A Tribute to the Nighthawk and “Whip-poor-will”

Imagine away the accumulated knowledge of the past 250 years. Forget that there is such a thing as a field guide. Let google vanish from memory.

And put yourself into the forest primeval of southeastern North America on a warm summer night in the middle of the eighteenth century. Above the rasping of the cicadas and the creaking of the tree crickets, beyond the yowls and hoots and delicate whistles of the owls, you hear the strange syncopated whistles of what has to be a bird.

But which one?

The first scientific attempts to sort out the disembodied voices of the American night were made three centuries ago by Mark Catesby, the great English natural historian who spent the years 1712 to 1719 traveling through the American wilds from Virginia to the Bahamas.

Catesby’s Natural History

In the published account of his explorations, The Natural History of Carolina, Florida and the Bahama Islands, Catesby reports a bird he names The Goat-Sucker of Carolina; the painting shows a brown, vaguely spotted bird standing on the ground, its grotesquely huge mouth agape and about to swallow a mole cricket.

The Goat-Sucker of Carolina

Says Catesby, “this Bird agrees with the description of that in Mr. Willoughby … of the same name, except that this is somewhat less” than the 10 or 12 inches Francis Willoughby gives as the length of his, the European, goat-sucker.

The Goat-Sucker from Willoughby’s Ornithologiae

Catesby’s American bird is “very numerous,” he writes, and in Virginia and Carolina people call it the “East India Bat.”

Caprimulgus carolinensis

Seventy years after Catesby’s return to England, in his thirteenth edition of the Systema naturae, Johann Friedrich Gmelin gave Catesby’s goatsucker its definitive Latin description and a formally correct Linnaean binomial, Caprimulgus carolinensis.

Absent an early specimen, Catesby’s painting serves as the type of the species, which is now assigned to the genus Antrostomus and known in English by the echoic name Chuck-will’s-widow.

Only trouble is, neither Catesby nor Gmelin actually describes a Chuck-will’s-widow. Here Catesby, on the sounds produced by his Goat-Sucker of Carolina:

Their Note is only a screep; but by their precipitating and swiftly mounting again to recover themselves from the ground, they make a hollow and surprizing noise …. like that made by the wind blowing into a hollow vessel….

And here Gmelin, on the wing pattern of his Caprimulgus carolinensis:

The flight feathers of the wing are marked with black and gray bars, with yellow dots on the outer vanes; the three first flight feathers of the wing are marked on the inner vanes with a large white spot.

This is obviously a reference to the odd oblong white patches visible on the underside of the left wing in Catesby’s painting—patches that, together with Gmelin’s plumage description and Catesby’s account of the bird’s voice, make it evident that both the Goat-Sucker of Carolina and Caprimulgus carolinensis in fact originally name, at least in muddled part, not the Chuck-will’s-widow but the Common Nighthawk, a familiar but sadly declining species in eastern North America, identified by the white bar across its outermost primaries and the whooshing, whirring boom made by its wingtips in a dive.

In 1746-47, Mark Catesby issued an Appendix to his Natural History. Among the additional birds illustrated there is The Whip-poor-Will; Catesby’s text quotes at length from a letter sent to him by the Virginia physician John Clayton.

Flora Virginica, by John Clayton

Clayton, a distinguished botanist and natural historian himself, contributes a fine description of the bird’s strangely accented chanting song, and also records the poignant belief of “the Indians [that] these birds were never known ‘till a great massacre was made of their countryfolks by the English, and that they are the Souls or departed Spirits of the massacred Indians.”

The Whip-poor-will in Catesby’s Natural History

Catesby’s own words are more problematic. Much of his plumage description clearly applies to the Eastern Whip-poor-will, but then, fatally, we learn that the “quill feathers of the wing are of a dark brown colour, except a broad white list [=contrasting stripe] crossing five of them on the middle of each wing.” This is, once again, the distinctive wing pattern of the Common Nighthawk, and Catesby’s painting clearly combines the pointed, white-barred wings of that species with the long, rounded tail and extravagant rictal bristles of the Eastern Whip-poor-will.

Combining the Common Nighthawk with the Eastern Whip-poor-will in Catesby’s Natural History

Like his Goat-Sucker of Carolina, this illustration, too, served as the type “specimen” for a later taxonomer. In 1771, Johann Reinhold Forster assigned the Linnaean name Caprimulgus minor to what he called in English the Lesser Goatsucker—giving as his authority “C.III.16,” an unequivocal citation to the “Whip-poor-will” on Plate 16 in Catesby’s Appendix.

Forster’s citation of the “Lesser Goatsucker,” based on Catesby’s Appendix

There things stood until Alexander Wilson took the birds into his own hands—quite literally.

Wilson’s illustrations of the Nighthawk and Whip-poor-will

Wilson, the bicentennial of whose death we celebrate this year, determined to “divest” the North American nightjars of the “considerable obscurity” promulgated by Catesby, George Edwards, Thomas Pennant, and “many of our own citizens and … some of our naturalists and writers.”

Wilson solved the riddle in a thoroughly straightforward way, shooting and carefully dissecting nineteen of the controverted night birds. Those that

dart about in the air like Swallows, and sometimes descend with rapidity from a great height, making a hollow sounding noise like that produced by blowing into the bunghole of an empty hogshead …. All corresponded in the markings and tints of their plumage … evidently of the same species….

Another, though,

shot in the evening, while in the act of repeating his usual and well-known notes…. was found to … [differ] in many remarkable particulars…. Three others were shot… all four were evidently of one species [different from the first birds].

Wilson goes on at length to describe the differences between the first set of specimens—which were Common Nighthawks—and the second—Eastern Whip-poor-wills—concluding that it is “impossible to withstand the conviction, that these two birds belonged to two distinct species….” Wilson ends in a note of triumph:

these facts having been laid before Mr. Bartram, together with a male and female of each of the above-mentioned species … that venerable naturalist was pleased to declare … that he had no doubt of the Night Hawk and the Whip-poor-will being two very distinct species….

William Jardine, in his posthumous edition of the American Ornithology, signaled Wilson’s detective work as one of the author’s great accomplishments. But not all American ornithologists saw it the same way. Audubon, reluctant as so often to acknowledge Wilson’s attainments, wrote in the Ornithological Biography that he “had known both birds from [his] early youth,” and, more snidely still, that he had “seldom seen a farmer or even a boy in the United States, who did not know the difference between them.”

Those must have been exceptionally learned farmboys. It took a full century, from Catesby’s arrival in America in 1712 to Wilson’s Ornithology of 1812, for science to work out the voices of the night. And the unraveling continues even today: 2010 saw the split of the Whip-poor-will into two species, and in 2012—three hundred years after Catesby’s arrival in North America, 200 years after Wilson’s unveiling of the “real” Whip-poor-will—both the Chuck-will’s-widow and the whip-poor-wills were moved from the Linnaean genus Caprimulgus to Charles-Lucian Bonaparte’s Antrostomus of 1838. The night still holds its secrets.

Michel Chevalier

In the early 1930s, the name of Chester A. Reed was known to all amateur and professional ornithologists in the United States and Canada. Today, there are few who remember him. And yet, he was the first to develop the concept of the “Field Guide ” by publishing his Bird Guide Part 2, Land Birds East of the Rockies (1905)*, which presented for  the  first time colored illustrations of birds in a small format book convenient for use in the field (3 X 5 ½ inches).

Reed’s most prominent publication, Bird Guide Part 2 revolutionized the art of bird identification in the field and directly contributed to public education about identification practices. Following the success of this publication, several other identification guides were published, including the first color “Field Guide” to wild plants in 1907 and, in 1911, with the collaboration of S. Bowdish Beecher, the first color “Field Guide” of the Audubon Society of New Jersey – Guide to the Birds of New Jersey.

Diagram of a bird, from Bird Guide Part 2

Reed’s publication history extends significantly beyond his renowned field guides. Between 1901 and 1906, Chester published 67 issues of the magazine American Ornithology, for Home and School. This journal was dedicated to the education and conservation of birds. Between 1903 and 1912, he published 24 books mainly on the topic of ornithology.

The Yellow-Bellied Sapsucker, in Bird Guide Part 2

One hundred years ago today (on December 16, 1912), at the age of 36 and five days after contracting pneumonia, Chester died. At that time, he was planning the trip of his dreams in Amazonia. Fate decided otherwise.

It was not until 22 years after his death that another talented illustrator adopted his format and improved on it, thus enabling a new generation of fans to indulge their favorite hobby. Roger T. Peterson was introduced to birding through Chester’s books and the publication of his Field Guide to the Bird in 1934 became a new source of inspiration for future authors of ornithology.

Sandpiper and Curlew Eggs

My interest in Chester A. Reed began in 2009. I wanted to pay tribute via a web project to the publication of his book North American Birds Eggs in 1904. I soon realized that there was no information on his life history and even institutions and historians were at an impasse on his personal life.

My research on Reed lasted 2 ½ years. I enlisted the help of many individuals, notably Mrs. Jean Mayo (specialist in genealogy) who enabled me to discover what history had forgotten. She helped me track down one of the last descendants of the Reed family. Mrs. Gail Berkshire had preserved the family history, and she allowed me access to his archives.

The generosity of Mrs. Berkshire has allowed me to trace a large part of the personal life of Chester, including a better understanding of the close relationship between Chester and his father Charles K. Reed, who was the publisher of all his books. This relationship earned him a great reputation amongst the birders of his time.

I could not keep this information to myself. I had to share this history and was motivated to create a website devoted to his biography and that of his father and mother. I wanted to make the experience others have of his life similar to a visit to a museum. Thus, at the end of each webpage, I present a little slideshow that allows visitors to view some of the archival material which I used in this research (see an example here-must have a Swiff player on your desktop to view).

First ad for Bird Guide pt. 2

The website also includes a Gallery section, which presents several of Reed’s illustrations which have never been published before. For instance, there you will find the first advertisement for the “Bird Guide” published in 1905.  All this valuable information has been preserved for over 100 years by the Reed family.

For the first time, all of the 34 books published by Chester and his father have been documented via this website. Each book has its own story and allows us to follow the evolution of this great pioneer of ornithological literature from the early 20th century.

The Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL) has many of the books published by Chester A. Reed and his father Charles K. Reed. This is the only collection in digital format available on the Web. It will allow many people to become familiar with his work and discover a teacher whose passion for his research is as obvious today as it was 100 years ago.

The life of Chester A. Reed has long been a mystery to historians. Thanks to the research now presented on the Chester Reed website, this is no longer the case. His work played an important role in the history of recreational ornithology in America. He should not be forgotten.

Book of the Week: Biologia Centrali Americana

Biologia author Frederick Godman

In 1876, two men by the names of Frederick Godman and Osbert Salvin began work on perhaps the most comprehensive account of the flora and fauna of Mexico and Central America ever undertaken. Entitled Biologia Centrali Americana, this 63 volume work, published over the course of 36 years, relates nearly all information known at the time on the mammals, birds, fish, mollusks, insects, arachnids, and botany in the region. Accompanied by over 1,600 lithographic plates, 900 of which are colored, Biologia Centrali Americana is arguably the single most authoritative work on Mexico and Central America’s turn-of-the-century biodiversity and constitutes a perfect candidate to help us celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month!

Great Things have Small Beginnings

Biologia author Osbert Salvin

Godman and Salvin became fast friends while attending Cambridge, where their mutual enthusiasm for natural history solidified their lifelong friendship. Early interest in ornithology prompted them, along with 18 other friends and young ornithologists, to establish a new, and ultimately extremely influential, journal dedicated to ornithology, the Ibis (learn more about the Ibis in our previous book of the week post).

Welcome to the New World

In Fall, 1857, the pair’s first interaction with Central America transpired, when Salvin visited the area to study palm nuts and their potential application in candle making. Finding the inquiry disappointing, Salvin spent the remainder of his time studying the birds and insects of the region, which ultimately led to a publication detailing the 381 known bird species of Central America in the first volume of the new Ibis journal.

Though Salvin returned to England in 1858, he was forever mesmerized by the biodiversity he encountered in Central America. He quickly returned to the area in 1859 and continued collecting bird and insect specimens, which he initially detailed in an article written for the Ibis.

Members of the Morpho genus in Biologia

In August, 1861, Godman joined Salvin on his third expedition to Central America. It was in Yzabal, where the expedition originated, that Godman had his first magical encounter with the region’s biodiversity:

This place will, however, always be associated in my mind with my first sight of a living example of one of the most striking and gorgeous of all butterflies, Morpho peleides. I was sitting on the trunk of a fallen tree in the forest, when it came floating past me, but I was so overcome with astonishment and delight at this wonderful vision that, although I had a butterfly net in my hand, I was utterly unable to rise in pursuit until it was too late to capture it.

Godman and Salvin spent nearly two years trekking through Central America, exploring, to name a few, Quirigua, Zacapa, Guatemala City, Duenas, Escuintla, San Germonimo, Coban, Cubilguitz, and Choctum, and collecting a wide range of specimens, including birds, butterflies, and fish. Salvin describes the pragmatic method by which he obtained fish specimens in the Rio Grande:

…I employed Indians to poison some nine miles of the water in order to make a collection of fish…The method adopted for this purpose was to beat the plant (Tephrosia toxicaria) on the rocks until a froth not unlike soap-suds was formed, this when mixed with the water caused the fish to sicken and some to the surface…Vast numbers were obtained, and from them I made a selection and preserved a good many specimens in spirit (aguardiente), but was somewhat disappointed to find there were but few species represented.

Fish of the genus Ailurichthys in Biologia

Though this first joint expedition ended in 1863, Godman and Salvin traveled back to the New World many times to study and accumulate more specimens (including trips to Mexico in the late 1880s), often bringing along additional subject specialist. Salvin’s wife, Caroline Maitland, accompanied Salvin on his final voyage to Central America, during which time she painted the illustrations of the flora found in the botanical volumes of Biologia.  The pair also employed various collection experts to gather specimens in specific region for their growing body of preserved Central American wildlife.

A Monumental Undertaking

The Manatee in Biologia

In 1876, the suggestion to publish a comprehensive work describing the biodiversity collected in Central America sparked the origins of Biologia. Originally intended to be published in six quarto parts a year, each supplemented with six colored plates, resulting in a total of 60 parts over 10 years, the continuous supply of fresh specimens, and abundance of material to be published, necessitated a total of 215 parts in zoology, 5 volumes in botany, and 17 parts in archaeology, spanning 36 years of publication.

Godman and Salvin worked diligently on the title until June 1, 1898, when Salvin unexpectedly died. At the point of his death, only 141 of the 215 parts of Zoology and 8 of the 17 parts of Archaeology had been completed (all botany volumes were completed at the time of Salvin’s death). With help from additional authors, Godman persevered “with a heavy heart,” and in 1915, the final part was issued, bringing this monumental undertaking to a close.

New World Feathers

As Godman and Salvin were both avid ornithologists, and as their publishing enterprises together began with an ornithological journal, we thought it fitting to feature the Aves Atlas from Biologia Centrali Americana in our post. The Atlas contains 79 plates illustrating the species found in the three previous bird volumes.

Godman relayed particular frustrations, and ultimate triumphs, with describing the birds of Mexico. As he outlines:

In working out the Mexican Birds we found ourselves hampered for want of an authentically named collection of North American species for comparison, which did not exist in Europe at that time. In order to remedy this, I acquired the Henshaw collection, numbering 13,326 specimens, and this was rendered still more valuable through the courtesy of the authorities at the United States National Museum, who allowed Mr. Ridgway, the highest authority in America, to go through and verify all the names on the labels attached.

As the Smithsonian (National Museum of Natural History) paid a key role in deciphering the ornithological specimens contained in this work, it is no wonder that they, in collaboration with many of our other BHL partners, would build a virtual exhibition dedicated to Biologia.

We’ve presented a few of our favorite illustrations from the Aves Atlas below. Be sure to check out all of the images on Flickr and the entire set of Atlases in BHL. Delve even further into these illustrations with our Book of the Week Pinterest board.

Finally, check back on our blog, Twitter, Facebook and Flickr for more posts celebrating Hispanic Heritage Month!

We hope you enjoyed this post. Interested in guest-blogging for BHL? We’d love that! Natural history, biodiversity and conservation topics are especially welcomed. Email us your ideas at [email protected]. 

This past June, BHL-Staff visited Cape Town, South Africa for a series of meetings aimed at developing a BHL for sub-Saharan Africa. The meeting brought together 20 African participants from six countries with a variety of backgrounds including Librarians, Researchers, and Information Technologists. One such individual was Margaret Koopman, a librarian at an ornithological institute in South Africa. Margaret uses BHL regularly to help her fulfill the needs of her patrons, and she graciously agreed to be interviewed about that usage for our blog.

What is your title, institutional affiliation (or alternative place of employment), and area of interest?

I am a librarian at the Niven Library of the Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology.  My areas of interest include ornithology, biodiversity conservation and environmental history.

How long have you been in your field of study?

I have been a qualified librarian since 1983, working almost entirely in Life Sciences libraries.  My particular field of study is environmental history in which I have an MSc.

When did you first discover BHL?

In April 2009 I linked BHL to my online catalogue.  In June 2009 I was trying to track down a copy of A Monograph of the Hirundinidae by R.B. Sharpe & C.W. Wyatt for information on population crashes of swallows in southern Africa because of extreme weather events.  I found the book in BHL and went on to write up a small piece from this publication about a population crash which took place in 1891 in Maputo, Mozambique for the Cape Bird Club Newsletter, Promerops.  The URL for BHL was included to enable readers of the article to find the BHL treasures for themselves.

What is your opinion of BHL and how has it impacted your research?

Although the Niven Library has an exceptional collection of material on African ornithology, it is not comprehensive.  BHL has been a great help in linking African ornithological research to early material published in European and British publications.  I am now able to point other researchers to what is available at BHL instead of providing pdfs myself.

How often do you use BHL?

This depends on the demand of my library users, probably on average once a week.

How do you usually use BHL (read the titles online/download whole PDFs/Select Pages to Download for a custom PDF/Download High Resolution Images/Generate Taxonomic Bibliographies/etc.)

I generally download whole PDFs, select pages to download, or identify a PDF and forward the URL to a user.

What are your favorite features/services on BHL?

I find the BHL web presence attractive and inviting.  As my use is focused I appreciate the ease with which I can establish whether a publication is available or not and the speed with which I can download material.

If you could change one thing about BHL, what would it be, or what developmental aspect would you like the BHL team to focus on next?

I know that my user community would appreciate single article access.

If you had to choose one title/item in BHL that has most impacted your research, or one item that you prefer above any other in BHL, what would it be and why?

Anything to do with African ornithology!  Providing information in this field is my mission and BHL has enabled me to do this much more easily and comprehensively.