throat and lower parts generally, brownish-white, the sides of
the breast with a few black streaks which on the flanks and
lower tail-coyerts take almost the form of bars: legs, toes
and claws lead-colour.
The whole length is about five inches and three-quarters;
from the carpal joint to the tip of the wing three inches and
three-eighths; but specimens vary considerably in size,
those from the north of Europe being larger than those
from the south.
The female ordinarily has the top of the head brownish-
white, without any red, though specimens are known in which
there is a trace of that colour; the black of the occiput
begins forwarder, and the lower parts are much browner.
The young of both sexes appear to haye the crown red,
hut much more evident in the males than in the females;
and the markings of the plumage generally which are
black in the adult are then brown.
Beside the three species of Woodpecker just described,
which alone deserve the name of British, so many others
have been at one time or another enrolled by various writers
on our list, that some remarks upon them are needed if only
to justify the omission of their history from the present
volume.
First of them comes the Black Woodpecker, Picus
martins,* of which Latham in 1787 (Syn. B. Suppl. pp.
104, 284) said he had heard of its being once met with in
the south of England. Mr. Harting has compiled a list (to
which several additions might he made) of more than thirty
supposed occurrences of the species in this country; but
Mr. J. H. Gurney had already contributed to Messrs.
Dresser and Sharpe’s work a critical revision of them, which
completely disposes of the claims set up in nearly every
* That this species should he regarded as the “ type ” of the Linnsean genus
Picus seems to the Editor obvious from the fact that the adjective martius loses all
its meaning when separated from the substantive Picus. It is a very great error
to retain the last as the generic term for the pied Woodpeckers, which were
carefully separated from Picus by Koch in 1816 (see above, page 470) ten years
before Boie (Isis, 1826, p. 977) applied Dryocopus to the Black Woodpecker.
instance. One of the strongest pieces of evidence in favour
of the admission of this Woodpecker was Montagu’s assertion,
afterwards repeated by Latham and many other authors,
of the then Lord Stanley having shot a Picus martius in
Lancashire. But Mr. T. J. Moore found that in Lord
Stanley’s copy of Latham’s work he had erased the passage
and written on the margin “ a mistaken idea.” This remark,
it is believed, will apply to all the other supposed cases,
except a few which there is reason to think have been recorded
from unworthy motives. The statement of Gould that
“ there is not a certified British-killed specimen in any of
our museums or private collections ” seems to he perfectly
tru e ; * and it must be added that most of the persons
professing to have seen an example of this species in England
have been singularly unfortunate as to the locality of their
vision. This species is almost strictly an inhabitant of pine-
forests from the arctic circle to Spain, where Lord Lilford
found it in the summer of 1876, and in Asia from Turkey to
Japan. But, though a bird of powerful flight, it may be said
scarcely ever to leave its pine-forests, and hence within any
period that we may deem historic there has been no part of
England suited for its habitation. In Scotland it may have
been otherwise, but there is no evidence to that effect; for
Sibbald’s statement, to which some weight has been attached,
does not, when rightly understood, bear on the point.f This
brief notice cannot be concluded without reference to Mr.
Hudleston’s excellent narrative (Ibis, 1859, pp. 264—273) of
the discovery by himself and the late John Wolley of some
nests of Picus martius in Sweden, which added much to our
knowledge of its habits.
The next species for consideration is the Middle Spotted
Woodpecker, Dendrocopus medius, which Pennant in 1768
said (Br. Zool. Ed. 2, i. p. 180) he was informed was found
in Lancashire. Though in his supplemental volume of
* Notwithstanding tbe examples recorded by Mr. Garth and Rodd (Zool. pp.
1298, 9847).
-ƒ■ He used the name “Picus Martius ” , as did most old writers, in a general
sense for birds that climbed trees, including not only all Woodpeckers, but the
Nuthatch and Tree-Creeper (see above, page 464, note).