THE ZOOLOGIST 
No. 847.—January 15th, 1912. 

THE PREHISTORIC ORIGIN OF THE COMMON FOWL.* 
: By Frepxk. J. Stusss & A. J. Rowe. 
It is a remarkable fact that ornithologists, as a class, are so 
ignorant of the bird which is beyond doubt of the most import- 
ance to the human race. The vast literature relating to the 
culture of the Common Fowl is seldom scientific in its treat- 
ment, and those archeologists who have written on its ancient 
history, or the anatomists who have analysed its structures, 
seldom show any wide knowledge of this species generally. Hven 
Professor Newton, in his authoritative ‘ Dictionary of Birds,’ is 
content to dismiss this important bird by the repetition of certain 
old phrases that are, in spite of their tenuity, quite misleading 
to the student. 
The vague modern idea is that the home of the Fowl is in 
and near India, that it reached us via Persia, Greece, and Rome, 
and that it was not known either to the early Mesopotamians or 
the ancient Egyptians. We desire to present our reasons for 
differing from most of these opinions, and shall attempt to prove 
that the bird was well known to the earliest Egyptians and the 
Mesopotamians, and that the evidence relating to an Indian 
origin is more than doubtful. 
* Although Gallus bankiva, Temminck, is the best known name for this 
species, the strictly correct one in a matter of priority is G. gallus (Linné), 
and many authors have used G. ferrugineus, Blyth. In India it is known 
as the Red Jungle Fowl, or more often Jungle Fowl; and it is a noteworthy 
fact that in English-speaking countries it has no common name peculiar to 
itself, for Fowl, Hen, and Cock are often used in speaking of other birds. 
The plural Poultry is, of course, fairly definite. 
Zool, 4th ser. vol. XVI., January, 1912. B 
