DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES.
PLATE I.
Ideal Scene in the island of Mauritius before its discovery, in 1598, by the Dutch, founded on:—
| Fig. 1. | Picture of the Dodo, by Roelandt Savery, 1626, in the Royal Gallery of Berlin. |
| Fig. 2. | Fac-simile of R. Savery’s Picture of the Dodo, in the possession of the late Wm. J. Broderip, Esq., F.R.S. (no date). |
| Fig. 3. | Picture of the Dodo, by R. Savery, 1628, in the Imperial Collection of the Belvedere, Vienna. |
| Each figure is coloured, and of the exact size, as in the original paintings. |
PLATE II.
| Two views of the Dodlet (Didunculus strigirostris, Peale; Gnathodon, Jardine), natural size, from the living bird, obtained at the Samoan or Navigators’ Islands, and transmitted from Sydney, New South Wales, by George Bennett, M.D., F.L.S.[48], to the Gardens of the Zoological Society of London, in 1864, where the paintings, of which the above are fac-similes, were made for the present work. A sketch of the dried head of the Dodo in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, of rather less than half the natural size, is introduced into the picture, now in the Author’s possession[49]. |
PLATE III.
| Fig. 1. | Side view of the skeleton of the Dodo (Didus ineptus, L.), with an outline of the bird as represented in the oil-painting presented to the British Museum by Edwards, Naturalist and Librarian of the Royal Society, into whose possession it came at the decease, in 1753, of Sir Hans Sloane, P.R.S., with the statement, or tradition, that the painting had been made, of the natural size, from a living specimen of the Dodo, in Holland. The bones represented in profile, of the natural size[50], testify to the accuracy of the form and proportions of the Dodo given in the painting. |
| Fig. 2. | An outline of the Samoan Dove or Dodlet (Didunculus strigirostris, Peale; Gnathodon strigirostris, Jardine[51]), of the natural size, from the specimen sent by Dr. G. Bennett, and living, in 1864, in the Gardens of the Zoological Society of London, with a view of the skeleton, corresponding with that of the Dodo. |
PLATE IV.
| Fig. 1. | Front view of the fourth (or first of the three confluent) dorsal vertebræ (centrum and neural arch). |
| Fig. 2. | Vertebral rib, or pleurapophysis, of the same vertebra, front view. |
| Fig. 3. | Sternal rib, or hæmapophysis, of the same vertebra: a, outer side; b, upper or pleural end; c, lower or sternal end; d, front margin; e, inner surface. |
| Fig. 4. | Front view of sternum, or connate mass of hæmal spines, including that of the same (fourth dorsal) vertebra. |
| Fig. 5. | Inner surface of an anterior pleurapophysis, with coalesced appendage, a. |
| Fig. 6. | Oblique view of ditto, ditto. |
| Fig. 7. | Anterior pleurapophysis, with appendage, a, front view: c, capitular end; d, tubercular end; f, hæmal end; 7 a, outer surface; 7 b, inner surface. |
| Fig. 8. | An anterior pleurapophysis, front view. |
| Fig. 9. | Posterior surface of the upper end of a posterior pleurapophysis: 9 a, body and lower end of ditto. |
| Fig. 10. | Part of a pleurapophysis which has been broken and healed. |
| Fig. 11. | Lower end of a posterior dorsal pleurapophysis, with connate rudiment of appendage, a. |
| Fig. 12. | Hæmapophysis. |
PLATE V[52].
| Fig. 1. | Fourth, fifth, and sixth dorsal vertebræ, anchylosed, side view. |
| Fig. 2. | Ditto, ditto, upper view. |
| Fig. 3. | Ditto, ditto, under view. |
| Fig. 4. | Ditto, ditto, back view. |
| Fig. 5. | Ditto, ditto, mutilated, of another Dodo. |
| Fig. 6. | Anterior dorsal vertebra, side view. |
| Fig. 7. | Ditto, front view; pl, outline of heads of floating rib. |
| Fig. 8. | Penultimate cervical vertebra, side view. |
| Fig. 9. | Ditto, back view. |
| Fig. 10. | Middle cervical vertebra, upper view. |
| Fig. 11. | Ditto, under view. |
| Fig. 12. | Axis, or second cervical vertebra, upper view. |
| Fig. 13. | Ditto, under view. |
PLATE VI.
| Fig. 1. | Under view of sternum. |
| Fig. 2. | Upper or inner view. |
| Fig. 3. | Back view. |
PLATE VII.
| Fig. 1. | Under or inner view of pelvis. |
| Fig. 2. | Upper or outer view of pelvis. |
PLATE VIII.
| Fig. 1. | Middle cervical vertebra, upper view. |
| Fig. 2. | Fifth cervical vertebra, upper view. |
| Fig. 3. | Fourth cervical vertebra, under view. |
| Fig. 4. | Right coracoid and clavicle. |
| Fig. 5. | Left coracoid and clavicle. |
| Fig. 6. | Right scapula, outer view. |
| Fig. 7. | Right scapula, inner view. |
| Fig. 8. | Left moiety of scapular arch, outer view. |
| Fig. 9. | Ditto, inner view. |
| Fig. 10. | Upper articular end of right coracoid. |
| Fig. 11. | Lower ditto. |
| Fig. 12. | Left humerus, anconal or back surface. |
| Fig. 13. | Left humerus, ulnar or inner surface. |
| Fig. 14. | Left ditto, palmar or front surface. |
| A. Ditto, proximal or upper end. | |
| B. Ditto, radial side of upper half. | |
| C. Ditto, distal end. | |
| Fig. 15. | Right radius. |
| Fig. 16. | Right ulna, inner or radial side. |
| Fig. 17. | Ditto, outer or ulnar side. |
PLATE IX.
| Fig. 1. | Left femur, front view. |
| Fig. 2. | Ditto, inner view. |
| Fig. 3. | Ditto, back view. |
| Fig. 4. | Ditto, upper end. |
| Fig. 5. | Ditto, lower end. |
PLATE X.
| Fig. 1. | Left tibia, front view. |
| Fig. 2. | Ditto, inner view. |
| Fig. 3. | Ditto, back view. |
| Fig. 4. | Ditto, upper end. |
| Fig. 5. | Ditto, lower end. |
| Fig. 6. | Left fibula, outer view. |
| Fig. 7. | Ditto, inner view. |
| Fig. 8. | Ditto, upper view. |
PLATE XI.
| Fig. 1. | Longitudinal vertical section of mutilated skull. |
| Fig. 2. | Ditto of third cervical vertebra. |
| Fig. 3. | Ditto of lower cervical vertebra. |
| Fig. 4. | Transverse vertical section of sternum. |
| Fig. 5. | Longitudinal section of humerus. |
| Fig. 6. | Ditto of upper end of femur. |
| Fig. 7. | Ditto of lower end of femur. |
| Fig. 8. | Ditto of upper end of tibia. |
| Fig. 9. | Ditto of lower end of tibia. |
| Fig. 10. | Ditto of metatarsus. |
PLATE XII.
| Fig. 1. | Sternum of Didunculus, upper view. |
| Fig. 2. | Ditto, front view. |
| Fig. 3. | Sternum of Goura, upper view. |
| Fig. 4. | Sternum of Podargus humeralis, under view. |
| Fig. 5. | Pelvis of Goura, under or inner view, half natural size. |
| Fig. 6. | Pelvis of Gyps (Vulture), under or inner view, half natural size. |
| Fig. 7. | Left moiety of scapular arch, Goura. |
| Fig. 8. | Left humerus of Goura, anconal surface. |
| Fig. 9. | Ditto, palmar surface of upper end. |
| Fig. 10. | Ditto, palmar surface of lower end. |
| Fig. 11. | Right femur of Goura, front view. |
| Fig. 12. | Ditto, back view of upper end, and back view of lower end. |
| Fig. 13. | Right tibia and fibula of Goura, front view. |
All the figures are of the natural size, save when otherwise expressed. The letters are explained in the text.
THE END.
PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.
PLATE. II.
E. W. Robinson pinx.
M. & N. Hanhart, imp.
J. Erxleben, lith.
DIDUNCULUS.
From Nat on Stone by J. Erxleben.
M. & N. Hanhart, imp.
DIDUNCULUS STRIGIROSTRIS. Jde DIDUS INEPTUS. L.
PL. IV.
E. W. Robinson del.
W. West imp.
PLATE. V.
From nat on Stone, by J. Erxleben.
M & N. Hanhart, imp.
PL. VI.
E. W. Robinson del.
W. West imp.
PLATE. VII.
J. Smit. lith.
M & N. Hanhart. imp.
PLATE. VIII.
From nat on Stone, by J. Erxleben.
M & N. Hanhart. imp.
PLATE. IX.
J. Smit lith.
M & N. Hanhart, imp.
PLATE. X.
J. Smit lith.
M & N. Hanhart, imp.
PLATE. XI.
J. Smit lith.
M & N. Hanhart, imp.
PLATE. XII.
from nat on stone, by J. Erxleben.
M & N. Hanhart, imp.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] By William John Broderip, Esq., F.R.S. The part
containing the article was published in 1836, the volume (ix.) appeared
in 1837.
[2] “So in Willughby, but the print is somewhat
indistinct, and there maybe error. In the original the words are
‘Walgh-Vogel, hoc est, nauseam movens, partim quod’ &c., the
word therefore is an interpolation.”
[3] These and other grotesque figures, which may be seen,
copied, in Strickland’s History of the Dodo (‘Dodo and its Kindred,’
4to, 1848), from the old authors cited by Broderip, are mere matters of
curiosity, and are here omitted as devoid of scientific value.
[4] This head, in the condition of a skull, has subsequently
been discovered at Copenhagen.—R. O.
[5] The outline of the Dodo in this painting is given, of the
natural size, in Pl. III. of the present work; the reduced woodcut
(tom. cit. p. 51, copied by Strickland, op. cit. p. 28)
is, therefore, not here reproduced.—R. O.
[6] “This curious statement is extracted in the recent edition
of Sir Thomas Brown’s works by Wilkins: published by Pickering.” [8vo,
1836, vol. i. p. 369, vol. ii. 173. The reference, in Strickland
(op. cit. p. 22), to vol. i. p. 369. is to a Letter by Sir Hamon
L’Estrange to Dr. Browne, not containing any allusion to the Dodo.—R.
O.]
[7] Art. Dodo, Penny Cyclopædia, vol. ix. p. 62 (1837).
[8] “London, 4to, Reeve and Co., 1848.”
[9] “Vol. ix. p. 47 (1837).”
[10] “Penny Cyclopædia, vol. xxiii. (1842).”
[11] Transactions of the Zoological Society of London, vol.
iv. part vi. p. 183.
[12] “Dict. des Monogrammes, 1 partie, pp. 201, 274.”
[13] “I am indebted to Mr. Russell for this information.”
[14] “Nautilus pompilius.”
[15] Op. cit. p. 30.
[16] Edwards’s ‘Natural History of Birds and other Rare and
undescribed Animals,’ &c., 4to, vol. vi. pl. 294, 1760.
[17] “Pendant tout le temps qu’on fut là, en vécut de tortues,
de dodarses, de pigeons, de perroquets gris, et d’autre chasse, qu’on
allait prendre avec les mains dans les bois.... La chair des tortues
terrestres étoit d’un fort bon goût. On en sala, et l’on fit fumer,
dent on se trouva fort bien, de même que des dodarses qu’on sala.”
(Recueil des Voiages de la Compagnie des Indes Or., vol. iii. pp. 195,
199, quoted by Strickland, op. cit. p. 17.)
[18] ‘History of the Mauritius,’ p. 145*, compiled from the
Baron’s papers by his son.
[19] See Annals of Nat. Hist. ser. 2. vol. vi. p. 290 (1850).
[20] “Es war in 1843, dass ich auf den Gedanken kam, dass der
Dodo eine anomale Taubenform sei; ich überzeugte mich bald dass diese
Auffassung die einzig richtige sei, und fing an eine Arbeit über diesen
Gegenstand vorzubereiten. In 1845 wurde ich aber von meiner Regierung
beauftragt eine Reise um die Welt mit einem dänischen Kriegsschiff
mitzumachen; meine Arbeit musste also vorläufig bei Seite gelegt
werden. Schon vor meine Abreise hat ich aber mehrere sowohl dänische
wie fremde Naturforscher mit meiner Ansicht bekannt gemacht, und der
Beweis das es sich so verhält wird Owen finden können:—
- “1. in den Forhandlingar de Scandinaviske Naturforskers Möde, i Kjöbenhavn, 1847, p. 948: und
- “2. in Sundevall, Arsberättelse om Framstegen i vertebrerade Djurens Naturalhistoria og Ethnographien, 1845–50, p. 254.”—Letter from Prof. J. Reinhardt to Dr. Albert Günther.
[21] Reinhardt, quoted by Strickland, op. cit. p. 41
(see also p. 70).
[22] This Collection was purchased by the Trustees of the
British Museum for the sum of £100.
[23] So determined, subsequent sets of bones transmitted
from Mauritius, and from which I was privileged to select the most
perfect specimens for the present memoir, got into the market and
were sold by auction since the present memoir was in type, as bones
certified by me to be of the Dodo. I have to express my sincere
and grateful acknowledgements to those gentlemen into whose
hands these lots have fallen, who have forborne their own advantage
and refrained from rushing into print with figures from inferior
specimens to anticipate the appearance of a Memoir communicated to the
Zoological Society of London, January 9th, 1866, and notified in the
‘Proceedings of the Zoological Society’ for January 1866 as destined
“to be published entire in the Society’s Transactions,” and therefore
necessarily awaiting the lithographing of “illustrations,” which every
true promoter of science for its own sake must have desired to see as
complete as the best-selected materials would permit to be given.—R. O., June 1866.
[24] In the quaint print, in folio 3, of the “Narration
Historique du Voiage faict par les huict Navires d’Amsterdam
au mois de Mars l’An 1598. soubs la conduitte de l’admiral Jaques
Corneille Necq,” &c., the first-named object, No 1, “Sont Tortues qui
se tiennent sur l’haut pays, frustez d’aisles pour nage, de telle
grandeur, qu’ils chargent ung homme et rampent encore fort roidement,
prennent aussi des Ecriuisses de la grandeur d’un pied qu’ils mengent.
2. Est ung oiseau, par nous nommé Oiseau de Nausée, à l’instar
d’une Cigne, ont le cul rond, couvert de deux ou trois plumettes
crespues, carent des aisles, mais en lieu d’icelles ont ilz trois
ou quatre plumettes noires, des susdicts oiseaux avons nous prins
une certaine quantité, accompaigné d’aucunes tourturelles et autres
oiseaux, qui par noz compaignons furēt prins, la premiere fois qu’il
arrivoyent au pays, pour chercher la plus profonde et plus fraische
Riviere, et si les navires y pourroyent estre sauvez, et retournerent
d’une grande joye, distribuant chasque navire, de leur Venoison prins,
dont nous partismes le lendemain vers le port, fournismes chasque
navire d’un Pilote de ceux qui au paravant y avoyent esté, avons cuict
cest oiseau, estoit si coriace que ne le povions asses boviller, mais
l’avons mengé a demy cru. Si tost qu’arrivames au port, envoya le
Vice-Admiral nous, avecq une certaine troupe au pays, pour trouver
aucun peuple, mais n’ont trouvé personne, que des Tourturelles et
autres en grande abondance, lesquels nous prismes et tuames, car veu
qu’il n’y eust personne qui les effraia, n’avoient ilz de nous nulle
crainte, tindrēt lieu, se laisserent assomer. En sōme c’est un pays
abōdant en poissō et oiseaux, voire tellemēt qu’il excella tous les
autres audit voyage.”—Le Second Livre de la Navigation des Indes
Orientales, fol., 1601. The Tortoise and Dodo in fig. 1, p. 1, of
the present work, are taken from the print, p. 3, of the above work and
edition.
[25] See, especially, Bontekoe’s figure, copied by Strickland,
in the title-page and at p. 63 of the above-cited work.
[26] Owen, ‘Anatomy of Vertebrates,’ 1866, vol. ii. p. 32.
[27] Called “hyosternal” in the Geoffroyan determination of
parts of the bird’s sternum.
[28] The intermuscular ridges (‘pectoral,’ ‘subcostal,’
‘carinal’) are, with other parts of the bird’s sternum, here named as defined in my ‘Anatomy of Vertebrates,’ vol. ii. pp. 16–23.
[29] “La Mare aux Songes.”
[30] Proc. Zool. Soc. l. c. p. 5.
[31] Proc, Zool. Soc. l. c. p. 6.
[32] Zool. Trans. vol. iv. pl. 24. fig. 4.
[33] Odontography, pl. 146. fig. 1; Anat. of Vertebrates, vol.
ii. p. 439. fig. 296.
[34] The habit of the Dodo to avail itself of extraneous
crushers to a gallinaceous or struthious degree, is attested by the
quotation, p. 8, not the least interesting of the fruits of the
extensive research of the learned and conscientious author of the
Article Dodo, in the ‘Penny Cyclopædia.’
[35] Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. pl. 51.
[36] Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. iv. pl. 24. fig. 4.
[37] Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. pl. 65. fig. 3.
[38] Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. pl. 65. fig. 1.
[39] Ibid. fig. 5.
[40] Histoire Naturelle &c., 4to, tom. xiv. “Dégénération des
Animaux:” 1760.
[41] Philosophie Zoologique, 8vo, 1809, tom. i, chaps. 3, 6, & 7.
[42] Agreeably with the principle of the “contest for
existence” by which I explained the extinction of the species of Dinornis, Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. iv. p. 14, 1851.
[43] Strickland and Melville, ‘The Dodo and its Kindred,’ 4to,
1848, p. 34.
[44] Op. cit. p. 34.
[45] See letter in ‘The Times’ of May 21st, 1862, advocating
the limitation of the National Museum of Natural History to “six rooms,” signed Thomas H. Huxley, F.R.S.
[46] Reply to the above in ‘The Times’ of May 2nd, 1866, and
in both editions (1861, 1862) of my ‘Discourse on the Extent and Aims
of a National Museum of Natural History.’ “Some naturalists urge that
it is only necessary to exhibit the type-form of each genus or family.
But they do not tell us what is such ‘type-form.’ It is a metaphysical
term, which implies that the Creative Force had a guiding pattern for
the construction of all the varying or divergent forms in each genus
or family. The idea is devoid of proof; and those who are loudest in
advocating the restriction of exhibited specimens to ‘types’ have
contributed least to lighten the difficulties of the practical curator
in making the selection.” (Ed. 1862, p. 24; see also pp. 26–34.)
[47] “The doctrine of typical nuclei seems only a mode of
evading the difficulty. Experience does not give us the types of
theory; and, after all, what are these types? It must be admitted
there are none in reality. How are we led to the theory of them?
Simply by a process of abstraction from classified existences. Having
grouped from natural similitudes certain natural forms into a class,
we select attributes common to each member of the class, and call the
assemblage of such attributes a type of the class. This process gives
us an abstract idea; and we then transfer this idea to the Creator, and
make Him start with that which our own imperfect generalization has
derived.” (Address, &c., by William R. Grove, Esq., Q.C., M.A.
8vo, London, 1866: p. 31.)
[48] See Dr. Bennett’s excellent notes on the living
Didunculus, in the ‘Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,’ 1864, p. 139.
[49] To my friend Dr. Bennett I owe the first specimens of
the Nautilus pompilius, impregnated uterus of the Kangaroo and
Ornithorhynchus, the young Ornithorhynchus, and other rare subjects
of early Memoirs. Natural History owes much to this accomplished and
indefatigable Observer.
[50] The scapular arch is rotated in advance of the ribs to
show the character of the anterior dorsal vertebræ.
[51] See also Gould, ‘Birds of Australia,’ part 22 (March, 1846).
[52] I beg to return my acknowledgments to the Trustees of the
Liverpool Museum for the opportunity of figuring two specimens, in this Plate, from the collection of Dodos’ bones in that Museum.
Transcriber’s Notes:
- New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the public domain.
- Blank pages have been removed.
- Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.
- Page 33 refers to Plate XV, which does not exist, nor could I find an image with a "dotted outline" of a bone.