2264 Birds. 



Lest this narrative should be received with doubt the writer adds, " This particu- 

 larity has something in it which looks a little fabulous, nevertheless what I say is sin- 

 cere truth, and what I have more than once observed with care and pleasure." For my 

 own part I consider the entire passage written with a force and simplicity that carries 

 conviction to the mind. It appears from another passage by the same author that the 

 solitaires fed on dates. Leguat's work contains no less than twenty-eight representa- 

 tions of this bird, and the great similarity that prevails amongst them is tolerably good 

 evidence of their general faithfulness. 



The remains of the solitaire appear to me far less satisfactory than those of the 

 dodo : they consist of certain bones found in caves in the Island of Rodriguez, and 

 their connexion with the bird described and figured by Leguat is not obvious. Our 

 authors regard this bird also as allied to the pigeons. 



The Isle of Bourbon, like its neighbours, appears to have had its brevipennate 

 birds, but of these the records are peculiarly scanty and unsatisfactory. I will not, 

 therefore, cite them, but conclude with a few words on the affinities of the dodo. In 

 the first place, then, I would remark that there appears to me no absolute necessity 

 for placing it with any known family of birds : almost all writers have fallen into what 

 I regard as an error on this point. Mr. Vigors has certain fives that constitute what 

 he considers the natural system in birds, and therefore the dodo must range with some 

 established group : he fixes on the ostriches, and having done so works out a case. De 

 Blainville, Gould and others declare it to be a vulture. Professor Owen coincides with 

 this opinion. Reinhardt and the authors of the work before me place it in the family Co- 

 lumbidae, although considering it an aberrant member; and Professor Brandt pronounces 

 it a cursorial bird in the vicinity of the plovers. Mr. Gray has expressed an opinion 

 that the head and foot do not belong to the same bird : he regards the head as that of 

 a bird of prey, and the foot as that of a gallinaceous bird. I would humbly suggest 

 that all these authors are in error, and that it enters into no family as now constituted. 

 Although I do not expect professed naturalists who have invented ornithological sys- 

 tems of their own to adopt my views, yet there are points on which I think we can all 

 agree. In the first place, I think it will be admitted by all who read ' The Dodo and its 

 Kindred,' that the vulture hypothesis is demolished. I therefore dismiss that question 

 altogether. It then remains in evidence that the dodo has certain affinities to both 

 the gallinaceous and grallatorial birds ; that in many points, as well exhibited by Mr. 

 Vigors, it resembles the ostriches ; that in other points, equally well exhibited by Pro- 

 fessor Brandt, it resembles the plovers ; and finally, that in many points, still better 

 exhibited by Mr. Strickland, it approaches the pigeons. Now, I would ask, is it not 

 illogical, under such circumstances, to place the dodo in a group that shall have either 

 Struthio, Charadrius or Columba for its type ? But if, on the other hand, we admit 

 that these three genera are respectively the types of groups, and that Didus is the type 

 of a fourth group, then we can place Didus in such a situation as shall exhibit its 

 affinities with the three others, for instance thus : — 



Columba. Charadrius. 



Didus. 



Struthio. 



