“ First, here and heie only and in
Dygarroys, is generated the Dodo,
which for shape and rarenesse may
antigonize the Phoenix oiArabia: her
body is round and fat, few weigh lesse
then fifty pound, are reputed of more
for wonder then food, greasie sto-
mackes may seeke after them, but to
the delicate, they are offensiue and of
no nourishment.
Her visage darts forth melancholy,
as sensible of Nature’s injurie in
framing so great a body to be guided
with complementall wings, so small
and impotent, that they seme only
to prove her Bird
The halfe of her head is naked,
seeming couered with a fine vaile,
her bill is crooked downwards, in
midst is the thrill, from which part
to the end tis of a light greene, mixt
with a pale yellow tincture; her eyes
are small, and like to Diamonds,
round and rowling; her clothing
downy feathers, her traine three
small plumes, short and inproportion-
able, her legs suting to her body,
her pounces sharpe, her appetite
strong and greedy, Stones and Iron
are digested, which description will
better be concerned in her representation.—
P. 211.
(ana no wnere eise ma« cvcx x uuuiu
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 Phoenix (wer’t in
Arabia:) her body is round and ex-
treame fat, her slow pace begets that
corpulencie; few of them weigh lesse
than fifty pound: better to the eye
than 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 half hooded with downy blackish
feathers; the other perfectly naked;
of a whitish hue, as if a transparent
Lawne had covered i t : her bill is very
howked, and bends downwards, the
thrill or breathing place is in the
midst of it ; from which part to the
end, the colour is a light greene
mixt with a pale yellow; her eyes be
round and small, and bright as Diamonds
; her cloathing is of finest
Downe, such as you see in Goslins: her
trayne is (like a China beard) of three
or foure short feathers; her legs thick,
and black, and strong,; her tallons or
pounces sharp, her stomach fiery hot,
so as stones and iron are easily digested
in it ; in that and shape, not ,
a little resembling the Africk Oes-
triches: but so much as for their
more certain difference I dare to give
thee (with two others) her represen- j
tation.—P. 347.
some, but better to the eye than stomach
; such as only a strong appetite
can vanquish: but otherwise,
through its oyliness it cannot chuse
but quickly doy and nauseate the
stomach, being indeed more pleasurable
to look than feed upon. It is of
a mdancholy visage, as sensible o f,
Nature’s injury in framing so massie
a body to be directed by complemen-
tal wings, such indeed as are unable
to hoise her from the ground, serving
only to rank her amongst Birds : her
head is variously drest, for one half is
hooded with down of a dark colour;
the other half naked and of a white
hue, as if lawn were drawn over it ;
her bill hooks and bends downwards;
the thrill or breathing place is in the
midst; from which part to the end
the colour is of a light green mixt
with a pale yellow; her eyes are round
and bright, and instead of feathers
has a most fine down; her train (like
to a Chyna beard) is no more tbnn
three or four short feathers: her leggs
are thick and black; her tallons
great; her stomach fiery, so, as she
can easily digest stones; in that and
shape not a little resembling the Ostrich.
The Dodo and one of
the Hens take so well as in my table-
book I could draw them.”—P. 383.
Sir T. Herbert also gives a figure of what he calls “ A Hen,” which is very probably
intended for the same bird which accompanies theDodo in Van den Broecke’s plate {supra, p. 19).
He alludes to “ Hens” among the other birds of Mauritius, but gives us no information by which
J 'j f e n
they can now be identified. This bird is probably the same that is mentioned by Leguat,
among other Mauritian birds, under the name of Gelinottes. The “ Velt-Jioenders” of Cornelisz
{supra, p. 13), and the “ Feldhüner” of Verhuffen (p. 18), may also refer to it. Compare also
the words of Cauche : “ Il y a en l’isle Maurice et Madagascar.................des poules rouges,
au bec de becasse ; pour les prendre il ne faut que leur presenter une pièce de drap rouge,
elles suivent et se laissent prendre à la main : elles sont de la grosseur de nos poules, excellentes
à manger.”—Cauche, Voyage, p. 132.
10. François Cauche, in the account of his Voyage made in 1638, published in the
* Relations véritables et curieuses de l’Isle de Madagascar, Paris, 1651/ says that he saw in
Mauritius birds called Oiseaux de Nazaret, larger than a swan, covered with black down, with
curled feathers on the rump, and similar ones in place of wings ; that the beak was large
and curved, the legs scaly, the nest made of herbs heaped together, that they lay but one egg
the size of a halfpenny roll, and that the young ones have a stone in the gizzard.
With a view of deducing the size of these eggs, I was contemplating an investigation of
the prices of corn, the wages of labour, the honesty of bakers, and other elements, in hopes of
determining the bulk of a “ pain d* un sol” in 1638, but I have fortunately been spared this
enquiry by another passage of Cauche, where he assigns the same dimensions to the egg of
the Cape Pelican (Pelicanus onocrotalus), which may therefore be taken as an approximation to
the size of the Dodo’s egg. There can be no doubt that the bird described by Cauche was
the Dodo, although his account was probably composed from memory, or confused with the
descriptions then current of the Cassowary ; for he tells us that it had only three toes on each
foot, that the legs were of considerable length, and that the bird had no tongue, which latter
character was at that time falsely attributed to the Cassowary. (See De Bry, part IV. pi. viii.)
Out of this erroneous statement sprang up the “ Didus nazarenus,” a phantom-species, which
has haunted our systems of ornithology from the days of Gmelin downwards. Cauche conjectures,
and many authors repeat, that these birds derived their name from the island, or rather
sand-bank, of Nazareth, to the north-east of Madagascar, but this idea is utterly unfounded.