Red-eyed Vireo
Vireo olivaceus (Linnaeus, 1766)
Photo © Kris Webb
STATUS
Canada and North America. Polytypic.
OVERVIEW
Formerly known as Red-eyed Flycatcher.
Species not admitted nationally during the period covered (BOU 1971).
NOT PROVEN
0). 1859 Derbyshire Chellaston, two, caught, May.
(Mosley, 1863; E. Brown, Zoologist 1864: 8965-67; Eds., Annals & Magazine of Natural History 13: 246; J. J. Briggs, Field 7th May 1870: 407-408; E. Brown, Field 21st May 1870: 433; J. J. Briggs, Field 21st May 1870: 433; Smart, 1886; W. B. Alexander & R. S. R. Fitter, British Birds 48: 11).
[C. R. Bree, Field 14th May 1870: 417; BOU, 1883; Whitlock, 1893; Saunders, 1899; BOU, 1915].
History Edwin Brown in Mosley (1863: 94) under 'The Red-eyed Flycatcher' says: 'In May 1859 a pair of these birds was caught by a birdtrapper of Derby, named Richard Pickney, alias "Hatter Dick". They were caught at Chellaston. Unfortunately only the male was preserved. This unique European specimen is now in my possession. - E.B.'
Edwin Brown of Burton-on-Trent (1864) in The Zoologist, 1st series, Vol. XXII. p. 8965-67, extracted from the Natural History of Tutbury p. 385, says: 'A male specimen of the Red-eyed Flycatcher was trapped by a birdcatcher, together with its female companion, at Chellaston, near Derby, in May, 1859. The specimen of the male is in my possession; the female was unfortunately not preserved....My specimen measures five and a half inches long. The top of the head is smoky grey, vanishing as it were on each side into narrow stripes of smoky black, beneath which and over the eyes are broad streaks of ashy white. The sides of the neck, the back, the wings and tail are olive-green; the inner portions of the wing and tail-feathers brownish-black; the chin, throat and belly white. The bill, as Wilson remarks, "is longer than usual with birds of its tribe, the upper mandible overhanging the lower considerably, and notched, dusky above and light-blue below". The legs and feet are bluish, and irides red.'
In an Editorial (1864) in the Annals & Magazine of Natural History, Vol. XIII. p. 246, in a review of Mosley's The Natural History of Tutbury, they say: 'In the matter of birds, the most remarkable fact recorded in the present volume is that of the occurrence of a pair of the American Red-eyed Flycatcher (Vireosylvia olivacea, Bonaparte) - the "Whip-Tom-Kelly" of our disunited cousins - in May 1859, at Chellaston, near Derby. Such notices are always worth mentioning, but we are far from subscribing to the common opinion that accidental visitors of this kind should be enrolled in our lists.'
John Joseph Briggs of King's Newton (1870) in The Field of 7th May, Vol. XXXV. pp. 407-408, dated 29th April, says: 'In the Natural History of Tutbury, by Sir Oswald Mosley, Bart., there is a notice and beautiful illustration of this bird (Muscicapa olivacea), two examples of which are stated to have been killed in May, 1859, at Chellaston, near Derby. As I am not aware of any individual of this species having previously been killed in England, or even in Europe, I confess I had some doubt that there was some mistake about this bird, and therefore it was with much pleasure that I had a few days ago the opportunity of authenticating the capture of it in Derbyshire, about which now I have no doubt. It occurred in rather a curious manner. There has been about my farm recently a quaint, original, shoeless, ragged-coated man, with his nets and call birds pursuing the occupation of catching Linnets for the London and other markets. He came to me with the usual request that I would sell him threepence worth of charlock seeds. "Are you a bird-fancier"? said I. "No, sir, a bird-catcher, and I have caught some Linnets, and want the seeds for food for them". In the course of conversation he began to tell me how, in the pursuit of his calling, he fell in with strange and unusual birds; and how, on one occasion, he took two birds near Chellaston that had not been seen before, which eventually proved to be Red-eyed Flycatchers. The man's name was Pinkney, of Derby, and his account was that he took the birds at a place called the Tuppas, on Chellaston Hill, near Derby, in May. They had all the appearance of being wild birds, and in beautiful fresh plumage. He sold them to Cook, of Derby, from whose possession one was transferred to the collection of Sir Oswald Mosley. His story had all the air of truth about it, and evidently was correct. I have been the more careful in giving full particulars, as Sir Oswald's specimen is, up to the present time, I believe, unique in Europe, and any details respecting it will of course be interesting to the naturalist.'
C. R. Bree of Colchester (1870) in The Field of 14th May, Vol. XXXV. p. 417, says: 'There can be no doubt that the bird in the possession of Sir Oswald Mosley, and described by him in the Natural History of Tutbury, was captured in Britain, and the note by Mr. Briggs in the last number of The Field is an interesting contribution to its authenticity. I do not think, however, that the bird is the Vireo-sylvia olivacea of Bonaparte, as affixed to the very beautiful drawing by Wolf in the Natural History of Tutbury, Plate 6, nor that this other bird's synonym is Muscicapa olivacea as given by Mr. Briggs. It is, I believe, a very closely-allied species, Vireo altiloquus (Gray), the bird known in America as "Whip Tom Kelly".
My reasons for this opinion are the following: - Vireo olivaceus (Vieillot) or Vireo-sylvia olivacea (Bp.) the "Red-eyed Flycatcher" of the American continent, has the crown of the head dark-ash sharply defined (see Baird's Birds of North America), and the tail slightly emarginate. No ash colour is shown on the occiput in Wolf's figure of the British bird, the tail is slightly rounded, and there is a distinct plumbeous mark on the base of the lower mandible, which Baird gives as a specific distinction between V. altiloquus and V. olivaceus. In the former, also, we are told that the tail is nearly even, and the ash on the head not so well defined....'
E. Brown (1870) in The Field of 21st May, Vol. XXXV. p. 433, says: 'The chapter upon this subject in Sir Oswald Mosley's Natural History of Tutbury is one of my contributions to that work, and the specimen the subject of it, and which was unfortunately the only one which was preserved, is in my collection. When the bird came into my possession I sent it for examination to Mr. George Robert Gray, of the British Museum, and he pronounced it to be Vireo-sylvia olivacea of Bonaparte. Mr. Gray, in his magnificent work on the Genera of Birds, under the name of Vireo olivaceus, gives references to Wilson's figure of the Red-eyed Flycatcher, which Wilson treats of as identical with the whip-tom-kelly, as does also Gosse in his Birds of Jamaica. I consequently described the Chellaston bird under the names Vireo-sylvia olivacea, Bon.; Vireo olivaceus, Bon.; Muscicapa olivacea, Linn. and Wilson; the Red-eyed Flycatcher, john-to-whit, or whip-tom-kelly. It appears, however, that later authors have discovered that two American species have been confounded under these names. If this be really so, it remains to be seen whether the name Red-eyed Flycatcher, or that of whip-tom-kelly, must be dropped in reference to my bird. Dr. Bree contends that it must in future be known as the whip-tom-kelly, or john-to-whit; which words are supposed to represent the call notes of that bird; and this he is probably correct. It is much to be regretted that the bird-catcher who trapped the little stranger had not the politeness to ask it by what name it would please to be called, as, if it be the true whip-tom-kelly, it would, according to authors who have treated upon its habits, have been quite ready to have told its own name, and so settled the point conclusively and for ever. If I can learn that authentic American specimens of the two species, V. olivaceus and V. altiloquus, exist anywhere in this country, my specimen shall be compared with them, and I will communicate the result. It is certainly very desirable that this rare visitor to our country should have its name correctly inserted in future lists of British and European birds.'
J. J. Briggs (1870) in The Field of 21st May, Vol. XXXV. p. 433, replies: 'The two correspondents who favoured me last week by noticing my note upon this bird seem rather to have mistaken the object of it. This was not to determine the species of the bird in Sir Oswald Mosley's possession, but to furnish additional evidence that the bird set down by Sir Oswald in his list as the Red-eyed Flycatcher, and figured there, was an English-killed specimen. This I thought I succeeded in doing. The bird killed in Derbyshire I have never seen, and therefore am unable to offer any opinion upon it.'
Not admitted nationally in their first List of British Birds (BOU 1883: 39).
Smart (1886: 22) says: 'This is another of those instances where two examples were taken at the same time and place; it is highly improbable that they had escaped in company from a cage; moreover it is not a bird probably that would thrive in confinement, if strictly insectivorous; the only question seems to be whether the genuine occurrence is authentic. And upon this Professor Newton throws no shadow of distrust. Whilst Harting states that the pair were trapped by a bird catcher in May, 1859. And that the male is in the collection of Mr. E. Brown, of Burton-upon-Trent: there is an account in Mosley's Natural History of Tutbury.'
Whitlock (1893: 42-43) says: '...The evidence is hardly strong enough to warrant inclusion of this species in the British list....it is very probable that a pair were brought over by some sailor, afterwards making their escape. It is not a far cry from Chellaston to Liverpool, and formerly a great traffic was carried on between the latter place and the Midlands, via the Trent and Mersey canal, which passes Chellaston. Bargees are very fond of birds as pets. It appears probable they may have had something to do with the appearance of the Red-eyed Flycatcher in Derbyshire.'
Not admitted nationally (Saunders 1899, 2nd ed.)
W. B. Alexander & R. S. R. Fitter (1955) in British Birds, Vol. XLVIII. p. 11, say: 'The occurrence of the Tuskar bird as an undoubted genuine drift-migrant makes it necessary to reconsider the opinion of the older writers that the Chellaston birds, caught by a bird-catcher, were escaped or released cage-birds.'
Comment Briggs was getting all confused in the end by saying the specimen was in Sir Oswald's possession. A rejected Tree Swallow was also recorded near Derby in 1850. Not admitted nationally (BOU 1971). Misidentified. Not acceptable.
