Cu. I.] OF THE DODO. 43 
12. The Dodo, like the Pigeons, is destitute of any membrane between the toes; whereas all the 
Vultures, as well as the Gallinaceous birds, are characterized by a short interdigital web. 
13. The short, strong, blunt claws of Didus do not indicate any Raptorial propensities, but are 
merely such as we find in most ground birds, as in the terrestrial genera of Pigeons, as well as in the 
Gallinacee. 
B. Internal Characters—14. An argument which has often been used to prove that the Dodo was 
a Vulture, or, at least, that it was carnivorous, is the toughness and supposed bad taste of its flesh. 
Tough it undoubtedly was, and so are all large birds. The toughest bird I ever ¢ried to eat, was a wild 
Swan, yet no one would argue from this that Swans are not allied to Geese and Ducks. Even common 
Wood-Pigeons are by no means remarkably tender. And the alleged bad taste of the Dodo is a pure 
invention of the moderns, founded on the statement in Van Neck’s Voyage, (see p. 9, supra,) that the 
Dutchmen became disgusted with these birds, and called them Walekvogel. But this disgust is 
expressly attributed, first, to their toughness (accompanied, however, with the admission that the 
breasts and stomachs [imagine the taste of a Vultwre’s stomach!] were “ saporis jucundi et masticationis 
facilis” ); and, secondly, because they found an abundance of Turtle-Doves which they liked better. 
And no wonder; Dutch sailors now-a-days, if supplied ad “iditwm with Turtle-Doves and Wood- 
Pigeons, would doubtless devour the former, and call the latter Walcekvigel. The voyagers who fol- 
lewed Van Neck seem to have been less dainty, for they both feasted on fresh Dodos, and stored them 
among their salt provisions (swpra, pp. 15,17). It is therefore clear that the little which we ever 
shall know concerning the flavour of Dodo-meat affords no objection to the Columbine hypothesis. 
15. It appears from the paintings of the Dodo, that this bird must have had a very large ceso- 
phagal dilatation or crop. This is a structure which occurs in many different orders, its object being, 
in some cases (as in granivorous birds), to macerate the food before it passes into the stomach; in 
others (as in the Raptores), to enable the bird to swallow large quantities of food at distant intervals. 
The crop of the Dodo, therefore, does not prove much as to its affinities, but as there are no birds 
in which the crop is more developed than in the Pigeons, the figures of the Dodo are quite consistent 
with its supposed relation to that family. 
16. We do not know much as to the degree of muscularity of the Dodo’s gizzard. If by the 
“stomach,” (venter, ventriculus, estomach, maag,) which the old voyagers found tender and palatable, 
the gizzard is intended, it would certainly imply a small degree of muscular rigidity. This, however, 
can hardly have been the case, for we are assured by numerous witnesses (supra, pp. 12, 15, 17, 20, 22,) 
that the Dodo had stones in its gizzard; a character which is always accompanied by a very muscular 
condition of that organ. Be this as it may, we know that stones are only swallowed by frugivorous 
birds, which require them to triturate their food, and are never found in the gizzards of the Raptores. 
17. We are told by Cauche that the Dodo laid only one egg, and the analogous case of the 
Solitaire (mentioned hereafter), confirms his statement. Now the Gallinaceous birds are generally 
remarkable for laying a large number of eggs. Raptorial birds, indeed, lay but few, yet no species of 
that order (as far as I am aware) lays a single egg, like the Dodo. But in the Pigeons we find that 
a very small number of eggs (commonly ¢wo) are the prevailing rule, while in certain genera (Carpophaga 
and Hetopistes, see Blyth in Journ. As. Soc. Beng. vol. xiv. p. 855), a single egg is produced, as in 
Didus. 
There yet remain several osteological peculiarities in the Dodo which are strongly 
N 
