52 Two New Species of Fossil Footmarks. 
inches for the smaller animal, and 47 inches for the larger one; 
that is, from the hip joint to the ground. ‘This is rather more 
than the length of the leg of the Red Flamingo of this country, 
which I think also has a larger foot than the fossil bird. 
I now proceed to describe the large and extraordinary animal 
whose tracks occur.on the same slab with the B. parallelum, (fig. 1,) 
but whose affinities to any existing animal are far less obvious. For 
this remarkable animal I have selected the generic name of Oto- 
zoum, from that of Otus, one of the fabled praeadamic giants. 
The meaning of Otozoum is, an animal Otus, or giant. 
The description of the foot of this animal, as we learn it from 
its footmarks, will depend to a considerable extent upon the zoo- 
logical class to which we refer it. 'The protuberances exhibited 
on the footmark may be all the result of phalangeal impressions ; 
or a part of them may be produced by carpal or metacarpal, or 1 
by the hind foot, by tarsal or metatarsal bones: or if the animal 
were a bird, by the distal extremity of its tarso-metatarsal bone. 
Can we then discover to what class of animals these tracks are to 
be referred ? 
In the first place, the proof seems quite strong that they must 
have been made by a biped. This evidence is shown on fig. 1; 
where it will be seen that the feet regularly alternate as those of 
a biped would do. But if made by a quadruped, there ought to 
be two rows, or at least two tracks, near to each other, separated 
by a longer interval from two others in close proximity: for im 
one or the other of these modes do most quadrupeds (except those 
that leap, and those that bring up the hind foot exactly into the 
place impressed by the fore foot) advance. Besides, the distance 
of the tracks to the right and left of the animal’s general course, 
is no greater than a biped so large would exhibit: whereas if It 
re a quadruped, that distance must have been much larger, and 
the axes of the feet would probably be more divaricate. 
When I saw that these tracks were four-toed, it occurred to me 
that they might have been made by the hind foot of the croco- 
dile. But their biped character forbids the supposition: and be- 
sides, the phalangeal impressions do not agree at all with the pha- 
langes of that animal, which are two in the inner toe of the ind 
foot, three in the second, and four in the third and fourth.* This 
latter reason, as well as the number of toes, affords strong evidence 
against the supposition that this animal was a bird. Some slight 
resemblance may be noticed between the accompanying drawing, 
fig. 2, and the feet of the Armadillos, as given in the Ossemens 
Fossiles, tome cinquiéme, Pl. XT, figs. 10 to 14; yet I doubt 
whether the resemblance is real. 
showing a drawing of this track to Professor Agassi? 
he made a suggestion as to the nature of the animal that im- 
oa) RE ean sat 
" Cuvier, Ossemens Fossiles, Tome cinquidme, p. 104. 
# 
