Long awaited book on oriental ornithology

Birds of South Asia: The Ripley Guide

Rasmussen, P.C. Anderton, J.C. (2005)

Vols 1 and 2

Smithsonian Institution and Lynx Edicions, Washington, D.C. and Barcelona.

Review: Gehan de Silva Wijeyeratne

BIRDS: The Birds of South Asia: The Ripley Guide is one of the most long awaited books in oriental ornithology.

There were many people, including me, who had hoped that it would become a benchmark, which would not only clarify many of the taxonomic issues, but also introduce some stability to the English nomenclature.

The 'book' takes the form of two volumes. Volume 1 is very nearly a stand alone field guide, whilst Volume 2 carries the detailed species commentaries.

With some of the difficult species and some of the new splits, I think birders need more details than are there in the existing text in Volume 1.

On first appearances I preferred Volume 1 to the other competing field guides by Grimmett et al (1998) and Kazmierczak (2000). Having analysed my intuitive preference, I rationalised the better 'feel' of Volume 01 is due to three factors. Firstly, the plates have fewer birds per plate than the others.

Secondly, the maps face the plates. The facing distribution maps make Volume 1 a strong candidate to become the preferred guide of the three on the market.

Besides, there is the advantage of having the most recent splits. More on that later. Thirdly, the birds in the Rasmussen plates are 'nicely' drawn.

Volume 1 comprises 180 plates with facing text and maps in a 378 page book. The inside front and back covers have a Plate Key, using thumbnail images of birds.

With so many families, the use of a plate key, increasingly popular in field guides, is very useful. At the front is a list of the plates and a key to the distribution maps. The back has an index to the plates by genus and group names.

Detailed species

Birds of South Asia. The Ripley Guide Volume 2: Attributes and Status is taken up mainly by the detailed species accounts and sonagrams but also has around 26 pages of introductory text on the coverage of the book, geography and avifauna, moult and plumages, measurements, illustrations, identification, vocalisations, taxonomy, names, maps, records, history of ornithology in South Asia and conservation.

There are ten appendices, a bibliography and an index. The appendices include a gazetteer of localities mentioned in text, major birding localities, a glossary etc.

The appendix on taxonomic changes is not as exciting as it sounds, because although it lists 198 species level changes, it does not provide convenient summary lists of the endemic birds. Volume 2 is heavy with 683 pages and a hard cover.

Given the interest that the splits would generate amongst birders, I was surprised that none of the appendices listed the 'endemic birds' of the region. I compiled a list of endemics by going through the captions of the maps on Volume 1, which is on the full version of this review on www.jetwingeco.com.

The much awaited 'splits' have been a bit of damp squib. It is not that Rasmussen has not delivered. She has.

In Sri Lanka for example, the number of endemics have risen from 23 or 26 (depending on which one of two birding taxonomic camps you belong to) to 33.

Birders, and those like me with a vested economic interest in endemics, should rejoice. The reason why it has been a damp squib is that the basis for the splits, we are told, is in the process of due publication by Rasmussen or others.

Oh dear. Does this mean that we can or cannot claim the endemic goodies served? The critical paragraph on page 25 of Volume 2 says;

"Remembering that the decisions to lump species were made in the absence (or without consideration) of much of the data now available, we propose, in a number of instances, a different taxonomic arrangement from that currently accepted by most sources.

In all cases of such changes, a separate taxonomic treatment is under way or planned, either by one of us or others who have provided information and/or tape recordings" (Italics are mine).

A simpler reading of this means that the justification of a split is yet to be made fully. It appears the reader should wait for ornithologists (some of whom are also sound recordists) to publish a fuller paper and consider the judgment as nothing more than provisional. The next sentence in the passage quoted above, strengthens this view.

"In most of these cases the status of the proposed full species is clear; however, in some cases that are less clear-cut, it nevertheless proved expedient to provide separate accounts for the sake of clarity.

We do not see any practical advantage in conflating these accounts, and we hope that this approach will encourage field observers to take special notice (and documentation) of such taxa rather than pass them off as 'just a race' of something they have already seen....." (italics are mine).

Spirited debate

In Sri Lanka, splits have been the subject of much spirited debate. The Ceylon Bird Club had accepted Priyantha Wijesinghe's three splits raising the number of Sri Lanka endemics from 23 to 26. Wijesinghe had felt that the Ceylon Small Barbet (Megalaima rubricapillus), Black-capped Bulbul (Pycnonotus melanicterus) and Black-throated Munia (Lonchura kelaarti) were sufficiently distinct to warrant endemic status.

Grimmett et al and many others do not accept these split on two grounds. Firstly, splits should be justified by the publication of a 'proper paper'.

Secondly, the taxonomic issues of what it has been split from, needs to be resolved. The taxonomy of the birds on the mainland cannot be left un-resolved when the birds on the island are split.

The Field Ornithology Group of Sri Lanka (FOGSL), a younger organisation with a mandate to take bird watching to the masses, strongly disagreed with the splits by Wijesinghe.

Interestingly, Rasmussen has agreed with two of the splits, but has felt that more work is needed to conclude whether Black-throated Munia is to be split.

Some of us had hoped that the new publication will put the controversy on the Sri Lankan splits to rest. Not quite.

FOGSL, in their quarterly bulletin the Malkoha in Volume 27 No. 3, have stated that the nine splits will be treated as 'Proposed endemics' until validly published.

The nine contentious endemics are Ceylon Green Pigeon (Treron pompadora), Ceylon Small Barbet (Megalaima rubricapillus). Crimson-backed Flameback Chrysocolaptes stricklandi), Ceylon Swallow Hirundo hyperythra), Ceylon Woodshrike Tephrodornis affinis), Black-capped Bulbul (Pycnonotus melanicterus), Ceylon Scaly Thrush (Zoothera imbricata), Ceylon Scimitar-Babbler (Pomatorhinus (schisticeps) melanurus) and Ceylon Crested Drongo (Dicrurus lophorinus).

Adding to the confusion over the splits is a heading describing distribution, titled 'Occurs' in the species descriptions in Volume 2.

In some species accounts, for example Black-capped Bulbul (Pycnonotus melanicterus), it says "(Endemic; taxonomy-dependant). This was one of the reasons for FOGSL treating the splits as 'proposed' and any splits being subject to a full paper.

I sought clarification on this by e-mail to Pamela Rasmussen and one of the principal contributors, Deepal Warakagoda. Rasmussen is in no doubt that where she has made a split in Sri Lanka it is on convincing taxonomic grounds.

The comment on 'taxonomy' dependent is a reference to the fact that what is known of the distribution of a species will have to be re-assessed when species are split.

Thus you would expect to see this comment on the mainland split of Flame-throated Bulbul (Pycnonotus gularis and Black-crested Bulbul Pynonotus flaviventris). Indeed this is so.

But unexpectedly, the same comment also applies to the Black-capped Bulbul (Pycnonotus melanicterus), which is confined to Sri Lanka. There cannot be any confusion to the distribution of what is now treated as Black-capped Bulbul.

Whereas, as expected, the 'taxonomy-dependant' does not apply to Crimson-fronted Barbet (Megalaima rubricapillus) which is split into Ceylon Small Barbet (Megalaima rubricapillus) and Malabar Barbet (Megalaima malabarica).

Credence

FOGSL's view to consider any splits as 'proposed' is given more credence by Rasmussen herself who states under Black-crested bulbul (P. melanicterus)" .... the whole complex requires formal revision". So are we to accept the splits or are we to wait for the 'formal revision'. When will it happen? '

As she has published latin names for some of the splits, those with commercial mileage in new splits can use it as an excuse to accept the whole lot. This has a hollow ring to it. If a case is to be made to accept the splits, it would be under Rasmussen's 'expediency' clause of not overlooking taxa and also for the expediency of not allowing the confusion to get any worse.

For certain species she has used square brackets to indicate where a taxon may be a full species or possibly only a sub-species but more taxonomic work is required.

For example, Indian Jungle Crow (Corvus (macrorhynchos) culminatus) means that the culminatus sub-species of Corvus macrorhynchos is probably a full species, Corvus culminatus.

Again there is an inconsistency in that some species in the Ripley Guide are already published as splits, but pending formal revision, whilst others are flagged as potential splits pending more taxonomic work.

A consistent and more widely understood approach would have been to retain an older accepted taxonomy and to air an opinion on proposed splits and possibly proposed Latin names in a taxonomic note with the caveat that these splits are pending formal publication.

For the newly split Ceylon Swallow (Hirundo hyperythra), under the taxonomy section it states "Considered a separate species here on the basis of its highly distinctive plumage and vocalisations."

The spartan description given for the split may better have been treated as a 'lead in', for a proposed split to be the subject of a full paper in due course.

But as new names have been published and we are reassured that formal papers are in press by her or other authors, a pragmatic approach to avoid any more muddles would be to accept the split. Unsatisfactory, but expedient to avoid the taxonomic muddle getting any worse.

If, however, we are to accept these, would it by the same logic have legitimised the following scenario. Imagine an author was bringing out a book on the birds of Sri Lanka. Let's assume this was before the Serendib Scops Owl was officially described. But confident and as Rasmussen taking the view ".... a separate taxonomic treatment is under way or planned, either by one of us or others who have provided information and/or tape recordings" the author decides to recognise the Serendib Scops Owl as Otus appuhami. Would this have been acceptable?

Would this have pre-empted the subsequent paper by Deepal Warakagoda and Pamela Rasmussen to validly publish it as a new species ? We can now understand why FOGSL is right to ask for new species to be validly published.

Rasmussen has followed the ENVIS list published by Manakadan & Pittie in 2001 in choosing the vernacular names. It may have been better to stick with the names published by the Oriental Bird Club where at least some thought had been given to consistency.

I have dwelt at length on the shortcomings, which are all under-pinned by one word, inconsistency. Inconsistency in the coining/use of common names, inconsistency in the break up of species levels and inconsistency of scientific tradition as to whether a species has been split or only being mooted as a split.

Field guide

How does it perform in the field ? On the whole I have been satisfied with Volume 1 which has become my standard field guide.

In February 2006 on a visit to Mannar thanks to the Rasmussen, I realised that a Shikra we were observing may possibly be a migrant bird, although the Shikra is traditionally thought of as comprising only of a resident race in Sri Lanka. Notes on the vocalisations are conspicuous by their absence in Volume 1.

On two birding trips to India, I did not notice this as a serious drawback. But this was possibly because I was already familiar with the calls of many species. But a beginner trying to tell apart the nightjars may find it difficult without notes on the vocalisations.

For example, the text on the Indian Little Nightjar (Caprimulgus asiaticus) is confined to the comment "Small and short-tailed; pattern like Jerdon's". The text on Jerdon's Nightjar (Caprimulgus atripennis) does not cast much light on separating it from the Indian Little Nightjar.

On a serious birding tour, without the help of a local naturalist, it would become impossible not to look up the bulky Volume 2. But as both volumes are too big to be carried in the field, a birder may be tempted to carry either the field guide by Grimmett et al or Kazmierczak.

The distribution maps, including those for Sri Lanka are not without a few glitches. In India, on two birding trips I realised that the distribution records are not up to date.

In Volume 2 in the section on records, the authors explain that they have been loathe to accept records with a few exceptions unless supported by a specimen or photographs. A reader who has followed me this far through all my grousing may think that I am not in favour of this book.

On the contrary, Volume 1, for the reasons I have outlined before, has become a strong contender to be my preferred field guide. I like especially the distribution maps facing the plates, sometimes indicating racial variation. The less cluttered plates also make the book more comfortable.

However the lack of vocalisations and at times insufficient detail means I would be loathe to travel on a long birding tour without either a Grimett or a Kazmierczak, close to hand.

The full review with references and annexures is on www.jetwingeco.com. The reviewer Gehan de Silva Wijeyeratne is the lead author of A Photographic Guide to the Birds of Sri Lanka (New Holland) and A Birdwatcher's Guide to Sri Lanka (OBC).

Focus on revival of Bhikkuni Order

Siri Lanka Meheni Udawa

Author: Ven. Bhikkuni Ambana Sri Gnanaseela

192 pages

Sri Devi Printers, Dehiwala

Review: D. Amarasiri Weeraratne

BUDDHISM: The author has been a relentless campaigner for the revival of the Bhikkuni Order for the last 30 years. She led the agitation as the president of the Dasa Sil Mata Federation.

At one time she edited a magazine called Meheni Udawa - Dawn of the Bhikkuni. In that she carried the agitation and answered all criticism by anti-feminists who opposed the move.

She has been in touch with the Buddha Sasana Ministry, Buddhist women leaders and advocates of the revival movement.

As such she is in a position to write on the history of Buddhist nuns in Sri Lanka from the Anuradhapura days to our present time.

A veteran lady professor Dr. Hema Gunatillaka who has been associated with the author, has written a foreword reviewing her contacts and her research in the field of Buddhist nuns in both the Theravada and Mahayana traditions. The book comprises 26 chapters.

Chola invasion

The author deals with the establishment of the Bhikkuni Order in India by the Buddha. Then she relates its introduction to Anuradhapura in Sri Lanka. She deals with the heyday of the Order and its achievements as recorded in the Sinhalese chronicles.

She speaks of the Chola invasion in 1017 A.D. This decimated the Bhikkuni Order which graced the land for nearly 1200 years.

The great famine at Anuradhapura and later the invasion of Magha of Kalinga gave the coup de grace which exterminated the Order and made it defunct.

The author goes to show, in the Pollonnaruwa period that followed Sinhalese Buddhism became an admixture of Buddhism and Hinduism. Caste entered the Sangha. Hindu gods were admitted to Buddhist temples.

Anti-feminism of the Manu Laws was adopted. In terms of these laws women were debarred from the life of a Buddhist nun, observing celibacy in Nunneries, wearing the yellow robe of a Bhikkuni.

The monks declared Bhikkuni Order defunct and not restorable. This was the situation till the British conquest of the island in 1815.

Junior Nuns

Under British rule democratic values, civil liberties and religious freedom was allowed. Low caste men were admitted to the Sangha in the Amarapura and Ramanna Sects. These sects were set up ignoring the objections of the Malwatte and Asgiriya primates.

In this climate of liberty Anagarika Dharmapala opened the first nunnery for Buddhist women renunciates, Miss Catherine de Alwis of Bentara went to Burma and was ordained as a Dasa Sil Mata, Buddhist Nun. She founded the junior Order of Buddhist nuns called Dasa Sil Matas.

They were only junior nuns or novices observing the Samaneri Dasa Sila. The Buddhist Sangha to be complete must have both Bhikkus and Bhikkunis. Therefore Dasa Sil Matas have to be trained and given higher ordination (upasampada) to make them full fledged Bhikkunis.

Buddhist leaders among the Sangha and the laity realised this and advocated the revival of the Bhikkuni Order by conferring senior ordination on selected and trained Dasa Sil Matas. The author mentions the names and the efforts made by advocates of the revival.

They include such luminaries and respected leaders like Ven. Pandit Narawela Dhammaratana, Dr. G.P. Malalasekera, Ven. Henpitagedera Gnanaseeha, Dr. Hema Gunatillaka, Ven. Walpola Rahula and many others. A list of their names and activities is given.

Bhikkuni ordination

The efforts of these pioneer advocates were crowned with success in the Bhikkuni ordination ceremonies held under the patronage of Ven. M. Vipulasara, Rector of Parama Dhamma Chetiya Seminary, Ratmalana. He was also the head of the Maha Bodhi Society.

The Sakya Dhita International Buddhist Women's Organisation and the Fo-Guan-Shan Buddhist mission of Taiwan fully supported him with funds and the necessary monks and nuns.

Thus at the grand ceremony held at Bodh Gaya on 12 Feb. 1998, some 150 women aspirants for ordination were admitted as Bhikkunis. Wide newspaper coverage and T.V. programmes gave publicity to this historic occasion in the annals of Buddhism.

It was followed by Ven. Inamaluwe Sumangala and his assistant elders representing monks from Theravada lands ordaining 20 Sinhalese Dasa Sil Matas as full fledged Bhikkunis.

This was done at the historic Sima-mala (consecrated ground) at Rangiri Vihara, Dambulla. Ever since then there have been annual ordinations of batches of Dasa Sil Mata Nuns as Bhikkunis under chapters of the International Theravada Sangha.

Thus the defunct Therawada Bhikkuni Order in Sri Lanka has been revived. Now there are some 400 Bhikkunis in Sri Lanka spread in Nunneries in several towns and villages. Their leader is Ven Bhikkuni Kussuma. She was formerly Kusuma Devendra lecturer at the Sri Jayawardanapura University.

The author has given details of the objections raised by the anti-feminist obscurantists in the Sangha.

She particularly cites the objections raised by Ven. M. Pannaseeha, Weligama Gnanaratana and Gangodawila Soma the three Amarapura Dharmarakshita factionists. Their objections were published in a book by Ven. Weligama Gnanaratana.

Their objections were refuted by and discredited in a book by Ven. Talalle Dhammaloka Anunayaka or cardinal of the Amarapura Mulawansa faction.

A study of these books gives a comprehensive view of the case for and against the revival of the Bhikkuni Order in Sri Lanka.

Glowing tribute

The author pays a glowing tribute to the Sangha elders who participated in the Buddha-Gaya and Dambulla ordinations that revived the Bhikkuni Sasana in Sri Lanka.

At the same time she denounces the reactionaries who made public statements criticising the revival and its proponents.

Bhikkuni Gnanaseela's and her historic publication will be long studied and remembered by feminists advocating women's rights in Buddhism.