PAVO NIGP\IPENN11
PAYO NIGRIPENNIS.
BLACK-SHOULDERED PEAFOWL.
PAVO NIGRIPENNIS, Sclat. Proc. Z:o6lt;Soc^p860) p. 221, and (1863) p.,' 123. sp. 2.—Gray, List Gall. (1867) p. 22. sp. 2.—Darwin,
Anim.' and Plants’under Domes.' voLii~('1868)p.'29b.
BLACK-SHOULDERED PEACOCK, Latham, Gen. Hist. vol. viii. p.114.
PAVO CRISTATUS PRIMUS, Teinm. Hist. Nat. des Pig. et Gall, v o m p. 26. ‘
H ab . Unknown.
T h is ' fine' bird was first described as differing'from the other known species of Pavo by Latham, who called it the Black-shouldered Peacock.
Dr. Sclater gave to it the Latin name it now bears; and perhaps I cannot do better than reproduce here Some of his remarks, published in
the *‘Proceedings ’ as quoted-a b o v e “ The species of the geuus Paw, generally recognized1 by naturalists since the time of Linnaeus, have
been two-in! number—the Common Peacock (Paw cristatus) and the Javanese or Green Peacock (Pavo muticus). My present object da
to call the attention of the Society to wliat seems to be a third distinct species, in some respects intermediate between these two, and
which, though long since introduced into Europe and often bred in our aviaries, appears in isome mysterious manner to have almost
escaped the notice of naturalists, and to have been left unprovided with a specific name .up to this time. .
- “ The bird I allude to is; the Black-shouldered Peacock of Latham’s ‘General History ’ i(ivol. viii. p. 114), where its differences from the
true P aw cristatus are accurately pointed out. They are, indeed, very obvious on comparison of either sex ofithese two birds.
“ In the Black-shouldered Peacock of Latham (a term which I propose to Latinize into Paw nigripennis), the metallic green, of
the back, which forms the centre of the train, when expanded, is of a more golden hue than in P. cristatus, which it otherwise most
generally\resembles. The whole of the secondaries, scapulars, and wiug-coverts are black with outer edgings of green, which becomes
bluish towards the carpal joint. In this particular it resembles P. muticus, an d 'is very different from P. cristatus, in which all these
feathers are cream-coloured crossed with black markings. ¿ T h e thighs of P . nigripennis axe black, as in P. muticus. In P . cristatus
they are always of a pale drab;. The female of P . nigripennis is of a much lighter colouring than that of- P . cristatus, being almost
entirely of a pale cream-colour, mottled with dark colouring above, and readily recognizable a t first sight. In this respect it may be
remarked that the Black-shouldered Peacock is not intermediate between the two others, since in Paw muticus the female is
much more like the male.’-" '
It has been supposed that this bird was the result of interbreeding between tlie two species P . cristatus and P. muticus; but on this
point Dr. Sclater asserts that it cannot he considered a hybrid, “ from the fact that we have now in our Gardens birds produced by this
- cross, and that they bear different characters altogether. Besides, the fertility of the birds, and the permanency and invariability of
the differences which separate it from its two allies, seem to be quite conclusive against this view.”
On the other hand, in support of the opinion that this bird is not a true species but a hybrid, I quote some facts as related by Dr.
Darwin in his work upon the Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication. Under the heading of “ The Peacock,” in his
first volume, our distinguished author says:—g |i |s
“ There is one strange fact with respect to the Peacock—namely, the occasional appearance in England of the ‘japanned’ or
‘ black-shouldered ’ kind. This form has lately been named, on the high authority of Mr. Sclater, as a distinct species, viz. Paw
nigripennis, which he believes will hereafter be found wild in some country, but not India,- where it is certainly unknown. These
japanned birds differ conspicuously from the Common Peacock in the colour of their secondary wing-feathers, scapulars, wihg-coverts,
and thighs; the females are much paler, and the young, as I hear from Mr. Bartlett, , likewise differ. They can b e . propagated
perfectly true. Although they do not resemble the hybrids which have been raised between P . cristatus and P . muticus, nevertheless
they are in some respects intermediate in character between these two species; and this favours, as Mr. Sclater believes, the view
that they form a distinct and natural .species; on the other hand, Sir R. Heron states that th is . breed suddenly appeared, within his
memory, in Lord Brownlpjy’s large stock of pied, white, and common Peacocks. The same thing occurred in Sir J . Trevelyan’s flock,
composed entirely of the common kind, and in Mr. Thornton’s stock of common and pied Peacocks., It is remarkable that in
these two latter instances the blackrshouldered kind increased ‘ to the extinction of th e ' previously existing breed.’ I have also
received, through Mr. Sclater, a statement from Mr. Hudson Gurney, that "he reared, many years ago, a pair of Black-shouldered
Peacocks from the common kind ; and another ornithologist, Prof. A. Newton, states that five or six years ago a female bird, in
all respects similar to the female of the black-shouldered kind, was produced from a stock of common Peacocks in his possession,
Which, during more than twenty years, had not been crossed with birds of any ’ other strain. Here we have five distinct cases
of japanned birds suddenly appearing iri flocks of the common kinds kept in England. Better evidence of the first appearance of
a new variety could hardly- h e desired. I f we reject this evidence and believe that the Japanned Peacock is a distinct species, we