Shakespeare's Kite - red or black? (1 Viewer)

[lockbreeze926]

Re-posting this here, since it was getting lonely over in the bleak uplands of the Birds of Prey section.......

Reading the other thread on "have Eagle Owls ever been native to Britain?", I got to thinking about the recent explosion of Red Kites across wide areas of the UK.

One of the themes that regularly surfaces in media reports about the RK is the assertion that "Shakespeare's kite has returned" (especially to London), but I wonder if this is actually correct.

References to kites are quite common in Shakespeare, and it seems clear that they were a common urban sight at the time, but I wonder why we assume they were Red Kites, which are birds of field and valley, rather than Black Kites, which are abundant throughout half the planet and which typically scavenge in street and garbage tip for anything they can eat. I do recall one article making this very point, suggesting that the species in the plays was much more likely to be a BK.

Now, given that written descriptions and observations of the time are quite inadequate to discern species (barely family in many cases), what is the biological and zoological evidence that Shakespeare's kites were Red? Or, to put it another way, was the Black Kite formerly a common British resident?

(Incidentally, reports in the last couple of years about "the first Red Kites in London for XXX years" were highly overdue; I well recall observing two over Scrubs Lane in west London in 1996.)

 

[Amarillo]

I agree, it seems likely they could have been black kites - although red kites in the Chilterns also seem very much at home in the towns and villages.

As I have been arguing in the eagle owl thread, we have to accept a degree of uncertainty when you go back more than a century or two, because people didn't study birds in as much detail as they do now. Even if you look at some of the earliest published bird guides some of the pictures are very inaccurate.

 

[Capercaillie71]

The only problem with the Black Kite hypothesis is the climate issue. Is it not generally assumed that Black Kites do not breed in the UK for climatic reasons, and that it is one of the species that may colonise as a result of global warming?

In Shakespeare's time (late 1500s early 1600s) the temperature was thought to have been cooler than it is now:

http://www.env.leeds.ac.uk/envi2150/oldnotes/lecture7/lecture7.html

 

[Barred Wobbler]

And yet I remember years ago reading that black kites were once commonly to be seen raiding the middens of London.

 

[Alastair Rae]

According to an English Nature pamplet:
The red kite was once one of Britain's most widespread and familiar birds. In medieval times it was even found in some of our towns and cities where it played a useful role in cleansing the streets of refuse and, for this reason, was one of the first birds to be given legal protection. As standards of hygiene improved the kite was no longer able to live in urban areas and, in the countryside, it was wrongly seen as a threat to livestock and gamebirds and was persecuted relentlessly. By the end of the nineteenth century the species had been lost completely from England and Scotland.
http://www.english-nature.org.uk/pubs/publication/PDF/Redkite.pdf

 

[lockbreeze926]

According to an English Nature pamplet:
The red kite was once one of Britain's most widespread and familiar birds. In medieval times it was even found in some of our towns and cities where it played a useful role in cleansing the streets of refuse and, for this reason, was one of the first birds to be given legal protection. As standards of hygiene improved the kite was no longer able to live in urban areas and, in the countryside, it was wrongly seen as a threat to livestock and gamebirds and was persecuted relentlessly. By the end of the nineteenth century the species had been lost completely from England and Scotland.
http://www.english-nature.org.uk/pubs/publication/PDF/Redkite.pdf

Well, that's just the kind of assertion I had in mind. People are always saying it was the Red Kite, but never actually substantiating that view. What kind of ID standards are they implying were in place in " medieval times"? All kinds of creatures were spectacularly misdescribed until much more recently - Satan's Chicken, Oblong Sparrow-Pigeon, Storke of Muche Bille, etc.

Now, the birds in question might indeed have been Red Kites, but street-sweeping is quite out of keeping with their habits nowadays, whereas it's exactly what Black Kites do as nearby as France. I don't actually have an opinion one way or the other, but I'm curious to hear some reasoning, rather than just he-says, she-says.

 

[Amarillo]

street-sweeping is quite out of keeping with their habits nowadays
.

Not really. The Chilterns kites seem at home in urban areas and visit rubbish dumps etc.

 

[lockbreeze926]

Not really. The Chilterns kites seem at home in urban areas and visit rubbish dumps etc.

Yes, they do, but they're not quite as fond of sitting in car parks and landing next to people's feet to eat burgers off the ground as Black Kites are.

 

[Amarillo]

Yes, they do, but they're not quite as fond of sitting in car parks and landing next to people's feet to eat burgers off the ground as Black Kites are.

but its possible they could adapt their behaviour in that way.

I wasn't aware that black kites were that fearless. Where do they do that?

I've seen them in various parts of Europe and Australia and their behaviour is not dissimilar to that of the red kites near me.

 

[Alastair Rae]

Well, that's just the kind of assertion I had in mind. People are always saying it was the Red Kite, but never actually substantiating that view. What kind of ID standards are they implying were in place in " medieval times"? All kinds of creatures were spectacularly misdescribed until much more recently - Satan's Chicken, Oblong Sparrow-Pigeon, Storke of Muche Bille, etc.

William Turner is commonly cited for stating that RK was abundant in English towns. According to Cornell Library:
"In 1544 Turner had printed a small book entitled Avium praecipuarum, quarum apud Plinium et Aristotelem mentio est, brevis et succincta historia. In this work Turner not only discussed the principal birds and bird names mentioned by Aristotle and Pliny but also added accurate descriptions and life histories of birds from his own extensive ornithological knowledge. This is the first printed book devoted entirely to birds." [1]

I don't have a copy and anyway my latin is a bit rusty but that sounds like a description of someone who would know the difference between RK and BK.

[1] http://rmc.library.cornell.edu/ornithology/guide/hillguide07.htm

 

[GreatHornedOwl]

If I'm correct, Kites were referred to as "Red glede" in Scotland in the middle ages, and may have been a rather common bird then.
"Red glede" = RED kite ?

 

[david kelly]

If I'm correct, Kites were referred to as "Red glede" in Scotland in the middle ages, and may have been a rather common bird then.
"Red glede" = RED kite ?

Just Gled. If you see a Scottish placename with Gled or Glad as a prefix (Gladstone, Gladhouse, Gladsmuir) then that refers to a place where kites were common.

I've been hit by a Black (Yellow-blled) Kite in Zimbabwe which was trying to steal my toast, that was pretty fearless.

David

 

[lockbreeze926]

I don't think there's any doubt that Red Kites (or gledes) were around in general (they were always found in Wales, of course), the question is whether they were found in abundance in London's streets. (To answer your question, Amarillo - I've seen Black Kites in France in large numbers around La Rochelle and they reminded me of crows or magpies, the way they poked around discarded food and wrappers in car parks, streets and the like).

Interestingly, I found this reference from the British Agricultural History Society - "Kites and ravens had been protected scavengers in late medieval and early
modern London. Clusius reported as many kites there in 1571 as in Cairo, but
by the eighteenth century London kites were rare. There is admittedly no con-
clusive evidence as to whether these birds were red kites (Milvus milvus) or
black kites (M. migrans) but although there is an overlap in range, habitat, and
behaviour between the two species, the black kite is the chief street scavenger
and was probably the London kite, whereas the red kite tends to become a
specialized poultry feeder and was probably the bird of the countryside."

The author cites four sources for this view, all from the 50s and 60s (" See M. L. Grossman and John Hamlet, Birds of Prey of the World, London, 1965, pp. 23~--3 ;
James Fisher, Tke Shell Bird Book, London, 1966, p. 312;A. E. Keys, History of Eastington, Glos., privately printed, 1953, pp. 56-64; and R. Meinertzhagen, Pirates and Predators, Edinburgh 1959, pp. 85-6) so it seems that there is an entire debate from earlier decades that recent Red Kite publicity disregards.

 

[Upland Birder]

Re-posting this here, since it was getting lonely over in the bleak uplands of the Birds of Prey section.......

Reading the other thread on "have Eagle Owls ever been native to Britain?", I got to thinking about the recent explosion of Red Kites across wide areas of the UK.

One of the themes that regularly surfaces in media reports about the RK is the assertion that "Shakespeare's kite has returned" (especially to London), but I wonder if this is actually correct.

References to kites are quite common in Shakespeare, and it seems clear that they were a common urban sight at the time, but I wonder why we assume they were Red Kites, which are birds of field and valley, rather than Black Kites, which are abundant throughout half the planet and which typically scavenge in street and garbage tip for anything they can eat. I do recall one article making this very point, suggesting that the species in the plays was much more likely to be a BK.

Now, given that written descriptions and observations of the time are quite inadequate to discern species (barely family in many cases), what is the biological and zoological evidence that Shakespeare's kites were Red? Or, to put it another way, was the Black Kite formerly a common British resident?

(Incidentally, reports in the last couple of years about "the first Red Kites in London for XXX years" were highly overdue; I well recall observing two over Scrubs Lane in west London in 1996.)

Hi there,

My traffic is sheets; when the Kite builds, look to lesser
Linen.

(The Winter's Tale, Act 4, Scene 3)



Ah, you Kite!-Now, gods and devils!

(Antony and Cleopatria, Act 3, Scene 13)


Detested Kite! thou liest:

(King Lear, Act 1, Scene 4)


I think you will find that Shakespeare's Kite is a Red Kite. He referred to Kites no fewer than 15 times.

A Red Kite was seen flying above Brick lane in Cental London in December 2000.

Cheers

Dean

Cheadle Birder :scribe:

 

[Isurus]

Interestingly, I found this reference from the British Agricultural History Society - "Kites and ravens had been protected scavengers in late medieval and early
modern London. Clusius reported as many kites there in 1571 as in Cairo, but
by the eighteenth century London kites were rare. There is admittedly no con-
clusive evidence as to whether these birds were red kites (Milvus milvus) or
black kites (M. migrans) but although there is an overlap in range, habitat, and
behaviour between the two species, the black kite is the chief street scavenger
and was probably the London kite, whereas the red kite tends to become a
specialized poultry feeder and was probably the bird of the countryside."

The author cites four sources for this view, all from the 50s and 60s (" See M. L. Grossman and John Hamlet, Birds of Prey of the World, London, 1965, pp. 23~--3 ;
James Fisher, Tke Shell Bird Book, London, 1966, p. 312;A. E. Keys, History of Eastington, Glos., privately printed, 1953, pp. 56-64; and R. Meinertzhagen, Pirates and Predators, Edinburgh 1959, pp. 85-6) so it seems that there is an entire debate from earlier decades that recent Red Kite publicity disregards.

Very interesting - and it raises an important question: anyone got £50K for a reintroduction project!?!?

 

[hollis_f]

I wasn't aware that black kites were that fearless. Where do they do that?

I'm off to Tanzania in July and I've read accounts of Black Kites at a Serengeti picnic area that will grab food from your hands (and sometimes a bit of hand with it). My ornithophobic friend is really not looking forward to that bit of the trip - even Glossy Starlings freaked her out.

 

[Gomphus]

Hi all,

Interesting stuff, for what its worth I always wondered about this myself, never really been able to prove to my satisfaction that the London Kites were Red Kite dispite reading various texts, always held a sneeking suspicion they were Black Kites on the descriptions of behaviour, but the climate factor is a good point.
I think it is alway difficult to relate a lot of the descriptions from the 1600's or earlier to precise species, as I think very few were interested in science and wildlife study before then, really I suppose people were too busy surviving to have money and leisure time to devote to pursuits such as this, unless you were one of the few gentry or monks etc? We must count ourselves lucky to have the ability to "waste" time doing this sort of thing!
IMO this makes it difficult to assertain exactly what species were being talked about, the point is made in the Eagle Owl thread that there are no references to the bird from long ago as a UK native, not sure how we arrive at this as because little study was done before the interest in science etc took off in the UK, references to big Owls probably could relate to anything from LEO to EO? Same with kites etc. We would presumably have to relate to fossil evidence, bones etc?
The assertation in the press releases etc about the re introduction of kites did never seem to back up the claim of the birds described as snatching food from peoples hands in the streets of long ago London with any facts as to why Red not Black kite, when Black Kite now seems to be the more urban bird? Anyone out there with any studies they did to prove this, surely it was investigated?

 

[Alastair Rae]

A point that people forget is that London wasn't a mega city in 16th century but a collection of villages with green fields in between.

 

[lockbreeze926]

A point that people forget is that London wasn't a mega city in 16th century but a collection of villages with green fields in between.

Nothing like it is today, of course, but Encarta says that in 1600 it had a population of 200,000, well on its way to becoming the biggest city in Europe, which it became in the following decades.

So, there weren't miles of concrete, but it was urban, overcrowded, dirty and squalid - a real city.

 

[Capercaillie71]

I have just been reading the entry on the Red Kite in Birds Britannica by Mark Cocker and Richard Mabey. It includes the following comments:

"Historical images of marauding city flocks led several modern observers... to argue that... the London birds were more likely to have been Black Kites.

...Although Black Kite is an occasional visitor to Britain, it has never bred and was conclusively not the bird seen above the London skyline, since these were known to be residents, while European Black Kites are only summer visitors."