On the Breeds of the Domestic Pigeon

On the Breeds of the Domestic Pigeon. Believing that it is alwaysbest to study some special group, I have, after deliberation, taken updomestic pigeons. I have kept every breed which I could purchase orobtain, and have been most kindly favoured with skins from severalquarters of the worid, more especially by the Hon. W. Elliot from India

In the skeletons of the several breeds, the development of the bonesof the face in length and breadth and curvature differs enormously. Theshape, as well as the breadth and length of the ramus of the lower jawvaries in a highly remarkable manner.

The number of the caudal andsacral vertebrae vary, as does the number of the ribs, together withtheir relative breadth and the presence of processes. The size andhape of the apertures in the sternum are highly variable, so is thedegree of divergence and relative size of the two arms of the furculaThe proportional width of the gape of mouth, the proportional length ofthe eye-lids, of the orifice of the nostrils, of the tongue(not always instrict correlation with the length of beak), the size of the crop and of theupper part of the oesophagus; the development and abortion of theoil-gland, the number of the primary wing and caudal feathers; therelative length of wing and tail to each other and to the body, the relativelength of leg and of the feet, the number of scutella on the toes, thedevelopment of skin between the toes, are all points of structure whichare variable. The period at which the perfect plumage is acquiredvaries, as does the state of the down with which the nestling birds areclothed when hatched. The shape and size of the eggs vary. Themanner of flight differs remarkably, as does in some breeds the voiceand disposition. Lastly, in certain breeds, the males and females havecome to differ to a slight degree from each other

Altogether at least a score of pigeons might be chosen, which ifshown to an ornithologist, and he were told that they were wild birdswould certainly, I think, be ranked by him as well-defined speciesMoreover, I do not believe that any ornithologist would place the Englishcarrier, the short- faced tumbler, the runt, the barb, pouter, and fantailin the same genus; more especially as in each of these breeds severaltruly-inherited sub-breeds, or species as he might have called themcould be shown himGreat as the differences are between the breeds of pigeons, I amfully convinced that the common opinion of naturalists is correctnamely, that all have descended from the rock-pigeon(Columba livia)including under this term several geographical races or sub-specieswhich differ from each other in the most trifling respects. As several ofreasons which have led me to this belief are in some degreelicable in other cases, I will here briefly give them. If the severalbreeds are not varieties, and have not proceeded from the rock-pigeonthey must have descended from at least seven or eight aboriginalstocks; for it is impossible to make the present domestic breeds by thecrossing of any lesser number: how, for instance, could a pouter beroduced by crossing two breeds unless one of the parent-stockspossessed the characteristic enormous crop? The supposed aboriginalstocks must all have been rock-pigeons, that is, not breeding or willinglyperching on trees. But besides C. livia, with its geographicalsub-species, only two or three other species of rock-pigeons are knownand these have not any of the characters of the domestic breeds. Hencethe supposed aboriginal stocks must either still exist in the countrieswhere they were originally domesticated, and yet be unknown toornithologists; and this, considering their size, habits, and remarkablecharacters, seems very improbable, or they must have become extinctthe wild state. But birds breeding on precipices, and good fliersunlikely to be exterminated, and the common rock-pigeon, which hasthe same habits with the domestic breeds has not been exterminatedeven on several of the smaller British islets or on the shores of theMediterranean. Hence the supposed extermination of so many specieshaving similar habits with the rock-pigeon seems to me a very raslassumption. Moreover, the several above-named domesticated breedshave been transported to all parts of the world, and, therefore, somethem must have been carried back again into their native country.but not one has ever become wild or feral, though the dovecot-pigeonwhich is the rock-pigeon in a very slightly altered state, has becomeferal in several places. Again, all recent experience shows that it s mostdifficult to get any wild animal to breed freely under domestication, yeon the hypothesis of the multiple origin of our pigeons, it must beassumed that at least seven or eight species were so thoroughlydomesticated in ancient times by half-civilized man, as to be quiteprolific under confinement

An argument, as it seems to me, of great weight, and applicable ineveral other cases, is, that the above-specified breeds, thoughagreeing generally in constitution, habits, voice, colouring, and in mostparts of theirstructure, with the wild rock-pigeon, yet are certainly highlyabnormal in other parts of their structure: we may look in vainthroughout the whole great family of Columbidae for a beak like that ofthe English carrier, or that of the short-faced tumbler, or barb, forreversed feathers like those of the Jacobin, for a crop like that of thepouter, for tail-feathers like those of the fantail. Hence it must beassumed not only that half-civilized man succeeded in thoroughlydomesticating several species, but that he intentionally or by chancepicked out extraordinarily abnormal species, and further, that thesevery species have since all become extinct or unknown. So manystrange contingencies seem to me improbable in the highest degree