Dear Sir,

op A set of company which stayed with me five week, & from whom I parted but yesterday, unavoidably took up my time & prevented my paying such attention to you & some other correspondents, as y^r engaging letters might reasonably demand.

op In the first place I am to return you thanks for your epistle of Sept^r: 2. From what I may gather from y^r frequent visits to the mountains, & from y^r nice topographical examination of those wild scenes, I begin to suspect & hope that you intend to favour the world with a nat: history of some of y^r counties of N. Wales¹.

op You saw the ring-ousels again among their native crags; & are farther assured that they continue resident in those cold regions the whole year. From whence then do our ring-ousels migrate so regularly every Septem^r: & make their appearance again as if in their return every April? They are more early this year than usual: for some were seen at the usual hill on the fourth day of this month. A Devon Gent: tells me they frequent some parts of Dartmoor, & breed there.

op If you do not receive a letter from my Brother in Thames-street² in due time you must not be surprized, because I know he is from home. He wrote me word some time ago that he had sent the birds by the Chester waggon.

op Tho’ Scopoli’s new work ( which I have just procured) is not so improving & entertaining as I could wish; yet it has, I think it’s merit in ascertaining the birds of that district. Monographera have a fair pretence to challenge some regard & approbation from the lovers of Nat: history: for as no man alone can investigate all the works of nature; these partial writers may each in their different department, be more accurate in their discoveries, & freer from errors than those that undertake in a more general way: & so by degrees may pave the way_^^road to a correct universal Nat: history. Not that Scopoli is so circumstantial & attentive to the life & conversation of his birds as I could wish. He advances some false facts: as when he says of the hirundo urbica, that “pullas excfra nidum non nutrit.³” This assertion I know to be wrong from repeated observation this summer: for house martins do feed their young flying; tho’ it must be acknowledged not so commonly as the house-swallow: & the feat is done in so quick a manner as not to be perceptible to indifferent observers. He also advances some improbably facts; as when he says of the wood-cock that “pullos rostro portat fugiens ab hoste⁴”. But candor forbids me to say absolutely that such a fact is false, because I have never been witness to such a fact. I have only to remark that the long unwieldy bill of the wood cock is perhaps the worse adapted of any bill among the feathered race for such a feat of natural affection.ⁱ

op After an ineffectual search in Linn: Brisson, & c. I begin to suspect that I discern my Brother’s⁵ hirimdo hyberna in Scopoli’s new-disovered hirundo rupestris p:167⁶. His description of - - - - “Supra murina, subtus albidæ: rectrices maculâ ovali albâ in latere inferno: pedes nudi nigri: rostrum nigrum: remiges obscuriones quam plumæ dorsalis: recrices remigibus concolores: cauda emarginata, hec forcipata⁷”: - - - agrees very well with the bird in question. But when he comes to advance that it is - - - “statura hiruninis urbicæ⁸:” & that - - definition hirundinis_^^are “ripariæ Linn: huic quoq^e convenit⁹”: - - - he in some measure invalidates all he has said: at least he shews at once that he compares them (if they are really the same with my Brother’s¹⁰) to these species merely from memory. For I have compared them with these species, & find they differ widely in every circumstance of shape, size, & colour. However as you will have a specimen I shall be glad to hear your judgment in this matter. Whether my Bro^r11: is forestalled in his nondescriptor not, he will still have the credit of first discovering that they spend their winters under the warm & sheltry shores of Spain & Barbary.

op Scopoli’s characters of his ordines & genera a clean, just, & expressive, & much in the spirit of Linnæus. These few remarks are the result of myfirst hasty perusal of Socopli’s annus I.mus.

op I return you thanks for y^r proof-sheet respecting the elk: & am pleased to see that my description of the moose corresponds so well with your’s.

op Last night as I rode home thro’ Alton I fund at the post-house, contained in three franks, Mar: Th: Brunnickii Ichthyologia Massiliensis: my best acknowledgements are due for_^^so curious & rare a present.

With the greatest esteem I conclude y^r most obliged, & humble servant,

Gil: White

¹²

op

op

---

---

Editorial notes

1. GW was correct here, Pennants first edition of his Tour in Wales was published in 1778
2. This is White's brother Thomas Holt-White. This line is interesting as it confirms direct communication between Thomas Holt-White and Thomas Pennant, and gives some indication of the extent of the involvement of Holt-White in their shared natural history endeavours
3. Translation: He does not feed the chicks of the nest
4. Translation: He carries the chicks in his beak while fleeing from the enemy
5. John White
6. White is correct in this assertion. Later renamed Ptyonoprogne rupestris, the White Brothers Hirundo hyberna is the Eurasian Crag Martin
7. Translation: Above murine, below white: rectrices oval white spots on the side hell: bare feet black: beak black: oars darker than the dorsal feathers: reticles concolorous with oars: emarginated tail, this forked
8. Translation: "the stature of an urban swallow" In this he references the House Martin
9. Direct Translation: "Linn of the banks: it also applies to this" In this he is referencing Linnaeus' 'bank swallow, or Sand Martin
10. John White
11. John White
12. Salute and signature are in Gilbert Whites hand