54 AFFINITIES [Parr I. 
as we know that they were all brought from the small island of Rodriguez, where no bird 
now exists to which they can be referred, we have a right to assume that they belong to the 
extinct species described and figured by Leguat as the Solitaire. 
On comparing these bones from Rodriguez with the few remains extant of the Dodo of 
Mauritius, we see at once that they are not specifically identical. The tarso-metatarsal from 
Rodriguez is about an inch longer than that of the Dodo, and the proportions of the other 
_ bones indicate a more erect and longer legged bird, precisely as the description and figure of 
the Solitaire given by Leguat would lead us to expect. On the other hand,’ the peculiar 
form of the calcaneal processes, the expansion of the distal end of the tarso-metatarsal, the 
large surface of attachment for the posterior metatarsal, and other characters which distin- 
guish the Dodo, are precisely repeated in the bones before us, showing that the species to 
which they belong is unquestionably very nearly allied to, though not identical with, the 
Dodo. And it is important to remark that as far as we can trace the pomts of agreement 
between these two extinct birds, they are shared in common with the Pigeons, and exist 7 
no other known families of birds. 
Unfortunately the cranium of the supposed Solitaire is very imperfect (see Plate XIIT.), 
and the anterior portion is entirely wanting. With such incomplete data, it may, therefore, 
appear premature to assert the generic distinction of these two birds. Yet from the greater 
length of the legs, and less development of the beak, as indicated by Leguat, it seems certain 
that the Dodo and the Solitaire would be classed (according to the present standard of zoolo- 
gical characters) in two distinct genera. I therefore propose to bestow upon the Solitaire the 
provisional generic name of Przopnars (from 7etos, pedestrian, and ¢ay, a pigeon), in the 
confidence that future discoveries of the remaining parts of the skeleton will justify this 
denomination. The Columbine characters of the Solitaire will be fully described by Dr. 
Melville in the second Part of this work, but I will draw attention in passing, to certain peculi- 
arities recorded by Leguat in his account of the Solitaire, which confirm this view of its 
affinities. I refer to the feeding on Dates or Plantains, the monogamous habits, the laymg 
only one egg, the building a nest, and the inability of the nestling to provide for itself. Now 
the first of these characters is incompatible with any supposed Raptorial affinities, and the four 
last are opposed to the Gallinaceous hypothesis, but the whole of them are consistent with 
the habits of that anomalous family, the Co/wmbide.! And as we have osteological evidence 
of the affinity of the Solitaire to the Dodo, we thus obtain a reflected and collateral proof of 
the Columbine relations of the latter bird. 
There is one remarkable character in the skeleton of the Solitaire which seems opposed 
to the supposition that it belongs to a brevipennate bird. In ordinary birds the power of 
flying requires great size and strength in the pectoral muscles, and a largely developed keel 
' Mr. Blyth tells us that the Pigeons of the genus Carpophaga “do not in general lay more than one egg, and 
certain species invariably but one; in which respect they resemble the celebrated Passenger Pigeon of North 
America (Eetopistes migratoria).”—Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal. vol. xiv. p. 855. 
