Description
This Lesser Antillean Macaw was described as being similar in colouration to the Scarlet Macaw, but with shorter tail feathers, as these were 18 or 15–20 in (45.7 or 38.1–50.1 cm) long. The tail feathers of the Scarlet Macaw are 2 ft (70 cm) long, and also differ by having blue tips, with the outer feathers being almost entirely blue. In spite of the tail feathers being shorter, it is not certain to determine whether the Lesser Antillean Macaw was smaller than the Scarlet Macaw overall, as the relative proportions of body parts vary between macaw species. The tail feathers were longer than those of the Cuban Macaw, which were 12 in (290–305 mm) long.
Du Tetre described the Lesser Antillean Macaw as follows in 1654:
The Macaw is the largest of all the parrot tribe; for although the parrots of Guadeloupe are larger than all other parrots, both of the islands and of the main land, the Macaws are a third larger than they... The head, neck, underparts, and back are flame color. The wings are a mixture of yellow, azure, and scarlet. The tail is wholly red, and a foot and a half long.
Labat described the macaw in much the same way in 1742:
The feathers of the head, neck, back and underparts are flame colour; the wings are of a mixture of blue, yellow and red; the tail, which is from fifteen to twenty inches in length is wholly red. The head and the beak are very large, and it walks gravely; it talks very well, if it is taught when young; its voice is strong and distinct; it is amiable and kind, and allows itself to be caressed...
Both authors noted the macaws were the largest parrots of Guadeloupe, and stressed that the parrot species of each Caribbean island was distinct, and could be distinguished from each other visually and vocally. According to Hume, this means that the birds described could not simply had been escaped South American macaws. Furthermore, the docile and amiable nature described by Du Tetre and Labat does not match the behaviour of macaws from South America.
Apart from Du Tetre's crude 1667 drawing and Labat's 1722 derivative, a few contemporary paintings depict red macaws that may be this species. A colour plate from a 1765 book of natural history (no. 12, entitled "L'Ara Rouge") shows a red macaw that may be the Lesser Antillean Macaw. All the tail feathers are entirely red, and it has more red on the tertial and scapular feathers of the wing than are present on the Scarlet Macaw. Different copies of the plate differ in the nuances used, but are identical in pattern. The painting suggests that a specimen may have been present in Europe at the time. Linnaeus cited the plate in his 1766 description of the Scarlet Macaw, but his description does not match the bird shown. A 1626 painting by Roelant Savery, which also includes a Dodo, shows a red macaw that agrees with the Lesser Antillean Macaw in appearance. A second macaw on the painting has been identified as being the likewise hypothetical Martinique Macaw, but though many parrots were imported to Europe at the time from all over the world, it is impossible to determine the accuracy of such paintings today.
Read more about this topic: Lesser Antillean Macaw
Famous quotes containing the word description:
“The next Augustan age will dawn on the other side of the Atlantic. There will, perhaps, be a Thucydides at Boston, a Xenophon at New York, and, in time, a Virgil at Mexico, and a Newton at Peru. At last, some curious traveller from Lima will visit England and give a description of the ruins of St Paul’s, like the editions of Balbec and Palmyra.”
—Horace Walpole (1717–1797)
“Why does philosophy use concepts and why does faith use symbols if both try to express the same ultimate? The answer, of course, is that the relation to the ultimate is not the same in each case. The philosophical relation is in principle a detached description of the basic structure in which the ultimate manifests itself. The relation of faith is in principle an involved expression of concern about the meaning of the ultimate for the faithful.”
—Paul Tillich (1886–1965)
“Everything to which we concede existence is a posit from the standpoint of a description of the theory-building process, and simultaneously real from the standpoint of the theory that is being built. Nor let us look down on the standpoint of the theory as make-believe; for we can never do better than occupy the standpoint of some theory or other, the best we can muster at the time.”
—Willard Van Orman Quine (b. 1908)