3S A F F I N I T I ES [PART I.
" 3 . I n Edwards's picture the bill is represented as much hooked (like the Raplores) at the t i p;
a character which unfortunately cannot be verified on the Oxford head, as that specimen is destitute of
the horny sheath of the bill, and only shows the form of the bony core.
""With regard to the size of the bill, it is to be observed that this part varies greatly in (lie different
species of Vultures, indeed so much so that there is no reason to believe that the bird of the
Oxford head was much larger than some of t he known Vultures.
" With regard to the foot, it has all t he character of that of the Gallinaceous birds, and differs
from all the Vultures in the shortness of the middle toe, the form of the leg, and the bluntness of the
claws." (Penny Cyclopaedia, vol. ix. p. 55.)
Mr. Broderip, on the other hand, after a full discussion of the question, stuns it up as
follows:—
" If the picture in the British Museum and the cut in Bontius be faitlrful representations of a
creature then living, to make such a bird a bird of prey—a Vulture, in the ordinary acceptation of the
term—would be to set all the usual laws of adaptation at defiance. A Vulture without wings! How
was it to be fed ? And not oidy without wings, but necessarily slow and heavy in progression on its
clumsy feet. The Vulturidai are, as we know, among the most active agents for removing the decomposing
animal remains in tropical and intertropical climates, and they are provided with a prodigal
development of wing to waft them speedily to the spot tainted by t he corrupt incumbrance. But no
such powers of wing would be required by a bird appointed to clear away the decaying and decomposing
masses of a luxuriant tropical vegetation—a kind of Vulture for vegetable impurities, so to speak,—and
such an office would not be by any means inconsistent with comparative slowness of pedestrian motion."
Professor Owen has lately made a more minute examination of the remains preserved
at Oxford than was in the power of M. de Blainville, who was only acquainted with these
relics through the medium of drawings and casts. The former was further aided by
the recent dissection of the foot, made by Dr. Kidd, and has given us the result of his
observations in a memoir published in 1845, in the Transactions of the Zoological Society,
vol. iii. p. 331. Mr. Owen remarks, that the Dodo differs from all Raptorial birds " i n the
greater elevation of the frontal bones above the cerebral hemispheres, in the sudden sinking
of the interorbital and nasal region of the forehead, in the rapid compression of the beak
anterior to the orbits, in the elongation of the compressed mandibles, and in the depth and
direction of the sloping symphysis of the lower jaw." He further adds that the eyes are
smaller in proportion, and the nostrils more in advance and lower down than in the Vulluridce.
The arguments adduced by Professor Owen in favour of its affinity to the Vultures,
from a comparison of the bones of the foot with those of the common Cock, Crux, and
other GalUnce, on the one hand, and of the Vulture and Eagle on the other, will be stated at
length in Part II. of this work. He concludes as follows :—
" Upon the whole, then, the Raptorial character prevails most in the structure of the foot, as in
the general form of the beak of the Dodo, and the present limited amount of our anatomical knowledge
of the extinct terrestial bird of the Mauritius supports the conclusion that it is an extremely modified
form of the Raptorial order. Devoid of the power of flight, it could have had small chance of obtaining
Cll.L] OF THE DODO. 39
food by preying upon the members of its own class; and if it did not exclusively subsist on dead and
decaying organized matter, it most probably restricted its attacks to the class of Reptiles and to the
littoral Fishes, Crustacea, &c, which its w-ell-developed back-toe and claw would enable it to seize and
hold with a firm gripe."
It is however evident from the many counter-arguments which both De Blainville and
Owen have with great impartiality adduced, that their conclusions as to the Raptorial
affinities of the Dodo are far from being absolutely demonstrated. If there are objections
to the Gallinaceous hypothesis, there are at least as many to the Raptorial one, and the
systematic zoologist finds no more satisfaction in the one conclusion than in the other. If
however we look a little further into the field of ornithic creation, we shall find a family of
buds ready to claim relationship with this pedestrian outcast, and to admit him among their
kindred.
The various zoologists who have hitherto attempted the classification of the Dodo, appear
to have been unconsciously influenced by its colossal stature, and they consequently compared
it only with birds of large size, like the Ostrich, the Vulture, or the Albatross. But although
each zoological group is characterized by certain limits of magnitude, yet the range between
those limits is often very great, and where the characters of structure in two organisms essentially
correspond, no amount of diversity in mere size ought to justify then- separation. It
is by overcoming this prejudice, as to the importance of size in classification, that the Mennra,
e. g., has been recently removed from the Rasores to its true place among the Tnsessores, and
I must now call upon zoologists to make a similar concession in regard to the Dodo.
The extensive group of Columbida, or Pigeons, is very isolated in character, and though
probably intermediate between the Insessorial and Gallinaceous orders, can with difficulty
be referred to either. In this group we find some genera that live wholly in trees, others
which arc entirely terrestrial, while the majority, of which the common Wood-Pigeon is an
instance, combine both these modes of life. But the main characteristic of all is their diet,
composed almost exclusively of the seeds of various plants and trees. We accordingly find
much diversity in the forms of their beaks, according to the size and mechanical structure of
the seeds on which each genus is destined to live. Those which feed on cereal grains and
the seeds of small grasses and other plants, like the Common Pigeon and Turtle-dove, have
the beak considerably elongated, feeble, and slender. But in tropical countries there are
several groups of Pigeons called Nutmeg-eaters and Trerons, which feed on the large fruits
and berries of various kinds of palms, fig, nutmeg, and other trees. These birds, and
especially those of the genus Treron {Vinago of Cuvier), have the beak much stouter than
other Pigeons, the corneous portion being strongly arched and compressed, so as greatly to
resemble the structure of certain Rapacious buds, especially of the Vulturine family.
This Raptorial form of beak is carried to the greatest extent in the genus Diduncidus, a
very singular bud of the Samoan Islands in the Pacific Ocean (see plate VII. f. 1). Very
little is yet known of its habits, but Mr. Stair, a missionary recently returned from
M