658 



THE DESCENT OF MAN 



shaft. Hence I concluded tliat tlie early progenitors of 

 the peacock could not have resembled a Polyplectron. 

 But on continuing my search, I observed that in some of 

 the species the two ocelK stood very near each other; that 

 in the tail-feathers of P. hardwickii they touched each 

 other; and, finally, that on the tail- coverts of this same 

 species as well as of P. malaccense (Fig. 56) they were 

 actually confluent. As the central part alone is confluent, 

 an indentation is left at both the upper and lower ends; 



and the surrounding colored 

 zones are likewise indented. 

 A single ocellus is thus formed 

 on each tail- covert, though 



>."t' 



>»* 





Fig. 55.— Part of a tail-covert of 

 Polyplectron chinquis, with the 

 two ocelli of natural size. 



Fio. 56.— Part of a tail-coTert of 

 Polyplectron malaccense, with the 

 two ocelli partially confluent, of 

 natural size. 



still plainly betraying its double origin. These confluent 

 ocelli differ from the single ocelli of the peacock in having 

 an indentation at both ends, instead of only at the lower 

 or basal end. The explanation, however, of this difference 

 is not difficult; in some species of Polyplectron the two 

 oval ocelli on the same feather stand parallel to each other; 

 in other species (as in P. chinquis) they converge toward 

 one end; now the partial confluence of two convergent 

 ocelli would manifestly leave a much deeper indentation 

 at the divergent than at the convergent end. It is also 



