BIRDS ALLIED TO THE DODO. 195 
No. 17. No. 18. 
inch. lin. inch. lin. 
Length from lower border of middle trochlea to summit of 
intercondyloiditubercle “22 7S2s 12998 FONe Aes ee 58 Sag 
Transverse diameter of the shaft . . . . , . 0 6 0 6 
Antero-posterior diameter of the shaft at hei upper potion 
of articular surface for posterior metatarsal . . . . . O 4 0 4 
Transverse diameter of lower extremity . . . 1 3} 1 33 
Distance from upper border of posterior eatatarsel artigalar 
facet to internal intertrochlear notch 1 3 1 33 
Length from external trochlea to external condyloid fie Sole eS 2k 
Length from internal trochlea to internal condyloid fossa 5-25 5) 3h 
Breadth of upper extremity . leg a7) ] 24 
Antero-posterior diameter of upper extremity ee 
Projection of ento-calcaneal process 0 55 
The tarso-metatarsus is the only bone of the genus Pezophaps (with the exception of 
the very imperfect fragment of the cranium No. 1) which we are at present able to 
compare with its corresponding member in the genus Didus. Fortunately also it is one 
of the most characteristic bones in the ornithic skeleton, presenting peculiarities of 
structure in each of the orders and families which enable us in most cases to identify 
with certainty the group of birds to which any example of this bone has belonged. 
On comparing the bones Nos, 17 and 18 with the tarso-metatarsus of the Dodo, de- 
scribed at p. 102, and figured in plate xi. figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, of the work above referred 
to, we are struck at once by the much slenderer proportions of this bone in Pezophaps 
than in Didus. Although the tarso-metatarsus of the former is longer by 6 lines than 
the latter, its transverse diameter is one-sixth less. The width of both extremities of 
the bone is also considerably less in the Pezophaps than in the Didus. 
These differences of proportion all indicate that the Pezophaps was a taller bird, but 
of lighter weight and more active movements than the Didus—a distinction, to which 
the historical accounts of the Solitaire and of the Dodo bear ample testimony. 
With the exception, however, of this difference in the proportions of its length and 
breadth, the entire details of structure are almost identical in the tarso-metatarsus of 
these two birds. The elaborate description given by Dr. Melville of the tarso-metatarsus 
of the Dodo (‘ Dodo and its Kindred,’ p.103) would apply almost word for word to the 
bones before us, and afford the most convincing proof of their close affinity. There are 
indeed some very slight modifications of form which distinguish the tarso-metatarsus of 
the Solitaire from that of the Dodo, which are carefully pointed out by Dr. Melville, 
loc. cit. p.118, and which I need not now adduce. I may, however, refer to two points, 
which the perfect state of the specimens Nos. 17 and 18 has now for the first time 
