diff options
Diffstat (limited to '75956-h/75956-h.htm')
| -rw-r--r-- | 75956-h/75956-h.htm | 3914 |
1 files changed, 3914 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/75956-h/75956-h.htm b/75956-h/75956-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..57e1a75 --- /dev/null +++ b/75956-h/75956-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,3914 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html> +<html lang="en"> +<head> + <meta charset="UTF-8"> + <title>Memoir on the Dodo | Project Gutenberg</title> + <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover"> + <style> + + body { + margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + } + + h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 { + text-align: center; + clear: both; + } + + h1 { + font-size: 300%; + line-height: 1.1em; + margin-bottom: 1%; + } + + h2 { + font-size: medium; + margin-top: 2em; + } + h2.nobreak {page-break-before: avoid;} + + h3 { + font-size: medium; + margin-bottom: 1%; + } + + p { + margin-top: .5em; + margin-bottom: .5em; + text-align: justify; + text-indent: 1em; + } + + .p2 {margin-top: 2em;} + + /* === Continuation after illo or poetry === */ + p.noindent {text-indent: 0;} + + .hang { + text-align: justify; + text-indent: -1em; + padding-left: 1em; + } + + /* === Title page === */ + div.titlepage { + text-align: center; + font-weight: bold; + page-break-before: always; + } + + div.titlepage p { + text-align: center; + text-indent: 0; + font-weight: bold; + line-height: 1.5; + margin-top: 3em; + } + + div.chapter { + clear: both; + margin-top: 10%; + page-break-before: always; + } + + hr {width: 35%; margin: 1% 32.5%; clear: both;} + hr.short {width: 15%; margin: auto 42.5%;} + hr.chap {width: 65%; margin: 5% 17.5%;} + .x-ebookmaker hr.chap {visibility: hidden;} + @media print {hr.chap {visibility: hidden;}} + + /* === Superscript size === */ + sup {font-size: 60%;} + + /* === Fonts === */ + .xsmall {font-size: x-small;} + .small {font-size: small;} + .large {font-size: large;} + .xlarge {font-size: x-large;} + .xxlarge {font-size: xx-large;} + .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + .bold {font-weight: bold;} + .allsmcap {font-variant: small-caps; text-transform: lowercase;} + .gesperrt4 {letter-spacing: 0.4em; margin-right: -0.4em;} + .gesperrt2 {letter-spacing: 0.2em; margin-right: -0.2em;} + + /* === Alignment === */ + .mt0 {margin-top: 0;} + .mt1 {margin-top: 1%;} + .mt2 {margin-top: 2%;} + .mt5 {margin-top: 5%;} + .mt10 {margin-top: 10%;} + .mb0 {margin-bottom: 0;} + .mb2 {margin-bottom: 2%;} + .lh2 {line-height: 2em;} + .left {text-align: left;} + .center {text-align: center;} + .right {text-align: right; margin-right: 2%;} + + /* === Page #s === */ + .pagenum { + position: absolute; + right: 1%; + color: gray; + font-size: x-small; + text-align: right; + font-style: normal; + font-weight: normal; + font-variant: normal; + padding: 0 0.2em; + } + + blockquote { + margin-left: 5%; + margin-right: 5%; + font-size: 90%; + } + + /* === Bordered box === */ + .bbox { + margin: auto; + border: 2px solid; + padding: .0; + } + + /* === Lists === */ + ul {list-style-type: none;} + + ul.hang { + margin-left: 0; + padding-left: 0; + } + ul.hang li { + text-indent: -4.5em; + padding-left: 4.5em; + margin-left: 0; + } + + ul.hang2 { + margin-left: 0; + padding-left: 0; + } + ul.hang2 li { + text-indent: -1.5em; + padding-left: 1.5em; + margin-left: 0; + } + + /* === Tables === */ + table { + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; + } + + table.tleft {margin-left: 0;} + + .tdr {text-align: right;} + + .tdr div {text-align: right;} + + .top {vertical-align: top;} + + .tdhang { + text-align: justify; + padding-left: 1.5em; + text-indent: -1.5em; + } + + .tdindent { + padding-left: 1em; + } + + /* === Footnotes === */ + .footheader { + font-size: x-large; + text-align: center; + text-decoration: underline; + margin-top: 2%; + margin-bottom: 3%; + } + + .footnote { + margin: 1% 5% 1% 6%; + font-size: small; + text-align: justify; + } + + .footnote .label { + position: absolute; + right: 86%; + text-align: right; + } + + .fnanchor { + vertical-align: super; + font-size: x-small; + text-decoration: none; + font-style: normal; + font-weight: normal; + font-variant: normal; + } + + .center-container { + display: flex; + justify-content: center; + } + + /* === Images === */ + img { + max-width: 100%; + height: auto; + } + + figure { + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; + max-width: 100%; + text-align: center; + page-break-inside: avoid; + clear: both; + } + + figcaption { + font-weight: bold; + /*font-size: large;*/ + /*text-align: center;*/ + clear: both; + } + + .figcenter { + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; + text-align: center; + clear: both; + max-width: 100%; + page-break-inside: avoid; + } + + .figright { + float: right; + clear: right; + margin: 1em 0 1em 1em; + padding: 0; + text-align: center; + page-break-inside: avoid; + max-width: 100%; + padding: 0; + } + .x-ebookmaker .figright {float: right;} + + .attr, .x-ebookmaker .attr { + float: right; + font-size: x-small; + margin-bottom: 0.5%; + } + + .attc, .x-ebookmaker .attc { + text-align: center; + font-size: x-small; + margin-bottom: 0.5%; + } + + .attl, .x-ebookmaker .attl { + float: left; + font-size: x-small; + margin-bottom: 0.5%; + } + + .illowp20 {width: 20%; max-width: 15em;} + .illowp50 {width: 50%; max-width: 37.5em;} + .illowp75 {width: 75%; max-width: 56.25em;} + .illowp78 {width: 78%; max-width: 58.5em;} + .illowp100 {width: 100%; max-width: 75em;} + .w100 {width: 100%;} + + /* === Abreviation: no underline, no color === */ + abbr { + border: none; + text-decoration: none; + } + + /* no underline */ + a {text-decoration: none;} + + /* === Transcriber's notes === */ + ul.spaced {list-style-type:disc;} + ul.spaced li {padding-top: 1%;} + + .transnote { + background-color: #E6E6FA; + border: 1px solid; + color: black; + font-size: small; + padding: 0.5em; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 5em; + font-family: sans-serif, serif; + } + + </style> +</head> + +<body> +<div style='text-align:center'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75956 ***</div> + + <figure class="figcenter illowp75" id="p_I"> + <div><b>PLATE. I.</b></div> + <img class="w100 bbox" src="images/p_i.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">R Savary pinx.</div> + <div class="attr">J Erxleben lith</div> + <div class="attc">M&N Hanhart. imp.</div> + <figcaption class="mt1">DIDUS.</figcaption> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <div class="titlepage"> + <h1><span class="xxlarge gesperrt2">MEMOIR</span><br> + <span class="xsmall">ON</span><br> + <span class="gesperrt4">THE DODO</span></h1> + + <div class="large">(<i>Didus ineptus</i>, <span class="smcap">Linn.</span>).</div> + + <div class="mt5 lh2"><span class="xsmall">BY</span><br>RICHARD OWEN, F.R.S.,</div> + + <div class="mt5 lh2"><span class="xsmall">WITH AN</span><br>HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION</div> + + <div class="mt2 lh2"><span class="xsmall">BY THE LATE</span><br><span class="large">WILLIAM JOHN BRODERIP, F.R.S.</span></div> + + <div class="mt10 lh2"></div><span class="gesperrt2">LONDON</span>:<br> + <span class="xsmall">PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.</span><br>1866.</div> + + <hr class="chap"> + <div class="titlepage mt10"> + <div class="lh2"><span class="small">TO</span><br> + <span class="large">THE HON. ADOLPHUS F. O. LIDDELL, Q.C.</span></div> + </div> + + <hr style="width: 30%; margin: 5% 35%;"> + + <p class="smcap" style="margin-left: 2.5em;">My dear Neighbour,</p> + + <p>If our accomplished and lamented friend, Mr. <span class="smcap">Broderip</span>, 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.</p> + + <p class="right"> + <span style="padding-right: 10em;">Believe me,</span><br> + <span style="padding-right: 3em;">Very sincerely yours,</span><br> + RICHARD OWEN.</p> + + <p class="small"> + Sheen Lodge, Richmond Park,<br> + <span style="padding-left:5em;">August 1866.</span></p> + + <hr class="chap"> + <h2 class="xlarge">CONTENTS.</h2> + <hr style="width: 15%; margin: 3% 42.5%;"> + + <table> + <thead> + <tr> + <th></th> + <th class="tdr small"><div>Page</div></th> + </tr> + </thead> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td><a href="#Introduction">§ 1. Historical Introduction</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>1</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td><a href="#Description">§ 2. Description of the Skeleton</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>21</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td style="padding-left: 4em;"><a href="#Vertebrae">Vertebræ</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>22</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td style="padding-left: 4em;"><a href="#Ribs">Ribs</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>25</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td style="padding-left: 4em;"><a href="#Pelvis">Pelvis</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>27</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td style="padding-left: 4em;"><a href="#Sternum">Sternum</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>29</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td style="padding-left: 4em;"><a href="#Scapular_Arch">Scapular Arch</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>31</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td style="padding-left: 4em;"><a href="#Bones_of_the_Wing">Bones of the Wing</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>32</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td style="padding-left: 4em;"><a href="#Bones_of_the_Leg">Bones of the Leg</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>33</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td style="padding-left: 4em;"><a href="#Skull">Skull</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>35</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td><a href="#Comparison">§ 3. Comparison of the Skeleton</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>41</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td><a href="#Conclusion">§ 4. Conclusion</a></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>49</div></td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <hr class="chap"> + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_1">1</span></p> + + <div class="center bold mb2 lh2"><span class="small">ON</span><br> + <span class="xxlarge gesperrt4">THE DODO</span><br> + (<i>Didus ineptus</i>, <span class="smcap">Linn.</span>).</div> + + <hr class="short"> + <h2 id="Introduction">§ 1. <i>Historical Introduction.</i></h2> + + <p class="noindent"><span class="smcap" style="font-size: 140%;">The Dodo</span> 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 “<span class="smcap">Dodo</span>” at the date of its publication in the ‘Penny + Cyclopædia’<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a>.</p> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p>“<i>Written and Pictorial Evidence.</i>—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 <i>Walgh-vogels</i> 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 (<a href="#fig_1">fig. 1</a>), in a small + engraving, one of six which form the prefixed plate.</p> + + <p>“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 (<a href="#fig_2">fig. 2</a>) + is taken from the figure on the left hand.</p> + + <div class="center mt0"> + <div class="hang small bold" style="display: inline-block; vertical-align: middle; width: 19%; margin-right: 1%;"> + Tortoise and Walgh-vogel, of the Mauritius (Van Neck and Wybrand, + 1598). From plate 2 of Van Neck’s Voyage. + </div> + <div class="center" style="display: inline-block; vertical-align: middle; width: 33%;"> + <figure class="figcenter" id="fig_1"> + <figcaption>Fig. 1.</figcaption> + <img class="w100" src="images/fig_1.jpg" alt=""> + </figure> + </div> + <div class="center" style="display: inline-block; vertical-align: middle; width: 28%;"> + <figure class="figcenter" id="fig_2"> + <figcaption>Fig. 2.</figcaption> + <img class="w100" src="images/fig_2.jpg" alt=""> + </figure> + </div> + <div class="center small bold" style="display: inline-block; width: 12%;">Dodo<br>(De Bry, 1601).</div> + </div> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_2">2</span></p> + + <p>“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 + <i>Walck-Vögel</i>, because the longer they were cooked the more unfit + for food they became (<span lang="la">quod quo longius seu diutius elixarentur, plus + lentescerent et esui ineptiores fierent</span>). 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.</p> + + <p>“Clusius, in his ‘Exotica’ (1605), gives a figure, here copied” (note <sup>1</sup>, + 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.</p> + + <p>“The following is Willughby’s translation of Clusius, and the section + is thus headed: ‘The Dodo, called by Clusius <i>Gallus gallinaceus + peregrinus</i>, by Nieremberg <i>Cygnus cucullatus</i>, by Bontius + <i>Dronte</i>.’ ‘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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">3</span>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 <i>Walgh-Vögel</i>, + that is, a nauseous or yellowish<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> 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, ‘<em>and no wonder, + for all other birds, as well as these, swallow stones to assist them in + grinding their meat</em>.’ Thus far Clusius.</p> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <p>“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; <span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">4</span>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<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a>.)</p> + + <p>“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 <i>Cygnus cucullatus</i>.</p> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <p>“Jonston (1657) repeats the figure of Clusius, and refers to his + description and that of Herbert.</p> + + <p>“Bontius, edited by Piso (1658), writes as follows: ‘<i>De Dronte</i> + aliis <i>Dod-aers</i>.’ 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 <i>Dronte</i> 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">5</span>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.’</p> + + <p>“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 <i>Walch-Vogel</i>, 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<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a>.</p> + + <p>“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 <i>Cygnus + cucullatus</i> by Nierembergius; by Clusius, <i>Gallus gallinaceus + peregrinus</i>; by Bontius called <i>Dronte</i>, who saith that by + some it is called (in Dutch) <i>Dod-aers</i>, 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">6</span>(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.</p> + + <p>“Charleton also (Onomasticon, 1688) speaks of the Dodo Lusitanorum + (<i>Cygnus cucullatus</i>, 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.</p> + + <p>“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:⁠—</p> + + <p>“‘In the Ashmolean Catalogue, made by Ed. Llhwyd, Musæi Procustos, + 1684 (Plott being the keeper), the entry of the bird is, “No. 29. + <i>Gallus gallinaceus peregrinus</i>, 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, <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> + 1755.” The <span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">7</span>Dodo is one of those which are here without the number.’ + (Duncan, “On the Dodo,” Zool. Journ. vol. iii. p. 559.)</p> + + <p>“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<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a>.</p> + + <p>“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.’</p> + + <p>“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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">8</span>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.)</p> + + <p>“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:⁠—</p> + + <p>“‘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.’</p> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <p>“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).</p> + + <p>“‘About 1638, as I walked London streets I <em>saw the</em> 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">9</span>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<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a>.’</p> + + <p>“<i>Evidence arising from Remains.</i>—The only existing recent remains + attributed to the Dodo are, a leg (<a href="#fig_4">fig. 4</a>) in the British Museum, + and a head (<a href="#fig_3">fig. 3</a>) (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.</p> + + <p>“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 <i>Testudo indica</i>, 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<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a>.’”</p> + + <figure class="figcenter" id="fig_3"> + <div><b>Fig. 3.</b></div> + <img class="illowp50" src="images/fig_3.jpg" alt=""> + <figcaption>Head of Dodo (specimen in the Oxford Museum), one-third nat. size.</figcaption> + </figure> + + <figure class="figcenter" id="fig_4"> + <div><b>Fig. 4.</b></div> + <img class="illowp50" src="images/fig_4.jpg" alt=""> + <figcaption>Foot of Dodo (specimen in the British Museum), one-third nat. size.</figcaption> + </figure> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">10</span></p> + + <p>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, 2<sup>de</sup> année), and belong to the Solitaire + (<i>Pezophaps</i>), a large extinct brevipennate bird, allied to the + Dodo. The other evidences from remains, cited by Broderip, also relate + to the Solitaire.</p> + + <p>Such was the history of the Dodo in 1837.</p> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p>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.”</p> + + <p class="center p2">“<i>Additional evidence relative to the Dodo. By</i> <span class="smcap">W. J. Broderip</span>, <i>Esq., F.R.S.</i></p> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <p>“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:⁠—</p> + + <p lang="nl">“‘C. Plinii Secundi Des wijdt-vermaerden Natuurkondigers vijf Boecken.</p> + + <div class="center mb0" lang="nl"><cite>Handelen van de Nature.</cite></div> + + <div class="center-container"> + <ol class="mt0 mb0" style="list-style-type:upper-roman" lang="nl"> + <li>Van de Menschen.</li> + <li>Van de viervoetige en Kruypende Dieren.</li> + <li>Van de Vogelen.</li> + <li>Van de Kleyne Beestjes of Ongedierten.</li> + <li>Van de Visschen, Oesters, Kreeften, &c.</li> + </ol> + </div> + + <p>“‘<span lang="nl">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</span>, By <span class="smcap">Abraham Wolfgangh</span>, 1662.’</p> + + <p>“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.’</p> + + <p>“The superscription is ‘C. Plinius S. Van de Menschen, Beesten, + Vogelen en Visschen.’</p> + + <p>“Mr. Strickland, in his elaborate work on ‘The Dodo and its + Kindred<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a>,’ in which <span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">11</span>he has done me the honour to adopt the + arrangement and the information collected in my article ‘Dodo,’ in + the ‘Penny Cyclopædia<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a>,’ 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:⁠—“<span lang="nl">sleepte haer de neers <em>by na</em></span> + (i. e. <em>almost</em>) <span lang="nl">langs de Aerde</span>.” 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.</p> + + <p>“‘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.</p> + + <p>“‘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.’</p> + + <p>“In Wolfgangh’s publication, p. 480, is the following description:⁠—</p> + + <p lang="nl">“‘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 <i>Jacob van Neck</i>, 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.’</p> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">12</span></p> + + <p>“This description may be thus rendered:⁠—</p> + + <p>“‘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 <i>Dod-aerses</i> or <i>Drontes</i>. + 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 <i>Jacob van Neck</i> 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.’</p> + + <p>“At the top of the page in which this passage commences is printed + ‘<i>Van de Dodaersen</i>.’ And immediately below it and above + the description is a copper-plate of the bird, superscribed + ‘<i>Dod-aers</i>,’ in engraved italics.</p> + + <p>“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 + <i>Echinus</i>.</p> + + <p>“The locality on which the Dodo is walking has the appearance of a + strand which the tide has left dry.</p> + + <p>“Wolfgangh’s account confirms the opinion which I hazarded in the + article ‘Dodo’ in the ‘Penny Cyclopædia.’</p> + + <p>“‘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 <i lang="la">usque ad nauseam</i>. “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.”’</p> + + <p>“It does not follow that because the Dodo is represented as looking + at the <i lang="la">frutti di mari</i>, 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 + <span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">13</span>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 + <i>mollusca</i> and <i>crustacea</i> left by the retreating tide.</p> + + <p>“In my article ‘Struthionidæ<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a>’ under the section ‘Didus,’ is + inserted the following extract from a letter written to me by + Professor Owen:⁠—</p> + + <p>“‘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 <cite>Paradise</cite>, <cite>Orpheus charming the beasts</cite>, &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 <cite>Orpheus and the beasts</cite>, 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.’</p> + + <p>“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<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a>.”</p> + + <p>The figure 2 in <a href="#p_I">Plate I.</a> is a faithful copy of the bird as represented in it.</p> + + <p>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 + <span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">14</span>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:⁠—</p> + + <p class="center p2">“<i>Notice of an Original Painting, including a Figure of the Dodo, in the Collection of</i><br> + <i>His Grace the Duke of Northumberland, at Sion House.</i></p> + + <figure class="figright illowp20" id="i_014a"> + <img class="w100" src="images/i_014a.jpg" alt=""> + </figure> + + <p>“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<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a>. + Jean Goeimare, who is not noticed by Descamps, <span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">15</span>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<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a>. 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.</p> + + <figure class="figcenter illowp78" id="fig_5"> + <div><b>Fig. 5.</b></div> + <img class="illowp75" src="images/fig_5.jpg" alt=""> + <figcaption>Dodo (from the painting by Goeimare, 1627, in Sion House).</figcaption> + </figure> + + <p>“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:⁠—<i>Nautilus</i>, <i>Pteroceras</i>, <i>Strombus</i>, + <i>Triton</i>, <i>Pyrula</i>, <i>Cassis</i>, <i>Cypræa</i>, + <i>Conus</i>, <i>Mitra</i>, <i>Turbo</i>, <i>Nerita</i>, + <i>Mytilus</i>, <i>Ostrea</i>, &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” (<a href="#fig_5">fig. 5</a>). “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 <em>my</em> picture” (<a href="#p_I">Pl. I.</a> + 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 <i>Cygnus cucullatus</i>, 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 <i>Nautili</i><a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a>, <i>Strombus gigas</i>, + <i>Triton</i>, and <i>Pyrula</i> 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 <i>Nautili</i> 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 <i>Nautili</i>, 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 <em>habitats</em> <span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">16</span>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 + <i>Canidæ</i>. 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.</p> + + <p>“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.’”</p> + + <p>The picture of the Dodo at Berlin by R. Savery, to which Mr. Broderip + refers, is copied in figure 1, <a href="#p_I">Plate I.</a> 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, <a href="#p_I">Plate I.</a> 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.</p> + + <p>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 <a href="#p_I">Plate I.</a> 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.</p> + + <p>“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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">17</span>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<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a>.”</p> + + <p>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 <i>Didus ineptus</i>, and had no doubt + been “drawn in Holland from the living bird<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a>.” 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<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a>, 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<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a>.</p> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p>This specimen was most unexpectedly discovered by Professor Reinhardt + in the Museum of Natural History at Copenhagen under the following + circumstances:⁠—“In <span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">18</span>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.</p> + + <p>“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)).</p> + + <p>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<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a>.</p> + + <p>Such, until the year 1865, was the sum of the remains of this large, + flightless, extinct bird which were known to have reached Europe.</p> + + <p>The happy perception, by the Danish Professor J. Reinhardt, in + 1843<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a>, of the resemblance of the beak of the Dodo to that of + the tropical Doves, generically separated by Cuvier under the name + <i>Vinago</i>, 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 <i>Didunculus<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">19</span></i>, 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 (<a href="#Page_4">p. 4</a>), left little doubt of + the “striking affinity which exists between this extinct bird and the + Pigeons”<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a>.</p> + + <p>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 + <i>Didus ineptus</i> which has at length been transmitted from the + island of Mauritius to London, under the following circumstances.</p> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p class="right p2">“St. James, Port Louis,<br> + <span style="padding-right: 1em;">“October 7, 1865.</span></p> + + <p>“<span class="smcap">My dear Sir</span>,—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<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a>.</p> + + <p>“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; <span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">20</span>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.</p> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <div class="right"> + <span style="padding-right: 15em;">“I remain, my dear Sir,</span><br> + <span style="padding-right: 9.5em;">“Your very faithful Servant,</span><br> + (Signed) <span style="padding-left: 2em;">“<span class="smcap">Vincent N. Mauritius</span>.”</span></div> + + <div style="margin-left: 2em;">“<i>Professor Owen.</i>”</div> + + <p class="p2">This letter was accompanied with the following “Statement” by Mr. + George Clark, Master of the Government School at Mahébourg, Island of Mauritius:⁠—</p> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">21</span></p> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <div class="right">(Signed) <span style="padding-left: 2em;">“<span class="smcap">George Clark.</span> 1865.”</span></div> + + <p>The above “Statement” was authenticated by the following testimony:⁠—</p> + + <p>“Having visited the place with Mr. Clark, I can vouch for the truth of + the facts herein mentioned.</p> + + <div class="right"><span style="padding-right: 5em;">(Signed) <span style="padding-left: 2em;">“<span class="smcap">William Thomas Banks</span>,</span></span><br> + <span>“Civil Chaplain, Mauritius.”</span></div> + + <p>“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.</p> + + <div class="right">(Signed) <span style="padding-left: 2em;">“<span class="smcap">Vincent N. Mauritius.</span> Oct. 6, 1865.”</span></div> + + <h2 id="Description">§ 2. <i>Description of the Skeleton.</i> (<a href="#p_III">Plate III.</a>)</h2> + + <p>The bones of the Dodo (<i>Didus ineptus</i>, Linn.) discovered by Mr. + Clark, under the above circumstances, which have reached me up to the + present date (December 20th, 1865) are the following:⁠—</p> + + <table> + <thead> + <tr> + <th>Name.</th> + <th>Number of bones or parts.</th> + </tr> + </thead> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td>Cranium and lower jaw, in parts</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>14</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Vertebræ and pelvis</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>30</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Ribs</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>22</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Sternum</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>2</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Scapular arch, in parts</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>7</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Humerus, ulna, radius</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>6</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Femora</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>5</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Tibiæ</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>6</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Fibulæ</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>4</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Metatarsals</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>4</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>——</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td>Total number of parts of skeleton of the Dodo</td> + <td class="tdr"><div>100</div></td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td></td> + <td class="tdr"><div>===</div></td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <p>The known characters of the skull and metatarsus of the <i>Didus + ineptus</i> 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<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a>. They belong, however, to + four or five individuals <span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">22</span>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<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a>.</p> + + <p>To the description of the Dodo’s bones I now proceed.</p> + + <h3 id="Vertebrae"><i>Vertebræ.</i> (Plates <a href="#p_III">III.</a>, <a href="#p_IV">IV.</a>, <a href="#p_V">V.</a>, <a href="#p_VIII">VIII.</a>, <a href="#p_XI">XI.</a>)</h3> + + <p>The dorsal vertebræ are chiefly represented, in this series of bones, + by three which are anchylosed together by their bodies and neural + arches (<a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> figs. 1–5): the posterior articular surface of the body + of the last of these vertebræ (ib., fig. 4, <i>c</i>) 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 (<a href="#p_VII">Pl. VII.</a> fig. 1, <i>c</i>). 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 (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a> fig. 1, <i>c</i>) 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">23</span>and + wedged-shaped, slightly expanded at their coalesced ends, produced + below into subquadrate hypapophyses in the first and second (<a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> + fig. 1, <i>hy</i>); while this process is restricted to the fore part + (ib. <i>hy</i> <span class="small">3</span>), or may be represented only by a slight anterior + production of the lower edge of the wedge, in the third (ib. fig. 5, <i>hy</i> <span class="small">3</span>).</p> + + <p>The hypapophysis of the first of the three expands at its termination + (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a> fig. 1, <i>hy</i>), 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 (<a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> figs. 1 & 5, <i>hy</i>). Each vertebra shows an + elliptical articular cavity (ib. figs. 1 & 5, <i>p</i>, <i>p</i> <span class="small">3</span>) 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 (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a> fig. 1, <i>d</i>).</p> + + <p>The neural arch circumscribes a canal the anterior outlet of which + (ib. fig. 1, <i>n</i>) 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 (<a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> fig. 4, <i>n</i>) 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 (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. + IV.</a> fig. 1, <i>z</i>) and diapophyses (ib. <i>d</i>); 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 (<a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> fig. 2, + <i>z</i>), as has happened also between this and the third vertebra. + In the last of the three vertebræ the postzygapophyses are entire (ib. + <i>z</i> <span class="small">3</span>), and show very slightly concave, oval articular surfaces, + looking obliquely downward and outward (ib. fig. 4, <i>z</i>). The + conjugational foramina, continuously surrounded by bone, are a full + ellipse, and large, the anterior one (ib. figs. 1 & 5, <i>f</i>) being + 5½ lines in vertical diameter; the second (ib. <i>f′</i>) 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, <i>ns</i>; 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, <i>ns</i>) 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 (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. + IV.</a> fig. 1, <i>ns</i>). A small foramen behind the base of each of the + coalesced zygapophyses (<a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> fig. 2, <i>z</i> <i>z</i>) leads to a + canal descending to the neural one, and indicates superiorly the limits + of the otherwise continuously ossified neural arches.</p> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">24</span></p> + + <p>In the series of detached vertebræ, one (<a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> 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, <i>c</i>) is narrow vertically, broad transversely; both + fore and hind surfaces indicate freedom and extent of flexure. The + hypapophysis has a broad, bituberculate base (ib. <i>hy</i>), 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, <i>hy</i>. + The parapophysis (fig. 7, <i>p</i>) is slender, and expands at both + attachments, with an indication of a terminal surface. The diapophysis + (<i>d</i>) has a larger costal surface: it sends forward a convex ridge + midway between the di- and zygapophysis (<i>z</i>). The neural canal + (fig. 7, <i>n</i>) 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 + (<i>pl</i>) existed, indicating the present to be the first of the + dorsal series, as shown in <a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a> The neural spine is short, broad, + obtusely pointed, with a vertically oblong syndesmotic surface (fig. 7) + before and behind. Each postzygapophysis (fig. 6, <i>z′</i>) supports + an anapophysial tubercle (<i>a</i>).</p> + + <p>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, <i>hy</i>) 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, <i>c</i>). The + parapophysis (ib. <i>p</i>) is continued from the anterior border of + the centrum to the middle; it is a depressed plate, confluent with the + rib (ib. <i>d</i>). The diapophysis forms a short, obtuse projection + above its anchylosis with the rib (ib. <i>pl</i>): this projects + backward 7 lines in length, terminating obtusely, and circumscribing + a vertebrarterial foramen (ib. <i>v</i>) of a full elliptic shape, 5½ + lines in long diameter. The surfaces of the præzygapophyses (<i>z</i>) + 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, <i>z′</i>), 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, <i>n</i>); 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, <i>a</i>).</p> + + <p>The three cervicals that succeed the axis show progressively sinking + neural spines, which subside in the six following vertebræ (<a href="#p_III">Pl. + III.</a>). The third cervical has also the hypapophysis (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> fig. 3, <i>hy</i>).</p> + + <p>In all the other cervicals of the present series the hypapophysis is + wanting, but each parapophysis developes a plate (<a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> figs. 10 & + 11, <a href="#p_VIII">Pl. VIII.</a> fig. 1, <i>p</i>) to form the sides of the hæmal canal + through which the carotids ran; and the position of such vertebræ + <span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">25</span>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, <i>a</i>), which advance from above + the postzygapophyses (<i>z′</i>), 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.</p> + + <p>In the axis vertebra (<a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> 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, <i>hy</i>) descends below this surface: the anterior or odontoid + surface presents the usual form in birds; the odontoid process (ib. + <i>x</i>) has a pit at its apex. The prezygapophyses (fig. 12, + <i>z</i>), 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, <i>z′</i>) 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, <i>a</i>) are large tubercles rising above + the articular surfaces. The base of the neural spine, 9 lines in length + (ib. <i>ns</i>), 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 (<a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a>).</p> + + <p>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 <a href="#p_III">Plate III.</a> with the varying proportions of the + pleurapophyses and other processes.</p> + + <h3 id="Ribs"><i>Ribs.</i> (Plates <a href="#p_III">III.</a> & <a href="#p_IV">IV.</a>)</h3> + + <p>The specimens of ribs include both vertebral and sternal portions; + that which appears to be the second or third on the right side (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. + IV.</a> figs. 7, 7 <i>a</i>) 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. <i>a</i>) 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. <i>b</i>), 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, <span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">26</span>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, <i>f</i>), for + the attachment of the hæmapophysis or sternal rib.</p> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p>The body of a posterior vertebral rib (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a> 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, <i>p</i>) at the fore part of the neck, near the base of the tubercle.</p> + + <p>The eight left vertebral ribs (<a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a>) 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 <a href="#p_III">III.</a> and <a href="#p_IV">IV.</a></p> + + <p>The sternal ribs (<a href="#p_IV">P. IV.</a> 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, <i>c</i>). One of these ribs, which is + entire, shows the single, elliptic syndesmotic surface at the opposite + end (ib. <i>b</i>); 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 <a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a>).</p> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">27</span></p> + + <h3 id="Pelvis"><i>Pelvis.</i> (Plates <a href="#p_III">III.</a> & <a href="#p_VII">VII.</a>)</h3> + + <p>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 <a href="#p_I">Pl. I.</a> fig. 2, and in the old + woodcuts of the Dutch “Dodaersen”<a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a>. It includes sixteen coalesced + sacral vertebræ, with which the iliac bones are continuously confluent.</p> + + <p>The first sacral shows the transversely extended and concave articular + surface of the centrum (<a href="#p_VII">Pl. VII.</a> fig. 1, <i>c</i>); the subcircular + pit (ib. <i>p</i>) 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. <i>n</i>) 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. <i>z</i>), and from the back part of their apex the surface (ib. + <i>d</i>), 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. <i>ns</i>) 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, <i>ns</i>) 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. <i>o</i>), indicating most of the constituent vertebræ.</p> + + <p>The second sacral vertebra abuts against the ilium by a pleurapophysis + (ib. fig. 1, <i>pl</i> <span class="small">2</span>), as well as a diapophysis (ib. <i>d</i> <span class="small">2</span>); + but the former is a slender, straight filament, or narrow plate of + bone, confluent at both ends.</p> + + <p>In the next two vertebræ the pleurapophysis (ib. <i>pl</i> <span class="small">3</span> & <span class="small">4</span>) + 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. <i>pl</i> + <span class="small">4</span>) has retained part of its primitive ligamentous attachment to the + ilium: the proportions of both are subject to some variety.</p> + + <p>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. <i>d</i> <i>d</i>), 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. + <i>pl</i> <span class="small">8</span>) 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">28</span>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.</p> + + <p>Eight vertebræ, abutting by diapophyses only (<a href="#p_VII">Pl. VII.</a> <i>d</i> <i>d</i>) + 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, <i>o</i>) 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.</p> + + <p>The ilium is divided, as usual, into two parts by the ridge on its + upper or outer surface (ib. fig. 2, <i>r</i>), 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<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> are almost + or quite obliterated. These canals are, here (ib. <i>i</i> <i>ï</i>), 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, <span class="allsmcap">62</span>). The acetabulum + (ib. <i>a</i> <i>a</i>) 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. <i>t</i> <i>t</i>) 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. <i>b</i>) 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. <i>r′</i>), 7 lines above the sharp + and prominent margin of the trochanterian <span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">29</span>surface (ib. <i>t</i>). + The ilia have diverged from each other for the extent of an inch and + a half behind the beginning of the boundary line (ib. <i>r</i>), + 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, ₆<span class="small">2</span>′) 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, <i>d</i> <i>d</i>). The inner or under + surface of the ilium is thickened into a kind of buttress (ib. fig. 1, + <i>e</i>), 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, <i>g</i>) projects as + an obtuse ridge above the ischiadic foramen and the succeeding expanded + and confluent part of the ischium (ib. ₆<span class="small">3</span>), which is vertically + concave externally: the ilium, ischium, and pubis (ib. fig. 1, ₆<span class="small">4</span>) + 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, <i>f</i>), which is 9 lines in length, + and is situated one half in advance of, and the other half beneath, the + ischiadic foramen (ib. <i>m</i>). 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. <i>e</i>) + near its posterior junction with the ischium. The prærenal fossa + (between <i>pl</i> <span class="small">4</span> & <i>pl</i> <span class="small">8</span>, fig. 1) is deep and subdivided by + the diapophysial plates: the postrenal fossa is wide and shallow.</p> + + <h3 id="Sternum"><i>Sternum.</i> (Plates <a href="#p_III">III.</a>, <a href="#p_IV">IV.</a>, <a href="#p_VI">VI.</a>, <a href="#p_XI">XI.</a>)</h3> + + <p>Of this instructive and determinative bone there are two specimens, the + one most entire (Pls. <a href="#p_III">III.</a>, <a href="#p_IV">IV.</a> 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 (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a> <i>h</i>) is 4½ + inches; from this diameter the bone contracts anteriorly to a breadth + of 3½ inches at the costal processes (ib. <i>d</i>), and posteriorly + it contracts more rapidly to an obtuse, horizontally flattened apex + (<a href="#p_VI">Pl. VI.</a> fig. 3). The anterior <span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">30</span>border of the sternum (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a> fig. + 4) is widely and rather deeply emarginate at the middle (<i>e</i>), + less deeply so on each side: the breadth of the mid notch (<i>b</i> + <i>e</i> <i>b</i>) is 1 inch 9 lines, that of each side notch (<i>b</i> + <i>d</i>) is 1 inch 2 lines. The sternum is deeply hollowed above (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. + XI.</a> fig. 4), correspondingly convex beneath (ib.); the keel (<i>s</i>) + is low and thick, commencing by a pair of broad obtuse ridges (Pls. + <a href="#p_IV">IV.</a> fig. 4, & <a href="#p_VI">VI.</a> fig. 1, <i>r</i> <i>r</i>) from the mesial ends + of the outer walls of the coracoid grooves (ib. <i>b′</i>), 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 (<i>e</i>): 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 (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. + VI.</a> fig. 3), a little increasing in thickness as it subsides: its + free border describes a pretty regular convex curve (<a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a>); 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 (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> + fig. 4). Behind the costal surface (<a href="#p_VI">Pl. VI.</a> <i>c</i>), on each side, + extends a lamelliform process (Pls. <a href="#p_III">III.</a> & <a href="#p_VI">VI.</a> <i>h</i>), 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 <a href="#p_III">Plate III.</a>; + it answers to the ectolateral process (<i>h</i>) of the gallinaceous + sternum (Pls. <a href="#p_III">III.</a> & <a href="#p_XII">XII.</a> fig. 3): there is no trace of an entolateral + process (ib. <i>i</i>). The thin margin of the Dodo’s breast-bone, + behind the ectolateral process (Pls. <a href="#p_III">III.</a> & <a href="#p_VI">VI.</a> <i>h</i>), is entire + and uninterrupted to the obtuse apex, and the body of the sternum + is imperforate: the notch (<i>f</i>) behind the process (<i>h</i>) + represents the ectolateral notch of the gallinaceous sternum (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> + figs. 1 & 3, <i>f</i>). The costal border (<a href="#p_VI">Pl. VI.</a> fig. 2, <i>c</i>) + 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 (<span class="small">2</span>–<span class="small">5</span>) are bilobed, the anterior one (<i>c</i> <span class="small">1</span>) 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 (<i>d</i>)<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> 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 (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a> fig. 4, <i>b</i> <i>b′</i>) 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 (<i>b′</i>), + 9 lines in extent, is moderately produced and convex; it appears to be + a continuation of one of the initial ridges (<i>r</i>) of the keel: + the inner wall of the groove (<i>b</i>) 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 (<i>p</i>) or depression. There is + no episternal process. On the convex outer surface of the body of the + sternum the “pectoral”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">31</span> ridge (<a href="#p_VI">Pl. VI.</a> fig, 1, <i>k</i>)<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> 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 (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> fig. 4).</p> + + <h3 id="Scapular_Arch"><i>Scapular Arch.</i> (Plates <a href="#p_III">III.</a> & <a href="#p_VIII">VIII.</a>)</h3> + + <p>This consists of the scapula (<a href="#p_VIII">Pl. VIII.</a> figs. 6, 7, 8 & 9, <span class="small">51</span>), + coracoid (ib. figs. 4 & 5, <span class="small">52</span>), 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, <span class="small">51</span>), 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. <span class="small">51</span>); 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, <i>a</i>), 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, <i>c</i>) extends + forward, curving toward the coracoid, and terminating obtusely.</p> + + <p>The coracoid (ib. figs. 4, 5, 8 & 9, <span class="small">52</span>), averaging a length of 3 + inches 7 lines, expands to a breadth of 1 inch 3 lines at its sternal + end (<span class="small">52</span>), of which the articular surface (<i>e</i>) occupies an inch; + the non-articular part forms the outer angle (<i>m</i>), and extends + in advance of the pneumatic foramen (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a> fig. 4, <i>p</i>) 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 (<a href="#p_VIII">Pl. VIII.</a> figs. 4 & 5, <i>n</i>). 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, <span class="small">52</span>, <span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">32</span><a href="#p_VIII">Pl. VIII.</a> A muscular ridge and rough + surface (ib. fig. 9, <i>r</i>) 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 + (<i>h</i>), 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 (<span class="small">58</span>). The coracoid unites with the scapula + at an angle of 100°.</p> + + <p>The clavicle (ib. figs. 4 & 5, <span class="small">58</span>), 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.</p> + + <h3 id="Bones_of_the_Wing"><i>Bones of the Wing.</i> (Pls. <a href="#p_VI">III.</a> & <a href="#p_VIII">VIII.</a> figs. 12–17.)</h3> + + <p>Of the humerus the series contains two specimens, both measuring 4 + inches 3 lines in length, one right, and the other left (<a href="#p_VIII">Pl. VIII.</a> + 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. <i>a</i>) 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. <i>b</i>) + is triangular, obtuse, short, and bent, or directed toward the front + side of the bone: the ulnar tuberosity (ib. <i>c</i>) is more produced + in that direction; it is oblong, obtuse, with its base impressed by a + large pit both above (fig. 12, <i>h</i>) and below—the lower one (ib. + <i>g</i>) 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, <i>c</i>) and a + lower and internal (ib. <i>g</i>), 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, <i>r</i>), 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 (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">33</span>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.</p> + + <p>The <em>radius</em> (Pls. <a href="#p_III">III.</a> & <a href="#p_XII">XII.</a> 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.</p> + + <p>The <em>ulna</em> (Pls. <a href="#p_III">III.</a> & <a href="#p_VIII">VIII.</a> 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, + <i>c</i>), 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.</p> + + <p id="note">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 <a href="#p_XV">Plate XV.</a></p> + + <h3 id="Bones_of_the_Leg"><i>Bones of the Leg.</i> (Pls. <a href="#p_III">III.</a>, <a href="#p_IX">IX.</a>, <a href="#p_X">X.</a> & <a href="#p_XI">XI.</a>)</h3> + + <p>Of the five <em>femora</em> in the above defined series of remains of the + Dodo, two measure 6 inches 3 lines in length; one (<a href="#p_IX">Pl. IX.</a>) 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 (<a href="#p_IX">Pl. IX.</a> figs. 1 & 2, <i>p</i>) on the inner side + of the anterior ridge of the great trochanter (ib. <i>c</i>), and on + the same transverse line with the head of the bone. This part shows + an oblong depression (ib. figs. 2 & 3, <i>a</i>) for the “ligamentum + teres” at the upper and back part. The articular surface on the same + aspect of the neck (ib. fig. 3, <i>b</i>), adapted to the trochanterian + prominence of the pelvis (<a href="#p_VII">Pl. VII.</a> <i>t</i>), is well-defined. The + trochanter (<a href="#p_IX">Pl. IX.</a> fig. 1, <i>c</i>) 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, <i>r</i>), inclining to the middle of + the fore part of the shaft, is continued from the trochanterian one. + The small trochanter (ib. fig. 3, <i>d</i>) 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, <i>m</i>) perforates the middle of the + back part of the shaft; the popliteal fossa (ib. fig. 3, <i>o</i>) + 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, <i>g</i>) there is a well-defined, slightly raised, + rough surface (ib. <i>k</i>) for the head of the ectogastrocnemius + muscle. The ridge (ib. <i>n</i>) extending to the back part of the + <span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">34</span>inner condyle is not sharp; the rotular groove (ib. fig. 1, <i>p</i>) + is deep and moderately wide, with the inner boundary, formed by the + narrow anterior part of the inner condyle (ib. fig. 5, <i>e′</i>), + 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 <a href="#p_IX">Pl. + IX.</a> fig. 5.</p> + + <p>The head, neck, and great trochanter (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> 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).</p> + + <p>The five <em>tibiæ</em> of <i>Didus</i> in the same collection range in + length from 8 inches 8 lines to 9 inches. The procnemial ridge (<a href="#p_X">Pl. X.</a> + figs. 1, 2, 4, <i>p</i>) 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, <i>n</i>). The ectocnemial process (ib. + figs. 1, 3, 4, <i>e</i>) is thicker, shorter, and terminates roughly + and obtusely. There is a low, narrow ridge (ib. fig. 2, <i>g</i>), + 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, <i>h</i>), 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, <i>k</i>) is + obtuse, and but little produced above the upper articular surfaces or + condyles (<i>t</i> <i>d</i>) 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, <i>l</i>), 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. <i>a</i>), which is more produced + forward than the outer one (ib. <i>b</i>). Their hind ends project + very little beyond the level of that aspect of the shaft of the tibia. + An intermuscular ridge (ib. fig. 1, <i>r</i>) strengthens into a + tuberosity (<i>r′</i>) at the inner side of the tendinal groove.</p> + + <p>The cancellous structure in the tibia is limited to an extent of about + half an inch below the proximal articular surfaces (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> 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).</p> + + <p>The <em>fibula</em> (<a href="#p_X">Pl. X.</a> figs. 6–8) presents the usual ornithic + characters of the bone: <span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">35</span>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 + <em>metatarsus</em>, taken in the direction from side to side (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> + 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 (<i>iii</i>), 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 (<i>iv</i>) is wider + and descends lower before the breaking up of the inner surface into + decussating lamellæ or filaments, than that of the inner metatarsal + (<i>ii</i>): 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. <i>op. + cit.</i>, and one falls short thereof to the same trifling amount.</p> + + <h3 id="Skull"><i>Skull.</i> (Plates <a href="#p_III">III.</a> & <a href="#p_XI">XI.</a> fig. 1.)</h3> + + <p>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 (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> fig. 1, <span class="small">32</span>), + 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. <span class="small">31</span>): 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.</p> + + <p>In size, shape, and all other characters of these important evidences + of the specific nature of the remains from the Mahébourg morass<a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a>, + they agree with those of <i>Didus ineptus</i> 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.</p> + + <p>The occipital condyle (ib. <span class="small">1</span>) 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">36</span>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 <i>Didunculus</i> (<a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a> fig. 2) shows no trace + of it; I have also failed to find it in the skull of a Crown-pigeon + (<i>Goura coronata</i>). 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, <i>Didus</i> + most resembles <i>Dinornis</i>. The basioccipital curves downward, + and unites with the basisphenoid in developing the pair of larger + tuberosities (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> fig. 1, <span class="small">5</span>), 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.</p> + + <p>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. <i>a</i>) 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 <i>Dinornis</i>. The Eustachian + tubes impress the outer and fore part of the basisphenoid.</p> + + <p>The temporal fossæ (<a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a>), 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 <i>Dinornis</i>, ‘Proc. + Zool. Soc.’ (1848, p. 3), differed from the larger extinct wingless + bird. In the approximation of the postorbital process to the mastoid, + <i>Didunculus</i> shows a closer resemblance to <i>Didus</i> than does + <i>Goura</i>, 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.</p> + + <p>The parietal region is broad, flat, and short, as in <i>Dinornis</i>, + 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.</p> + + <p>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 + <i>Didunculus</i>, not in <i>Goura</i>, where it is barely indicated.</p> + + <p>The presphenoid is compressed, but thickened and rounded below, where + the palatines <span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">37</span>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 <i>Didunculus</i>.</p> + + <p>The frontals are broad and convex, rising abruptly (as in + <i>Didunculus</i>) above the coalesced cranial ends of the nasals + and premaxillary (<a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a>); in <i>Didus</i> the breadth greatly + exceeds the length of the interorbital frontal convexity, as compared + with <i>Didunculus</i>, and the convexity reigns in the transverse + as well as the antero-posterior direction; in <i>Didunculus</i>, + however, it is less concave transversely than in <i>Goura</i>. In + the breadth or thickness of the interorbital septum <i>Didus</i> + resembles <i>Apteryx</i> and <i>Palapteryx</i> and shows the same + pneumatic cancellous structure. The posterior olfactory chambers are + partially divided, as in <i>Dinornis</i>, 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.</p> + + <p>The cranial ends of the nasals and nasal process of the premaxillary + (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> fig. 1, <span class="small">22</span>) 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.’ <i>l. c.</i> 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.</p> + + <p>“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”<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a>. 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 <i>Dinornis</i> or <i>Didunculus</i>. 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 <i>Didunculus</i> or any + Dove, and related, like most other deviations from the Columbine + cranial characteristics, <span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">38</span>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 (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> fig. 1, <span class="small">22*</span>) is smooth and slightly convex vertically; + both upper and lower borders are obtuse and thick.</p> + + <p>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 + <i>Didunculus</i> they coalesce before receiving the abutment of the + pterygoids.</p> + + <p>“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”<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a>. There is a larger pneumatic foramen, + communicating with the tympanic cavity, between the articulating + cavities for these condyles.</p> + + <p>The brain is singularly small in the present species of <i>Didus</i>: + and if it be viewed as an index of intelligence of the bird, the + latter may well be termed <i>ineptus</i>. The length of the cranial cavity + (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> fig. 1, <i>v</i> <i>c</i>) 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 <i>Didus</i> 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 <i>Dinornis</i><a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a>, + the Owls, and a few large Cockatoos, <i>e. g.</i> <i>Microglossum + aterrimum</i>; but it is fully paralleled only by the Elephant among + air-breathing vertebrates, as may be seen by comparing the section <a href="#p_XI">Pl. + XI.</a> fig. 1 with the figures of a similar section quoted below<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a>.</p> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p>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 <i>Didus</i> it exceeds that diameter. The + thickness of the pneumatic diploë above the cerebral cavity equals + the vertical diameter of <span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">39</span>that cavity in <i>Didus</i>: 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 (<i>Goura</i>). + 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.</p> + + <p>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 (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. + XI.</a> fig. 1, <i>n</i> <i>o</i>) 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.</p> + + <p>The proportions of <i>Didus</i>, <i>Pezophaps</i>, <i>Casuarius</i>, + <i>Rhea</i>, <i>Dromaius</i>, <i>Struthio</i>, <i>Aptornis</i>, + <i>Cnemiornis</i>, <i>Palapteryx</i>, <i>Æpyornis</i>, <i>Dinornis</i>, + &c. among terrestrial birds, of <i>Notornis</i> among the lake-haunting + Coots, and of <i>Aptenodytes</i> and <i>Alca impennis</i> among + seabirds, <span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">40</span>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.</p> + + <p>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, <i>Aptornis</i>, <i>Cnemiornis</i>, + <i>Æpyornis</i>, <i>Palapteryx</i>, <i>Dinornis</i>, <i>Didus</i>, and + <i>Pezophaps</i>, with the largest of the Auks, have thus passed away, + while <i>Notornis</i> and <i>Apteryx</i> 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.</p> + + <p>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 (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> + fig. 1, <i>o</i>) 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. <i>tr</i>) 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. <i>n</i>) 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.</p> + + <p>The vertically expanded anterior part of the premaxillary (ib. fig. 1, + <span class="small">22</span>) 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">41</span>(ib. <span class="small">22*</span>) + 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.</p> + + <p>Although some characters have been too much insisted on (<i>e. g.</i> + 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.</p> + + <p>But the affinities of <i>Didus</i> 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.</p> + + <h3 id="Comparison">§ 3. <i>Comparison of the Skeleton.</i></h3> + + <p>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 <i>Phœnicopterus</i>, + viz. the second to the fifth dorsal inclusive, leaving the sixth + free, which articulates with the first costigerous sacral vertebra. + In <i>Platalea</i> 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, <i>Psophia</i>, + <i>Cariama</i>, <i>Palamedea</i>, Auks, Penguins, and in all + flightless land-birds save the Dodo, no such anchylosis takes place. + The <i>Columbidæ</i> are the species in which the dorsal vertebræ, + homologous and the same in number with those of <i>Didus</i>, 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 <i>Goura</i> and <i>Didunculus</i>, + hypapophyses closely corresponding in shape and proportion with those + in the Dodo.</p> + + <p>The chief difference which <i>Didus</i> offers in the present + region of the vertebral column from that of <i>Columbidæ</i> 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 <i>Didus</i> (<a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a>); <i>Didunculus</i> (ib.) shows + four; <i>Goura</i> 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 + <span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">42</span>have moveable pleurapophyses terminating freely in a point, with + no hæmapophyses other than the costal processes of the sternum may + represent. In <i>Goura</i>, which has six pairs of moveable or thoracic + ribs, the second pair belong to the first of the three anchylosed + dorsal vertebræ: in <i>Didunculus</i>, which has seven pairs of + thoracic ribs, the second pair belongs to the free dorsal immediately + in advance of the anchylosed mass. Supposing <i>Didus</i> to have had + one pair of ribs behind, and two pairs in front of those that directly + articulate with the sternum, as the vertebra <a href="#p_V">Pl. V.</a> fig. 7 indicates, + it would have had eight pairs of thoracic ribs; and I think this excess + of one pair beyond the formula in <i>Didunculus</i> to be very probable + in the large-bodied, small-winged, extinct Ground-dove.</p> + + <p>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 <i>Columbidæ</i>. + 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 <i>Goura</i> or <i>Didunculus</i>; and + not any of the vertebræ of <i>Didus</i>, which I have yet received, + shows such circumscription of the hæmal canal. The majority of the + cervicals in <i>Didus</i> (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 <i>Didus</i> has + both the above processes, as in <i>Columbidæ</i>: 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.</p> + + <p>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 <i>Didus</i>, 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 <i>Didus</i> are + afforded by other parts.</p> + + <p>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 (<a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a> fig. 2, <i>Didunculus</i>), 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 + <i>Columbidæ</i> (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> fig. 2, <i>b</i>); consequently the inner + or upper wall of the confluent grooves forms a median prominence (ib. + <i>e</i>) at the front margin of the sternum, contrasting with the wide + notch at that part of the bone in the Dodo (<a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a> fig. 4). The next + difference, as compared with <i>Goura</i> and most Pigeons, is the + absence of the entolateral processes (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> fig. 3, <i>i</i>) in + the Dodo’s sternum: but <i>Didunculus</i> singularly exemplifies its + nearer affinity to <i>Didus</i> by a like absence of those processes; + only the sternal <span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">43</span>margins behind the ectolateral processes (ib. fig. + 1, <i>h</i>), instead of converging with a slight convexity to an + obtuse apex, as in <a href="#p_VI">Pl. VI.</a>, describe a concavity, through an expansion + of the posterior truncate end of the breast-bone. The sternum of + <i>Didunculus</i> may be said to show one pair of posterior notches + (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> fig. 1, <i>f</i>), that of other Pigeons two pairs (ib. + fig. 3, <i>f</i> <i>f′</i>); but the sternum of <i>Didus</i>, which + is relatively broader, shows no other trace of the anterior notch + (<a href="#p_VI">Pl. VI.</a> <i>f</i>) than is afforded by the rounded angle at which the + ectolateral process (<i>h</i>) 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 <i>Didunculus</i> as + compared with <i>Goura</i>, in which latter Dove there are articular + surfaces for three sternal ribs (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> fig. 3, <i>o</i> <span class="small">1</span>, <span class="small">2</span>, <span class="small">3</span>), + whilst in <i>Didunculus</i> there are four (ib. fig. 1, <i>c</i>). + <i>Didunculus</i> also exhibits, more strongly than <i>Goura</i>, the + obtuse ridges (ib. fig. 2, <i>r</i>) converging like buttresses from + the outer wall of the coracoid groove to the fore part of the keel, + where they subside. In <i>Didunculus</i> there is a pneumatic foramen + exterior to the coracoid groove, corresponding with <i>p</i>, fig. 4, + <a href="#p_IV">Pl. IV.</a>, which I do not find in the sternum of <i>Goura</i>; 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 <i>Didunculus</i> (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> fig. 1).</p> + + <p>In the direction of the ectolateral processes <i>Goura</i> (ib. fig. 3, + <i>h</i>) is intermediate between <i>Didunculus</i> and <i>Didus</i>. + 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 <i>Didus</i>. In <i>Goura</i> the subcostal ridge is + better marked than in <i>Didunculus</i>. In no Dove of flight is the + body of the sternum so broad and hollow as in <i>Didus</i> (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> + 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 (<i>Podargus humeralis</i>). The ectolateral processes + (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> fig. 4, <i>h</i>) rise behind the moderately extended costal + borders, <i>c</i>; and beyond them the body of the sternum converges + to an obtuse end, with a contour similar to that in <i>Didus</i>. + Moreover the coracoid grooves are divided from each other by a free + concave border, less deep and extensive, indeed, than in <i>Didus</i>, + 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, + <i>f′</i>, of which one was present on one side in the specimen figured.</p> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">44</span></p> + + <p>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 + <i>Apteryx</i>; it is long but almost straight in <i>Rhea</i>; in + <i>Casuarius</i> and <i>Dromaius</i> it is narrow but deeply notched; + in <i>Struthio</i> it developes a short episternal process. In no + Grallatorial sternum with both ecto- and ento-lateral processes (as + e.⁠g. <i>Otis</i>, <i>Œdicnemus</i>, <i>Charadrius</i>) do the former + project, as in <i>Didus</i> 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.</p> + + <p>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<a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a>.</p> + + <p>In comparing the pelvis of <i>Didunculus</i> and <i>Goura</i> (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. + XII.</a> fig. 5) with that of <i>Didus</i> (<a href="#p_VII">Pl. VII.</a> 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 <i>Didus</i>, 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 <i>Didus</i>; but in <i>Goura</i> I have noted an instance in + which it agreed with the <i>Didunculus</i> on the left side, and + with <i>Didus</i> 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 <i>Didunculus</i> they show a median canal instead + of a ridge, while the ridge is feebly indicated here and there and + there is no canal in <i>Goura</i>. In neither <i>Didunculus</i> nor + <i>Goura</i> do the sacral centrums behind the last rib-abutments + diminish in breadth so suddenly as in <i>Didus</i>: in both the winged + Pigeons the hinder part of the pelvic cavity is relatively deeper and + narrower than in <i>Didus</i>; in both, also, the upper and anterior + concave tracks of the ilia are deeper; and in <i>Didunculus</i> the + mesial borders do not attain the neural crest, but leave a pair of open + longitudinal canals at that part of the pelvis; in <i>Goura</i> those + margins reach the neural crest, but do not overtop it at any part. In + <i>Goura</i> the acetabula are more in advance of a median position + than in <i>Didunculus</i>, <i>Columba magnifica</i>, or <i>Didus</i>. + Although the ischiadic foramina are completed by terminal confluence + of the ilium and ischium in <span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">45</span><i>Dromaius</i> and <i>Casuarius</i>, yet + the length of those foramina (which are unclosed) in <i>Struthio</i> + and <i>Apteryx</i>, concomitant with the greater relative length of + the pelvis, shows the difference of <i>Didus</i> 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 <i>Didunculus</i>: in the <i>Goura</i> it + is less developed than in <i>Didus</i>; the bone is longer also in + proportion to its breadth, and the ischiadic foramen is longer and + narrower: the proportions of that in <i>Didunculus</i> are more like + those in <i>Didus</i>. In <i>Didunculus</i> 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.</p> + + <p>In comparing the pelvis of the Dodo with that of the Vulture (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> + 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 <i>Didus</i> 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.</p> + + <p>With regard to the iliac bones, the anterior concave track occupies + two-thirds of the extent of the bone in <i>Vultur</i>, not one-half as + in <i>Didus</i> 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 <i>Didus</i>. In <i>Ciconia</i> + the antacetabular part of the pelvis is relatively longer, and the + iliac bones are more expanded anteriorly. In <i>Platalea</i> the + proportions are more nearly those in <i>Didus</i>. In <i>Otis</i> 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 <i>Œdicnemus</i> and <i>Charadrius</i> 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 <i>Didus</i>. + In <i>Eudyptes</i> and <i>Aptenodytes</i> the ilia are more expanded + anteriorly, but the whole pelvis is narrower and longer than in + <i>Didus</i>. The Gar-fowl (<i>Alca impennis</i>)<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a>, <i>Uria</i>, + <i>Podiceps</i>, and <i>Colymbus</i>, all show still longer and + narrower proportions of the pelvis.</p> + + <p>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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">46</span>of the prosencephalic roof resembles + that in <i>Didus</i>. 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 (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> fig. 1, <i>o</i>) in the + Dodo: from it, in <i>Goura</i>, is continued backward the arch of bone + formed by the superior semicircular canal, above which is the groove + for the venous sinus, as in <i>Didus</i>. The internal auditory fossa + is less deep than in <i>Didus</i>: above it is a similarly vertically + oblong cerebellar pit. The nerve-foramina correspond with those in + <i>Didus</i>: the entocarotid canal opens into a rather deeper sella in + <i>Columba palumbus</i>.</p> + + <p>On comparing the cranial cavity, as exposed by a vertical longitudinal + section in the Dodo (<a href="#p_XI">Pl. XI.</a> fig. 1), with that of a Dinornis similarly + exposed<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a>, 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 <i>Didus</i>; it + holds, however, a similar relative position: finally, the cerebellar + pit, above the internal auditory fossa, is wanting in the Dinornis.</p> + + <p>The Dodo agrees with the Doves in possessing a slender furculum, + forming an acute angle: it resembles <i>Columba galeata</i>, more + especially, in the halves of that bone being united by ligament below, + and forming separate styles or “clavicles.”</p> + + <p>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 + <i>Didus</i> (<a href="#p_VIII">Pl. VIII.</a> figs. 12 & 14) as in the volant Doves (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. + XII.</a> figs. 8 & 9, <i>Goura</i>); that, indeed, which is a ridge + (<i>r</i>) on the back part of the shaft in <i>Didus</i>, is a mere + rough surface in <i>Goura</i>, and does not show in <i>Didunculus</i>. + The pneumatic fossa, which varies in depth in the two humeri of the + Dodo, is in both relatively larger and shallower than in <i>Goura</i>. + The pectoral process is thinner, but relatively rather more produced, + in <i>Didunculus</i>. The humerus in <i>Œdicnemus</i>, <i>Otis</i>, + and <i>Charadrius</i> has a more longitudinally extended, thinner, + and more produced pectoral ridge than in <i>Didus</i> and the + <i>Columbidæ</i>; there is a more marked ectocondyloid tuberosity, + which in <i>Charadrius</i> becomes a pointed process.</p> + + <p>There is nothing to be gained by giving the details of the more + striking differences <span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">47</span>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 <i>Cnemiornis</i> (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 <i>Didus</i>; 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 <i>Didus</i>; the distal articulation is + of the same size as in <i>Didus</i>, but neither the radial nor the + ulnar convexity is so prominent or well-defined.</p> + + <p>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 + <i>Didunculus</i> (<a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a>) it is a little longer than the humerus; + in the Dodo (ib.) it is shorter than the humerus. The length of the + ulna in <i>Goura coronata</i> 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.</p> + + <p>In comparing the femur of the Dodo with that of the largest Dove, the + bone appears gigantic. The length of the femur in <i>Goura coronata</i> + (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> 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 <i>Otis</i> and <i>Œdicnemus</i> 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 <i>Didus</i> and the Doves.</p> + + <p>The femur of <i>Aptornis otidiformis</i><a id="FNanchor_37" href="#Footnote_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> 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<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">48</span> is more produced and sharper in + <i>Aptornis</i>, the fore part of the same condyle is less produced.</p> + + <p>The femur in <i>Cnemiornis</i><a id="FNanchor_38" href="#Footnote_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> + and <i>Dinornis</i><a id="FNanchor_39" href="#Footnote_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a> is much + thicker, in proportion to its length, than in either <i>Aptornis</i> or + <i>Didus</i>. In <i>Pezophaps</i> 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 <i>Didus</i>.</p> + + <p>The characters which have been noted at the proximal and distal ends + of the tibia of <i>Didus</i> are repeated in those of the tibia of the + <i>Goura</i>. The difference in size is more marked than in the femur; + the length of the tibia of <i>Goura coronata</i> is 4 inches 7 lines, + and its shaft is more slender, in proportion to its length (<a href="#p_XII">Pl. XII.</a> + fig. 13), than in <i>Didus</i> (<a href="#p_X">Pl. X.</a>). The tendency to a trihedral + form of the shaft is less marked in <i>Goura</i>; the anterior + prominences of the distal condyles are thicker in proportion to the + intervening fossa.</p> + + <p>In the Vulture the fibular ridge is more parallel with the long axis of + the shaft than in <i>Didus</i>; 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.</p> + + <p>In the great Plover (<i>Œdicnemus crepitans</i>) the tibia, as in + other Grallæ, is longer in proportion to its thickness than in + <i>Didus</i>; 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 <i>Didus</i>. The + tibia in <i>Charadrius</i>, <i>Otis</i>, <i>Tantalus</i>, <i>Grus</i>, + <i>Ciconia</i>, <i>Mycteria</i>, <i>Porphyrio</i>, opposes similar + or equivalent differences to those in <i>Œdicnemus</i>, against the + affinity of <i>Didus</i> to any of those Grallæ.</p> + + <p>In the comparison of the tibia of this extinct flightless bird with + that of the <i>Cnemiornis</i>, the wonderful development of the + plates and processes at the proximal end of the bones in the New + Zealand bird is strikingly manifested. In <i>Cnemiornis</i> the + fibular ridge runs in a line with the shaft, and does not incline + from above obliquely forward as in <i>Didus</i> and the Doves; the + ridge on the outer side of the distal fourth of the bone is stronger + and sharper in <i>Cnemiornis</i>; the tendinal canal is transversely + elliptical, medial in position, with a slight inward inclination; + the intercondyloid fossa is much wider in <i>Cnemiornis</i>. The + differences, indeed, in all the characters of the tibia, as compared + with <i>Didus</i>, 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.</p> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">49</span></p> + + <h2 id="Conclusion">§ 4. <i>Conclusion.</i></h2> + + <p>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.</p> + + <p>The researches and observations of naturalists have been carried out + to such an extent as to support the conclusion that the <i>Didus + ineptus</i> 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 (<a href="#Page_39">p. 39</a>).</p> + + <p>The Dodo exemplifies Buffon’s idea<a id="FNanchor_40" href="#Footnote_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> 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<a id="FNanchor_41" href="#Footnote_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a>. 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<a id="FNanchor_42" href="#Footnote_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a>. The Mauritian Doves + (<i>Columba nitidissima</i> and <i>C. meyeri</i>) that retained their + powers of flight continue to exist there.</p> + + <p>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 <i>Didus</i>, any more than + in <i>Dinornis</i>, 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.</p> + + <p>They warn their readers to “beware of attributing anything like + <em>imperfection</em> 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">50</span>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”<a id="FNanchor_43" href="#Footnote_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a>.</p> + + <p>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 <i>Didus + ineptus</i>, 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 <em>something</em>, 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 + <em>suppressed</em>, not wholly <em>annihilated</em>”<a id="FNanchor_44" href="#Footnote_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a>.</p> + + <p>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<a id="FNanchor_45" href="#Footnote_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a>, when the question was before the + “House” four years ago. I have let slip no suitable occasion<a id="FNanchor_46" href="#Footnote_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> + 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 <span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">51</span>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<a id="FNanchor_47" href="#Footnote_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a>, in the present year.</p> + + <hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + <div class="chapter"> + <h2 class="nobreak" id="PLATES">DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES.</h2> + </div> + + <h3 id="PLATE_I"><a href="#p_I">PLATE I.</a></h3> + + <p>Ideal Scene in the island of Mauritius before its discovery, in 1598, by the Dutch, founded on:⁠—</p> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Picture of the Dodo, by Roelandt Savery, 1626, in the Royal Gallery of Berlin.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">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).</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 3.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Picture of the Dodo, by R. Savery, 1628, in the Imperial Collection of the Belvedere, Vienna.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td></td> + <td class="tdhang">Each figure is coloured, and of the exact size, as in the original paintings.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <h3 id="PLATE_II"><a href="#p_II">PLATE II.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="tdhang">Two views of the Dodlet (<i>Didunculus strigirostris</i>, Peale; + <i>Gnathodon</i>, 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.<a id="FNanchor_48" href="#Footnote_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a>, + 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<a id="FNanchor_49" href="#Footnote_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a>.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">52</span></p> + + <h3 id="PLATE_III"><a href="#p_III">PLATE III.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Side view of the skeleton of the Dodo (<i>Didus ineptus</i>, 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<a id="FNanchor_50" href="#Footnote_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a>, testify to the accuracy of the form and proportions + of the Dodo given in the painting.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">An outline of the Samoan Dove or Dodlet (<i>Didunculus strigirostris</i>, Peale; + <i>Gnathodon strigirostris</i>, Jardine<a id="FNanchor_51" href="#Footnote_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a>), 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.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <h3 id="PLATE_IV"><a href="#p_IV">PLATE IV.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3.5em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Front view of the fourth (or first of the three confluent) dorsal vertebræ (centrum + and neural arch).</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Vertebral rib, or pleurapophysis, of the same vertebra, front view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 3.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Sternal rib, or hæmapophysis, of the same vertebra: <i>a</i>, outer side; <i>b</i>, upper or + pleural end; <i>c</i>, lower or sternal end; <i>d</i>, front margin; <i>e</i>, inner surface.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 4.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Front view of sternum, or connate mass of hæmal spines, including that of the + same (fourth dorsal) vertebra.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 5.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Inner surface of an anterior pleurapophysis, with coalesced appendage, <i>a</i>.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 6.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Oblique view of ditto, ditto.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 7.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Anterior pleurapophysis, with appendage, <i>a</i>, front view: <i>c</i>, capitular end; <i>d</i>, + tubercular end; <i>f</i>, hæmal end; 7 <i>a</i>, outer surface; 7 <i>b</i>, inner surface.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 8.</td> + <td class="tdhang">An anterior pleurapophysis, front view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 9.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Posterior surface of the upper end of a posterior pleurapophysis: 9 <i>a</i>, body and + lower end of ditto.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 10.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Part of a pleurapophysis which has been broken and healed.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 11.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Lower end of a posterior dorsal pleurapophysis, with connate rudiment of appendage, <i>a</i>.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 12.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Hæmapophysis.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">53</span></p> + + <h3 id="PLATE_V"><a href="#p_V">PLATE V</a><a id="FNanchor_52" href="#Footnote_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a>.</h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Fourth, fifth, and sixth dorsal vertebræ, anchylosed, side view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, ditto, upper view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 3.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, ditto, under view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 4.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, ditto, back view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 5.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, ditto, mutilated, of another Dodo.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 6.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Anterior dorsal vertebra, side view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 7.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, front view; <i>pl</i>, outline of heads of floating rib.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 8.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Penultimate cervical vertebra, side view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 9.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, back view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 10.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Middle cervical vertebra, upper view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 11.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, under view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 12.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Axis, or second cervical vertebra, upper view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 13.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, under view.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <h3 id="PLATE_VI"><a href="#p_VI">PLATE VI.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Under view of sternum.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Upper or inner view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 3.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Back view.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <h3 id="PLATE_VII"><a href="#p_VII">PLATE VII.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Under or inner view of pelvis.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Upper or outer view of pelvis.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <h3 id="PLATE_VIII"><a href="#p_VIII">PLATE VIII.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Middle cervical vertebra, upper view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Fifth cervical vertebra, upper view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 3.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Fourth cervical vertebra, under view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 4.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Right coracoid and clavicle.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 5.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Left coracoid and clavicle.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 6.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Right scapula, outer view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 7.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Right scapula, inner view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 8.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Left moiety of scapular arch, outer view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 9.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, inner view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 10.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Upper articular end of right coracoid.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 11.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Lower ditto.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 12.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Left humerus, anconal or back surface.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 13.</td> + <td class="tdhang"><span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">54</span>Left humerus, ulnar or inner surface.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 14.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Left ditto, palmar or front surface.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td></td> + <td class="tdindent">A. Ditto, proximal or upper end.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td></td> + <td class="tdindent">B. Ditto, radial side of upper half.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td></td> + <td class="tdindent">C. Ditto, distal end.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 15.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Right radius.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 16.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Right ulna, inner or radial side.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 17.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, outer or ulnar side.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <h3 id="PLATE_IX"><a href="#p_IX">PLATE IX.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Left femur, front view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, inner view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 3.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, back view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 4.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, upper end.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 5.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, lower end.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <h3 id="PLATE_X"><a href="#p_X">PLATE X.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Left tibia, front view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, inner view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 3.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, back view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 4.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, upper end.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 5.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, lower end.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 6.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Left fibula, outer view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 7.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, inner view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 8.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, upper view.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <h3 id="PLATE_XI"><a href="#p_XI">PLATE XI.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Longitudinal vertical section of mutilated skull.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto of third cervical vertebra.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 3.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto of lower cervical vertebra.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 4.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Transverse vertical section of sternum.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 5.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Longitudinal section of humerus.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 6.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto of upper end of femur.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 7.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto of lower end of femur.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 8.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto of upper end of tibia.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 9.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto of lower end of tibia.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 10.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto of metatarsus.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">55</span></p> + + <h3 id="PLATE_XII"><a href="#p_XII">PLATE XII.</a></h3> + + <table class="tleft"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td class="top" style="min-width: 3em;">Fig. 1.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Sternum of <i>Didunculus</i>, upper view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 2.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, front view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 3.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Sternum of <i>Goura</i>, upper view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 4.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Sternum of <i>Podargus humeralis</i>, under view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 5.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Pelvis of <i>Goura</i>, under or inner view, half natural size.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 6.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Pelvis of <i>Gyps</i> (Vulture), under or inner view, half natural size.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 7.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Left moiety of scapular arch, <i>Goura</i>.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 8.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Left humerus of <i>Goura</i>, anconal surface.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 9.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, palmar surface of upper end.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 10.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, palmar surface of lower end.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 11.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Right femur of <i>Goura</i>, front view.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 12.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Ditto, back view of upper end, and back view of lower end.</td> + </tr> + <tr> + <td class="top">Fig. 13.</td> + <td class="tdhang">Right tibia and fibula of <i>Goura</i>, front view.</td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + + <p class="p2">All the figures are of the natural size, save when otherwise expressed. + The letters are explained in the text.</p> + + <div class="center mt10">THE END.</div> + + <div class="center small mt10">PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.</div> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp100" id="p_II"> + <div><b>PLATE. II.</b></div> + <img class="w100 bbox" src="images/p_ii.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">E. W. Robinson pinx.</div> + <div class="attr">M. & N. Hanhart, imp.</div> + <div class="attc">J. Erxleben, lith.</div> + <figcaption class="mt1">DIDUNCULUS.</figcaption> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp100 mt5" id="p_III" style="max-width: 150.0em;"> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_iii.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">From Nat on Stone by J. Erxleben.</div> + <div class="attr">M. & N. Hanhart, imp.</div> + <figcaption class="mt1 left"><span style="padding-left: 10%;">DIDUNCULUS STRIGIROSTRIS. <i>Jde</i></span> <span style="padding-left: 11%;">DIDUS INEPTUS. <i>L.</i></span></figcaption> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp75 mt5" id="p_IV"> + <div><i><b>PL. IV.</b></i></div> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_iv.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">E. W. Robinson del.</div> + <div class="attr">W. West imp.</div> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp75 mt5" id="p_V"> + <div><b>PLATE. V.</b></div> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_v.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">From nat on Stone, by J. Erxleben.</div> + <div class="attr">M & N. Hanhart, imp.</div> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp75 mt5" id="p_VI"> + <div><i><b>PL. VI.</b></i></div> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_vi.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">E. W. Robinson del.</div> + <div class="attr">W. West imp.</div> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp75 mt5" id="p_VII"> + <div><b>PLATE. VII.</b></div> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_vii.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">J. Smit. lith.</div> + <div class="attr">M & N. Hanhart. imp.</div> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp75 mt5" id="p_VIII"> + <div><b>PLATE. VIII.</b></div> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_viii.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">From nat on Stone, by J. Erxleben.</div> + <div class="attr">M & N. Hanhart. imp.</div> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp75 mt5" id="p_IX"> + <div><b>PLATE. IX.</b></div> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_ix.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">J. Smit lith.</div> + <div class="attr">M & N. Hanhart, imp.</div> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp75 mt5" id="p_X"> + <div><b>PLATE. X.</b></div> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_x.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">J. Smit lith.</div> + <div class="attr">M & N. Hanhart, imp.</div> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp75 mt5" id="p_XI"> + <div><b>PLATE. XI.</b></div> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_xi.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">J. Smit lith.</div> + <div class="attr">M & N. Hanhart, imp.</div> + </figure> + + <hr class="chap"> + <figure class="figcenter illowp75 mt5" id="p_XII"> + <div><b>PLATE. XII.</b></div> + <img class="w100" src="images/p_xii.jpg" alt=""> + <div class="attl">from nat on stone, by J. Erxleben.</div> + <div class="attr">M & N. Hanhart, imp.</div> + </figure> + + <h3 class="footheader">FOOTNOTES:</h3> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> By <span class="smcap">William John Broderip</span>, Esq., F.R.S. The part + containing the article was published in 1836, the volume (ix.) appeared + in 1837.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> “So in Willughby, but the print is somewhat + indistinct, and there maybe error. In the original the words are + ‘<i>Walgh-Vogel</i>, hoc est, nauseam movens, partim quod’ &c., the + word therefore is an interpolation.”</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> 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.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> This head, in the condition of a skull, has subsequently + been discovered at Copenhagen.—R. O.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> The outline of the Dodo in this painting is given, of the + natural size, in <a href="#p_III">Pl. III.</a> of the present work; the reduced woodcut + (<i>tom. cit.</i> p. 51, copied by Strickland, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 28) + is, therefore, not here reproduced.—R. O.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> “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 + (<i>op. cit.</i> 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.]</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> Art. <span class="smcap">Dodo</span>, Penny Cyclopædia, vol. ix. p. 62 (1837).</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> “London, 4to, Reeve and Co., 1848.”</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> “Vol. ix. p. 47 (1837).”</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> “Penny Cyclopædia, vol. xxiii. (1842).”</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> Transactions of the Zoological Society of London, vol. + iv. part vi. p. 183.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> “Dict. des Monogrammes, 1 partie, pp. 201, 274.”</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> “I am indebted to Mr. Russell for this information.”</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> “<i>Nautilus pompilius.</i>”</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> <i>Op. cit.</i> p. 30.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> Edwards’s ‘Natural History of Birds and other Rare and + undescribed Animals,’ &c., 4to, vol. vi. pl. 294, 1760.</div> + + <div class="footnote" lang="fr"><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> “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, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 17.)</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> ‘History of the Mauritius,’ p. 145*, compiled from the + Baron’s papers by his son.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> See Annals of Nat. Hist. ser. 2. vol. vi. p. 290 (1850).</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> “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:⁠— + + <ul class="hang2" lang="de"> + <li>“1. in den Forhandlingar de Scandinaviske Naturforskers Möde, i + Kjöbenhavn, 1847, p. 948: und</li> + + <li>“2. in Sundevall, Arsberättelse om Framstegen i vertebrerade + Djurens Naturalhistoria og Ethnographien, 1845–50, p. + 254.”—<i>Letter from</i> Prof. <span class="smcap">J. Reinhardt</span> <i>to</i> Dr. + <span class="smcap">Albert Günther</span>.</li> + </ul> + </div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> Reinhardt, quoted by Strickland, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 41 + (see also p. 70).</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> This Collection was purchased by the Trustees of the + British Museum for the sum of £100.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> 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 <em>gentlemen</em> 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.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> In the quaint print, in folio 3, of the “Narration + Historique du Voiage faict par les huict Navires d’<i>Amsterdam</i> + 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 <i>Oiseau de Nausée</i>, à l’instar + d’une <i>Cigne</i>, 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.”—<cite>Le Second Livre de la Navigation des Indes + Orientales</cite>, 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.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="label">[25]</a> See, especially, Bontekoe’s figure, copied by Strickland, + in the title-page and at p. 63 of the above-cited work.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="label">[26]</a> Owen, ‘Anatomy of Vertebrates,’ 1866, vol. ii. p. 32.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="label">[27]</a> Called “hyosternal” in the Geoffroyan determination of + parts of the bird’s sternum.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="label">[28]</a> 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.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="label">[29]</a> “La Mare aux Songes.”</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="label">[30]</a> Proc. Zool. Soc. <i>l. c.</i> p. 5.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="label">[31]</a> Proc, Zool. Soc. <i>l. c.</i> p. 6.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="label">[32]</a> Zool. Trans. vol. iv. pl. 24. fig. 4.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="label">[33]</a> Odontography, pl. 146. fig. 1; Anat. of Vertebrates, vol. + ii. p. 439. fig. 296.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="label">[34]</a> 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 <span class="smcap">Dodo</span>, in the ‘Penny Cyclopædia.’</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="label">[35]</a> Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. pl. 51.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="label">[36]</a> Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. iv. pl. 24. fig. 4.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_37" href="#FNanchor_37" class="label">[37]</a> Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. pl. 65. fig. 3.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_38" href="#FNanchor_38" class="label">[38]</a> Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. pl. 65. fig. 1.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_39" href="#FNanchor_39" class="label">[39]</a> Ibid. fig. 5.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_40" href="#FNanchor_40" class="label">[40]</a> Histoire Naturelle &c., 4to, tom. xiv. “Dégénération des + Animaux:” 1760.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_41" href="#FNanchor_41" class="label">[41]</a> Philosophie Zoologique, 8vo, 1809, tom. i, chaps. 3, 6, & 7.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_42" href="#FNanchor_42" class="label">[42]</a> Agreeably with the principle of the “contest for + existence” by which I explained the extinction of the species of <i>Dinornis</i>, Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. iv. p. 14, 1851.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_43" href="#FNanchor_43" class="label">[43]</a> Strickland and Melville, ‘The Dodo and its Kindred,’ 4to, + 1848, p. 34.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_44" href="#FNanchor_44" class="label">[44]</a> <i>Op. cit.</i> p. 34.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_45" href="#FNanchor_45" class="label">[45]</a> See letter in ‘The Times’ of May 21st, 1862, advocating + the limitation of the National Museum of Natural History to “six rooms,” signed <span class="smcap">Thomas H. Huxley</span>, F.R.S.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_46" href="#FNanchor_46" class="label">[46]</a> 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.)</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_47" href="#FNanchor_47" class="label">[47]</a> “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 <span class="smcap">William R. Grove</span>, Esq., Q.C., M.A. + 8vo, London, 1866: p. 31.)</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_48" href="#FNanchor_48" class="label">[48]</a> See Dr. Bennett’s excellent notes on the living + <i>Didunculus</i>, in the ‘Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,’ 1864, p. 139.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_49" href="#FNanchor_49" class="label">[49]</a> To my friend Dr. Bennett I owe the first specimens of + the <i>Nautilus pompilius</i>, 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.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_50" href="#FNanchor_50" class="label">[50]</a> The scapular arch is rotated in advance of the ribs to + show the character of the anterior dorsal vertebræ.</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_51" href="#FNanchor_51" class="label">[51]</a> See also Gould, ‘Birds of Australia,’ part 22 (March, 1846).</div> + + <div class="footnote"><a id="Footnote_52" href="#FNanchor_52" class="label">[52]</a> 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.</div> + + <div class="transnote"> + <div class="large center"><b>Transcriber’s Notes:</b></div> + <ul class="spaced"> + <li>New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the public domain.</li> + <li>Blank pages have been removed.</li> + <li>Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.</li> + <li id="p_XV"><a href="#note">Page 33</a> refers to Plate XV, which does not exist, nor could I find an image with a "dotted outline" of a bone.</li> + </ul> + </div> + +<div style='text-align:center'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75956 ***</div> +</body> +</html> + |