362 Antediluvian Soology. 
We proceed to a more important division, that of the 
VERTEBRATED ANIMALS. 
Birds. — These remains also are of rare occurrence; and 
the same remark might be applied to them, with respect to 
pr oportion, as to the preceding order. It does seem a singular 
circumstance, that more birds have not been found fossil, when 
we consider that they now are, as regards species, ae times 
as numerous as the Mammalia. The. known proportions are 
estimated by Baron Humboldt as follows : — 
In the world. In Europe only. 
Birds - - 4000 species. Birds - - 400 species. 
Reptiles - - 700 Reptiles - - 30 
Mammalia - 500 Mammalia - 80 
In the opposite or southern zone we find likewise nearly 
five times more birds than Mammalia, and towards the equa- 
tor the proportion of birds increases considerably. 
These facts are remarkably opposed to those furnished by 
the antediluvian zoology, where, according to Cuvier’s enu- 
meration of fossil animals, it appears that in those ancient 
periods the globe was inhabited much more by Mammalia 
than by hinds. 
Bones of birds have been detected in the oolite limestone of 
Stonesfield by Dr. Buckland, and two species in the ferrugi- 
nous sandstones of Plastinie. and of Tilgate Forest by Mr. 
Mantell. Since the discovery of a perfect skeleton of the 
flying reptile to which has been affixed the name of Pterodac- 
tylus, which appears both in the lias of Dorsetshire and in the 
tertiary beds of Paris, it has been suggested by Dr. Buckland 
that some of the bones at Stonesfield, which have been 
hitherto assigned to birds, may possibly belong to this singular 
animal. Should this supposition prove to be well founded, 
our proofs of the ancient existence of birds will be much cir- 
cumscribed. 
Ten species of birds have been furnished by the gypsum 
quarries near Paris. * 
* The editors of the English edition of the Animal Kingdom have pointed 
out the errors of compilers relative to fossil birds, particularly as to the 
petrified cuckoos, arismg {rom a mistaken quotation from Zannichelli, who 
speaks of a fish bearing that name, and not of a bird, A mistake, equally 
ludicrous, has been repeated in this country. Martin, fifty years ago, 
described the bird called the stone curlew as existing in the neighbourhood 
of Thetford. A work of very extensive circulation and popularity has 
subsequently assured its readers that petrified curlews have been discovered 
at Thetford, and the error seems likely to be perpetuated by other equally 
accurate topographers ! 
