Origin of Domestic Fowls. 
5°J 
The above are all the wild breeds of poultry now known to naturalists. Temminck described 
a fifth, under the name of G alius giganteus, which is generally supposed to have been the Malay, 
though there is some difficulty in reconciling the whole ot his description with that breed. The 
Malay at all events is now extinct as a wild race, so far as is at present known. Reviewing these 
four varieties, then, most naturalists consider the Gallus Bankiva to be the sole progenitor of the 
domestic breeds ; and Mr. Darwin sums up the arguments in favour of this view so forcibly, that 
we may for convenience condense them from his work alone.* 
Of the Sonnerat Fowl Mr. Darwin notices the peculiar horny plates, which he has not been 
able to find traces of in any domestic breed, and which he found in some hybrids raised in the 
Zoological Gardens from a Red Game hen ; also the absence of distinct serrations in the cock s 
comb, the want of true hackles on the saddle, the “utterly different” voice, and the nearly 
sterile character of the hybrids. Of the last point especially he collects examples ; quoting 
Mr. Blyth, who raised nearly ioo hybrid chickens, which were tender, and mostly died young, those 
which survived being absolutely sterile when crossed either inter se or with either parent. Mr. 
Dixon, he says, inquired into some hybrids raised at the Regent’s Park Gardens, and found them 
not quite so sterile, five or six chickens being reared out of about fifty eggs, but still very unfertile. 
In other and more extensive experiments at the Gardens, out of some 500 eggs from various 
hybrids and first crosses, only twelve chickens were reared, of which only three were the product of 
hybrids inter se. “ From these facts, and from the above strongly-marked differences in structure 
between the Domestic Fowl and Gallus Sonneratii,” Mr. Darwin concludes, “we may reject this 
latter species as the parent of any domestic breed.” 
Of the Gallus Stanleyii he says that, like the last, it crosses readily with the tame hens, and 
even visits farms for that purpose. But the two hybrids being found by Mr. Mitford to be quite 
sterile, this too “may in all probability be rejected as one of the primitive stocks.” 
The Gallus furcatus is said to “ differ in so many characters — green plumage, unserrated 
comb, and single median wattle — that no one supposes it to have been the parent of any one of our 
breeds,” though many hybrids have been raised from it. These hybrids are said by Mr. Crawford 
to be invariably sterile ; but Mr. Darwin himself states that this was not the case with some bred at 
the Gardens. He also adds the curious fact that across the tail of one of several fowls sent him by 
Sir James Brooke from Borneo were transverse blue bands, like those which are very often seen on 
the tails of the hybrids from Gallus furcatus ; this he thinks may denote that some of the fowls 
of Borneo have been affected by a cross of Gallus furcatus , though the case may also possibly be 
merely one of “analogous variation.” 
Coming, then, to Gallus Bankiva , he finds that this variety has a much wider range than the 
other ; that it varies in its habitat ; that it varies considerably even in the wild state; that it almost 
precisely resembles the Game — the most typical of all our present breeds ; that the voice resembles 
that of the Game cock ; and that it breeds freely with Bantams, and the progeny also breed freely 
with Bantams, though very unfortunately Captain Hutton, who establishes this fact, did not 
attempt breeding the hybrids mte? se. This is certainly to be regretted, as the breeding of hybrids 
amongst themselves is known universally to be the severest proof of unity of species ; we think, 
however, it is very possible the experiment would have succeeded. Hence Mr. Darwin concludes 
that “ from the extremely close resemblance in colour, general structure, and especially in voice, 
between Gallus Bankiva and the Game fowl ; from their fertility, as far as this has been ascertained, 
when crossed ; from the possibility of the wild species being tamed ; and from its varying in the 
* “ Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication,” Vol. I., pp. 233—237. 
