyeere :” & more
lately to Dr. How’ unto whome I sent some notes
and a box full of the fresh Juli. This elegant plant
groweth very plentifully and beareth its Julus yearly
by the bankes of Norwich river [fol. 13 verso] chiefly
about Claxton and Surlingham. & also between norwich
& Hellsden bridge so that I have known Heigham
Church in the suburbes of Norwich strowed all over with
it, it hath been transplanted and set on the sides of
Marish pondes in severall places of the country where
it thrives and beareth ye Julus yearly.

Sesamoides Salamanticum Magnum. Why you
omit Sesamoides Salamanticum parvum this groweth
not far from Thetford and Brandon and plentifull in
neighbour places where I found it and have it in my
hortus hyemalis answering ye description in Gerard.

Urtica Romana™ which groweth with button seede

 

of the rush, on being trodden on, is said to have perfumed the whole
building. The root was also used as a remedy in cases of ague, and formed
the base of tooth and hair powders.

102 Towards the end of the Introductory Letter to Johnson’s (1636)
Edition of Gerard’s ‘* Herball,” he acknowledges the assistance he received
from Mr. John Goodyer, of Maple-Durham, in Hampshire. Sir J. E.
Smith (‘‘ Eng. Flora,” iv., p. 34) speaks of him as ‘‘one of the most
deserving of our early English Botanists.” Robert Brown named a genus
of plants (Goodyera) after Goodyer.

103 William How, 1620-1656, was the author of ‘‘ Phytologia Britannica,”
Lond., 1650, ‘‘the earliest work on botany restricted to the plants of this
island” (‘‘ Dic. of Nat. Biog.”). He practised medicine in London.

104 Sesamotdes is stated in Ree’s Encyclopedia and in Eng. FI. to
be a synonym of Reseda, therefore Sesamoides magnum would appear to
be 2. Juteola and S. parvum, R. lutea.

105 Urtica Romana, which is again referred to as U. mas near the end
of the third letter and as being found at Gorleston, is the Roman
Nettle, U. pilulifera. In 1834 the Pagets (‘‘Nat. Hist. of Great
60 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

bags is not in yr. catalogue I have founde ‘it to grow
wild at [Golston crossed out] Golston by Yarmouth, &
transplanted it to other places.*

[MS. SLOANE 1830. FOL. 36-40.]

No. II.
Fol, 39.]

“ My second letter to Dr Meret Aug xtiit 1668.”

Honord Sr I receiued your courteous letter & am
sorry some diuersions have so long delayed this my
second vnto you. You are very exact in the account
of the fungi. I have met with two, which I have not
found in any Author, of which I have sent you a rude
draught inclosed. The first an elegant fungus Ligneus
found in an hollow sallowe I haue one of them by mee
butt without a very good opportunitie dare not send it
fearing it should bee broken vnto some it seemed to
resemble some noble or princely ornament of the head
& so might bee called fungus Regius vnto others a

* This letter, evidently a copy as shown by the heading ‘‘ My father to
Dr. Meret,” is in the writing of Dr. Edwd. Browne.

 

Yarmouth ”) reported it as still found under old walls at Gorleston, ‘ but
rarer than formerly,” and it is only in recent years that it has been
exterminated, owing to building operations in that locality.

105 Dr. Plowright informs me that ‘it is impossible to say with certainty
what the first named Fungus is; the description suggests some form of
Polyporus perhaps, P. varzus, which is a ligneous species and occurs
frequently on willows in Norfolk. The second is the abortive form of
Polyporus sqguamosus, which is well figured by many of the older botanists,
for instance under the name of Boletus rangiferinus, by Bolton, t. 138,
and Boletus squamosus, var. rangiferinus, by Hooker, ‘Flora Lon-
dinensis,’ new series. In many cases no pileus at all is formed and it used
then to be referred to Clavaria.” The Phalloides is Phallus impudicus, L., a
very common species in this county and even occurring in some of the city
gardens where its exceedingly offensive odour renders it very undesirable.
Fungus rotundus is the well-known Lycoperdon giganteum, Fr., which
sometimes reaches a very large size.
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 61

turret, top of a cupola or Lanterne of a building & so
might bee named fungus pterygoides, pinnacularis or
Lanterniformis you may name it as you please. The
second fungus Ligneus teres Antliarum or fungus ligu-
laris longissimus consisting [of crossed out] or made of
many wooddy strings about the bignesse of round
poynts or Laces some about half a yard long shooting
in a bushie forme from the trees wch serue vnderground
for pumpes I have obserued diuers especially in
norwich where wells are sunck deep for pumpes.

The fungus phalloides found not farre from norwich
large & very fetid answering the description of Hadri-
anus junius I have a part of one dryed by mee.

Fungus rotundus maior I haue found about x inches
in Diameter & half [szc, have ?] half a one dryed by mee.

Another small paper containes the rude draughts of
fibule marine pellucidz, [see Note 90] or sea buttons a
kind of squalder & referring to vrtica marina which I
haue obserued in great numbers by yarmouth after a
flood & easterly winds. They resemble pure crystall
buttons chamfered or welted on the sides with 2 small
holes at the ends. They cannot bee sent for the
included water or thinne gelly soon runneth from them.

Vrtica marina minor jonstoni [see Mote 90] I haue
often found on this coast. [Continued on fol. 39 verso.]

Physsalus [see Note 89] I haue often found also I
haue one dryed but it hath lost its shape & colour.

Galei & canicule [see Note 56] are often found I
haue a fish hanged up in my yard of 2 yards long taken
among the Herrings at yarmouth which is the Canis
carcharias alius Johnstoni. Tab. vi fig. 6.

Lupus marinus you mention upon an handsome
experiment butt I find it not in the catalogue. This
Lupus marinus or Lycostomus is often taken by our
seamen wch fish for cods_ I haue had diuers brought
mee. they hang up in many howses in Yarmouth.
62 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

Trutta marina is taken with us—a better dish than
the Riuer trowt butt of the same bignesse.

Loligo sepia a cuttle page 191 of your Pinax [see
Note 80] I conceiue worthy Sr it were best to putt them
in 2 distinct lines as distinct species of the Molles. The
loligo, calamare or sleue I haue often found cast up on
the seashoare & some haue been brought mee by
fishermen of aboue [20 crossed out] twentie pound
wayet.

Among the fishes of our Norwich riuer wee scarce
reckon salmons [see ote 92] yet some are yearly taken.
butt all taken in the Riuer or coast haue the end of the
lower jaw very much hooked which enters a great way
into the upper jaw like a socket. you may find the
same though not in figure if you please to read
Johnstonus fol 101 Iam not satisfied with the conceit
of some authors there that is [it?] is a difference
of male and female for all ours are thus formed. The
fish is thicker than [oth crossed ou¢] ordinarie salmons
and very much & more largely spotted whether not
rather Beccard gallorum or Anchorago Scaligeri I
haue bothe draught & head of one dryed either of
wch you may command.

Scyllarus or cancellus in turbine tis probable you
have [see Note 84]. haue you cancellus in nerite a
small testaceous found upon this coast.

[/oZ. 40.] Haue you mullus ruber asper [see Note 63].

Haue [you] piscis octangularis Bivormii?* [see Mote
66, also pp. 65 and 87 znzfra].

vermes marini larger than earthwormes [see Wote 91]
digged out of the sea sand about 2 foot deepe at an
ebbe water for bayte they are discouered by a little hole
or sinking of the sand at the top aboue them.

* Thus in the MS., but Browne seems to have intended to write Bicornis
Vormii, and accidentally to have run the two words together [see p. 41
supra).
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 63

Haue you that handsome colourd [bird crossed out]
jay [see Note 49] answering the description of Garrulus
Argentoratensis & may be called the parret jay I
haue one that was killed upon a tree about 5 yeares
ago.

Haue you a may chitt a small dark gray bird [see
Note 29] about the bignesse of a stint wch cometh about
may & stayeth butt a moneth. a bird of exceeding
fattnesse and accounted a daintie dish. they are plenti-
fully taken in marshland and about wisbich.

Haue you a [caprimulgus or wrztten above] dorhawke
a bird as bigge as [a] pigeon [see Note 42] with
a wide throat bill as little as a titmous & white fethers
in the tayle & paned like an hawke.

Succinum rard occurrit™ pag 291 of yours. [Should
be p. 219] not so rarely on the coast of norfolk. tis
usually found in small peeces [butt crossed out] some-
times in peeces of a pound wayght. I haue one by mee

 

107 Amber, writes Mr. Clement Reid, in a paper contributed by him to the
* Trans. Norf. and Nor. Nat. Soc.” (iii., p. 601), ‘‘is found on the Norfolk
coast, usually mixed with the seaweed thrown up by the Spring gales,” but
is very rarely found in place ; as much as three or four pounds are annually
gathered near Cromer. The quality, Mr. Reid says, is very good, but the
dark transparent lumps are most generally found. In a subsequent paper
(op. czt., iv., p. 248) he enumerates seven species of insects which have been
found enclosed, and in a third communication mentions an eighth. Mr.
A. S. Ford, as the result of an examination of a collection of East-coast
Amber made at Yarmouth (of. cz¢., v., p. 92), adds one species of
Hymenoptera, three of Coleoptera, two of Orthoptera, with some Araneida,
and remains of vegetable substances which had not been identified.

The Jet found on the Norfolk coast differs considerably from the Whitby
Jet, and Mr. Reid, ‘‘ Geology of the Country Round Cromer” (p. 133),
believes that in all probability it was originally derived from Lower
Tertiary beds under the North Sea, a few miles from the present coast.
Mr. Savin estimates the average annual find of Jet near Cromer at from
ten to twenty pounds.

The doctor does not display his usual acumen when he rejects the
“ancient ” opinion as to the vegetable origin of Amber, see Pseudodoxia,
book ii., chap. iv. ; also letter from Earl of Yarmouth to T. B. (Wilkin
Edit. i., p. 411).
64 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

fat & fayre of x ounces wayght—jet more often found I
haue an handsom peece of xii ounces in wayet.

No. III.
[FOL. 40 verso.]
“ My third letter Sept xiit.”

Sr I receaued your courteous Letter and with all
respects I now agayne salute you.

The mola piscis is almost yearely taken on our coast
[see Note 58] this [last crossed out] year one was taken
of about 2 hundred pounds wayght diuers of them I
haue opened & haue found many lyce sticking close
vnto thier gills whereof I send you some.

In your pinax I find onocrotalus or pellican [see Mote
25] whether you meane those at St. James or others
brought ouer or such as haue been taken or killed heere
I knowe not. I haue one hangd up in my howse wch
was shott in a fenne ten miles of about 4 yeares ago and
because it was so rare some conjectured it might bee
one of those which belonged vnto the King & flewe
away.

Ciconia rard huc aduolat. I haue seen two [see Note
14] one in a watery marsh 8 miles of, another shott
whose case is yet to bee seen. [See Appendix D.]

Vitulus marinus. Jn ¢tractibus borealibus et Scotia
[see Mote 53]. no raritie upon the coast of Norfolk at
a lowe water I haue knowne them taken asleep vnder
the cliffes. diuers haue been brought vnto mee. our
seale is different from the Mediterranean seale. as
hauing a rounder head a shorter and stronger body.

Rana piscatrix I haue often known taken on our
coast & some very large [see Mode 50].

Xiphias or gladius piscis or sword fish wee haue in
our seas [see Note 55]. I haue the head of one which

.
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 65

was taken not long ago entangled in the Herring netts
the sword aboue 2 foot in length.

Among the whales you may very well putt in the
spermacetus [see Mote 51] or that remarkably peculiar
whale which so aboundeth in spermaceti. about twelve
years ago wee had one cast up on our shoare neer
welles wch I discribed in a peculiar chapter in the last
edition of [Fo 41] my pseudodoxia epidemica. another
was diuers yeares before cast up at Hunstanton. both
whose heads are yet to bee seen.

Ophidion or at least ophidion nostras [see Mote 69]
comonly called a sting fish hauing a small prickley
finne running all along the back, & another a good way
on the belly, with little black spotts at the bottom of
the back finne if the fishermens hands bee touched or
scrached with this venemous fish they grow paynfull
and swell the figure hereof I send you in colours they
are comon about cromer see Schoneveldeus de Ophidiis.

Piscis octogonius or octangularis answering the dis-
cription of Cataphractus Schoneveldei [see Mote 66] only
his is discribed with the finnes spread & when it was
fresh taken & a large one howeuer this may bee nostras
I send you one butt I haue seen much larger which
fishermen haue brought mee.

Physsalus [see Mote 89]. I send one which hath been
long opened & shrunck & lost the colour when I tooke
it upon the sea shoare it was full & plump answering the
figure & discription of Rondeletius. there is also a like
figure at the end of [Rondeletius crossed out] muffetus
I haue kept them aliue butt obserued no motion [butt
crossed out] except of contraction and dilation when it
is fresh the prickles or brisles are of a brisk green &
Amethest colours—some call it a sea mous.

Our mullet is white & imberbis [see Mote 63] butt wee
haue also a mullis barbatus ruber miniaceus or cinna-
berinus somewhat rough & butt drye meat. there is of
66 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

them maior & minor resembling the figures in Johnstonus
tab xvii Rotbart.

Of the Acus marinus or needle fishes [see Note 64] I
haue obserued 3 sorts. The Acus Aristotelis called
heere an Addercock Acus maior or Garfish with a green
verdigris backbone the other saurus Acui similis Acus
sauroides or sauriformis as it may be called much
answering to the discription of saurus Rondeletij in the
hinder part much resembling a makerell opening one I
found not the backbone green Johnstonus writes nearest
to it in his Acus minor. I-send you the head of one
dryed butt the bill is broken I haue the whole draught in
picture. this kind is more rare then the other wch are
comon & is a rounder fish.

[Fol 41 verso.) Vermes marini are large wormes
[see Note 91] found 2 foot deep in the sea sands & are
digged out at an ebbe for bayt.

The Avicula Maialis or may chitt [see Vote 29] isa
litle dark gray bird somewhat bigger then a stint which
cometh in may or the later end of April & stayeth about
a moneth. A marsh bird the legges & feet black without
an heele the bill black about 3 quarters of an inch
long they grow very fatt & are accounted a dayntie
dish,

A Dorhawke a bird not full so bigge as a pigeon [see
Note 42] somewhat of a woodcock colour & paned some-
what like an hawke with a bill not much bigger
then that of a Titmouse [& very wide throat added
above] known by the name of a dorhawke or prayer
upon beetles, as though it were some kind of accipiter
muscarius. in brief this accipiter cantharophagus or
dorhawke [a word smeared out] is Avis Rostratula
gutturosa, quasi coaxans, scavrab@is vescens, sub ves-
peram volans, ouum speciosissimi [word smeared]
excludens. I haue had many of them & am sorry I
have not one to send you I spoake to a friend to shoote
one butt I doubt they are gone ouer.
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 67

of the vpupa [see Note 35] diuers have been brought
mee & some I haue obserued in these parts as I
trauuyled about.

The Aquila Gesneri I sent [aliue added above] to
Dr. Scarburg [see Mote 3] who told mee it was kept in
the colledge it was brought mee out of Ireland. I kept
it 2 yeares in my howse I am sorry I haue only one
fether of it to send you.

A shooing horn or Barker from the figure of the bill
& barking note [see Note 38] a long made bird of white
& blakish colour finne footed, a marsh bird & not rare
some times of the yeare in marshland. it may upon vewe
bee called Recuruirostra nostras or Auoseta much re-
sembling the Auosettz [species crossed out] species in
Johnstonus tab (54). I send you the head in picture

[A smeared out| stone curliews I haue kept in large
cages [sce ote 37] the [y] haue a prettie shrill note, not
hard to bee got in some parts of norfolk.

[Fol 42.] Haue you Scorpius marinus Schoneueldei
[see Node 68]

haue you putt in the musca Tulipari muscata™

That bird which I sayd much answered the discription
of Garrulus Argentoratensis [see Mote 49] I send you
it was shott on a tree x miles of 4 yeares ago. it may
well bee called the Parret Jay or Garrulus psittacoides
speciosus. the colours are much faded. if you haue it

 

108 It seems impossible to identify this insect ; AZerodon narcissé has been
suggested, but Mr.Verrall, whom I consulted says, ‘‘ certainly not AMerodon,
which probably was not known in Britain until about 1870,” and suggests
the small fly Wemopfoda. Mr. Bloomfield writes that the only fly of which
he has seen any mention as having a musky or ‘excellent fragrant odour ”
is Sepsis cynipsea, which Kirby and Spence state on the authority of De
Geer, ‘‘emits a fragrant odour of beaum” (balm); this species is very
nearly allied to Nemopoda. Several Bees, for instance the Genus Prosopis,
emit a strong scent of balm, and it is possible that Browne may have used
the term “fly” in what is even now a popular sense, and that really some
species of Bee may have called forth his remarks. It will be noticed that
at p. 74 he speaks of it as a *‘ small beelike flye.”
68 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

before I should bee content to haue it agayne otherwise
you may please to keep it.

Garrulus Bohemicus™ probably you haue a prettie
handsome bird with the fine cinnaberin tipps of the
wings some wch I haue seen heere haue the tayle tipt
with yellowe wch is not in the discription.

I haue also sent you urtica mas [see Mote 105]
which I lately gathered at Golston by yarmouth where I
found it to growe also 25 yeares ago. of the stella
marina Testacea which I sent you [see Note 87] I do not
find the figure in any booke.

I send you a few flies" which some unhealthful
yeares about the first part of september I haue
obserued so numerous upon plashes in the marshes
& marish diches that in a small compasse it were no
hard matter to gather a peck of them I brought some
what my box would hold butt the greatest part are
scatterd lost or giuen away for memorie sake I writ on
my box musce palustres Autumnales [See Appendix D.]

worthy Sr I shall be euer redie to serue you who am
Sr your humble Seruant

Norwich, Sep 16. 1668. THO BROWNE.

 

109 Mr. Stevenson, whom very little relating to Norfolk Ornithology
escaped, was well acquainted with Sir Thomas Browne’s works, yet
has in his ‘‘ Birds of Norfolk’ unaccountably overlooked this passage, and
remarks that Browne does not appear to have noticed this species ; he how-
ever not only refers to it as above, but evidently describes it from his
personal observation. It is a very uncertain winter visitor to this county,
but on rare occasions makes its appearance in considerable flocks. A
remarkable instance of this occurred in the winter of 1866-7, when Mr.
Stevenson, as the result of the examination of a very large series, contri-
buted an exhaustive paper on the plumage of this handsome bird to the
‘‘Transactions of the Norf. and Nor. Nat. Soc.,” iii., pp. 326-344.

0 Mr. Verrall assures me that even in the present day it is quite
impossible to recognise the species of Diptera described by persons unac-
quainted with the particular group, and that Browne’s remarks would apply
to hundreds of species. It is possible that an Zphydya may be meant.
This genus of small flies, says Mr. Verrall, abounds in such places as
Browne describes, but it is likely that other species were with them.
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 69

No. IV.
“ The fourth Letter to Dr. Merrett Decemb xxix.” [1668]

[¥ol. 42 verso.] Sr I am very joyfull that you haue
recouered your health whereof I heartily wish the con-
tinuation for your own and the publick good. And I
humbly thank you for the courteous present of your
booke. with much delight and satisfaction I had read
the same not once in English I must needs acknowledge
your coment more acceptable to me then the text which
I am sure is an hard obscure peice without it. though I
haue not been a stranger unto the vitriarie Art both in
England and abroad.

I perceiue you haue proceeded farre in your Pinax.
These few at present I am bold to propose & hint unto
you intending God willing to salute you agayne.

A paragraph might probably be annexed unto Quer-
cus. Though wee haue not all the exotick oakes, nor
their excretions yet these and probably more supercres-
cences productions or excretions may bee obserued in
England.

Viscum—polypodium—Juli pilula—

Gemme foraminate [formicate ?] foliori—

excrementu fungosum verticibus scatens—

Excrementum Lanatum—

Capitula squamosa jaczee cemula.

Nodi—melleus Liquor—Tubera radicum

vermibus scatentia—Muscus—Lichen—

Fungus—vare quercine.™

 

11 This evidently refers to the gift of a copy of Merrett’s Latin translation
of Antonio Neri’s L’ Arte Vetraria (Firenze, 1612, 4to), published under
the title of ‘‘ The Art of Glass, translated into English with some
observations on the Author,” &c., in 1662, and a Latin edition in 1668.

12 The Rev. E. N. Bloomfield has most kindly assisted me in attempt-
ing to identify the Parasitic products of the Oak mentioned above:
JO LETTERS TO MERRETT.

[Fol 43.] Capillaris marina sparsa fucus capillaris.
marinus sparsus sive capillitius marinus or sea peri-
wigge.™ strings of this are often found on the sea
shoare. but-this is the full figure I haue seen 3 times
as large.

 

Viscunz, is doubtless the Mistletoe.

Polypodium, the Common Polypody Fern,

Juli pilule; “little balls on the flower catkins.” The Currant Gall,
Neurosterus baccarum, which is the spring form of M. denticularis,
Oliv.

Gemme foraminate [formicate ?] foliorum: ‘* pimple-like buds on the
leaves.” Leaf-galls, such as the Silky Button, MV. xzmzsmatis, Oliv.,
and the common Spangle, MW. lenticularus, Oliv.

Excrementum fungosum verticibus scatens ; ‘a spongy secretion bursting
out from the ends of the shoots.” The Oak Apple, Bzorhiza termi-
nalis, Fab.

Excrementum lanatum: the Woolly Gall, Andricus ramuli, L., asome-
what rare Gall, resembling a ball of cotton-wool.

Capitula squamosa jacee emula; “little scaley (or imbricated) heads.
resembling the heads of Jacea” (Black Knapweed). The Artichoke
Gall. Andricus fecundatrix, Htg.

Nodi: probably swellings of any sort, whether caused by insects or not.

Melleus liquor : Woney-dew, a secretion of Aphides.

Tubera radicum vermibus scatentza : ‘* swollen tubers on the roots contain-
ing grubs;” without doubt the Root-Gall, Andricus radicis, Fab.
Polythalamous Galls, often very large at the roots or on the trunk near
the ground.

Mosses, Lichens, and Fungi, all ‘‘ genuine products of the Oak,” need no.
comment, but Mr. Bloomfield remarks, ‘‘ How wonderfully observant
Sir Thomas Browne must have been thus to distinguish the various.
galls, &c., and to point them out so distinctly.”

Browne’s contemporary, Dean Wren, seems sadly to have misunderstood
the fructification of the Oak. In a note on Browne’s remarks on the
**Miseltoe” (Pseudodoxia, book ii., chap. vi.), he says, ‘‘ Arboreous.
excrescences of the Oak are soe many as may raise the greatest wonder.
Besides the gall, which is his proper fruite, hee shootes out oakerns, i.e.,
ut nunc vocamus (acornes), and oakes apples, and polypodye, and moss 3:
five several sorts of excrescences.” See also letter to his son, Dr. Edward
Browne, in which Sir Thomas Browne says that ‘‘ wee haue little or none
of viscus guercinus, or miselto of the oake, in this country ; butt I beleeve
they have in the woods and parks of Oxfordshyre.” —Wilkin, i., p. 279.

118 In Sir Thomas Browne’s time the Hydrozoa were not distinguished from.
the Corallines, and both were regarded as vegetable growths. It is almost
impossible to determine from his vague descriptions even to which section:
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 71

I send you also [several words smeared out] a little
elegant sea plant™ which I pulled from a greater
bush thereof which I haue resembling the back bone
of a fish. Fucus marinus vertebratus pisciculi spinum
referens Icthyorachius or what you thinck fitt.

And though perhaps it bee not worth the taking
notice of formicz arenariz marine or at least muscus
formicarius marinus!!® yet I obserue great numbers by
the seashoare and at yarmouth an open sandy coast,
in a sunny day many large and winged ones may bee
obserued upon & rising out of the [shoare crossed out]
wet sands when the tide falls away.

Notonecton an insect that swimmeth on its back [see
Note 98] & mentioned by Muffettus may be obserued
with us.

 

those mentioned belong, but although our exposed coast-line is not favour-
able to such growths, there are a few common species of Hydroid Zoophytes
which abound here, and to these, fortunately, Browne’s specimens appear
to belong. What he calls the ‘‘Sea-perriwig” is doubtless Sertularia
operculata, Lin., sometimes known as ‘‘Sea-hair,” a very common and
widely dispersed species.

14 The little ‘‘ Fucus,” which he compares to the backbone of a fish, is
probably Malecium halecinum, Lin., the ‘‘ Herring-bone Coral” of Ellis,
one of the most common Zoophytes on our coast. The ‘‘ Abies,” of which
he suggests at p. 75 that this may be a “‘ difference,” is most likely
Sertularia abietina, Lin., which this species resembles, but is less regularly
pinnate ; this may have led him to suppose that the ‘sprouts, wings, or
leaves” may have fallen off. The Fucus marinus is most likely Fucus
serratus.

15 Swarms of Ants and Flies are no uncommon sight along the sea-
shore at certain seasons of the year, and under the conditions which
Browne describes. The Pagets (‘‘Nat. Hist. of Great Yarmouth”)
mention that the fly, Actora estuum, is common on the beach at high-
water mark; but Mr. Verrall writes me that there are many others
likely to be thus met with, such as Ovygma luctuosa and Limosina zostera@,
widely divergent species. In his ‘‘ Journal of a Tour” into Derbyshire,
Dr. Edward Browne, in crossing the sands of the Wash, mentions his
satisfaction at the absence of the swarms of flies ‘* with which all the fenne
countrys are extremely pestered.” See also Note 110 supra.

G
72 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

I send you a white Reed chock” by name some kind
of Junco or litle sort thereof I haue had another very
white when fresh.

Also the draught of a sea fowle called a sherewater
[see Note 17] billed like a cormorant, feirce & snapping
like it upon any touch. I kept 2 of them aliue 5 weekes
cramming them with fish refusing of themselues to feed
on anything & wearied with cramming them they liued
17 dayes without food. They often fly about fishing
[ves crossed out] shipps when they cleans their fish &
throwe away the offell. so that it may bee referred to
the Lari as Larus niger gutture albido rostro adunco.

Gossander videtur esse puphini species [Pzzaz, p. 184].
worthy Sr that wch we call a gossander [see Note 19]
& is no rare fowle among us is a large well colourd &
marked diuing fowle most answering the [mer crossed
out] Merganser. it may bee like the puffin in fattnesse
and [Ranknesse crossed out] Ranknesse butt no fowle is

 

6 Tt is impossible to form an idea as to what is here intended. I know
of no /zncus which would answer the description. Professor Newton
reminds me that ‘‘Junco” was a common name for ‘‘a bird that inhabited
reeds,” and was loosely applied, some old authors taking it to be the Reed
Thrush (z.e., the Great Reed-Warbler of these days), and others, the
Reed-Sparrow or Bunting. But bearing in mind Browne’s practice of
referring to Jonston, it seems possible that the latter’s Fzzco may be
here intended, and that, as the figure (pl. 53) shows, is a small Sand-
piper, almost certainly the Dunlin. It is lettered ‘‘Junco Bellonii,”
but this he must have taken second-hand from Aldrovandus, since Belon
never used the word ‘‘Junco” in this connexion, but called it
‘«Schoeniclus” or ‘‘ Alouette-de-mer”—terms rendered /zzco by Aldro-
vandus (iii. p. 487). Charleton took the same view in his ‘‘ Onomasticon ”
(p. 108), published in 1668 (the year assigned as that of this letter), stating
that it was so-called because ‘‘in juncis libenter degat,” and identifying it
with the AJlowette-de-mer of the French, and the English ‘‘ Stint, or Sparr,
or Perr.” Gilbert White appears to have thus applied the term (4 “‘ Life’”’
by Rashleigh Holt-White, i. pp. 186, 194, 250). In one place he says,
“No. five is Ray’s Junco and the Turdus arundinaceus of Linn.” That
*‘Junco” is the name of a bird is absolutely certain, but the context,
‘‘ very white when fresh,” does not seem to admit of explanation.
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 73

I think like the puffin differenced from all others by a
peculiar kind of bill

[Fol. 43 verso.] Barganders [see Note 18] not so rare
as Turn [Turner] makes them comon in Norfolk so
abounding in vast & spatious warrens.

If you haue not yet putt in Larus minor or a sterne
[see Note 13] it would not bee omitted, comon about
broad waters and plashes not farre from the sea.

Haue you a Yarwhelp, Barker, or Latrator [see Note
39] a marsh bird about the bignesse of a Godwitt

Haue you Dentalia [see Mote 83] which are small
vniualue testacea whereof sometimes wee find some on
the seashoare

Haue you putt in nerites another little Testaceum
which wee haue [see Note 83].

Haue you an Apiaster a small bird calld a Beebird.™

Haue you morinellus marinus or the sea Dotterell
better colourd then the other & somewhat lesse [see
Note 28).

I send you a draught of 2 small birds the bigger
called a Chipper or Betule Carptor [see Note 48]
cropping the first sproutings of the Birch trees & comes
early in the spring. The other a very small bird lesse
than the certhya or ox eyecreeper called a whinne
bird

I send you the draught ofa fish taken sometimes in
our seas [see Mote 69]. pray compare it with Draco
minor Johnstoni. this draught was taken from the fish
dried & so the prickly finnes less discernible.

There is a very small kind of smelt [see Node 71] butt
in shape &smell like the other taken in good plenty
about [wh crossed out] Lynne & called Primmes.

 

i7 Probably the Spotted Flycatcher is here referred to, the prefix not
being used in a technical sense ; it is known here as the Beam-bird, either
of which names may be a corruption of the other. Another Norfolk name
for this bird is the Wall-bird.
74 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

Though Scombri or Makerells [see Mote 73] bee a
comon fish yet [in crossed out] our seas afford sometimes
strange & large ones as J haue heard from fishermen
& others. & this yeare 1668 one was taken at Lestoffe
an ell long by measure & presented to a Gentleman a
friend of myne.

Musca Tuliparum moschata is a small beelike flye
[see Mote 108] of an excellent fragrant odour which I haue
often found at the bottom of the flowers of Tuleps.

[FoZ, 44.] In the little box I send a peece of vesi-
caria or seminaria marina [yo crossed out] cutt of from
a good full one found on the sea shoare [see Note 91].

Wee haue [two or three words smeared out here] also
an eiectment of the sea very comon which is fanago [see
Note 91] whereof some very large.

I thank you for communicating the account of Thun-
der & lightening some strange effects thereof I haue
found heere butt this last yeere wee had litle or no
Thunder & lightening. [Vo szgnature.]

No. V.
Dr. BROWNE TO MERRETT.

[This letter which was originally printed in the ‘* Posthumous
Works,” will be found in MS. Sloane 1911-13, fol. 106, where
it is headed in pencil as addressed to Sir Wm. Dugdale, but it
was restored to its proper place by Wilkin in the 1836 Edition of
the Works, i., p. 404.]

Honoured Sir

[ Fol. 106.] Iam sorry I have had [diuersions above] of
such necessitie, as to hinder my more sudden salute since
I receiued your last. I thank you for the sight of the
Sperma Ceti, and such kind of effects from [Lightning &
Thunder wrztten above] I have known and about 4
yeares ago about this towne when I with many others
LETTERS TO MERRETT. as

saw fire-balls fly & go of when they met with resistance,
and one carried away the tiles and boards of a leucomb
Window of my owne howse, being higher then the
neighbour howses & breaking agaynst it with a report
like a good canon. I set downe that occurrence in this
citty & country, & haue it somewhere [in crossed out]
amongst my papers, and fragments of a woman’s hat
that was shiuered into pieces of the bignesse of a groat.
I haue still by mee a little of the spermaceti of our
whale, as also the oyle & balsome wch I made with the
oyle & spermaceti. Our whale was worth 500 lib, my
Apothecarie got about fiftie pounds in one sale of a
quantitie of sperm [see ote 51].

I made enumeration of the excretions of the oake
which might bee obserued in england [see Note 112],
because I conceived they would bee most obseruable if
you set them downe together, not minding whether there
were any addition by excrementum fungosum vermicu-
lis scatens I only meant an vsuall excretion, soft &
fungous at first & pale & sometimes couered in part with
a fresh red growing close vnto the sprouts. first full of
maggots in little woodden cells which afterwards turne
into little reddish browne or bay flies. of the tubera
indica vermiculis scatentia I send you a peece, they are
as bigg as good Tennis-balls & ligneous.

The little elegant fucus [see Mote 114] may come in as
a difference of the abies, being somewhat like it, as also
unto the 4 corrallium in Gerard of the sprouts whereof I
could never find any sprouts wings or leaves as in the
abies whether fallen of I knowe not, though I call’d it
icthyorachius or pisciculi spinam referens yet pray do you
call it how you please I send you now the figure of a
quercus mar. [inus] or alga which I found by the sea-
shoare differing from the comon [see Mote 114] as being
denticulated & in one place there seemes to bee the
beginning of some flower pod or seedvessell.
76 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

[Fol, 106 verso.] A draught of the morinellus
marinus or sea doterell I now send you. the bill
should not have been so black & the leggs more red,
[see Note 28] & [the crossed out] a greater eye of dark
red in the feathers of wing and back: it is lesse &
differently colourd from the comon dotterell, wch [wee
haue crossed out] cometh to us about March & Sep-
tember. these sea-dotterells are often shot near the sea.

A yarewhelp or barker [some words smeared out
[see Mote 39] a marsh-bird the bill 2 inches long the
legges about that length the bird of a brown or russet
colour.

That which is knowne by the name of a bee-bird [see
Note 117] is a litle dark gray bird I hope to get one for
you.

That whch I call’d a betula carptor & should rather
have calld it Alni carptor [sce Note 48] whereof I sent a
rude draught. it feeds upon alder [budds mucaments or
written above] seeds which grow plentifully heere & they
fly in little flocks.

That [calld by some a wrztten above] whin-bird is a
kind of ox eye butt the shining yellow spot on the back
of the head [see Mote 48] is scarce to bee well imitated
by a pensill.

I confess for such litle birds I am much unsatisfied on
the names giuen to many by countrymen, and vncertaine
what to giue them myself, or to what classes of authors
cleerly to reduce them. surely there are many found
among us whch are not described ; & therefore such whch
you cannot well reduce may (if at all) bee set downe
after the exacter nomination of small birds as yet of
uncertain classe or knowledge.

I present you with a draught of a water-fowl not
comon & none of our fowlers can name it [see p. 79 enfra]
the bill could not bee exactly expressed by a coale or
black chalk, whereby the litle incuruitie [at the end
LETTERS TO MERRETT. ay

written above] of the upper bill & small recurvitie of the
lower is not discerned. the wings are very short, & it is
finne footed. the bill is strong & sharp, if you name it
not Iam uncertaine what to call it pray consider this
Anatula or mergulus melanoleucus rostro acuto.

[Fol. 107.) I send you also the heads of mustela or
mergus mustelaris mas. et faemina [see Mote 21] called a
wesel from some resemblance in the head especially of
the female wch is brown or russet not black & white like
the male. & from their praying quality upon small fish.
I have found small eeles small perches & small muscles
in their stomacks. Have you a sea phaysant [see Note
22]so comonly calld from resemblance of an hen phaisant
in the head & eyes & spotted marks on the wings & back.
& wth a small bluish flat bill, tayle longer than other
ducks, long winges crossing over the tayle like those
of a long winged hawke.

Have you taken notice of a breed of porci solidi
pedes.”” I first obserued them above xx yeares ago
& they are still among us. [See also p. 80 zzfra.|

Our nerites or nerite are litle ones [sce Note 83].

I queried whether you had dentalia [see Note 83]
becaus probably you might haue met with them in

 

418 Mr. Darwin writes (‘‘ Anim. and Plants under Domestication,” i.,
p- 78), that from the time of Aristotle to the present day, Solid-hoofed
Swine have been occasionally observed in various parts of the world.
Dr. Coues also says that this variety seems to be persistent in a Texas
breed. See also Professor Struthers in the ‘‘ Edin. New Phil. Journal,”
April, 1863. The two distal phalanges of the two great toes, both front
and back, in the examples described by Professor Struthers, were joined
together, forming single hoof-bearing bone. The next two phalanges
were separate, and sometimes kept widely apart from each other by the
introduction of a special ossicle. I have been told that about the year
1827, a breed of solid-footed swine existed at or near Upwell. By some it
was thought that their flesh was not good for food because they were
“‘uncloven.” Dr. Wren, in a note to Browne’s Pseudodoxia (book vi.,
chap. x.), says, ‘‘ About Aug., 1625, at a farm 4 miles from Winchester, I
beheld with wonder a great heard of swine, whoie-footed, and taller than
any other that ever I sawe.”
78 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

england. I neuer found any on our shoare butt one
brought mee a few small ones with smooth with [szc]
small shells from the shoare. I shall inquire further
after them.

Urtica marina minor Johnst. tab. xviii. [see Mote 90]
haue found more than once by the sea side.

The hobby and the merlin would not bee omitted
among hawkes the first coming to us in the spring the
other about the autumn. Beside the ospray wee have a
larger kind of agle, calld an erne [see Note 3]. I haue
had many of them.

Worthy deare Sr, if I can do anything farther wch
may bee seruiceable unto you you shall ever readily
comand my endeauours; who am, Sr, Your humble &
very respectfull seruant,

THO. BROWNE.

Febr 6 [1668-9.]

Norwich.

No. VI.
[MISCELLANEOUS PAPERS. MS. SLOANE 1847, FOL. 198.]

[This volume contains a Miscellaneous collection, mostly
letters to his son Edward, and some to “Tom.” The following
(as all in the volume) is on letter-sized paper, 7} x 6 in.]

Worthy Sr
[Fol. 198.] Though I writ vnto you last monday.
yet hauing omitted some few things wch I thought to
have mentioned I am bold to giue you this trouble
so soone agayne haue you putt in a sea fish calld a
bleak [see Note 74] a fish like an herring often taken with
us and eat butt a more lanck & thinne & drye fish.
The wild swanne or elk [see Moze 8] would not bee
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 79

omitted, [here crossed out] being comon in hard winters
& differenced from [the crossed out] our River swanns by
the Aspera Arteria. [See also pp. 80 and 83 injfra.]

Fulica and cotta Anglorum [see Mote 23] are different
birds though good resemblance between them, so some
doubt may bee made whether it bee to bee made a
coote except you set it downe fulica nostras. & cotta
Anglorum I pray consider whether that waterbird
whose draught I sent in the last box & thought it might
bee named Anatula or mergulus melanoleucos may not
bee some gallinula. it hath some resemblance with
gallina hypoleucos of Johnst Tab 32 [31] butt myne
hath shorter wings by much & the bill not so long
[Fol. 198 verso] & slender & shorter leggs & lesser &
so may ether be calld gallina Aquatica hypoleucos
nostras or hypoleucos or melanoleucos Anatula or
mergulus nostras.’”

Tis much there should be no Icon of Rallus or Ralla
Aquatica I haue a draught of one & they are found
among us

Feb xii 1668.

The vesicaria I sent is like that you mention [see
Note 91] if not the same the comon fanago resembleth
the husk of peas this of [Part crossed out] Barly when the

 

9 The “draught” of this bird sent to Merrett is not forthcoming.
Professor Newton has been kind enough to send me the following note
on this puzzling passage. ‘‘Jonston’s figure (tab. 31) of Gallina
hypoleucos, to which Browne says it bore some resemblance, undoubtedly
represents what we know as the Common Sandpiper, Zotanus hypoleucus or
Actitis hypoleuca, the Fysterlin of the Germans of Jonston’s time (p. 160),
and Fisterlen or Pfisterlein of modern days. But there seems to be some
strange confusion that cannot now be cleared, between this bird and
Browne’s Anatula or Mergulus melanoleucos [see p. 76 ante], of which
some years later, he sent a drawing, under the latter name, to Willughby,
in whose work it is described and figured (Lat. Ed. p. 261, Engl. 343,
tab. lix.), for this most certainly is the Rotche or Little Auk, Mergulus alle
of modern ornithology.” In the next letter (p. 81), Browne mentions
that he encloses the draft of ‘* Ralla aquatica” here referred to.
80 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

flower is mouldred away. [See also p. 89 zzfra, where
Merrett aptly compares the latter to the flowers of the
Grape Hyacinth.]

No. VII.

[BIBLIOTHECA BODLEIANA. MS. RAWLINSON D. cviii.
SR THO BROWN TO DR. MERRETT.]

[Fof. 105.] Sr I craue your pardon for this delayed
returne unto your last, whose courteus acceptance &
worthy entertaynment [?] deserued [a speed dotted out]
even a speedier reply. The small plant may fitly come
in among the corallines upon the [diff crossed out]
account of articulation Icthyorachius [see Mote 114] I
think will bee a good Diference [?]. whether you will
subexpand [?] the word I referre it to yourself. certhia
may best bee vertice aureo [word blotted out] or vertice
aureo penicello vix imitando. morinellus marinus [see
Note 28] I think rather then Aquaticus becuse it is seen
most about the sea coast. Anas alis oculatis® rather
then Anser for it is not altogether so longe asa wild
duck. of porci solidipedes [see Mote 118] there are still
in this country in some places. and J am promised a
pigge by a Gentleman that hath still a boar and sow of
that kind. I tooke notice of them 26 years ago & having
not lately [met with crossed out] met with any thought
the race had been worne out butt I perceue it is not—
they are whole footed in the forfeet & have [only crossed
out] a seame only in the hinder. so they are animalia
duplici nomine imunda. The wild swans or elk [see
Note 8] in [very crossed out] lasting cold winters are most
plentifull. It is larger then the River swan somewhat
gray & of a lowder note & [differenced call crossed out]

 

120 Possibly the Pintail, Dafida acuta (Linn.), see p. 77.
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 81

a recuruation of the Aspera arteria in the sternon as I
noted in the margin long agoe in vulgar errors. the
blicca marina [see Note 74] may well be named Harengi-
formis. [several words smeared out] 1 have the draught of
that an Herring & a pilcher in one paper upon that
account [Fol. 104 verso] I belieue [?] you were well
informd of the cotta [see p. 79] & fulica of our Ralla
Aquatica I enclose a draught.

Of porci solidipedes there are diuers still in the country
in some places I am promised a pigge by a friend who
cherisheth that [new crossed out] breed. I tooke notice of
them 26 yeares ago, & hauing not lately minded them
thought they had been worn out butt I perceiue they
are not—some are more plainly wholefooted then others
& especially in the fore feet & in the rest there is no
thorough fissure butt at most a superficiall seame, so
they are [No. 3 cap 27 above] Quadrupedia duplici
nomine imunda.

[This last paragraph seems to have been written by
way of emendation of what appears above on the same
subject. A photograph of a portion of the above letter
will, by the courtesy of the Bodleian Librarian, be found
as a frontispiece to this volume. Mr. Jenkinson, the
Librarian of the University of Cambridge, and through
him, Mr. G. F. Warner and Mr. Kenyon, of the Depart-
ment of Manuscripts of the British Museum, have kindly
interested themselves in the transcript of this letter,
which was very difficult to decipher.]

No. VII.

BIBLIOTHECA BODLEIANA (MS. RAWL. D. cviii.)

[Draft of a letter from Sir Thomas Browne, described in the
Catalogue of the Rawlinson MSS. as to the Secretary of the
Royal Society, but from its contents evidently written to Merrett,
whose letter, dated 8th May, 1669, is in part a reply to it.]
82 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

[Fol 58.] Honord Sr I humbly thank you for your
care of my sonnes paper & the Royll Societie for their
acceptance of it. If hee bee in health I knowe hee is
mindfull of their comands receiued aboue 2 months ago
by a letter from Mr. Oldenburg.” I haue not heard from
him of late the last I receiued was from Komorn* in
Lower Hungary and hee was then going to the mine
countryes. I think the Rowd may bee calld Rutilus
ventre magis compresso” w is the first discoverable
difference to the eye. The weazelling [see Note 60]
is as you see in the draught a long fish figura
ad teretem vergente. somewhat of the shape butt
differing in the head from the mustela viuipara of
Schoneueld. butt not lozenged on the back though
the back bee much darker then the other parts. I send
you the figure of the head of a cristated wild duck. it is
black blackish [szc] in the greater part of the body some
white on the brest & wings blewish legges & bill & seems
to bee of the Latirostrous tribe perhaps you haue it not.
it may bee called Azas macrolophos [Fol. 59] as excelling
in that kind.” there is also a draught of one sort of
mergus cristatus resembling that of Aldrovandus or John-
stonus where there is only the figure of the head only

* A well-known town on the Danube, forty-seven miles west of Buda-

Pesth, probably the Comorra of E. Browne’s letter to his father,
Wilkin, i., p. 159.

 

121 Henry Oldenburg (1615-1677) was born at Bremen. Came to
England about 1640, where he remained eight years. In 1653 he was
sent to England from Bremen on a diplomatic mission to Cromwell. He
returned to England a third time in 1660. He was an original Member of
the Royal Society, and became one of its first Secretaries. A half-length
portrait is in the possession of the Royal Society.

12 The Rudd (Leuczscus erythrophthalmus, Will.) is known in Norfolk as
the Roud. Browne seems to treat it as a variety of the Roach (Rzéclus,
Willugh.), and Merrett in his second letter remarks with approval ‘you
have very well named the Rutilus.”

13 Fuligula créstata (Linneeus), the Tufted Duck.
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 83

this is also ruffus butt the head sad red wee haue a
kind of teale which some fowlers call crackling teale from
the noyse it maketh™ it is almost of the bignesse of a
duck coming late of the yeare & latest going away hath
a russet head & neck with a dark yellow stroak about a
quarter of an inch broad from the crowne to the bill
winged like a teale a white streake through the middle
of the wings and edges thereof the tale blackish. it may
be calld Querquedula maior serotina. I send you the
figure in litle of a pristis wh I receaued from a yarmouth
seaman. you may please to compare it w‘® yours. the
asper you mention is much like our Rough or Aspredo.

I forgot in my last to signifie that an oter [an other ?]
Elk or wild swan was headed like a goose that is
without any knobb at the bottome of the bill. [See
p. 80 and Wore 8.]

Haue you had the duck called Clangula in Ald.
[drovandus] & Johnst.”7 wee haue one heere w®

 

124 Professor Newton suggests that Browne intended to write Mergus
ctrratus. Aldrovandus figures the head, iii., p. 283, and that of MW. longi-
rostris in the preceding page. This last is copied by Jonston (fol. 47).
Both birds seem to be female or immature Goosanders. Neither author has
a M. cristatus.

1% The above description certainly applies to the Common Teal, which
was well-known to Browne (vzde supra, p. 14), and that species is with us all
the year; I cannot help thinking, however, that he had in his mind the
Garganey, or Summer Teal, so called from the season of its visit to us.
This species is known to the Norfolk gunners as the ‘‘ Cricket Teal,” and
being slightly larger than the common species it might well be called by
him ‘‘ Querguedula major serotina.”’

326 See Mote 55, p. 36. It will be noticed that both this and the
Centriscus mentioned at p. 41 were given to Browne by a ‘‘ seaman of
these seas,” but may possibly have been brought home as curiosities from
a foreign voyage ; the Saw-fish, however, mentioned at p. 36, is distinctly
stated to have been ‘‘taken about Lynn.” It is a matter of intense regret
that the numerous drawings mentioned in these letters should have been
lost.

127 Aldrovandus’s figure of ‘‘Clangula” (head only, ili., p. 224) is too
indefinite for determination. He says the feet are yellow, but Jonston,
84 LETTERS TO MERRETT.

answereth their descriptions exactly butt [ze, except]
only in the colour of their leggs & feet.
Haue you a willock a sea fowl like a rook or crowe.*

No. IX.

[MISCELLANEOUS PAPERS. MS. SLOANE 1847,
FOL. 182.]

[Fol. 182.] Sr Icraue your pardon that I haue no
sooner sent unto you. I shall be very reddie to do you
service in order to your desires And shall endeavour to
procure you such animalls as I haue formerly met with
& any other not ordinary wch [shall crossed out] are to
bee acquired. though many of my old assistants are
dead. & sometimes they fell upon animalls, [not to bee
crossed out] scarce to bee met with agayne. I wish I
had been acquainted with your desires 3 yeares ago.
for I had about fortie hanging up in my howse. wch
the plague being at the next doores the person intrusted
in my howse, burnt or threw away. The figure of the
weasell Cray [see Noe 60 and p. 82] was in a long paper
pasted together at the ends & I make no question you
will find it otherwise I would send another [the willick
wee in crossed out] that fowl wch some call willick, [see

 

who refers to it under the name of Anas platyrhincus describes it fairly
well (p. 145). Clangula ab alarum clangore, Aldrov., 7.¢., ‘* Rattlewings,”
an old name by which the Golden-eye was known to the Norfolk gunners.

12 A local name for the Guillemot. Merrett says, in a letter dated
8th May, 1669, ‘‘The Clangula I know no more of than reading hath
informed mee ; [see Voce 127] a willock I have seen brought from Greenland,*
where they are said exceedingly to abound, but never thought either of
them was found in England, and having not taken sufficient notice of the
latter, crave your description of both.”

* The Greenland of those days was Spitsbergen, where they would be met with by
the Whalers, but in that case the bird would be Briinnich’s Guillemot, a species not then
differentiated,
LETTERS TO MERRETT. 85

Note 128] wee meet with sometimes. The last I met with
was taken on the sea shoare. the head and body black
the brest inclining to black headed and billd like a crowe,
leggs set very backward wings short leggs set very
backward (szc) that it move overland very badly only.
it may bee a kind of cornix marina. [The latter portion
very badly written and difficult to decipher.]

[Fo 184 verso.] That litle plant upon oyster shells
[see Mote 91] I remember I haue seen & surely is
some kind of vescaria or calicularia

of what that other [was crossed out] electricall body
was Mr. Boyle” showed [smear] by this time more
tryall hath probably been made, something of jet it
might consist of.

I thank you that you were pleased to enquire of those
German gentlemen concerning my sonne_ I receiued a
letter lately from him he hath not been unmindfull of
the R. Society’s comds & hath been in Hungaria in the
mines of Gold, sylver & copper at Schemets, Cremitz &
Neusol & desired mee to signifie so much to Mr.
Oldenberg.

[The above is hastily scrawled ; it was evidently indited
to Merrett, as indicated by the reference to the German
gentlemen, &c.; the date would therefore be some time
in the year 1669. Wilkin prints it in the 1836 Edition,
Vol. i., p. 408, but it is not in Bohn’s reprint.]

 

29 The Hon. Robert Boyle (1627-1691), although deeply learned in
many branches of science, was chiefly distinguished as a chemist. He
took a leading part in the founding of the Royal Society, and was elected
President in 1680, but from some conscientious scruple did not accept
the office. Naturalists are deeply indebted to him, as he was ‘‘the first
that made trial of preserving animals” in spirit (see Grew’s ‘‘ Museum
Regalis Societatis” (London, 1681), p. 58).
APPENDIX A.

[Two LETTERS FROM DOCTOR CHRISTOPHER
MERRETT TO SIR THOMAS BROWNE, MS. SLOANE
1830, FOL. I TO 3. THEY ARE BOUND UP IN
INVERSE ORDER OF DATE.]

[Reply to No. 2 in the above Series.]

[ Fol. 3.] WoRTHY SR,—y* of y*® 14 instant I
recaeved as full off learning in discovering so many
very great curiosities as kindness in communicating
them to mee & promising y* farther assistance. ffor
which I shall always proclame by my tongue as well as
by my pen, my due resentment & thanks.

The 2 funguses [ guses crossed out and i inserted] y sent
y® figures off [see Mote 106] are y* finest & rarest as to
their figure I have ever seen or read of, & soe is y* fibula
marina, far surpassing one I reacived from Cornwall
much of y* same bigness, neither of which I find any-
where mentioned. The urtica marina minor Jonst. &
physalus I never met with, nor have bin informed off
y® canis charcharius alius Jonst. Many of y* Lupus
piscis I have seen, & have bin informed by y* Kings fish
monger they are taken on our coast, but was not satisfyed
for some reasons off his relation soe as to enter it into
my pinax, though tis said to bee peculiar to y® river
Albis [= Elbe] yet I thought they might come some-
times thence to y’ coasts. Trutta marina I haue and
y® loligo, sepia, & polypus y* 3 sorts off y* molles have
bin found on our western coasts which shall bee exactly
APPENDIX A. 87

distinguished—As for y® Salmons taken a bove London
towards Richmond & nearer, & yt in great quantity
some years they have all off them their lower jaw
as y” observ, [see Note 92] & our fishermen [men crossed
out] say they usually wear off some part off it on
y* banks or els y* lower would grow into y* upper &
soe starve them as they have sometimes seen—
y” ask whether I haue y* mullus ruber asper, or
y® piscis Octangularis Wormii. or y® sea worm longer
than y* earth worms, or y® garrulus Argentor. or
y® duck cal’d a May chit or y* Dor hawke. The
4 first I haue noe account off y® 2 later I know not
especially by those names, wee have noe hawk by
yt name [see Mote 42] y* account of succinum as all
y® rest will bee registered. As for y* Aquila Gesneri
I never saw nor heard off any such in y* Collidge for
[fol. 3 verso] this 25 years last past. Sry are pleased to
say y™ shall write more if y” know how not to bee surpur-
fluous—certainly what y” have hitherto done hath bin
all curiosities, & I doubt not but y” have many more by
you—I can direct y” noe further than y™ own reason
dictates to y*- Besides those mentioned in y* pinax I
have 100 to add, & cannot give y” a particular off them
—whatever y” write is either confirmative or additional.
I doe entreat this favour off y” to inform mee fuller off
those unknown things mentioned herein, & to add
y® name page &c of y* Author if mentioned by any
or else to give them such a latin name for them as
y” have done by y* fungi which may bee descriptive
& differencing off them. Sr I hope y° publigs [szc] interest
& y™ own good genius will plead y™ pardon desired by
y™ humble servant

Loudon Aug. 29. 68. CHR. MERRETT.
88 APPENDIX A.

[Reply to No. 8 of the above Series.]

[ Fol. 1.] WoRTHY SR,—my due thanks premised I
at present acquaint y” yt y” have very well named
y* Rutilus & expressed fully y* cours to bee taken in
y® imposition of names viz y* most obvious & most
peculiar difference to y* ey or any other sens. I am
farther to say y‘ y* icon of y® weazeling came not
to my hands, pray bee pleas’d to look amongst y"™ papers
perhaps it might bee laid by through some accident or
other [I have added above] y* figures of y* ‘anas macro-
lophos, & of y* mergi cristati [see Vote 124] & of y* pristis
y' which came from Cornwall was of y* gladius, y* name
of sword fish being applied to both of them by our
nation. It seemeth by y” yt y* Norwich aspredo is
not y* Ceruna fluviatilis contrary to what Camden
affirms, for y® rutilus mentioned in mine to y~ differs
toto ccelo from y* ceruna—The difference of y* Elks bill
by y” signified is remarkable to distinguish it from others
of its own kind. [See p. 83 sapra.] The crackling teal
seems [clearly crossed out] to bee y* same which Dr
Charleton™ mentions in his Onomasticon under y® name
of 'y* cracker,& showing him y* description hee acknow-
ledged to bee y* same, y® clangula I know noe more of
than reading hath informed mee, a willock I have seen
brought from Greenland where they are said exceedingly
to abound, but never y* [thought ?] either of them was
found in England, & having [not added above] taken
sufficient notice of it y* later, crave y" description off both.

And now Sr since my last only 2 things remarkable
haue come to my knowledge. The one was a cake off
black amber + off an inch thick & neer a palm each way.

 

130 In Charleton’s ‘‘ Onomasticon,” at p. 99, the Cracker is called by him,
Anas caudacuta, and is said to be the ‘* Gaddel” of the London dealers in
fowl. [See Mote 125.]
APPENDIX A. 89

Mr. Boyle brought it to y* R. society to whom it was
sent from y* Sussex shore, hee had only tryed it to its
electricity & found it answer his expectation, farther
tryals will be made of it. The second is a small plant
found on oyster shells which when fresh did perfectly
represent y° flowers off Hyacinthus botryoides, [see Mote
91] but yt was somewhat longer & not so much sweld out
towards its pedunculus, some of them are here inclosed.
Tis doubtless a sort off vesicaria, though much different
from what y” sent mee. Most off them are now shrunk
& y* sides constituting y* cavity come together & appear
only a transparent husk. One thing more I had to
add (but scarcely dare speak it out) y* is if it would
please [you added above] to let it bee done without
y' charge & 2ly if it might be done without y* trouble,
then I would beg off y¥ to set some a work to procure
mee some of those rare animals &c y” have mentioned
in your seueral Letters. My intention therein is double :
first to take their descriptions & furnish our colledge with
them as curiosities, all being lost by y® fire this is onely
wished but must not bee proposed without y* former
limitation by y™ too much allready obliged friend &

servant
8th May ’69. CHR. MERRETT.

I met this week with some persons off quality high
Germans who lately saw yt son & record all good
things off him.

ffor Dr Browne off Norwich.

[The reply to this letter is No. IX of the above Series.}
APPENDIX B.

[MISCELLANEOUS PAPERS. MS, SLOANE 1847,
FOL. 56-57. ]

[See Note 51, p. 32 supra.]

Praye Request Mr. Johnson to obtayne this fauor of
Mr. Bacon who is unknown to mee, to afford mee his
resolution to these few queries concerning the whale
[wch crossed out] whereof I understand he had the
‘cutting up and disposure whether there were any
spermacetie found, or made out of other parts beside the
head ; if soe, of what parts & out of what most: and
whether any out of the meere fleshie parts whether that
wch runne from it about the shoare came out of the
mouth.

[Wot signed or dated. |
REPLY.

Sr in Answer to your questions conserninge the whale,
I founde noe Sperme but in his heade and that after I
had taken off his scalpe one tonn weight [or more
written above] of a nexuous substance, we found in the
circumference as large as a small coach wheele in the
middle part certain round pieces of Sperm as bigge as a
mans fist some as large as eggs and on the out side of
the said rounds, flakes as large as a mans head in forme
like hony combs being very white and full of oyle. And.
APPENDIX B, QI

that Sp. wch was cast upon the shore I doe conceive
came out of his nostrells. thus much ffrom him who doth
remayne Sir your humble Servant, Arthur Bacon
Yarmouth roth May 1652.

BROWNE TO DUGDALE ON CERTAIN FOSSIL BONES.

[‘ EASTERN COUNTIES COLLECTANEA,” pp. 193-195].

The letter referred to in the foot-note on page 33,
written by Sir Thomas Browne to Dugdale, and formerly
in the possession of the late Mr. Arthur Preston of
Norwich, whose collection of manuscripts was dispersed
by auction in August, 1888, was printed in a brief-lived
and little-known local publication, entitled the “Eastern
Counties Collectanea” (1872-3), at page 193. In this
letter occurs a passage which confirms the doubt expressed
as to the Whales which had young ones after coming on
shore at Hunstanton being Sperm Whales. They are
expressly said to have been of that sort “which seamen
call a Grampus,” and as Sir Nicholas le Strange, in a
MS. preserved in the Muniment room at Hunstanton,
applies the name “Grampus” to an undoubted specimen
of Hyperoodon rostratus (as shown both by his description
and outline sketch) which came ashore there in the
year 1700, I have little doubt that the Cetaceans in
question belonged to that species and not to Physeter
macrocephalus.

This letter is interesting also as filling a gap in
Wilkin’s series and I therefore reproduce it, omitting
only occasional learned digressions which do not affect
the subject. The original not being available, I have
used the copy in the “ Collectanea” before mentioned.

Dugdale, in November, 1658, and again later, had
written to Browne, sending him a bone of a “fish which
was taken up by Sir Robert Cotton, in digging a pond
at the skirt of Conington downe,” and asking his
opinion thereof. (Wilkin, i., pp. 385 and 390.)

To the first of these letters Browne replied, under
date of the 6th December, 1658, “I receaued the bone
of the fish, and shall giue you some account of it when
92 APPENDIX B.

I have compared it with another bone which is not by
mee” (op. cit. p. 387). _ The letter which follows and
which was unknown to Wilkin supplies this information.

[p. 193] “Sr I cannot sufficiently admire the
ingenious industry of Sr Robert Cotton in preserving
so many things of rarity and observation nor commend
your own enquiries for the satisfaction of such particulars.
The petrified bone you sent me, which with divers others
was found underground, near Cunnington, seems to be
the vertebra, spondyle or rackbone of some large fish,
and no terrestrious animal as some upon sight conceived,
as either of Camel, rhinoceros, or elephant, for it is not
perforated and hollow but solid according to the spine
of fishes in whom the spinal marrow runs in a channel
above these solid racks, or spondiles.

“Tt seems much too big for the largest Dolphins,
porpoises, or sword fishes, and too little for a true or
grown whale, but may be the bone of some big cetaceous
animal, as particularly of that which seamen call a
Grampus; a kind of small whale, whereof some come
short, some exceed twenty foot. And not only whales
but Grampusses have been taken in this Estuarie or
mouth of the fenland rivers. And about twenty years
ago four were run ashore near Hunstanton and two had
young ones after they came to land. But whether this
fish were of the longitude of twenty foot (as is conceived)
some doubt may be made for this bone containeth little
more than an inch in thickness, and not three inches in
breadth so that it might have a greater number thereof
than is easily allowable to make out that longitude. For
of the whale which was cast upon our coast about six
years ago a vertebra or rackbone still preserved, con-
taineth a foot in breadth and nine inches in depth, yet
the whale with all advantages but sixty-two foot in
length. [p. 194.] We are not ready to believe that,
wherever such relics of fish or sea animals are found, the
APPENDIX B. 93

sea hath had its course. And Goropius Becanus™ long
ago could not digest that conceit when he found great
numbers of shells upon the highest Alps. For many
may be brought unto places where they were not first
found.

“Some bones of our whale were left in several fields
which when the earth hath obscured them, may deceive
some hereafter, that the sea hath come so high. In
northern nations where men live in houses of fishbones
and in the land of the Icthiophagi near the Red sea
where mortars were made of the backbones of whales,
doors of their jaws, and arches of their ribs, when time
hath covered them they might confound after discoverers.

“For many years great doubt was made concerning
those large bones found in some parts of England, and
named Giants’ bones till men [p. 195] considered they
might be the bones of elephants brought into this island
by Claudius, and perhaps also by some succeeding
emperors [then follow other ancient examples of the
finding ‘elephants bones’ in various countries attributed
to similar modes of introduction]. But many things
ese obscure in subterraneous discovery. 3

“Tn some chalk pits about Norwich many stag’s ‘heees
are found of large beams and branches, the solid parts
converted into a chalky and fragile substance, the pithy
part sometimes hollow and full of brittle earth and clay.
In a churchyard of this city an oaken billet was found
in a coffin. About five years ago an humourous man of
this country after his death and according to his own
desire was wrap’t up in a horned hide of an ox and so

 

181 This seems to refer to the ‘‘De Gigantibus eorumque reliquiis”
of J. van Gorp, Jean Bécan, or Joannes Goropius (as the name is
variously given in the ‘‘ Biographie Universelle” (b. 1518, d. 1572), and
apparently published after the Author’s death by Jean Chassanion, 8vo,
Basilez, 1580, and another edition in 1587. See Brit. Mus. Cat. ; but I
have not seen the book.
94 APPENDIX B.

buried.* Now when the memory hereof is past how this
may hereafter confound the discoverers and what con-
jectures will arise thereof it is not easy to conjecture.
Sr Your servant to my power,
THo. BROWNE.”

This is endorsed “Sr Thomas Browne’s discourse
about the Fish bone found at Conington Com. Hunt,
Shown, Dr. Tanner.”

* Richard Ferrer, of Thurne, by his will, proved about 1654, directed
that his ‘‘dead body be handsomely trussed up in a black bullock’s
hide, and be decently buried in the Churchyard of Thurne.”—‘ Norfolk
Archeology,” v., p. 212.
APPENDIX. C,

[SLOANE MS. ADDITIONAL 5233, LARGE FOLIO, IS A
VOLUME LABELLED “DR. EDW. BROWN’S DRAWINGS.” ]

“ Some original drawing of Towns, Castles, Antiquities,
Medals &c. by Dr. Edward Browne in his Travels &
presented by his Father Sir Thomas Browne. Who
hath write upon sev! of them what they are.”

The above is the inscription written on the fly-leaf
of this volume, which I hoped might have contained
some drawings of birds or fishes by Sir Thomas Browne,
but there is nothing in it of interest from a Natural
History point of view. In Wilkin’s Catalogue of the
MSS. (Vol. iv., p. 476) it is described as “a collection of
very curious drawings (some coloured) of public buildings,
habits, fiskes, mines, rocks, tombs, and other antiquities,
observed by Sir Thos. and Dr. Edward Browne in their
travels,” but there are no fishes, birds, or other animals in
the volume.
98 APPENDIX D.

mentions towards the end that he sends certain observa-
tions on T. B.’s “Enquiries into Common Errors,” at
page “27 thereof I write of a whale cast upon my
shoare.” This criticism is now separated from the letter,
which originally covered it, but happily is preserved in
the British Museum, MS. Sloane, 1839, fols. 104-145.

 

INDEX.
A. PAGE
PAGE | Barker - 24, 67, 73, 76
Acorus verus” - 58 | Barnacle shell - 48
Acus, Needlefish 40, 41,66 | Barnacle Goose 12
Adders - - 55 | Bargander 13,73
Addercock ea Bass - 43
Alcedo ispida Bearded Tit 26 (note)
Allis Shad 42 (note) Bee-bird 73, 76
Alni carptor 76 | Betule Carptor - 29, 73, 76
Amber 64, 88 | Birdcatcher 25
Alosa - . 42 | Birds found in Norfolk I
Anas arctica 17, 73 » number of species 32
»» Macrolophos 82, 88 | Bittern 17
» alis oculatis 80 | Black Grouse 28
Anatula - 76,79 | Black Heron - = ‘ar
Anglorum, Sand Eel 44 | Black-tailed Godwit - 24 (note)
Apiaster - 73 | Bleak - 43, 53, 78, 81
Aphia cobites 42 | Bones, Fossil - gt
Appendix A. 86 | Boyle, Robert 85
” B. go | Bream 52
a C, 95 | Brent Goose 12
si D. 96 | Brill, Bret 45
Aquila Gesneri 3, 67, 87 | Brittle Stars 49
Ardea stellaris Browne, Sir Thomas—
Arcuata - Attitude towards Witch-
Armed Bull- head, 41 (note), 62, 65, Be craft : xi. oe
Avicula Maialis 19, 66 Collection of Eggs Io (note
Ascidians 50 (note) Correspondents + viii.
Aselli - 43 Drawings lost XXV.
Asprage - - 45 Editions of his Collected
Aspredo 53, 83, 88 Works - - xviii.
Astacus - 46, 57 Estimation in which he
Atherine ? 42 (note), 73 was held , xvii.
Auk, Little? 79 (note) Letters to Merrett Xxii., 57
Avis pugnax 20 ae Dugdale gl
Avis trogloditica 26 Notes on Certain Birds xx., 1
Avocet 24, 67 98 fs Fishes xx., 31
Observations on Migra-
B. tion - xvi., 2 (note)
Originality - Xi, Xvi.
Balani - 48 Purpose for which written xxi., 2
Banstickle 44 State of Natural Science in

Barbel 53 his day S,, Bie.
INDEX.

PAGE
Bull-head, Armed, 41 (note), 62, 65, 87
Burbot :

54
Bustard - 18
Butcher bird 25
Butt - 45
Buzzard, Bald 4, 56
oe Grav 4
ERRATA,

8, note 10, last line, de/e/e us.
8, a)

99

PAGE

Dog-Whelk 47 (note)
Dolphin - - 34
Dorhawk 26, 63, 66, 87
Dory : 41
Dotterel, Land - 19

7 Sea

19, 73, 76, 80

TNirann minne

II, first line, afler Great Northern Diver, insert Colymzbus

glacialis ; line three, delete Colymbus glactalis, and
after A/ergus maxdmus insert Farrensis.

12, ,, 17, line 8, for ‘‘ English Birds’ read ‘‘ English words.”

12, ,, 18, line 4 from bottom, for ‘‘near the centre’ read ‘‘ near
the south-west border.”

14, 5, 22, line 9, after ‘‘ (Hunt) ” insert ** ;.”

20, 5, 31, line 5, transfer the words ‘‘ for the last few years” to line
4, after ‘‘has bred.”

23, 5) 36, line 3, for ‘* Eringo” read ‘‘ Eryngo,””

34, 55 52, line 1, for “hat” read “that.”

35, oy 54, line 5, for ‘‘ Neridiform” read ‘‘ Nereidiform.”

36, 45 55, line 7, for prist’s antiguoram read pristds antiguorun.

46, ,, 82, line 1, for Cancer read Carsinus (corrected in Index).

47, 5, 83, lines 9 and 19, for Ztoria, read /2/torea.

50, 4, 99, line 2 from bottom, after ‘‘and ” insert ‘‘ which.”

535 >

93, line 5 from bottom, for Pandalus varius, read Hippolyte

varzans (corrected in Index),

Culex marinus 99
Curlew 5 23

» Stone 24
Cuttle fish - - 45, 62
Cyclas 55 (note)

D.

Dab - 45 (note)
Dabchick = Ag
Dace 52
Dentalia 47, 735 77
Divers - 8 (note)
Dog-fish - 37

Gannet - : 7,13
Gammarus - - 53
Garfish - 40, 66
Garrulus Bohemicus 68

» Argentoratensis 30, 63,67, 87

Geese - 12, 13
Gladius - 36, 64, 88
Glot, Eel - 54
Gnatts or Knots - 19
Goatsucker 26, 63, 66, 87
Gobies - 42 (note)
Godwit - IQ, 24
Gold-crested Wren - 29 ey. 76
Golden Eagle 3 (note), 67
98 APPENDIX D.

mentions towards the end that he sends certain observa-
tions on T. B.’s “Enquiries into Common Errors,” at
page “27 thereof I write of a whale cast upon my
shoare.” This criticism is now separated from the letter,
which originally covered it, but happily is preserved in

Asprage 45
Aspredo 53, 83, 88
Astacus - 46, 57
Atherine ? 42 (note), 73
Auk, Little? 79 (note)
Avis pugnax 20
Avis trogloditica 26
Avocet 24, 67
B.
Balani - 48
Banstickle 44
Barbel 53

Editions of his Collected

Works - - Xviii.

Estimation in which he
was held , Xvii.
Letters to Merrett xxii., 57
if Dugdale gl

Notes on Certain Birds xx.,1
33 aa Fishes xx., 31
Observations on Migra-
tion - xvi., 2 (note)
Originality - xi., xvi.
Purpose for which written xxi., 2
State of Natural Science in
his day X., xiv.
INDEX. 99

PAGE
Bull-head, Armed, 41 (note), 62, 65, 87
Burbot 54
Bustard - 18
Butcher bird 25
Butt . 45
Buzzard, Bald 4, 56
» Gray 4

Cc.
Canis (Dog-fish) - 36
Canis carcharias 37 (note), 61, 86
Caprimulgus 26, 63, 66, 87
Cancellus 48, 62
Carcinus mzenas 46
Carp + =r 155
Certhia 80
Ceruna 53, 88
Chad a
Chipper 29, 73
Chock 26
Chough 27
Chub - 53
Churre - 1g (note), 20
Ciconia Io, 64, 96
Cirripeds - 48
Clams 47
Clangula 83, 88
Coal-fish 43
Coble bird 25
Cockles - 47
Cods 43
Conger 44
Coot I5
Corculum - 553 56
Cormorant - - Ir
+ Rock II
Corallines 80
Cotta Anglorum 79, 81
Cottus scorpius - - 42
Corvus marinus IL
Crabs - 46
Crane 5
Crawfish 53
Crossbill 25
Crow 27
» Hooded 25
Cuckoo - - 20
» Mate 22 (note)
Culex marinus = 9g
Curlew 23
» Stone 24
Cuttle fish - - 45, 62
Cyclas 55 (note)

D.
Dab - - 45 (note)
Dabchick * 13
Dace - 52
Dentalia 47s 73) 77
Divers - 8 (note)

Dog-fish * 37

 

PAGE
Dog-Whelk 47 (note)
Dolphin - - 34
Dorhawk 26, 63, 66, 87
Dory : = 4r
Dotterel, Land . 19
» Sea 19, 73, 76, 80
Draco minor 42 (note), 73
Dragon fly 55 (note)
Draw Water - - 28
Ducks, Wild 13, 13 (note), 88
Duck, Golden-eye : 83
» Tufted - 82
Dunlin - - 19

E.
Eagles - 3, 67, 78, 87
Echinus - 48
Eels 54
» Conger 44
» Sand 44
Eelpout - 54
Elke 7, 78, 80, 83, 88
Erythropus 19

F,
Faber marinus Al
Fanago 51,74
Father Lasher - 42 (note)
Fen Cricket - 55 (note), 56
Fibula marina 50, 61, 86
Finches - 29
Fishing Frog - 38, 64
Fishes found in Norfolk 31
1, _ Dumber of species 32
Flat-fish - - 45
Flies 67, 71, 97
Fly-catcher - 73 (note), 76
Forficula 55 (note), 56
Fucus marinus 71, 75
Fulica Cotta - - 14
Fungi, various - 60, 61, 86
Funduli fluviatiles 54
» Marini - - 42

G.
Gallinula aquatica 15
Gannet . 7s 13
Gammarus 53
Garfish - 40, 66
Garrulus Bohemicus 68
» Argentoratensis 30, 63,67, 87
Geese - - 12,13
Gladius 36, 64, 88
Glot, Eel - 54
Gnatts or Knots - 19
Goatsucker 26, 63, 66, 87
Gobies 42 (note)
Godwit : IQ, 24
Gold-crested Wren - 29 ean 76
Golden Eagle 3 (note), 67
100

Golden-eye Duck

Goldfinch
Goosander -
Goodyer, John
Grampus

Great Northern Diver

Green Plover

INDEX.
PAGE
84 atc 88 | Larks -
29 | Larus minor -
13) 72, 83 (note) Leeches

vi 159)
33, 92
7 8

- Ig (note), 20

Grey - - 20
Grebe, G Crested - 13
» Little 13
Grouse, Black 28
Gryllotalpa - 55 (note), 2
Gudgeon
Guillemot - 84 (note), 38
Gulls - 8,9, I0
Gurnards - 39
Gurney, Anna 2X
HL
Haddock 43
Hard-worm 55, 56
Harriers 4, 5 (note)
Hawfinch - - 25
Hermit Crabs 48
Herons = 17
Heron, Black me 22
» Purple 22 (note)
Heathpoult » 28
Herring - 39
Hippolyte varians 53
Hirundo marina, Sea Swallow 10

Hirudines marini, Sea Leeches 50

Horse-leeches

55 (note), 56

Horse Mackerel 39
Hobby 78
Hobby-bird 22
Hoopoe 23, 67
Hooded Crow - 26
How, Dr. William 59 (note)
Hydrocantharus - 55 (note), 56
Hydrozoa : 70
Je
Jackdaw - 27
Jelly-fish 50, 61, 78
et 63 (note), 64, 85
Junco 2 72
K.
Kingfisher 22
Kite 4, 15, 27
Knots - Ig
L.
Lampern 54
Lamprey 54
Lanius 25
Lapwing 20
Lari, many sorts of - 8.9

 

Lesser Butcher Bird
Letters to Dugdale
ss Merrett
» from Merrett
Limpets
Lingula -
Little Auk?
Littorina -
Lizard
Loach
Lobster
Lolego
Loon -
Loxia
Lug Worm
Lump-fish
Lupus marinus

Mackerel
5 Horse
Marine Worms
May-chit
Medusae
Merganser
Mergus acutirostris
Ph cristatus
a major
ee minor
»,  mustelaris
serratus
Mergulus
Merlin -
Merrett, Christopher
Mistletoe
Migration
Miller’s Thumb
Minnow -
Mole Cricket
Moon-fish (Mola)
Moor Hen
Morinellus
Musca tuliparum
Mullet -
» Red
Mussels -
Musk Beetle
Mustela fluviatilis
sy marina
we variegata

N.

Needle-fish -
Nerites -
Night-jar -
Norway Lobster
Notonacton
Nuthatch -

PAGE
28

9; 73

-~ 50
26 (note)
91

57

86

.

79 (note)

50 (note)

+ 3o
38, 61, 86

43,74
29

50
19, 63, 66, 87
49 (note)

13; 72

- 13

82, 88

8,57

13.

77

18, 83.

77, 79

78

Xxii., 57

; 70
xvi., 2 (note)
- =

55 (note), 2
38, 64

15

19, 73, 76, 80
- 67, 74
40, 65

40, 62, 65, 87
- 47

58

54

39

14

- 40 (note), 41, 66

47) 73) 77

26, 63, 66, 87

46 (note)

55 (note), 56, ie
INDEX.

PAGE
0.
Oak Galls 69, 70, 75
Octopus? . - 46 (note), 86
Oldenburg, Henry - 82
Onocrotalus - 16, 64
Ophidian 65
Osprey - 4,78
Otters 56
Oysters - 46
Oyster Catcher 8 (note)
P.

Parrot Jay - 30, 63, 67, 87
Partridge ' . 27
7 Red-legged 28
Pectines - - 47
Pediculus marinus - 49
Pelican 16, 64
Perch - - 52
Periwinkle - 47, 55 (mote), 56
Peter-fish - 41
Physalus 49, 65
Pica marina - 8
Picus martius - = 2I
Pigs, Solid-footed - 77, 80, 81
Pike - 52
Pilchard : - 44, 81
Pinax - - 57, 87
Pintail Duck : 14, 77, 80
Piscis octangularis 41, 62, 65, 87
Pisidium?  - 55 (note)

Place - : -

45
xxiv. (note)
Ig (note), 20
20

Plot, Dr. Robert
Plover, Green

» Grey - “

” Ring - 23
Pogge 41 (note)
Polypus - . 46, 86
Porbeagle 57 (note), 61, 86
Porpoise - - - 34
Porci solidi pedes 77, 80, 81
Primmes 42, 73
Pristis serra - 36, 83, 88
Puets Io
Puffin : 17; 73
Pungitius - 44, 58

Q.

Quail - 28
Quercus Galls 69, 70
» marinus 75
Querquedula  - 14, 83

R. =
Rail, Land 28
» Water - 15, 79, 81
Rana piscatrix 38, 64
Raven - : - 27

Rays - : - - 45

 

IOI
a
Razor shells - -
Red-backed Shrike 25 (note}
Red-legged Partridge .
Red Mullet - 40, ss 65, m
Redshank
Reed-chock - i
Reseda 59
Ringlestones 23
Ring Plover 23
Roach Se
Rochet 39
Rock Cormorant II
Rockling 39 (note)
Roller - 30, 63, 67, ps
Roman Nettle 59, 6
Rook o
Rudd, Roud 52, 82
Ruff (fish) 53, 83, 88
Ruff (Reeve) 20
Rubelliones - - 39
Rutilus 82, 88
S.
Salmon 51, 62, i
Sand Eel
Sanderling 19 (note), 63, 66, 87
Saurus - 40, 66
Sawfish 36, 83, 88
Sandpiper, Common - 79
Scad 39
Scallop 47
Scarabeus - 58
Scarburgh, Sir C. 3 (note)
Scolopax 41
Scolopendra 35
Scombri 43, 74
Scorpius 42, 67
Scotch Goose 12
Sea Buttons 50, 61
», Dotterel - 19, 73, 76, 80
», Dugge 50 (note), 51
» Gudgeon = 42
», Leach 50
», Loach 42
», Louse 49
,, Miller’s Thumb 42
» Mouse 49, 65
», Perriwig 7o
» Pheasant 14,77
», Pie 8
,, Stars 49, 57
», Trout 62, 86
» Wolf 38, 61, 86
», Woodcock - 40
Seal - 35, 64
Seaweeds 7O
Sepia - 45, 86
Sesamoides 59
Shad - 42 (note)
Shag as
Shagreen Ray - 45
102 INDEX.
PAGE PAGE
Shearwater - 12,72 | Tufted Duck - 82
Sheld-drake 2 (note), 13, 73 | Tunny? 43 (note), 74
Shoeing-horn 24 | Turbines 47
Shore Crab 46 (note) | Turbot 45
Shovelard 10
Shoveller Duck - I4 U
Shrike - 25 ‘
Shrimp, Freshwater - 55 (note) | Upupa - 23, 67
Silerella - 26 (note) | Urtica marina 49, 61, 78, 86
Siskin 29 (note), 73, - », mas - 68
Skate » pilulifera 59 (note)
Skipper (Saury) - 40 iho) |S Romane - 59
kua - 8,58
Smelt 42
Smew 14, 77 Vv.
ee 55 _| Vermes marinus - 50 62, 66, 87
ee 2 : a »-setacei - 56
Solid-footed Swine . 77, 80, 81 vo 50 (note), st 74: 79, 85 :
Sperm Whale 32, 65, 75, 99, 91,98 | Vitulus marinus - 35, 64
Spermologous - 27 :
Spoonbill - 10
Spotted ce - 73, 76 W.
Sprat aay aa . Water Beetle - - 55 (note), 56
Squalders 49, 50 (note), 61 ” ere 55 (note), 56
ae 45 feote) ” on z sens a
3 ” 179s
Starling 28 Toe See
Stella marina 49, 57 easel ioe 40, 88 a
Se h ae eB Weever-fish 42 (note), 65, 67
Ripe = 42,°5 | Wesell - - : 14,77
Sune oe 19 (note), Whale, Sperm 32, 65, 75, 90, 91, 98
Stickleback 44 (note), 58 wee 26 (note)
eo ee 28D | aritedaited Haple 2
Stork 10, 64, 96 Whiting : 8: s
Sis aaies 8 | Whinne Bird 29, 76
Wild Duck 14
eS st 38, 64 Goose 12, 13
Swan, Wild 7, 78, 80, 83 és |» Swan - 7, 78; 80, 83, 88
t Fl Pees oe es Wilkin, Simon - Xvili. (note)
oe ee . 22 | Willick - 84, 88
d Fish - 6, 64, 88 Wolf-fish 38, 61, 86
Sword Bis Sth Woodcock (fish) 4I
Woodpecker - ai
2 Wren, Dr. Christopher Sx,
Wren, Gold-crested 29, '76
Teal - 14, 83, 88 : :
Tench 52 Wryneck 22 (note)
‘Tenison, Archbishop ix.
Terns oy 73 X,
Tethya 50 (note = tesa La
Thornback Xiphias : - 36
Tope 37 ects
Trachurus - 39, 58 Y
Trout oN a5S :
» Sea 66, 82 | Yarwhelp 2 6
4,73, 7

 

Jarrold & Sons, The Empire Press, Norwich and London.