Initial commitHEADmain

1 files changed, 3243 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/75956-0.txt b/75956-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..34ea335
--- /dev/null
+++ b/75956-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,3243 @@
+
+*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75956 ***
+
+
+[Illustration: PLATE. I.
+
+  R Savary pinx.   M&N Hanhart. imp.   J Erxleben lith
+
+  DIDUS.]
+
+
+
+
+                                 MEMOIR
+                                   ON
+                                THE DODO
+
+                       (_Didus ineptus_, +Linn.+).
+
+                                   BY
+                          RICHARD OWEN, F.R.S.,
+
+                                 WITH AN
+                         HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
+
+                               BY THE LATE
+                      WILLIAM JOHN BRODERIP, F.R.S.
+
+                                 LONDON:
+      PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.
+                                  1866.
+
+
+
+
+                                   TO
+
+                  THE HON. ADOLPHUS F. O. LIDDELL, Q.C.
+
+
+  +My dear Neighbour+,
+
+If our accomplished and lamented friend, Mr. +Broderip+, had been
+spared to see the evidences of the extinct bird of the Mauritius
+described in the following pages, he would probably have taken a more
+direct share in the present work, and he certainly would have felt
+equal pleasure with myself in inscribing it to you, in whose society we
+so often enjoyed pleasant and instructive discourse in the sylvan walks
+and tranquil shades of Sheen.
+
+                                           Believe me,
+                                               Very sincerely yours,
+                                                           RICHARD OWEN.
+
+ Sheen Lodge, Richmond Park,
+      August 1866.
+
+
+
+                                CONTENTS.
+
+
+                                                                    Page
+
+  § 1. Historical Introduction                                         1
+
+  § 2. Description of the Skeleton                                    21
+
+           Vertebræ                                                   22
+
+           Ribs                                                       25
+
+           Pelvis                                                     27
+
+           Sternum                                                    29
+
+           Scapular Arch                                              31
+
+           Bones of the Wing                                          32
+
+           Bones of the Leg                                           33
+
+           Skull                                                      35
+
+  § 3. Comparison of the Skeleton                                     41
+
+  § 4. Conclusion                                                     49
+
+
+
+
+                                   ON
+                                THE DODO
+                       (_Didus ineptus_, +Linn.+).
+
+                     § 1. _Historical Introduction._
+
+
+The Dodo has long been one of the “Curiosities of Natural History,”
+through the singularity of its recorded shape, and the paucity of the
+material evidences of the bird. The head and foot in the Ashmolean
+Museum at Oxford, and the foot in the British Museum, were all the
+parts of the bird known to the author of the admirable article “+Dodo+”
+at the date of its publication in the ‘Penny Cyclopædia’[1].
+
+The history of the bird to that date is so conscientiously and
+exhaustively worked out by my lamented friend, that, instead of
+paraphrasing or amplifying it, I here give it in Mr. Broderip’s own
+words.
+
+“_Written and Pictorial Evidence._—In the voyage to the East Indies, in
+1598, by Jacob Van Neck and Wybrand van Warwijk (small 4to, Amsterdam,
+1648), there is a description of the _Walgh-vogels_ in the Island of
+Cerne, now called Mauritius, as being as large as our swans, with large
+heads, and a kind of hood thereon; no wings, but, in place of them,
+three or four black little pens (pennekens), and their tails consisting
+of four or five curled plumelets (pluymkens) of a greyish colour. The
+breast is spoken of as very good, but it is stated that the voyagers
+preferred some Turtle-doves that they found there. The bird appears
+with a tortoise near it (fig. 1), in a small engraving, one of six
+which form the prefixed plate.
+
+“In the frontispiece to De Bry (Quinta Pars Indiæ Orientalis, &c.,
+M.DCI.), surmounting the architectural design of the titlepage, will be
+found, we believe, the earliest engravings of the Dodo. A pair of these
+birds stand on the cornice on each side, and the following cut (fig. 2)
+is taken from the figure on the left hand.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 1.
+
+  Tortoise and Walgh-vogel, of the Mauritius (Van Neck and Wybrand,
+  1598). From plate 2 of Van Neck’s Voyage.
+
+  Fig. 2.
+
+  Dodo
+  (De Bry, 1601).]
+
+“In De Bry’s ‘Descriptio Insulæ Do Cerne a nobis Mauritius dictæ’
+is the following account:—‘Cærulean Parrots also are there in great
+numbers, as well as other birds; besides which there is another larger
+kind, greater than our swans, with vast heads, and one half covered
+with a skin, as it were, hooded. These birds are without wings, in
+the place of which are three or four rather black feathers (quarum
+loco tres quatuorve pennæ nigriores prodeunt). A few curved delicate
+ash-coloured feathers constitute the tail. These birds we called
+_Walck-Vögel_, because the longer they were cooked the more unfit
+for food they became (quod quo longius seu diutius elixarentur, plus
+lentescerent et esui ineptiores fierent). Their bellies and breasts
+were nevertheless of a pleasant flavour (saporis jucundi) and easy of
+mastication. Another cause for the appellation we gave them was the
+preferable abundance of Turtle-doves which were of a far sweeter and
+more grateful flavour.’ It will be observed that the bill in De Bry’s
+figure is comparatively small.
+
+“Clusius, in his ‘Exotica’ (1605), gives a figure, here copied” (note
+¹, p. 4), “which, he says, he takes from a rough sketch in a journal of
+a Dutch voyager who had seen the bird in a voyage to the Moluccas in
+the year 1598.
+
+“The following is Willughby’s translation of Clusius, and the section
+is thus headed: ‘The Dodo, called by Clusius _Gallus gallinaceus
+peregrinus_, by Nieremberg _Cygnus cucullatus_, by Bontius _Dronte_.’
+‘This exotic bird, found by the Hollanders in the island called Cygnæa
+or Cerne (that is the Swan Island) by the Portuguese, Mauritius Island
+by the Low Dutch, of thirty miles’ compass, famous especially for
+black ebony, did equal or exceed a swan in bigness, but was of a far
+different shape; for its head was great, covered as it were with a
+certain membrane resembling a hood: beside, its bill was not flat
+and broad, but thick and long; of a yellowish colour next the head,
+the point being black. The upper chap was hooked; in the nether had
+a bluish spot in the middle between the yellow and black part. They
+reported that it is covered with thin and short feathers, and wants
+wings, instead whereof it hath only four or five long black feathers;
+that the hinder part of the body is very fat and fleshy, wherein for
+the tail were four or five small curled feathers, twirled up together,
+of an ash colour. Its legs are thick rather than long, whose upper
+part, as far as the knee, is covered with black feathers; the lower
+part, together with the feet, of a yellowish colour; its feet divided
+into four toes, three (and those the longer) standing forward, the
+fourth and shortest backward: all furnished with black claws. After
+I had composed and writ down the history of this bird with as much
+diligence and faithfulness as I could, I happened to see in the house
+of Peter Pauwius, primary professor of physic in the University of
+Leyden, a leg thereof cut off at the knee, lately brought over out
+of Mauritius his island. It was not very long, from the knee to the
+bending of the foot being but little more than four inches, but of a
+great thickness, so that it was almost four inches in compass, and
+covered with thick-set scales, on the upper side broader, and of a
+yellowish colour, on the under (or back side of the leg) lesser and
+dusky. The upper side of the toes was also covered with broad scales,
+the under side wholly callous. The toes were short for so thick a leg:
+for the length of the greatest or middlemost toe to the nail did not
+much exceed two inches, that of the other toe next to it scarce came up
+to two inches: the back toe fell something short of an inch and a half;
+but the claws of all were thick, hard, black, less than an inch long;
+but that of the back toe longer than the rest, exceeding an inch. The
+mariners, in their dialect, gave this bird the name _Walgh-Vögel_, that
+is, a nauseous or yellowish[2] bird; partly because after long boiling
+its flesh became not tender, but continued hard and of a difficult
+concoction, excepting the breast and gizzard, which they found to be of
+no bad relish, partly because they could easily get many Turtle-doves,
+which were much more delicate and pleasant to the palate. Wherefore it
+was no wonder that in comparison of those they despised this, and said
+they could be well content without it. Moreover, they said that they
+found certain stones in its gizzard, ‘_and no wonder, for all other
+birds, as well as these, swallow stones to assist them in grinding
+their meat_.’ Thus far Clusius.
+
+“In the voyage of Jacob Heemskerk and Wolfert Harmanz to the East
+Indies, in 1601, 1602, 1603 (small 4to, Amsterdam, 1648), folio 19,
+the Dod-aarsen (Dodos) are enumerated among the birds of the Island of
+‘Cerne, now Mauritius’; and in the ‘Journal of the East Indian Voyage
+of Willem Ysbrantsz Bontekoe van Hoorn, comprising many wonderful
+and perilous things that happened to him’—from 1618 to 1625 (small
+4to, Utrecht, 1649)—under the head of the ‘Island of Mauritius or
+Maskarinas,’ mention is made (page 6) of the Dod-eersen, which had
+small wings, but could not fly, and were so fat that they scarcely
+could go.
+
+“Herbert, in his Travels (1634), gives a figure or rather figures of
+a bird that he calls ‘Dodo,’ and the following account:—‘The Dodo
+comes first to our description, here, and in Dygarrois (and no where
+else, that ever I could see or heare of, is generated the Dodo). (A
+Portuguize name it is, and has reference to her simplenes), a bird
+which for shape and rarenesse might be called a Phœnix (wer’t in
+Arabia); her body is round and extreame fat, her slow pace begets that
+corpulencie; few of them weigh lesse than fifty pound: better to the
+eye than the stomack: greasie appetites may perhaps commend them, but
+to the indifferently curious nourishment, but prove offensive. Let’s
+take her picture: her visage darts forth melancholy, as sensible of
+nature’s injurie in framing so great and massie a body to be directed
+by such small and complementall wings, as are unable to hoise her from
+the ground, serving only to prove her a bird; which otherwise might
+be doubted of: her head is variously drest, the one halfe hooded with
+downy blackish feathers; the other perfectly naked; of a whitish hue,
+as if a transparent lawne had covered it: her bill is very howked and
+bends downwards, the thrill or breathing place is in the midst of it;
+from which part to the end, the colour is a light greene mixt with a
+pale yellow; her eyes be round and small, and bright as diamonds; her
+cloathing is of finest downe, such as you see in goslins; her trayne
+is (like a China beard) of three or foure short feathers; her legs
+thick, and black, and strong; her tallons or pounces sharp; her stomack
+fiery hot, so as stones and iron are easily digested in it; in that and
+shape, not a little resembling the Africk oestriches: but so much, as
+for their more certain difference I dare to give thee (with two others)
+her representation.’ (4th ed. 1677[3].)
+
+“Nieremberg’s description (1655) may be considered a copy of that of
+Clusius, and indeed his whole work is a mere compilation. As we have
+seen above, he names the bird _Cygnus cucullatus_.
+
+“In Tradescant’s catalogue (‘Musæum Tradescantianum; or, a
+Collection of Rarities preserved at South Lambeth, near London, by
+John Tradescant,’ London, 1656, 12mo), we find among the ‘Whole
+Birds’—‘Dodar, from the island Mauritius; it is not able to flie being
+so big.’ That this was a Dodo there can be no doubt; for we have the
+testimony of an eye-witness, whose ornithological competency cannot be
+doubted, in the affirmative. Willughby at the end of his section on
+‘The Dodo,’ and immediately beneath his translation of Bontius, has
+the following words: ‘We have seen this bird dried, or its skin stuft
+in Tradescant’s cabinet.’ We shall, hereafter, trace this specimen to
+Oxford.
+
+“Jonston (1657) repeats the figure of Clusius, and refers to his
+description and that of Herbert.
+
+“Bontius, edited by Piso (1658), writes as follows: ‘_De Dronte_ aliis
+_Dod-aers_.’ After stating that among the islands of the East Indies
+is that which is called Cerne by some, but Mauritius ‘a nostratibus,’
+especially celebrated for its ebony, and that in the said island a bird
+‘miræ conformationis’ called _Dronte_ abounds, he proceeds to tell
+us—we take Willughby’s translation—that it is ‘for bigness of mean
+size between an ostrich and a turkey, from which it partly differs
+in shape, and partly agrees with them, especially with the African
+ostriches, if you consider the rump, quills, and feathers: so that it
+was like a pigmy among them, if you regard the shortness of its legs.
+It hath a great, ill-favoured head, covered with a kind of membrane
+resembling a hood; great black eyes; a bending, prominent, fat neck; an
+extraordinary long, strong, bluish-white bill, only the ends of each
+mandible are of a different colour, that of the upper black, that of
+the nether yellowish, both sharp-pointed and crooked. It gapes huge
+wide as being naturally very voracious. Its body is fat, round, covered
+with soft grey feathers, after the manner of an ostriches: in each
+side, instead of hard wing-feathers or quills, it is furnished with
+small, soft-feathered wings, of a yellowish ash-colour; and behind, the
+rump, instead of a tail, is adorned with five small curled feathers
+of the same colour. It hath yellow legs, thick, but very short; four
+toes in each foot, solid, long, as it were scaly, armed with strong,
+black claws. It is a slow-paced and stupid bird, and which easily
+becomes a prey to the fowlers. The flesh, especially of the breast, is
+fat, esculent, and so copious, that three or four Dodos will sometimes
+suffice to fill an hundred seamens’ bellies. If they be old, or not
+well boiled, they are of difficult concoction, and are salted and
+stored up for provision of victual. There are found in their stomachs
+stones of an ash colour, of divers figures and magnitudes; yet not bred
+there, as the common people and seamen fancy, but swallowed by the
+bird; as though by this mark also nature would manifest that these fowl
+are of the ostrich kind, in that they swallow any hard things, though
+they do not digest them.’
+
+“It appears from Adam Olearius (Die Gottorfische Kunst Kammer, 1666),
+that there was a head to be seen in the Gottorf Museum; but the figure
+(tab. 13. f. 5) is very like that of Clusius. It is mentioned as the
+head of the _Walch-Vogel_, and Clusius is referred to. In the plate the
+head is shaded, and has a more finished appearance: the rest of the
+bird is in outline[4].
+
+“Grew (‘Musæum Regalis Societatis; or a catalogue and description of
+the natural and artificial rarities belonging to the Royal Society,’
+London, folio, 1681), at p. 68, thus describes the bird which is the
+subject of our inquiry. ‘The leg of a Dodo; called _Cygnus cucullatus_
+by Nierembergius; by Clusius, _Gallus gallinaceus peregrinus_; by
+Bontius called _Dronte_, who saith that by some it is called (in
+Dutch) _Dod-aers_, largely described in Mr. Willughby’s Ornithol. out
+of Clusius and others. He is more especially distinguished from other
+birds by the membranous hood on his head, the greatness and strength
+of his bill, the littleness of his wings, his bunchy tail, and the
+shortness of his legs. Abating his head and legs, he seems to be much
+like an ostrich, to which also he comes near as to the bigness of his
+body. He breeds in Mauris’s Island. The leg here preserved is covered
+with a reddish-yellow scale. Not much above four inches long, yet
+above five in thickness, or round about the joints, wherein, though
+it be inferior to that of an Ostrich or Cassowary, yet, joined with
+its shortness, may render it of almost equal strength.’ At p. 73,
+there is the following notice:—‘The head of the Man of War, called
+also Albitrosse; supposed by some to be the head of a Dodo, but it
+seems doubtful. That there is a bird called the Man of War is commonly
+known to our seamen; and several of them who have seen the head here
+preserved, do affirm it to be the head of that bird, which they
+describe to be a very great one, the wings whereof are eight feet over.
+And Ligon (Hist. of Barbad. p. 61), speaking of him, saith, that he
+will commonly fly out to sea to see what ships are coming to land, and
+so return. Whereas the Dodo is hardly a volatile bird, having little
+or no wings, except such as those of the Cassowary and the Ostrich.
+Besides, although the upper beak of this bill doth much resemble that
+of the Dodo, yet the nether is of a quite different shape; so that
+this either is not the head of a Dodo, or else we have nowhere a
+true figure of it.’ Grew then gives a very lengthened description of
+the skull which is figured by him (tab. 6), and intituled ‘Head of
+the Albitros,’ as it doubtless was. The leg above mentioned is that
+now preserved in the British Museum, where it was deposited with the
+other specimens described by Grew, when the Royal Society gave their
+‘rarities’ to that national establishment. Grew was a well qualified
+observer, and much of this description implies observation and
+comparison; indeed, though he does not refer to it, there is no reason
+for supposing that Grew was not familiar with Tradescant’s specimen.
+
+“Charleton also (Onomasticon, 1688) speaks of the Dodo Lusitanorum
+(_Cygnus cucullatus_, Willughby and Ray), and asserts that the Museum
+of the Royal Society of London contained a leg of the Dodo. This was
+evidently the leg above alluded to.
+
+“We now proceed to trace the specimen which was in the Musæum
+Tradescantianum. There were, it seems, three Tradescants, grandfather,
+father, and son. The two former are said to have been gardeners to
+Queen Elizabeth, and the latter to Charles I. There are two portraits
+to the ‘Musæum,’ one of ‘Joannes Tradescantus pater,’ and the other of
+‘Joannes Tradescantus filius,’ by Hollar. These two appear to have been
+the collectors: for John Tradescant, the son, writes in his address,
+‘to the ingenious reader’ that ‘he was resolved to take a catalogue
+of those varieties and curiosities which my father had scedulously
+collected and my selfe with continued diligence have augmented, and
+hitherto preserved together.’ This John Tradescant, the son, must have
+been the Tradescant with whom Elias Ashmole boarded for a summer when
+Ashmole agreed to purchase the collection, which was said to have been
+conveyed to Ashmole by deed of gift from Tradescant and his wife.
+Tradescant died soon after, and Ashmole, in 1662, filed a bill in
+Chancery for a delivery of the curiosities. The cause is stated to have
+come to a hearing in 1664; and, in 1674, Mrs. Tradescant delivered up
+the collection pursuant to a decree in Chancery, and afterwards (April,
+1678, some say) was found drowned in her own pond. Ashmole added to
+the collection, and presented it to the University of Oxford, where it
+became the foundation of the Ashmolean Museum. That the entire ‘Dodar’
+went to Oxford with the rest of Tradescant’s curiosities there can be
+no doubt. Hyde (Religionis Veterum Persarum, &c., Historia, 1700) makes
+particular mention of it as existing in the Museum at Oxford. There,
+according to Mr. Duncan, it was destroyed in 1755 by order of the
+visitors, and he thus gives the evidence of its destruction:—
+
+“‘In the Ashmolean Catalogue, made by Ed. Llhwyd, Musæi Procustos,
+1684 (Plott being the keeper), the entry of the bird is, “No. 29.
+_Gallus gallinaceus peregrinus_, Clusii,” &c. In a Catalogue made
+subsequently to 1755, it is stated “That the numbers from 5 to 46,
+being decayed, were ordered to be removed at a meeting of the majority
+of the visitors, Jan. 8, 1755.” Among these of course was included the
+Dodo, its number being 29. This is further shown by a new Catalogue,
+completed in 1756, in which the order of the visitors is recorded
+as follows: “Illa quibus nullus in margine assignatur numerus a
+Musæo subducta sunt cimelia, annuentibus Vice-Cancellario aliisque
+Curatoribus ad ea lustranda convocatis, die Januarii 8vo, +a.d.+ 1755.”
+The Dodo is one of those which are here without the number.’ (Duncan,
+“On the Dodo,” Zool. Journ. vol. iii. p. 559.)
+
+“We now come to the celebrated painting in the British Museum, a copy
+of which, by the kind assistance of the officers of the zoological
+department, who have given us every assistance in prosecuting this
+inquiry, and who had it taken down for the purpose, we present to our
+readers[5].
+
+“It has been stated that the painting came into the possession of Sir
+Hans Sloane, president of the Royal Society, and that it was bought
+at his sale by Edwards, who, after publishing a plate from it in his
+Gleanings, presented it to the Royal Society, whence it passed, as well
+as the foot, into the British Museum. But Mr. Gray informs us that the
+foot only came with the museum of the Royal Society described by Grew;
+and that the picture was an especial gift from Edwards. Edwards’s copy
+seems to have been made in 1760, and he himself says—‘The original
+picture was drawn in Holland from the living bird brought from St.
+Maurice’s Island, in the East Indies, in the early times of the
+discovery of the Indies by the way of the Cape of Good Hope. It was
+the property of the late Sir Hans Sloane to the time of his death; and
+afterwards becoming my property I deposited it in the British Museum as
+a great curiosity. The above history of the picture I had from Sir Hans
+Sloane and the late Dr. Mortimer, secretary to the Royal Society.’
+
+“M. Morel (Ecrivain Principal des Hôpitaux au Port-Louis de l’Isle de
+France) writes as follows in his paper ‘Sur les oiseaux monstrueux
+nommés Dronte, Dodo, Cygne Capuchonné, Solitaire, et Oiseau de Nazare,
+et sur la petite Isle de Sable à 50 lieues environ de Madagascar.’
+‘These birds, so well described in the second volume of the ‘History
+of Birds,’ by M. le Comte de Buffon, and of which M. de Borame has
+also spoken in his ‘Dictionary of Natural History,’ under the names
+of Dronte, Dodo, Hooded Swan (Cygne Capuchonné), Solitary or Wild
+Turkey (Dinde sauvage) of Madagascar, have never been seen in the
+isles of France, Bourbon, Rodriguez, or even the Seychelles lately
+discovered, during more than sixty years since when these places have
+been inhabited and visited by French colonists. The oldest inhabitants
+assure every one that these monstrous birds have been always unknown
+to them.’ After some remarks that the Portuguese and Dutch who first
+overran these islands may have seen some very large birds, such as
+Emeus or Cassowaries, &c., and described them each after his own manner
+of observing, M. Morel thus proceeds: ‘However this may be, it is
+certain that for nearly an age (depuis près un siècle) no one has here
+seen an animal of this species. But it is very probable that before
+the islands were inhabited, people might have been able to find some
+species of very large birds, heavy and incapable of flight, and that
+the first mariners who sojourned there soon destroyed them from the
+facility with which they were caught. This was what made the Dutch
+sailors call the bird ‘Oiseau de dégoût’ (Walck-Voegel), because they
+were surfeited with the flesh of it.... But among all the species of
+birds which are found on this isle of sand and on all the other islets
+and rocks which are in the neighbourhood of the Isle of France, modern
+navigators have never found anything approaching to the birds above
+named, and which may be referred to the number of species which may
+have existed, but which have been destroyed by the too great facility
+with which they are taken, and which are no longer found excepting upon
+islands or coasts entirely uninhabited. At Madagascar, where there are
+many species of birds unknown in these islands, none have been met with
+resembling the description above alluded to.’ (Observations sur la
+Physique pour l’an 1778, tom. xii. p. 154, notes.)
+
+“Mr. Duncan thus concludes his paper above alluded to:—‘Having applied,
+through the medium of a friend, to C. Telfair, Esq., of Port Louis,
+in the Mauritius, a naturalist of great research, for any information
+he could furnish or procure relating to the former existence of the
+Dodo in that island, I obtained only the following partly negative
+statement:—
+
+“‘That there is a very general impression among the inhabitants that
+the Dodo did exist at Rodriguez, as well as in the Mauritius itself;
+but that the oldest inhabitants have never seen it, nor has the bird
+or any part of it been preserved in any museum or collection formed in
+those islands, although some distinguished amateurs in natural history
+have passed their lives on them, and formed extensive collections.
+And with regard to the supposed existence of the Dodo in Madagascar,
+although Mr. Telfair had not received, at the time of his writing to
+Europe, a reply to a letter on the subject which he had addressed to a
+gentleman resident on that island, yet he stated that he had not any
+great expectations from that quarter; as the Dodo was not mentioned
+in any of his voluminous manuscripts respecting that island, which
+contained the travels of persons who had traversed Madagascar in all
+directions, many of them having no other object in view than that of
+extending the bounds of natural history.’
+
+“We close this part of the case with the evidence of one evidently well
+qualified to judge, and whose veracity there is no reason to doubt. If
+this evidence be, as we believe it to be, unimpeachable, it is clear
+not only that the Dodo existed, but that it was publicly exhibited in
+London. The lacunæ in the print represent the spaces occasioned by a
+hole burnt in the manuscript.
+
+“In the ‘Sloane MSS.’ (No. 1839, 5, p. 108, Brit. Mus.) is the
+following interesting account by L’Estrange in his observations on
+Sir Thomas Browne’s ‘Vulgar Errors.’ It is worthy of note that the
+paragraph immediately follows one on the ‘Estridge’ (Ostrich).
+
+“‘About 1638, as I walked London streets I _saw the_ picture of a
+strange fowl hong out upon a cloth canvas and myselfe with one or two
+more Gen. in company went in to see it. It was kept in a chamber, and
+was a great fowle somewhat bigger than the largest Turkey Cock and so
+legged and footed but stouter and thicker and of a more erect shape,
+coloured before like the breast of a yong Cock Fesan (pheasant), and on
+the back of dunn or deare coulour. The keeper called it a Dodo and in
+the ende of a chimney in the chamber there lay an heap of large pebble
+stones whereof hee gave it many in our sight, some as big as nutmegs,
+and the keeper told us shee eats them (conducing to digestion) and
+though I remember not how farre the keeper was questioned therein yet I
+am confident that afterwards she cast them all agayne[6].’
+
+“_Evidence arising from Remains._—The only existing recent remains
+attributed to the Dodo are, a leg (fig. 4) in the British Museum,
+and a head (fig. 3) (a cast of which is in the British Museum), and
+a leg in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, the relics most probably of
+Tradescant’s bird. Whether the leg formerly in the museum of Pauw be
+that at present in the British Museum may be, perhaps, doubtful, though
+we think with Mr. Gray that they are probably identical; but that the
+specimen in the British Museum did not belong to Tradescant’s specimen
+is clear, for it existed in the collection belonging to the Royal
+Society when Tradescant’s ‘Dodar’ was complete.
+
+“In the ‘Annales des Sciences’ (tome xxi. p. 103, Sept 1830) will
+be found an account of an assemblage of fossil bones, then recently
+discovered, under a bed of lava, in the Isle of France, and sent to the
+Paris Museum. They almost all belonged to a large living species of
+land-tortoise, called _Testudo indica_, but amongst them were the head,
+sternum, and humerus of the Dodo. ‘M. Cuvier,’ adds Mr. Lyell in his
+‘Principles of Geology,’ ‘showed me these valuable remains at Paris,
+and assured me that they left no doubt in his mind that the huge bird
+was one of the gallinaceous tribe[7].’”
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 3.
+
+  Head of Dodo (specimen in the Oxford Museum), one-third nat. size.]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 4.
+
+  Foot of Dodo (specimen in the British Museum), one-third nat. size.]
+
+The bones in question were obtained from a cavern in the Island of
+Rodriguez (Desjardins, Analyse des Travaux de la Soc. d’Hist. Nat. de
+l’Ile Maurice, 2ᵈᵉ année), and belong to the Solitaire (_Pezophaps_),
+a large extinct brevipennate bird, allied to the Dodo. The other
+evidences from remains, cited by Broderip, also relate to the Solitaire.
+
+Such was the history of the Dodo in 1837.
+
+In the following year I visited Holland, chiefly with a view to
+ascertain whether there might possibly be any remnant of the bird
+preserved in the Natural History Museums of that country, and to
+collect for my friend whatever other evidence, material, written or
+pictorial, might have escaped his assiduous researches.
+
+My visits to the museums at Leyden, Amsterdam, Utrecht, and the Hague,
+during which I received every requisite aid from the accomplished
+Professors and Curators, were productive of only negative results.
+The little other information I was able to obtain was communicated to
+Mr. Broderip, who incorporated it in the following “Supplement to his
+History.”
+
+
+    “_Additional evidence relative to the Dodo. By_ +W. J. Broderip+,
+                             _Esq., F.R.S._
+
+  “The interest which attaches to any communication relative to an
+  extinct, and, at one time, a doubted species, must be my apology
+  for offering the following addition to the evidences of the
+  existence and habits of the Dodo.
+
+  “My old and valued friend Professor Owen presented me, on his
+  return from Holland some time since, with a short thick volume,
+  bearing on its titlepage (not without black letter) the following
+  promise:—
+
+  “‘C. Plinii Secundi Des wijdt-vermaerden Natuurkondigers vijf
+  Boecken.
+
+
+                        _Handelen van de Nature._
+
+      I. Van de Menschen.
+     II. Van de viervoetige en Kruypende Dieren.
+    III. Van de Vogelen.
+     IV. Van de Kleyne Beestjes of Ongedierten.
+      V. Van de Visschen, Oesters, Kreeften, &c.
+
+  “‘Hier zijn by-gevoeght de Schriften van verscheyden andere oude
+  Authueren de Natuur der Dieren aengaende. En nu in desen laetsen
+  Druck wel het vierde part vermeerdert, uyt verscheyden nieuwe
+  Schrijvers en eygen oudervindinge: en met veel Kopere Platen
+  verziert t’Amsterdam, By +Abraham Wolfgangh+, 1662.’
+
+  “The frontispiece presents the artist’s notion of the Garden of
+  Eden, with a very Dutch Adam and Eve, the latter with the apple
+  in her hand, while the serpent twined round the tree looks sly
+  and satisfied. Our first parents are surrounded by beasts, and in
+  the foreground is represented a piece of water with waterfowl and
+  ‘ill-shaped fishes.’
+
+  “The superscription is ‘C. Plinius S. Van de Menschen, Beesten,
+  Vogelen en Visschen.’
+
+  “Mr. Strickland, in his elaborate work on ‘The Dodo and its
+  Kindred[8],’ in which he has done me the honour to adopt the
+  arrangement and the information collected in my article ‘Dodo,’ in
+  the ‘Penny Cyclopædia[9],’ gives some addenda in his postscript
+  to Part I. of his and Dr. Melville’s book. ‘The first of these,’
+  writes Mr. Strickland, ‘is a rare edition of Bontekoe’s Voyage,
+  kindly communicated to me by Dr. Bandinel, the Bodleian Librarian,
+  entitled “Journael van de acht-jarige avontuerlijcke Reyse van
+  Willem Ysbrantsz Bontekoe van Hoorn, gedaen nae Oost-Indien,”
+  published in quarto at Amsterdam, by Gillis Joosten Zaagman. There
+  is no date; but from a narrative introduced at the end, it must be
+  subsequent (probably by a year or two) to 1646. The narrative is
+  nearly a verbatim version of the other Dutch editions of Bontekoe;
+  and the only variation of text which concerns us, is in the
+  statement that the underside of the Dodo dragged along the ground,
+  which is here qualified thus:—“sleepte haer de neers _by na_ (i.
+  e. _almost_) langs de Aerde.” But what gives a peculiar interest
+  to this volume is, that it contains (alone of all the editions of
+  Bontekoe which I have seen) a figure of the Dodo, which I here
+  present.’ Then follows the cut.
+
+  “‘This highly ludicrous representation,’ continues Mr. Strickland,
+  ‘is more like a fighting cock than a Dodo; and the black letter
+  of the Dutch text omits to tell us whether this design was due to
+  the pencil of Bontekoe or his publisher Zaagman, or whether it was
+  copied from some contemporary painting now forgotten. But there can
+  be no doubt that this figure refers to the true Dodo of Mauritius,
+  and not to the “Solitaire” of Bourbon, with which Bontekoe
+  confounded it.
+
+  “‘We may regret that the rudeness of the original woodcut leaves
+  us in the dark as to the nature of the object on which the Dodo
+  appears about to feed. This figure would pass equally well for a
+  testaceous mollusk, or for an arboreal fruit; so that the problem
+  of the Dodo’s food seems as far from a solution as ever.’
+
+  “In Wolfgangh’s publication, p. 480, is the following description:—
+
+  “‘Op’t Eylandt Mauritius in Oost-Indien, als mede op sommige
+  andere plaetsen gelijck mede in West-Indien, vindt men voegels soo
+  groot als Swanen, die men Dodaersen of Dronten noemt, sy hebben
+  groote hoofden, en daer op een velleken in manier van een Kapken,
+  sy hebben geen vleugels, dan in plaetsvan dien, 3 of 4 swarte
+  pennekens, en daer haer staert behoorde te staen, daer Zijn 4 of 5
+  gekrulde Pluymkens, van graeuwachtige verwe. Sy hebben een dicke
+  ronde Naers, daer uyt het schijnt, dat haer de naem van Dodaers
+  toe gekomen is; in de maegh hebben sy gemeenlijck een Steen van
+  een vuyst groot, dese is bruyn, graeuw van verwe, en vol gaetkens,
+  en hollingheydt, doch soo hart als grauwe Bentemeer-steen. Het
+  Boots-volck van _Jacob van Neck_, noemden se Walgh-vogels, om dat
+  se die niet recht gaer of murrruw konden koken: of om datse soo
+  veel Tortel-duyven konden bekomen, die leckerder smaeckten, datse
+  van dese Dod-aersen de walgh kregen. Aen 3 of 4 van dese Vogels had
+  al’t Scheeps volck van een Schip, voor een maeltijdt genoegh t’
+  eeten: Dese Dod-aersen hebbense oock ingesouten en op de reys mede
+  genomen.’
+
+  “This description may be thus rendered:—
+
+  “‘In the Island of Mauritius in the East Indies, as also in sundry
+  other places, likewise in the West Indies, men find birds as big as
+  swans, which they call _Dod-aerses_ or _Drontes_. They have large
+  heads, upon the top of which is a skin (a little skin-membrane) in
+  the shape of a cap (little cap). They have no wings, but in the
+  place of them there are three or four black feathers; and there
+  where the tail should be, there are instead four or five curling
+  plumes of a greyish colour. They have a thick round rump, and
+  from this it appears they got the name of Dod-aerses. In their
+  stomachs they have commonly a stone as big as a fist; this stone
+  is of a brown-grey colour, and full of little holes and hollows,
+  but as hard as the grey Bentemer stone. The boat’s crew of _Jacob
+  van Neck_ called them Walgh-vogels (surfeit birds), because they
+  could not cook them till they were done, or make them tender; or
+  because they were able to get so many turtle-doves which had a much
+  more pleasant flavour, so that they took a disgust to these birds.
+  Likewise it is said that three or four of these birds are enough
+  to afford a whole ship’s company one full meal. Indeed they salted
+  down some of them, and carried them with them on the voyage.’
+
+  “At the top of the page in which this passage commences is
+  printed ‘_Van de Dodaersen_.’ And immediately below it and above
+  the description is a copper-plate of the bird, superscribed
+  ‘_Dod-aers_,’ in engraved italics.
+
+  “The engraving of the bird is identical in position and accessories
+  with the woodcut given by Mr. Strickland; but the sharpness of
+  the work and the nature of the plate make the whole much clearer.
+  The object at which the Dodo is looking, as if about to feed,
+  is manifestly a testaceous mollusk with a turbinated shell, and
+  between that and the raised foot of the bird is a half-buried spiny
+  _Echinus_.
+
+  “The locality on which the Dodo is walking has the appearance of a
+  strand which the tide has left dry.
+
+  “Wolfgangh’s account confirms the opinion which I hazarded in the
+  article ‘Dodo’ in the ‘Penny Cyclopædia.’
+
+  “‘As to the stories of the disgusting quality of the flesh of the
+  bird found and eaten by the Dutch, they will weigh but little
+  in the scale when we take the expression to be, what it really
+  was, indicative of a comparative preference for the turtle-doves
+  there found, after feeding on Dodos _usque ad nauseam_. “Always
+  partridges” has become proverbial, and we find from Lawson how
+  a repetition of the most delicious food palls. “We cooked our
+  supper,” says that traveller, “but having neither bread nor salt,
+  our fat turkeys began to be loathsome to us; although we were never
+  wanting of a good appetite, yet a continuance of one diet made us
+  weary;” and again, “By the way our guide killed more turkeys, and
+  two polecats, which he eat, esteeming them before fat turkeys.”’
+
+  “It does not follow that because the Dodo is represented as looking
+  at the _frutti di mari_, he is about to devour them. But if it
+  be granted he is, the admission would not militate against the
+  opinion of those who would place the Dodo between the Struthious
+  and Gallinaceous birds. It is well known that the turkeys in
+  America come down to the shore and feed upon the ‘fiddler’ crabs;
+  and there would be nothing extraordinary in a quisquilious feeder,
+  such as the Dodo probably was, varying its fruit and vegetable
+  diet occasionally by resorting to such animal substances as it
+  might find on the strand. Common poultry eagerly pick up insects
+  and slugs in the fields, and, in the neighbourhood of tidal rivers
+  and estuaries, may be seen availing themselves of the smaller
+  _mollusca_ and _crustacea_ left by the retreating tide.
+
+  “In my article ‘Struthionidæ[10]’ under the section ‘Didus,’ is
+  inserted the following extract from a letter written to me by
+  Professor Owen:—
+
+  “‘Whilst at the Hague in the summer of 1848, I was much struck
+  with the minuteness and accuracy with which the exotic species of
+  animals had been painted by Savery and Breughel, in such subjects
+  as _Paradise_, _Orpheus charming the beasts_, &c., in which scope
+  was allowed for grouping together a great variety of animals.
+  Understanding that the celebrated menagerie of Prince Maurice had
+  afforded the living models to those artists, I sat down one day
+  before Savery’s _Orpheus and the beasts_, to make a list of the
+  species, which the picture evinced that the artist had had the
+  opportunity to study alive. Judge of my surprise and pleasure in
+  detecting in a dark corner of the picture (which is badly hung
+  between two windows), the Dodo beautifully finished, showing for
+  example, though but three inches long, the auricular circle of
+  feathers, the scutation of the tarsi, and the loose structure of
+  the caudal plumes. In the number and proportions of the toes and in
+  general form, it accords with Edwards’s oil-painting in the British
+  Museum; and I conclude that the miniature must have been copied
+  from the study of a living bird, which, it is most probable, formed
+  part of the Mauritian menagerie.’
+
+  “I little thought, when, with his permission, I published this
+  graphic product of my kind friend’s pen, what was in store for
+  me. Not long afterwards, a friend informed me that he had seen a
+  picture at a dealer’s painted by one of the Saverys, and that he
+  was pretty sure there was a Dodo in one corner of it. I sent for
+  the picture, and there, sure enough, in the right-hand corner, and
+  consequently to the left of the spectator, was the bird, in all the
+  beauty of its ugliness. The Dodo stands on one foot with its back
+  to the spectator, and turning round its head, which is represented
+  with the huge bill picking the other uplifted foot. Like all the
+  rest of the birds in this picture, which bears the name of Roland
+  Savery, the Dodo is highly finished. The picture is now in my
+  possession[11].”
+
+The figure 2 in Plate I. is a faithful copy of the bird as represented
+in it.
+
+Whilst on a visit to Sion House I was unexpectedly gratified by
+finding, in a small oil-painting in the long gallery, an unequivocal
+and original representation of the Dodo, in an attitude different
+from that of any of the figures of the living bird by Roland Savery,
+and evidently by another master. I lost no time in communicating
+this additional evidence of the extinct bird to Mr. Broderip, and
+in obtaining the permission of my noble host to make such use of the
+painting as might best subserve the interests of Natural History. Mr.
+Broderip communicated to the Zoological Society the following:—
+
+    “_Notice of an Original Painting, including a Figure of the Dodo,
+                          in the Collection of
+          His Grace the Duke of Northumberland, at Sion House._
+
+  [Illustration]
+
+  “Professor Owen, at whose disposal the Duke of Northumberland
+  placed the following additional pictorial evidence of the existence
+  of the Dodo in the seventeenth century, has requested me to draw
+  the attention of this Society to the highly interesting picture
+  which the Duke has been so good as to send for the inspection
+  of the Fellows. The size of the picture, which is in the finest
+  preservation, is thirty-two inches by nineteen. It is executed
+  in oil, and bears the following monogram and date. Mr. William
+  Russell, with his usual discernment, detected in this monogram the
+  signatures of Jean Goeimare and Jean David de Heem, and proved
+  the correctness of his judgment by a reference to Brulliot[12].
+  Jean Goeimare, who is not noticed by Descamps, Bryan, Sandrart,
+  or Houbraken, is described by Brulliot as a Flemish artist who
+  flourished at the commencement of the seventeenth century, and
+  painted landscapes with many animals, executed with great care,
+  but in rather a dry manner[13]. Of De Heem, the celebrated painter
+  of still life, it would be superfluous to say anything. We may
+  conclude, then, that in this joint production the landscape and
+  animals were painted by Goeimare, and the shells by De Heem.
+
+  [Illustration: Fig. 5.
+
+    Dodo (from the painting by Goeimare, 1627, in Sion House).]
+
+  “In this picture, which seems to have been intended as a record
+  of rarities, the foreground represents a sea-shore from which
+  the tide has retired, leaving empty shells of the following
+  genera:—_Nautilus_, _Pteroceras_, _Strombus_, _Triton_, _Pyrula_,
+  _Cassis_, _Cypræa_, _Conus_, _Mitra_, _Turbo_, _Nerita_, _Mytilus_,
+  _Ostrea_, &c. Behind, on elevated ground, are two Ostriches; and
+  below, to the right of the spectator, the Dodo is represented as
+  in the act of picking up something from the strand” (fig. 5). “The
+  head and body of the bird, covering an area as large as the palm
+  of a man’s hand, are seen; but the legs are hidden. The painter of
+  the Dodo, in _my_ picture” (Pl. I. fig. 2), “has given the only
+  complete foreshortened back view of the bird known to me. In the
+  Duke’s picture the head and body are presented to the spectator on
+  a larger scale; and I have nowhere seen the hood or ridge at the
+  base of the bill, from which the bird obtained the name of _Cygnus
+  cucullatus_, so clearly represented. Near the Dodo are a Smew and
+  other aquatic birds, and further off Hoopoes and Terns. In the
+  distance is the ocean, with a sea-monster awaiting the attack of
+  Perseus, who descends on a winged steed to the rescue of Andromeda
+  chained to a rock. Those who have had occasion to describe and
+  figure new species of Testacea, know how difficult it is to find
+  a draughtsman who can give a correct design of the shell to be
+  represented. Unless the artist, like Mr. G. B. Sowerby, jun., is
+  aware of the internal structure of the shell, and acquainted with
+  its organization, a lamentable failure is generally the result.
+  In the picture before us, with one exception—and even in that
+  the specimen may have been distorted—so accurate was the eye
+  of the painter, that if he had been aware of the organization
+  of each shell—knowledge which he probably had not—he could not
+  have represented the objects more correctly. The _Nautili_[14],
+  _Strombus gigas_, _Triton_, and _Pyrula_ are painted with great
+  breadth and power, and all are drawn and coloured with wonderful
+  truth; indeed a conchologist may name every species. One of the
+  _Nautili_ is partially uncoated, to show the nacre, and the other
+  dissected, to display the concamerations. None of the shells have
+  the epidermis, and all are of the natural size. The artificial
+  condition of these subjects, and especially of the _Nautili_,
+  is, it must be allowed, rather out of place in an assemblage of
+  testaceans left on the sands by the retired tide, unless we are
+  to suppose that the sea-nymphs had been amusing themselves by
+  polishing the specimens and displaying the internal structure of
+  one of them; but this very treatment shows that the designs were
+  accurately made from real objects then considered as rarities. With
+  the exception of the Dodo, none of the natural objects represented
+  are now rare. The shells, especially those whose _habitats_ are
+  the seas of the Antilles, are at present very common; but at the
+  date of the picture—the second year of the reign of our first
+  Charles—the natural productions of the West Indies were not well
+  known, and were, comparatively, very scarce. With the shells on the
+  shore is the cranium of a carnivorous quadruped, apparently of the
+  family _Canidæ_. The monster-cetacean in the distance has evidently
+  no chance with the avenger who is coming down upon him mounted on a
+  winged steed. But Pegasus, who, with other prodigies, sprang from
+  the blood that dropped from Medusa’s head, as the conqueror who had
+  cut it off with his harpe traversed the air with his gory trophy,
+  immediately winged its flight to Helicon, there to become the pet
+  of the Muses. The best version of this mythological story relates,
+  that when Perseus afterwards killed the sea-monster and delivered
+  Andromeda on the coast of Ethiopia, he effected his purpose by
+  raising himself in the air through the aid of the wings and talaria
+  given to him by Mercury, and not with the help of the winged horse
+  on which most of the painters mount him.
+
+  “Professor Owen informs me that Roland Savery’s picture containing
+  the Dodo, in the Berlin collection, bears the date of 1626; and
+  that the colour of the Dodo in the Duke of Northumberland’s picture
+  resembles that of the portrait of the bird, of life size, by the
+  same painter, now at Oxford. L’Estrange describes the hue of the
+  back of the living Dodo which he saw exhibited in London ‘about
+  1638,’ as of ‘dunn or deare colour.’”
+
+The picture of the Dodo at Berlin by R. Savery, to which Mr. Broderip
+refers, is copied in figure 1, Plate I. Another figure of the bird,
+by the same artist, is introduced into a painting in the Imperial
+Collection of the Belvedere at Vienna. Fig. 3, Plate I. of the present
+work, is from the copy of this picture, transmitted by Dr. Tschudi to
+Mr. Strickland, and given at p. 30 of the ‘Dodo and its Kindred.’ The
+date of the picture is 1628.
+
+We have thus evidence of figures of the bird being introduced into
+paintings executed during the years 1626, 1627, and 1628. The
+different attitudes and life-like actions of the Dodo, in these
+representations, indicate that the artists had a living model before
+them. Their original studies may, indeed, have been executed at some
+period antecedent to the dates of the paintings into the subjects of
+which this rare and curious bird is introduced; but the capital fact
+remains, viz. that the figures given in Plate I. faithfully represent
+the shape, colour, and attitudes of the now extinct brevipennate bird
+of the Mauritius. Different conjectures have been propounded as to the
+time, place, and other circumstances under which Roelandt Savery and
+Jean Goeimare were enabled to execute their drawings or studies of the
+living Dodo, and I had the satisfaction to find that Mr. Strickland
+concurred in the conclusion at which I arrived after my researches in
+Holland into the history and evidences of the bird.
+
+“As Roland Savery was born in 1576, he was twenty-three years old when
+Van Neck’s expedition returned to Holland, and as we are told by De Bry
+that the Dutch brought home a Dodo on that occasion, it is possible
+enough that Savery may have taken the portrait of this individual,
+and that the design thus made may have been copied by himself and by
+his nephew John in their later pictures. Or if we feel disposed to
+doubt the correctness of De Bry’s statement, we may yet suppose, with
+Professor Owen, that the menagerie of Prince Maurice supplied the
+living prototype for Savery’s pencil. This opinion is corroborated by
+the tradition recorded by Edwards, that the picture in the British
+Museum was drawn in Holland from the living bird. It is far more
+probable than the conjecture of Dr. Hamel (Bull. Ac. Petersb. vol. v.
+p. 317), that Savery’s pictures were copied from the Dodo exhibited in
+London, as this individual must in that case have lived in captivity at
+least twelve years, from 1626 to 1638[15].”
+
+With the view to test the tradition recorded by Edwards as to the date
+and origin of the painting of the Dodo in the British Museum, I took a
+copy of the outline of the bird and laid upon it outlines of the bones
+of the Dodo subsequently to be described, as shown in Plate III., and
+thus obtained proof that the painting truly represented the natural
+size and shape of the _Didus ineptus_, and had no doubt been “drawn in
+Holland from the living bird[16].” From the date of the first landing
+of the Dutch on the Island of Mauritius, in 1598, to their colonization
+of it in 1644, their ships frequently, perhaps annually, visited that
+island, and, as recorded by most of the writers quoted by Broderip,
+and testified by Van der Hagen, in 1607[17], their crews feasted on
+Tortoises, Dodos, Doves, and other game, and also salted the Tortoises
+and Dodos for consumption during the voyage to the spice-islands of
+the Indian Archipelago. It is highly probable that more than one of
+the strange birds of Prince Maurice’s Island would be brought alive
+to Holland, and we know that a specimen was brought from that country
+for exhibition in London in the year 1638. It is certain that through
+the attacks of man, and those of the dogs, cats, and swine introduced
+by the Dutch into the Mauritius, the slow and heavy flightless Dodos
+were extirpated, probably before Leguat’s visit to the island in 1693.
+The French colonists, who succeeded the Dutch in 1712, seem not to
+have found any Dodos remaining in the island; their descendants and
+successors have preserved no traditions of the living bird; and Baron
+Grant, who resided in the Mauritius from 1740 to 1760, expressly states
+that no such bird was to be found there at that time[18].
+
+Mr. Broderip refers, in his History of the Dodo, to the notice by Adam
+Olearius, in 1666, of the head of that bird in the museum of the Duke
+of Gottorp.
+
+This specimen was most unexpectedly discovered by Professor Reinhardt
+in the Museum of Natural History at Copenhagen under the following
+circumstances:—“In the summer of 1840 I happened to search through
+a box wherein different natural-history objects were stored, which
+had been presented by the ‘Kunstkammer’ to the Royal Natural History
+Museum, and on this occasion I found a very large bird-cranium, which
+attracted my attention partly through its size, partly through its
+unusual and peculiar shape, and by a further examination and comparison
+with the authenticated representations of the Dodo, I became persuaded
+that it must have belonged to that remarkable bird.
+
+“It is very well preserved, only wanting the left ‘os pterygoideum;’
+and the ‘condylus occipitalis,’ together with the entire border of
+the ‘foramen magnum’ are broken away; otherwise it is quite perfect,
+so that an almost complete description of the osteology of the head
+of this remarkable genus may be made out from it. Although I have
+searched through Laurentz’s ‘Museum Regium’ and the MS. Catalogue of
+the ‘Kunstkammer,’ I have nowhere been able to discover any notice of
+such a cranium having ever been possessed by the Collection, and it
+is therefore clear that it has preserved the present specimen quite
+unwittingly, and it stands probably under one of the many numbers
+given as referring to heads of unknown foreign birds. I have meanwhile
+gradually come to the conclusion that this head is in all likelihood
+the one called ‘Dodo’s head’ by Olearius in the year 1666, in his
+description of the Gottorp Kunst-Museum, which, when that museum, at
+least in part, was amalgamated with the Copenhagen Museum, found its
+way there.” (Reinhardt, in ‘Kröyer’s Naturhist. Tidsskr.’ iv. pp. 71,
+72 (1842)).
+
+About ten years afterwards a portion of the bone of the upper beak of a
+Dodo was discovered in the Imperial and Royal Museum of Natural History
+at Prague[19].
+
+Such, until the year 1865, was the sum of the remains of this large,
+flightless, extinct bird which were known to have reached Europe.
+
+The happy perception, by the Danish Professor J. Reinhardt, in
+1843[20], of the resemblance of the beak of the Dodo to that of
+the tropical Doves, generically separated by Cuvier under the name
+_Vinago_, on account of their proportionately larger, more strongly
+arched, and compressed beak than in other Pigeons, and the still closer
+resemblance, in miniature, of the beak of the Samoan Dove to that
+of the great Mauritian bird, which led Titian Peale to give to the
+former the generic name _Didunculus_, directed the ornithologist and
+ornithotomist to the family in which the most instructive comparisons
+might be made; and the results of these, so far as relates to the head
+and foot and the bones of those parts, published by the authors of the
+above-cited work (p. 4), left little doubt of the “striking affinity
+which exists between this extinct bird and the Pigeons”[21].
+
+Whatever doubt, indeed, may have lingered in the minds of naturalists
+as to this affinity will probably be finally set at rest by the results
+of the comparison of the large proportion of the skeleton of the _Didus
+ineptus_ which has at length been transmitted from the island of
+Mauritius to London, under the following circumstances.
+
+In 1863, I was favoured by Miss A. Burdett Coutts with an introduction
+to the Bishop of Mauritius, then in this country, and I endeavoured
+to interest his lordship in aiding or promoting the acquisition, by
+the British Museum, of the zoological rarities of Madagascar, and
+especially of any remains of the Dodo which might be discovered in the
+island of Mauritius, to which his lordship was about to return.
+
+How speedily and successfully the Bishop has fulfilled my latter desire
+will be shown by the following letter, with which I was favoured in
+November, 1865.
+
+                                               “St. James, Port Louis,
+                                                 “October 7, 1865.
+
+  “+My dear Sir+,—when I had the pleasure of conversing with you for
+  a short time in London two years ago, I promised to acquaint you
+  with any facts or discoveries which might come to my knowledge,
+  likely to interest you in connexion with Madagascar. I have not
+  anything as yet to communicate definitely respecting that island in
+  the way of natural history, but I have strong reasons to believe
+  that a discovery has been made here recently which will gratify you
+  very much. Mr. George Clark, who has for many years devoted himself
+  to the work of teaching in this island with great success, is an
+  ardent student of natural history, and has explored many parts of
+  the island in search of information on the subject. From careful
+  observation he was led to conclude that no remains of the Dodo were
+  likely to be found in any of our watercourses, because of their
+  steep descent and the immense rush of water which sweeps down them
+  at times. But he had also frequently expressed his opinion that in
+  certain marshes, with high banks of sand between them and the sea,
+  such remains would probably be found. In one of these places he has
+  found several of the bones of the Dodo (as he believes), and is now
+  forwarding them home for your inspection[22].
+
+  “At his request, I write these lines to ask for your kind care of
+  his interests in securing any reward which may accrue to him. It
+  would be a great pleasure to me to find that his discovery was
+  really important, and likely to be useful to himself; for he
+  has pursued these and similar investigations with an amount of
+  intelligence, skill, and diligence, in his vacation-times (by no
+  means extensive), which deserves much credit and encouragement.
+
+  “The book which you kindly sent me on the Aye-Aye has been read
+  by many, and especially by medical men, with much interest. I
+  entrusted the other copy to Mr. John Douglas for the Society here.
+
+                              “I remain, my dear Sir,
+                                  “Your very faithful Servant,
+                                      (Signed) “+Vincent N. Mauritius+.”
+  “_Professor Owen._”
+
+This letter was accompanied with the following “Statement” by Mr.
+George Clark, Master of the Government School at Mahébourg, Island of
+Mauritius:—
+
+  “On the estate called ‘Plaisance,’ about three miles from
+  Mahébourg, in the island of Mauritius, there is a ravine of no
+  great depth or steepness, which, apparently, once conveyed to the
+  sea the drainings of a considerable extent of circumjacent land,
+  but which has been stopped to seaward, most likely for ages, by
+  an accumulation of sand extending all along the shore. The outlet
+  from this ravine having been thus impeded, a sort of bog has
+  been formed, called ‘La Mare aux Songes,’ in which is a deposit
+  of alluvium, varying in depth, on account of the inequalities of
+  the bottom, which is formed of large masses of basalt, from three
+  to ten or twelve feet. The proprietor of the estate a few weeks
+  ago conceived the idea of employing this alluvium as manure; and
+  shortly after, the men began digging in it; when they had got to
+  a depth of three or four feet they found numerous bones of large
+  tortoises, among which were a carapace and a plastron pretty nearly
+  entire, as also several crania.
+
+  “When I heard of this, it immediately struck me that the spot was
+  one of the most likely possible to contain bones of the Dodo, and I
+  gave directions to the men working there to look out for any bones
+  they might find. Nothing, however, was turned up but a fragment of
+  what I supposed to be the humerus of a large bird. This encouraged
+  me to look further; and my search was rewarded by the discovery of
+  several tibiæ, more or less perfect, two tarsi, one nearly perfect
+  pelvis, and fragments of three others.
+
+  “These were found imbedded in a black vegetable mould, the
+  lighter-coloured specimens being near the springs. My reasons
+  for believing these to be remains of the Dodo are:—the certainty
+  that that bird once existed in Mauritius; the similarity of these
+  bones to what the representations of the Dodo which I have seen
+  would lead one to expect, particularly the breadth of the pelvis,
+  the stoutness of the tibiæ and tarsi, and the shortness of the
+  latter; the favourable nature of the spot in which they were found
+  for the haunts of such birds when living—a sheltered hollow with
+  two springs in it; the non-existence, actual or traditional, in
+  Mauritius of any bird to which bones such as these could have
+  belonged; the indubitable antiquity of these bones, proved by the
+  deposit of alluvium which covered them.
+
+  “During nearly thirty years that I have inhabited this colony, I
+  have made frequent inquiries of old people as to the finding of
+  the bones of large birds, and have offered liberal rewards for
+  such; and I have consulted with the late Dr. Ayres as to the spots
+  most likely to contain them. We agreed that the floods which sweep
+  the hill-sides and the ravines in the rainy season would be most
+  likely to carry any remains into the sea; and this would doubtless
+  have been the case here, but for the stoppage occasioned by the
+  sand-down.
+
+                                        (Signed) “+George Clark.+ 1865.”
+
+The above “Statement” was authenticated by the following testimony:—
+
+  “Having visited the place with Mr. Clark, I can vouch for the truth
+  of the facts herein mentioned.
+                                      (Signed)  “+William Thomas Banks+,
+                                            “Civil Chaplain, Mauritius.”
+
+  “The Rev. W. T. Banks, Civil Chaplain at Mahébourg, in this
+  diocese, and Mr. George Clark, Master of the Government School at
+  Mahébourg, are well known to me, and deserving implicit credit for
+  their statements as to matters of fact.
+
+                       (Signed)  “+Vincent N. Mauritius.+ Oct. 6, 1865.”
+
+
+
+
+            § 2. _Description of the Skeleton._ (Plate III.)
+
+The bones of the Dodo (_Didus ineptus_, Linn.) discovered by Mr. Clark,
+under the above circumstances, which have reached me up to the present
+date (December 20th, 1865) are the following:—
+
+              Name.                             Number of bones or parts.
+
+  Cranium and lower jaw, in parts                          14
+  Vertebræ and pelvis                                      30
+  Ribs                                                     22
+  Sternum                                                   2
+  Scapular arch, in parts                                   7
+  Humerus, ulna, radius                                     6
+  Femora                                                    5
+  Tibiæ                                                     6
+  Fibulæ                                                    4
+  Metatarsals                                               4
+                                                          ———
+  Total number of parts of skeleton of the Dodo           100
+                                                          ===
+
+The known characters of the skull and metatarsus of the _Didus ineptus_
+served to identify those bones as belonging to that species: the
+agreement in relative size, colour, condition, and locality left no
+room for hesitation in referring the other bones in the above list to
+the same species[23]. They belong, however, to four or five individuals
+varying somewhat in size. With the bones of the Dodo were the end of
+the lower jaw of a broad-billed Parrot, two bones (radius) of a small
+Mammal, and part of the skull of a large Tortoise[24].
+
+To the description of the Dodo’s bones I now proceed.
+
+
+             _Vertebræ._ (Plates III., IV., V., VIII., XI.)
+
+The dorsal vertebræ are chiefly represented, in this series of bones,
+by three which are anchylosed together by their bodies and neural
+arches (Pl. V. figs. 1–5): the posterior articular surface of the body
+of the last of these vertebræ (ib., fig. 4, _c_) is subquadrate, longer
+in the vertical than the transverse direction, concave vertically,
+convex transversely, almost fitting, but being rather too small for,
+the anterior articular surface of the body of the first of the sacral
+series (Pl. VII. fig. 1, _c_). The difference is such as to indicate
+that only one dorsal vertebra may have intervened; and I conclude that
+the last of the three coalesced vertebræ is the penultimate dorsal.
+The anterior articular surface of the foremost of the three (Pl. IV.
+fig. 1, _c_) is 11 lines in transverse, and 4 to 5 lines in vertical
+diameter: it is concave transversely for the middle three-fifths,
+and convex transversely at the two outer fifths of its extent: it is
+more or less convex vertically throughout its extent. The bodies of
+these vertebræ are compressed and wedged-shaped, slightly expanded
+at their coalesced ends, produced below into subquadrate hypapophyses
+in the first and second (Pl. V. fig. 1, _hy_); while this process is
+restricted to the fore part (ib. _hy_ 3), or may be represented only
+by a slight anterior production of the lower edge of the wedge, in the
+third (ib. fig. 5, _hy_ 3).
+
+The hypapophysis of the first of the three expands at its termination
+(Pl. IV. fig. 1, _hy_), with the hinder angle bent back to coalesce
+with the front one of the next hypapophysis, which is somewhat longer,
+and bent forward with a similar terminal expansion: a full elliptical
+space is intercepted by this terminal confluence of these hypapophyses
+(Pl. V. figs. 1 & 5, _hy_). Each vertebra shows an elliptical articular
+cavity (ib. figs. 1 & 5, _p_, _p_ 3) for the head of the rib, near to
+the anterior articular surface; the long axis of this costal surface
+is directed from above obliquely downward and forward. The surface of
+the rib’s tubercle cuts obliquely the lower part of the free end of the
+diapophysis (Pl. IV. fig. 1, _d_).
+
+The neural arch circumscribes a canal the anterior outlet of which (ib.
+fig. 1, _n_) is oval with the small end downward, 5 lines in vertical,
+and 3½ in transverse diameter: the sides of the neural canal slightly
+project inward above the lower third: the posterior outlet (Pl. V. fig.
+4, _n_) is more regularly elliptical in form, and rather narrower in
+proportion to its vertical diameter. The neurapophysis sends off from
+the outer and fore part of its base a stout process, which expands and
+divides into zygapophyses (Pl. IV. fig. 1, _z_) and diapophyses (ib.
+_d_); the articular surface of the former is of a full oval shape,
+flat, looking obliquely upward and inward; the diapophyses extend
+outward and a little backward: the articular surface for the tubercle
+of the rib is transversely elliptical and nearly flat. The hinder
+part of the neurapophysis expands into the postzygapophyses: these
+have coalesced with the præzygapophyses in the succeeding vertebra
+(Pl. V. fig. 2, _z_), as has happened also between this and the third
+vertebra. In the last of the three vertebræ the postzygapophyses are
+entire (ib. _z_ 3), and show very slightly concave, oval articular
+surfaces, looking obliquely downward and outward (ib. fig. 4, _z_). The
+conjugational foramina, continuously surrounded by bone, are a full
+ellipse, and large, the anterior one (ib. figs. 1 & 5, _f_) being 5½
+lines in vertical diameter; the second (ib. _f′_) is somewhat less:
+these foramina are also rather larger in one of the specimens than in
+the other. The length of the three coalesced dorsals is the same in
+both, viz. 2 inches 3 lines. The neural spines have run together into a
+continuous ridge in fig. 1, _ns_; in fig. 5 the summit is broken off in
+both, leaving only the anterior angle of the foremost entire; in both
+this inclines forward; the hinder border of the third vertebra (fig. 1,
+_ns_) has the same vertical parallel as the back part of the centrum.
+The anterior margin of the base of the spine shows a rough surface for
+the attachment of ligament (Pl. IV. fig. 1, _ns_). A small foramen
+behind the base of each of the coalesced zygapophyses (Pl. V. fig. 2,
+_z_ _z_) leads to a canal descending to the neural one, and indicates
+superiorly the limits of the otherwise continuously ossified neural
+arches.
+
+In the series of detached vertebræ, one (Pl. V. figs. 6 & 7) indicates
+by its neural spine and hypapophysis a position at the base of the
+neck. The centrum is barely an inch in length; its anterior surface
+(ib. fig. 7, _c_) is narrow vertically, broad transversely; both
+fore and hind surfaces indicate freedom and extent of flexure. The
+hypapophysis has a broad, bituberculate base (ib. _hy_), but is limited
+in fore and aft extent to the middle third of the under surface of the
+centrum: its length is shown in fig. 6, _hy_. The parapophysis (fig. 7,
+_p_) is slender, and expands at both attachments, with an indication of
+a terminal surface. The diapophysis (_d_) has a larger costal surface:
+it sends forward a convex ridge midway between the di- and zygapophysis
+(_z_). The neural canal (fig. 7, _n_) has wider and more fully
+elliptical outlets than the hinder dorsal vertebræ, in relation to the
+greater extent of motion at the fore part of the series. I conclude
+that a free pleurapophysis (_pl_) existed, indicating the present to be
+the first of the dorsal series, as shown in Pl. III. The neural spine
+is short, broad, obtusely pointed, with a vertically oblong syndesmotic
+surface (fig. 7) before and behind. Each postzygapophysis (fig. 6,
+_z′_) supports an anapophysial tubercle (_a_).
+
+A cervical vertebra from a position just in advance of the above has
+lost the neural spine, but retains the hypapophysis. This process
+(ib. figs. 8 & 9, _hy_) is compressed and directed obliquely downward
+and forward for an extent of 6 lines; the extremity is rounded:
+the length of the centrum of this vertebra is 1 inch 3 lines; the
+anterior articular surface is longest transversely, and concave in
+that direction, convex vertically; the proportions and curvatures are
+transposed in the posterior surface (fig. 9, _c_). The parapophysis
+(ib. _p_) is continued from the anterior border of the centrum to the
+middle; it is a depressed plate, confluent with the rib (ib. _d_).
+The diapophysis forms a short, obtuse projection above its anchylosis
+with the rib (ib. _pl_): this projects backward 7 lines in length,
+terminating obtusely, and circumscribing a vertebrarterial foramen
+(ib. _v_) of a full elliptic shape, 5½ lines in long diameter. The
+surfaces of the præzygapophyses (_z_) are larger, and look more upward
+and less inward, than in the preceding and the dorsal vertebræ: they
+are very slightly concave. Those of the postzygapophyses (fig. 8,
+_z′_), with a downward and slightly outward aspect, are in a similar
+degree convex. The neural canal, as usual in the cervical series,
+expands at its outlets, most so posteriorly (fig. 9, _n_); the middle
+of the upper surface of the neural arch is impressed by an elliptical,
+rough, ligamentous surface, which slightly rising in the middle is
+the sole indication of a neural spine. The upper surface of each
+postzygapophysis developes a tuberous anapophysis (figs. 8 & 9, _a_).
+
+The three cervicals that succeed the axis show progressively sinking
+neural spines, which subside in the six following vertebræ (Pl. III.).
+The third cervical has also the hypapophysis (Pl. XI. fig. 3, _hy_).
+
+In all the other cervicals of the present series the hypapophysis is
+wanting, but each parapophysis developes a plate (Pl. V. figs. 10
+& 11, Pl. VIII. fig. 1, _p_) to form the sides of the hæmal canal
+through which the carotids ran; and the position of such vertebræ
+in the cervical series is indicated, respectively, by the degree of
+convergence of these processes, in none of which, where entire, have
+they met so as to circumscribe the canal: in some of these vertebræ,
+however, they are mutilated. They differ chiefly in the position and
+shape of the anapophyses (fig. 10, _a_), which advance from above the
+postzygapophyses (_z′_), converging towards the middle of the upper
+surface of the neural arch, being arrested, save in one instance, at
+the sides of the ligamentous surface occupying the common position of
+the base of the neural spine.
+
+In the axis vertebra (Pl. V. figs. 12 & 13) the posterior articular
+surface, concave vertically, and 3 lines in that extent at its middle
+part, is very convex transversely, being continued upon the sides of
+the posterior part of the centrum; a thick obtuse hypapophysis (fig.
+13, _hy_) descends below this surface: the anterior or odontoid surface
+presents the usual form in birds; the odontoid process (ib. _x_) has
+a pit at its apex. The prezygapophyses (fig. 12, _z_), of very small
+size, project from the outer and fore border of the neural arch, with
+their articular surface looking outward and slightly upward; a ridge is
+continued from their back part to the base of the postzygapophyses: the
+surface (fig. 13, _z′_) in these, 4½ lines in long diameter, is three
+times the size of the anterior one; it is concave transversely, and
+looks downward and a little outward. The anapophyses (ib. fig. 12, _a_)
+are large tubercles rising above the articular surfaces. The base of
+the neural spine, 9 lines in length (ib. _ns_), is coextensive with the
+neural arch; the spine rises posteriorly to a height of 6 lines, with a
+thickness of 2 lines, having a convex upper margin (Pl. III.).
+
+The relative size and position of the cervical vertebræ, as coadjusted
+in the position and degree of flexure of the neck represented in
+Sir Hans Sloane’s life-size painting of the Dodo, in the British
+Museum, are given in Plate III. with the varying proportions of the
+pleurapophyses and other processes.
+
+
+                       _Ribs._ (Plates III. & IV.)
+
+The specimens of ribs include both vertebral and sternal portions;
+that which appears to be the second or third on the right side (Pl.
+IV. figs. 7, 7 _a_) is 4 inches 4 lines in length (following the outer
+curve), and expands to a breadth of 7 lines at its lower part; the
+interval between the articular surfaces of the head and tubercle is 6
+lines. The appendage (ib. _a_) has coalesced with the middle of the
+hind margin of the shaft. The neck is compressed, with a thin upper
+margin; the lower one is continued with a curve upon a strong internal
+buttress-like ridge (ib. _b_), which runs to near the fore part of
+the flattened body of the rib, where it meets the ridge continued
+from the tubercle, about 2 inches down the rib: there is a shallow
+channel between these ridges, contracting to their confluence. The
+inner surface of the rib is impressed by a deeper and broader channel
+behind the buttress: the posterior border expands in the form of a
+triangular plate, with a base of about an inch in extent, due to the
+complete confluence there of the epipleural process. The anterior
+border is thicker, and is almost straight. Towards the sternal end
+the pleurapophysis contracts and thickens, terminating in a rough
+syndesmotic elliptical surface, 3 lines by 2 (fig. 7, _f_), for the
+attachment of the hæmapophysis or sternal rib.
+
+A vertebral rib (ib. fig. 2) which is entire, measures 9 inches in
+length (following the outer curve). The head and tubercle are at the
+same distance as in the preceding, but the tubercle is broader. The
+characters of the body of the rib are very similar; but it is narrower,
+not attaining a breadth of 5½ lines at its lower end; the narrowing and
+thickening to the articular surface for the sternal rib is more gradual.
+
+A last vertebral rib is adapted, by the longitudinal extent and partial
+division of the tubercle, to the vertebra which forms the first of
+the coalesced series of sacrals; and the body of the rib, instead of
+preserving the regular outward curve of the antecedent ones, is more
+suddenly bent soon after it emerges beyond the margin of the ilium; the
+lamelliform part thence continued is straighter, and, moreover, shows
+upon its outer surface a flattened facet, indicative of pressure or
+friction by the movements to and fro of the thigh over a rib in such
+position. Beyond this surface the rib curves in a way not shown in the
+other specimens; the distal end has the flat syndesmotic articular
+surface to which had been attached a hæmapophysis not reaching the
+sternum. In this last (eighth) free rib there is no epipleural process,
+nor any definitely marked ligamental surface on the posterior margin
+indicative of the attachment of such process.
+
+The body of a posterior vertebral rib (Pl. IV. fig. 10) shows a
+fracture which has been healed, with some irregular ossific deposit on
+the inner surface. All the ribs have a pneumatic foramen (ib. figs. 2,
+7, 8, _p_) at the fore part of the neck, near the base of the tubercle.
+
+The eight left vertebral ribs (Pl. III.) and the five right ones do
+not, either of them, constitute a consecutive series, but have come
+from different individuals, of different sizes, as exemplified in the
+third rib figured in Plates III. and IV.
+
+The sternal ribs (P. IV. figs. 3 & 12) are characterized by the two
+facets, nearly or quite meeting at an open angle, into which their
+sternal end expands (ib. fig. 3, _c_). One of these ribs, which is
+entire, shows the single, elliptic syndesmotic surface at the opposite
+end (ib. _b_); it is 3½ inches in length, with a greatest breadth of 5
+lines, and is straight. Another and longer specimen (ib. 12) shows a
+moderate degree of curvature. A third specimen is 6 inches in length:
+the proximal end has a breadth of nearly half an inch (the penultimate
+rib in Pl. III.).
+
+Five successive sternal ribs are indicated by gradational size and
+curvature, and a sixth, which does not reach the sternum. Before
+describing this bone I shall proceed with the account of the sacral
+vertebræ, and the expanded hæmal arches of such as complete the pelvis.
+
+
+                     _Pelvis._ (Plates III. & VII.)
+
+The pelvis of the Dodo is chiefly remarkable for the flatness and great
+breadth of the posterior half, corresponding with the characteristic
+proportions of that part of the body in Pl. I. fig. 2, and in the old
+woodcuts of the Dutch “Dodaersen”[25]. It includes sixteen coalesced
+sacral vertebræ, with which the iliac bones are continuously confluent.
+
+The first sacral shows the transversely extended and concave articular
+surface of the centrum (Pl. VII. fig. 1, _c_); the subcircular pit (ib.
+_p_) for the head of the rib is behind the middle of the side of the
+centrum, at its upper part; the inferior surface is ridged lengthwise;
+and a transverse low but sharp ridge defines the posterior boundary,
+the depressions in front of which indicate the hindmost origins of the
+subvertebral muscle (longus colli?). The anterior outlet of the neural
+canal (ib. _n_) is subcircular in one specimen, vertically elliptic in
+others, and 3 lines or less in transverse diameter. From the sides of
+the neurapophyses stretch out the strong buttresses of bone which blend
+with the under part of the ilia, giving off from the fore part of their
+base the præzygapophyses (ib. _z_), and from the back part of their
+apex the surface (ib. _d_), or part of it, for the tubercle of the last
+moveable rib, the ilium in the latter variety affording the rest of
+that surface. The fore part of the strong neural spine (ib. _ns_) is
+roughened by a syndesmotic surface; it rises to a height of 14 lines,
+curving forward, and is confluent at its summit with the approximated
+anterior margins of the ilia. A continuous track of bone, forming a
+smoothly obtuse longitudinal ridge, represents the summits of the
+succeeding sacral spines (ib. fig. 2, _ns_) to the hindmost vertebra
+of the series, without any trace of their primitive division; but this
+track rises, posteriorly, above the shallow channel on each side, in
+which are the foramina (ib. _o_), indicating most of the constituent
+vertebræ.
+
+The second sacral vertebra abuts against the ilium by a pleurapophysis
+(ib. fig. 1, _pl_ 2), as well as a diapophysis (ib. _d_ 2); but the
+former is a slender, straight filament, or narrow plate of bone,
+confluent at both ends.
+
+In the next two vertebræ the pleurapophysis (ib. _pl_ 3 & 4) assumes
+more breadth and robustness, but is short and straight, abutting
+against the inner surface of the ilium an inch in advance of the
+acetabulum. The first of these rib-buttresses inclines forward, and is
+completely confluent with the ilium; the thicker one (ib. _pl_ 4) has
+retained part of its primitive ligamentous attachment to the ilium: the
+proportions of both are subject to some variety.
+
+These are succeeded by three or four vertebræ in which the
+pleurapophysis is not developed, the attachment to the ilia being
+by diapophyses only (ib. _d_ _d_), which are short slender lamellæ,
+directed upward and backward; below and between them are the double
+orifices for the separate motory and sensory roots of the sacro-spinal
+nerves. In the next vertebra the pleurapophysis (ib. _pl_ 8) reappears,
+longer but more slender than in the fourth sacral, extending obliquely
+backward, and expanding at its extremity to abut against a prominence
+on the underside of the ilium, opposite the hind part of the
+acetabulum, with which prominence the rib has completely coalesced by
+an expanded end. The under part of all these vertebræ is traversed by a
+sharp median longitudinal ridge, which is more feebly and interruptedly
+continued to near the end of the sacral series.
+
+Eight vertebræ, abutting by diapophyses only (Pl. VII. _d d_) against
+the ilia, succeed the one last described; their coalesced bodies are
+less than half the breadth of those of the preceding vertebræ: they
+gradually diminish in depth to the last, without loss of breadth. The
+diapophyses proceed obliquely outward and backward, are lamelliform,
+about 9 lines in length, and intercept oblong cavities of the same
+extent and direction, into which open the orifices (ib. fig. 2, _o_)
+noticed on the upper surface of that part of the pelvis. The articular
+surface of the body of the last sacral is transversely elliptic, 4
+lines by 2 lines, and very slightly convex. The outlet of the neural
+canal, above it, is circular, and about a line in diameter, the whole
+vertical extent of the last sacral being 5 lines, while that of the
+first sacral is 2 inches 2 lines.
+
+The ilium is divided, as usual, into two parts by the ridge on its
+upper or outer surface (ib. fig. 2, _r_), extending obliquely backward
+to behind the acetabulum—the anterior division being narrower and
+concave, the posterior broader and convex but in a minor degree. The
+anterior (slightly thickened) border of the ilium is curved with the
+convexity forward, extending 8 or 9 lines in advance of the fore
+part of the neural spine of the first sacral vertebra. The ilia
+almost meet above that of the second and third sacrals, with which
+they coalesce, and then diverge to the oblique boundary ridge, which
+is thence continued, in some with an angular bend, more directly
+outward. At this angle the bone is so confluent with the sacrum that
+the orifices leading to the ileoneural canals[26] are almost or quite
+obliterated. These canals are, here (ib. _i ï_), the longitudinally
+extended cavities intercepted between the fore parts of the ilia and
+the continuous coalesced sacral spines and diapophyses, widening to
+their anterior outlets. The extent of that part of the ilium in advance
+of the acetabulum is 3 inches 8 lines; the breadth at its middle part
+is 2 inches. As the ilium approaches the acetabulum it increases in
+thickness, and is grooved at the outer margin by a vessel which leaves
+impressions of its ramifications upon the upper concave surface of
+the bone (ib. fig. 2, +62+). The acetabulum (ib. _a a_) is circular,
+11 lines in the diameter of its outlet, 9 or 10 lines in that of its
+inner circumference, being widely open, as usual in birds, towards the
+cavity of the pelvis; the trochanterian surface (ib. _t t_) above the
+acetabulum is elliptic, with the long axis lengthwise, 9 lines by 6 in
+its diameter, with its upper border sharp and produced; the anterior
+border (ib. _b_) of the acetabulum is slightly produced; the position
+of this articular cavity is about midway between the fore and hind ends
+of the pelvis. The oblique external ridge of the ilium terminates in
+the outer margin of the broader part of the bone (ib. _r′_), 7 lines
+above the sharp and prominent margin of the trochanterian surface
+(ib. _t_). The ilia have diverged from each other for the extent of an
+inch and a half behind the beginning of the boundary line (ib. _r_),
+which interval is occupied exteriorly by lateral ossification from
+the neural spines to the diapophyses of that part of the sacrum: the
+mesial borders of the ilia (ib. fig. 2, 62′) slightly converge to the
+fifteenth sacral vertebra, where they are separated by an interspace
+of 1 inch, and then again diverge to the last sacral; they coalesce
+with the diapophyses (ib. fig. 2, _d_ _d_). The inner or under surface
+of the ilium is thickened into a kind of buttress (ib. fig. 1, _e_),
+terminating behind the ischiadic foramen. The breadth of the iliac
+bones and intervening sacrals, 1 inch behind the acetabulum, is 5
+inches; at the back part of the pelvis it is 4 inches. The outer border
+of the posterior part of the ilium (ib. fig. 2, _g_) projects as an
+obtuse ridge above the ischiadic foramen and the succeeding expanded
+and confluent part of the ischium (ib. 63), which is vertically
+concave externally: the ilium, ischium, and pubis (ib. fig. 1, 64)
+have completely coalesced around the acetabulum. The pubis, which in
+this part is 7 lines thick, contracts as it becomes free to a diameter
+of 4 lines; it is smooth and convex below, and has been broken off
+near the acetabulum on both sides; the fracture shows its pneumatic
+structure. The ischium, as it recedes from the acetabulum, contracts
+to a trihedral column, with a vertical diameter of 4 lines; it is
+concave outwardly, convex inwardly, and suddenly expands below, about
+an inch from the acetabulum, to form part of the posterior boundary of
+the obturator foramen (ib. fig. 1, _f_), which is 9 lines in length,
+and is situated one half in advance of, and the other half beneath,
+the ischiadic foramen (ib. _m_). This latter is oval, with the large
+end forwards, 1 inch 3 lines by 10 lines in its principal diameters.
+Behind this foramen the ischium is confluent with the ilium for an
+extent of 2 inches, or perhaps rather more, as the posterior margin of
+the pelvis is not entire in any of my specimens. The inner surface of
+the ischium forms a low, obtuse longitudinal ridge towards the pelvic
+cavity, losing thickness as it recedes from the acetabulum. The chief
+pneumatic foramina in the pelvis are on the inner surface, above the
+acetabulum, behind the trochanterian articulation, and behind the iliac
+confluence of the last sacral pleurapophyses,—also at the hinder part
+of the ilium, on each side of the transverse buttress (ib. _e_) near
+its posterior junction with the ischium. The prærenal fossa (between
+_pl_ 4 & _pl_ 8, fig. 1) is deep and subdivided by the diapophysial
+plates: the postrenal fossa is wide and shallow.
+
+
+                 _Sternum._ (Plates III., IV., VI., XI.)
+
+Of this instructive and determinative bone there are two specimens, the
+one most entire (Pls. III., IV. fig. 4, & VI.) measuring in a straight
+line, from the costal process to the hind border, 7 inches. The extreme
+breadth between the lateral processes (Pl. IV. _h_) is 4½ inches; from
+this diameter the bone contracts anteriorly to a breadth of 3½ inches
+at the costal processes (ib. _d_), and posteriorly it contracts more
+rapidly to an obtuse, horizontally flattened apex (Pl. VI. fig. 3).
+The anterior border of the sternum (Pl. IV. fig. 4) is widely and
+rather deeply emarginate at the middle (_e_), less deeply so on each
+side: the breadth of the mid notch (_b_ _e_ _b_) is 1 inch 9 lines,
+that of each side notch (_b_ _d_) is 1 inch 2 lines. The sternum is
+deeply hollowed above (Pl. XI. fig. 4), correspondingly convex beneath
+(ib.); the keel (_s_) is low and thick, commencing by a pair of broad
+obtuse ridges (Pls. IV. fig. 4, & VI. fig. 1, _r_ _r_) from the mesial
+ends of the outer walls of the coracoid grooves (ib. _b′_), which
+gradually rise from the surface of the bone as they extend backward,
+converging to form the beginning of the keel about 2 inches from the
+anterior emargination (_e_): the keel gains a depth of ¾ of an inch at
+the middle of the sternum, then gradually sinks to the level of the
+bone, as it extends backward, at 1½ inch from the hind end (Pl. VI.
+fig. 3), a little increasing in thickness as it subsides: its free
+border describes a pretty regular convex curve (Pl. III.); it is thick,
+flat, partially canaliculate: the sides of the base of the keel expand,
+to be continued gradually into the body of the sternum (Pl. XI. fig.
+4). Behind the costal surface (Pl. VI. _c_), on each side, extends a
+lamelliform process (Pls. III. & VI. _h_), ½ an inch in breadth, upward
+and a little outward, slightly expanding to its free termination,
+which, however, is not entire in either specimen: the longitudinal
+extent of this characteristic process, where it is best preserved, is
+1 inch; it is conjecturally restored in Plate III.; it answers to the
+ectolateral process (_h_) of the gallinaceous sternum (Pls. III. & XII.
+fig. 3): there is no trace of an entolateral process (ib. _i_). The
+thin margin of the Dodo’s breast-bone, behind the ectolateral process
+(Pls. III. & VI. _h_), is entire and uninterrupted to the obtuse apex,
+and the body of the sternum is imperforate: the notch (_f_) behind the
+process (_h_) represents the ectolateral notch of the gallinaceous
+sternum (Pl. XII. figs. 1 & 3, _f_). The costal border (Pl. VI. fig.
+2, _c_) is 1 inch 9 lines in extent, and 6 lines across its broadest
+part; it shows articular surfaces for five sternal ribs, of which the
+four posterior (2–5) are bilobed, the anterior one (_c_ 1) simple,
+and limited to the outer half of the border; the second sternum shows
+some variety in this respect: the deep interspaces, in both, are
+perforated by pneumatic foramina. The costal process (_d_)[27] in
+advance of these surfaces expands, as it rises upward and a little
+outward and forward, to the extent of nearly an inch; the hinder and
+outer side is impressed by a concavity, continued from the costal
+border; the inner side is smooth and convex: it is not quite entire on
+either side. The coracoid grooves (Pl. IV. fig. 4, _b_ _b′_) are small
+in proportion to the sternum, and are divided from each other by an
+interspace of about an inch; the outer wall of the groove (_b′_), 9
+lines in extent, is moderately produced and convex; it appears to be a
+continuation of one of the initial ridges (_r_) of the keel: the inner
+wall of the groove (_b_) is deeper, and is formed by the obtuse angle
+of the anterior border of the sternum, between the medial and lateral
+emarginations. External to each coracoid groove is a large elliptical
+pneumatic foramen (_p_) or depression. There is no episternal process.
+On the convex outer surface of the body of the sternum the “pectoral”
+ridge (Pl. VI. fig, 1, _k_)[28] is feebly indicated, extending from
+the outer end of the coracoid groove backward and inward to near the
+posterior third of the keel. The concave surface of the sternum (ib.
+fig. 2) shows a number of small pneumatic foramina, chiefly along the
+middle line to near the posterior third. Behind the costal border the
+substance of the sternum gradually increases in thickness from the
+sharp lateral margins to the middle, above the base of the keel, and
+shows there a fine pneumocancellous texture (Pl. XI. fig. 4).
+
+
+                 _Scapular Arch._ (Plates III. & VIII.)
+
+This consists of the scapula (Pl. VIII. figs. 6, 7, 8 & 9, 51),
+coracoid (ib. figs. 4 & 5, 52), and clavicle (ib. 58), the latter
+ending in a point and here tied by ligament to its fellow, to form
+a furculum. I have received the elements of this arch in three
+conditions:—one in which the bones, though of full size, are separate;
+a second, in which the scapula and coracoid are confluent, but the
+clavicle distinct; a third, in which the three bones are confluent
+at the ends converging to the humeral articulation. The scapula (ib.
+figs. 6, 7, 8 & 9, 51), 3 inches 7 or 8 lines in length, has the
+usual sabre-shaped body, slightly expanding and decurved at its free
+extremity, the breadth of which is 7 lines: it terminates obtusely:
+varieties of shape are shown in figures 6 & 8. The outer surface of the
+bone, at the two posterior thirds of its extent, is slightly concave
+and marked by muscular attachments; the inner surface of that part is
+smooth and slightly convex: the bone increases in breadth, with some
+diminution of thickness, towards the articular end, and is remarkable
+for sending off from the lower border, at 7 or 8 lines from that end,
+a short process (ib. 51); between this process and the articulation
+the breadth of the bone is little more than 3 lines; the breadth of
+the articular end is 9 lines. Nearly one-half of it is occupied by the
+almost flat, subcircular humeral surface (fig. 8, _a_), with a diameter
+of 4½ lines, and directed upward, outward, and a little forward. From
+this is continued an oblong, much narrower coracoidal surface, beyond
+which the acromial process (fig. 6, _c_) extends forward, curving
+toward the coracoid, and terminating obtusely.
+
+The coracoid (ib. figs. 4, 5, 8 & 9, 52), averaging a length of 3
+inches 7 lines, expands to a breadth of 1 inch 3 lines at its sternal
+end (52), of which the articular surface (_e_) occupies an inch; the
+non-articular part forms the outer angle (_m_), and extends in advance
+of the pneumatic foramen (Pl. IV. fig. 4, _p_) at that part of the
+breast-bone: the outer border which extends from this free angle to the
+body of the bone, into which it subsides, at one-third of the extent
+of the bone, is sharp; the inner border is obtuse to near the inner
+angle (Pl. VIII. figs. 4 & 5, _n_). The outer surface of the expanded
+sternal end is smooth and convex; the inner surface is flatter and
+more irregular, perforated by pneumatic foramina; the diameter of the
+subcylindrical part of the shaft is 4 lines: the extremes of difference
+in the distal expansion of the coracoid are shown in figs. 4 & 8, 52,
+Pl. VIII. A muscular ridge and rough surface (ib. fig. 9, _r_) mark
+the back part below the middle of the shaft. The bone then expands
+to its upper articular end, which is obliquely truncate from within
+outward: it shows, first, the oblong surface for the scapula, which is
+extended upon the inner prominence of that end; next, the larger and
+full oval surface for the humerus (_h_), from which the thick, obtuse,
+inner continuation of the scapular end projects inward, forward, with
+a slightly upward curve, and shows the narrow oblong surface for the
+articulation and ultimate confluence of the clavicle (58). The coracoid
+unites with the scapula at an angle of 100°.
+
+The clavicle (ib. figs. 4 & 5, 58), at its scapular end, is slightly
+expanded, compressed, with an obtuse recurved termination articulating
+with the above-named surface of the coracoid, and in one instance
+coalescing therewith, and by extended ossification with the “acromion
+scapulæ” (ib. figs. 8 & 9). As the clavicle descends it curves slightly
+and contracts to a point. The angle at which the pair meet is shown in
+figs. 4 & 5.
+
+
+          _Bones of the Wing._ (Pls. III. & VIII. figs. 12–17.)
+
+Of the humerus the series contains two specimens, both measuring 4
+inches 3 lines in length, one right, and the other left (Pl. VIII.
+figs. 12–14), but differing slightly in their proportions and in
+colour—one being of the olive-brown tint with which most of the bones
+are stained, the other black. The articular head (ib. _a_) is an
+elongate oval convexity, with the larger end toward the radial side,
+prominent toward the back and rather flattened toward the front of the
+bone, which there swells out beyond the base of the articular surface.
+The radial tubercle is small, and descends from the radial end of the
+head for about 5 lines; the pectoral process (ib. _b_) is triangular,
+obtuse, short, and bent, or directed toward the front side of the bone:
+the ulnar tuberosity (ib. _c_) is more produced in that direction; it
+is oblong, obtuse, with its base impressed by a large pit both above
+(fig. 12, _h_) and below—the lower one (ib. _g_) being the deepest,
+and perforated by a pneumatic foramen; the convex, broad, ulnar border
+of this tuberosity has two slightly produced processes, an upper or
+posterior (ib. fig. 12, _c_) and a lower and internal (ib. _g_), which
+is the smallest. The breadth of the proximal end of the humerus, across
+the tuberosities, is 1 inch 5 lines, beyond them the bone contracts
+to a smooth subcylindrical shaft, showing at the back part of the
+proximal third a longitudinal ridge (fig. 12, _r_), half an inch in
+length; it gradually expands at the distal third to a breadth of 10
+lines, where the articulations offer the usual avian characteristics
+of the elbow-joint. The head of the humerus is occupied by a fine
+cancellous structure: into the large vacuity below this, crossed in
+the section figured (Pl. XI. fig. 5) by a transverse slender bar of
+bone, the small pneumatic foramina at the bottom of the wide and deep
+fossa for the axillary air-cell open. The part of the hollow proximal
+end giving off the pectoral and other processes for the attachment of
+muscles is strengthened by similar abutments. The pneumatic cavity of
+the main part of the shaft of the humerus is simple, with a compact
+wall thicker than at the ends of the humerus, but not exceeding that
+which is characteristic of the long air-bones in birds. The portion
+of the distal end chiefly serving for muscular attachments and the
+antibrachial articulation are also cancellous.
+
+The _radius_ (Pls. III. & XII. fig. 15) is a straight and slender bone,
+3 inches 1 line in length, and 2 lines in chief diameter of the shaft.
+The proximal articular surface is subcircular, 3 lines in diameter,
+moderately concave; the distal end expands to the same extent, but is
+compressed, as usual.
+
+The _ulna_ (Pls. III. & VIII. figs. 16 & 17) is 3 inches 1 line in
+length, of the usual ornithic character, with a well-defined, narrow,
+elliptic, rough muscular depression, 8 lines in length (fig. 16, _c_),
+extending upon the shaft from below the anterior or palmar angle of
+the proximal articular surface. This bone has no pneumatic foramen;
+the orifice for the medullary artery is above the middle of the same
+palmar surface, the canal inclining distad. The shaft of the bone is
+nearly straight; the back or anconal surface, which is slightly convex,
+shows feeble impressions of the attaching ligaments of the alar plumes,
+which are represented in all the figures of the entire or living bird.
+A second ulna is 3 inches 3 lines in length.
+
+There was no carpal or pinion bone in the collection of remains
+submitted to me: this part of the wing is conjecturally restored in
+dotted outline in Plate XV.
+
+
+             _Bones of the Leg._ (Pls. III., IX., X. & XI.)
+
+Of the five _femora_ in the above defined series of remains of the
+Dodo, two measure 6 inches 3 lines in length; one (Pl. IX.) is 6 inches
+4½ lines; the shortest is a little under 6 inches, with proportionate
+differences in the diameter of the shaft. All of them show a small
+pneumatic foramen (Pl. IX. figs. 1 & 2, _p_) on the inner side of the
+anterior ridge of the great trochanter (ib. _c_), and on the same
+transverse line with the head of the bone. This part shows an oblong
+depression (ib. figs. 2 & 3, _a_) for the “ligamentum teres” at the
+upper and back part. The articular surface on the same aspect of the
+neck (ib. fig. 3, _b_), adapted to the trochanterian prominence of the
+pelvis (Pl. VII. _t_), is well-defined. The trochanter (Pl. IX. fig. 1,
+_c_) rises, ridge-like, above the level of the head, and is continued
+from behind the middle of the articular surface on the neck, forward,
+with a convex outline upon the fore and outer part of the shaft, where
+it gradually subsides; a narrow intermuscular ridge (ib. fig. 1, _r_),
+inclining to the middle of the fore part of the shaft, is continued
+from the trochanterian one. The small trochanter (ib. fig. 3, _d_)
+is a small subcircular tuberosity, in some specimens a ridge, 3 to 4
+lines in length, on the inner side of the shaft, about an inch below
+the head. The muscular impressions on the fore part of the bone are
+well defined. A minute medullary canal (ib. fig. 3, _m_) perforates the
+middle of the back part of the shaft; the popliteal fossa (ib. fig.
+3, _o_) shows a few small pneumatic orifices; a triangular rough flat
+surface divides the fossa from the outer condyle. Above the fibular
+depression (ib. fig. 3, _g_) there is a well-defined, slightly raised,
+rough surface (ib. _k_) for the head of the ectogastrocnemius muscle.
+The ridge (ib. _n_) extending to the back part of the inner condyle is
+not sharp; the rotular groove (ib. fig. 1, _p_) is deep and moderately
+wide, with the inner boundary, formed by the narrow anterior part of
+the inner condyle (ib. fig. 5, _e′_), most produced. The breadth of
+this end of the longer femora is 1 inch 9 lines; the character of the
+distal articular surface is shown in Pl. IX. fig. 5.
+
+The head, neck, and great trochanter (Pl. XI. fig. 6) are occupied by a
+pneumatic cancellous structure, with a thin compact wall on the upper
+part and sides: this begins to gain thickness at the under part of the
+neck and at the lower and back part of the trochanter, the compact wall
+acquiring a thickness of a line at the beginning of the shaft, where
+the cancellous structure is confined to the outer side of the pneumatic
+cavity; this structure gives way to a few delicate filaments of bone
+crossing the cavity of the major part of the shaft, and is not resumed
+until the bone expands to form the distal condyles (ib. fig. 7).
+
+The five _tibiæ_ of _Didus_ in the same collection range in length from
+8 inches 8 lines to 9 inches. The procnemial ridge (Pl. X. figs. 1,
+2, 4, _p_) is a triangular plate, with the base longest and the apex
+rounded off: it inclines outwardly, and does not extend much more than
+half an inch from the level of the proximal end of the bone: the length
+of its base rather exceeds an inch: on its inner side a triangular
+muscular surface is well defined by an irregular inferior line or ridge
+(ib. fig. 2, _n_). The ectocnemial process (ib. figs. 1, 3, 4, _e_)
+is thicker, shorter, and terminates roughly and obtusely. There is a
+low, narrow ridge (ib. fig. 2, _g_), about half an inch in length, on
+the inner side of the proximal end of the shaft, beginning about 9
+lines below the articular surface at that end. The fibular ridge (ib.
+figs. 1 & 3, _h_), beginning 1 inch 8 lines from the proximal end,
+extends about 2 inches down the outer side of the shaft. The epicnemial
+ridge (ib. figs. 1 & 4, _k_) is obtuse, and but little produced above
+the upper articular surfaces or condyles (_t_ _d_) of the tibia: the
+breadth of that end of the bone, in the longest specimen, is 2 inches 3
+lines. The tendinal canal at the fore part of the distal end is bridged
+by bone (ib. fig. 1, _l_), and is situated on the inner half of that
+aspect of the shaft; the lower opening is subcircular and close to
+the anterior end of the inner lower condyle (ib. _a_), which is more
+produced forward than the outer one (ib. _b_). Their hind ends project
+very little beyond the level of that aspect of the shaft of the tibia.
+An intermuscular ridge (ib. fig. 1, _r_) strengthens into a tuberosity
+(_r′_) at the inner side of the tendinal groove.
+
+The cancellous structure in the tibia is limited to an extent of about
+half an inch below the proximal articular surfaces (Pl. XI. fig.
+8), and to about an inch and a half from the distal end of the line
+(ib. fig. 9): the shaft is occupied by a large air-cavity, with a
+compact wall of half a line in thickness at the upper third, gradually
+increasing to about a line at the lower fourth, until the cancellous
+structure is reestablished; the transverse direction of a plate of this
+structure indicates the extent of the original distal epiphysis of the
+tibia (fig. 8).
+
+The _fibula_ (Pl. X. figs. 6–8) presents the usual ornithic characters
+of the bone: it varies from 4 inches 4 lines to 4 inches 6 lines in
+length, with a greatest proximal breadth of 8 lines. No adequate gain
+would result from a detailed description or comparison of this bone;
+and the rest of the bones of the foot have received every requisite
+attention in this way in the excellent work on the Dodo and its
+kindred, already quoted. A longitudinal section of the _metatarsus_,
+taken in the direction from side to side (Pl. XI. fig. 10), shows
+the loose cancellous texture of the common epiphysis of the three
+long metatarsals, and the remnant of their contiguous coalesced walls
+reduced to a thin lamella of bone. As the moiety of the bone figured is
+the posterior one (of the left metatarsus), the usual oblique position
+of the middle metatarsal (_iii_), with its proximal end nearer the back
+part and its distal end nearer the fore part of the coalesced series,
+produces a corresponding direction of the section, with narrowing and
+termination of the exposed part of the medullary canal about one-third
+from the distal end of that metatarsal. The medullary canal of the
+outer metatarsal (_iv_) is wider and descends lower before the breaking
+up of the inner surface into decussating lamellæ or filaments, than
+that of the inner metatarsal (_ii_): the peripheral compact wall of the
+inner is twice the thickness of that of the outer metatarsal. I may
+remark that the more posterior position of the middle metatarsal at
+its proximal end, from which and the corresponding part of the common
+epiphysis the calcaneal process is developed, is related to the greater
+share taken by the middle toe in the act of walking and scratching. I
+will only remark that of the four metatarsals of as many Dodos in the
+present series, one exceeds by a line the length of that figured in
+plate xi. _op. cit._, and one falls short thereof to the same trifling
+amount.
+
+
+                  _Skull._ (Plates III. & XI. fig. 1.)
+
+Of the skull of the Dodo, the series of bones transmitted to me include
+the cranial part with the detached upper mandibular bone (more or
+less mutilated) of two mature birds, and the lower mandible of three
+individuals. In the latter the dentary elements (Pl. XI. fig. 1, 32),
+confluent at the “gonys,” are distinct from the hinder halves of the
+rami formed by the confluent, or perhaps connate, articular, surangular
+and angular elements (ib. 31): if the “splenial” were ever distinct, it
+has coalesced with the dentary, where its upper boundary is indicated
+by a linear groove or series of small foramina.
+
+In size, shape, and all other characters of these important evidences
+of the specific nature of the remains from the Mahébourg morass[29],
+they agree with those of _Didus ineptus_ detailed in the ‘Proceedings
+of the Zoological Society’ for January 11th, 1848 (part xvi. pp. 2–8),
+and in the work entitled “The Dodo and its Kindred,” pp. 76–96.
+
+The occipital condyle (ib. 1) presents the same hemispheroid or
+reniform shape, with the median vertical notch or depression above.
+The upper margin of the foramen magnum is broad, as it were excised,
+with the sides slightly prominent. The superoccipital foramen is
+present in both specimens, as in the one originally described (Proc.
+Zool. Soc. part xvi. p. 2). This foramen also exists in Owls and
+Parrots, but not in all Pigeons; the _Didunculus_ (Pl. III. fig. 2)
+shows no trace of it; I have also failed to find it in the skull of a
+Crown-pigeon (_Goura coronata_). The superoccipital ridge is defined by
+the subsidence of the surface beneath it being continued directly from
+the upper, almost flat, smooth surface of the cranium: the middle part
+of the ridge is more produced than the angles. In the great breadth of
+the occipital surface compared with its depth, in its flatness from
+side to side, and its aspect backward and a little upward, _Didus_ most
+resembles _Dinornis_. The basioccipital curves downward, and unites
+with the basisphenoid in developing the pair of larger tuberosities
+(Pl. XI. fig. 1, 5), which terminate about ½ an inch below the
+occipital condyle. There is nothing of this structure in the Columbine
+cranium. In one of my Dodo’s skulls there is a pair of small tubercles
+between the larger basioccipital ones; these are not developed in the
+other cranium. The basisphenoid is subquadrate, and flattish below,
+impressed by a shallow median longitudinal channel.
+
+The hypoglossal nerve escapes by two small foramina on each side of
+the base of the condyle; external to these is the vagal foramen; still
+more external is the depression (ib. _a_) perforated below by the
+entocarotid, glossopharyngeal, and sympathetic, above by the tympanic
+vein. The entocarotid canal opens into the hind part of the sella or
+pituitary fossa: the vagal canal begins within the skull, above the
+hypoglossal foramina. The paroccipital carries the posterior surface
+of the skull downward and outward to a much greater degree than in any
+Dove, but to a less degree than in _Dinornis_. The Eustachian tubes
+impress the outer and fore part of the basisphenoid.
+
+The temporal fossæ (Pl. III.), in the present specimens, show the same
+contraction in proportion to their depth by which the original skull
+of the Dodo, compared with that of the _Dinornis_, ‘Proc. Zool. Soc.’
+(1848, p. 3), differed from the larger extinct wingless bird. In the
+approximation of the postorbital process to the mastoid, _Didunculus_
+shows a closer resemblance to _Didus_ than does _Goura_, in which the
+temporal fossa, besides being narrow, is shallow. The temporal muscle
+appears to spread its origin above the fossa upon the sides of the
+cranium, forward half an inch in advance of the postfrontal process,
+and backward to the outer angle of the superoccipital ridge.
+
+The parietal region is broad, flat, and short, as in _Dinornis_, not
+convex as in Doves; it is also impressed at its middle part by a
+shallow transverse groove, continued outward and forward of less depth
+and definition, so as to mark off the convex interorbital part of the
+swollen frontals.
+
+The outer side of the mastoid is convex, smooth, overhanging the
+tympanic cavity, and sending off a short process, the base of which is
+defined in one cranium by a transverse ridge in front of the anterior
+articular cup for the tympanic bone. A similar process is developed in
+_Didunculus_, not in _Goura_, where it is barely indicated.
+
+The presphenoid is compressed, but thickened and rounded below, where
+the palatines and pterygoids at their junction with each other abut
+against it: the pterygoid sends off a short process from the middle of
+its hinder border; but this is not met by a corresponding “pterygoid
+process” of the basisphenoid as in _Didunculus_.
+
+The frontals are broad and convex, rising abruptly (as in _Didunculus_)
+above the coalesced cranial ends of the nasals and premaxillary (Pl.
+III.); in _Didus_ the breadth greatly exceeds the length of the
+interorbital frontal convexity, as compared with _Didunculus_, and the
+convexity reigns in the transverse as well as the antero-posterior
+direction; in _Didunculus_, however, it is less concave transversely
+than in _Goura_. In the breadth or thickness of the interorbital
+septum _Didus_ resembles _Apteryx_ and _Palapteryx_ and shows the
+same pneumatic cancellous structure. The posterior olfactory chambers
+are partially divided, as in _Dinornis_, by an upper median septum;
+each compartment, which is 7 lines across and an inch in length, is
+perforated posteriorly by an olfactory foramen more than a line in
+diameter, from which grooved impressions of ramifications of the nerve
+diverge upon the hind and upper wall of the chamber: external to the
+olfactory foramen is a longer one for the passage of a vein into the
+fore and inner part of the orbit.
+
+The cranial ends of the nasals and nasal process of the premaxillary
+(Pl. XI. fig. 1, 22) are flat, depressed, thin plates; the latter at
+its junction with the frontal is 6 lines broad, partially divided by
+a median groove above and a ridge below, and by short linear fissures
+from the nasals: the forward extension of these bones is feebly
+indicated by linear grooves terminating at the outer margins of the
+nasal branch of the premaxillary, about 4 inches from its vertical
+end. The proportion of the base of the upper mandible attached to the
+frontal contributed by the nasals is the same as that indicated in
+the ‘Proc. Zool. Soc.’ _l. c._ The nasal branch of the premaxillary
+presents a full elliptical transverse section where it quits the
+maxillary processes, losing both depth and breadth as it recedes
+to join the nasals; here it retains its breadth, viz. 6 lines, but
+continues to be thinned off vertically to the plate above named joining
+the frontal. The under surface of the narrower part of the stem is
+angular, the upper one being gently convex.
+
+“Where the nasal and maxillary processes diverge, there is a deep
+groove externally, terminating in a canal directed forwards into
+the rostral part or body of the premaxillary”[30]. This part is
+subdecurved, pointed, roughened by irregular vascular perforations and
+grooves, with a sharp alveolar border, which describes a sigmoid curve
+lengthwise, and with a deeper concavity of the palatal surface than in
+_Dinornis_ or _Didunculus_. Moreover the concavity is partially divided
+lengthwise by a median ridge. The palatal surfaces of the maxillary
+processes and maxillaries are narrow and very convex transversely,
+intercepting a long narrow palato-nasal fissure. The outer side of the
+maxillary process is deep vertically and slightly concave lengthwise—a
+structure not known in _Didunculus_ or any Dove, and related, like
+most other deviations from the Columbine cranial characteristics, to
+the provision of unwonted strength of beak in the Dodo. The maxillary
+branches of the premaxillary have completely coalesced with the
+maxillaries, as these have with the palatines; and the halves of the
+upper mandible here swell out laterally and more so vertically, the
+maxillaries rising to combine with the outer divisions of the nasals,
+and sending back a short process from their lower and lateral part to
+join the malar. The inner surface of the maxillary process (Pl. XI.
+fig. 1, 22*) is smooth and slightly convex vertically; both upper and
+lower borders are obtuse and thick.
+
+The palatines arch outward from their posterior attachments, are broad
+and smooth mesially; the margin here is angular, with a slightly
+produced obtuse apex, divided by a channel on the under surface of
+the palatine from the outer convex border; the upper and outer ridge
+extends forward to the maxillary; the inner one subsides before
+reaching that bone. “The palatines form the posterior boundaries
+of the naso-palatine aperture, and approximate each other at both
+ends, but more closely posteriorly, yet here without meeting; whilst
+in _Didunculus_ they coalesce before receiving the abutment of the
+pterygoids.
+
+“The tympanic bone is subquadrate, with the four angles produced, and
+the upper and hinder are bifurcate, forming the double condyle for
+the mastoid articulation”[31]. There is a larger pneumatic foramen,
+communicating with the tympanic cavity, between the articulating
+cavities for these condyles.
+
+The brain is singularly small in the present species of _Didus_: and
+if it be viewed as an index of intelligence of the bird, the latter
+may well be termed _ineptus_. The length of the cranial cavity (Pl.
+XI. fig. 1, _v_ _c_) is 1 inch 8 lines, its extreme breadth 1 inch
+6 lines, its greatest height 1 inch (and this is at the cerebellar
+fossa). The most remarkable feature in the cranial structure of _Didus_
+is the disproportionate size of the brain-case to the important part
+of the neural axis it contained and protected: some approximation to
+this condition is made by _Dinornis_[32], the Owls, and a few large
+Cockatoos, _e. g._ _Microglossum aterrimum_; but it is fully paralleled
+only by the Elephant among air-breathing vertebrates, as may be seen
+by comparing the section Pl. XI. fig. 1 with the figures of a similar
+section quoted below[33].
+
+Not only was the brain of very small proportional size in the present
+large extinct bird, but the division of the cranial cavity appropriate
+to the cerebrum proper is less in proportion to that for the cerebellum
+and optic lobes, at least in vertical and longitudinal diameters, than
+in any other known bird.
+
+In the Elephant the thickness of the pneumatic diploë between the
+fore part of the cerebral cavity and that of the outer cranial wall
+equals the longitudinal diameter of the cavity containing the cerebral
+hemispheres: in _Didus_ it exceeds that diameter. The thickness of the
+pneumatic diploë above the cerebral cavity equals the vertical diameter
+of that cavity in _Didus_: the diploë gradually decreases in thickness
+as it approaches the foramen magnum. The disposition of the osseous
+lamellæ forming the cells or cavities of the diploë is very different
+in the Elephant and Dodo: they extend for the most part vertically
+between the outer and inner tables of the skull in the proboscidian
+mammal, leaving long and narrow interspaces; in the heavy ground-bird
+they form a congeries of small subequal and subspherical air-cells, and
+this structure obtains in the basal and lateral walls as well as in the
+superior or “roofing” wall of the cranial cavity. The extent of this
+cancellous structure at the sides of the cranial cavity may be known by
+the ratio of the breadth of that cavity to the breadth of the cranium,
+which is 3 inches and 8 lines at the broadest part of the brain, viz.
+the prosencephalon. It would seem, at first sight, as if the poorly
+developed brain of the Dodo had needed, on some account, unusual
+protection; but the true explanation rests on the size, weight, and
+power of the bill, and the concomitant necessity for adequate extent
+of attachment of the facial to the cranial part of the skull, and of
+the muscles from the trunk destined to sustain and wield the long and
+heavy-beaked head. The cerebrum of the Dodo does not greatly, and by
+no means proportionally, exceed the size of that part of the brain in
+the Crown-pigeons (_Goura_). If the great Ground-dove of the Mauritius
+gradually gained bulk in the long course of successive generations in
+that uninhabited thickly-wooded island, and, exempt from the attacks
+of any enemy, with food enough scattered over the ground, ceased to
+exert the wings to raise the heavy trunk, then, on Lamarck’s principle,
+the disused members would atrophy, while the hind limbs, through the
+increased exercise by habitual motion on land, with increasing weight
+to support, would hypertrophy.
+
+In the long course of generations subject to this slow rate of
+change, there would be nothing in the contemporaneous condition of
+the Mauritian fauna to alarm or in any way to put the Dodo to its
+wits; being, like other Pigeons, monogamous, the excitement, even, of
+a seasonal or prenuptial combat, might, as in them, be wanting: we
+may well suppose the bird to go on feeding and breeding in a lazy,
+stupid fashion, without call or stimulus to any growth of cerebrum
+proportionate to the gradually accruing increment of the bulk of
+the body. Whatever part of the brain was concerned in regulating or
+controlling muscular actions, might, indeed, be expected to show some
+concurrent rate of increase with the growing mass of the voluntary
+contractile fibres; and the size of the cerebellar division (Pl. XI.
+fig. 1, _n_ _o_) of the cranial cavity accords with the generally
+accepted physiology of the superincumbent mass of the epencephalon.
+The lateral depression at the fore and under part of the side of the
+postcerebral division of the cranial cavity indicates that the optic
+lobes, like the eyes, remained almost stationary during the progressive
+acquisition of the bulk that distinguishes the Dodo from the largest
+existing Doves.
+
+The proportions of _Didus_, _Pezophaps_, _Casuarius_, _Rhea_,
+_Dromaius_, _Struthio_, _Aptornis_, _Cnemiornis_, _Palapteryx_,
+_Æpyornis_, _Dinornis_, &c. among terrestrial birds, of _Notornis_
+among the lake-haunting Coots, and of _Aptenodytes_ and _Alca impennis_
+among seabirds, point to the disuse of wings in flight as the main
+condition of increase of size in species of birds—the next condition
+being absence of lethal enemies during the years requisite for such
+course and rate of growth.
+
+Let foes arise from whom a power of flight is the main condition of
+escape, and the wingless giants of the feathered class soon succumb.
+Among the genera above-cited, _Aptornis_, _Cnemiornis_, _Æpyornis_,
+_Palapteryx_, _Dinornis_, _Didus_, and _Pezophaps_, with the largest
+of the Auks, have thus passed away, while _Notornis_ and _Apteryx_ are
+on the verge of extinction through the rapid increase of population
+in the small island to which they are restricted. In sparsely peopled
+continents, such as Africa, South America, and Australia, brevipennate
+giants may still range the deserts, pampas, and unfrequented wilds. The
+ascertained recent advent of Man in New Zealand, New Britain, Ceram,
+Banda, Salwattie, Mauritius, Rodriguez, significantly points to the
+conditions under which have come to pass, in lapse of time, so strange
+an anomaly as a bird with the specially modified instruments of flight
+reduced below the power of exerting that mode of locomotion, yet, as
+a bird, retaining the conditions of the respiratory and tegumentary
+systems of the volant class, of which it has become a degenerate
+member. With the cessation of the chief of those conditions, viz. the
+absence of enemies, such birds necessarily perish.
+
+Refraining, however, from further indulgence in an easy and seductive
+vein of speculation, I would recall attention to the notable
+protuberance in the cranial cavity of the Dodo (Pl. XI. fig. 1, _o_)
+developed towards the upper part of the vertical tentorium, contracting
+at its lower part into the ridge dividing the prosencephalic from
+the mesencephalic chamber. In the latter are the orifices for the
+issue of the trigeminal nerve, the larger and posterior (ib. _tr_)
+giving passage to the third and second divisions, and answering to the
+combined foramen ovale and rotundum of mammals, and the smaller and
+anterior foramen dismissing the first or orbital division of the fifth
+nerve. At the upper part of the mesencephalic fossa the narrow groove
+for the lateral venous sinus impresses and defines the back part of the
+tentorial protuberance, above which it bifurcates, the lower branch
+bounding or defining the wall of the superior semicircular canal and
+the upper part of the primitive acoustic capsule. Below this arch is
+an oblong cerebellar fossa (ib. _n_) which appears to have received
+veins from the cranial diploë. Beneath this fossa, and just behind
+the mesencephalic chamber, is the multiperforate internal auditory
+depression. Next behind this is the outlet for the vagal nerve and
+entojugular vein. Below this are the small precondyloid foramina. There
+is a falcial ridge, low and thick, indicating the division of the
+prosencephalic chamber into lateral compartments for hemispheres; and
+this ridge shows a narrow groove as for a small longitudinal sinus. A
+transverse linear groove abruptly defines the fore part of the ridge.
+
+The vertically expanded anterior part of the premaxillary (ib. fig. 1,
+22) has a large pneumatic cavity communicating by a reticulate wall
+with the cells of a cancellous structure, larger than those of the
+cranial diploë. The maxillary branch of the premaxillary (ib. 22*)
+consists of a light open-work air-diploë, with a very thin outer case
+of bone. The short symphysis mandibulæ shows a small cavity, surrounded
+by more minutely cancellous structure and thicker compact walls,
+especially at the upper and hinder parts.
+
+Although some characters have been too much insisted on (_e.g._ the
+“superoccipital foramen”) as exemplifying the affinity of the Dodo, the
+more essential characters of the skull relate to its true Columbine
+character, while the deviations from that part of the skeleton of
+volant Doves are explicable in the adaptive developments needed for the
+wielding of long, powerful, massive mandibles, serving most probably
+to enable the bird to subsist on some proportion of animal diet, in
+addition to such vegetable food as it might gain from the ground. Such
+indiscriminate feeding doubtless rendered its flesh less palatable than
+that of the winged Pigeons of the Mauritius to the Dutch navigators of
+the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
+
+But the affinities of _Didus_ will be more fully and decisively brought
+out in the comparison of the, in this respect, more instructive and
+light-giving parts of the skeleton.
+
+
+
+
+                   § 3. _Comparison of the Skeleton._
+
+
+The dorsal region of the vertebral column shows, in some birds, a
+confluence of certain vertebræ: I have observed four to be so welded
+together by both centrums and neural spines in _Phœnicopterus_, viz.
+the second to the fifth dorsal inclusive, leaving the sixth free, which
+articulates with the first costigerous sacral vertebra. In _Platalea_
+three dorsals coalesce in advance of the antepenultimate free vertebra.
+In the smaller diurnal birds of prey five dorsal vertebræ are usually
+confluent, leaving one free vertebra for the lateral movements of the
+trunk between such dorsal “sacrum” and the pelvic one. In Vultures,
+Plovers, Bustards, Cranes, _Psophia_, _Cariama_, _Palamedea_, Auks,
+Penguins, and in all flightless land-birds save the Dodo, no such
+anchylosis takes place. The _Columbidæ_ are the species in which the
+dorsal vertebræ, homologous and the same in number with those of
+_Didus_, undergo the process of confluence into one mass of bone:
+they are the three which immediately precede the last (moveable)
+dorsal vertebra; and of these the two anterior develope, in _Goura_
+and _Didunculus_, hypapophyses closely corresponding in shape and
+proportion with those in the Dodo.
+
+The chief difference which _Didus_ offers in the present region of the
+vertebral column from that of _Columbidæ_ is in the greater number
+of the vertebræ or segments which are typically completed by bony
+hæmapophyses articulating with pleurapophyses and directly with their
+mass of coalesced and expanded hæmal spines constituting the sternum.
+Of these typical thoracic segments there were five in _Didus_ (Pl.
+III.); _Didunculus_ (ib.) shows four; _Goura_ three. In both existing
+genera these segments are succeeded by a single one, anchylosed to
+the fore part of the sacrum, but with the pleurapophysis long and
+moveable, with its hæmapophysis terminating in a point before reaching
+the sternum, and extensively connected with the antecedent hæmapophysis
+or sternal rib: in both genera two dorsal vertebræ in advance of the
+typically complete one have moveable pleurapophyses terminating freely
+in a point, with no hæmapophyses other than the costal processes of
+the sternum may represent. In _Goura_, which has six pairs of moveable
+or thoracic ribs, the second pair belong to the first of the three
+anchylosed dorsal vertebræ: in _Didunculus_, which has seven pairs of
+thoracic ribs, the second pair belongs to the free dorsal immediately
+in advance of the anchylosed mass. Supposing _Didus_ to have had one
+pair of ribs behind, and two pairs in front of those that directly
+articulate with the sternum, as the vertebra Pl. V. fig. 7 indicates,
+it would have had eight pairs of thoracic ribs; and I think this excess
+of one pair beyond the formula in _Didunculus_ to be very probable in
+the large-bodied, small-winged, extinct Ground-dove.
+
+As far as the series of Dodo’s neck-vertebræ under my observation
+exhibit such characters, the proportion of those with neural spines,
+or with hypapophyses, or both, is the same as in the _Columbidæ_. In
+this family, as in most birds, the greater part of the series want
+both processes. The cervical parapophyses, descending to form the
+sides of the carotid canal, do not meet, coalesce, and circumscribe
+it in any cervical vertebra of _Goura_ or _Didunculus_; and not any
+of the vertebræ of _Didus_, which I have yet received, shows such
+circumscription of the hæmal canal. The majority of the cervicals in
+_Didus_ (those, viz., that lack both neural spines and hypapophyses)
+are broader and more massive in proportion to their length than in
+the winged Doves. The third cervical in _Didus_ has both the above
+processes, as in _Columbidæ_: the characters of the axis vertebra
+in the same family are closely repeated in that of the Dodo. In the
+Raptores the axis vertebra is shorter in proportion to its length,
+and a greater proportion of the cervical vertebræ at both ends of the
+series have both neural spines and hypapophyses.
+
+The ribs of the Dodo are as broad, in proportion to their length, as in
+Doves, but are relatively longer in proportion to the dorsal region,
+encompassing a more capacious thoracic-abdominal cavity. The ribs
+of the Vulture are more expanded than in _Didus_, especially where
+they afford the extensive attachment to the epipleurals. But I shall
+not dwell further on the comparative characters of this part of the
+skeleton, as more decisive ones of the affinity of _Didus_ are afforded
+by other parts.
+
+In comparing the sternum of the Dodo with that of Doves of flight,
+the first well-marked difference is in the adaptive development of
+the keel in the last (Pl. III. fig. 2, _Didunculus_), and in the
+provision for the concomitantly broader coracoids, the grooves for
+which meet and run into each other across the fore part of the bone in
+existing _Columbidæ_ (Pl. XII. fig. 2, _b_); consequently the inner
+or upper wall of the confluent grooves forms a median prominence (ib.
+_e_) at the front margin of the sternum, contrasting with the wide
+notch at that part of the bone in the Dodo (Pl. IV. fig. 4). The next
+difference, as compared with _Goura_ and most Pigeons, is the absence
+of the entolateral processes (Pl. XII. fig. 3, _i_) in the Dodo’s
+sternum: but _Didunculus_ singularly exemplifies its nearer affinity
+to _Didus_ by a like absence of those processes; only the sternal
+margins behind the ectolateral processes (ib. fig. 1, _h_), instead of
+converging with a slight convexity to an obtuse apex, as in Pl. VI.,
+describe a concavity, through an expansion of the posterior truncate
+end of the breast-bone. The sternum of _Didunculus_ may be said to
+show one pair of posterior notches (Pl. XII. fig. 1, _f_), that of
+other Pigeons two pairs (ib. fig. 3, _f_ _f′_); but the sternum of
+_Didus_, which is relatively broader, shows no other trace of the
+anterior notch (Pl. VI. _f_) than is afforded by the rounded angle at
+which the ectolateral process (_h_) rises from the bone. Although the
+costal margin is relatively shorter in Doves of flight than in the
+Dodo, again an intermediate condition is manifested by _Didunculus_
+as compared with _Goura_, in which latter Dove there are articular
+surfaces for three sternal ribs (Pl. XII. fig. 3, _o_ 1, 2, 3),
+whilst in _Didunculus_ there are four (ib. fig. 1, _c_). _Didunculus_
+also exhibits, more strongly than _Goura_, the obtuse ridges (ib.
+fig. 2, _r_) converging like buttresses from the outer wall of the
+coracoid groove to the fore part of the keel, where they subside. In
+_Didunculus_ there is a pneumatic foramen exterior to the coracoid
+groove, corresponding with _p_, fig. 4, Pl. IV., which I do not find
+in the sternum of _Goura_; but in the Crown-pigeons the pneumatic
+foramina along the middle line of the upper surface of the sternum are
+conspicuous; they are confined to the fore part of that surface in
+_Didunculus_ (Pl. XII. fig. 1).
+
+In the direction of the ectolateral processes _Goura_ (ib. fig. 3, _h_)
+is intermediate between _Didunculus_ and _Didus_. The pectoral ridge
+on the outer surface of the sternum, continued backward from the outer
+end of the coracoid groove, is adaptively better marked in Pigeons
+of flight than in the Dodo; and the pair of ridges are more nearly
+parallel in their backward course, not so convergent as in _Didus_.
+In _Goura_ the subcostal ridge is better marked than in _Didunculus_.
+In no Dove of flight is the body of the sternum so broad and hollow
+as in _Didus_ (Pl. XI. fig. 4); in this respect the Vulture more
+nearly resembles the Dodo, as it does also in the more convex anterior
+contour of the keel: but the vulturine sternum does not lose breadth
+as it extends backward; it is a square-shaped shield in birds of prey,
+shorter in proportion to its breadth, with a greater extent of costal
+process and margin, and with the ectolateral processes, when they
+exist, extending backward as far as the hinder border of the bone. In
+the thorough quest of resemblances to the Dodo’s sternum which I have
+made through the class of Birds, I came upon an unexpected superficial
+likeness to it in the sternum of a Night-jar (_Podargus humeralis_).
+The ectolateral processes (Pl. XII. fig. 4, _h_) rise behind the
+moderately extended costal borders, _c_; and beyond them the body of
+the sternum converges to an obtuse end, with a contour similar to
+that in _Didus_. Moreover the coracoid grooves are divided from each
+other by a free concave border, less deep and extensive, indeed, than
+in _Didus_, but as free from any trace of episternal projection. The
+ectolateral processes, however, are extended backward to beyond the
+sternal body; and this part usually shows a pair of small entolateral
+notches, _f′_, of which one was present on one side in the specimen
+figured.
+
+Through the reduction of the coracoids in all flightless birds, there
+is an interval between their sternal articulations: this is long
+and concave in the Dodo, but is longest and most deeply concave in
+_Apteryx_; it is long but almost straight in _Rhea_; in _Casuarius_ and
+_Dromaius_ it is narrow but deeply notched; in _Struthio_ it developes
+a short episternal process. In no Grallatorial sternum with both ecto-
+and ento-lateral processes (as e.g. _Otis_, _Œdicnemus_, _Charadrius_)
+do the former project, as in _Didus_ and the Rasores, immediately
+behind the costal margin, but they are continued, parallel with the
+keel, from the outer and posterior angle of the sternum, distant from
+the costal margin. In old Plovers the entolateral process joins the
+contiguous angle of the sternal body, and converts the inner notch into
+a foramen.
+
+In the breast-bone of the Dodo we plainly discern the Columbine
+modification of the Gallinaceous type, simplified in the minor
+development of those parts relating adaptively to the power of flight,
+and expanded and excavated for the support of the larger gizzard with
+its heavier grindstones[34].
+
+In comparing the pelvis of _Didunculus_ and _Goura_ (Pl. XII. fig.
+5) with that of _Didus_ (Pl. VII. fig. 1), the correspondences
+are:—in the general shape, proportions and disposition of the ilia;
+in the articulation therewith of the last pair of moveable ribs,
+and of the short straight confluent pleurapophyses of the three
+succeeding sacral vertebræ; then follow, as in _Didus_, three vertebræ
+without pleurapophyses, these reappearing in the next two with their
+extremities converging to abut against a prominence of the inner
+surface of the ilium in the same relative position. The difference
+here is in the two equal and more slender rib-buttresses, in place
+of the single stronger one, which is the more common structure in
+_Didus_; but in _Goura_ I have noted an instance in which it agreed
+with the _Didunculus_ on the left side, and with _Didus_ on the right,
+in the last-specified character. In the Crown-pigeons, also, there is
+an indication of the transverse ridge marking off the under part of
+the centrum of the first sacral from the rest, and those that follow
+are less expanded than in the Dodlets; moreover in _Didunculus_ they
+show a median canal instead of a ridge, while the ridge is feebly
+indicated here and there and there is no canal in _Goura_. In neither
+_Didunculus_ nor _Goura_ do the sacral centrums behind the last
+rib-abutments diminish in breadth so suddenly as in _Didus_: in both
+the winged Pigeons the hinder part of the pelvic cavity is relatively
+deeper and narrower than in _Didus_; in both, also, the upper and
+anterior concave tracks of the ilia are deeper; and in _Didunculus_
+the mesial borders do not attain the neural crest, but leave a pair of
+open longitudinal canals at that part of the pelvis; in _Goura_ those
+margins reach the neural crest, but do not overtop it at any part.
+In _Goura_ the acetabula are more in advance of a median position
+than in _Didunculus_, _Columba magnifica_, or _Didus_. Although the
+ischiadic foramina are completed by terminal confluence of the ilium
+and ischium in _Dromaius_ and _Casuarius_, yet the length of those
+foramina (which are unclosed) in _Struthio_ and _Apteryx_, concomitant
+with the greater relative length of the pelvis, shows the difference of
+_Didus_ from the cursorial Brevipennates in this part of the skeleton.
+The ischia of the winged Pigeons resemble those of the Dodo; but the
+inner longitudinal ridge is more strongly marked in _Didunculus_: in
+the _Goura_ it is less developed than in _Didus_; the bone is longer
+also in proportion to its breadth, and the ischiadic foramen is longer
+and narrower: the proportions of that in _Didunculus_ are more like
+those in _Didus_. In _Didunculus_ the pubis coalesces with the ischium
+behind the small obturator foramen, but leaves a second or posterior
+elongate ischio-pubic vacuity. The greatest amount of resemblances with
+the pelvis of the Dodo is found in that of different members of the
+Dove-tribe.
+
+In comparing the pelvis of the Dodo with that of the Vulture (Pl. XII.
+fig. 6), we find in the latter that the first two confluent sacral
+vertebræ; supporting moveable ribs are succeeded by several with short
+abutting ribs, the extent of this part of the sacrum being nearly
+one-half of the whole, instead of one-fourth as in _Didus_ and the
+Doves. The reappearance of rib-abutments after four ribless sacrals is
+in the posterior third of the sacrum, and they are continued to the end
+of that bone from the last four vertebræ of the series, constituting
+a very marked difference, both as to number and the character of the
+vertebræ in the sacral part of the pelvis.
+
+With regard to the iliac bones, the anterior concave track occupies
+two-thirds of the extent of the bone in _Vultur_, not one-half as
+in _Didus_ and most Doves; the breadth of the posterior parts of
+the ilia with the intervening sacrum in the Vulture is relatively
+less than in the winged Doves, and differs in a greater degree from
+that characteristic part in the sacrum of _Didus_. In _Ciconia_ the
+antacetabular part of the pelvis is relatively longer, and the iliac
+bones are more expanded anteriorly. In _Platalea_ the proportions are
+more nearly those in _Didus_. In _Otis_ the ilia touch the fore part of
+the sacro-spinal ridge, but leave both posterior and anterior apertures
+of the ilio-neural canals widely open. In _Œdicnemus_ and _Charadrius_
+they are grooves, the ilia not reaching the sacral spines. The external
+concavity of the ilium is longer, narrower, and deeper, in most waders,
+than in _Didus_. In _Eudyptes_ and _Aptenodytes_ the ilia are more
+expanded anteriorly, but the whole pelvis is narrower and longer than
+in _Didus_. The Gar-fowl (_Alca impennis_)[35], _Uria_, _Podiceps_,
+and _Colymbus_, all show still longer and narrower proportions of the
+pelvis.
+
+In the Doves of flight the proportions and relative position of the
+three compartments of the cranial cavity differ from those in the Dodo.
+Both the pros- and mes-encephalic ones are proportionally larger than
+the epencephalic; and the mesencephalic compartment lies more directly
+below the prosencephalic one. A very thin stratum of finely cellular
+diploë divides the two tables of the skull along the medial line of
+the upper surface: it is thicker between the orbits. The falcial
+ridge at the inner surface of the prosencephalic roof resembles that
+in _Didus_. The tentorial ridge bifurcates halfway down, the front
+portion dividing, almost horizontally, the pros- from the mesencephalic
+compartment, the hinder and more obtuse ridge dividing, almost
+vertically, the mes- from the epencephalic compartment. The angle
+of bifurcation is slightly produced and obtuse, but represents very
+feebly the tentorial tuberosity (Pl. XI. fig. 1, _o_) in the Dodo: from
+it, in _Goura_, is continued backward the arch of bone formed by the
+superior semicircular canal, above which is the groove for the venous
+sinus, as in _Didus_. The internal auditory fossa is less deep than in
+_Didus_: above it is a similarly vertically oblong cerebellar pit. The
+nerve-foramina correspond with those in _Didus_: the entocarotid canal
+opens into a rather deeper sella in _Columba palumbus_.
+
+On comparing the cranial cavity, as exposed by a vertical longitudinal
+section in the Dodo (Pl. XI. fig. 1), with that of a Dinornis similarly
+exposed[36], the first difference is the smaller proportional depth
+of the diploë in the larger wingless bird, which is not greater over
+the prosencephalic than over the epencephalic compartment; next
+may be noticed the larger relative size of the former compartment,
+indicating the larger cerebrum of the Dinornis, then the absence of
+the tentorial tuberosity, the sharper and more produced superior part
+of the tentorial ridge arching transversely between the cerebrum and
+cerebellum, the smaller internal auditory fossa, and the deeper sella:
+the mesencephalic compartment, or cavity for the optic lobe, is less in
+proportion to the prosencephalic compartment than in _Didus_; it holds,
+however, a similar relative position: finally, the cerebellar pit,
+above the internal auditory fossa, is wanting in the Dinornis.
+
+The Dodo agrees with the Doves in possessing a slender furculum,
+forming an acute angle: it resembles _Columba galeata_, more
+especially, in the halves of that bone being united by ligament below,
+and forming separate styles or “clavicles.”
+
+The humerus of the Goura closely repeats most of the characters
+described in that of the Dodo; but its length is proportionally
+greater, being 3 inches 9 lines, nearly equal to that of the sternum or
+pelvis, whereas the humerus of the Dodo is little more than half the
+length of either sternum or pelvis. The processes for the attachment of
+the muscles are, nevertheless, fully as strongly developed in _Didus_
+(Pl. VIII. figs. 12 & 14) as in the volant Doves (Pl. XII. figs. 8 &
+9, _Goura_); that, indeed, which is a ridge (_r_) on the back part of
+the shaft in _Didus_, is a mere rough surface in _Goura_, and does not
+show in _Didunculus_. The pneumatic fossa, which varies in depth in
+the two humeri of the Dodo, is in both relatively larger and shallower
+than in _Goura_. The pectoral process is thinner, but relatively rather
+more produced, in _Didunculus_. The humerus in _Œdicnemus_, _Otis_,
+and _Charadrius_ has a more longitudinally extended, thinner, and more
+produced pectoral ridge than in _Didus_ and the _Columbidæ_; there is a
+more marked ectocondyloid tuberosity, which in _Charadrius_ becomes a
+pointed process.
+
+There is nothing to be gained by giving the details of the more
+striking differences which the humerus presents in Penguins, Auks,
+and birds of prey, as compared with that bone in the Dodo; but a few
+words may be recorded of the comparison of the humerus of the Dodo
+with that of the flightless bird of New Zealand so nearly approaching
+to it in size, which bird is described in the 5th volume of the
+‘Transactions’ of the Society under the name of _Cnemiornis_ (p. 395,
+pl. 66. figs. 7–10). In that extinct species, although the humerus is
+5½ inches in length, the parts indicative of the forces by which it
+was worked are comparatively feebly developed. The ulnar tuberosity
+is narrower, thicker, more obtuse, and its base has neither the upper
+nor lower excavation; it rises above the articular head, which is less
+prominent and narrower than in _Didus_; the pectoral ridge is shorter
+and situated lower down upon the shaft, not on the same level with
+the radial tuberosity as it is in _Didus_; the distal articulation is
+of the same size as in _Didus_, but neither the radial nor the ulnar
+convexity is so prominent or well-defined.
+
+The ulna of the Dodo is shorter absolutely, and much more so
+proportionally, than in the Goura and most other volant Doves. In
+these it exceeds the humerus by about one-fourth its own length; in
+_Didunculus_ (Pl. III.) it is a little longer than the humerus; in the
+Dodo (ib.) it is shorter than the humerus. The length of the ulna in
+_Goura coronata_ is 4 inches 6 lines; it is more bent than in the Dodo;
+the quill-tubercles, seven or eight in number, are more prominent;
+nevertheless the rough depression for the insertion of the chief flexor
+is less deep and less defined. The plumed winglet of the Dodo would
+seem, therefore, to have been frequently and forcibly moved.
+
+In comparing the femur of the Dodo with that of the largest Dove, the
+bone appears gigantic. The length of the femur in _Goura coronata_
+(Pl. XII. fig. 11) is but 3 inches 3 lines, and it is more slender in
+proportion to its length than in the Dodo; it, however, repeats the
+few characteristics, if they may be so termed, of the Dodo’s femur. It
+has the pneumatic foramen in the same position, perhaps proportionally
+larger; it has the same large oblong surface for the ligament at
+the head of the bone; the great trochanter has the same form and
+disposition, but is not quite so much produced anteriorly; there is a
+slight depression instead of a ridge for the trochanter minor; the fore
+part of the inner condyle is relatively thicker and less produced. The
+femur in _Otis_ and _Œdicnemus_ has a thicker and shorter trochanter
+major, & more narrow and shallow rotular channel; it is shorter in
+comparison with the tibia, and more especially with the metatarsus,
+than in _Didus_ and the Doves.
+
+The femur of _Aptornis otidiformis_[37] is of the same size as that
+of the Dodo; but it has no pneumatic foramen, the head is more
+hemispheroid and inclined forward, the ligamentous pit is deeper and
+more circular, the supracervical articular surface is not defined from
+that of the head, there is a wider and deeper depression at the fore
+part of the proximal end of the femur, and a more prominent tuberosity
+on the back part; the ridge continued from the back part of the
+shaft to that of the inner condyle is more produced and sharper in
+_Aptornis_, the fore part of the same condyle is less produced.
+
+The femur in _Cnemiornis_[38] and _Dinornis_[39] is much thicker, in
+proportion to its length, than in either _Aptornis_ or _Didus_. In
+_Pezophaps_ the great trochanterian ridge rises higher above the neck,
+and the shaft has a more uniform thickness, with the inner contour less
+concave, than in _Didus_.
+
+The characters which have been noted at the proximal and distal ends of
+the tibia of _Didus_ are repeated in those of the tibia of the _Goura_.
+The difference in size is more marked than in the femur; the length of
+the tibia of _Goura coronata_ is 4 inches 7 lines, and its shaft is
+more slender, in proportion to its length (Pl. XII. fig. 13), than in
+_Didus_ (Pl. X.). The tendency to a trihedral form of the shaft is less
+marked in _Goura_; the anterior prominences of the distal condyles are
+thicker in proportion to the intervening fossa.
+
+In the Vulture the fibular ridge is more parallel with the long axis of
+the shaft than in _Didus_; the tendinal canal is less cylindrical, has
+an oblique course from the middle of the anterior surface towards the
+inner condyle; the fore parts of both distal condyles are less produced
+and less convex; the distal end is narrower from before backwards
+in proportion to its breadth; both extremities of the bone are less
+expanded in proportion to the shaft than in the Dodo.
+
+In the great Plover (_Œdicnemus crepitans_) the tibia, as in other
+Grallæ, is longer in proportion to its thickness than in _Didus_; the
+epicnemial process rises higher above and projects further in front of
+the condylar surfaces before it divides into the pro- and ectocnemial
+plates; and these are relatively more produced. The fibular ridge is
+shorter in proportion to the length of the tibia, is more prominent,
+and more parallel with the axis of the shaft. The distal condyles
+project further backward than in _Didus_. The tibia in _Charadrius_,
+_Otis_, _Tantalus_, _Grus_, _Ciconia_, _Mycteria_, _Porphyrio_, opposes
+similar or equivalent differences to those in _Œdicnemus_, against the
+affinity of _Didus_ to any of those Grallæ.
+
+In the comparison of the tibia of this extinct flightless bird with
+that of the _Cnemiornis_, the wonderful development of the plates
+and processes at the proximal end of the bones in the New Zealand
+bird is strikingly manifested. In _Cnemiornis_ the fibular ridge runs
+in a line with the shaft, and does not incline from above obliquely
+forward as in _Didus_ and the Doves; the ridge on the outer side of the
+distal fourth of the bone is stronger and sharper in _Cnemiornis_; the
+tendinal canal is transversely elliptical, medial in position, with a
+slight inward inclination; the intercondyloid fossa is much wider in
+_Cnemiornis_. The differences, indeed, in all the characters of the
+tibia, as compared with _Didus_, in the Vultures, Plovers, Penguins,
+and terrestrial flightless birds tend to render more instructive
+and convincing the resemblances which Pigeons present in the same
+characters to the extinct Mauritian bird.
+
+
+
+
+                           § 4. _Conclusion._
+
+
+The affinities or place in nature of the Dodo being thus determined by
+the characters of its skeleton, but few words remain to be said on the
+bearings of present knowledge of this species upon other zoological
+generalizations.
+
+The researches and observations of naturalists have been carried out to
+such an extent as to support the conclusion that the _Didus ineptus_
+does not now live in any part of the world, and that it never existed
+save in that part of which the island of Mauritius may be a remnant.
+Consequently the species there originated; and the most intelligible
+conception of its mode of origin is that to which I have alluded in the
+description of the brain-case (p. 39).
+
+The Dodo exemplifies Buffon’s idea[40] of the origin of species
+through departure from a more perfect original type by degeneration;
+and the known consequences of the disuse of one locomotive organ and
+extra use of another indicate the nature of the secondary causes that
+may have operated in the creation of this species of bird, agreeably
+with Lamarck’s philosophical conception of the influence of such
+physiological conditions of atrophy and hypertrophy[41]. The young of
+all Doves are hatched with wings as small as in the Dodo: that species
+retained the immature character. The main condition making possible the
+production and continuance of such a species in the island of Mauritius
+was the absence of any animal that could kill a great bird incapable
+of flight. The introduction of such a destroyer became fatal to the
+species which had lost such means of escape[42]. The Mauritian Doves
+(_Columba nitidissima_ and _C. meyeri_) that retained their powers of
+flight continue to exist there.
+
+As I have no reason to offer why one kind of Pigeon should have
+retained and another lost its powers of flight, nor am able to adduce a
+particle of evidence of the hypothetical degrees of diminution of the
+wing-bones to their stunted proportions in _Didus_, any more than in
+_Dinornis_, I feel that in the foregoing remarks I lay myself open to
+the rebuke of fellow-labourers who may think with the able authors who
+last treated of the present subject.
+
+They warn their readers to “beware of attributing anything like
+_imperfection_ to these anomalous organisms, however deficient they may
+be in those complicated structures which we so much admire in other
+creatures. Each animal and plant has received its peculiar organization
+for the purpose, not of exciting the admiration of other beings, but
+of sustaining its own existence. Its perfection, therefore, consists,
+not in the number or complication of its organs, but in the adaptation
+of its whole structure to the external circumstances in which it is
+destined to live. And, in this point of view, we shall find that every
+department of the organic creation is equally perfect, the humblest
+animalcule or the simplest conferva being as completely organized with
+reference to its appropriate habitat and its destined functions as Man
+himself, who claims to be lord of all. Such a view of the creation is
+surely more philosophical than the crude and profane ideas entertained
+by Buffon and his disciples”[43].
+
+Nevertheless the truth, as we have or feel it, should be told. In
+the end it may prove to be the more acceptable service. The _Didus
+ineptus_, L., through its degenerate or imperfect structure, howsoever
+acquired, has perished. What have the stigmatizers of Buffon to offer
+in lieu of his theory as applied to the origin of this species of bird?
+They begin by asking, “Why does the whale possess the germs of teeth
+which are never used for mastication? and why was the Dodo endowed
+with wings at all, when those wings were useless for locomotion?
+This question,” they own, “is too wide and too deep to plunge into
+at present.” They nevertheless proceed to remark, “These apparently
+anomalous facts are really the indications of laws which the Creator
+has been pleased to follow in the construction of organized beings;
+they are inscriptions in an unknown hieroglyphic, which we are quite
+sure mean _something_, but of which we have scarcely begun to master
+the alphabet. There appear, however, reasonable grounds for believing
+that the Creator has assigned to each class of animals a definite
+type or structure, from which He has never departed, even in the most
+exceptional or eccentric modifications of form. Thus, if we suppose,
+for instance, that the abstract idea of a Mammal implied the presence
+of teeth, and the idea of a Bird the presence of wings, we may then
+comprehend why in the Whale and the Dodo these organs are merely
+_suppressed_, not wholly _annihilated_”[44].
+
+This notion of type-forms or centres, unfortunately, has not merely
+relation to abstract biological speculations or theories, but to
+practical questions on which the true progress of Natural History
+vitally depends. If such types do exist, the National Museum, it is
+argued, may be restricted to their exhibition: and so our legislators
+and the public were assured by the Professor of Natural History in
+the Government School of Mines[45], when the question was before the
+“House” four years ago. I have let slip no suitable occasion[46]
+to combat and expose what has seemed to me to be both an erroneous
+and mischievous view, most obstructive to the best interests of the
+science; and, standing alone as I seemed to do on this point in the
+array of evidence before the “Parliamentary Committee on the British
+Museum, 1860,” I was glad to find my views on type-forms adopted
+and paraphrased by the President of the British Association in his
+Inaugural Address at the Meeting at Nottingham[47], in the present year.
+
+
+
+
+                       DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES.
+
+
+                                PLATE I.
+
+Ideal Scene in the island of Mauritius before its discovery, in 1598,
+by the Dutch, founded on:—
+
+  Fig. 1. Picture of the Dodo, by Roelandt Savery, 1626, in the
+            Royal Gallery of Berlin.
+
+  Fig. 2. Fac-simile of R. Savery’s Picture of the Dodo, in the
+            possession of the late Wm. J. Broderip, Esq., F.R.S. (no
+            date).
+
+  Fig. 3. Picture of the Dodo, by R. Savery, 1628, in the
+            Imperial Collection of the Belvedere, Vienna.
+
+          Each figure is coloured, and of the exact size, as in the
+            original paintings.
+
+
+                                PLATE II.
+
+  Two views of the Dodlet (_Didunculus strigirostris_, Peale;
+            _Gnathodon_, Jardine), natural size, from the living
+            bird, obtained at the Samoan or Navigators’ Islands,
+            and transmitted from Sydney, New South Wales, by
+            George Bennett, M.D., F.L.S.[48], to the Gardens of
+            the Zoological Society of London, in 1864, where the
+            paintings, of which the above are fac-similes, were made
+            for the present work. A sketch of the dried head of the
+            Dodo in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, of rather less than
+            half the natural size, is introduced into the picture,
+            now in the Author’s possession[49].
+
+
+                               PLATE III.
+
+  Fig. 1. Side view of the skeleton of the Dodo (_Didus
+            ineptus_, L.), with an outline of the bird as represented
+            in the oil-painting presented to the British Museum by
+            Edwards, Naturalist and Librarian of the Royal Society,
+            into whose possession it came at the decease, in 1753,
+            of Sir Hans Sloane, P.R.S., with the statement, or
+            tradition, that the painting had been made, of the
+            natural size, from a living specimen of the Dodo, in
+            Holland. The bones represented in profile, of the natural
+            size[50], testify to the accuracy of the form and
+            proportions of the Dodo given in the painting.
+
+  Fig. 2. An outline of the Samoan Dove or Dodlet (_Didunculus
+            strigirostris_, Peale; _Gnathodon strigirostris_,
+            Jardine[51]), of the natural size, from the specimen sent
+            by Dr. G. Bennett, and living, in 1864, in the Gardens
+            of the Zoological Society of London, with a view of the
+            skeleton, corresponding with that of the Dodo.
+
+
+                                PLATE IV.
+
+  Fig. 1. Front view of the fourth (or first of the three
+            confluent) dorsal vertebræ (centrum and neural arch).
+
+  Fig. 2. Vertebral rib, or pleurapophysis, of the same
+            vertebra, front view.
+
+  Fig. 3. Sternal rib, or hæmapophysis, of the same vertebra:
+            _a_, outer side; _b_, upper or pleural end; _c_, lower or
+            sternal end; _d_, front margin; _e_, inner surface.
+
+  Fig. 4. Front view of sternum, or connate mass of hæmal
+            spines, including that of the same (fourth dorsal)
+            vertebra.
+
+  Fig. 5. Inner surface of an anterior pleurapophysis, with
+            coalesced appendage, _a_.
+
+  Fig. 6. Oblique view of ditto, ditto.
+
+  Fig. 7. Anterior pleurapophysis, with appendage, _a_, front
+            view: _c_, capitular end; _d_, tubercular end; _f_, hæmal
+            end; 7 _a_, outer surface; 7 _b_, inner surface.
+
+  Fig. 8. An anterior pleurapophysis, front view.
+
+  Fig. 9. Posterior surface of the upper end of a posterior
+            pleurapophysis: 9 _a_, body and lower end of ditto.
+
+  Fig. 10. Part of a pleurapophysis which has been broken and
+            healed.
+
+  Fig. 11. Lower end of a posterior dorsal pleurapophysis, with
+            connate rudiment of appendage, _a_.
+
+  Fig. 12. Hæmapophysis.
+
+
+                              PLATE V[52].
+
+  Fig. 1. Fourth, fifth, and sixth dorsal vertebræ, anchylosed,
+            side view.
+
+  Fig. 2. Ditto, ditto, upper view.
+
+  Fig. 3. Ditto, ditto, under view.
+
+  Fig. 4. Ditto, ditto, back view.
+
+  Fig. 5. Ditto, ditto, mutilated, of another Dodo.
+
+  Fig. 6. Anterior dorsal vertebra, side view.
+
+  Fig. 7. Ditto, front view; _pl_, outline of heads of floating
+            rib.
+
+  Fig. 8. Penultimate cervical vertebra, side view.
+
+  Fig. 9. Ditto, back view.
+
+  Fig. 10. Middle cervical vertebra, upper view.
+
+  Fig. 11. Ditto, under view.
+
+  Fig. 12. Axis, or second cervical vertebra, upper view.
+
+  Fig. 13. Ditto, under view.
+
+
+                                PLATE VI.
+
+  Fig. 1. Under view of sternum.
+
+  Fig. 2. Upper or inner view.
+
+  Fig. 3. Back view.
+
+
+                               PLATE VII.
+
+  Fig. 1. Under or inner view of pelvis.
+
+  Fig. 2. Upper or outer view of pelvis.
+
+
+                               PLATE VIII.
+
+  Fig. 1. Middle cervical vertebra, upper view.
+
+  Fig. 2. Fifth cervical vertebra, upper view.
+
+  Fig. 3. Fourth cervical vertebra, under view.
+
+  Fig. 4. Right coracoid and clavicle.
+
+  Fig. 5. Left coracoid and clavicle.
+
+  Fig. 6. Right scapula, outer view.
+
+  Fig. 7. Right scapula, inner view.
+
+  Fig. 8. Left moiety of scapular arch, outer view.
+
+  Fig. 9. Ditto, inner view.
+
+  Fig. 10. Upper articular end of right coracoid.
+
+  Fig. 11. Lower ditto.
+
+  Fig. 12. Left humerus, anconal or back surface.
+
+  Fig. 13. Left humerus, ulnar or inner surface.
+
+  Fig. 14. Left ditto, palmar or front surface.
+              A. Ditto, proximal or upper end.
+              B. Ditto, radial side of upper half.
+              C. Ditto, distal end.
+
+  Fig. 15. Right radius.
+
+  Fig. 16. Right ulna, inner or radial side.
+
+  Fig. 17. Ditto, outer or ulnar side.
+
+
+                                PLATE IX.
+
+  Fig. 1. Left femur, front view.
+
+  Fig. 2. Ditto, inner view.
+
+  Fig. 3. Ditto, back view.
+
+  Fig. 4. Ditto, upper end.
+
+  Fig. 5. Ditto, lower end.
+
+
+                                PLATE X.
+
+  Fig. 1. Left tibia, front view.
+
+  Fig. 2. Ditto, inner view.
+
+  Fig. 3. Ditto, back view.
+
+  Fig. 4. Ditto, upper end.
+
+  Fig. 5. Ditto, lower end.
+
+  Fig. 6. Left fibula, outer view.
+
+  Fig. 7. Ditto, inner view.
+
+  Fig. 8. Ditto, upper view.
+
+
+                                PLATE XI.
+
+  Fig. 1. Longitudinal vertical section of mutilated skull.
+
+  Fig. 2. Ditto of third cervical vertebra.
+
+  Fig. 3. Ditto of lower cervical vertebra.
+
+  Fig. 4. Transverse vertical section of sternum.
+
+  Fig. 5. Longitudinal section of humerus.
+
+  Fig. 6. Ditto of upper end of femur.
+
+  Fig. 7. Ditto of lower end of femur.
+
+  Fig. 8. Ditto of upper end of tibia.
+
+  Fig. 9. Ditto of lower end of tibia.
+
+  Fig. 10. Ditto of metatarsus.
+
+
+                               PLATE XII.
+
+  Fig. 1. Sternum of _Didunculus_, upper view.
+
+  Fig. 2. Ditto, front view.
+
+  Fig. 3. Sternum of _Goura_, upper view.
+
+  Fig. 4. Sternum of _Podargus humeralis_, under view.
+
+  Fig. 5. Pelvis of _Goura_, under or inner view, half natural size.
+
+  Fig. 6. Pelvis of _Gyps_ (Vulture), under or inner view, half natural
+          size.
+
+  Fig. 7. Left moiety of scapular arch, _Goura_.
+
+  Fig. 8. Left humerus of _Goura_, anconal surface.
+
+  Fig. 9. Ditto, palmar surface of upper end.
+
+  Fig. 10. Ditto, palmar surface of lower end.
+
+  Fig. 11. Right femur of _Goura_, front view.
+
+  Fig. 12. Ditto, back view of upper end, and back view of lower end.
+
+  Fig. 13. Right tibia and fibula of _Goura_, front view.
+
+All the figures are of the natural size, save when otherwise expressed.
+The letters are explained in the text.
+
+
+                                THE END.
+
+
+      PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.
+
+[Illustration: PLATE. II.
+
+  E. W. Robinson pinx  M & N Hanhart, imp.  J. Erxleben, lith.
+
+  DIDUNCULUS.]
+
+[Illustration: From Nat on Stone by J. Erxleben.
+
+  M. & N. Hanhart, imp.
+
+  DIDUNCULUS STRIGIROSTRIS. _Jde_  DIDUS INEPTUS. _L._]
+
+[Illustration: _PL. IV._
+
+  _E. W. Robinson del._  _W. West imp._]
+
+[Illustration: PLATE. V.
+
+  From nat on Stone, by J. Erxleben.  M & N. Hanhart, imp.]
+
+[Illustration: _PL. VI._
+
+  _E. W. Robinson del._  _W. West imp._]
+
+[Illustration: PLATE. VII.
+
+  J. Smit. lith.  M & N. Hanhart. imp.]
+
+[Illustration: PLATE. VIII.
+
+  From nat on Stone, by J. Erxleben.  M. & N. Hanhart, imp.]
+
+[Illustration: PLATE. IX.
+
+  _Fig 1_
+
+  _Fig 2_
+
+  _Fig 3_
+
+  _Fig 4_
+
+  _Fig 5_
+
+  J. Smit lith.  M & N. Hanhart, imp.]
+
+[Illustration: PLATE. X.
+
+  _Fig 1_
+
+  _Fig 2_
+
+  _Fig 3_
+
+  _Fig 4_
+
+  _Fig 5_
+
+  _Fig 6_
+
+  _Fig 7_
+
+  _Fig 8_
+
+  J. Smit. lith.  M. & N. Hanhart imp.]
+
+[Illustration: PLATE. XI.
+
+  J. Smit. lith.  M. & N. Hanhart. imp.]
+
+[Illustration: PLATE. XII.
+
+  from nat on stone, by J. Erxleben.  M & N Hanhart imp.]
+
+
+                               FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1] By +William John Broderip+, Esq., F.R.S. The part containing the
+article was published in 1836, the volume (ix.) appeared in 1837.
+
+[2] “So in Willughby, but the print is somewhat indistinct, and
+there maybe error. In the original the words are ‘_Walgh-Vogel_,
+hoc est, nauseam movens, partim quod’ &c., the word therefore is an
+interpolation.”
+
+[3] These and other grotesque figures, which may be seen, copied, in
+Strickland’s History of the Dodo (‘Dodo and its Kindred,’ 4to, 1848),
+from the old authors cited by Broderip, are mere matters of curiosity,
+and are here omitted as devoid of scientific value.
+
+[4] This head, in the condition of a skull, has subsequently been
+discovered at Copenhagen.—R. O.
+
+[5] The outline of the Dodo in this painting is given, of the natural
+size, in Pl. III. of the present work; the reduced woodcut (_tom. cit._
+p. 51, copied by Strickland, _op. cit._ p. 28) is, therefore, not here
+reproduced.—R. O.
+
+[6] “This curious statement is extracted in the recent edition of Sir
+Thomas Brown’s works by Wilkins: published by Pickering.” [8vo, 1836,
+vol. i. p. 369, vol. ii. 173. The reference, in Strickland (_op. cit._
+p. 22), to vol. i. p. 369. is to a Letter by Sir Hamon L’Estrange to
+Dr. Browne, not containing any allusion to the Dodo.—R. O.]
+
+[7] Art. +Dodo+, Penny Cyclopædia, vol. ix. p. 62 (1837).
+
+[8] “London, 4to, Reeve and Co., 1848.”
+
+[9] “Vol. ix. p. 47 (1837).”
+
+[10] “Penny Cyclopædia, vol. xxiii. (1842).”
+
+[11] Transactions of the Zoological Society of London, vol. iv. part
+vi. p. 183.
+
+[12] “Dict. des Monogrammes, 1 partie, pp. 201, 274.”
+
+[13] “I am indebted to Mr. Russell for this information.”
+
+[14] “_Nautilus pompilius._”
+
+[15] _Op. cit._ p. 30.
+
+[16] Edwards’s ‘Natural History of Birds and other Rare and undescribed
+Animals,’ &c., 4to, vol. vi. pl. 294, 1760.
+
+[17] “Pendant tout le temps qu’on fut là, en vécut de tortues, de
+dodarses, de pigeons, de perroquets gris, et d’autre chasse, qu’on
+allait prendre avec les mains dans les bois.... La chair des tortues
+terrestres étoit d’un fort bon goût. On en sala, et l’on fit fumer,
+dent on se trouva fort bien, de même que des dodarses qu’on sala.”
+(Recueil des Voiages de la Compagnie des Indes Or., vol. iii. pp. 195,
+199, quoted by Strickland, _op. cit._ p. 17.)
+
+[18] ‘History of the Mauritius,’ p. 145*, compiled from the Baron’s
+papers by his son.
+
+[19] See Annals of Nat. Hist. ser. 2. vol. vi. p. 290 (1850).
+
+[20] “Es war in 1843, dass ich auf den Gedanken kam, dass der Dodo eine
+anomale Taubenform sei; ich überzeugte mich bald dass diese Auffassung
+die einzig richtige sei, und fing an eine Arbeit über diesen Gegenstand
+vorzubereiten. In 1845 wurde ich aber von meiner Regierung beauftragt
+eine Reise um die Welt mit einem dänischen Kriegsschiff mitzumachen;
+meine Arbeit musste also vorläufig bei Seite gelegt werden. Schon
+vor meine Abreise hat ich aber mehrere sowohl dänische wie fremde
+Naturforscher mit meiner Ansicht bekannt gemacht, und der Beweis das es
+sich so verhält wird Owen finden können:—
+
+  “1. in den Forhandlingar de Scandinaviske Naturforskers Möde, i
+  Kjöbenhavn, 1847, p. 948: und
+
+  “2. in Sundevall, Arsberättelse om Framstegen i vertebrerade
+  Djurens Naturalhistoria og Ethnographien, 1845–50, p. 254.”—_Letter
+  from_ Prof. +J. Reinhardt+ _to_ Dr. +Albert Günther+.
+
+
+[21] Reinhardt, quoted by Strickland, _op. cit._ p. 41 (see also p. 70).
+
+[22] This Collection was purchased by the Trustees of the British
+Museum for the sum of £100.
+
+[23] So determined, subsequent sets of bones transmitted from
+Mauritius, and from which I was privileged to select the most perfect
+specimens for the present memoir, got into the market and were sold
+by auction since the present memoir was in type, as bones certified
+by me to be of the Dodo. I have to express my sincere and grateful
+acknowledgements to those _gentlemen_ into whose hands these lots
+have fallen, who have forborne their own advantage and refrained from
+rushing into print with figures from inferior specimens to anticipate
+the appearance of a Memoir communicated to the Zoological Society of
+London, January 9th, 1866, and notified in the ‘Proceedings of the
+Zoological Society’ for January 1866 as destined “to be published
+entire in the Society’s Transactions,” and therefore necessarily
+awaiting the lithographing of “illustrations,” which every true
+promoter of science for its own sake must have desired to see as
+complete as the best-selected materials would permit to be given.—R.
+O., June 1866.
+
+[24] In the quaint print, in folio 3, of the “Narration Historique
+du Voiage faict par les huict Navires d’_Amsterdam_ au mois de Mars
+l’An 1598. soubs la conduitte de l’admiral Jaques Corneille Necq,”
+&c., the first-named object, No 1, “Sont Tortues qui se tiennent sur
+l’haut pays, frustez d’aisles pour nage, de telle grandeur, qu’ils
+chargent ung homme et rampent encore fort roidement, prennent aussi des
+Ecriuisses de la grandeur d’un pied qu’ils mengent. 2. Est ung oiseau,
+par nous nommé _Oiseau de Nausée_, à l’instar d’une _Cigne_, ont le cul
+rond, couvert de deux ou trois plumettes crespues, carent des aisles,
+mais en lieu d’icelles ont ilz trois ou quatre plumettes noires, des
+susdicts oiseaux avons nous prins une certaine quantité, accompaigné
+d’aucunes tourturelles et autres oiseaux, qui par noz compaignons furēt
+prins, la premiere fois qu’il arrivoyent au pays, pour chercher la plus
+profonde et plus fraische Riviere, et si les navires y pourroyent estre
+sauvez, et retournerent d’une grande joye, distribuant chasque navire,
+de leur Venoison prins, dont nous partismes le lendemain vers le port,
+fournismes chasque navire d’un Pilote de ceux qui au paravant y avoyent
+esté, avons cuict cest oiseau, estoit si coriace que ne le povions
+asses boviller, mais l’avons mengé a demy cru. Si tost qu’arrivames
+au port, envoya le Vice-Admiral nous, avecq une certaine troupe au
+pays, pour trouver aucun peuple, mais n’ont trouvé personne, que des
+Tourturelles et autres en grande abondance, lesquels nous prismes et
+tuames, car veu qu’il n’y eust personne qui les effraia, n’avoient
+ilz de nous nulle crainte, tindrēt lieu, se laisserent assomer. En
+sōme c’est un pays abōdant en poissō et oiseaux, voire tellemēt
+qu’il excella tous les autres audit voyage.”—_Le Second Livre de la
+Navigation des Indes Orientales_, fol., 1601. The Tortoise and Dodo in
+fig. 1, p. 1, of the present work, are taken from the print, p. 3, of
+the above work and edition.
+
+[25] See, especially, Bontekoe’s figure, copied by Strickland, in the
+title-page and at p. 63 of the above-cited work.
+
+[26] Owen, ‘Anatomy of Vertebrates,’ 1866, vol. ii. p. 32.
+
+[27] Called “hyosternal” in the Geoffroyan determination of parts of
+the bird’s sternum.
+
+[28] The intermuscular ridges (‘pectoral,’ ‘subcostal,’ ‘carinal’) are,
+with other parts of the bird’s sternum, here named as defined in my
+‘Anatomy of Vertebrates,’ vol. ii. pp. 16–23.
+
+[29] “La Mare aux Songes.”
+
+[30] Proc. Zool. Soc. _l. c._ p. 5.
+
+[31] Proc, Zool. Soc. _l. c._ p. 6.
+
+[32] Zool. Trans. vol. iv. pl. 24. fig. 4.
+
+[33] Odontography, pl. 146. fig. 1; Anat. of Vertebrates, vol. ii. p.
+439. fig. 296.
+
+[34] The habit of the Dodo to avail itself of extraneous crushers to
+a gallinaceous or struthious degree, is attested by the quotation, p.
+8, not the least interesting of the fruits of the extensive research
+of the learned and conscientious author of the Article +Dodo+, in the
+‘Penny Cyclopædia.’
+
+[35] Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. pl. 51.
+
+[36] Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. iv. pl. 24. fig. 4.
+
+[37] Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. pl. 65. fig. 3.
+
+[38] Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. pl. 65. fig. 1.
+
+[39] Ibid. fig. 5.
+
+[40] Histoire Naturelle &c., 4to, tom. xiv. “Dégénération des Animaux:”
+1760.
+
+[41] Philosophie Zoologique, 8vo, 1809, tom. i, chaps. 3, 6, & 7.
+
+[42] Agreeably with the principle of the “contest for existence” by
+which I explained the extinction of the species of _Dinornis_, Trans.
+Zool. Soc. vol. iv. p. 14, 1851.
+
+[43] Strickland and Melville, ‘The Dodo and its Kindred,’ 4to, 1848, p.
+34.
+
+[44] _Op. cit._ p. 34.
+
+[45] See letter in ‘The Times’ of May 21st, 1862, advocating the
+limitation of the National Museum of Natural History to “six rooms,”
+signed +Thomas H. Huxley+, F.R.S.
+
+[46] Reply to the above in ‘The Times’ of May 2nd, 1866, and in both
+editions (1861, 1862) of my ‘Discourse on the Extent and Aims of a
+National Museum of Natural History.’ “Some naturalists urge that it
+is only necessary to exhibit the type-form of each genus or family.
+But they do not tell us what is such ‘type-form.’ It is a metaphysical
+term, which implies that the Creative Force had a guiding pattern for
+the construction of all the varying or divergent forms in each genus
+or family. The idea is devoid of proof; and those who are loudest in
+advocating the restriction of exhibited specimens to ‘types’ have
+contributed least to lighten the difficulties of the practical curator
+in making the selection.” (Ed. 1862, p. 24; see also pp. 26–34.)
+
+[47] “The doctrine of typical nuclei seems only a mode of evading the
+difficulty. Experience does not give us the types of theory; and,
+after all, what are these types? It must be admitted there are none in
+reality. How are we led to the theory of them? Simply by a process of
+abstraction from classified existences. Having grouped from natural
+similitudes certain natural forms into a class, we select attributes
+common to each member of the class, and call the assemblage of such
+attributes a type of the class. This process gives us an abstract idea;
+and we then transfer this idea to the Creator, and make Him start with
+that which our own imperfect generalization has derived.” (Address,
+&c., by +William R. Grove+, Esq., Q.C., M.A. 8vo, London, 1866: p. 31.)
+
+[48] See Dr. Bennett’s excellent notes on the living _Didunculus_, in
+the ‘Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,’ 1864, p. 139.
+
+[49] To my friend Dr. Bennett I owe the first specimens of the
+_Nautilus pompilius_, impregnated uterus of the Kangaroo and
+Ornithorhynchus, the young Ornithorhynchus, and other rare subjects
+of early Memoirs. Natural History owes much to this accomplished and
+indefatigable Observer.
+
+[50] The scapular arch is rotated in advance of the ribs to show the
+character of the anterior dorsal vertebræ.
+
+[51] See also Gould, ‘Birds of Australia,’ part 22 (March, 1846).
+
+[52] I beg to return my acknowledgments to the Trustees of the
+Liverpool Museum for the opportunity of figuring two specimens, in this
+Plate, from the collection of Dodos’ bones in that Museum.
+
+
+
+                          Transcriber’s Notes:
+
+  • Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
+  • Text enclosed by pluses is in small caps (+small caps+).
+  • Blank pages have been removed.
+  • Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.
+  • Page 33 refers to Plate XV, it does not exist, nor could I find an
+    image with a “dotted outline” of a bone.
+
+
+
+*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75956 ***