Hundreds of scholarly studies and illustrated ornithological compendia refer to Asian hornbills. The taxonomy of these birds has undergone a complex history of continued adjustment. Currently, modern zoology assigns dozens of species in Asia to the family known as Bucerotidae. The present book on Asia’s hornbills cites traditional works mainly written and published by Europeans in the period from circa 1600 to 1850. It mentions the bird names used in these sources, but for the identification of species it basically follows the taxonomy found in the well-known study by Alan C. Kemp and Martin Woodcock (1995). Kemp, one may add, also contributed the chapter on hornbills to the monumental collection edited by Joseph del Hoyo and others. Furthermore, while König and Walravens do not consider the earlier German survey by Kurt Sanft (1960), they do list Daniel Giraud Elliot’s (1835–1915) monograph of 1882, which is the first special account of the Bucerotidae.
Many works deal with cultural aspects surrounding these birds. Examples are the relevant entry in Isaac H. Burkill’s dictionary (1935) and a fine book by Bernard Sellato (originally 1989; this item appears in König’s and Walraven’s bibliography). However, very few modern sources discuss or reproduce the beautiful bird images found in earlier Asian and European records. König and Walravens fill that gap. They provide around 200 illustrations in small format but of good quality, mostly in colour and mostly taken from colonial sources or printed in Europe. Finding and analysing such illustrations is essential for our understanding of scholarly progress. Indeed, images play a key role in the history of ornithology. Of course, König and Walravens also refer to early descriptions of the Asian Bucerotidae and the uses of hornbill caskets and feathers, but their chief intention is to structure the visual material and not to investigate rituals or the trade in beaks, which were made into various objects, especially in China. Undoubtedly, these and other aspects would merit a major research project as both Asian and European sources frequently allude to trade and manufacturing, but that is a different story.
The present book contains separate chapters on pictorial (and other) evidence related to the Chinese sphere, Japan, South Asia (including present-day Myanmar), and Southeast Asia. The last chapter looks at images produced and circulated in Europe. This is followed by several appendices with valuable statistics (mainly on the images), a superb bibliography, and a detailed and very reliable index.
Both the earliest textual references to Asian hornbills and the earliest printed image of such a bird appear in Chinese books. The illustration is found in the Yiyu tuzhi 異域圖志 (fourteenth century). So-called bencao 本草 texts provide additional information. Furthermore, the Jesuits used the term juniao 巨鳥, literally “huge bird”. From the Zhifang waiji 職方外紀 (1623) we learn that their beaks (or caskets?) served as an antidote against poisoning. König and Walravens draw attention to all this. Here one may also think of similar substances, such as “snake horn”, which had comparable functions. Indeed, there may have been undocumented connections between these antidotes and their alleged properties (?). Another theme is the coloured illustrations by artists who worked for the Qing court. In that context König and Walravens provide a German translation of the Manchu entries on hornbills found in a beautiful album. Both the Manchu and Chinese names listed in that source could derive from a Thai (or Laotian?) term, as we are told. The chapter ends with a discussion of Chinese descriptions related to the breeding behaviour of hornbills.
There are no hornbills in Japan, but illustrations of these avian creatures in local works abound. This is discussed in the next chapter. It tells us that the Japanese were deeply interested in the fauna of distant regions and that they relied on Chinese and European material imported via Nagasaki, when they were writing about or drawing hornbills. Finally, in rare cases the hard keratin of the birds’ beaks was used to carve netsuke objects (根付).
In South Asia, the earliest known hornbill picture appears in an album made by Ustad Mansur (d. 1624). Early written references to South Asian hornbills are found, for example, in the works by Ludovico de Varthema (c. 1470–1514) and Peter Mundy (c. 1597–1667). Later sources, mostly by Dutch and British travellers, include illustrations of hornbills in Sri Lanka and other regions. Regarding the Bucerotidae of Indochina and the insular world to its east, once again, the relevant pictures were mostly created by Europeans, but Chinese artists also produced some pieces for export. While König and Walravens do not investigate different styles and artistic conventions, they draw special attention to the Philippines, where Spanish chroniclers used the term calao for the endemic species. According to the well-known Glossário luso-asiático, this expression often stood for jars – certainly an allusion to the fact that the beaks of these birds were sometimes made into small containers.
The final chapter explains that the first ornithological sources printed in Europe focus on the birds’ beaks, which aroused the curiosity of collectors. Only later did images of entire birds appear in books. König and Walravens list many such illustrations, and they also provide a very detailed discussion of a picture made by Anselmus Boetius de Boodt (1550–1632) which records the names Calao rhinoceros and Avis japonica. This discussion reveals the confused history of the names and the “identity” of the bird in question.
What can one say in conclusion? The present book is a meticulous contribution to the history of bird images. Undoubtedly, scholars working on past perceptions of Asia’s fauna will enjoy using it as a rich and finely organized “treasure calao” that is filled with valuable data.
