Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Extinct birds
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Extinct birds
An attempt to unite in one volume a short account of those
birds which have become extinct in historical times
Author: Baron Lionel Walter Rothschild Rothschild
Release date: June 15, 2012 [eBook #40000]
Most recently updated: October 24, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/40000
Credits: Produced by Chris Curnow, Keith Edkins and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive. Plate 4a, which is missing from
the I.A. copy, was taken from Wikimedia Commons, where
it
is stated to be in the public domain.)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EXTINCT
BIRDS ***
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Extinct birds
An attempt to unite in one volume a short account of those
birds which have become extinct in historical times
Author: Baron Lionel Walter Rothschild Rothschild
Release date: June 15, 2012 [eBook #40000]
Most recently updated: October 24, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/40000
Credits: Produced by Chris Curnow, Keith Edkins and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive. Plate 4a, which is missing from
the I.A. copy, was taken from Wikimedia Commons, where
it
is stated to be in the public domain.)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EXTINCT
BIRDS ***
Page 4
Transcriber's A few typographical errors have been corrected. They
note: are listed at the end of the text, after the plates.
EXTINCT BIRDS.
An attempt to unite in one volume a short account of
those Birds which have become extinct in historical
times—that is, within the last six or seven
hundred years. To which are
added a few which still
exist, but are on
the verge of
extinction.
BY
The Hon. WALTER ROTHSCHILD,
Ph. D., F.Z.S.
With 45 Coloured Plates, embracing 63 subjects, and
other illustrations.
LONDON.
Hutchinson & Co., Paternoster Row, E.C.
1907
LONDON:
A. CHRIS. FOWLER, PRINTER,
TENTER STREET,
MOORFIELDS,
E.C.
PREFACE.
note: are listed at the end of the text, after the plates.
EXTINCT BIRDS.
An attempt to unite in one volume a short account of
those Birds which have become extinct in historical
times—that is, within the last six or seven
hundred years. To which are
added a few which still
exist, but are on
the verge of
extinction.
BY
The Hon. WALTER ROTHSCHILD,
Ph. D., F.Z.S.
With 45 Coloured Plates, embracing 63 subjects, and
other illustrations.
LONDON.
Hutchinson & Co., Paternoster Row, E.C.
1907
LONDON:
A. CHRIS. FOWLER, PRINTER,
TENTER STREET,
MOORFIELDS,
E.C.
PREFACE.
Page 5
When I decided to read a paper before the Ornithological Congress of 1905
on Extinct and Vanishing Birds, I found it necessary to illustrate my paper
by a number of drawings. These drawings roused special interest among
those who listened to my lecture, and I was asked by many if I could not see
my way to publish the lecture and drawings, in book form, as these plates
were far too numerous for the proceedings of the Congress. After some
hesitation I determined to do this, greatly owing to the persuasion of the late
Dr. Paul Leverkühn. The preparation of a book required considerably more
research than the lecture, and therefore my readers will find, in the
following pages, a totally different account to that in the lecture, as well as
corrections and numerous additions. The lecture itself has been published in
the "Proceedings of the IVth International Ornithological Congress."
I wish to thank very heartily all those of my ornithological friends, who
have kindly helped me with the loan of specimens or otherwise, and
especially Dr. H. O. Forbes, Dr. Scharff, Professor Dr. K. Lampert, Dr. O.
Finsch, Professor Dr. A. Koenig, Dr. Kerbert, Mr. Fleming, Dr. von Lorenz,
and others.
WALTER ROTHSCHILD.
INTRODUCTION.
The study of the forms of life no longer existing on the earth, from the
scanty remains preserved to us, has provoked a very great interest almost
from the commencement of historical times. The very small portion of this
vast field I am treating of in the following pages has a special attraction, as
it deals to a great extent with forms familiar in a living state to our
immediate forefathers and even to some of ourselves. Although I have here
arranged the species systematically, they fall into two distinct categories,
namely those known externally as well as internally, and those of which we
know bones and egg-shells only. Under the former category might be
included those merely known from descriptions or figures in ancient books,
as well as those of which specimens exist. In the present work several plates
have been reconstructed from such descriptions in order to give some idea
of their probable appearance. There is considerable difference of opinion as
on Extinct and Vanishing Birds, I found it necessary to illustrate my paper
by a number of drawings. These drawings roused special interest among
those who listened to my lecture, and I was asked by many if I could not see
my way to publish the lecture and drawings, in book form, as these plates
were far too numerous for the proceedings of the Congress. After some
hesitation I determined to do this, greatly owing to the persuasion of the late
Dr. Paul Leverkühn. The preparation of a book required considerably more
research than the lecture, and therefore my readers will find, in the
following pages, a totally different account to that in the lecture, as well as
corrections and numerous additions. The lecture itself has been published in
the "Proceedings of the IVth International Ornithological Congress."
I wish to thank very heartily all those of my ornithological friends, who
have kindly helped me with the loan of specimens or otherwise, and
especially Dr. H. O. Forbes, Dr. Scharff, Professor Dr. K. Lampert, Dr. O.
Finsch, Professor Dr. A. Koenig, Dr. Kerbert, Mr. Fleming, Dr. von Lorenz,
and others.
WALTER ROTHSCHILD.
INTRODUCTION.
The study of the forms of life no longer existing on the earth, from the
scanty remains preserved to us, has provoked a very great interest almost
from the commencement of historical times. The very small portion of this
vast field I am treating of in the following pages has a special attraction, as
it deals to a great extent with forms familiar in a living state to our
immediate forefathers and even to some of ourselves. Although I have here
arranged the species systematically, they fall into two distinct categories,
namely those known externally as well as internally, and those of which we
know bones and egg-shells only. Under the former category might be
included those merely known from descriptions or figures in ancient books,
as well as those of which specimens exist. In the present work several plates
have been reconstructed from such descriptions in order to give some idea
of their probable appearance. There is considerable difference of opinion as
Page 6
to the approximate date of the disappearance of many of the species known
from bones dug from deposits which have been variously determined as
pleistocene and post-pleistocene. It seems to me that this problem can never
be entirely solved, but the significant fact remains, that while many bones
of these species in one locality have been collected in the kitchen-middens
of the former inhabitants, in other localities the same bones occur in what
seem to be much older formations.
In view of this and kindred facts, I have mentioned many species which
some ornithologists will probably consider outside the range of the present
treatise, viz., birds which have become extinct in the last seven- or eight-
hundred years. Taking my first category, viz., those species whose exterior
is more or less known, our knowledge is very variable in scope; about some
we have a very full and even redundant literature, such as the Great Auk,
the Labrador Duck, and Notornis, while of others, such as most of the
extinct Parrots from the West Indies, the "Giant" of Mauritius, the "Blue
Bird" of Bourbon, and so forth, we have the very scantiest knowledge. Even
in the times of Leguat and Labat there must have been many species, now
extinct, of which no mention has ever been made, for these old writers only
mentioned such species which impressed themselves on their memories
either from their size, peculiar shape, beauty of plumage, or excellence and
usefulness for food—in fact the culinary property of the various birds seems
to have been their principal interest. One of the most interesting phenomena
connected with recently extinct birds is the resemblance of the fauna of the
Mascarene Islands and that of the Chatham Islands in the possession of a
number of large flightless Rails, though the significance of this fact has
been much exaggerated.
On the whole, this book is confined to species actually known to be extinct,
but a few are included of which a small number is still known to exist,
because firstly there seems no doubt that they will vanish soon, and
secondly, as in the case of Notornis, it was necessary to clear up certain
misconceptions and contradictory statements. In the case of a few species
believed to be quite extinct, it is possible that some individuals may still
exist in little known parts of their range, while on the other hand it is more
than likely that several of the species referred to in my lecture (Proc. Orn.
Congress pp. 191-207, 1907) as threatened with destruction, have already
from bones dug from deposits which have been variously determined as
pleistocene and post-pleistocene. It seems to me that this problem can never
be entirely solved, but the significant fact remains, that while many bones
of these species in one locality have been collected in the kitchen-middens
of the former inhabitants, in other localities the same bones occur in what
seem to be much older formations.
In view of this and kindred facts, I have mentioned many species which
some ornithologists will probably consider outside the range of the present
treatise, viz., birds which have become extinct in the last seven- or eight-
hundred years. Taking my first category, viz., those species whose exterior
is more or less known, our knowledge is very variable in scope; about some
we have a very full and even redundant literature, such as the Great Auk,
the Labrador Duck, and Notornis, while of others, such as most of the
extinct Parrots from the West Indies, the "Giant" of Mauritius, the "Blue
Bird" of Bourbon, and so forth, we have the very scantiest knowledge. Even
in the times of Leguat and Labat there must have been many species, now
extinct, of which no mention has ever been made, for these old writers only
mentioned such species which impressed themselves on their memories
either from their size, peculiar shape, beauty of plumage, or excellence and
usefulness for food—in fact the culinary property of the various birds seems
to have been their principal interest. One of the most interesting phenomena
connected with recently extinct birds is the resemblance of the fauna of the
Mascarene Islands and that of the Chatham Islands in the possession of a
number of large flightless Rails, though the significance of this fact has
been much exaggerated.
On the whole, this book is confined to species actually known to be extinct,
but a few are included of which a small number is still known to exist,
because firstly there seems no doubt that they will vanish soon, and
secondly, as in the case of Notornis, it was necessary to clear up certain
misconceptions and contradictory statements. In the case of a few species
believed to be quite extinct, it is possible that some individuals may still
exist in little known parts of their range, while on the other hand it is more
than likely that several of the species referred to in my lecture (Proc. Orn.
Congress pp. 191-207, 1907) as threatened with destruction, have already
Page 7
ceased to live. This may also be the case with some birds not alluded to at
all.
In several instances I have treated of extinct flightless species under genera
including existing species capable of flight. This may appear to be
inconsistent, seeing that I maintain Notornis separate from Porphyrio, but,
while not considering flightlessness in itself a generic character, the great
development of the wing-coverts and the modification of the toes appear of
sufficient generic value in this case. I know that several of the most eminent
ornithologists of the day, among them Dr. Sharpe, differ from me, and are
convinced that the loss of the power of flight is so profound a modification,
that it is imperative that we should treat it as sufficient for generic
distinction.
While agreeing that many genera are founded on much less striking
modifications, I cannot concur in this opinion, for, unless the loss of the
power of flight is also accompanied by other changes, in some cases it is
difficult to find at first sight even specific differences other than the aborted
wings.
The cause of recent extinction among birds is in most cases due directly or
indirectly to man, but we also have instances of birds becoming extinct for
no apparent reason whatever.
Man has destroyed, and is continually destroying species directly, either for
food or for sport, but also in many other ways he contributes to their
destruction. Some species have been exterminated by the introduction of
animals of prey, such as rats, cats, mongoose, etc., and we know that also
the acclimatisation of other birds, such as the mynah, etc., has proved to be
harmful to the native birds. Again we find that the introduction of domestic
creatures or others kept as pets has brought diseases which may prove fatal
to the indigenous fauna. Another means by which man causes immense
destruction, is by destroying the natural habitat of various species. By
cutting down or burning the forests, prairies, or scrub, and by bringing the
land under cultivation, man indirectly kills off a species through starvation,
from extermination of certain insects or plants on which it depends for food.
Many species, such as the Moas, were evidently greatly reduced in numbers
by cataclysms of Nature, such as volcanic outbreaks, earthquakes, floods,
all.
In several instances I have treated of extinct flightless species under genera
including existing species capable of flight. This may appear to be
inconsistent, seeing that I maintain Notornis separate from Porphyrio, but,
while not considering flightlessness in itself a generic character, the great
development of the wing-coverts and the modification of the toes appear of
sufficient generic value in this case. I know that several of the most eminent
ornithologists of the day, among them Dr. Sharpe, differ from me, and are
convinced that the loss of the power of flight is so profound a modification,
that it is imperative that we should treat it as sufficient for generic
distinction.
While agreeing that many genera are founded on much less striking
modifications, I cannot concur in this opinion, for, unless the loss of the
power of flight is also accompanied by other changes, in some cases it is
difficult to find at first sight even specific differences other than the aborted
wings.
The cause of recent extinction among birds is in most cases due directly or
indirectly to man, but we also have instances of birds becoming extinct for
no apparent reason whatever.
Man has destroyed, and is continually destroying species directly, either for
food or for sport, but also in many other ways he contributes to their
destruction. Some species have been exterminated by the introduction of
animals of prey, such as rats, cats, mongoose, etc., and we know that also
the acclimatisation of other birds, such as the mynah, etc., has proved to be
harmful to the native birds. Again we find that the introduction of domestic
creatures or others kept as pets has brought diseases which may prove fatal
to the indigenous fauna. Another means by which man causes immense
destruction, is by destroying the natural habitat of various species. By
cutting down or burning the forests, prairies, or scrub, and by bringing the
land under cultivation, man indirectly kills off a species through starvation,
from extermination of certain insects or plants on which it depends for food.
Many species, such as the Moas, were evidently greatly reduced in numbers
by cataclysms of Nature, such as volcanic outbreaks, earthquakes, floods,
Page 8
bush fires, etc., and then died out from what appears only explicable by the
natural exhaustion of their vitality. The chief cause of the extermination of
the Moas was undoubtedly their slaughter by the Maoris for food, but in
several inaccessible parts of the interior large numbers of Moa remains have
been found which undoubtedly had died for no apparent reason.
This cause also seems to be the only explanation of the dying out of such
birds as Aechmorhynchus, Chaetoptila, Camptolaimus and others.
The melancholy fact however remains that man and his satellites, cats, rats,
dogs, and pigs are the worst and in fact the only important agents of
destruction of the native avifaunas wherever they go.
I have not included in the body of this work the fossil species from the
pleistocene of Europe, Asia, Australia and America, as I believe that these
belonged to an avifauna of an epoch considerably anterior to those
attributed to the pleistocene of New Zealand and the adjacent islands, as
well as that of the Mascarenes and Madagascar. I, however, give here the
list of the species described from the above mentioned regions which I have
been able to find in our literature, to serve as a guide to those who may
think I ought to have included them in the work itself.
Strix melitensis Lydekker Malta.
Vultur melitensis Lydekker Malta.
Pelecanus proavus De Vis Queensland.
Phalacrocorax sp. Lydekker New Zealand.
Aythya robusta De Vis Queensland.
Anas elapsa De Vis Queensland.
Anas benedeni Sharpe Belgium.
Alopochen pugil Winge Brazil.
Dendrocygna validipennis (De Vis) Queensland.
Branta hypsibata Cope Oregon.
Branta propinqua Schufeldt Oregon.
Anser scaldii Van Beneden Belgium.
Anser sp. Lydekker England.
Anser coudoni Schufeldt Oregon.
Cygnus sp. Lydekker Malta.
natural exhaustion of their vitality. The chief cause of the extermination of
the Moas was undoubtedly their slaughter by the Maoris for food, but in
several inaccessible parts of the interior large numbers of Moa remains have
been found which undoubtedly had died for no apparent reason.
This cause also seems to be the only explanation of the dying out of such
birds as Aechmorhynchus, Chaetoptila, Camptolaimus and others.
The melancholy fact however remains that man and his satellites, cats, rats,
dogs, and pigs are the worst and in fact the only important agents of
destruction of the native avifaunas wherever they go.
I have not included in the body of this work the fossil species from the
pleistocene of Europe, Asia, Australia and America, as I believe that these
belonged to an avifauna of an epoch considerably anterior to those
attributed to the pleistocene of New Zealand and the adjacent islands, as
well as that of the Mascarenes and Madagascar. I, however, give here the
list of the species described from the above mentioned regions which I have
been able to find in our literature, to serve as a guide to those who may
think I ought to have included them in the work itself.
Strix melitensis Lydekker Malta.
Vultur melitensis Lydekker Malta.
Pelecanus proavus De Vis Queensland.
Phalacrocorax sp. Lydekker New Zealand.
Aythya robusta De Vis Queensland.
Anas elapsa De Vis Queensland.
Anas benedeni Sharpe Belgium.
Alopochen pugil Winge Brazil.
Dendrocygna validipennis (De Vis) Queensland.
Branta hypsibata Cope Oregon.
Branta propinqua Schufeldt Oregon.
Anser scaldii Van Beneden Belgium.
Anser sp. Lydekker England.
Anser coudoni Schufeldt Oregon.
Cygnus sp. Lydekker Malta.
Page 9
Cygnus falconeri Parker Malta.
Palaeopelargus nobilis De Vis Queensland.
Prociconia lydekkeri Ameghino Brazil.
Platibis subtenuis De Vis Queensland.
Grus proavus Marsh New Jersey.
Grus melitensis Lydekker Malta.
Grus turfa Portis Italy.
Grus primigenia Milne Edwards France.
Fulica prior De Vis Queensland.
Fulica pisana Portis Italy.
Porphyrio mackintoshi De Vis Queensland.
Gallinula strenuipes De Vis Queensland.
Gallinula peralata De Vis Queensland.
Microtribonyx effluxus De Vis Queensland.
Progura gallinacea De Vis Queensland.
Columba melitensis Lydekker Malta.
Lithophaps ulnaris De Vis Queensland.
Gallus sp. Lydekker New Zealand.
Gallus sp. Lydekker Central Germany.
Phasianus sp. Lydekker Germany.
Perdix sp. Issel Italy.
Tetrao sp. Issel Italy.
Metapteryx bifrons De Vis Queensland.
Dromaius queenslandiae (De Vis) Queensland.
Dromaius gracilipes (De Vis) Queensland.
Dromaius patricius (De Vis) East Australia.
Genyornis newtoni Sterling & Zeitz South Australia.
Casuarius lydekkeri nom. nov.
"The distal extremity of the tibio-tarsus is narrow, without a semilunar pit
on the lateral surface of the ectocondyle, and with a very deep extensor
groove" (Lydekker, Cat. Fossil B. Brit. Mus., p. 353).
Type, a caste of the distal portion of the right tibio-tarsus, in the British
Museum. The original is preserved in the Museum at Sydney and was
Palaeopelargus nobilis De Vis Queensland.
Prociconia lydekkeri Ameghino Brazil.
Platibis subtenuis De Vis Queensland.
Grus proavus Marsh New Jersey.
Grus melitensis Lydekker Malta.
Grus turfa Portis Italy.
Grus primigenia Milne Edwards France.
Fulica prior De Vis Queensland.
Fulica pisana Portis Italy.
Porphyrio mackintoshi De Vis Queensland.
Gallinula strenuipes De Vis Queensland.
Gallinula peralata De Vis Queensland.
Microtribonyx effluxus De Vis Queensland.
Progura gallinacea De Vis Queensland.
Columba melitensis Lydekker Malta.
Lithophaps ulnaris De Vis Queensland.
Gallus sp. Lydekker New Zealand.
Gallus sp. Lydekker Central Germany.
Phasianus sp. Lydekker Germany.
Perdix sp. Issel Italy.
Tetrao sp. Issel Italy.
Metapteryx bifrons De Vis Queensland.
Dromaius queenslandiae (De Vis) Queensland.
Dromaius gracilipes (De Vis) Queensland.
Dromaius patricius (De Vis) East Australia.
Genyornis newtoni Sterling & Zeitz South Australia.
Casuarius lydekkeri nom. nov.
"The distal extremity of the tibio-tarsus is narrow, without a semilunar pit
on the lateral surface of the ectocondyle, and with a very deep extensor
groove" (Lydekker, Cat. Fossil B. Brit. Mus., p. 353).
Type, a caste of the distal portion of the right tibio-tarsus, in the British
Museum. The original is preserved in the Museum at Sydney and was
Page 10
obtained from the pleistocene cavern-deposits in the Wellington Valley in
New South Wales.
A bird usually stated to be extinct is Monarcha dimidiata, from Rara-Tonga,
but in March, 1901, two specimens, male and female, were procured by the
Earl of Ranfurly. Doubtless this is a species which will one day vanish
entirely, but at present it hardly comes within the scope of this work.
The birds known to be more or less on the verge of extinction which I have
not thought advisable to give in the main part of this book might, for
convenience of reference and to avoid possible controversy as to my having
omitted any species, be given here, but it must be understood that of these
species I only know the fact that their numbers have been greatly reduced
and mostly almost to vanishing point. I have already mentioned before that
some of them may already have disappeared, but in many cases recent
investigations are wanting, and all, therefore, that can be said of them is that
they are threatened and may soon become extinct, if they still exist.
Myadestes sibilans St. Vincent.
Myadestes genibarbis Martinique.
Cinclocerthia gutturalis Martinique.
Rhamphocinclus brachyurus Martinique.
Ixocincla olivacea Mauritius.
Phedina borbonica Mascarene Islands.
Trochocercus borbonicus Mascarene Islands.
Oxynotus typicus Mauritius.
Foudia newtoni Bourbon.
Drymoeca rodericana Rodriguez.
Cyanorhamphus cooki Norfolk Island.
Cyanorhamphus erythrotis Antipodes Island.
Cyanorhamphus unicolor Antipodes Island.
Turnagra tanagra North Island, New Zealand.
Sceloglaux albifacies Middle Island, New Zealand.
Miro albifrons North Island, New Zealand.
Miro australis Middle Island, New Zealand.
Clitonyx albicilla North Island, New Zealand.
New South Wales.
A bird usually stated to be extinct is Monarcha dimidiata, from Rara-Tonga,
but in March, 1901, two specimens, male and female, were procured by the
Earl of Ranfurly. Doubtless this is a species which will one day vanish
entirely, but at present it hardly comes within the scope of this work.
The birds known to be more or less on the verge of extinction which I have
not thought advisable to give in the main part of this book might, for
convenience of reference and to avoid possible controversy as to my having
omitted any species, be given here, but it must be understood that of these
species I only know the fact that their numbers have been greatly reduced
and mostly almost to vanishing point. I have already mentioned before that
some of them may already have disappeared, but in many cases recent
investigations are wanting, and all, therefore, that can be said of them is that
they are threatened and may soon become extinct, if they still exist.
Myadestes sibilans St. Vincent.
Myadestes genibarbis Martinique.
Cinclocerthia gutturalis Martinique.
Rhamphocinclus brachyurus Martinique.
Ixocincla olivacea Mauritius.
Phedina borbonica Mascarene Islands.
Trochocercus borbonicus Mascarene Islands.
Oxynotus typicus Mauritius.
Foudia newtoni Bourbon.
Drymoeca rodericana Rodriguez.
Cyanorhamphus cooki Norfolk Island.
Cyanorhamphus erythrotis Antipodes Island.
Cyanorhamphus unicolor Antipodes Island.
Turnagra tanagra North Island, New Zealand.
Sceloglaux albifacies Middle Island, New Zealand.
Miro albifrons North Island, New Zealand.
Miro australis Middle Island, New Zealand.
Clitonyx albicilla North Island, New Zealand.
Page 11
Pogonornis cincta North Island, New Zealand.
Hypotaenidia mülleri Auckland Island.
Mergus australis Auckland Island.
Nesonetta aucklandica Auckland Island.
Ocydromus? sylvestris Lord Howe's Island.
Puffinus newelli Hawaiian Islands.
Telespiza flaviceps Hawaii.
Nesochen sandvicensis Hawaii.
Pareudiastes pacificus Samoa.
Nesomimus trifasciatus Charles? and Gardener
Island, Galápagos Islands.
Phalacrocorax harrisi Galápagos Islands.
Meleagris americana United States.
Conurus carolinensis Southern United States.
Pseudgryphus californianus California.
Amazona guildingi St. Vincent.
Campephilus principalis Southern United States.
Pyrrhula pyrrhula murina Azores.
Stringops habroptilus New Zealand.
Anthornis melanocephala Chatham Islands.
Gallinago pusilla Chatham Islands.
Thinornis novaezealandiae Chatham Islands.
Amazona augusta Dominica.
Amazona bouqueti St. Lucia.
Amazona versicolor Dominica.
Hemignathus lanaiensis Lanai, Sandwich Islands.
Many of my readers will, I fear, find fault with me for having bestowed
names on a number of forms, known only from fragments of bones, single
bones, or two or three bones. Especially will they, I fear, blame me for
doing this when these forms have been described by other authors who have
refrained from giving names. My reasons for doing so are very simple: in
such cases as Dr. Parker's species which are fully described, but quoted
under the formula Pachyornis species A or Anomalopteryx species B, the
danger lies in different authors using the same formula for quite other
Hypotaenidia mülleri Auckland Island.
Mergus australis Auckland Island.
Nesonetta aucklandica Auckland Island.
Ocydromus? sylvestris Lord Howe's Island.
Puffinus newelli Hawaiian Islands.
Telespiza flaviceps Hawaii.
Nesochen sandvicensis Hawaii.
Pareudiastes pacificus Samoa.
Nesomimus trifasciatus Charles? and Gardener
Island, Galápagos Islands.
Phalacrocorax harrisi Galápagos Islands.
Meleagris americana United States.
Conurus carolinensis Southern United States.
Pseudgryphus californianus California.
Amazona guildingi St. Vincent.
Campephilus principalis Southern United States.
Pyrrhula pyrrhula murina Azores.
Stringops habroptilus New Zealand.
Anthornis melanocephala Chatham Islands.
Gallinago pusilla Chatham Islands.
Thinornis novaezealandiae Chatham Islands.
Amazona augusta Dominica.
Amazona bouqueti St. Lucia.
Amazona versicolor Dominica.
Hemignathus lanaiensis Lanai, Sandwich Islands.
Many of my readers will, I fear, find fault with me for having bestowed
names on a number of forms, known only from fragments of bones, single
bones, or two or three bones. Especially will they, I fear, blame me for
doing this when these forms have been described by other authors who have
refrained from giving names. My reasons for doing so are very simple: in
such cases as Dr. Parker's species which are fully described, but quoted
under the formula Pachyornis species A or Anomalopteryx species B, the
danger lies in different authors using the same formula for quite other
Page 12
species. In the case of others, where an author fears to name a form, but
gives the distinctive characters and quotes only Casuarius species or Emeus
sp., unless the author and page are quoted, confusion must arise, and so in
both cases I have thought it easier for reference and also more concise to
name all these forms which have been described or differentiated without a
binomial or trinomial appellation. I have, however, refrained from doing so
in the foregoing list of Pleistocene species in the following eight cases as I
was not able to decide anything about them with the material or literature at
my disposal, viz.:—
Phalacrocorax sp. Lydekker New Zealand.
Anser sp. Lydekker England.
Cygnus sp. Lydekker Malta.
Gallus sp. Lydekker New Zealand.
Gallus sp. Lydekker Central Germany.
Phasianus sp. Lydekker Germany.
Perdix sp. Issel Italy.
Tetrao sp. Issel Italy.
LITERATURE
REFERRING TO
EXTINCT BIRDS.
No attempt has been made to quote all books in which extinct birds have
been mentioned; not only would that mean a tedious, long work, and a book
in itself, but, the repetitions being so numerous, it would have been of very
little use. On the other hand, I have tried to quote the most important
literature referring to Extinct Birds, and I have specially been anxious to
cite and verify the principal ancient literature. Well known general works on
birds in which extinct species have, of course, also been mentioned, are, as
a rule, not quoted; such as: The 27 volumes of the Catalogue of Birds;
Brisson's Ornithology; Daubenton's, Buffon's and Montbeillard's works;
Latham's Ornithological Writings; Linnaeus' Systema Naturae in all its
gives the distinctive characters and quotes only Casuarius species or Emeus
sp., unless the author and page are quoted, confusion must arise, and so in
both cases I have thought it easier for reference and also more concise to
name all these forms which have been described or differentiated without a
binomial or trinomial appellation. I have, however, refrained from doing so
in the foregoing list of Pleistocene species in the following eight cases as I
was not able to decide anything about them with the material or literature at
my disposal, viz.:—
Phalacrocorax sp. Lydekker New Zealand.
Anser sp. Lydekker England.
Cygnus sp. Lydekker Malta.
Gallus sp. Lydekker New Zealand.
Gallus sp. Lydekker Central Germany.
Phasianus sp. Lydekker Germany.
Perdix sp. Issel Italy.
Tetrao sp. Issel Italy.
LITERATURE
REFERRING TO
EXTINCT BIRDS.
No attempt has been made to quote all books in which extinct birds have
been mentioned; not only would that mean a tedious, long work, and a book
in itself, but, the repetitions being so numerous, it would have been of very
little use. On the other hand, I have tried to quote the most important
literature referring to Extinct Birds, and I have specially been anxious to
cite and verify the principal ancient literature. Well known general works on
birds in which extinct species have, of course, also been mentioned, are, as
a rule, not quoted; such as: The 27 volumes of the Catalogue of Birds;
Brisson's Ornithology; Daubenton's, Buffon's and Montbeillard's works;
Latham's Ornithological Writings; Linnaeus' Systema Naturae in all its
Page 13
editions; Vieillot's writings; popular natural histories and school books;
Brehm's Thierleben in its various editions; Finsch's Papageien; Gray's and
Sharpe's Hand-lists; Dubois' Synopsis Avium, lists of specimens in
Museums, and many others, in which extinct birds are as a matter of course
mentioned.
Three most complete detailed bibliographies must be named: The
"Bibliography of the Didinae," forming Appendix B. of Strickland's "Dodo
and its Kindred" (1848), the Bibliography of Alca impennis by Wilhelm
Blasius in the new Edition of Naumann, vol. XII, pp. 169-176 (1903), and
the Bibliography referring to the Moas by Hamilton, in the Trans. New
Zealand Institute XXVI and XXVII (1894, 1895).
Most of the books and pamphlets quoted hereafter are in my library at the
Zoological Museum at Tring, in the ornithological part of which Dr. Hartert
and I have been specially interested for many years. Those books that are
not in my library are marked with an asterisk, but several of these I have
been able to consult in other libraries.
The chronological order appeared to be best suited to the particular subject
treated of.
1580 or 90. Collaert, Adrian. Avium vivae icones, in aes incisae &
editae ab Adriano Collardo.
(On one of the plates is figured the "Avis Indica." This figure
seems to have been the original of the representations in
Dubois' and Leguat's works.)
1601. Jacob Cornelisz Neck. Het tweede Boek, Journael oft Dagh-
register, inhoudende een warachtig verhael, etc., etc.
Middelburch, Anno 1601.
(On picture No. 2, page 7, the Dodo is figured and described as
follows: "Desen Voghel de is soo groot als een Swaen, gaven
hem de naem Walchvoghel, want doen wy de leckere Duyfkens
ende ande cleyn ghevoghelte ghenoech vinghen, doen taelden
wy niet meer naer desen Voghel." This appears to be the first
mention of the Dodo in literature.)
Brehm's Thierleben in its various editions; Finsch's Papageien; Gray's and
Sharpe's Hand-lists; Dubois' Synopsis Avium, lists of specimens in
Museums, and many others, in which extinct birds are as a matter of course
mentioned.
Three most complete detailed bibliographies must be named: The
"Bibliography of the Didinae," forming Appendix B. of Strickland's "Dodo
and its Kindred" (1848), the Bibliography of Alca impennis by Wilhelm
Blasius in the new Edition of Naumann, vol. XII, pp. 169-176 (1903), and
the Bibliography referring to the Moas by Hamilton, in the Trans. New
Zealand Institute XXVI and XXVII (1894, 1895).
Most of the books and pamphlets quoted hereafter are in my library at the
Zoological Museum at Tring, in the ornithological part of which Dr. Hartert
and I have been specially interested for many years. Those books that are
not in my library are marked with an asterisk, but several of these I have
been able to consult in other libraries.
The chronological order appeared to be best suited to the particular subject
treated of.
1580 or 90. Collaert, Adrian. Avium vivae icones, in aes incisae &
editae ab Adriano Collardo.
(On one of the plates is figured the "Avis Indica." This figure
seems to have been the original of the representations in
Dubois' and Leguat's works.)
1601. Jacob Cornelisz Neck. Het tweede Boek, Journael oft Dagh-
register, inhoudende een warachtig verhael, etc., etc.
Middelburch, Anno 1601.
(On picture No. 2, page 7, the Dodo is figured and described as
follows: "Desen Voghel de is soo groot als een Swaen, gaven
hem de naem Walchvoghel, want doen wy de leckere Duyfkens
ende ande cleyn ghevoghelte ghenoech vinghen, doen taelden
wy niet meer naer desen Voghel." This appears to be the first
mention of the Dodo in literature.)
Page 14
1605. Clusius. Caroli Clusii Atrebatis ... Exoticorum libri decem:
Quibus Animalium, Plantarum, Aromatum historiae
describuntur. Ex Officina Plantiniana Raphelengii, 1605.
(On p. 100 van Neck's Dodo is reproduced, on p. 103 the Great
Auk, sub nomine "Mergus Americanus.")
1606. De Bry. Achter Theil der Orientalischen Indien, begreiffend
erstlich ein Histor. Beschr. d. Schiffahrt, so der Adm. Jacob von
Neck ausz Hollandt, etc., etc. Frankf. 1606.
(Figure and mention of the Dodo.)
1619. Jacob Cornelisz Neck. Historiale Beschryvinghe, Inhoudende
een waerachtich verhael vande veyse ghedaen met acht
Schepen van Amsterdam, etc., etc. Amsterdam, 1619.
(Evidently another edition of Neck's voyage of 1601. On page
5 and on Picture No. 2 (page 7), which is the same as in the
other editions of Neck's voyage, the Dodo is described. There is
also a French edition of 1601.)
1625. Castleton. Purchas his Pilgrimes. In five books.
(On p. 331, in chapter XV., first mention of the Réunion Dodo.)
1626. Sir Thomas Herbert. A relation of some years' Travaile.
(First mention of Aphanapteryx bonasia.)
1635. Nieremberg. Joannis Evsebii Nierembergii ... Historia
Naturae, maxime peregrinae, libris XVI distincta. In quibus
rarissima Naturae arcana, etc., etc., etc. Antverpiae
MDCXXXV.
(Clusius' account and figure of the Dodo reproduced on pp.
231, 232. On p. 237 the Great Auk ("Goifugel") mentioned).
Quibus Animalium, Plantarum, Aromatum historiae
describuntur. Ex Officina Plantiniana Raphelengii, 1605.
(On p. 100 van Neck's Dodo is reproduced, on p. 103 the Great
Auk, sub nomine "Mergus Americanus.")
1606. De Bry. Achter Theil der Orientalischen Indien, begreiffend
erstlich ein Histor. Beschr. d. Schiffahrt, so der Adm. Jacob von
Neck ausz Hollandt, etc., etc. Frankf. 1606.
(Figure and mention of the Dodo.)
1619. Jacob Cornelisz Neck. Historiale Beschryvinghe, Inhoudende
een waerachtich verhael vande veyse ghedaen met acht
Schepen van Amsterdam, etc., etc. Amsterdam, 1619.
(Evidently another edition of Neck's voyage of 1601. On page
5 and on Picture No. 2 (page 7), which is the same as in the
other editions of Neck's voyage, the Dodo is described. There is
also a French edition of 1601.)
1625. Castleton. Purchas his Pilgrimes. In five books.
(On p. 331, in chapter XV., first mention of the Réunion Dodo.)
1626. Sir Thomas Herbert. A relation of some years' Travaile.
(First mention of Aphanapteryx bonasia.)
1635. Nieremberg. Joannis Evsebii Nierembergii ... Historia
Naturae, maxime peregrinae, libris XVI distincta. In quibus
rarissima Naturae arcana, etc., etc., etc. Antverpiae
MDCXXXV.
(Clusius' account and figure of the Dodo reproduced on pp.
231, 232. On p. 237 the Great Auk ("Goifugel") mentioned).
Page 15
*1638 and 1651. Cauche. Rélations véritables et curieuses de l'isle
de Madagascar. (Two editions.)
(See Aphanapteryx bonasia.)
1640. Père Bouton. Relation de l'établ. des Français dep. 1635, en
l'ile Martinique, l'vne des antilles de l'Amérique.
(Describes, among other birds, the Aras and Parrots of the
island of Martinique.)
1646. Bontekoe. Journ. of te gedenckw. beschr. van de Ost. Ind.
Reyse. Haarlem 1646.
(On p. 6 mention of the Réunion Dodo.)
1655. Worm. Museum Wormianum.
(On pp. 300, 301, lib. III, description and figure of a Great Auk
from the Faroe Islands.)
1658. Histoire Naturelle et Morale des Iles Antilles de
l'Amérique. Enrichie de pleusieurs belles figures des Raretez
les plus considerables qui y sont d'écrites. Avec un vocabulaire
caraïbe. Rotterdam 1658.
(The title-page has no author's name, but according to Père du
Tertre the author is "Le Sieur de Rochefort, Ministre de
Rotterdam." Contains important notes on former bird-life on
the Antilles.)
1665. The same. Second Edition. Rotterdam 1665.
1658. Bontius. Gulielmi Pisonis Medici Amstelaedamensis de
Indiae Utriusque re naturali et medica libri quatuordecim. Third
Part: Jacobi Bontii, medici civitatis Bataviae Novae in Java
Ordinarii, Historiae Natur. et Medici Indiae Orientalis libri sex.
de Madagascar. (Two editions.)
(See Aphanapteryx bonasia.)
1640. Père Bouton. Relation de l'établ. des Français dep. 1635, en
l'ile Martinique, l'vne des antilles de l'Amérique.
(Describes, among other birds, the Aras and Parrots of the
island of Martinique.)
1646. Bontekoe. Journ. of te gedenckw. beschr. van de Ost. Ind.
Reyse. Haarlem 1646.
(On p. 6 mention of the Réunion Dodo.)
1655. Worm. Museum Wormianum.
(On pp. 300, 301, lib. III, description and figure of a Great Auk
from the Faroe Islands.)
1658. Histoire Naturelle et Morale des Iles Antilles de
l'Amérique. Enrichie de pleusieurs belles figures des Raretez
les plus considerables qui y sont d'écrites. Avec un vocabulaire
caraïbe. Rotterdam 1658.
(The title-page has no author's name, but according to Père du
Tertre the author is "Le Sieur de Rochefort, Ministre de
Rotterdam." Contains important notes on former bird-life on
the Antilles.)
1665. The same. Second Edition. Rotterdam 1665.
1658. Bontius. Gulielmi Pisonis Medici Amstelaedamensis de
Indiae Utriusque re naturali et medica libri quatuordecim. Third
Part: Jacobi Bontii, medici civitatis Bataviae Novae in Java
Ordinarii, Historiae Natur. et Medici Indiae Orientalis libri sex.
Page 16
(On p. 70 an excellent figure of the Dodo. Caput XVII.
Appendix: De Dronte, aliis Dod-aers.)
1667. Du Tertre. Histoire générale des Antilles habitées par les
François. Tome II, contenant l'Histoire Naturelle. Paris 1667.
(On p. 246. Traite V. Des animaux de l'air. § I, Les Arras. § II,
Des Perroquets. § III, Des Perriques.)
1668. Historische Beschreibung der Antillen Inseln in America
gelegen. In sich begreiffend deroselben Gelegenheit, darinnen
befindl. natürl. Sachen, sampt deren Einwohner Sitten und
Gebraüchen. Von dem Herrn de Rochefort, zum zweiten mahl
in Französischer sprach an den Tag gegeben, nunmehr aber in
die Teutsche übersetzet. Frankfurt 1668.
(Translation of the second edition of Rochefort's book.)
*1668. Carré, Voyage des Indes Orientales.
(Page 12 the "Solitaire." Cf. Didus solitarius.)
1668. J. Marshall. Memorandums concerning India.
(In the article on Mauritius occurs a mention of Geese.)
1674. Père Dubois. Les Voyages faits par le Sieur D.B. aux Isles
Dauphine ou Madagascar, et Bourbon, ou Mascarenne, és
années 1669-70-71-72.
(Of this extremely rare work I possess a beautiful copy,
together with the map of Sanson belonging to it.)
(On p. 168 we find "Description de quelques Oyseaux de l'Isle
de Bourbon," with figures of the "Géant" and "Solitaire.")
1696. Thevenot, M. Melchisedec. Rélations de divers voyages
curieux qui nont point este' publié'es. Nouvelle Edition. Vol. I,
II, 1696.
Appendix: De Dronte, aliis Dod-aers.)
1667. Du Tertre. Histoire générale des Antilles habitées par les
François. Tome II, contenant l'Histoire Naturelle. Paris 1667.
(On p. 246. Traite V. Des animaux de l'air. § I, Les Arras. § II,
Des Perroquets. § III, Des Perriques.)
1668. Historische Beschreibung der Antillen Inseln in America
gelegen. In sich begreiffend deroselben Gelegenheit, darinnen
befindl. natürl. Sachen, sampt deren Einwohner Sitten und
Gebraüchen. Von dem Herrn de Rochefort, zum zweiten mahl
in Französischer sprach an den Tag gegeben, nunmehr aber in
die Teutsche übersetzet. Frankfurt 1668.
(Translation of the second edition of Rochefort's book.)
*1668. Carré, Voyage des Indes Orientales.
(Page 12 the "Solitaire." Cf. Didus solitarius.)
1668. J. Marshall. Memorandums concerning India.
(In the article on Mauritius occurs a mention of Geese.)
1674. Père Dubois. Les Voyages faits par le Sieur D.B. aux Isles
Dauphine ou Madagascar, et Bourbon, ou Mascarenne, és
années 1669-70-71-72.
(Of this extremely rare work I possess a beautiful copy,
together with the map of Sanson belonging to it.)
(On p. 168 we find "Description de quelques Oyseaux de l'Isle
de Bourbon," with figures of the "Géant" and "Solitaire.")
1696. Thevenot, M. Melchisedec. Rélations de divers voyages
curieux qui nont point este' publié'es. Nouvelle Edition. Vol. I,
II, 1696.
Page 17
(A very interesting collection of ancient voyages, translated
into French. In Vol. II is a translation of Bontekoe's travels to
the "East Indies," with figures of the Dodo and other interesting
notes.)
1707. Leguat, François. Voyages et Avantures de François Leguat,
et de ses Compagnons, en deux Isles desertes des Indes
Orientales. Londres 1707.
1708. Leguat, Francis. A New Voyage to the East Indies by Francis
Leguat and his companions. Containing their adventures in two
desert islands. London 1708.
(Valuable notes on the birds of Rodriguez and Mauritius.)
1707. Sloane, Hans. A Voyage to the islands Madera, Barbados,
Nieves, S. Christofers and Jamaica, with the Natural History of
the Herbs and Trees, four-footed Beasts, Fishes, Insects, Birds,
Reptiles, etc. Vol. I, 1707; vol. II, 1725.
(Gives most valuable notes on the birds, including the
Goatsucker, Aestrelata and Parrots.)
1722. Labat, Jean Baptiste. Nouveau Voyage aux Iles de
l'Amérique contenant l'histoire naturelle de ces pays. Paris
1722. 6 vols.
(In Vol. II, chapter VIII, the different species of Parrots are
described, and it is stated that each island had three kinds, viz.,
an "Aras," a "Perroquet" and a "Perrique," evidently meaning a
Macaw, an Amazona and a Conurus.)
1742. Nouvelle Edition. 8 vols.
1752. Moehring. Avium Genera.
(In this ominous work, which, through an article by Poche in
Zool. Anz. 1904, has recently caused so much quite
unnecessary disturbance among nomenclatorists—cf. Hartert,
into French. In Vol. II is a translation of Bontekoe's travels to
the "East Indies," with figures of the Dodo and other interesting
notes.)
1707. Leguat, François. Voyages et Avantures de François Leguat,
et de ses Compagnons, en deux Isles desertes des Indes
Orientales. Londres 1707.
1708. Leguat, Francis. A New Voyage to the East Indies by Francis
Leguat and his companions. Containing their adventures in two
desert islands. London 1708.
(Valuable notes on the birds of Rodriguez and Mauritius.)
1707. Sloane, Hans. A Voyage to the islands Madera, Barbados,
Nieves, S. Christofers and Jamaica, with the Natural History of
the Herbs and Trees, four-footed Beasts, Fishes, Insects, Birds,
Reptiles, etc. Vol. I, 1707; vol. II, 1725.
(Gives most valuable notes on the birds, including the
Goatsucker, Aestrelata and Parrots.)
1722. Labat, Jean Baptiste. Nouveau Voyage aux Iles de
l'Amérique contenant l'histoire naturelle de ces pays. Paris
1722. 6 vols.
(In Vol. II, chapter VIII, the different species of Parrots are
described, and it is stated that each island had three kinds, viz.,
an "Aras," a "Perroquet" and a "Perrique," evidently meaning a
Macaw, an Amazona and a Conurus.)
1742. Nouvelle Edition. 8 vols.
1752. Moehring. Avium Genera.
(In this ominous work, which, through an article by Poche in
Zool. Anz. 1904, has recently caused so much quite
unnecessary disturbance among nomenclatorists—cf. Hartert,
Page 18
Zool. Anz. 1904, p. 154, and Proc. IV. Int. Orn. Congress, pp.
276-283. The Dodo is mentioned under the name "Raphus.")
1763. L'Abbé de la Caille. Journal Historique du Voyage fait au
Cap de Bonne-espérance.
(Some birds from Mauritius mentioned, but no descriptions.)
1773. Voyage a l'isle de France, à l'isle de Bourbon, au Cap de
Bonne Espérance, etc. Avec des observations nouvelles sur la
nature et sur les hommes. Par un officier du roi. Neuchatel
1773.
1775. A voyage to the island of Mauritius, etc. By a French Officer.
(Translation of the above).
(Lettre IX, page 67, treats of the "Animals natural to the isle of
France.")
1782. Sonnerat. Voyage aux iles orientales et à la Chine. Two
volumes, 1782.
(In Volume II, on plate 101, opposite page 176, the extinct
Alectroenas nitidissima is figured, under the name of "Pigeon
hollandais.")
*1783 (?) Callam. Voyage Botany Bay.
(According to Gray Notornis alba is mentioned under the name
of "White Gallinule.")
1786. Sparrmann. Museum Carlsonianum I.
(On pl. 23 Pomarea nigra Sparrm.)
1789. G. Dixon. Voyage round the World.
(On p. 357 is note and figure of the extinct Moho apicalis,
under the name of the "Yellow-tufted Bee-eater.")
276-283. The Dodo is mentioned under the name "Raphus.")
1763. L'Abbé de la Caille. Journal Historique du Voyage fait au
Cap de Bonne-espérance.
(Some birds from Mauritius mentioned, but no descriptions.)
1773. Voyage a l'isle de France, à l'isle de Bourbon, au Cap de
Bonne Espérance, etc. Avec des observations nouvelles sur la
nature et sur les hommes. Par un officier du roi. Neuchatel
1773.
1775. A voyage to the island of Mauritius, etc. By a French Officer.
(Translation of the above).
(Lettre IX, page 67, treats of the "Animals natural to the isle of
France.")
1782. Sonnerat. Voyage aux iles orientales et à la Chine. Two
volumes, 1782.
(In Volume II, on plate 101, opposite page 176, the extinct
Alectroenas nitidissima is figured, under the name of "Pigeon
hollandais.")
*1783 (?) Callam. Voyage Botany Bay.
(According to Gray Notornis alba is mentioned under the name
of "White Gallinule.")
1786. Sparrmann. Museum Carlsonianum I.
(On pl. 23 Pomarea nigra Sparrm.)
1789. G. Dixon. Voyage round the World.
(On p. 357 is note and figure of the extinct Moho apicalis,
under the name of the "Yellow-tufted Bee-eater.")
Page 19
1789. Browne, Patrick. The Civil and Natural History of Jamaica.
1789. The Voyage of Governor Phillip to Botany Bay, etc. London
1789.
(Among other interesting birds Notornis stanleyi is figured on
the plate opposite p. 273.)
1790. J. White. Journal of a Voyage to New South Wales with sixty-
five Plates of Nondescript Animals, Birds, Lizards, Serpents,
etc. London MDCCXC.
(I have a copy with black and white, and another with coloured
plates. Notornis alba.)
1804. Hermann. Observationes Zoolog.
(On page 125 the extinct Bourbon Palaeornis is described as
Psittacus semirostris.)
1807. M. F. Péron. Voyage de découvertes aux terres australes,
exécuté par ordre de Sa Majesté l'Empereur et Roi, etc., etc. 2
vols. 1807 and 1816 and Atlas.
(On p. 467 is described the Little Emu from Kangaroo Island,
which I have named Dromaius peronii, in honour of its
discoverer, François Péron. A memoir of this extraordinary and
admirable man's short and brilliant life will be found in Vol. VI
of the "Naturalist's Library," Edinburgh, 1843.)
1810. André Pierre Ledru. Voyage aux iles de Ténériffe, la Trinité,
Saint-Thomas, Sainte-Croix et Porto-Ricco, exécuté par ordre
du Gouvern. français, etc., etc. Two volumes, 1810.
(In Vol. II, page 39, are mentioned various birds as occurring
on the Danish West-Indian Islands, which are not found there at
present. "Un todier, nommé vulgairement perroquet de terre"
and seven species of Humming-Birds!)
1789. The Voyage of Governor Phillip to Botany Bay, etc. London
1789.
(Among other interesting birds Notornis stanleyi is figured on
the plate opposite p. 273.)
1790. J. White. Journal of a Voyage to New South Wales with sixty-
five Plates of Nondescript Animals, Birds, Lizards, Serpents,
etc. London MDCCXC.
(I have a copy with black and white, and another with coloured
plates. Notornis alba.)
1804. Hermann. Observationes Zoolog.
(On page 125 the extinct Bourbon Palaeornis is described as
Psittacus semirostris.)
1807. M. F. Péron. Voyage de découvertes aux terres australes,
exécuté par ordre de Sa Majesté l'Empereur et Roi, etc., etc. 2
vols. 1807 and 1816 and Atlas.
(On p. 467 is described the Little Emu from Kangaroo Island,
which I have named Dromaius peronii, in honour of its
discoverer, François Péron. A memoir of this extraordinary and
admirable man's short and brilliant life will be found in Vol. VI
of the "Naturalist's Library," Edinburgh, 1843.)
1810. André Pierre Ledru. Voyage aux iles de Ténériffe, la Trinité,
Saint-Thomas, Sainte-Croix et Porto-Ricco, exécuté par ordre
du Gouvern. français, etc., etc. Two volumes, 1810.
(In Vol. II, page 39, are mentioned various birds as occurring
on the Danish West-Indian Islands, which are not found there at
present. "Un todier, nommé vulgairement perroquet de terre"
and seven species of Humming-Birds!)
Page 20
*1826. Bloxam. Voyage of the Blonde.
(See Phaeornis oahensis, Loxops coccinea rufa. Also
interesting notes on other Sandwich-Islands Birds.)
1827. Pallas. Zoogr. Rosso-Asiat. II p. 305: Phalacrocorax
perspicillatus, the now extinct Cormorant from Bering Island.
1830. Quoy et Gaimard. Voy. Astrolabe, Zool. I p. 242 pl. 24.
(Coturnix novaezealandiae described.)
1830. Kittlitz. Mémoires Acad. Sc. Pétersburg I.
(Kittlitz describes Turdus terrestris and Fringilla papa.)
*1838. Polack. New Zealand.
(First mention of Moas.)
*1838. Don de Navarette. Rel. Quat. voy. Christ.
1838. Lichtenstein. Abhandl. K. Akademie d. Wissenschaften p.
448, plate V.
(Hemignathus ellisianus—sub nomine obscurus—and
Hemignathus lucidus described.)
1843. Dieffenbach's Travels in New Zealand, 1843. Appendix,
Birds, by J. E. Gray. On page 197 Rallus dieffenbachii
described.
1843. Owen. P.Z.S. 1843, p. 1., letter read from Rev. W. C. Cotton,
mentioning remains of gigantic birds in New Zealand, p. 8 the
name Dinornis novaezealandiae given to the first Moa-bones
exhibited.
1846. In the "Voyage of Erebus and Terror," Birds, Gray describes
and figures Nesolimnas dieffenbachii.
(See Phaeornis oahensis, Loxops coccinea rufa. Also
interesting notes on other Sandwich-Islands Birds.)
1827. Pallas. Zoogr. Rosso-Asiat. II p. 305: Phalacrocorax
perspicillatus, the now extinct Cormorant from Bering Island.
1830. Quoy et Gaimard. Voy. Astrolabe, Zool. I p. 242 pl. 24.
(Coturnix novaezealandiae described.)
1830. Kittlitz. Mémoires Acad. Sc. Pétersburg I.
(Kittlitz describes Turdus terrestris and Fringilla papa.)
*1838. Polack. New Zealand.
(First mention of Moas.)
*1838. Don de Navarette. Rel. Quat. voy. Christ.
1838. Lichtenstein. Abhandl. K. Akademie d. Wissenschaften p.
448, plate V.
(Hemignathus ellisianus—sub nomine obscurus—and
Hemignathus lucidus described.)
1843. Dieffenbach's Travels in New Zealand, 1843. Appendix,
Birds, by J. E. Gray. On page 197 Rallus dieffenbachii
described.
1843. Owen. P.Z.S. 1843, p. 1., letter read from Rev. W. C. Cotton,
mentioning remains of gigantic birds in New Zealand, p. 8 the
name Dinornis novaezealandiae given to the first Moa-bones
exhibited.
1846. In the "Voyage of Erebus and Terror," Birds, Gray describes
and figures Nesolimnas dieffenbachii.
Page 21
1847. Gosse. Birds of Jamaica.
(Cf. Ara erythrocephala, Siphonorhis americanus and other
Jamaican birds.)
1848. Edm. de Sélys-Longchamps. Résumé concern, les Oiseaux
brévipennes mentionnés dans l'ouvrage de M. Strickland sur le
Dodo.
In Rev. Zool. 1848, pp. 292-295.
1848. Strickland and Melville. The Dodo and its kindred; or the
history, affinities, and Osteology of the Dodo, Solitaire, and
other extinct birds of the islands Mauritius, Rodriguez and
Bourbon. London 1848.
(141 pages and 15 plates.)
*1848. Peale. U.S. Expl. Exp. Birds.
(On p. 147, pl. XL, is described and figured the extinct
Chaetoptila augustipluma, under the name of Entomiza
augustipluma. This work is not available, as only 3 or 4 copies
exist of it, but see:
Cassin. U.S. Expl. Exp. Mamm. and Orn. p. p. 148 pl. XI
(1858).
1851. Is. Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire. Notice sur des ossements et des
oeufs trouvés a Madagascar dans les alluvions modernes, et
provenant d'un oiseau gigantesque.
In Annales des Scienc. Naturelles, 13 série. Zoologie, tome 40.
(This volume is dated "1850," but the above article is said to
have been read before the Academy on January 27, 1851,
therefore the date of publication must be rather 1851 than
1850.)
(Cf. Ara erythrocephala, Siphonorhis americanus and other
Jamaican birds.)
1848. Edm. de Sélys-Longchamps. Résumé concern, les Oiseaux
brévipennes mentionnés dans l'ouvrage de M. Strickland sur le
Dodo.
In Rev. Zool. 1848, pp. 292-295.
1848. Strickland and Melville. The Dodo and its kindred; or the
history, affinities, and Osteology of the Dodo, Solitaire, and
other extinct birds of the islands Mauritius, Rodriguez and
Bourbon. London 1848.
(141 pages and 15 plates.)
*1848. Peale. U.S. Expl. Exp. Birds.
(On p. 147, pl. XL, is described and figured the extinct
Chaetoptila augustipluma, under the name of Entomiza
augustipluma. This work is not available, as only 3 or 4 copies
exist of it, but see:
Cassin. U.S. Expl. Exp. Mamm. and Orn. p. p. 148 pl. XI
(1858).
1851. Is. Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire. Notice sur des ossements et des
oeufs trouvés a Madagascar dans les alluvions modernes, et
provenant d'un oiseau gigantesque.
In Annales des Scienc. Naturelles, 13 série. Zoologie, tome 40.
(This volume is dated "1850," but the above article is said to
have been read before the Academy on January 27, 1851,
therefore the date of publication must be rather 1851 than
1850.)
Page 22
1854. H. Schlegel. Ook een woordje over den Dodo en zijne
verwanten.
In: Verslagen en Mededeelingen der Koninglijke Akademie der
Wetenschappen, Afdeel. Naturkunde, Deel II, p. 254.
1857. Japetus Steenstrup. Bidrag til Geirfuglens Naturhistorie, etc.
In: Naturh. Forening. Vidensk. Meddel. for 1855, Nos. 3-7.
(The first history and bibliography of the Great Auk.)
1858. H. Schlegel. Over eenige uitgestorvene reusachtige Vogels
van de Mascarenhas-eilanden. (Een tegenhanger tot zijne
geschiedenis der Dodo's.)
In: Verslagen en Mededeelingen der Koninglijke Akademie van
Wetenschappen, Afdeel. Naturkunde, Deel VII, pp. 116-128.
(Leguatia gigantea, Porphyrio (Notornis?) caerulescens.)
1860. A. v. Pelzeln. Zur Ornithologie der Insel Norfolk.
In: Sitzungsberichte der Mathemat. Naturwiss. Cl. Akademie
Wien Bd. XLI, No. 15, pp. 319-332. (Mit 1 Tafel.)
(Lengthy account of Nestor norfolcensis, from Bauer's
Manuscript, Notornis alba, etc.)
1861. Alfred Newton. Abstract of Mr. Wolley's Researches in
Iceland respecting the Gare-fowl.
In Ibis, 1861, pp. 374-399.
1862. W. J. Broderip. Notice of an Original Painting, including a
figure of the Dodo.
In Trans. Zool. Soc. London IV, p. 197.
1862. William Preyer. Ueber Plautus impennis.
verwanten.
In: Verslagen en Mededeelingen der Koninglijke Akademie der
Wetenschappen, Afdeel. Naturkunde, Deel II, p. 254.
1857. Japetus Steenstrup. Bidrag til Geirfuglens Naturhistorie, etc.
In: Naturh. Forening. Vidensk. Meddel. for 1855, Nos. 3-7.
(The first history and bibliography of the Great Auk.)
1858. H. Schlegel. Over eenige uitgestorvene reusachtige Vogels
van de Mascarenhas-eilanden. (Een tegenhanger tot zijne
geschiedenis der Dodo's.)
In: Verslagen en Mededeelingen der Koninglijke Akademie van
Wetenschappen, Afdeel. Naturkunde, Deel VII, pp. 116-128.
(Leguatia gigantea, Porphyrio (Notornis?) caerulescens.)
1860. A. v. Pelzeln. Zur Ornithologie der Insel Norfolk.
In: Sitzungsberichte der Mathemat. Naturwiss. Cl. Akademie
Wien Bd. XLI, No. 15, pp. 319-332. (Mit 1 Tafel.)
(Lengthy account of Nestor norfolcensis, from Bauer's
Manuscript, Notornis alba, etc.)
1861. Alfred Newton. Abstract of Mr. Wolley's Researches in
Iceland respecting the Gare-fowl.
In Ibis, 1861, pp. 374-399.
1862. W. J. Broderip. Notice of an Original Painting, including a
figure of the Dodo.
In Trans. Zool. Soc. London IV, p. 197.
1862. William Preyer. Ueber Plautus impennis.
Page 23
In Journ. f. Orn. 1862, pp. 110-124, 337-356.
1865. Alfred Newton. The Gare-fowl and its Historians.
In Natural Hist. Review XII (1865), pp. 467-488; id. in
Encylcl. Britannica Ed. IX, Vol. III; id. Dict. Birds, p. 220-221.
1866. Owen. Psittacus mauritianus named, in Ibis p. 168; also
mentioned in Trans. Zool. Soc. VI, p. 53, 1866.
(See Lophopsittacus.)
1866-1873. Alph. Milne-Edwards. Recherches sur la Faune
Ornithologique Eteinte des iles Mascareignes et de
Madagascar. Paris 1866-1873.
(With 37 plates. This volume consists of reprints of the author's
articles on the subject in French periodicals, though not a word
of this is mentioned. To the plates originally issued with the
articles, several new ones are added.)
1867. Alfred Newton. On a Picture supposed to represent the
Didine Bird of the Island of Bourbon (Réunion).
In Trans. Zool. Soc. London VI, pp. 373-376. Plate 62.
1867. George Dawson Rowley. On the Egg of Aepyornis, the
Colossal Bird of Madagascar.
In Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1867, pp. 892-895.
1868. Frauenfeld, George Ritter von. Neu aufgefundene
Abbildung des Dronte und eines zweiten kurzflügligen Vogels,
wahrscheinlich des poule rouge au bec de bécasse der
Maskarenen, in der Privatbibliothek S.M. des verstorbenen
Kaisers Franz. Wien 1868. Mit 4 Tafeln.
1868. Schlegel & Pollen. Mammifères et Oiseaux, in: Pollen et
von Dam, Recherches sur la faune de Madagascar et de ses
1865. Alfred Newton. The Gare-fowl and its Historians.
In Natural Hist. Review XII (1865), pp. 467-488; id. in
Encylcl. Britannica Ed. IX, Vol. III; id. Dict. Birds, p. 220-221.
1866. Owen. Psittacus mauritianus named, in Ibis p. 168; also
mentioned in Trans. Zool. Soc. VI, p. 53, 1866.
(See Lophopsittacus.)
1866-1873. Alph. Milne-Edwards. Recherches sur la Faune
Ornithologique Eteinte des iles Mascareignes et de
Madagascar. Paris 1866-1873.
(With 37 plates. This volume consists of reprints of the author's
articles on the subject in French periodicals, though not a word
of this is mentioned. To the plates originally issued with the
articles, several new ones are added.)
1867. Alfred Newton. On a Picture supposed to represent the
Didine Bird of the Island of Bourbon (Réunion).
In Trans. Zool. Soc. London VI, pp. 373-376. Plate 62.
1867. George Dawson Rowley. On the Egg of Aepyornis, the
Colossal Bird of Madagascar.
In Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1867, pp. 892-895.
1868. Frauenfeld, George Ritter von. Neu aufgefundene
Abbildung des Dronte und eines zweiten kurzflügligen Vogels,
wahrscheinlich des poule rouge au bec de bécasse der
Maskarenen, in der Privatbibliothek S.M. des verstorbenen
Kaisers Franz. Wien 1868. Mit 4 Tafeln.
1868. Schlegel & Pollen. Mammifères et Oiseaux, in: Pollen et
von Dam, Recherches sur la faune de Madagascar et de ses
Page 24
dépendances. Leyde 1868.
1868. Owen, on Moas in Trans. Zool. Soc. London, VI.
(Dinornis maximus established.)
*1868. H. C. Millies. Over eene nieuw ontdekte afbeelding van den
Dodo.
In: Verhandelingen der Koningl. Akad. d. Wetenschappen, Deel
XI, Amsterdam 1868.
1869. Owen. On the osteology of the Dodo.
In: Trans. Zool. Soc. London VI, 1869, p. 70.
1869. Elliot. New and heretofore unfig. sp. N. American Birds.
(In Vol. II, part 14, No. 3, the now extinct Carbo perspicillatus
from Bering Island figured.)
1872. F. W. Hutton. On the Microscopical structure of the Egg-shell
of the Moa.
In Trans. & Proceed. New Zealand Inst. IV, pp. 166-167, with
illustrations.
1872. F. W. Hutton. Notes on some Birds from the Chatham
Islands, collected by H. H. Travers, Esq.
In Ibis 1872, pp. 243-250.
(Miro traversi and Sphenoeacus rufescens (Bowdleria
rufescens of this book) only found on Mangare. First
description of "Rallus modestus" (Cabalus modestus), "Rallus
dieffenbachi" already extinct.)
1872. J. Hector. On Recent Moa Remains in New Zealand.
1868. Owen, on Moas in Trans. Zool. Soc. London, VI.
(Dinornis maximus established.)
*1868. H. C. Millies. Over eene nieuw ontdekte afbeelding van den
Dodo.
In: Verhandelingen der Koningl. Akad. d. Wetenschappen, Deel
XI, Amsterdam 1868.
1869. Owen. On the osteology of the Dodo.
In: Trans. Zool. Soc. London VI, 1869, p. 70.
1869. Elliot. New and heretofore unfig. sp. N. American Birds.
(In Vol. II, part 14, No. 3, the now extinct Carbo perspicillatus
from Bering Island figured.)
1872. F. W. Hutton. On the Microscopical structure of the Egg-shell
of the Moa.
In Trans. & Proceed. New Zealand Inst. IV, pp. 166-167, with
illustrations.
1872. F. W. Hutton. Notes on some Birds from the Chatham
Islands, collected by H. H. Travers, Esq.
In Ibis 1872, pp. 243-250.
(Miro traversi and Sphenoeacus rufescens (Bowdleria
rufescens of this book) only found on Mangare. First
description of "Rallus modestus" (Cabalus modestus), "Rallus
dieffenbachi" already extinct.)
1872. J. Hector. On Recent Moa Remains in New Zealand.
Page 25
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. IV, p. 110.
1872. Julius Haast. Notes on Harpagornis Moorei.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. IV, p. 192.
1873. A. v. Pelzeln. On the Birds in the Imperial Collection at
Vienna obtained from the Leverian Museum.
In Ibis 1873, pp. 14-54, 103-124.
(Most important notes on some of Latham's types. Cf. Drepanis
pacifica, Platycercus ulietanus, Notornis alba.)
1873. Christmann und Oberländer. Ozeanien.
(On pages 138-144 a popular account and wood cuts—from
Brehm's Thierleben—of Moas and other Gigantic Birds.)
1873. Buller. The Birds of New Zealand.
1874. A. Milne-Edwards. Recherches sur la faune ancienne des iles
Mascareignes.
In Ann. Sciences naturelles sér. V, Tome XIX, article 3
(Erythromachus, Strix murivora, Columba rodericana, etc.)
1875. Rowley. Porphyrio Stanleyi.
In Ornith. Miscell. I, pp. 37-48, plate.
1875. Hutton. Description of the Moa Swamp at Hamilton.
In Trans. & Proc. N. Zealand Inst. VII, p. 123, pl. V.
1875. Hutton & Coughtrey. Description of some Moa Remains
from the Knobby Ranges.
In Trans. & Proc. N. Zealand Inst. VII, p. 266, pl. XIX.
1872. Julius Haast. Notes on Harpagornis Moorei.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. IV, p. 192.
1873. A. v. Pelzeln. On the Birds in the Imperial Collection at
Vienna obtained from the Leverian Museum.
In Ibis 1873, pp. 14-54, 103-124.
(Most important notes on some of Latham's types. Cf. Drepanis
pacifica, Platycercus ulietanus, Notornis alba.)
1873. Christmann und Oberländer. Ozeanien.
(On pages 138-144 a popular account and wood cuts—from
Brehm's Thierleben—of Moas and other Gigantic Birds.)
1873. Buller. The Birds of New Zealand.
1874. A. Milne-Edwards. Recherches sur la faune ancienne des iles
Mascareignes.
In Ann. Sciences naturelles sér. V, Tome XIX, article 3
(Erythromachus, Strix murivora, Columba rodericana, etc.)
1875. Rowley. Porphyrio Stanleyi.
In Ornith. Miscell. I, pp. 37-48, plate.
1875. Hutton. Description of the Moa Swamp at Hamilton.
In Trans. & Proc. N. Zealand Inst. VII, p. 123, pl. V.
1875. Hutton & Coughtrey. Description of some Moa Remains
from the Knobby Ranges.
In Trans. & Proc. N. Zealand Inst. VII, p. 266, pl. XIX.
Page 26
1875. Alfred Newton. P.Z.S. 1875, p. 350: the name
Lophopsittacus established.
1875. Hutton. On the Dimensions of Dinornis bones.
In Trans. & Proc. N. Zealand Inst. VII, p. 274.
1875. Julius von Haast. Researches and Excavations on, in and near
the Moa-bone Point Cave, Sumner Road, in the year 1872.
In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Institute VII, pp. 54-85,
pls. I, II.
*1875. Van Beneden. Journ. Zool. IV, p. 267.
(Description of Anas finschi.)
1876. A. & E. Newton. On the Psittaci of the Mascarene Islands.
In Ibis 1876, pp. 281-288, plate VI.
1876. Tommaso Salvadori. Nota intorno al Fregilupus varius.
In: Atti della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, Vol. XI,
pp. 482-488.
1877. G. D. Rowley. On the Extinct Birds of the Mascarene Islands.
In Orn. Miscell. II, pp. 124-133, plates LII, LIII.
1878. G. D. Rowley. Remarks on the Extinct Gigantic Birds of
Madagascar and New Zealand.
In Ornith. Miscell. III, pp. 237-247, pls. CXII-CXV.
1879. Dole. List of Birds of the Hawaiian Islands. Corrected from
the Hawaiian Almanack.
Reprint: Ibis 1881, p. 241.
Lophopsittacus established.
1875. Hutton. On the Dimensions of Dinornis bones.
In Trans. & Proc. N. Zealand Inst. VII, p. 274.
1875. Julius von Haast. Researches and Excavations on, in and near
the Moa-bone Point Cave, Sumner Road, in the year 1872.
In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Institute VII, pp. 54-85,
pls. I, II.
*1875. Van Beneden. Journ. Zool. IV, p. 267.
(Description of Anas finschi.)
1876. A. & E. Newton. On the Psittaci of the Mascarene Islands.
In Ibis 1876, pp. 281-288, plate VI.
1876. Tommaso Salvadori. Nota intorno al Fregilupus varius.
In: Atti della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, Vol. XI,
pp. 482-488.
1877. G. D. Rowley. On the Extinct Birds of the Mascarene Islands.
In Orn. Miscell. II, pp. 124-133, plates LII, LIII.
1878. G. D. Rowley. Remarks on the Extinct Gigantic Birds of
Madagascar and New Zealand.
In Ornith. Miscell. III, pp. 237-247, pls. CXII-CXV.
1879. Dole. List of Birds of the Hawaiian Islands. Corrected from
the Hawaiian Almanack.
Reprint: Ibis 1881, p. 241.
Page 27
(Pennula millsi, Ciridops anna.)
1879. Owen, Richard. Memoirs on the Extinct Wingless Birds of
New Zealand; with an Appendix on those of England,
Australia, Newfoundland, Mauritius and Rodriguez.
(Memoirs on the Dinornithidae, their bones, eggs, integument
and plumage, Notornis, Aptornis, Cnemiornis, Alca impennis,
Didus and Pezophaps. With many wood-cuts and plates.)
(See also Owen's articles in Trans. Zool. Soc. London III, IV,
VI, X, XI.)
1879. Günther and E. Newton, on Aphanapteryx leguati in
Philosophical Transactions. Vol. 168, pp. 431-432, pl. XLIII.
1879. W. A. Forbes. On the systemat. position and scientific name
of "Le Perroquet mascarin" of Brisson.
In Ibis 1879, p. 303.
1884. Wilhelm Blasius. Zur Geschichte von Alca impennis.
In Journ. f. Orn. 1884, pp. 58-176.
(The most accurate and complete list—till 1884—of specimens
of Alca impennis.)
1885. A. B. Meyer. Notornis hochstetteri.
In: Zeitschr. ges. Orn. II, p. 45, pl. I.
1885. Symington Grieve. The Great Auk or Garefowl. Its History,
Archaeology, and Remains. London 1885.
1897. Id.: Supplementary note on the Great Auk; in Trans.
Edinburgh Field Nat. Soc. 1897, pp. 238-273.
1886. December. Julius von Haast. On Megalapteryx hectori, a new
Gigantic Species of Apterygian Bird.
1879. Owen, Richard. Memoirs on the Extinct Wingless Birds of
New Zealand; with an Appendix on those of England,
Australia, Newfoundland, Mauritius and Rodriguez.
(Memoirs on the Dinornithidae, their bones, eggs, integument
and plumage, Notornis, Aptornis, Cnemiornis, Alca impennis,
Didus and Pezophaps. With many wood-cuts and plates.)
(See also Owen's articles in Trans. Zool. Soc. London III, IV,
VI, X, XI.)
1879. Günther and E. Newton, on Aphanapteryx leguati in
Philosophical Transactions. Vol. 168, pp. 431-432, pl. XLIII.
1879. W. A. Forbes. On the systemat. position and scientific name
of "Le Perroquet mascarin" of Brisson.
In Ibis 1879, p. 303.
1884. Wilhelm Blasius. Zur Geschichte von Alca impennis.
In Journ. f. Orn. 1884, pp. 58-176.
(The most accurate and complete list—till 1884—of specimens
of Alca impennis.)
1885. A. B. Meyer. Notornis hochstetteri.
In: Zeitschr. ges. Orn. II, p. 45, pl. I.
1885. Symington Grieve. The Great Auk or Garefowl. Its History,
Archaeology, and Remains. London 1885.
1897. Id.: Supplementary note on the Great Auk; in Trans.
Edinburgh Field Nat. Soc. 1897, pp. 238-273.
1886. December. Julius von Haast. On Megalapteryx hectori, a new
Gigantic Species of Apterygian Bird.
Page 28
In Trans. Zool. Soc. London XII, p. 161, pl. XXX.
1887. Henry Seebohm. The Geographical Distribution of the family
Charidriidae.
(Plates of Prosobonia leucoptera and Aechmorhynchus
cancellata.)
1888. Buller. A History of the Birds of New Zealand.
In two volumes. Second Edition. (See 1873.)
1889. Sir Edward Newton. Presidential address.
In Trans. Norfolk and Norwich Natural. Society IV, pp. 540-
547.
1889. A. de Quatrefages. Nouvelle Preuve de l'Extinction récente
des Moas.
In: Le Naturaliste 1889, p. 117.
1889. F. C. Noll. Die Veränderung in der Vogelwelt im Laufe der
Zeit.
In: Bericht über die Senckenberg. Naturf. Gesellsch. in Frankf.-
a.-M. 1887-1888, pp. 77-142.
1890. Stejneger and Lucas. Contributions to the History of Pallas'
Cormorant. With plates II-IV.
In Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. XII, pp. 83-94.
1890-99. Scott B. Wilson & Evans. Aves Hawaiienses: The Birds
of the Sandwich Islands. With numerous plates.
1891. Richard Lydekker. Catalogue of the Fossil Birds in the
British Museum. London 1891.
1887. Henry Seebohm. The Geographical Distribution of the family
Charidriidae.
(Plates of Prosobonia leucoptera and Aechmorhynchus
cancellata.)
1888. Buller. A History of the Birds of New Zealand.
In two volumes. Second Edition. (See 1873.)
1889. Sir Edward Newton. Presidential address.
In Trans. Norfolk and Norwich Natural. Society IV, pp. 540-
547.
1889. A. de Quatrefages. Nouvelle Preuve de l'Extinction récente
des Moas.
In: Le Naturaliste 1889, p. 117.
1889. F. C. Noll. Die Veränderung in der Vogelwelt im Laufe der
Zeit.
In: Bericht über die Senckenberg. Naturf. Gesellsch. in Frankf.-
a.-M. 1887-1888, pp. 77-142.
1890. Stejneger and Lucas. Contributions to the History of Pallas'
Cormorant. With plates II-IV.
In Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. XII, pp. 83-94.
1890-99. Scott B. Wilson & Evans. Aves Hawaiienses: The Birds
of the Sandwich Islands. With numerous plates.
1891. Richard Lydekker. Catalogue of the Fossil Birds in the
British Museum. London 1891.
Page 29
(Pages I-XXVII, 1-368. With 75 figures in the text.)
1891. Frederic A. Lucas. Animals recently extinct or threatened
with extermination, as represented in the collection of the U.S.
National Museum.
In Report of the Smithson Inst. (U.S. Nat. Mus.) 1889 (1891!),
pp. 609-649, pls. XCV-CV.
(An account of some of the larger animals which have become
extinct within historic times, or are threatened with extinction,
with reasons suggested for their disappearance.)
1891. Hartert. Katalog der Vogelsammlung im Museum der
Senchenberg. Naturf. Ges. Frankfurt-a-M.
(Alca impennis, Turdus terrestris, Chaunoproctus ferreorostris,
Hemiphaga spadicea mentioned.)
1891. Will. Dutcher. The Labrador Duck. A revised list of the
extant specimens in North America, with some historical notes.
In Auk 1891, pp. 301-316, pl. 2.
1894. Will. Dutcher. The Labrador Duck. With additional data
respecting extant specimens.
In Auk 1894, pp. 4-12.
1892. Forbes, H. O. Preliminary Notice of Additions to the Extinct
Avifauna of New Zealand (Abstract).
In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Inst. Vol. XXIV, pp. 185-
189.
(The editors say that the paper is published in abstract, as it had
been impossible to prepare the drawings for its illustrations in
time.—It is a most pitiful and unscientific proceeding to
publish such preliminary abstracts containing insufficiently
1891. Frederic A. Lucas. Animals recently extinct or threatened
with extermination, as represented in the collection of the U.S.
National Museum.
In Report of the Smithson Inst. (U.S. Nat. Mus.) 1889 (1891!),
pp. 609-649, pls. XCV-CV.
(An account of some of the larger animals which have become
extinct within historic times, or are threatened with extinction,
with reasons suggested for their disappearance.)
1891. Hartert. Katalog der Vogelsammlung im Museum der
Senchenberg. Naturf. Ges. Frankfurt-a-M.
(Alca impennis, Turdus terrestris, Chaunoproctus ferreorostris,
Hemiphaga spadicea mentioned.)
1891. Will. Dutcher. The Labrador Duck. A revised list of the
extant specimens in North America, with some historical notes.
In Auk 1891, pp. 301-316, pl. 2.
1894. Will. Dutcher. The Labrador Duck. With additional data
respecting extant specimens.
In Auk 1894, pp. 4-12.
1892. Forbes, H. O. Preliminary Notice of Additions to the Extinct
Avifauna of New Zealand (Abstract).
In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Inst. Vol. XXIV, pp. 185-
189.
(The editors say that the paper is published in abstract, as it had
been impossible to prepare the drawings for its illustrations in
time.—It is a most pitiful and unscientific proceeding to
publish such preliminary abstracts containing insufficiently
Page 30
founded names and complete "nomina nuda" without
publishing a fuller account; such, as far as I know, has never
appeared.)
1892. H. O. Forbes. Aphanapteryx and other remains in the
Chatham Islands.
In Nature, Vol. XLVI, p. 252.
(Short notes on avian remains which, unfortunately, were never
properly studied afterwards.)
1892. Hutton. The Moas of New Zealand.
In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Institute Vol. XXIV, pp.
93-172, pls. XV-XVII.
1892. Hamilton. Notes on Moa Gizzard-stones, t.c. p. 172.
1892. Hamilton. On the genus Aptornis, t.c. pp. 175-184.
1892. Hartlaub. Vier seltene Rallen.
In: Abhandl. d. Naturwiss. Vereins zu Bremen XII.
1893. H. O. Forbes. A List of the Birds inhabiting the Chatham
Islands.
In Ibis 1893, pp. 521-546.
(Notes on the living and extinct forms. The genus
Palaeolimnas established. Egg of Cabalus modestus figured,
etc.)
1893. W. W. Smith. Notes on certain species of New Zealand Birds.
In Ibis 1893, pp. 509-520.
(Methods of colonization and their disastrous results to the
birds described.)
publishing a fuller account; such, as far as I know, has never
appeared.)
1892. H. O. Forbes. Aphanapteryx and other remains in the
Chatham Islands.
In Nature, Vol. XLVI, p. 252.
(Short notes on avian remains which, unfortunately, were never
properly studied afterwards.)
1892. Hutton. The Moas of New Zealand.
In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Institute Vol. XXIV, pp.
93-172, pls. XV-XVII.
1892. Hamilton. Notes on Moa Gizzard-stones, t.c. p. 172.
1892. Hamilton. On the genus Aptornis, t.c. pp. 175-184.
1892. Hartlaub. Vier seltene Rallen.
In: Abhandl. d. Naturwiss. Vereins zu Bremen XII.
1893. H. O. Forbes. A List of the Birds inhabiting the Chatham
Islands.
In Ibis 1893, pp. 521-546.
(Notes on the living and extinct forms. The genus
Palaeolimnas established. Egg of Cabalus modestus figured,
etc.)
1893. W. W. Smith. Notes on certain species of New Zealand Birds.
In Ibis 1893, pp. 509-520.
(Methods of colonization and their disastrous results to the
birds described.)
Page 31
1893. Milne-Edwards & Oustalet. Notice sur quelques espèces
d'oiseaux actuellement éteintes qui se trouvent représentées
dans les collections du muséum d'histoire naturelle. In:
Centenaire de la fondation du muséum d'histoire naturelle.
Volume commémoratif publié par les professeurs du Muséum.
Pp. 189-252, pls. I-V.
(Only 6 species: Mascarinus mascarinus, Alectroenas
nitidissima, Alca impennis, Fregilupus varius, Camptolaemus
labradorius, Dromaius "ater," but these beautifully figured and
masterly described and discussed.)
1893. Sir E. Newton and Gadow. On additional Bones of the Dodo
and other Extinct Birds of Mauritius obtained by Mr. Théodore
Sauzier.
In Trans. Zool. Soc. London XIII, pp. 281-302. Pls. XXXIII-
XXXVII.
(Strix sauzieri, Astur alphonsi, Butorides mauritianus, Plotus
nanus, Sarcidiornis mauritianus, Anas theodori, etc.)
1893. A. de Quatrefages. The Moas and Moa-hunters.
In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Inst. XXV, pp. 17-49.
(Translation of the French article which appeared in the Nos.
for June and July of the "Journal des Savants" by Laura Buller.)
1893. Parker. On the classification and mutual relations of the
Dinornithidae. By T. J. Parker.
In Trans. and Proc. New Zealand Inst. XXV, pp. 1-6, pls. I-III.
1893. F. W. Hutton. New Species of Moas.
In Trans. and Proc. New Zealand Inst. Vol. XXV, pp. 6-13.
d'oiseaux actuellement éteintes qui se trouvent représentées
dans les collections du muséum d'histoire naturelle. In:
Centenaire de la fondation du muséum d'histoire naturelle.
Volume commémoratif publié par les professeurs du Muséum.
Pp. 189-252, pls. I-V.
(Only 6 species: Mascarinus mascarinus, Alectroenas
nitidissima, Alca impennis, Fregilupus varius, Camptolaemus
labradorius, Dromaius "ater," but these beautifully figured and
masterly described and discussed.)
1893. Sir E. Newton and Gadow. On additional Bones of the Dodo
and other Extinct Birds of Mauritius obtained by Mr. Théodore
Sauzier.
In Trans. Zool. Soc. London XIII, pp. 281-302. Pls. XXXIII-
XXXVII.
(Strix sauzieri, Astur alphonsi, Butorides mauritianus, Plotus
nanus, Sarcidiornis mauritianus, Anas theodori, etc.)
1893. A. de Quatrefages. The Moas and Moa-hunters.
In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Inst. XXV, pp. 17-49.
(Translation of the French article which appeared in the Nos.
for June and July of the "Journal des Savants" by Laura Buller.)
1893. Parker. On the classification and mutual relations of the
Dinornithidae. By T. J. Parker.
In Trans. and Proc. New Zealand Inst. XXV, pp. 1-6, pls. I-III.
1893. F. W. Hutton. New Species of Moas.
In Trans. and Proc. New Zealand Inst. Vol. XXV, pp. 6-13.
Page 32
(Dinornis strenuus, Anomalopteryx fortis, Euryapteryx
compacta, Pachyornis inhabilis, P. valgus.)
1893. F. W. Hutton. On Anomalopteryx antiqua. T.c. p. 14, pl. IV.
*1893. R. Burckhardt, in Paläontolog. Abhandl. VI, Heft 2, pp.
127-145, Taf. 1-4.
(Aepyornis.)
1893. H. O. Forbes. The Moas of New Zealand.
In Natural Science II, pp. 374-380.
1893. A. Hamilton. On the Fissures and Caves at the Castle Rocks,
Southland; with a description of the remains of the Existing and
Extinct Birds found in them.
(In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Inst. XXV, pp. 88-106;
with figures.)
1893. A. Newton. "Extermination." In A Dictionary of Birds.
(See also in Encyclopaedia Britannica.)
1893-1900. Walter Rothschild. The Avifauna of Laysan and the
Neighbouring Islands: with a complete history to date of the
Birds of the Hawaiian Possessions. London 1893-1900. With
numerous plates.
(Account and coloured plates of the extinct birds of Oahu and
Hawaii.)
1894. Milne-Edwards et Grandidier. Observations sur les
Aepyornis de Madagascar.
In: Comptes Rendus hebd. des Séances de l'Acad. d. Sciences,
Paris, Vol. CXVIII, Part I, pp. 122-127.
compacta, Pachyornis inhabilis, P. valgus.)
1893. F. W. Hutton. On Anomalopteryx antiqua. T.c. p. 14, pl. IV.
*1893. R. Burckhardt, in Paläontolog. Abhandl. VI, Heft 2, pp.
127-145, Taf. 1-4.
(Aepyornis.)
1893. H. O. Forbes. The Moas of New Zealand.
In Natural Science II, pp. 374-380.
1893. A. Hamilton. On the Fissures and Caves at the Castle Rocks,
Southland; with a description of the remains of the Existing and
Extinct Birds found in them.
(In Trans. and Proceed. New Zealand Inst. XXV, pp. 88-106;
with figures.)
1893. A. Newton. "Extermination." In A Dictionary of Birds.
(See also in Encyclopaedia Britannica.)
1893-1900. Walter Rothschild. The Avifauna of Laysan and the
Neighbouring Islands: with a complete history to date of the
Birds of the Hawaiian Possessions. London 1893-1900. With
numerous plates.
(Account and coloured plates of the extinct birds of Oahu and
Hawaii.)
1894. Milne-Edwards et Grandidier. Observations sur les
Aepyornis de Madagascar.
In: Comptes Rendus hebd. des Séances de l'Acad. d. Sciences,
Paris, Vol. CXVIII, Part I, pp. 122-127.
Page 33
1894. J. Parker. Notes on Three Moa-Skulls.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVI, p. 223.
1894. Hamilton. On Avian Remains in Southland.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVI, p. 226.
1894. Hamilton. Materials for a Bibliography of the Dinornithidae.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVI, pp. 229-257.
(A careful list to which I refer my readers.)
1895. C. W. Andrews. On some remains of Aepyornis in the Hon.
Walter Rothschild's Museum at Tring.
In: Novitates Zoologicae II, pp. 23-25.
1895. Hamilton. Further contributions towards a Bibliography of the
Moas.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVII, p. 228-232.
1895. Jeffery Parker. On the Cranial Osteology, Classification, and
Phylogeny of the Dinornithidae.
In Trans. Zool. Soc. London Vol. XIII, pp. 373-431, pls. LVI-
LXII.
1895. Hamilton. On the Feathers of a small Moa.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVII, pp. 232-238.
*1895. C. W. Andrews. On Aepyornis bones, etc., in Geological
Magazine 1895.
1896. Hutton. On a deposit of Moa-bones at Kapua.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVI, p. 223.
1894. Hamilton. On Avian Remains in Southland.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVI, p. 226.
1894. Hamilton. Materials for a Bibliography of the Dinornithidae.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVI, pp. 229-257.
(A careful list to which I refer my readers.)
1895. C. W. Andrews. On some remains of Aepyornis in the Hon.
Walter Rothschild's Museum at Tring.
In: Novitates Zoologicae II, pp. 23-25.
1895. Hamilton. Further contributions towards a Bibliography of the
Moas.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVII, p. 228-232.
1895. Jeffery Parker. On the Cranial Osteology, Classification, and
Phylogeny of the Dinornithidae.
In Trans. Zool. Soc. London Vol. XIII, pp. 373-431, pls. LVI-
LXII.
1895. Hamilton. On the Feathers of a small Moa.
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVII, pp. 232-238.
*1895. C. W. Andrews. On Aepyornis bones, etc., in Geological
Magazine 1895.
1896. Hutton. On a deposit of Moa-bones at Kapua.
Page 34
In Trans. and Proc. N. Zealand Inst. XXVIII, p. 627. Id. On the
Moa-bones from Enfield, t.c. p. 645.
1896. C. W. Andrews. On the Extinct Birds of the Chatham Islands.
In Novit Zoolog. III, p. 73-84 and 260-271.
(Diaphorapteryx hawkinsi, Palaeolimnas chathamensis,
Nesolimnas dieffenbachii.)
1896. G. Hartlaub. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der ausgestorbenen
Vögel der Neuzeit, sowie derjenigen, deren Fortbestehen
bedroht erscheint.
In: Abhandl. d. Naturwiss. Vereins gn. Bremen XIV Band, 1
Heft.
(Also: Second edition of the same, printed as manuscript, with
a few alterations and additions.)
(The most useful, comprehensive pamphlet on recently extinct
birds.)
1897. Andrews. On some fossil remains of Carinate Birds from
Central Madagascar.
In Ibis 1897, pp. 343-359, pls. VIII and IX.
1897. H. O. Forbes. On an apparently new, and supposed to be now
extinct, species of Bird from the Mascarene Islands,
provisionally referred to the genus Necropsar. With plate.
In Bull. Liverpool Museums, I, p. 34, pl. Sturn. I (Necropsar
leguati).
1897. Forbes and Robinson. Note on Two Species of Pigeon, t.c. p.
35.
(Hemiphaga spadicea.)
Moa-bones from Enfield, t.c. p. 645.
1896. C. W. Andrews. On the Extinct Birds of the Chatham Islands.
In Novit Zoolog. III, p. 73-84 and 260-271.
(Diaphorapteryx hawkinsi, Palaeolimnas chathamensis,
Nesolimnas dieffenbachii.)
1896. G. Hartlaub. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der ausgestorbenen
Vögel der Neuzeit, sowie derjenigen, deren Fortbestehen
bedroht erscheint.
In: Abhandl. d. Naturwiss. Vereins gn. Bremen XIV Band, 1
Heft.
(Also: Second edition of the same, printed as manuscript, with
a few alterations and additions.)
(The most useful, comprehensive pamphlet on recently extinct
birds.)
1897. Andrews. On some fossil remains of Carinate Birds from
Central Madagascar.
In Ibis 1897, pp. 343-359, pls. VIII and IX.
1897. H. O. Forbes. On an apparently new, and supposed to be now
extinct, species of Bird from the Mascarene Islands,
provisionally referred to the genus Necropsar. With plate.
In Bull. Liverpool Museums, I, p. 34, pl. Sturn. I (Necropsar
leguati).
1897. Forbes and Robinson. Note on Two Species of Pigeon, t.c. p.
35.
(Hemiphaga spadicea.)
Page 35
(On pl. I of the same vol. is figured Nestor norfolcensis. See p.
5.)
1900. W. Wolterstorff. Ausgestorbene Riesenvögel. Vortrag,
gehalten im Naturwissenschaftlichen Verein zu Magdeburg.
Mit zwei Abbildungen. Stuttgart. Verlag von E. Nägele.
1900. A. Mertens. Die Moas im Naturwissenschaftl. Museum zu
Magdeburg. Mit 2 Abbildungen.
In: Jahresbericht Naturwiss. Vereins zu Magdeburg für 1898-
1900. (Pp. 1-24 in separate copy.)
1901. W. A. Bryan. Key to the Birds of the Hawaiian group.
1902. Walter Rothschild and Ernst Hartert. Further notes on the
fauna of the Galápagos Islands.
In Nov. Zool. 1902, pp. 381-418; cf. also Nov. Zool. 1899, pp.
154, 163.
(Geospiza magnirostris and dentirostris.)
1902. H. W. Henshaw. Birds of the Hawaiian Islands, being a
complete list of the Birds of the Hawaiian Possessions, with
notes on their habits. Honolulu 1902.
1903. Graham Renshaw. The Black Emu.
In: Zoologist 1903, pp. 81-88.
1903. Wilhelm Blasius. Der Riesenalk, Alca impennis L. In the
New Edition of Naumann called "Naumann, Naturgeschichte
der Vögel Mitteleuropas" (sic), vol. XII, pp. 169-208, pls. 17,
17A-17D, 1903.
(Among others the most complete bibliography and very
detailed descriptions.)
1903. Fleming, J. H. On the Passenger Pigeon.
5.)
1900. W. Wolterstorff. Ausgestorbene Riesenvögel. Vortrag,
gehalten im Naturwissenschaftlichen Verein zu Magdeburg.
Mit zwei Abbildungen. Stuttgart. Verlag von E. Nägele.
1900. A. Mertens. Die Moas im Naturwissenschaftl. Museum zu
Magdeburg. Mit 2 Abbildungen.
In: Jahresbericht Naturwiss. Vereins zu Magdeburg für 1898-
1900. (Pp. 1-24 in separate copy.)
1901. W. A. Bryan. Key to the Birds of the Hawaiian group.
1902. Walter Rothschild and Ernst Hartert. Further notes on the
fauna of the Galápagos Islands.
In Nov. Zool. 1902, pp. 381-418; cf. also Nov. Zool. 1899, pp.
154, 163.
(Geospiza magnirostris and dentirostris.)
1902. H. W. Henshaw. Birds of the Hawaiian Islands, being a
complete list of the Birds of the Hawaiian Possessions, with
notes on their habits. Honolulu 1902.
1903. Graham Renshaw. The Black Emu.
In: Zoologist 1903, pp. 81-88.
1903. Wilhelm Blasius. Der Riesenalk, Alca impennis L. In the
New Edition of Naumann called "Naumann, Naturgeschichte
der Vögel Mitteleuropas" (sic), vol. XII, pp. 169-208, pls. 17,
17A-17D, 1903.
(Among others the most complete bibliography and very
detailed descriptions.)
1903. Fleming, J. H. On the Passenger Pigeon.
Page 36
In Auk 1903, p. 66.
1903. M. Guillaume Grandidier. Contribution à l'étude de l'Epiornis
de Madagascar.
In: Comptes Rendus des Séances de l'Acad. Sc., Paris 1903
(pp. 1-3 in separate copy.)
1903. G. Grandidier. Note au sujet du squelette de l'Aepyornis
ingens.
In Bull. Mus. Paris 1903, pp. 318-323, with figures.
1903. Paul Carié. Observations sur quelques oiseaux de l'ile
Maurice.
In Ornis XII, p. 121-128.
(We are informed that neither Palaeornis echo—sub nomine
eques—nor Nesoenas mayeri are extinct.)
1905. A. H. Clark. Extirpated West Indian Birds.
In Auk 1905, pp. 259-266.
1905. A. H. Clark. The Lesser Antillean Macaws.
In Auk 1905, pp. 266-273.
1905. A. H. Clark. The West Indian Parrots.
In Auk 1905, pp. 337-344.
1905. A. H. Clark. The Greater Antillean Macaws.
In Auk 1905, pp. 345-348.
1905-1906. Sir Walter Buller. Supplement to the "Birds of New
Zealand." Two volumes.
1903. M. Guillaume Grandidier. Contribution à l'étude de l'Epiornis
de Madagascar.
In: Comptes Rendus des Séances de l'Acad. Sc., Paris 1903
(pp. 1-3 in separate copy.)
1903. G. Grandidier. Note au sujet du squelette de l'Aepyornis
ingens.
In Bull. Mus. Paris 1903, pp. 318-323, with figures.
1903. Paul Carié. Observations sur quelques oiseaux de l'ile
Maurice.
In Ornis XII, p. 121-128.
(We are informed that neither Palaeornis echo—sub nomine
eques—nor Nesoenas mayeri are extinct.)
1905. A. H. Clark. Extirpated West Indian Birds.
In Auk 1905, pp. 259-266.
1905. A. H. Clark. The Lesser Antillean Macaws.
In Auk 1905, pp. 266-273.
1905. A. H. Clark. The West Indian Parrots.
In Auk 1905, pp. 337-344.
1905. A. H. Clark. The Greater Antillean Macaws.
In Auk 1905, pp. 345-348.
1905-1906. Sir Walter Buller. Supplement to the "Birds of New
Zealand." Two volumes.
Page 37
(Though containing very interesting notes on extinct and
threatened birds, these two volumes are rather disappointing.
They contain very little that is new, and are mainly composed
of quotations from other people's writings or letters. Buller's
former great book on the Birds of New Zealand was a most
important and creditable work, though not without
shortcomings. Our knowledge of New Zealand Birds might
have been brought up to date in his supplement, but we cannot
say that this has been done properly, and errors are frequent.)
1906. Baldwin Spencer. The King Island Emu.
In The Victorian Naturalist XXIII (1906), pp. 139, 140.
(Dromaius minor described.)
1907. Walter Rothschild. On Extinct and Vanishing Birds. A short
Essay on the Birds which have presumably become extinct
within the last 500 years, and also of those birds which are on
the verge of extinction, including a few which, though not yet
so far gone, are threatened with extinction in the near future.
In Proceed, of the IV Intern. Ornith. Congress, London 1905,
pp. 191-217.
LIST OF PLATES.
1. Fregilupus varius. From the plate in the "Volume Centenaire,"
Mus. Hist. Naturelle, Paris.
2. 1. Foudia bruante. From the figure in Daubenton's work.
2. Necropsar rodericanus. Made up from description.
3. Necropsar leguati. From the type specimen in Liverpool.
3. 1. Geospiza magnirostris. From the type specimen in London.
threatened birds, these two volumes are rather disappointing.
They contain very little that is new, and are mainly composed
of quotations from other people's writings or letters. Buller's
former great book on the Birds of New Zealand was a most
important and creditable work, though not without
shortcomings. Our knowledge of New Zealand Birds might
have been brought up to date in his supplement, but we cannot
say that this has been done properly, and errors are frequent.)
1906. Baldwin Spencer. The King Island Emu.
In The Victorian Naturalist XXIII (1906), pp. 139, 140.
(Dromaius minor described.)
1907. Walter Rothschild. On Extinct and Vanishing Birds. A short
Essay on the Birds which have presumably become extinct
within the last 500 years, and also of those birds which are on
the verge of extinction, including a few which, though not yet
so far gone, are threatened with extinction in the near future.
In Proceed, of the IV Intern. Ornith. Congress, London 1905,
pp. 191-217.
LIST OF PLATES.
1. Fregilupus varius. From the plate in the "Volume Centenaire,"
Mus. Hist. Naturelle, Paris.
2. 1. Foudia bruante. From the figure in Daubenton's work.
2. Necropsar rodericanus. Made up from description.
3. Necropsar leguati. From the type specimen in Liverpool.
3. 1. Geospiza magnirostris. From the type specimen in London.
Page 38
2. Geospiza strenua. Head. From specimen at Tring.
3. Nesoenas mayeri. From specimen in the British Museum.
4. Chaunoproctus ferreorostris ♂ ♀. From the pair in the British
Museum.
4. 1. Hemignathus ellisianus. After a drawing from the type in the
Berlin Museum.
2. Heterorhynchus lucidus. From a specimen in the Paris
Museum.
3. Psittirostra psittacea deppei. From the type in the Tring
Museum.
4. Ciridops anna. From a specimen in the Tring Museum.
4a. 1. Moho apicalis. From specimen in the Tring Museum.
2. Chaetoptila angustipluma. From specimen in the Tring
Museum.
5. 1. Miro traversi. From skin in the Tring Museum.
2. Traversia lyalli ♂ and ♀ . From the type specimens in the
Tring Museum.
3. Bowdleria rufescens. From a skin in the Tring Museum.
5a. Siphonorhis americanus. From skin in the British Museum.
6. 1. Nestor norfolcensis. From the plate in the Bulletin of the
Liverpool Museum.
2. Head of Nestor productus. From a specimen in the Tring
Museum.
7. Lophopsittacus mauritianus. From ancient drawing and
description.
8. Necropsittacus borbonicus. From a description.
3. Nesoenas mayeri. From specimen in the British Museum.
4. Chaunoproctus ferreorostris ♂ ♀. From the pair in the British
Museum.
4. 1. Hemignathus ellisianus. After a drawing from the type in the
Berlin Museum.
2. Heterorhynchus lucidus. From a specimen in the Paris
Museum.
3. Psittirostra psittacea deppei. From the type in the Tring
Museum.
4. Ciridops anna. From a specimen in the Tring Museum.
4a. 1. Moho apicalis. From specimen in the Tring Museum.
2. Chaetoptila angustipluma. From specimen in the Tring
Museum.
5. 1. Miro traversi. From skin in the Tring Museum.
2. Traversia lyalli ♂ and ♀ . From the type specimens in the
Tring Museum.
3. Bowdleria rufescens. From a skin in the Tring Museum.
5a. Siphonorhis americanus. From skin in the British Museum.
6. 1. Nestor norfolcensis. From the plate in the Bulletin of the
Liverpool Museum.
2. Head of Nestor productus. From a specimen in the Tring
Museum.
7. Lophopsittacus mauritianus. From ancient drawing and
description.
8. Necropsittacus borbonicus. From a description.
Page 39
9. Mascarinus mascarinus. From the drawing in the Volume
commémoratif, Centenaire Mus. Paris.
10. Ara tricolor. From specimen in the Liverpool Museum.
11. Ara gossei. From Gosse's description.
12. Ara erythrocephala. From Gosse's description.
13. Anadorhynchus purpurascens. From description.
14. Ara martinicus. From description.
15. Ara erythrura. From description.
16. Conurus labati. From description.
17. Amazona violaceus. From description.
18. Amazona martinicana. From description.
19. Palaeornis exsul. From the plate in the "Ibis."
20. Palaeornis wardi. From the plate in the "Ibis."
21. Hemiphaga spadicea. From the specimen in the Tring Museum.
22. Alectroenas nitidissima. From the plate in the Volume
commémoratif du Centenaire, Mus. Paris.
23. Pezophaps solitaria. Made up from descriptions and ancient
drawings.
24. Didus cucullatus. From drawings.
24a. Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page 172.
24b. Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page 172.
24c. Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page 172.
25. Didus solitarius. From a picture supposed to be taken from a
living specimen in Amsterdam, but beak and wing restored.
commémoratif, Centenaire Mus. Paris.
10. Ara tricolor. From specimen in the Liverpool Museum.
11. Ara gossei. From Gosse's description.
12. Ara erythrocephala. From Gosse's description.
13. Anadorhynchus purpurascens. From description.
14. Ara martinicus. From description.
15. Ara erythrura. From description.
16. Conurus labati. From description.
17. Amazona violaceus. From description.
18. Amazona martinicana. From description.
19. Palaeornis exsul. From the plate in the "Ibis."
20. Palaeornis wardi. From the plate in the "Ibis."
21. Hemiphaga spadicea. From the specimen in the Tring Museum.
22. Alectroenas nitidissima. From the plate in the Volume
commémoratif du Centenaire, Mus. Paris.
23. Pezophaps solitaria. Made up from descriptions and ancient
drawings.
24. Didus cucullatus. From drawings.
24a. Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page 172.
24b. Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page 172.
24c. Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page 172.
25. Didus solitarius. From a picture supposed to be taken from a
living specimen in Amsterdam, but beak and wing restored.
Page 40
25a. Didus solitarius. After Dubois' description.
25b. 1, 2, 3. Pezophaps solitarius. Reproduction of ancient figures,
see page 177.
4, 5, 7, 8. Didus solitarius. Reproduction of ancient figures, see
page 177.
26. 1. Hypotaenidia pacifica. From Forster's unpublished drawing in
the British Museum.
2. Pennula sandwichensis. From the unique specimen in the
Leyden Museum.
3. Pennula millsi. From skin in the Tring Museum.
27. Nesolimnas dieffenbachi. From the unique specimen in the
British Museum.
28. 1. Cabalus modestus. From skin in the Tring Museum.
2. Coturnix novaezealandiae. From skin in the Tring Museum.
29. Aphanapteryx bonasia. From ancient drawing.
30. Erythromachus leguati. Made up from ancient outline figure and
description.
31. Leguatia gigantea. Made up from ancient figures and
descriptions.
32. Apterornis coerulescens. From description.
33. Notornis alba. From the plate in "Ibis," 1873.
34. Notornis hochstetteri. From the plate in the Zeitschr. f.d. ges.
Ornithologie.
35. 1. Aechmorhynchus cancellatus. From the plate in Seebohm's
"Charadriidae."
2. Prosobonia leucoptera. After the unpublished drawings in the
British Museum, but the artist has not shown the white patch on
25b. 1, 2, 3. Pezophaps solitarius. Reproduction of ancient figures,
see page 177.
4, 5, 7, 8. Didus solitarius. Reproduction of ancient figures, see
page 177.
26. 1. Hypotaenidia pacifica. From Forster's unpublished drawing in
the British Museum.
2. Pennula sandwichensis. From the unique specimen in the
Leyden Museum.
3. Pennula millsi. From skin in the Tring Museum.
27. Nesolimnas dieffenbachi. From the unique specimen in the
British Museum.
28. 1. Cabalus modestus. From skin in the Tring Museum.
2. Coturnix novaezealandiae. From skin in the Tring Museum.
29. Aphanapteryx bonasia. From ancient drawing.
30. Erythromachus leguati. Made up from ancient outline figure and
description.
31. Leguatia gigantea. Made up from ancient figures and
descriptions.
32. Apterornis coerulescens. From description.
33. Notornis alba. From the plate in "Ibis," 1873.
34. Notornis hochstetteri. From the plate in the Zeitschr. f.d. ges.
Ornithologie.
35. 1. Aechmorhynchus cancellatus. From the plate in Seebohm's
"Charadriidae."
2. Prosobonia leucoptera. After the unpublished drawings in the
British Museum, but the artist has not shown the white patch on
Page 41
the shoulder.
36. Camptolaimus labradorius. From the two specimens in the Tring
Museum.
37. Aestrelata caribbaea. From the type specimen in the Dublin
Museum.
38. Alca impennis. From the stuffed specimen in the Tring Museum.
39. Carbo perspicillatus. From a specimen in the British Museum.
40. Dromaius peroni. From the type of the species in the Paris
Museum.
41. Megalapteryx huttoni. Restored from osteological remains and
feathers.
42. Dinornis ingens. Restoration from skeleton and some feathers.
PALAEOCORAX FORBES.
T HIS genus is founded on cranial characters: Basipterygoid processes
of parasphenoid present but rudimentary. The vomer broad, flat, and
three-pointed in front. Maxillaries anchylosed to the premaxillaries,
the latter anchylosed to the expanded ossified base of the nasal septum. The
ossified mesethmoid stretches backward and is lodged in the concavity of
the upper surface of the vomer, so that it presents a form intermediate
between the complete aegithognathous forms, such as Corvus, and the
compound aegithognathous forms, such as Gymnorhina, in which
desmognathism was superadded by "anchylosis of the inner edge of the
maxillaries with a highly ossified alinasal wall and nasal septum" (Parker).
36. Camptolaimus labradorius. From the two specimens in the Tring
Museum.
37. Aestrelata caribbaea. From the type specimen in the Dublin
Museum.
38. Alca impennis. From the stuffed specimen in the Tring Museum.
39. Carbo perspicillatus. From a specimen in the British Museum.
40. Dromaius peroni. From the type of the species in the Paris
Museum.
41. Megalapteryx huttoni. Restored from osteological remains and
feathers.
42. Dinornis ingens. Restoration from skeleton and some feathers.
PALAEOCORAX FORBES.
T HIS genus is founded on cranial characters: Basipterygoid processes
of parasphenoid present but rudimentary. The vomer broad, flat, and
three-pointed in front. Maxillaries anchylosed to the premaxillaries,
the latter anchylosed to the expanded ossified base of the nasal septum. The
ossified mesethmoid stretches backward and is lodged in the concavity of
the upper surface of the vomer, so that it presents a form intermediate
between the complete aegithognathous forms, such as Corvus, and the
compound aegithognathous forms, such as Gymnorhina, in which
desmognathism was superadded by "anchylosis of the inner edge of the
maxillaries with a highly ossified alinasal wall and nasal septum" (Parker).
Page 42
PALAEOCORAX MORIORUM (FORBES).
Corvus moriorum Forbes, Nature XLVI p. 252 (1892).
Palaeocorax moriorum Forbes, Bull. B.O.C. I p. XXI (1892).
D R. FORBES says this bird is of about half the size again of a Corvus
cornix. The principal characters are cranial, and the same as those of
the genus.
Habitat: Chatham Islands, and possibly the Middle Island, New Zealand.
Many skulls and bones in the Tring Museum.
PALAEOCORAX ANTIPODUM FORBES.
Palaeocorax antipodum Forbes, Ibis 1893, p. 544.
T HIS is said to be distinguished from P. moriorum by its considerably
smaller size. Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
FREGILUPUS LESSON.
H UGE crest, bill long and curved. One species, extinct.
FREGILUPUS VARIA (BODD.)
(Plate 1.)
Huppes ou Callendres, Voyages du Sieur D.B. (Dubois) aux Iles Dauphine ou Madagascar, et
Bourbon ou Mascarenne, etc., p. 172 (1674—Bourbon).
Huppe du Cap de Bonne Espérance Daubenton, Pl. Enl. 697.
Corvus moriorum Forbes, Nature XLVI p. 252 (1892).
Palaeocorax moriorum Forbes, Bull. B.O.C. I p. XXI (1892).
D R. FORBES says this bird is of about half the size again of a Corvus
cornix. The principal characters are cranial, and the same as those of
the genus.
Habitat: Chatham Islands, and possibly the Middle Island, New Zealand.
Many skulls and bones in the Tring Museum.
PALAEOCORAX ANTIPODUM FORBES.
Palaeocorax antipodum Forbes, Ibis 1893, p. 544.
T HIS is said to be distinguished from P. moriorum by its considerably
smaller size. Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
FREGILUPUS LESSON.
H UGE crest, bill long and curved. One species, extinct.
FREGILUPUS VARIA (BODD.)
(Plate 1.)
Huppes ou Callendres, Voyages du Sieur D.B. (Dubois) aux Iles Dauphine ou Madagascar, et
Bourbon ou Mascarenne, etc., p. 172 (1674—Bourbon).
Huppe du Cap de Bonne Espérance Daubenton, Pl. Enl. 697.
Page 43
Huppe noire et blanche du Cap de Bonne Espérance Montbeillard, Hist. Nat. Ois. VI, p. 463
(1779).
Madagascar Hoopoe Latham, Gen. Syn. B. II pt. I, p. 690 (1783).
Upupa varia Boddaert, Tabl. Pl. Enl. p. 43 (1783—ex Daubenton).
Upupa capensis Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 466 (1788—ex Montbeillard).
La Huppe grise Audebert et Vieillot, Ois. Dor., "Promerops" p. 15 pl. III (1802).
Le Mérops huppé Levaillant, Hist. Nat. Promérops, etc., p. 43, pl. 18 (1806).
Upupa madagascariensis Shaw, Gen. Zool. VIII, pt. I, p. 140 (1812).
Coracia cristata Vieillot, Nouv. Dict. d'Hist. Nat. VIII, p. 3 (1817).
Pastor upupa Wagler, Syst. Avium, Pastor, sp. 13 (1827).
Fregilupus borbonicus Vinson, Bull. Soc. d'Acclimat 1868, p. 627.
Fregilupus varius Hartlaub, Vög. Madagasc. p. 203 (1877); Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XIII
p. 194 (1890); Milne-Edwards & Oustalet, Centenaire Mus. Hist. Nat., p. 205, pl. II
(1893).
A S long ago as 1674 a note about the "Huppe" exists, by "Le Sieur
D.B.," i.e., Dubois. He says, when describing the birds of Réunion
(translated): "Hoopoes or 'Callendres,' having a white tuft on the
head, the rest of the plumage white and grey, the bill and the feet like a bird
of prey; they are a little larger than the young pigeons; this is another good
game (i.e., to eat) when it is fat."
This description has generally been accepted as referring to the Fregilupus,
though that of the bill and feet is then due to an error of the author, for
Fregilupus has the bill and feet of a member of the Sturnidae or family of
Starlings.
Good descriptions and representations of the "Huppe" have been given in
many places (see literature), but whether they were taken from males or
females is generally not known. The sexes seem to be alike in colour, but
the female is smaller, and has a shorter and straighter bill than the male. At
least, this is the conclusion of Dr. Hartert, who saw the four examples in the
museum at Troyes. As far as he could see through the glass all four seemed
to be adult birds, but two were larger with longer and more curved bills, two
smaller and with shorter and straighter beaks, so that they are evidently two
pairs.
(1779).
Madagascar Hoopoe Latham, Gen. Syn. B. II pt. I, p. 690 (1783).
Upupa varia Boddaert, Tabl. Pl. Enl. p. 43 (1783—ex Daubenton).
Upupa capensis Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 466 (1788—ex Montbeillard).
La Huppe grise Audebert et Vieillot, Ois. Dor., "Promerops" p. 15 pl. III (1802).
Le Mérops huppé Levaillant, Hist. Nat. Promérops, etc., p. 43, pl. 18 (1806).
Upupa madagascariensis Shaw, Gen. Zool. VIII, pt. I, p. 140 (1812).
Coracia cristata Vieillot, Nouv. Dict. d'Hist. Nat. VIII, p. 3 (1817).
Pastor upupa Wagler, Syst. Avium, Pastor, sp. 13 (1827).
Fregilupus borbonicus Vinson, Bull. Soc. d'Acclimat 1868, p. 627.
Fregilupus varius Hartlaub, Vög. Madagasc. p. 203 (1877); Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XIII
p. 194 (1890); Milne-Edwards & Oustalet, Centenaire Mus. Hist. Nat., p. 205, pl. II
(1893).
A S long ago as 1674 a note about the "Huppe" exists, by "Le Sieur
D.B.," i.e., Dubois. He says, when describing the birds of Réunion
(translated): "Hoopoes or 'Callendres,' having a white tuft on the
head, the rest of the plumage white and grey, the bill and the feet like a bird
of prey; they are a little larger than the young pigeons; this is another good
game (i.e., to eat) when it is fat."
This description has generally been accepted as referring to the Fregilupus,
though that of the bill and feet is then due to an error of the author, for
Fregilupus has the bill and feet of a member of the Sturnidae or family of
Starlings.
Good descriptions and representations of the "Huppe" have been given in
many places (see literature), but whether they were taken from males or
females is generally not known. The sexes seem to be alike in colour, but
the female is smaller, and has a shorter and straighter bill than the male. At
least, this is the conclusion of Dr. Hartert, who saw the four examples in the
museum at Troyes. As far as he could see through the glass all four seemed
to be adult birds, but two were larger with longer and more curved bills, two
smaller and with shorter and straighter beaks, so that they are evidently two
pairs.
Page 44
This bird seems to have become extirpated about the middle of the last
century. The late Monsieur Pollen wrote in 1868 (translated): "This species
has become so rare that one did not hear them mentioned for a dozen years.
It has been destroyed in all the littoral districts, and even in the mountains
near the coast. Trustworthy persons, however, have assured us that they
must still exist in the forests of the interior, near St. Joseph. The old creoles
told me that, in their youth, these birds were still common, and that they
were so stupid that one could kill them with sticks. They call this bird the
"Hoopoe." It is, therefore, not wrong what a distinguished inhabitant of
Réunion, Mr. A. Legras, wrote about this bird with the following words:
"The Hoopoe has become so rare that we have hardly seen a dozen in our
wanderings to discover birds; we were even grieved to search for it in vain
in our museum."
We are certain that Fregilupus existed still on Réunion in 1835, as Monsieur
Desjardins, living on Mauritius, wrote in a manuscript formerly belonging
to the late Professor Milne-Edwards: "My friend, Marcelin Sauzier, has sent
me four alive from Bourbon in May, 1835. They eat everything. Two have
escaped some months afterwards, and it might well happen that they will
stock our forests."
It seems, indeed, that specimens were killed in 1837 on Mauritius, where
they did not originally exist. Verreaux shot an example in Réunion in 1832.
The names "La Huppe du Cap" and "Upupa madagascariensis" arose out of
the mistaken notions that this bird lived in South Africa or Madagascar, but
we know now that its real home was Réunion or Bourbon.
WE ARE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SPECIMENS PRESERVED IN
COLLECTIONS.
2 stuffed ones, one in good, one in bad condition, and two in spirits, in the Paris Museum.
4 stuffed in Troyes.
1 stuffed, from the Riocour collection, in the British Museum.
1 in the Florence Museum.
1 in Turin.
1 in Pisa.
1, rather poor and old, in Leyden.
century. The late Monsieur Pollen wrote in 1868 (translated): "This species
has become so rare that one did not hear them mentioned for a dozen years.
It has been destroyed in all the littoral districts, and even in the mountains
near the coast. Trustworthy persons, however, have assured us that they
must still exist in the forests of the interior, near St. Joseph. The old creoles
told me that, in their youth, these birds were still common, and that they
were so stupid that one could kill them with sticks. They call this bird the
"Hoopoe." It is, therefore, not wrong what a distinguished inhabitant of
Réunion, Mr. A. Legras, wrote about this bird with the following words:
"The Hoopoe has become so rare that we have hardly seen a dozen in our
wanderings to discover birds; we were even grieved to search for it in vain
in our museum."
We are certain that Fregilupus existed still on Réunion in 1835, as Monsieur
Desjardins, living on Mauritius, wrote in a manuscript formerly belonging
to the late Professor Milne-Edwards: "My friend, Marcelin Sauzier, has sent
me four alive from Bourbon in May, 1835. They eat everything. Two have
escaped some months afterwards, and it might well happen that they will
stock our forests."
It seems, indeed, that specimens were killed in 1837 on Mauritius, where
they did not originally exist. Verreaux shot an example in Réunion in 1832.
The names "La Huppe du Cap" and "Upupa madagascariensis" arose out of
the mistaken notions that this bird lived in South Africa or Madagascar, but
we know now that its real home was Réunion or Bourbon.
WE ARE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SPECIMENS PRESERVED IN
COLLECTIONS.
2 stuffed ones, one in good, one in bad condition, and two in spirits, in the Paris Museum.
4 stuffed in Troyes.
1 stuffed, from the Riocour collection, in the British Museum.
1 in the Florence Museum.
1 in Turin.
1 in Pisa.
1, rather poor and old, in Leyden.
Page 45
1 in Stockholm.
1 in the Museum at Port Louis, on the island of Mauritius.
1 in the collection of the late Baron de Selys Longchamps.
1 in Genoa.
NECROPSAR GÜNTHER & NEWTON.
T HE authors state that this genus was very closely allied to Fregilupus,
and, besides some minor differences, give as the principal difference
the shorter and less curved bill.
NECROPSAR RODERICANUS GÜNTH. & NEWT.
(Plate 2, Fig. 2.)
Necropsar rodericanus Günther & Newton, Phil. Trans. vol. 168, p. 427, pl. XLII, figs. A-G
(1879).
T HE original description given by the anonymous author of the
"Relation de l'Ile Rodrigue" is as follows:—"These birds are a little
larger than a blackbird, and have white plumage, part of the wings and
the tail black, the beak and the legs yellow, and make a wonderful
warbling." Our author also says they inhabited the Islet au Mât, and fed on
seabirds' eggs and dead turtle.
The bird evidently became extinct on Rodriguez before 1730, and lingered
a little longer on the outlying islets. Only known from bones, mostly
collected by the Rev. H. H. Slater, and the above description.
Habitat: Rodriguez and neighbouring islets.
There is one tibia in the Tring Museum.
The figure is coloured according to the description, while the shape of the
bird is evident from its bones and relation.
1 in the Museum at Port Louis, on the island of Mauritius.
1 in the collection of the late Baron de Selys Longchamps.
1 in Genoa.
NECROPSAR GÜNTHER & NEWTON.
T HE authors state that this genus was very closely allied to Fregilupus,
and, besides some minor differences, give as the principal difference
the shorter and less curved bill.
NECROPSAR RODERICANUS GÜNTH. & NEWT.
(Plate 2, Fig. 2.)
Necropsar rodericanus Günther & Newton, Phil. Trans. vol. 168, p. 427, pl. XLII, figs. A-G
(1879).
T HE original description given by the anonymous author of the
"Relation de l'Ile Rodrigue" is as follows:—"These birds are a little
larger than a blackbird, and have white plumage, part of the wings and
the tail black, the beak and the legs yellow, and make a wonderful
warbling." Our author also says they inhabited the Islet au Mât, and fed on
seabirds' eggs and dead turtle.
The bird evidently became extinct on Rodriguez before 1730, and lingered
a little longer on the outlying islets. Only known from bones, mostly
collected by the Rev. H. H. Slater, and the above description.
Habitat: Rodriguez and neighbouring islets.
There is one tibia in the Tring Museum.
The figure is coloured according to the description, while the shape of the
bird is evident from its bones and relation.
Page 46
NECROPSAR LEGUATI FORBES.
(Plate 2, Fig. 3.)
Necropsar leguati Forbes, Bull. Liverp. Mus. I, p. 34, pl. Sturnidae I (1897-1898).
D R. FORBES' description is as follows:—"General colour white
everywhere, except on the outer webs of distal half of the primaries
and secondaries and the outer webs of the newly moulted and both
webs of the unmoulted rectrices, which are marked with lighter or darker
ferruginous."
Dr. Forbes then gives an exhaustive description of the structure, to which I
refer my readers, and the following measurements:—
Culmen 32 mm.
Wing 109 "
Tail 98 "
Tarsus 31.5 "
I should have been inclined to consider this bird an albinistic specimen of
the bird described in "Relation de l'Ile Rodrigue," but for the fact that the
tibia of Necropsar rodericanus is 52-59 mm. in length, while this is only 46
mm. in length, while the metatarsus measures 31.5 mm. as opposed to 36-
41 mm. in N. rodericanus. I cannot accept the theory that this is the Islet au
Mât bird, and therefore different from N. rodericanus, as the islet is too
close to Rodriguez to have had a different starling. I therefore believe this
bird to have been an albinistic specimen of the Mauritius species of
Necropsar, for there can be little doubt that it is albinistic, as the
ferruginous colour is much stronger on one wing than on the other; and I
conclude that the colour in the wings and tail in normal specimens was
black like the Rodriguez bird, and that N. leguati was a close ally of N.
rodericanus, from which it differed principally in its much smaller size.
Habitat doubtful.—The type specimen bears Lord Derby's Museum number,
1792, and a label of Verreaux giving Madagascar as the habitat, which is
certainly erroneous.
(Plate 2, Fig. 3.)
Necropsar leguati Forbes, Bull. Liverp. Mus. I, p. 34, pl. Sturnidae I (1897-1898).
D R. FORBES' description is as follows:—"General colour white
everywhere, except on the outer webs of distal half of the primaries
and secondaries and the outer webs of the newly moulted and both
webs of the unmoulted rectrices, which are marked with lighter or darker
ferruginous."
Dr. Forbes then gives an exhaustive description of the structure, to which I
refer my readers, and the following measurements:—
Culmen 32 mm.
Wing 109 "
Tail 98 "
Tarsus 31.5 "
I should have been inclined to consider this bird an albinistic specimen of
the bird described in "Relation de l'Ile Rodrigue," but for the fact that the
tibia of Necropsar rodericanus is 52-59 mm. in length, while this is only 46
mm. in length, while the metatarsus measures 31.5 mm. as opposed to 36-
41 mm. in N. rodericanus. I cannot accept the theory that this is the Islet au
Mât bird, and therefore different from N. rodericanus, as the islet is too
close to Rodriguez to have had a different starling. I therefore believe this
bird to have been an albinistic specimen of the Mauritius species of
Necropsar, for there can be little doubt that it is albinistic, as the
ferruginous colour is much stronger on one wing than on the other; and I
conclude that the colour in the wings and tail in normal specimens was
black like the Rodriguez bird, and that N. leguati was a close ally of N.
rodericanus, from which it differed principally in its much smaller size.
Habitat doubtful.—The type specimen bears Lord Derby's Museum number,
1792, and a label of Verreaux giving Madagascar as the habitat, which is
certainly erroneous.
Page 47
FOUDIA BRUANTE (P.L.S. MÜLL.)
(Plate 2, Fig. 1.)
Bruant de l'isle de Bourbon Daubenton, Pl. Enl. 321.
Le Mordoré, Montbeillard, Hist. Nat. Ois., Quarto Edition IV., p. 366 (1778—Bourbon).
Fringilla bruante P.L.S. Müll., Natursyst., Suppl. p. 164, No. 51 (1776—ex Daubenton Pl.
enl).
Emberiza fuscofulva Boddaert, Table Pl. Enl. p. 20 (1783—based on Pl. Enl. 321 and
Montbeillard's "Morderé").
Emberiza borbonica Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I p. 886 (1788—ex Daubenton and Montbeillard).
Foudia bruante Newton, Trans. Norf. and Norw. Nat. Soc. IV., pp. 543 and 548 (1889).
Nesacanthis fusco-fulvus Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XIII p. 484 (1890).
W E know absolutely nothing about this bird, except Daubenton's
figure and the description by Montbeillard. In the plate the whole
body, including the back, is uniform red, about the same red as in
other species of Foudia, while the wings and tail are dark brown with
yellowish-brown borders. In the description the body plumage is described
as rufous ("morderé") and the wings, wing-coverts and tail as more or less
bright rufous ("d'un mordoré plus ou moins clair"). The size is said to be
about that of a Bunting, but the tail shorter and the wings longer.
According to Dr. Sharpe (Cat. B. XIII, p. 484) "it has generally been
considered identical with Foudia madagascariensis," but the latter has the
back marked with longitudinal black spots, while both the figure and
description of F. bruante represent a uniform red upperside; moreover the
locality of the latter is expressly stated, and as we know other forms of
Foudia from the Seychelles, Mauritius, Comoros, Aldabra and Madagascar,
we have no reason to doubt the statement. We are not aware of any
specimen existing of this doubtless extinct bird, though it would be worth
while to search the Paris Museum for this treasure.
Habitat: Réunion or Bourbon.
(Plate 2, Fig. 1.)
Bruant de l'isle de Bourbon Daubenton, Pl. Enl. 321.
Le Mordoré, Montbeillard, Hist. Nat. Ois., Quarto Edition IV., p. 366 (1778—Bourbon).
Fringilla bruante P.L.S. Müll., Natursyst., Suppl. p. 164, No. 51 (1776—ex Daubenton Pl.
enl).
Emberiza fuscofulva Boddaert, Table Pl. Enl. p. 20 (1783—based on Pl. Enl. 321 and
Montbeillard's "Morderé").
Emberiza borbonica Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I p. 886 (1788—ex Daubenton and Montbeillard).
Foudia bruante Newton, Trans. Norf. and Norw. Nat. Soc. IV., pp. 543 and 548 (1889).
Nesacanthis fusco-fulvus Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XIII p. 484 (1890).
W E know absolutely nothing about this bird, except Daubenton's
figure and the description by Montbeillard. In the plate the whole
body, including the back, is uniform red, about the same red as in
other species of Foudia, while the wings and tail are dark brown with
yellowish-brown borders. In the description the body plumage is described
as rufous ("morderé") and the wings, wing-coverts and tail as more or less
bright rufous ("d'un mordoré plus ou moins clair"). The size is said to be
about that of a Bunting, but the tail shorter and the wings longer.
According to Dr. Sharpe (Cat. B. XIII, p. 484) "it has generally been
considered identical with Foudia madagascariensis," but the latter has the
back marked with longitudinal black spots, while both the figure and
description of F. bruante represent a uniform red upperside; moreover the
locality of the latter is expressly stated, and as we know other forms of
Foudia from the Seychelles, Mauritius, Comoros, Aldabra and Madagascar,
we have no reason to doubt the statement. We are not aware of any
specimen existing of this doubtless extinct bird, though it would be worth
while to search the Paris Museum for this treasure.
Habitat: Réunion or Bourbon.
Page 48
CHAUNOPROCTUS BP.
Chaunoproctus Bonaparte, Consp. Av. I p. 526 (1850).
T HE genus Chaunoproctus contains only one species, which is
characterized by its enormous bill, the depth of the mandible being
greater than the distance between the nasal apertures. The cutting-edge
of the maxilla is nearly straight, and there is no tooth in the posterior half of
the maxilla. The total length is about seven to eight inches. The adult male
has red in the plumage, the female is brown, above and below.
Dr. Hartert (Vögel pal. Fauna I, p. 115) is of opinion that this bird is
connected with Carpodacus and allies, and not with the Greenfinches and
Hawfinches, among which it is placed in the Catalogue of Birds in the
British Museum.
CHAUNOPROCTUS FERREOROSTRIS (VIG.)
(Plate 3, Fig. 4.)
Coccothraustes ferreorostris (sic) Vigors, Zool. Journ. IV p. 354 (1828); id. in Beechey's
Voy. Blossom, p. 22, pl. 8 (1839).
Fringilla papa Kittlitz, Mém. Acad. Imp. Sc. Petersbourg I p. 239, pl. 15 (1830); id.
Kupfertaf. Vög. p. 24, pl. 32, 2 (1832).
Chaunoproctus papa Bonaparte, Consp. I p. 526 (1850); Bp. and Schlegel, Monogr. Loxiens
p. 32 pls. 37, 38 (1850).
Chaunoproctus ferreirostris Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XII p. 31 (1888).
V IGORS' original description, translated from the Latin, is as follows:
"Dark brown; head, breast and upper part of abdomen scarlet. Bill
very strong, feet plumbeous. Length of body 8½, bill ⅞, at gape 13⁄16,
height ⅞; wings from the carpus to the third quill 4½; tail 3, tarsus ⅞
inches."
In the "Catalogue of Birds," XII, p. 31, both sexes are carefully described.
Chaunoproctus Bonaparte, Consp. Av. I p. 526 (1850).
T HE genus Chaunoproctus contains only one species, which is
characterized by its enormous bill, the depth of the mandible being
greater than the distance between the nasal apertures. The cutting-edge
of the maxilla is nearly straight, and there is no tooth in the posterior half of
the maxilla. The total length is about seven to eight inches. The adult male
has red in the plumage, the female is brown, above and below.
Dr. Hartert (Vögel pal. Fauna I, p. 115) is of opinion that this bird is
connected with Carpodacus and allies, and not with the Greenfinches and
Hawfinches, among which it is placed in the Catalogue of Birds in the
British Museum.
CHAUNOPROCTUS FERREOROSTRIS (VIG.)
(Plate 3, Fig. 4.)
Coccothraustes ferreorostris (sic) Vigors, Zool. Journ. IV p. 354 (1828); id. in Beechey's
Voy. Blossom, p. 22, pl. 8 (1839).
Fringilla papa Kittlitz, Mém. Acad. Imp. Sc. Petersbourg I p. 239, pl. 15 (1830); id.
Kupfertaf. Vög. p. 24, pl. 32, 2 (1832).
Chaunoproctus papa Bonaparte, Consp. I p. 526 (1850); Bp. and Schlegel, Monogr. Loxiens
p. 32 pls. 37, 38 (1850).
Chaunoproctus ferreirostris Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XII p. 31 (1888).
V IGORS' original description, translated from the Latin, is as follows:
"Dark brown; head, breast and upper part of abdomen scarlet. Bill
very strong, feet plumbeous. Length of body 8½, bill ⅞, at gape 13⁄16,
height ⅞; wings from the carpus to the third quill 4½; tail 3, tarsus ⅞
inches."
In the "Catalogue of Birds," XII, p. 31, both sexes are carefully described.
Page 49
It appears that only one pair, now in the British Museum, was obtained
during Captain Beechey's voyage. Curiously enough, Vigors suggested that
the brilliantly coloured adult male might be the young, the female the adult
bird, "as is the case in the Pine-Grosbeak" (Sic!).
Kittlitz, who visited the largest of the Bonin Islands in May, 1828, obtained
a number of specimens, of which some are in St. Petersburg, two in
Frankfurt-a.-M., one or two in Leyden, and, I believe, in Paris. These seem
to be all the specimens known in European museums. Mr. Seebohm's
collector, the late Holst, failed to obtain it, and Mr. Alan Owston's men, who
several times went to the Bonin group to obtain it, and who were promised
good prices for specimens, did not get one. I am therefore convinced that
for some unknown reason this bird became extinct, though there is still the
possibility that the recent collectors did not collect on the main island of the
group, which alone was visited by Kittlitz.
Kittlitz tells us that he found it in the woods along the coast, but not
numerous. That it keeps concealed, is very phlegmatic, and is so little shy
that one is obliged to go back for some distance, before shooting, if one
wishes to preserve the specimen. Kittlitz saw it but seldom on high trees,
mostly on the ground. Its frequently heard note is a very fine piping sound.
In the crop and stomach small fruit and buds of one kind of tree were found.
Habitat: The largest of the Bonin Islands, south of Japan.
GEOSPIZA MAGNIROSTRIS GOULD.
(Plate 3, Fig. 1.)
Geospiza magnirostris Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1837, p. 5 (Galapagos Islands);
Rothschild & Hartert, Nov. Zool. 1899 p. 154, 1902 p. 388; Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus.
XII, pp. 6, 7 (Fig.); Ridgway, B. North and Middle America I, p. 495 (1901).
A S explained in Nov. Zool. 1899, p. 154, it is uncertain where Darwin
obtained the type specimens of Gould's G. magnirostris, as
"Unfortunately, most of the specimens of the finch-tribe were
mingled together," as Darwin tells us in his "Journal of Researches" (New
during Captain Beechey's voyage. Curiously enough, Vigors suggested that
the brilliantly coloured adult male might be the young, the female the adult
bird, "as is the case in the Pine-Grosbeak" (Sic!).
Kittlitz, who visited the largest of the Bonin Islands in May, 1828, obtained
a number of specimens, of which some are in St. Petersburg, two in
Frankfurt-a.-M., one or two in Leyden, and, I believe, in Paris. These seem
to be all the specimens known in European museums. Mr. Seebohm's
collector, the late Holst, failed to obtain it, and Mr. Alan Owston's men, who
several times went to the Bonin group to obtain it, and who were promised
good prices for specimens, did not get one. I am therefore convinced that
for some unknown reason this bird became extinct, though there is still the
possibility that the recent collectors did not collect on the main island of the
group, which alone was visited by Kittlitz.
Kittlitz tells us that he found it in the woods along the coast, but not
numerous. That it keeps concealed, is very phlegmatic, and is so little shy
that one is obliged to go back for some distance, before shooting, if one
wishes to preserve the specimen. Kittlitz saw it but seldom on high trees,
mostly on the ground. Its frequently heard note is a very fine piping sound.
In the crop and stomach small fruit and buds of one kind of tree were found.
Habitat: The largest of the Bonin Islands, south of Japan.
GEOSPIZA MAGNIROSTRIS GOULD.
(Plate 3, Fig. 1.)
Geospiza magnirostris Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1837, p. 5 (Galapagos Islands);
Rothschild & Hartert, Nov. Zool. 1899 p. 154, 1902 p. 388; Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus.
XII, pp. 6, 7 (Fig.); Ridgway, B. North and Middle America I, p. 495 (1901).
A S explained in Nov. Zool. 1899, p. 154, it is uncertain where Darwin
obtained the type specimens of Gould's G. magnirostris, as
"Unfortunately, most of the specimens of the finch-tribe were
mingled together," as Darwin tells us in his "Journal of Researches" (New
Page 50
Edition 1890, p. 420), and he had only "strong reasons to suspect that some
of the species of the sub-group Geospiza are confined to separate islands."
We are, however, convinced that the types of G. magnirostris can only have
come from Charles Island, where it is, probably, the representative of G.
strenua strenua. It seems, however, that G. magnirostris exists no longer,
for all subsequent collectors have failed to obtain specimens, unless an
immature specimen in the U. S. Nat. Mus., from Charles Island (No.
115,905), is a young magnirostris (cf. Nov. Zool. 1902, p. 388).
The dimensions of the three black specimens in the British Museum are as
follows: Culmen 26.5, 27, 27; height of bill at base 23.5-24; wing 91, 91,
95; tarsus 25 mm. These measurements—a culmen of over 26.5 and a wing
of 91 mm. combined—do not occur among our large series of strenua, and
therefore it is hardly possible that G. magnirostris is composed of huge
examples of strenua only.
As Charles Island has been inhabited for many years it is not at all unlikely
that a bird became extinct on that place. On plate 3 is figured G.
magnirostris and a head of G. strenua for comparison.
GEOSPIZA DENTIROSTRIS GOULD.
Geospiza dentirostris Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1837, p. 6; Rothschild & Hartert, Nov.
Zool. 1899 p. 163, 1902 p. 396.
T HIS curious form differs from G. fortis fortis (Charles Island!) in its
bill, which is bowed in towards the end of the upper mandible, and
slightly "toothed" on its cutting edge. The one specimen in the British
Museum certainly came from Charles Island, and we may, therefore,
conclude that the other also came from there, and there is certainly no
reason to think that it came from Chatham Island. As the skins in the British
Museum slightly differ from each other, there is some reason to suspect that
they are both aberrations of G. fortis fortis. Otherwise it must have become
extinct, as, in spite of special attention being paid to it, none of the recent
collectors met with G. dentirostris.
of the species of the sub-group Geospiza are confined to separate islands."
We are, however, convinced that the types of G. magnirostris can only have
come from Charles Island, where it is, probably, the representative of G.
strenua strenua. It seems, however, that G. magnirostris exists no longer,
for all subsequent collectors have failed to obtain specimens, unless an
immature specimen in the U. S. Nat. Mus., from Charles Island (No.
115,905), is a young magnirostris (cf. Nov. Zool. 1902, p. 388).
The dimensions of the three black specimens in the British Museum are as
follows: Culmen 26.5, 27, 27; height of bill at base 23.5-24; wing 91, 91,
95; tarsus 25 mm. These measurements—a culmen of over 26.5 and a wing
of 91 mm. combined—do not occur among our large series of strenua, and
therefore it is hardly possible that G. magnirostris is composed of huge
examples of strenua only.
As Charles Island has been inhabited for many years it is not at all unlikely
that a bird became extinct on that place. On plate 3 is figured G.
magnirostris and a head of G. strenua for comparison.
GEOSPIZA DENTIROSTRIS GOULD.
Geospiza dentirostris Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1837, p. 6; Rothschild & Hartert, Nov.
Zool. 1899 p. 163, 1902 p. 396.
T HIS curious form differs from G. fortis fortis (Charles Island!) in its
bill, which is bowed in towards the end of the upper mandible, and
slightly "toothed" on its cutting edge. The one specimen in the British
Museum certainly came from Charles Island, and we may, therefore,
conclude that the other also came from there, and there is certainly no
reason to think that it came from Chatham Island. As the skins in the British
Museum slightly differ from each other, there is some reason to suspect that
they are both aberrations of G. fortis fortis. Otherwise it must have become
extinct, as, in spite of special attention being paid to it, none of the recent
collectors met with G. dentirostris.
Page 51
POMAREA NIGRA (SPARRM.)
Muscicapa nigra Sparrmann, Mus. Carlson. I, pl. 23 and text (1786—Society Islands).
Pomarea nigra Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. IV, p. 434 (1879—Full synonymy, description,
etc., Society Islands, Marquesas group).
I N the list of birds now fully extinct, in the Proceedings of the Fourth
Intern. Orn. Congress, I enumerated Pomarea nigra, on the strength of
E. L. Layard's statement, P.Z.S. 1876, p. 501, who says: "This bird has
undoubtedly become extinct. Large sums have been offered by Messrs.
Godeffroy's collectors for the acquisition of a single specimen, but in vain!
The very old natives say they remember the bird and call it "Moho."
I, however, overlooked the fact that this note of Layard's referred to the
Friendly Islands only, and that this bird has afterwards been obtained in
numbers on the Marquesas group. It would, nevertheless, be very
interesting to compare specimens from the various islands, viz.: the Society
group, Marquesas and Tongatabu, to see if they are perfectly similar.
MIRO TRAVERSI BULLER.
(Plate 5, Fig. 1.)
Miro traversi Buller, B. New Zealand, Ed. I p. 123 (1873—Chatham Islands).
Petroeca traversi Hutton, Ibis 1872, p. 245.
Myiomoira traversi Finsch, Journ.-f.-Orn. 1874, p. 189.
Miro traversi Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. IV p. 236 (1879).
Miro traversi (partim) Buller, Suppl. B. N. Zealand II p. 125? pl. XII (October, 1906).
T HE late Sir Walter Buller described, in 1873, Miro traversi as follows:
"Adult male. The whole of the plumage black, the base of the feathers
dark plumbeous; wing-feathers and their coverts tinged with brown,
the former greyish on their inner surface; tail-feathers black, very slightly
tinged with brown. Irides dark brown; bill black; tarsi and toes blackish
brown, the soles of the feet dull yellow. Total length 6 inches; wing, from
Muscicapa nigra Sparrmann, Mus. Carlson. I, pl. 23 and text (1786—Society Islands).
Pomarea nigra Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. IV, p. 434 (1879—Full synonymy, description,
etc., Society Islands, Marquesas group).
I N the list of birds now fully extinct, in the Proceedings of the Fourth
Intern. Orn. Congress, I enumerated Pomarea nigra, on the strength of
E. L. Layard's statement, P.Z.S. 1876, p. 501, who says: "This bird has
undoubtedly become extinct. Large sums have been offered by Messrs.
Godeffroy's collectors for the acquisition of a single specimen, but in vain!
The very old natives say they remember the bird and call it "Moho."
I, however, overlooked the fact that this note of Layard's referred to the
Friendly Islands only, and that this bird has afterwards been obtained in
numbers on the Marquesas group. It would, nevertheless, be very
interesting to compare specimens from the various islands, viz.: the Society
group, Marquesas and Tongatabu, to see if they are perfectly similar.
MIRO TRAVERSI BULLER.
(Plate 5, Fig. 1.)
Miro traversi Buller, B. New Zealand, Ed. I p. 123 (1873—Chatham Islands).
Petroeca traversi Hutton, Ibis 1872, p. 245.
Myiomoira traversi Finsch, Journ.-f.-Orn. 1874, p. 189.
Miro traversi Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. IV p. 236 (1879).
Miro traversi (partim) Buller, Suppl. B. N. Zealand II p. 125? pl. XII (October, 1906).
T HE late Sir Walter Buller described, in 1873, Miro traversi as follows:
"Adult male. The whole of the plumage black, the base of the feathers
dark plumbeous; wing-feathers and their coverts tinged with brown,
the former greyish on their inner surface; tail-feathers black, very slightly
tinged with brown. Irides dark brown; bill black; tarsi and toes blackish
brown, the soles of the feet dull yellow. Total length 6 inches; wing, from
Page 52
flexure, 3.4; tail 2.6; bill 0.5, tarsus 1.1; middle toe and claw 0.1, hind toe
and claw 0.8 inch."
"Female. Slightly smaller than the male, and without the brown tinge on the
wings and tail."
It may be added that Miro traversi is not pure black, but of a somewhat
brownish slaty black.
Miro traversi is only known from the Chatham Islands, where it was
formerly very common, but, according to a letter from the late W. Hawkins,
the cats, which have been introduced to destroy rats and rabbits, have
exterminated it. It seems to have disappeared from Warekauri, the main
island of the Chatham group, long ago, for H. O. Forbes (Ibis 1893, p. 524)
and Henry Palmer found it, in 1890 and 1892, only on the outlying islets of
Mangare and Little Mangare.
The bird from the Snares is quite different, being deep glossy black and
having a shorter and narrower first primary. I named it M. dannefaerdi. It is
to be feared that a similar fate will one day befall it as has, apparently,
already befallen its congener from the Chatham Islands.
Sir Walter Buller (Suppl. B.N.Z. II, p. 125) has confounded M. traversi and
dannefaerdi, and the figure he gave on his plate looks so black, that I do not
doubt it represents rather the latter than the former. Of course M.
dannefaerdi alone occurs on the Snares, and Buller's traversi from the
Snares were all dannefaerdi. Dr. Finsch's statement (Ibis 1888, p. 308) that
Reischek's specimen from the Snares "agreed in every respect with
specimens from the Chatham Islands" is entirely wrong, for, even if one
prefers unscientifically to lump allied forms, one cannot say that a Miro
from the Chathams agrees in every respect with one from the Snares.
Buller's doubts about the distinctness of the latter might easily have been
removed, if he had taken the trouble to compare them, for it does not
require any genius to see the differences. I admit that with my present views
on geographical forms I would regard the two Miro as sub-species, and call
them M. traversi traversi and M. traversi dannefaerdi, but most
ornithologists would still consider them to be "good species."
and claw 0.8 inch."
"Female. Slightly smaller than the male, and without the brown tinge on the
wings and tail."
It may be added that Miro traversi is not pure black, but of a somewhat
brownish slaty black.
Miro traversi is only known from the Chatham Islands, where it was
formerly very common, but, according to a letter from the late W. Hawkins,
the cats, which have been introduced to destroy rats and rabbits, have
exterminated it. It seems to have disappeared from Warekauri, the main
island of the Chatham group, long ago, for H. O. Forbes (Ibis 1893, p. 524)
and Henry Palmer found it, in 1890 and 1892, only on the outlying islets of
Mangare and Little Mangare.
The bird from the Snares is quite different, being deep glossy black and
having a shorter and narrower first primary. I named it M. dannefaerdi. It is
to be feared that a similar fate will one day befall it as has, apparently,
already befallen its congener from the Chatham Islands.
Sir Walter Buller (Suppl. B.N.Z. II, p. 125) has confounded M. traversi and
dannefaerdi, and the figure he gave on his plate looks so black, that I do not
doubt it represents rather the latter than the former. Of course M.
dannefaerdi alone occurs on the Snares, and Buller's traversi from the
Snares were all dannefaerdi. Dr. Finsch's statement (Ibis 1888, p. 308) that
Reischek's specimen from the Snares "agreed in every respect with
specimens from the Chatham Islands" is entirely wrong, for, even if one
prefers unscientifically to lump allied forms, one cannot say that a Miro
from the Chathams agrees in every respect with one from the Snares.
Buller's doubts about the distinctness of the latter might easily have been
removed, if he had taken the trouble to compare them, for it does not
require any genius to see the differences. I admit that with my present views
on geographical forms I would regard the two Miro as sub-species, and call
them M. traversi traversi and M. traversi dannefaerdi, but most
ornithologists would still consider them to be "good species."
Page 53
I may add that Buller, l.c., p. 125, has not quoted my description correctly,
for in his rendering are several disturbing misprints, and in the fourth line
from the bottom occurs a "not" which ought not to be there, and which
makes the sentence incomprehensible. Also the name itself is spelt
incorrectly.
I have a series from Mangare and Little Mangare, taken by Henry Palmer in
1890. The egg seems to be unknown.
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
TURDUS TERRESTRIS KITTL.
Turdus terrestris Kittlitz, Mém. Acad. Sc. Pétersburg I p. 245, pl. 17 (1830—Boninsima).
Geocichla terrestris Bonaparte, Consp. Av. I, p. 268 (1850); Seebohm, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. V,
p. 183 (1881); Hartert, Kat. Vogels. Senckenb, p. 6 (1891); Sharpe, Monograph
Turdidae, I p. 107, pl. 33 (1902).
Cichlopasser terrestris Bonaparte, C.R. XXXVIII, p. 6 (1854).
T HE following is Dr. Sharpe's description from a specimen in the
Leyden Museum: "General colour of the upper parts olive-brown,
shading into chestnut-brown on the rump, upper tail-coverts, and tail;
the inside web of each feather much darker, approaching black on the back;
lores dark brown; eye-stripe very obscure; lesser wing-coverts brown,
darkest on the inside web; median coverts dark brown, with large olive-
brown tips; greater coverts nearly black, broadly tipped, and narrowly
margined towards the base with olive-brown; primary coverts black, with a
broad olive-brown patch on the outer webs; tertials dark brown on the inner
web, and olive-brown on the outer web; secondaries brown, margined with
olive-brown on the outer webs; primaries brown, with the basal half of the
outer webs, and a spot where the emargination begins, olive-brown; tail-
feathers chestnut-brown; ear-coverts brown; underparts olive-brown,
shading into white on the chin, throat, and centre of belly; under tail-coverts
dark brown, with irregular diamond-shaped white tips; axillaries brown;
under wing-coverts brown. Geocichline markings on inner webs of quills
for in his rendering are several disturbing misprints, and in the fourth line
from the bottom occurs a "not" which ought not to be there, and which
makes the sentence incomprehensible. Also the name itself is spelt
incorrectly.
I have a series from Mangare and Little Mangare, taken by Henry Palmer in
1890. The egg seems to be unknown.
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
TURDUS TERRESTRIS KITTL.
Turdus terrestris Kittlitz, Mém. Acad. Sc. Pétersburg I p. 245, pl. 17 (1830—Boninsima).
Geocichla terrestris Bonaparte, Consp. Av. I, p. 268 (1850); Seebohm, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. V,
p. 183 (1881); Hartert, Kat. Vogels. Senckenb, p. 6 (1891); Sharpe, Monograph
Turdidae, I p. 107, pl. 33 (1902).
Cichlopasser terrestris Bonaparte, C.R. XXXVIII, p. 6 (1854).
T HE following is Dr. Sharpe's description from a specimen in the
Leyden Museum: "General colour of the upper parts olive-brown,
shading into chestnut-brown on the rump, upper tail-coverts, and tail;
the inside web of each feather much darker, approaching black on the back;
lores dark brown; eye-stripe very obscure; lesser wing-coverts brown,
darkest on the inside web; median coverts dark brown, with large olive-
brown tips; greater coverts nearly black, broadly tipped, and narrowly
margined towards the base with olive-brown; primary coverts black, with a
broad olive-brown patch on the outer webs; tertials dark brown on the inner
web, and olive-brown on the outer web; secondaries brown, margined with
olive-brown on the outer webs; primaries brown, with the basal half of the
outer webs, and a spot where the emargination begins, olive-brown; tail-
feathers chestnut-brown; ear-coverts brown; underparts olive-brown,
shading into white on the chin, throat, and centre of belly; under tail-coverts
dark brown, with irregular diamond-shaped white tips; axillaries brown;
under wing-coverts brown. Geocichline markings on inner webs of quills
Page 54
dirty white. Wing 3.8 inches, tail 2.6, culmen 0.85, tarsus 1.07, bastard
primary 0.8."
The only person who ever collected this short-tailed Ground-Thrush was
Kittlitz, who obtained four specimens, one of which is in St. Petersburg, one
in Frankfurt, one in Vienna, and one in Leyden. Neither Holst, nor Alan
Owston's Japanese collectors obtained specimens, though their special
attention was called to it. Therefore, unless these recent collectors left
unvisited the most important island of the group, we must suppose that it
became extinct.
Habitat: Bonin Islands, south-east of Japan.
PHAEORNIS OAHENSIS WILSON & EVANS.
Phaeornis oahensis Wilson & Evans, Aves Hawaiienses, Introd. p. XIII (1899—Based on
Turdus sandwichensis var. Bloxam, Voy. "Blonde" App. p. 250 (1826—Oahu) and
Turdus woahensis Bloxam M.S.)
N OTHING is known about this evidently extinct bird, which formerly
existed on the island of Oahu, except Bloxam's short description,
which is as follows:—"Length 7½ inches; upper parts olive-brown,
extremities of the feathers much lighter colour; tail and wings brown; bill
bristled at the base."
The corresponding description of Phaeornis obscura in Bloxam's M.S.
notes is:—"Length 8 inches; belly light ash; back, tail and wings an ash-
brown; bill slender, ¾-in. long, bristled at the base. A beautiful songster."
It is thus evident that Bloxam considered both forms to be distinct, and
Messrs. Wilson and Evans were perfectly justified in naming the extinct
Oahu form.
We are not aware of any specimens being preserved in any Museum, though
Bloxam obtained a skin. Messrs. Wilson and Evans (l.c.) write:—"All the
specimens obtained by Mr. Andrew Bloxam, properly prepared and
labelled, were placed at the disposal of the Lords of the Admiralty, as shewn
by a copy of the letter he wrote to their Secretary, and probably all were
primary 0.8."
The only person who ever collected this short-tailed Ground-Thrush was
Kittlitz, who obtained four specimens, one of which is in St. Petersburg, one
in Frankfurt, one in Vienna, and one in Leyden. Neither Holst, nor Alan
Owston's Japanese collectors obtained specimens, though their special
attention was called to it. Therefore, unless these recent collectors left
unvisited the most important island of the group, we must suppose that it
became extinct.
Habitat: Bonin Islands, south-east of Japan.
PHAEORNIS OAHENSIS WILSON & EVANS.
Phaeornis oahensis Wilson & Evans, Aves Hawaiienses, Introd. p. XIII (1899—Based on
Turdus sandwichensis var. Bloxam, Voy. "Blonde" App. p. 250 (1826—Oahu) and
Turdus woahensis Bloxam M.S.)
N OTHING is known about this evidently extinct bird, which formerly
existed on the island of Oahu, except Bloxam's short description,
which is as follows:—"Length 7½ inches; upper parts olive-brown,
extremities of the feathers much lighter colour; tail and wings brown; bill
bristled at the base."
The corresponding description of Phaeornis obscura in Bloxam's M.S.
notes is:—"Length 8 inches; belly light ash; back, tail and wings an ash-
brown; bill slender, ¾-in. long, bristled at the base. A beautiful songster."
It is thus evident that Bloxam considered both forms to be distinct, and
Messrs. Wilson and Evans were perfectly justified in naming the extinct
Oahu form.
We are not aware of any specimens being preserved in any Museum, though
Bloxam obtained a skin. Messrs. Wilson and Evans (l.c.) write:—"All the
specimens obtained by Mr. Andrew Bloxam, properly prepared and
labelled, were placed at the disposal of the Lords of the Admiralty, as shewn
by a copy of the letter he wrote to their Secretary, and probably all were
Page 55
sent, as some certainly were, to the British Museum; but no other trace of
this unique specimen of a vanished species, which may be properly called
Phaeornis oahensis, is now forthcoming."
BOWDLERIA RUFESCENS (BULLER).
(Plate 5, Fig. 3.)
Sphenoeacus rufescens Buller, Ibis 1869, p. 38.
Megalurus rufescens Gray Hand-l. B. I, p. 206. No. 2913. (1869.)
B ULLER'S original description is as follows: "Upper parts, sides, and
tail dark rufous brown, brightest on the crown and hind-neck; the
feathers of the shoulders and sides centred with black. Quills dusky
black, margined with rufous brown. Streak over the eye, throat, breast and
abdomen pale fawn colour; sides of the head and ear-coverts marked with
black. Bill light brown with the ridge black, feet dark brown." Buller's type
probably had been preserved in spirit, as the colouration of fresh specimens
is very different to his description. The general colour above and on the
flanks chestnut rufous, most feathers with darker or black centres; chin,
throat, breast and abdomen pure white; crissum and under tail-coverts whity
buff or buffy brown. Wing 2.6 inches, tail 3.9 inches, culmen 0.65 inch.
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
Cats, rats and weasels have exterminated this fine species, which is now
quite extinct. Messrs. Travers and Dannefaerd have supplied the specimens
in most colonial museums, while Henry Palmer collected the 14 at Tring. A
few in Liverpool and two in the British Museum are all known to me in
Europe, in addition to those at Tring.
TRAVERSIA ROTHSCH.
See description below. Only one species known.
this unique specimen of a vanished species, which may be properly called
Phaeornis oahensis, is now forthcoming."
BOWDLERIA RUFESCENS (BULLER).
(Plate 5, Fig. 3.)
Sphenoeacus rufescens Buller, Ibis 1869, p. 38.
Megalurus rufescens Gray Hand-l. B. I, p. 206. No. 2913. (1869.)
B ULLER'S original description is as follows: "Upper parts, sides, and
tail dark rufous brown, brightest on the crown and hind-neck; the
feathers of the shoulders and sides centred with black. Quills dusky
black, margined with rufous brown. Streak over the eye, throat, breast and
abdomen pale fawn colour; sides of the head and ear-coverts marked with
black. Bill light brown with the ridge black, feet dark brown." Buller's type
probably had been preserved in spirit, as the colouration of fresh specimens
is very different to his description. The general colour above and on the
flanks chestnut rufous, most feathers with darker or black centres; chin,
throat, breast and abdomen pure white; crissum and under tail-coverts whity
buff or buffy brown. Wing 2.6 inches, tail 3.9 inches, culmen 0.65 inch.
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
Cats, rats and weasels have exterminated this fine species, which is now
quite extinct. Messrs. Travers and Dannefaerd have supplied the specimens
in most colonial museums, while Henry Palmer collected the 14 at Tring. A
few in Liverpool and two in the British Museum are all known to me in
Europe, in addition to those at Tring.
TRAVERSIA ROTHSCH.
See description below. Only one species known.
Page 56
TRAVERSIA LYALLI ROTHSCH.
(Plate 5, Fig. 3.)
Traversia lyalli Rothschild, Bull. B.O.C. IV p. X (December 29th, 1894); Nov. Zool. 1895, p.
81.
Xenicus insularis Buller, Ibis 1895, p. 236, pl.
Traversia insularis Buller, Suppl. B.N.Z. II p. 109, pl. X (1906).
I N 1894 I described this remarkable little bird as follows: "Traversia,
gen. nov. Xenicidarum. Differs in several important points both from
Xenicus and Acanthidositta. Bill much larger and stouter, very little
shorter, if at all, than the tarsus; the latter about as long as middle toe
without claw, or the hind toe and claw, while in Xenicus and Acanthidositta
it is about twice as long as the hind toe. The principal difference, however,
is the weakness of the wing, which suggests flightlessness, as does also the
very soft and loose character of the entire plumage, and the very Ralline
aspect of the bird. There are only ten tail-feathers, and the scutellation of
the tarsus is like that of Xenicus. These two points determine its position in
the Xenicidae at once (cf. Sclater, Cat. B. XIV, p. 450).
"The type is: Traversia lyalli, sp. nov.
"Male. Above dark brownish olive-yellow, each feather with a brownish-
black border. A narrow distinct yellow superciliary line. Wings and tail
umber-brown, the inner webs darker; wing-coverts like back. Chin, throat,
and breast chrome-yellow, each feather slightly edged with greyish brown.
Flanks, abdomen, and vent pale brown, centre of feathers paler.
"Female. Upper surface umber-brown, each feather bordered with very dark
brown; wings and tail similar. Under surface buffy grey, the feathers edged
with pale brown. Total length about 4 inches, culmen 0.6, wing 1.8 to 1.9,
tail 0.8, but much concealed, tarens 0.75, middle toe 0.65, hind toe without
claw 0.5.
"Habitat: Stephens Island, New Zealand. Discovered by Mr. Dr. Lyall,
lighthouse-keeper, and sent to me by Mr. Henry H. Travers."
(Plate 5, Fig. 3.)
Traversia lyalli Rothschild, Bull. B.O.C. IV p. X (December 29th, 1894); Nov. Zool. 1895, p.
81.
Xenicus insularis Buller, Ibis 1895, p. 236, pl.
Traversia insularis Buller, Suppl. B.N.Z. II p. 109, pl. X (1906).
I N 1894 I described this remarkable little bird as follows: "Traversia,
gen. nov. Xenicidarum. Differs in several important points both from
Xenicus and Acanthidositta. Bill much larger and stouter, very little
shorter, if at all, than the tarsus; the latter about as long as middle toe
without claw, or the hind toe and claw, while in Xenicus and Acanthidositta
it is about twice as long as the hind toe. The principal difference, however,
is the weakness of the wing, which suggests flightlessness, as does also the
very soft and loose character of the entire plumage, and the very Ralline
aspect of the bird. There are only ten tail-feathers, and the scutellation of
the tarsus is like that of Xenicus. These two points determine its position in
the Xenicidae at once (cf. Sclater, Cat. B. XIV, p. 450).
"The type is: Traversia lyalli, sp. nov.
"Male. Above dark brownish olive-yellow, each feather with a brownish-
black border. A narrow distinct yellow superciliary line. Wings and tail
umber-brown, the inner webs darker; wing-coverts like back. Chin, throat,
and breast chrome-yellow, each feather slightly edged with greyish brown.
Flanks, abdomen, and vent pale brown, centre of feathers paler.
"Female. Upper surface umber-brown, each feather bordered with very dark
brown; wings and tail similar. Under surface buffy grey, the feathers edged
with pale brown. Total length about 4 inches, culmen 0.6, wing 1.8 to 1.9,
tail 0.8, but much concealed, tarens 0.75, middle toe 0.65, hind toe without
claw 0.5.
"Habitat: Stephens Island, New Zealand. Discovered by Mr. Dr. Lyall,
lighthouse-keeper, and sent to me by Mr. Henry H. Travers."
Page 57
I received nine specimens of this new bird, and was not aware that any
others had been taken at that time. As I was unable to attend the December
meeting, 1894, of the British Ornithologists Club, I asked Dr. Hartert to
exhibit the birds in my name. When he had done so and had read the
description, the Chairman, Dr. P. L. Sclater, said that the bird had also been
received for illustration and description in the Ibis, from Sir Walter Buller,
and he asked Dr. Hartert if I would not withdraw my description. Dr.
Hartert said that this was unfortunate, but he had no authority to withdraw
my description, and he and Dr. Sharpe thought that the proceedings of the
meeting should be printed without consideration of any manuscripts which
might refer to the same bird. No doubt this was hard luck on Sir Walter
Buller, but it would have been equally hard luck for me if he had forestalled
me with the new bird. He had only one specimen, I had nine, of both sexes,
and I had paid a high price for them, as types of a new bird. My type is in
Tring, and, as everybody knows, available for study by any competent
ornithologist, while Buller's type was not in any museum, and it was
uncertain to whom he would sell it afterwards. I suppose it is now in the
Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, to which Buller's third collection, 625
specimens, was sold for a thousand pounds, as Buller himself tells us in his
Supplement II, p. 167, under the heading of Glaucopis wilsoni! On the same
page Sir Walter Buller also tells us that his "second collection" was sold to
me, but he makes a mistake about the price, as I certainly did not pay a
thousand pounds for it.
I mentioned these unimportant details, because Buller rather bitterly and
severely complained about my describing the Stephens' Island Wren, on p.
111 of his supplement. I may only add that of course my name, being
published in December, 1894, has the priority over his, which was not
published before April, 1895.
The history of Traversia lyalli is perhaps the most extraordinary of any bird
known. All the specimens I am aware of, viz., the eight now in my
collection, the type of "Xenicus insularis" in Buller's former collection, one
in the late Canon Tristram's collection, one in the British Museum (ex
Tring), and two or more offered some years ago by Mr. Travers, were
brought in by the lighthouse-keeper's cat. Evidently this feline discoverer
has at the same time been the exterminator of Traversia lyalli, and many
may have been digested by that unique cat, as in letters received from Mr.
others had been taken at that time. As I was unable to attend the December
meeting, 1894, of the British Ornithologists Club, I asked Dr. Hartert to
exhibit the birds in my name. When he had done so and had read the
description, the Chairman, Dr. P. L. Sclater, said that the bird had also been
received for illustration and description in the Ibis, from Sir Walter Buller,
and he asked Dr. Hartert if I would not withdraw my description. Dr.
Hartert said that this was unfortunate, but he had no authority to withdraw
my description, and he and Dr. Sharpe thought that the proceedings of the
meeting should be printed without consideration of any manuscripts which
might refer to the same bird. No doubt this was hard luck on Sir Walter
Buller, but it would have been equally hard luck for me if he had forestalled
me with the new bird. He had only one specimen, I had nine, of both sexes,
and I had paid a high price for them, as types of a new bird. My type is in
Tring, and, as everybody knows, available for study by any competent
ornithologist, while Buller's type was not in any museum, and it was
uncertain to whom he would sell it afterwards. I suppose it is now in the
Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, to which Buller's third collection, 625
specimens, was sold for a thousand pounds, as Buller himself tells us in his
Supplement II, p. 167, under the heading of Glaucopis wilsoni! On the same
page Sir Walter Buller also tells us that his "second collection" was sold to
me, but he makes a mistake about the price, as I certainly did not pay a
thousand pounds for it.
I mentioned these unimportant details, because Buller rather bitterly and
severely complained about my describing the Stephens' Island Wren, on p.
111 of his supplement. I may only add that of course my name, being
published in December, 1894, has the priority over his, which was not
published before April, 1895.
The history of Traversia lyalli is perhaps the most extraordinary of any bird
known. All the specimens I am aware of, viz., the eight now in my
collection, the type of "Xenicus insularis" in Buller's former collection, one
in the late Canon Tristram's collection, one in the British Museum (ex
Tring), and two or more offered some years ago by Mr. Travers, were
brought in by the lighthouse-keeper's cat. Evidently this feline discoverer
has at the same time been the exterminator of Traversia lyalli, and many
may have been digested by that unique cat, as in letters received from Mr.
Page 58
Travers I have been told that no more specimens could be obtained, and
Buller (l.c.) says: "Very diligent search has been made on Stephen Island for
further specimens of the Island Wren, but without success, and there is too
much reason to fear that this species has almost immediately after its
discovery become extinct."
Habitat: Stephen Island, a small, partly wooded islet, about a square mile in
extent, in Cook Strait. It is almost impossible that this bird has only existed
on Stephen Island. It must have been overlooked on d'Urville Island or the
"mainland," where it probably became extinct—through rats and cats, and
similar pests—long ago.
MOHO APICALIS GOULD.
(Plate 4a, 1.)
Yellow-tufted Bee-eater (non Latham!), Dixon, Voyage round the World, p. 357, plate (1789).
Moho apicalis Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1860, p. 381 (? Hawaii).
Acrulocercus apicalis Wilson & Evans, Av. Hawaii, pt. V text and plate (1894).
Moho apicalis Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 223 and plate (1900).
T HIS rarest species of the Mohos formerly inhabited the island of Oahu,
where specimens were obtained in 1837, near Enero, by Herr Deppe.
The localities of the specimens figured by Dixon and that of the type
of Gould are uncertain, but they must have been obtained on Oahu. Since
1837 we have no further traces of Moho apicalis.
The only specimens known are those in Berlin, collected by Deppe, two in
the British Museum, and one in my Museum at Tring. The latter, which I
obtained in exchange from the British Museum, is the one brought home
from the Sandwich Islands by Capt. Lord Byron. There is no specimen of
Moho apicalis in the Vienna Museum.
Habitat: Oahu.
Buller (l.c.) says: "Very diligent search has been made on Stephen Island for
further specimens of the Island Wren, but without success, and there is too
much reason to fear that this species has almost immediately after its
discovery become extinct."
Habitat: Stephen Island, a small, partly wooded islet, about a square mile in
extent, in Cook Strait. It is almost impossible that this bird has only existed
on Stephen Island. It must have been overlooked on d'Urville Island or the
"mainland," where it probably became extinct—through rats and cats, and
similar pests—long ago.
MOHO APICALIS GOULD.
(Plate 4a, 1.)
Yellow-tufted Bee-eater (non Latham!), Dixon, Voyage round the World, p. 357, plate (1789).
Moho apicalis Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1860, p. 381 (? Hawaii).
Acrulocercus apicalis Wilson & Evans, Av. Hawaii, pt. V text and plate (1894).
Moho apicalis Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 223 and plate (1900).
T HIS rarest species of the Mohos formerly inhabited the island of Oahu,
where specimens were obtained in 1837, near Enero, by Herr Deppe.
The localities of the specimens figured by Dixon and that of the type
of Gould are uncertain, but they must have been obtained on Oahu. Since
1837 we have no further traces of Moho apicalis.
The only specimens known are those in Berlin, collected by Deppe, two in
the British Museum, and one in my Museum at Tring. The latter, which I
obtained in exchange from the British Museum, is the one brought home
from the Sandwich Islands by Capt. Lord Byron. There is no specimen of
Moho apicalis in the Vienna Museum.
Habitat: Oahu.
Page 59
CHAETOPTILA SCL.
Chaetoptila Sclater, Ibis 1871 p. 358.
D R. SCLATER justly proposed a new generic term for the "Entomyza"
or "Moho" angustipluma of former authors. This bird belongs
doubtless to the family of Meliphagidae or Honey-eaters, and the
genus is sufficiently distinct from all others. There are no fleshy wattles
anywhere. The tail is long and strongly graduated; all the rectrices are
obliquely pointed at their tips. The plumage of the body is very soft, that of
the head, throat and chest almost fluffy; the feathers of the chin, throat and
forehead end in hair-like bristles.
We know only one species.
CHAETOPTILA ANGUSTIPLUMA (PEALE).
(Plate 4a, Fig. 2.)
Entomiza angustipluma Peale, U.S. Expl. Exp., Birds p. 147 pl. XL fig. 2 (1848—Hawaii).
Mohoa angustipluma Cassin, Proc. Acad. Philad. 1855 p. 440.
Moho angustipluma Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exp., Mamm. & Orn. p. 148 pl. XI fig. 1 (1858—
Hawaii).
Wilson & Evans, Aves. Hawai. pt. II and plate (1891—Hawaii).
Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 215 and plate (1900).
T HIS remarkable bird, belonging to the family Meliphagidae, used to
inhabit the island of Hawaii in the Sandwich Archipelago. It has been
said by Mr. Dole to inhabit Molokai, but this is evidently an error. At
present nobody on the island of Hawaii has any recollection of its presence,
and its former native name is unknown—the name "Kiowea" erroneously
quoted by Mr. Dole being that of Numenius tahitiensis. The bird is extinct,
though we do not know the reason why it disappeared.
THE ONLY SPECIMENS WE KNOW OF ARE THE FOLLOWING:—
1. The type in the Museum at Washington, U.S.A.
Chaetoptila Sclater, Ibis 1871 p. 358.
D R. SCLATER justly proposed a new generic term for the "Entomyza"
or "Moho" angustipluma of former authors. This bird belongs
doubtless to the family of Meliphagidae or Honey-eaters, and the
genus is sufficiently distinct from all others. There are no fleshy wattles
anywhere. The tail is long and strongly graduated; all the rectrices are
obliquely pointed at their tips. The plumage of the body is very soft, that of
the head, throat and chest almost fluffy; the feathers of the chin, throat and
forehead end in hair-like bristles.
We know only one species.
CHAETOPTILA ANGUSTIPLUMA (PEALE).
(Plate 4a, Fig. 2.)
Entomiza angustipluma Peale, U.S. Expl. Exp., Birds p. 147 pl. XL fig. 2 (1848—Hawaii).
Mohoa angustipluma Cassin, Proc. Acad. Philad. 1855 p. 440.
Moho angustipluma Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exp., Mamm. & Orn. p. 148 pl. XI fig. 1 (1858—
Hawaii).
Wilson & Evans, Aves. Hawai. pt. II and plate (1891—Hawaii).
Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 215 and plate (1900).
T HIS remarkable bird, belonging to the family Meliphagidae, used to
inhabit the island of Hawaii in the Sandwich Archipelago. It has been
said by Mr. Dole to inhabit Molokai, but this is evidently an error. At
present nobody on the island of Hawaii has any recollection of its presence,
and its former native name is unknown—the name "Kiowea" erroneously
quoted by Mr. Dole being that of Numenius tahitiensis. The bird is extinct,
though we do not know the reason why it disappeared.
THE ONLY SPECIMENS WE KNOW OF ARE THE FOLLOWING:—
1. The type in the Museum at Washington, U.S.A.
Page 60
2. One in the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum in Honolulu.
3. One in the Museum of the University at Cambridge, obtained in exchange from Honolulu
by Mr. Scott Wilson.
4. One in my Museum at Tring, obtained in exchange from the Honolulu Museum.
The type was obtained by Peale, the three others by the late Mr. Mills on the
island of Hawaii.
STRIGICEPS LEUCOPOGON LESS.
Strigiceps leucopogon Lesson, Echo du Monde Savant 1840 (?); Rev. Zool. 1840, p. 266;
Suppl. aux œuvres compl. de Buffon, Descr. de Mammif. & Ois, récemm. découverts, p.
277 (1847—Nouvelle Hollande); Hartlaub, Beitrag Gesch ausgest Vögel, in Abhandl.
Naturw. Ver. Bremen, 2te Ausgabe, als M.S. gedr., p. 40 (1896).
N OBODY has hitherto identified the curious bird described by Lesson,
l.c., under the above name. From the generic characters he gives it is
evident that it was a bird with a long, curved bill, lanceolate feathers
on the head and throat, and long, strongly graduated tail, doubtless
belonging to the Meliphagidae. The description of the colouration is as
follows:—
"Back, wings and tail bright greenish-olive; quills brown inside; shafts of
the rectrices canary-yellow from below, glossy brown-red from above; top
of head and neck chestnut, each feather being narrow and streaked with
white, then with fawn-colour on the top; the feathers of the throat are
elongated and fringed out on their edges, very narrow and lanceolate, grey
at base, white at the tips; cheeks, sides of neck and chest ferruginous, some
white streaks on the feathers of the chest and in the middle of the throat;
flanks and belly clear rufous, passing into canary-yellow on the under tail-
coverts. Tail from below greenish-yellow; tarsi horn-colour, bill above
brownish, below yellowish with brown tip. Length about eight french
inches and a half (0.23 centimètres)." (Translated.)
This bird was said to have come from Australia. I have made enquiries, but
the type seems to have disappeared. There is something in the description
reminding us of Chaetoptila angustipluma. Unless the description is faulty,
3. One in the Museum of the University at Cambridge, obtained in exchange from Honolulu
by Mr. Scott Wilson.
4. One in my Museum at Tring, obtained in exchange from the Honolulu Museum.
The type was obtained by Peale, the three others by the late Mr. Mills on the
island of Hawaii.
STRIGICEPS LEUCOPOGON LESS.
Strigiceps leucopogon Lesson, Echo du Monde Savant 1840 (?); Rev. Zool. 1840, p. 266;
Suppl. aux œuvres compl. de Buffon, Descr. de Mammif. & Ois, récemm. découverts, p.
277 (1847—Nouvelle Hollande); Hartlaub, Beitrag Gesch ausgest Vögel, in Abhandl.
Naturw. Ver. Bremen, 2te Ausgabe, als M.S. gedr., p. 40 (1896).
N OBODY has hitherto identified the curious bird described by Lesson,
l.c., under the above name. From the generic characters he gives it is
evident that it was a bird with a long, curved bill, lanceolate feathers
on the head and throat, and long, strongly graduated tail, doubtless
belonging to the Meliphagidae. The description of the colouration is as
follows:—
"Back, wings and tail bright greenish-olive; quills brown inside; shafts of
the rectrices canary-yellow from below, glossy brown-red from above; top
of head and neck chestnut, each feather being narrow and streaked with
white, then with fawn-colour on the top; the feathers of the throat are
elongated and fringed out on their edges, very narrow and lanceolate, grey
at base, white at the tips; cheeks, sides of neck and chest ferruginous, some
white streaks on the feathers of the chest and in the middle of the throat;
flanks and belly clear rufous, passing into canary-yellow on the under tail-
coverts. Tail from below greenish-yellow; tarsi horn-colour, bill above
brownish, below yellowish with brown tip. Length about eight french
inches and a half (0.23 centimètres)." (Translated.)
This bird was said to have come from Australia. I have made enquiries, but
the type seems to have disappeared. There is something in the description
reminding us of Chaetoptila angustipluma. Unless the description is faulty,
Page 61
this bird came probably not from Australia, but from one of the Pacific
Islands. It has not been observed since, and is possibly extinct.
DREPANIS TEMM.
Drepanis Temminck, Man. d'Orn. Ed. II, I p. LXXXVI (1820—"Espèces: Certhia pacifica—
obscura—vestiaria et probablement falcata, que je n'ai pas vu.") Type by elimination:
Drepanis pacifica.
T HE name Drepanis is now restricted to the practically extinct "Mamo"
of the natives of the Sandwich Islands. Drepanis pacifica has a very
striking black and yellow colouration; the somewhat loose-webbed
under tail-coverts cover about three-quarters of the tail. The bill is long,
curved, non-serrated, the upper mandible a few millimetres longer than the
lower jaw. Nostrils large, covered by an operculum. First primary
rudimentary, hidden by its covert. There is a silky, soft and fluffy axillary
patch of feathers. The tail is slightly rounded. The metatarsus is covered
with large, partly fused scutes.
Only one species known.
DREPANIS PACIFICA (GM.)
Great Hook-billed Creeper Latham, Gen. Synops. I p. 703 (1782).
Certhia pacifica Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I p. 470 (1788—ex Latham).
B OTH Mr. Scott Wilson and myself have at length discussed this
beautiful bird in our books on the Hawaiian Avifauna. Of the actual
status of this bird in former times we know nothing. Latham described
it first (Gmelin named this species after Latham's description) from a pair in
the Leverian collection, which is now preserved in the Vienna Museum.
About half a century ago several specimens were collected by the late W.
Mills near Hilo, on the island of Hawaii, the only island where it existed.
Nothing certain was heard of the "Mamo" until, in 1892, my collector
Islands. It has not been observed since, and is possibly extinct.
DREPANIS TEMM.
Drepanis Temminck, Man. d'Orn. Ed. II, I p. LXXXVI (1820—"Espèces: Certhia pacifica—
obscura—vestiaria et probablement falcata, que je n'ai pas vu.") Type by elimination:
Drepanis pacifica.
T HE name Drepanis is now restricted to the practically extinct "Mamo"
of the natives of the Sandwich Islands. Drepanis pacifica has a very
striking black and yellow colouration; the somewhat loose-webbed
under tail-coverts cover about three-quarters of the tail. The bill is long,
curved, non-serrated, the upper mandible a few millimetres longer than the
lower jaw. Nostrils large, covered by an operculum. First primary
rudimentary, hidden by its covert. There is a silky, soft and fluffy axillary
patch of feathers. The tail is slightly rounded. The metatarsus is covered
with large, partly fused scutes.
Only one species known.
DREPANIS PACIFICA (GM.)
Great Hook-billed Creeper Latham, Gen. Synops. I p. 703 (1782).
Certhia pacifica Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I p. 470 (1788—ex Latham).
B OTH Mr. Scott Wilson and myself have at length discussed this
beautiful bird in our books on the Hawaiian Avifauna. Of the actual
status of this bird in former times we know nothing. Latham described
it first (Gmelin named this species after Latham's description) from a pair in
the Leverian collection, which is now preserved in the Vienna Museum.
About half a century ago several specimens were collected by the late W.
Mills near Hilo, on the island of Hawaii, the only island where it existed.
Nothing certain was heard of the "Mamo" until, in 1892, my collector
Page 62
Henry Palmer obtained a fine male, which was caught before his eyes by a
native birdcatcher. In July, 1898, Mr. H. W. Henshaw saw "at least a pair,
possibly a whole family," in the woods of Kaumana, and in 1899 a native
heard the, to him, well-known call near the same place. This brings the
existence of the Mamo down to the year 1898 or 1899. In view of the futile
efforts of Messrs. Henry Palmer, Perkins, Henshaw and others to observe
this rare bird again, we may well suppose that this species is either extinct,
or will very soon vanish if any are left.
In former times the Mamo was probably more or less common. Its golden
yellow feathers were of great value, and, though the majority of the famous
war-cloaks are composed of the feathers of Moho nobilis, a few such cloaks
are known to consist of Mamo feathers. It is supposed that it took
generations to complete such a cape.
I only know of specimens of this bird in Vienna, Leyden, Paris, Honolulu,
Cambridge and Tring.
The two examples in the Vienna Museum were obtained by Fichtel at the
sale of the Leverian collection. One is perfect, the other has the upper
portion of the bill wanting.
HEMIGNATHUS OBSCURUS ELLISIANUS GRAY.
(Plate 4, Fig. 1.)
Hemignathus obscurus Lichtenstein (non Gmelin!), Abh. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1838, p. 440 pl.
5 fig. 1 (Oahu).
Drepanis (Hemignathus) ellisiana Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Is. Pac. Oc. p. 9 (1859—based on
Lichtenstein's H. obscurus from Oahu).
Hemignathus lichtensteini Scott Wilson, Ann. & Mag. N. H. ser. 6, vol. IV, p. 401 (1889—
Oahu, based on the Berlin specimen).
Hemignathus ellisianus Rothschild, Avif. of Laysan, etc., p. 87 (1893) p. 310 (1900).
W E know only of one single specimen, the type of the names
ellisianus and lichtensteini, figured and described by Lichtenstein,
in 1838, under the name of Hemignathus obscurus. It is true that
native birdcatcher. In July, 1898, Mr. H. W. Henshaw saw "at least a pair,
possibly a whole family," in the woods of Kaumana, and in 1899 a native
heard the, to him, well-known call near the same place. This brings the
existence of the Mamo down to the year 1898 or 1899. In view of the futile
efforts of Messrs. Henry Palmer, Perkins, Henshaw and others to observe
this rare bird again, we may well suppose that this species is either extinct,
or will very soon vanish if any are left.
In former times the Mamo was probably more or less common. Its golden
yellow feathers were of great value, and, though the majority of the famous
war-cloaks are composed of the feathers of Moho nobilis, a few such cloaks
are known to consist of Mamo feathers. It is supposed that it took
generations to complete such a cape.
I only know of specimens of this bird in Vienna, Leyden, Paris, Honolulu,
Cambridge and Tring.
The two examples in the Vienna Museum were obtained by Fichtel at the
sale of the Leverian collection. One is perfect, the other has the upper
portion of the bill wanting.
HEMIGNATHUS OBSCURUS ELLISIANUS GRAY.
(Plate 4, Fig. 1.)
Hemignathus obscurus Lichtenstein (non Gmelin!), Abh. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1838, p. 440 pl.
5 fig. 1 (Oahu).
Drepanis (Hemignathus) ellisiana Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Is. Pac. Oc. p. 9 (1859—based on
Lichtenstein's H. obscurus from Oahu).
Hemignathus lichtensteini Scott Wilson, Ann. & Mag. N. H. ser. 6, vol. IV, p. 401 (1889—
Oahu, based on the Berlin specimen).
Hemignathus ellisianus Rothschild, Avif. of Laysan, etc., p. 87 (1893) p. 310 (1900).
W E know only of one single specimen, the type of the names
ellisianus and lichtensteini, figured and described by Lichtenstein,
in 1838, under the name of Hemignathus obscurus. It is true that
Page 63
Lichtenstein says, that Herr Deppe procured several specimens, but there is
only one in the Berlin Museum, and we have no knowledge where the
others may be, if they are still in existence.
There can hardly be any doubt that H. obscurus ellisianus is extinct on
Oahu, where it was discovered by Deppe. All recent collectors, from Wilson
and Palmer to this day, have failed to find a trace of it. Although collecting
in the dense forests and rugged mountains of Oahu is most difficult, we may
suppose that at least one of these collectors would have come across it, if it
still existed.
The following is the description made by Dr. Hartert of the type in
Berlin:—
"Above greenish olive-brown, more greenish on the back and rump, and
somewhat more greyish on the head and hind-neck; the dark bases of the
feathers on the head showing through, lores deep brown. A distinct yellow
superciliary stripe. Chin, throat, and middle of abdomen dull brownish
white (apparently somewhat faded). Upper breast olive-greenish, sides of
breast and flanks dull olive-greenish, more olive-brown on the flanks.
Wings and tail deep brown, bordered with yellowish green. Under-wing
coverts dull white. Bill brown, somewhat horn-brown, but not blackish, as
in the other forms of Hemignathus.
It is not probable that the bill and feet are faded, as in specimens of
Heterorhynchus lucidus collected and stuffed at the same time and kept side
by side with H. o. ellisianus, the bill and feet are still blackish and not
brown.
Wing 83.5, tail 53, culmen 56, bill from gape to tip in a straight line 47.5,
lower mandible from mental apex to tip 40 mm."
HETERORHYNCHUS LUCIDUS (LICHT.)
(Plate 4, Fig. 2.)
only one in the Berlin Museum, and we have no knowledge where the
others may be, if they are still in existence.
There can hardly be any doubt that H. obscurus ellisianus is extinct on
Oahu, where it was discovered by Deppe. All recent collectors, from Wilson
and Palmer to this day, have failed to find a trace of it. Although collecting
in the dense forests and rugged mountains of Oahu is most difficult, we may
suppose that at least one of these collectors would have come across it, if it
still existed.
The following is the description made by Dr. Hartert of the type in
Berlin:—
"Above greenish olive-brown, more greenish on the back and rump, and
somewhat more greyish on the head and hind-neck; the dark bases of the
feathers on the head showing through, lores deep brown. A distinct yellow
superciliary stripe. Chin, throat, and middle of abdomen dull brownish
white (apparently somewhat faded). Upper breast olive-greenish, sides of
breast and flanks dull olive-greenish, more olive-brown on the flanks.
Wings and tail deep brown, bordered with yellowish green. Under-wing
coverts dull white. Bill brown, somewhat horn-brown, but not blackish, as
in the other forms of Hemignathus.
It is not probable that the bill and feet are faded, as in specimens of
Heterorhynchus lucidus collected and stuffed at the same time and kept side
by side with H. o. ellisianus, the bill and feet are still blackish and not
brown.
Wing 83.5, tail 53, culmen 56, bill from gape to tip in a straight line 47.5,
lower mandible from mental apex to tip 40 mm."
HETERORHYNCHUS LUCIDUS (LICHT.)
(Plate 4, Fig. 2.)
Page 64
Hemignathus lucidus Lichtenstein, Abh. d. Kön. Akad. Wissensch. Berlin 1838 p. 451, pl. V
figs. 2 ♂ 3 ♀ (1839—Oahu).
Heterorhynchus olivaceus Lafresnaye, Mag. de Zool. 1839 pl. X. and text (Oct. 1839).
T HE Oahu form of Heterorhynchus is now extinct, and specimens are
only, as far as we know, preserved in the Museums of Berlin (types of
H. lucidus), Boston (type of H. olivaceus), Francfort, Paris, Leyden,
London, Cambridge, Liverpool.
In 1838 Deppe saw this bird in great numbers flying round the flowers of
the banana plantations. As the bird was apparently common, it is quite
possible that specimens are preserved in several other collections, and it
would be most welcome if the officials of continental Museums would give
information in case they should find specimens of this interesting extinct
bird.
Habitat: Oahu.
PSITTIROSTRA PSITTACEA DEPPEI ROTHSCH.
(Plate 4, Fig. 3.)
Psittirostra olivacea Rothschild, Avifauna of Laysan p. 193 (1900—Oahu, ex Lichtenstein
nomen nudum & M.S.)
Psittirostra psittacea deppei Rothschild, Bull. B.O.C. XV. p. 45 (1905—new name for the
above, the name olivacea being preoccupied by Ranzani).
P SITTIROSTRA PSITTACEA PSITTACEA is still one of the commoner
birds on most of the Hawaiian Islands, except Oahu, where it was
formerly replaced by a closely allied form, P. p. deppei,
distinguishable by slightly smaller dimensions, more whitish abdomen in
the male, and somewhat more olivaceous upperside. Specimens have been
collected on Oahu by Prof. Behn and Herr Deppe, and besides a pair in my
collection, I only know of examples in the museums of Berlin and Vienna.
There is no trace left of this species in Oahu, and in spite of great efforts
Mr. Palmer and all other recent collectors did not come across it. This form
has thus shared the fate of Hemignathus ellisianus, Heterorhynchus lucidus,
figs. 2 ♂ 3 ♀ (1839—Oahu).
Heterorhynchus olivaceus Lafresnaye, Mag. de Zool. 1839 pl. X. and text (Oct. 1839).
T HE Oahu form of Heterorhynchus is now extinct, and specimens are
only, as far as we know, preserved in the Museums of Berlin (types of
H. lucidus), Boston (type of H. olivaceus), Francfort, Paris, Leyden,
London, Cambridge, Liverpool.
In 1838 Deppe saw this bird in great numbers flying round the flowers of
the banana plantations. As the bird was apparently common, it is quite
possible that specimens are preserved in several other collections, and it
would be most welcome if the officials of continental Museums would give
information in case they should find specimens of this interesting extinct
bird.
Habitat: Oahu.
PSITTIROSTRA PSITTACEA DEPPEI ROTHSCH.
(Plate 4, Fig. 3.)
Psittirostra olivacea Rothschild, Avifauna of Laysan p. 193 (1900—Oahu, ex Lichtenstein
nomen nudum & M.S.)
Psittirostra psittacea deppei Rothschild, Bull. B.O.C. XV. p. 45 (1905—new name for the
above, the name olivacea being preoccupied by Ranzani).
P SITTIROSTRA PSITTACEA PSITTACEA is still one of the commoner
birds on most of the Hawaiian Islands, except Oahu, where it was
formerly replaced by a closely allied form, P. p. deppei,
distinguishable by slightly smaller dimensions, more whitish abdomen in
the male, and somewhat more olivaceous upperside. Specimens have been
collected on Oahu by Prof. Behn and Herr Deppe, and besides a pair in my
collection, I only know of examples in the museums of Berlin and Vienna.
There is no trace left of this species in Oahu, and in spite of great efforts
Mr. Palmer and all other recent collectors did not come across it. This form
has thus shared the fate of Hemignathus ellisianus, Heterorhynchus lucidus,
Page 65
Moho apicalis and Phaeornis oahensis, which have all disappeared from
Oahu, while Loxops rufa may still exist in a few pairs, or has possibly
followed suit already.
LOXOPS COCCINEA RUFA BLOXAM.
Fringilla rufa Bloxam, Voy. "Blonde" p. 250 (1826).
Loxops wolstenholmei Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club I, p. LVI (1893—Oahu).
Loxops rufa Wilson, Aves Hawaiienses part VI, plate and text (1896); Rothschild, Avif. of
Laysan, etc., p. 177 (1900).
T HIS form of Loxops is only found on Oahu, where it is doubtless very
rare now, if not already extinct. The last known specimen was shot on
April 20th, 1893, in the mountains of the Wailua district, on Oahu, and
is in my collection. This is the only specimen obtained by the efforts of
recent collectors, and, if any should still exist, we may suppose that their
fate is sealed.
L. c. rufa differs from L. coccinea coccinea of Hawaii by its smaller size
and more brownish, somberer coloration.
We know of specimens in the British Museum, including the type of
Bloxam's Fringilla rufa, in Liverpool, Philadelphia, Berlin, Berlepsch
Castle, Vienna and Tring.
CIRIDOPS WILSON.
Ciridops Wilson, Nature 1892, p. 469.
T HOUGH formerly supposed to belong to the Fringillidae, it is now
generally acknowledged to belong to the family Drepanidae, a
peculiar family of different forms restricted in its distribution to the
Hawaiian Islands. The genus Ciridops seems to stand nearest to Loxops,
from which, however, it is easily distinguished by the form of the bill, the
Oahu, while Loxops rufa may still exist in a few pairs, or has possibly
followed suit already.
LOXOPS COCCINEA RUFA BLOXAM.
Fringilla rufa Bloxam, Voy. "Blonde" p. 250 (1826).
Loxops wolstenholmei Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club I, p. LVI (1893—Oahu).
Loxops rufa Wilson, Aves Hawaiienses part VI, plate and text (1896); Rothschild, Avif. of
Laysan, etc., p. 177 (1900).
T HIS form of Loxops is only found on Oahu, where it is doubtless very
rare now, if not already extinct. The last known specimen was shot on
April 20th, 1893, in the mountains of the Wailua district, on Oahu, and
is in my collection. This is the only specimen obtained by the efforts of
recent collectors, and, if any should still exist, we may suppose that their
fate is sealed.
L. c. rufa differs from L. coccinea coccinea of Hawaii by its smaller size
and more brownish, somberer coloration.
We know of specimens in the British Museum, including the type of
Bloxam's Fringilla rufa, in Liverpool, Philadelphia, Berlin, Berlepsch
Castle, Vienna and Tring.
CIRIDOPS WILSON.
Ciridops Wilson, Nature 1892, p. 469.
T HOUGH formerly supposed to belong to the Fringillidae, it is now
generally acknowledged to belong to the family Drepanidae, a
peculiar family of different forms restricted in its distribution to the
Hawaiian Islands. The genus Ciridops seems to stand nearest to Loxops,
from which, however, it is easily distinguished by the form of the bill, the
Page 66
pattern of colouration, stronger feet, and the structure of its plumage, which
is somewhat stiff and scanty, while it is soft and rich in Loxops. The
feathers of the crown and throat are pointed.
We only know one species belonging to this genus.
CIRIDOPS ANNA (DOLE).
(Plate 4, Fig. 4.)
Fringilla anna Dole, Hawaiian Almanac 1879, p. 49 (Hawaii); reprint in Ibis 1880.
Ciridops anna Wilson & Evans, Aves Hawaienses, Part IV, text and plate; Rothschild,
Avifauna of Laysan, p. 183.
T HE "Ulaaihawane" of the natives of Hawaii is one of the rarest birds
known, only three specimens being on record—one, the type, in the
Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum in Honolulu, and two in my
collection. One of these was brought home by Mr. Scott Wilson, who
obtained it from Mr. Bishop in Honolulu, the other was shot by a native for
my former collector, Mr. Palmer. No other examples have been obtained. As
there are still a good many hawane palms in elevated districts of Hawaii,
there is, of course, a possibility that a few examples still exist there; but to
all intents and purposes Ciridops anna may be looked upon as extinct.
SIPHONORHIS SCL.
Siphonorhis Sclater, P.Z.S. 1861, p. 77. Type: Caprimulgus americanus L.
"
T HE bill is extremely broad at base, the tip strong and heavily
decurved; nostrils tubular and very prominent; rictal bristles strongly
developed. Wing pointed, third primary longest; tail rounded, almost
graduated. Tarsi long and naked. The sexes differ slightly in coloration.
(Hartert.)"
is somewhat stiff and scanty, while it is soft and rich in Loxops. The
feathers of the crown and throat are pointed.
We only know one species belonging to this genus.
CIRIDOPS ANNA (DOLE).
(Plate 4, Fig. 4.)
Fringilla anna Dole, Hawaiian Almanac 1879, p. 49 (Hawaii); reprint in Ibis 1880.
Ciridops anna Wilson & Evans, Aves Hawaienses, Part IV, text and plate; Rothschild,
Avifauna of Laysan, p. 183.
T HE "Ulaaihawane" of the natives of Hawaii is one of the rarest birds
known, only three specimens being on record—one, the type, in the
Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum in Honolulu, and two in my
collection. One of these was brought home by Mr. Scott Wilson, who
obtained it from Mr. Bishop in Honolulu, the other was shot by a native for
my former collector, Mr. Palmer. No other examples have been obtained. As
there are still a good many hawane palms in elevated districts of Hawaii,
there is, of course, a possibility that a few examples still exist there; but to
all intents and purposes Ciridops anna may be looked upon as extinct.
SIPHONORHIS SCL.
Siphonorhis Sclater, P.Z.S. 1861, p. 77. Type: Caprimulgus americanus L.
"
T HE bill is extremely broad at base, the tip strong and heavily
decurved; nostrils tubular and very prominent; rictal bristles strongly
developed. Wing pointed, third primary longest; tail rounded, almost
graduated. Tarsi long and naked. The sexes differ slightly in coloration.
(Hartert.)"
Page 67
SIPHONORHIS AMERICANUS (L.)
(Plate 5a.)
Small Wood-Owle Sloane, Voy. Jamaica II, p. 296, pl. 255, fig. 1 (1725).
Caprimulgus americanus Linnaeus, Syst. Nat., Ed. X, p. 193 (1758—Ex Sloane. "Habitat in
America calidiore").
Chordeiles americanus Bonaparte, Consp. Av. I, p. 63 (1850).
Siphonorhis americanus Sclater, P.Z.S. 1861, p. 77; id. P.Z.S. 1866, p. 144; Cory, B. W.
Indies, p. 139 (1889); Hartert, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XVI, p. 592 (1892).
T HE whole diagnosis of Linnaeus is "Caprimulgus narium tubulis
eminentibus," but the prominent tubular nostrils are just the character
which distinguishes S. americanus most strikingly from all the other
goatsuckers, and I think that Sloane's figure and description are sufficient to
indicate this bird. Sloane says as follows:—
"This was seven Inches from the end of the Bill to that of the Tail, and ten
from the end of Wing to Wing expanded, it had a quarter of an Inch long
crooked black bill, with two Tubuli about one eight Part of an Inch long for
the Nostrills, along the upper Mandible were several bristly Hairs in a Line,
like those of a Cat's Mustachoes of a black Colour, the Aperture of Chaps or
Swallow was extraordinary large. The Feathers on the Head and under the
Chaps were many, the Tail was four Inches long, the Head and Back were
cover'd with Feathers of a mixt Colour of Feuille Morte, grey and black, the
Wings and Tail were of the same Colour only Lighter under the Chaps,
Breast and Belly was also of the same, the Legs and Feet were an Inch and
half cover'd with brown Scales, the Toes four, three before, that in the
middle three-quarters of an Inch long, and one behind.
"Its Stomach was not very muscular, it was fill'd with Scarabei, &c. The rest
of the Bowells agreed in everything with those of the greater Sort,
concerning which see the description above.
"They feed on Scarabei and other Insects of that Kind.
"They are found with the former."
(Plate 5a.)
Small Wood-Owle Sloane, Voy. Jamaica II, p. 296, pl. 255, fig. 1 (1725).
Caprimulgus americanus Linnaeus, Syst. Nat., Ed. X, p. 193 (1758—Ex Sloane. "Habitat in
America calidiore").
Chordeiles americanus Bonaparte, Consp. Av. I, p. 63 (1850).
Siphonorhis americanus Sclater, P.Z.S. 1861, p. 77; id. P.Z.S. 1866, p. 144; Cory, B. W.
Indies, p. 139 (1889); Hartert, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XVI, p. 592 (1892).
T HE whole diagnosis of Linnaeus is "Caprimulgus narium tubulis
eminentibus," but the prominent tubular nostrils are just the character
which distinguishes S. americanus most strikingly from all the other
goatsuckers, and I think that Sloane's figure and description are sufficient to
indicate this bird. Sloane says as follows:—
"This was seven Inches from the end of the Bill to that of the Tail, and ten
from the end of Wing to Wing expanded, it had a quarter of an Inch long
crooked black bill, with two Tubuli about one eight Part of an Inch long for
the Nostrills, along the upper Mandible were several bristly Hairs in a Line,
like those of a Cat's Mustachoes of a black Colour, the Aperture of Chaps or
Swallow was extraordinary large. The Feathers on the Head and under the
Chaps were many, the Tail was four Inches long, the Head and Back were
cover'd with Feathers of a mixt Colour of Feuille Morte, grey and black, the
Wings and Tail were of the same Colour only Lighter under the Chaps,
Breast and Belly was also of the same, the Legs and Feet were an Inch and
half cover'd with brown Scales, the Toes four, three before, that in the
middle three-quarters of an Inch long, and one behind.
"Its Stomach was not very muscular, it was fill'd with Scarabei, &c. The rest
of the Bowells agreed in everything with those of the greater Sort,
concerning which see the description above.
"They feed on Scarabei and other Insects of that Kind.
"They are found with the former."
Page 68
Specimens of this Goatsucker are very rare in collections, and I am only
aware of the existence of examples in American museums and of the pair
obtained by Osburn in Jamaica about half a century ago, and now in the
British Museum. Recent collectors have failed to procure it, and it is
therefore to be feared that, like Aestrelata caribbaea, it has been
exterminated by the introduced mongoose and other animals.
Habitat: Jamaica.
NESTOR PRODUCTUS (GOULD.)
(Plate 6, head.)
Wilson's Parrakeet Latham, Gen. Hist. B. II, p. 170 (1822).
Plyctolophus productus Gould, P.Z.S. 1836, p. 19.
Nestor productus Gould, Syn. Austr. B. and adj. Isl. pt. I, pl., fig. 1 (183—?).
Centrurus productus Bp., Naumannia 1856, Consp. Psitt. No. 265.
L ATHAM'S original description is as follows: "Length thirteen inches.
Bill very long and hooked, and upper mandible measuring almost two
inches, the under three-quarters, colour dusky; plumage in general
greenish ash, inclining to brown, and clouded here and there with orange as
in the 'Crossbill,' but the edges of the feathers of the back dun colour; all the
under parts of the body mixed yellow and dull orange; rump dull red; under
wing coverts dull yellow; thighs brown; the quills reach almost to the end of
the tail, which is somewhat, but not greatly, cuneiform; both quills and tail
are brown, the former marked on the inner webs with five or six whitish
bars; legs dusky, toes very long. Inhabits New South Wales. I met with a
fine specimen of it in the collection of Thomas Wilson, Esqre."
It has long been a question whether Nestor productus of Gould and Nestor
norfolcensis of Pelzeln were really distinct or only individual varieties of
one species. I had for a long time considered them to be merely individual
varieties, for I could not persuade myself that a small island like Philip
Island, almost contiguous to Norfolk Island, could have a different species
of Nestor to that found on the larger island. Since commencing to write this
aware of the existence of examples in American museums and of the pair
obtained by Osburn in Jamaica about half a century ago, and now in the
British Museum. Recent collectors have failed to procure it, and it is
therefore to be feared that, like Aestrelata caribbaea, it has been
exterminated by the introduced mongoose and other animals.
Habitat: Jamaica.
NESTOR PRODUCTUS (GOULD.)
(Plate 6, head.)
Wilson's Parrakeet Latham, Gen. Hist. B. II, p. 170 (1822).
Plyctolophus productus Gould, P.Z.S. 1836, p. 19.
Nestor productus Gould, Syn. Austr. B. and adj. Isl. pt. I, pl., fig. 1 (183—?).
Centrurus productus Bp., Naumannia 1856, Consp. Psitt. No. 265.
L ATHAM'S original description is as follows: "Length thirteen inches.
Bill very long and hooked, and upper mandible measuring almost two
inches, the under three-quarters, colour dusky; plumage in general
greenish ash, inclining to brown, and clouded here and there with orange as
in the 'Crossbill,' but the edges of the feathers of the back dun colour; all the
under parts of the body mixed yellow and dull orange; rump dull red; under
wing coverts dull yellow; thighs brown; the quills reach almost to the end of
the tail, which is somewhat, but not greatly, cuneiform; both quills and tail
are brown, the former marked on the inner webs with five or six whitish
bars; legs dusky, toes very long. Inhabits New South Wales. I met with a
fine specimen of it in the collection of Thomas Wilson, Esqre."
It has long been a question whether Nestor productus of Gould and Nestor
norfolcensis of Pelzeln were really distinct or only individual varieties of
one species. I had for a long time considered them to be merely individual
varieties, for I could not persuade myself that a small island like Philip
Island, almost contiguous to Norfolk Island, could have a different species
of Nestor to that found on the larger island. Since commencing to write this
Page 69
book, however, I have come to somewhat different conclusions. In the first
place no special locality is given for N. productus by the earlier authors, in
the same way as in the case of Notornis alba, which, like the Nestor, was
said to come from N. S. Wales. This fact is easily explained, as N. S. Wales
and Norfolk Island were both penal settlements in the early days, and there
was intercourse by regular vessels plying between these colonies and Lord
Howe's Island. Now we find in the case of several other birds that distinct
local forms occur on Norfolk and Lord Howe's Islands, while as far as I
know there is no other record of a distinct bird from Philip Island. I
therefore believe that Nestor productus inhabited both Norfolk and Philip
Islands, and that all specimens extant are from Philip Island, where it
lingered some years longer than on the main island, while the specimens of
Ferdinand Bauer and Governor Hunter, and possibly the supposed N.
norfolcensis of Canon Tristram's collection, now in Liverpool, had been
brought from Lord Howe's Island in cages and were kept as pets in Norfolk
Island; and then, as the value of exact data in those early days of our
science was unknown, the references were made to the place whence the
specimens were seen or brought. One thing however is certain, the bill in
Ferdinand Bauer's sketch is evidently a monstrous growth produced by
captivity, for Latham expressly describes the bill of Governor Hunter's bird
as ending in a long thin point. The differences of N. norfolcensis are the dull
crimson sides of face, chin, and throat; dull green head and hind neck, and
the total absence of bars on the tail. The plate given herewith is a
reproduction of the Liverpool bird, with the bill of Ferdinand Bauer's sketch
added, as this is wanting in that bird, and in the corner a head of the
specimen of N. productus, purchased for the Tring Museum, when the late
Mr. Wallace's Museum at Distington, Cumberland, was dispersed.
I have carefully examined the three fine specimens of Nestor productus in
the British Museum, and the conclusion I have come to is that the bird
described by Gould as the adult of his N. productus was an abnormal
specimen, and was in relation to normal N. productus what the aberrations
called "superbus" and "esslingi" are to N. meridionalis. The bills of the
British Museum specimens are very different. The one from the Bell
collection has the long, thin bill, but it is at least half-an-inch to three-
quarters shorter than those in the Tring and Florence specimens.
Habitat: Philip Island and probably Norfolk Island.
place no special locality is given for N. productus by the earlier authors, in
the same way as in the case of Notornis alba, which, like the Nestor, was
said to come from N. S. Wales. This fact is easily explained, as N. S. Wales
and Norfolk Island were both penal settlements in the early days, and there
was intercourse by regular vessels plying between these colonies and Lord
Howe's Island. Now we find in the case of several other birds that distinct
local forms occur on Norfolk and Lord Howe's Islands, while as far as I
know there is no other record of a distinct bird from Philip Island. I
therefore believe that Nestor productus inhabited both Norfolk and Philip
Islands, and that all specimens extant are from Philip Island, where it
lingered some years longer than on the main island, while the specimens of
Ferdinand Bauer and Governor Hunter, and possibly the supposed N.
norfolcensis of Canon Tristram's collection, now in Liverpool, had been
brought from Lord Howe's Island in cages and were kept as pets in Norfolk
Island; and then, as the value of exact data in those early days of our
science was unknown, the references were made to the place whence the
specimens were seen or brought. One thing however is certain, the bill in
Ferdinand Bauer's sketch is evidently a monstrous growth produced by
captivity, for Latham expressly describes the bill of Governor Hunter's bird
as ending in a long thin point. The differences of N. norfolcensis are the dull
crimson sides of face, chin, and throat; dull green head and hind neck, and
the total absence of bars on the tail. The plate given herewith is a
reproduction of the Liverpool bird, with the bill of Ferdinand Bauer's sketch
added, as this is wanting in that bird, and in the corner a head of the
specimen of N. productus, purchased for the Tring Museum, when the late
Mr. Wallace's Museum at Distington, Cumberland, was dispersed.
I have carefully examined the three fine specimens of Nestor productus in
the British Museum, and the conclusion I have come to is that the bird
described by Gould as the adult of his N. productus was an abnormal
specimen, and was in relation to normal N. productus what the aberrations
called "superbus" and "esslingi" are to N. meridionalis. The bills of the
British Museum specimens are very different. The one from the Bell
collection has the long, thin bill, but it is at least half-an-inch to three-
quarters shorter than those in the Tring and Florence specimens.
Habitat: Philip Island and probably Norfolk Island.
Page 70
One in Tring, three in London, one in Florence, two in Vienna, one in
Prague, two in Leyden, one in Amsterdam, are known to me.
The two specimens in the Vienna Museum were both bought in 1839. One
from Ward, with a short bill, brown chest and throat, and a very wide
yellow breast-band. The other from Baron von Hügel, which has a long bill
and very red cheeks and chin.
NESTOR NORFOLCENSIS PELZELN.
(Plate 6, full figure.)
Long-billed Parrakeet Latham, Gen. Hist. II, p. 171 (1822).
Nestor norfolcensis Pelzeln, Sitzb. k. Akad. Wiss. XLI, pp. 322-325, pl.—(1860—detailed
description from the manuscript of the late botanist, Ferdinand Lucas Bauer, and figure
of head with an evidently abnormally developed bill. The specimen was from Norfolk
Island; it had disappeared before Pelzeln's time).
L ATHAM'S original description is as follows: "Length above 12 inches.
Bill very long and curved, thick halfway from the base, but tapering
quite to a point at the tip, and under mandible truncated at the end,
colour of both, dusky; head and neck dull green; sides under the eyes, chin
and throat pale crimson; upper parts of the body, wings and tail dusky;
breast yellowish; belly, thighs and vent more or less crimson; tail
cuneiform; legs brown."
"One of these was in possession of Governor Hunter, who brought it from
Norfolk Island; from the bill it seems related to the other, but the tail is
cuneiform in a much greater degree, without any bars across it."
The only bird of this species extant is the one in Liverpool, from the
Tristram collection.
Governor Hunter's specimen and Bauer's bird were both brought from
Norfolk Island, but as they were cage-birds, and differed so markedly from
N. productus, I, for reasons given under N. productus, believe this bird
came from Lord Howe's Island.
Prague, two in Leyden, one in Amsterdam, are known to me.
The two specimens in the Vienna Museum were both bought in 1839. One
from Ward, with a short bill, brown chest and throat, and a very wide
yellow breast-band. The other from Baron von Hügel, which has a long bill
and very red cheeks and chin.
NESTOR NORFOLCENSIS PELZELN.
(Plate 6, full figure.)
Long-billed Parrakeet Latham, Gen. Hist. II, p. 171 (1822).
Nestor norfolcensis Pelzeln, Sitzb. k. Akad. Wiss. XLI, pp. 322-325, pl.—(1860—detailed
description from the manuscript of the late botanist, Ferdinand Lucas Bauer, and figure
of head with an evidently abnormally developed bill. The specimen was from Norfolk
Island; it had disappeared before Pelzeln's time).
L ATHAM'S original description is as follows: "Length above 12 inches.
Bill very long and curved, thick halfway from the base, but tapering
quite to a point at the tip, and under mandible truncated at the end,
colour of both, dusky; head and neck dull green; sides under the eyes, chin
and throat pale crimson; upper parts of the body, wings and tail dusky;
breast yellowish; belly, thighs and vent more or less crimson; tail
cuneiform; legs brown."
"One of these was in possession of Governor Hunter, who brought it from
Norfolk Island; from the bill it seems related to the other, but the tail is
cuneiform in a much greater degree, without any bars across it."
The only bird of this species extant is the one in Liverpool, from the
Tristram collection.
Governor Hunter's specimen and Bauer's bird were both brought from
Norfolk Island, but as they were cage-birds, and differed so markedly from
N. productus, I, for reasons given under N. productus, believe this bird
came from Lord Howe's Island.
Page 71
Habitat: Lord Howe's Island (?).
LOPHOPSITTACUS NEWTON.
T HE huge bill and peculiar shaped crest, together with the—apparently,
i.e., if the figure is correct—very short wings are characteristic of this
genus. (P.Z.S. 1875, p. 350.)
LOPHOPSITTACUS MAURITIANUS (OWEN).
(Plate 7.)
Broad-billed Parrot Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VI, p. 53 (1866).
Psittacus mauritianus Owen, Ibis, p. 168 (1866).
Psittacus (Lophopsittacus) mauritianus A. Newton, P.Z.S. (1875), pp. 349, 350.
Lophopsittacus mauritianus Newton, Enc. Brit. (ed. 9) III, p. 732, ff. 44, 46 (1875).
T HIS extraordinary parrot was first described and made known to
science by Professor Owen in 1866. He described it from 2 lower
mandibles, much damaged, which were dug up from the Mare aux
Songes. Except a few further osseous remains, mostly collected by Sir
Edward Newton, nothing more of importance was found relating to this bird
till Professor Schlegel discovered in the Library of Utrecht the manuscript
journal kept during the voyage to Mauritius in A.D. 1601-1602 of Wolphart
Harmanszoon, in which among other items of natural history there is a
sketch of Lophopsittacus from life, and the statement that it was wholly of a
grey-blue colour. From the fact that this bird is not mentioned by the
voyagers who visited Mauritius in the 2nd and 3rd decades of the 18th
century, it is probable that it was one of the first of the Mascarene birds to
become extinct. This is easily understood when we consider that the bird
was apparently unable to fly, and would like all big parrots prove excellent
eating.
LOPHOPSITTACUS NEWTON.
T HE huge bill and peculiar shaped crest, together with the—apparently,
i.e., if the figure is correct—very short wings are characteristic of this
genus. (P.Z.S. 1875, p. 350.)
LOPHOPSITTACUS MAURITIANUS (OWEN).
(Plate 7.)
Broad-billed Parrot Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VI, p. 53 (1866).
Psittacus mauritianus Owen, Ibis, p. 168 (1866).
Psittacus (Lophopsittacus) mauritianus A. Newton, P.Z.S. (1875), pp. 349, 350.
Lophopsittacus mauritianus Newton, Enc. Brit. (ed. 9) III, p. 732, ff. 44, 46 (1875).
T HIS extraordinary parrot was first described and made known to
science by Professor Owen in 1866. He described it from 2 lower
mandibles, much damaged, which were dug up from the Mare aux
Songes. Except a few further osseous remains, mostly collected by Sir
Edward Newton, nothing more of importance was found relating to this bird
till Professor Schlegel discovered in the Library of Utrecht the manuscript
journal kept during the voyage to Mauritius in A.D. 1601-1602 of Wolphart
Harmanszoon, in which among other items of natural history there is a
sketch of Lophopsittacus from life, and the statement that it was wholly of a
grey-blue colour. From the fact that this bird is not mentioned by the
voyagers who visited Mauritius in the 2nd and 3rd decades of the 18th
century, it is probable that it was one of the first of the Mascarene birds to
become extinct. This is easily understood when we consider that the bird
was apparently unable to fly, and would like all big parrots prove excellent
eating.
Page 72
Only known from osseous remains and the above-quoted drawing and
notes.
35 tarsi and tibiae, and 60 complete and incomplete lower mandibles and
fragments of palatine bones in the Tring Museum.
Habitat: Mauritius.
ARA TRICOLOR BECHST.
(Plate 10.)
Le petit Ara D'Aubenton, Pl. Enl. 641.
L'Ara tricolor Levaill., Perr. I p. 17, pl. 5 (1801).
Psittacus tricolor Bechst., Kurze Ueb. p. 64, pl. I (1811).
Sittace? lichtensteini Wagl., fide Bp., Naumannia 1856, Consp. Psitt.
B ECHSTEIN'S description, taken from Levaillant, is (translated) as
follows: "This Aras, which others have held to be only a variety of
Macao, is according to Vaillant a distinct species. It is one third
smaller than the red-fronted species, or 1 ft. 10 in. long, of which the tail
takes 11 inches and the bill 18 lines. The latter is of a black colour and has
the upper mandible less curved, and the sides of the lower mandible more
swollen than is the case in the other Ara species. The cheeks are naked and
white, with three lines of red feathers. Head, front and sides of the neck,
breast, belly and thighs red; back of the neck pale yellow; back, shoulders
and smaller wing coverts brownish red bordered with yellow or green;
flanks yellowish, primaries above dark azure blue, below coppery red.
Crissum violet blue, undertail coverts pale blue with green and brown-red
borders; under-wing coverts red, the larger yellow, and brownish green.
Two centre tail feathers all red with blue tips, the outer ones blue on outer
webs and tips, red on the rest of the feather."
Of this bird I know only of two in the British Museum, one in Paris, one in
Leyden, one in Liverpool. The specimen in the Paris Museum bears the
inscription "Macrocercus tricolor (Bechst.) M. E. Rosseau. Cuba.
notes.
35 tarsi and tibiae, and 60 complete and incomplete lower mandibles and
fragments of palatine bones in the Tring Museum.
Habitat: Mauritius.
ARA TRICOLOR BECHST.
(Plate 10.)
Le petit Ara D'Aubenton, Pl. Enl. 641.
L'Ara tricolor Levaill., Perr. I p. 17, pl. 5 (1801).
Psittacus tricolor Bechst., Kurze Ueb. p. 64, pl. I (1811).
Sittace? lichtensteini Wagl., fide Bp., Naumannia 1856, Consp. Psitt.
B ECHSTEIN'S description, taken from Levaillant, is (translated) as
follows: "This Aras, which others have held to be only a variety of
Macao, is according to Vaillant a distinct species. It is one third
smaller than the red-fronted species, or 1 ft. 10 in. long, of which the tail
takes 11 inches and the bill 18 lines. The latter is of a black colour and has
the upper mandible less curved, and the sides of the lower mandible more
swollen than is the case in the other Ara species. The cheeks are naked and
white, with three lines of red feathers. Head, front and sides of the neck,
breast, belly and thighs red; back of the neck pale yellow; back, shoulders
and smaller wing coverts brownish red bordered with yellow or green;
flanks yellowish, primaries above dark azure blue, below coppery red.
Crissum violet blue, undertail coverts pale blue with green and brown-red
borders; under-wing coverts red, the larger yellow, and brownish green.
Two centre tail feathers all red with blue tips, the outer ones blue on outer
webs and tips, red on the rest of the feather."
Of this bird I know only of two in the British Museum, one in Paris, one in
Leyden, one in Liverpool. The specimen in the Paris Museum bears the
inscription "Macrocercus tricolor (Bechst.) M. E. Rosseau. Cuba.
Page 73
Ménagerie 1842." Probably, however, there are more specimens in other
museums.
Apparently the last specimen was shot in 1864 at La Vega (Bangs, Americ.
Nat. XXXIX, p. 200).
Like all the extinct West Indian Macaws, Amazons and Conures, it became
extinct through its persecution by the inhabitants for food.
Habitat: Formerly Cuba and Isle of Pines.
ARA GOSSEI ROTHSCH.
(Plate 11.)
Yellow-headed Macaw Gosse, Birds of Jamaica, p. 260 (1847).
Ara gossei Rothsch., Bull. B.O.C., XVI, p. 14 (1905); Proc. IV, Orn. Congr., p. 201 (1907).
Ara tricolor (non Bechstein) Clark, Auk 1905, p. 348.
M R. GOSSE'S description is as follows:—"Basal half of upper
mandible black; apical half, ash coloured; lower mandible, black, tip
only ash coloured; forehead, crown, and back of neck, bright
yellow; sides of face, around eyes, anterior and lateral parts of the neck, and
back, a fine scarlet; wing coverts and breast deep sanguine red; winglet and
primaries an elegant light blue. The legs and feet are said to have been
black; the tail, red and yellow intermixed (Rob.)"
Mr. Gosse also remarks, "If this is not the tricolor of Le Vaillant, which is
the only Macaw I am aware of marked with a yellow nape, it is probably
new."
In spite of the evident differences in the description, the Jamaican Ara has
always been united with the Cuban A. tricolor, even as lately as October,
1905, by Mr. Austin H. Clark (Auk, 1905, p. 348), though he queries it in a
footnote. The specimen described by Dr. Robinson, here quoted by Gosse,
was shot about 1765, by Mr. Odell, in the mountains of Hanover parish,
about ten miles east of Lucea.
museums.
Apparently the last specimen was shot in 1864 at La Vega (Bangs, Americ.
Nat. XXXIX, p. 200).
Like all the extinct West Indian Macaws, Amazons and Conures, it became
extinct through its persecution by the inhabitants for food.
Habitat: Formerly Cuba and Isle of Pines.
ARA GOSSEI ROTHSCH.
(Plate 11.)
Yellow-headed Macaw Gosse, Birds of Jamaica, p. 260 (1847).
Ara gossei Rothsch., Bull. B.O.C., XVI, p. 14 (1905); Proc. IV, Orn. Congr., p. 201 (1907).
Ara tricolor (non Bechstein) Clark, Auk 1905, p. 348.
M R. GOSSE'S description is as follows:—"Basal half of upper
mandible black; apical half, ash coloured; lower mandible, black, tip
only ash coloured; forehead, crown, and back of neck, bright
yellow; sides of face, around eyes, anterior and lateral parts of the neck, and
back, a fine scarlet; wing coverts and breast deep sanguine red; winglet and
primaries an elegant light blue. The legs and feet are said to have been
black; the tail, red and yellow intermixed (Rob.)"
Mr. Gosse also remarks, "If this is not the tricolor of Le Vaillant, which is
the only Macaw I am aware of marked with a yellow nape, it is probably
new."
In spite of the evident differences in the description, the Jamaican Ara has
always been united with the Cuban A. tricolor, even as lately as October,
1905, by Mr. Austin H. Clark (Auk, 1905, p. 348), though he queries it in a
footnote. The specimen described by Dr. Robinson, here quoted by Gosse,
was shot about 1765, by Mr. Odell, in the mountains of Hanover parish,
about ten miles east of Lucea.
Page 74
Habitat: Jamaica.
The specimen described no longer exists, and there are none in any
collection known.
There was a third member of the tricolor group of Macaws found on the
large island of Haiti, which Mr. Clark has also united under A. tricolor, but I
believe it must have been different, just as the Jamaica bird.
ARA ERYTHROCEPHALA ROTHSCH.
(Plate 12.)
Ara militaris Gosse, Birds of Jamaica, p. 261 (1847).
Ara erythrocephala Rothsch., Bull. B.O.C., XVI, p. 14 (1905); Proc. IV Orn. Congr., p. 201
(1907).
G OSSE says the description given to him in a letter, just received from
Mr. Hill, was as follows:—"Head red; neck, shoulders, and
underparts of a light and lively green; the greater wing coverts and
quills, blue; and the tail scarlet and blue on the upper surface, with the
under plumage, both of wings and tail, a mass of intense orange yellow."
"The specimen here described was procured in the mountains of Trelawny
and St. Anne's by Mr. White, proprietor of the Oxford estate." No specimen
now known.
Habitat: Jamaica.
Mr. Gosse also relates that the Rev. Mr. Coward, in 1842, saw two large
Macaws flying near the foot of the mountains in the parish of St. James,
near the centre of the island. These birds were said to have been blue and
yellow; if so, probably they were my Ara erythrura, whose precise island
home is unknown.
The specimen described no longer exists, and there are none in any
collection known.
There was a third member of the tricolor group of Macaws found on the
large island of Haiti, which Mr. Clark has also united under A. tricolor, but I
believe it must have been different, just as the Jamaica bird.
ARA ERYTHROCEPHALA ROTHSCH.
(Plate 12.)
Ara militaris Gosse, Birds of Jamaica, p. 261 (1847).
Ara erythrocephala Rothsch., Bull. B.O.C., XVI, p. 14 (1905); Proc. IV Orn. Congr., p. 201
(1907).
G OSSE says the description given to him in a letter, just received from
Mr. Hill, was as follows:—"Head red; neck, shoulders, and
underparts of a light and lively green; the greater wing coverts and
quills, blue; and the tail scarlet and blue on the upper surface, with the
under plumage, both of wings and tail, a mass of intense orange yellow."
"The specimen here described was procured in the mountains of Trelawny
and St. Anne's by Mr. White, proprietor of the Oxford estate." No specimen
now known.
Habitat: Jamaica.
Mr. Gosse also relates that the Rev. Mr. Coward, in 1842, saw two large
Macaws flying near the foot of the mountains in the parish of St. James,
near the centre of the island. These birds were said to have been blue and
yellow; if so, probably they were my Ara erythrura, whose precise island
home is unknown.
Page 75
ARA MARTINICUS (ROTHSCH.)
(Plate 14.)
Les Aras Père Bouton, Rel. de l'étab. d. Français dep. 1635, en l'ile Martinique pp. 71. 72
(1640).
Anadorhynchus martinicus Rothsch. Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 14 (1905); Proc. IV Orn. Congr.,
p. 202 (1907).
P ÈRE BOUTON says, "Les Aras sont deux ou trois fois gros comme les
Perroquets et ont un plumage bien différent en couleur. Ceux que j'ai
vus avaient les plumes leleucs et orangées."
No specimen preserved.
Habitat: Martinique.
ARA GUADALOUPENSIS CLARK.
Les Arras Du Tertre, Hist. gen. des Antilles Vol. II p. 248 (1667).
Ara Rouge D'Aubenton, Pl. Enl. 12 (1779).
Ara guadaloupensis Clark, Auk, XXII, p. 272 (1905).
D U TERTRE gives the following description:—"The Arras is a sort of
Parrot bigger than all the others. This is proved because those of
Guadaloupe are larger than all the other Parrots, both those from the
Islands as well as from the Mainland; while this Arras is larger than these
by one third. It has the head, the neck, the belly and the back of the colour
of fire; its wings are a mixture of yellow azure, and crimson feathers; while
the tail is entirely red and a foot-and-a-half long."
Macaws of this colouration are mentioned by Du Tertre, De Rochefort, and
others of the older authors as being found on Guadaloupe, Dominica and
Martinique, and Mr. Clark has united them under one name. This I feel sure
is wrong, and I believe each of the three islands had a distinct species of
Red Macaw, so I confine this name to the Guadaloupe form.
(Plate 14.)
Les Aras Père Bouton, Rel. de l'étab. d. Français dep. 1635, en l'ile Martinique pp. 71. 72
(1640).
Anadorhynchus martinicus Rothsch. Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 14 (1905); Proc. IV Orn. Congr.,
p. 202 (1907).
P ÈRE BOUTON says, "Les Aras sont deux ou trois fois gros comme les
Perroquets et ont un plumage bien différent en couleur. Ceux que j'ai
vus avaient les plumes leleucs et orangées."
No specimen preserved.
Habitat: Martinique.
ARA GUADALOUPENSIS CLARK.
Les Arras Du Tertre, Hist. gen. des Antilles Vol. II p. 248 (1667).
Ara Rouge D'Aubenton, Pl. Enl. 12 (1779).
Ara guadaloupensis Clark, Auk, XXII, p. 272 (1905).
D U TERTRE gives the following description:—"The Arras is a sort of
Parrot bigger than all the others. This is proved because those of
Guadaloupe are larger than all the other Parrots, both those from the
Islands as well as from the Mainland; while this Arras is larger than these
by one third. It has the head, the neck, the belly and the back of the colour
of fire; its wings are a mixture of yellow azure, and crimson feathers; while
the tail is entirely red and a foot-and-a-half long."
Macaws of this colouration are mentioned by Du Tertre, De Rochefort, and
others of the older authors as being found on Guadaloupe, Dominica and
Martinique, and Mr. Clark has united them under one name. This I feel sure
is wrong, and I believe each of the three islands had a distinct species of
Red Macaw, so I confine this name to the Guadaloupe form.
Page 76
Habitat: Guadaloupe.
No specimen existing.
ARA ERYTHRURA NOM. NOV.
(Plate 15.)
De Rochefort, Histoire Nat. & Mor. des Iles Antilles, &c. (1658), p. 154, Art. IX (Des Arras).
Anadorhynchus coeruleus (non Gmelin) Rothsch., Bull. B.O.C., XVI, p. 15 (1905).
I N the Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 15 (1905), I unfortunately described this bird
under the name of Anadorhynchus coeruleus (Gm.), having misread his
description, and also said it came from Jamaica. Professor Salvadori, in
the Ibis (1906) Series 8, Vol. VI, "Notes on Parrots," p. 451, calls attention
to my double error, but failed entirely to realise what bird I really meant.
The original description is (translated) as follows:—
"Among them are some which have the head, the upper side of the neck,
and the back of a satiny sky blue; the underside of the neck, the belly, and
undersurface of the wings, yellow, and the tail entirely red."
No specimen existing.
Habitat: One of the West Indian Islands.
ANODORHYNCHUS PURPURASCENS ROTHSCH.
(Plate 13.)
Le gros Perroquet de la Guadaloupe Don de Navarette, Rel. Quat. voy. Christ. p. 425 pl. II
(1838).
Anadorhynchus purpurascens Rothsch. Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 13 (1905); Proc. IV Orn.
Congr., p. 202 (1907).
No specimen existing.
ARA ERYTHRURA NOM. NOV.
(Plate 15.)
De Rochefort, Histoire Nat. & Mor. des Iles Antilles, &c. (1658), p. 154, Art. IX (Des Arras).
Anadorhynchus coeruleus (non Gmelin) Rothsch., Bull. B.O.C., XVI, p. 15 (1905).
I N the Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 15 (1905), I unfortunately described this bird
under the name of Anadorhynchus coeruleus (Gm.), having misread his
description, and also said it came from Jamaica. Professor Salvadori, in
the Ibis (1906) Series 8, Vol. VI, "Notes on Parrots," p. 451, calls attention
to my double error, but failed entirely to realise what bird I really meant.
The original description is (translated) as follows:—
"Among them are some which have the head, the upper side of the neck,
and the back of a satiny sky blue; the underside of the neck, the belly, and
undersurface of the wings, yellow, and the tail entirely red."
No specimen existing.
Habitat: One of the West Indian Islands.
ANODORHYNCHUS PURPURASCENS ROTHSCH.
(Plate 13.)
Le gros Perroquet de la Guadaloupe Don de Navarette, Rel. Quat. voy. Christ. p. 425 pl. II
(1838).
Anadorhynchus purpurascens Rothsch. Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 13 (1905); Proc. IV Orn.
Congr., p. 202 (1907).
Page 77
T HE original description of this bird says it was entirely deep violet.
Native name Oné couli. No specimen extant. I have placed this species
in the genus Anodorhynchus on account of its uniform bluish colour.
Habitat: Guadaloupe.
AMAZONA VIOLACEUS (GM.)
(Plate 17.)
Perroquet de la Guadeloupe Du Tertre, Hist. Nat. Antill. II, p. 250, fig. p. 246 (1667).
Perroquets Labat, Voy. aux iles de l'Amér., vol. II p. 214 (1742).
Psittacus violaceus Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 337 (1788).
L ABAT'S translated original description is as follows:—"Those of
Guadaloupe are a little smaller than the Aras; they have the head, the
neck, and the belly slate colour with a few green and black feathers,
the back is entirely green, and the wings are yellow and red."
Gmelin's description reads thus:—"Ps. violaceus viridi et nigro admisto
varius, dorso ex fusco viridi, remigibus majoribus nigris, reliquis ex luteo,
viridi, et rubro variis, tectricum macula rosea. Rostrum et orbitae
incarnata."
Du Tertre's description is as follows:—"He is about as big as a fowl, has the
beak and eyes bordered with red. All the feathers of the head, neck and
belly are of a violet colour, a little mixed with black and green, shot like the
throat of a pigeon. All the upper part of the back is green, strongly washed
with brown. Outer primaries black, rest yellow, green and red."
No specimens in collections.
Habitat: Guadaloupe.
Native name Oné couli. No specimen extant. I have placed this species
in the genus Anodorhynchus on account of its uniform bluish colour.
Habitat: Guadaloupe.
AMAZONA VIOLACEUS (GM.)
(Plate 17.)
Perroquet de la Guadeloupe Du Tertre, Hist. Nat. Antill. II, p. 250, fig. p. 246 (1667).
Perroquets Labat, Voy. aux iles de l'Amér., vol. II p. 214 (1742).
Psittacus violaceus Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 337 (1788).
L ABAT'S translated original description is as follows:—"Those of
Guadaloupe are a little smaller than the Aras; they have the head, the
neck, and the belly slate colour with a few green and black feathers,
the back is entirely green, and the wings are yellow and red."
Gmelin's description reads thus:—"Ps. violaceus viridi et nigro admisto
varius, dorso ex fusco viridi, remigibus majoribus nigris, reliquis ex luteo,
viridi, et rubro variis, tectricum macula rosea. Rostrum et orbitae
incarnata."
Du Tertre's description is as follows:—"He is about as big as a fowl, has the
beak and eyes bordered with red. All the feathers of the head, neck and
belly are of a violet colour, a little mixed with black and green, shot like the
throat of a pigeon. All the upper part of the back is green, strongly washed
with brown. Outer primaries black, rest yellow, green and red."
No specimens in collections.
Habitat: Guadaloupe.
Page 78
AMAZONA MARTINICANA CLARK.
(Plate 18.)
Perroquets Labat's Voy. aux iles de l'Amér. II p. 214 (1742).
Amazona martinicana Clark, Auk. XXII, p. 343 (1905).
L ABAT'S description reads thus:—"Those of Dominica have some red
feathers on the wings, under the throat, and in the tail; all the rest is
green (Amazona bouqueti, W.R.). Those of Martinique have the same
plumage as the last mentioned, but the top of the head is slate colour with a
small amount of red."
No specimen now known.
Habitat: Martinique.
CONURUS LABATI ROTHSCH.
(Plate 16.)
Perriques Labat, Voy. aux iles de l'Amér. II p. 218 (1742).
Conurus labati Rothsch. Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 13 (1905); Proc. IV Orn. Congr., p. 202
(1907).
L ABAT'S translated description of this bird is as follows:—"Those of
Guadaloupe are about the size of a blackbird, entirely green, except a
few small red feathers, which they have on their head. Their bill is
white. They are very gentle, loving, and learn to speak easily."
No specimens known.
Habitat: Island of Guadaloupe.
NECROPSITTACUS MILNE-EDW.
(Plate 18.)
Perroquets Labat's Voy. aux iles de l'Amér. II p. 214 (1742).
Amazona martinicana Clark, Auk. XXII, p. 343 (1905).
L ABAT'S description reads thus:—"Those of Dominica have some red
feathers on the wings, under the throat, and in the tail; all the rest is
green (Amazona bouqueti, W.R.). Those of Martinique have the same
plumage as the last mentioned, but the top of the head is slate colour with a
small amount of red."
No specimen now known.
Habitat: Martinique.
CONURUS LABATI ROTHSCH.
(Plate 16.)
Perriques Labat, Voy. aux iles de l'Amér. II p. 218 (1742).
Conurus labati Rothsch. Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 13 (1905); Proc. IV Orn. Congr., p. 202
(1907).
L ABAT'S translated description of this bird is as follows:—"Those of
Guadaloupe are about the size of a blackbird, entirely green, except a
few small red feathers, which they have on their head. Their bill is
white. They are very gentle, loving, and learn to speak easily."
No specimens known.
Habitat: Island of Guadaloupe.
NECROPSITTACUS MILNE-EDW.
Page 79
Necropsittacus Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sc. Nat. (5) XIX, Art. 3, p. 18 (1874).
M ILNE-EDWARDS considered Necropsittacus closely allied to the
genus Palaeornis, and at the same time to show affinities with the
Loriidae. At the same time the two mandibles were sufficient, in his
opinion, to show that this bird belonged to a little generic group standing
near Palaeornis.
NECROPSITTACUS RODRICANUS (MILNE-EDW.)
Psittacus Rodricanus A. Milne-Edw., Ann. Sc. Nat. (5) VIII, pp. 151-155, pl. 7, ff. 1, 2
(1867).
Necropsittacus rodericanus A. Newt., P.Z.S. p. 41 (1875).
T HIS parrot was described from a portion of the upper mandible by
Professor Milne-Edwards, and then was more fully described by Dr.
Günther and Sir Edward Newton, who examined a nearly complete
skull and other bones.
A manuscript discovered in the Archives of the Ministry of Marine in Paris
proves that this bird only became extinct at a not very distant date, it having
been seen alive by the writer of the manuscript about the year 1731. In this
manuscript the bird was said to have a body considerably larger than a
pigeon, with a very long tail and a very large head and bill. Unfortunately
the writer does not mention the colour, but adds that the smaller green and
blue parrot (Palaeornis exsul) was much handsomer; so we can safely
assume that our bird was of sombre colouration. It was undoubtedly closely
allied to the genus Palaeornis. The two following, though much brighter
coloured and but scantily described, apparently belong to the same genus.
Habitat: Rodriguez.
NECROPSITTACUS(?) BORBONICUS NOM. NOV.
M ILNE-EDWARDS considered Necropsittacus closely allied to the
genus Palaeornis, and at the same time to show affinities with the
Loriidae. At the same time the two mandibles were sufficient, in his
opinion, to show that this bird belonged to a little generic group standing
near Palaeornis.
NECROPSITTACUS RODRICANUS (MILNE-EDW.)
Psittacus Rodricanus A. Milne-Edw., Ann. Sc. Nat. (5) VIII, pp. 151-155, pl. 7, ff. 1, 2
(1867).
Necropsittacus rodericanus A. Newt., P.Z.S. p. 41 (1875).
T HIS parrot was described from a portion of the upper mandible by
Professor Milne-Edwards, and then was more fully described by Dr.
Günther and Sir Edward Newton, who examined a nearly complete
skull and other bones.
A manuscript discovered in the Archives of the Ministry of Marine in Paris
proves that this bird only became extinct at a not very distant date, it having
been seen alive by the writer of the manuscript about the year 1731. In this
manuscript the bird was said to have a body considerably larger than a
pigeon, with a very long tail and a very large head and bill. Unfortunately
the writer does not mention the colour, but adds that the smaller green and
blue parrot (Palaeornis exsul) was much handsomer; so we can safely
assume that our bird was of sombre colouration. It was undoubtedly closely
allied to the genus Palaeornis. The two following, though much brighter
coloured and but scantily described, apparently belong to the same genus.
Habitat: Rodriguez.
NECROPSITTACUS(?) BORBONICUS NOM. NOV.
Page 80
(Plate 8.)
T HIS parrot is described by the Sieur D.B. (Dubois) in the following
terms:—"Body the size of a large pigeon, green; head, tail and upper
part of wings the colour of fire." As he compares it with the other
parrots which are true Palaeornis, it is evident that this bird must have been
a Necropsittacus.
This description is the sole evidence we have of the existence of this bird.
Habitat: Bourbon or Réunion.
NECROPSITTACUS(?) FRANCICUS ROTHSCH.
Necropsittacus francicus Rothsch., Proceedings Int. Ornith. Congress 1905, p. 197 (1907).
O RIGINAL description:—"Head and tail fiery red, rest of body and
wings green." We only know this bird from the descriptions in the
various "Voyages" to Mauritius in the 17th and early 18th centuries.
Habitat: Mauritius.
MASCARINUS LESSON.
Mascarinus Lesson, Traité d'Orn. p. 188 (1831—A mixture of forms. By elimination the
name Mascarinus has been restricted to the Mascarine Parrot).
T HE generic affinities of this bird have been discussed by various
authors. Wagler, Gray, Pelzeln, Hartlaub (1877) and Messrs. A. and E.
Newton united it with the Vaza Parrots in the genus Coracopsis,
Finsch included it, together with the Vazas and the Grey Parrot (Psittacus
erithacus), in the genus Psittacus. Recent authors—Oustalet 1893, W. A.
Forbes 1879, and Salvadori (Cat. B. XX, p. 421, 1891)—have admitted a
separate genus, Mascarinus. This is evidently the proper course, and I agree
with W. A. Forbes, Oustalet and Salvadori that its nearest affinities appear
T HIS parrot is described by the Sieur D.B. (Dubois) in the following
terms:—"Body the size of a large pigeon, green; head, tail and upper
part of wings the colour of fire." As he compares it with the other
parrots which are true Palaeornis, it is evident that this bird must have been
a Necropsittacus.
This description is the sole evidence we have of the existence of this bird.
Habitat: Bourbon or Réunion.
NECROPSITTACUS(?) FRANCICUS ROTHSCH.
Necropsittacus francicus Rothsch., Proceedings Int. Ornith. Congress 1905, p. 197 (1907).
O RIGINAL description:—"Head and tail fiery red, rest of body and
wings green." We only know this bird from the descriptions in the
various "Voyages" to Mauritius in the 17th and early 18th centuries.
Habitat: Mauritius.
MASCARINUS LESSON.
Mascarinus Lesson, Traité d'Orn. p. 188 (1831—A mixture of forms. By elimination the
name Mascarinus has been restricted to the Mascarine Parrot).
T HE generic affinities of this bird have been discussed by various
authors. Wagler, Gray, Pelzeln, Hartlaub (1877) and Messrs. A. and E.
Newton united it with the Vaza Parrots in the genus Coracopsis,
Finsch included it, together with the Vazas and the Grey Parrot (Psittacus
erithacus), in the genus Psittacus. Recent authors—Oustalet 1893, W. A.
Forbes 1879, and Salvadori (Cat. B. XX, p. 421, 1891)—have admitted a
separate genus, Mascarinus. This is evidently the proper course, and I agree
with W. A. Forbes, Oustalet and Salvadori that its nearest affinities appear
Page 81
to be the genus Tanygnathus rather than Coracopsis, and that the place of
Mascarinus is among the Palaeornithinae of Salvadori.
The large red bill, with distinctly ridged gonys, concealed nostrils and
moderately long, strongly rounded tail, are peculiar characters. The
colouration is unique. Only one species is known.
MASCARINUS MASCARINUS (L.)
MASCARINE PARROT.
(Plate 9.)
"Perroquets un peu plus gros que pigeons, ayant le plumage de couleur de petit gris, un
chaperon noir sur la teste, le becq fort gros, & couleur de feu" Le Sieur D.B, (Dubois),
Voyages aux Iles Dauphine ou Madagascar, et Bourbon ou Mascarenne. p. 172 (1674
—"Bourbon ou Mascarenne").
Psittacus Mascarinus Brisson, Orn. IV., p. 315 (1760); Hahn, Orn. Atlas, Papageien p. 54, pl.
39 (1835).
Psittacus mascarin. Linnaeus, Mantissa Plantarum, regni animalis appendix p. 524 (1771
—"Habitat in Mascarina." Ex Brisson).
Perroquet Mascarin Levaillant, Perroquets II, p. 171, pl. 189 (1805—"Madagascar," errore).
Mascarinus madagascariensis Lesson, Traité d'Orn, p. 189 (1831—"Madagascar," ex
Levaillant).
Coracopsis mascarina Wagler, Mon. Psittac. p. 679 (1832); Pelzeln, Verh. Zool. Bot. Ges.
Wien 1863, p. 934.
Mascarinus obscurus (non Psittacus obscurus L.) Bonaparte, Rev. & Mag. de Zool. 1854 p.
154 (Linnaeus, Psittacus obscurus—Syst. Nat. Ed. X, p. 97, 1758, ex Hasselquist M.S.
—though identified by himself with the Mascarine Parrot in 1766—Syst. Nat. Ed. XII,
I, p. 140—cannot be the same as P. mascarinus; the description disagrees entirely, and
the bird was described from a specimen probably seen alive by Hasselquist, with
uncertain locality. What Linnaeus' P. obscurus was, is difficult to say; if it was not for
the long tail, one might consider it a variety of the Grey Parrot).
Psittacus madagascarensis Finsch, Papageien II pp. 306, 955 (1868—Finsch was not
acquainted with the history of this Parrot, as he still considered Madagascar to be its
home, and wondered why it had not been found there by recent collectors).
Psittacus madagascariensis Pelzeln, Ibis 1873, p. 32.
Mascarinus is among the Palaeornithinae of Salvadori.
The large red bill, with distinctly ridged gonys, concealed nostrils and
moderately long, strongly rounded tail, are peculiar characters. The
colouration is unique. Only one species is known.
MASCARINUS MASCARINUS (L.)
MASCARINE PARROT.
(Plate 9.)
"Perroquets un peu plus gros que pigeons, ayant le plumage de couleur de petit gris, un
chaperon noir sur la teste, le becq fort gros, & couleur de feu" Le Sieur D.B, (Dubois),
Voyages aux Iles Dauphine ou Madagascar, et Bourbon ou Mascarenne. p. 172 (1674
—"Bourbon ou Mascarenne").
Psittacus Mascarinus Brisson, Orn. IV., p. 315 (1760); Hahn, Orn. Atlas, Papageien p. 54, pl.
39 (1835).
Psittacus mascarin. Linnaeus, Mantissa Plantarum, regni animalis appendix p. 524 (1771
—"Habitat in Mascarina." Ex Brisson).
Perroquet Mascarin Levaillant, Perroquets II, p. 171, pl. 189 (1805—"Madagascar," errore).
Mascarinus madagascariensis Lesson, Traité d'Orn, p. 189 (1831—"Madagascar," ex
Levaillant).
Coracopsis mascarina Wagler, Mon. Psittac. p. 679 (1832); Pelzeln, Verh. Zool. Bot. Ges.
Wien 1863, p. 934.
Mascarinus obscurus (non Psittacus obscurus L.) Bonaparte, Rev. & Mag. de Zool. 1854 p.
154 (Linnaeus, Psittacus obscurus—Syst. Nat. Ed. X, p. 97, 1758, ex Hasselquist M.S.
—though identified by himself with the Mascarine Parrot in 1766—Syst. Nat. Ed. XII,
I, p. 140—cannot be the same as P. mascarinus; the description disagrees entirely, and
the bird was described from a specimen probably seen alive by Hasselquist, with
uncertain locality. What Linnaeus' P. obscurus was, is difficult to say; if it was not for
the long tail, one might consider it a variety of the Grey Parrot).
Psittacus madagascarensis Finsch, Papageien II pp. 306, 955 (1868—Finsch was not
acquainted with the history of this Parrot, as he still considered Madagascar to be its
home, and wondered why it had not been found there by recent collectors).
Psittacus madagascariensis Pelzeln, Ibis 1873, p. 32.
Page 82
Mascarinus duboisi W. A. Forbes, Ibis 1879, pp. 304, 305 (figures), 306; Milne-Edwards &
Oustalet, Centenaire Mus. d'Hist. Nat. pp. 191-205, pl. I (1893—excellent lengthy
account).
Mascarinus mascarinus Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XX, p. 421 (1891—Réunion).
I T has been mentioned above that "Le Sieur D.B." (Dubois) described
this Parrot clearly in 1674, and that it lived on Réunion, and not on
Madagascar. Linnaeus in 1771 (see above) was the first to bestow a
scientific name on it, though Brisson had already again described it in 1760.
Linnaeus' diagnosis is, as usual, rather poor, and not quite correct[1], but his
reference to Brisson leaves no doubt as to what he meant.
This parrot is one of the rarest of extinct birds, only two stuffed specimens
being known. One normally coloured specimen is preserved in the Museum
of Natural History in Paris, and it is evidently this which has been figured
by Daubenton and Levaillant, and in the "Centenaire du Muséum d'Historie
Naturelle." From the latter plate my figure has been taken.
The example in Vienna is unfortunately semi-albinistic, there being some
white feathers on the back, wings and tail. Another normal individual,
however, lived formerly in the Menagerie of the King of Bavaria, where it
was depicted by Hahn in 1835. Unfortunately this specimen has not been
preserved.
PALAEORNIS EXSUL NEWTON.
(Plate 19.)
Palaeornis exsul A. Newton, Ibis 1872, p. 33.
L EGUAT was the first to mention these parrots as "Perroquets verds et
bleus," and that they were wonderfully good to eat and also delightful
pets.
Professor Newton's description is as follows: "Female: Of moderate size.
General appearance greyish-glaucous, darker above than beneath. From the
corner of the mouth proceeds an ill-defined dull black chin stripe, which
becomes broader as it passes backward and upward, ceasing somewhat
Oustalet, Centenaire Mus. d'Hist. Nat. pp. 191-205, pl. I (1893—excellent lengthy
account).
Mascarinus mascarinus Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XX, p. 421 (1891—Réunion).
I T has been mentioned above that "Le Sieur D.B." (Dubois) described
this Parrot clearly in 1674, and that it lived on Réunion, and not on
Madagascar. Linnaeus in 1771 (see above) was the first to bestow a
scientific name on it, though Brisson had already again described it in 1760.
Linnaeus' diagnosis is, as usual, rather poor, and not quite correct[1], but his
reference to Brisson leaves no doubt as to what he meant.
This parrot is one of the rarest of extinct birds, only two stuffed specimens
being known. One normally coloured specimen is preserved in the Museum
of Natural History in Paris, and it is evidently this which has been figured
by Daubenton and Levaillant, and in the "Centenaire du Muséum d'Historie
Naturelle." From the latter plate my figure has been taken.
The example in Vienna is unfortunately semi-albinistic, there being some
white feathers on the back, wings and tail. Another normal individual,
however, lived formerly in the Menagerie of the King of Bavaria, where it
was depicted by Hahn in 1835. Unfortunately this specimen has not been
preserved.
PALAEORNIS EXSUL NEWTON.
(Plate 19.)
Palaeornis exsul A. Newton, Ibis 1872, p. 33.
L EGUAT was the first to mention these parrots as "Perroquets verds et
bleus," and that they were wonderfully good to eat and also delightful
pets.
Professor Newton's description is as follows: "Female: Of moderate size.
General appearance greyish-glaucous, darker above than beneath. From the
corner of the mouth proceeds an ill-defined dull black chin stripe, which
becomes broader as it passes backward and upward, ceasing somewhat
Page 83
abruptly on reaching the level of the ears. Head, nape and shoulders, upper
wing-coverts, and rectrices above dull greyish-glaucous, the blue tinge in
which predominates when the bird is seen against the light, and the green
when seen in the contrary aspect; the outer rectrices paler. Rump verditer
blue. Primaries with their outer, and most part of their inner, webs deep
greenish blue, the former with narrow, lighter edges, and the latter broadly
bordered with pitch black; shafts and lower surfaces greyish black.
Secondaries much the same as the primaries, but of a still deeper shade.
Breast dull greyish-glaucous, but lighter than the upper parts and passing on
the belly into verditer, which becomes lighter and greener on the vent.
Rectrices beneath yellowish grey, darker toward the tips of the longer
feathers. Bill black."
The specimen was sent in spirits to Sir Edward Newton in 1871 by Mr.
Jenner, the Magistrate of Rodriguez.
The male differs from the female in having the upper mandible crimson,
fading into horn at the tip. Top of head more glaucous. Black stripe from
nostril to eye. Black chin stripe prolonged almost to meet on nape of neck.
Most of primaries with dull black patch on inner webs. Middle secondaries
dusky black.
The male was sent to Sir Edward Newton in 1875 by Mr. J. Caldwell.
Total length 16 inches.
Wing 7.5 "
Tail 8.5 "
Probably almost if not quite extinct. Recent investigations about its status
are very desirable.
Habitat: Rodriguez Island.
PALAEORNIS WARDI E. NEWTON.
(Plate 20.)
wing-coverts, and rectrices above dull greyish-glaucous, the blue tinge in
which predominates when the bird is seen against the light, and the green
when seen in the contrary aspect; the outer rectrices paler. Rump verditer
blue. Primaries with their outer, and most part of their inner, webs deep
greenish blue, the former with narrow, lighter edges, and the latter broadly
bordered with pitch black; shafts and lower surfaces greyish black.
Secondaries much the same as the primaries, but of a still deeper shade.
Breast dull greyish-glaucous, but lighter than the upper parts and passing on
the belly into verditer, which becomes lighter and greener on the vent.
Rectrices beneath yellowish grey, darker toward the tips of the longer
feathers. Bill black."
The specimen was sent in spirits to Sir Edward Newton in 1871 by Mr.
Jenner, the Magistrate of Rodriguez.
The male differs from the female in having the upper mandible crimson,
fading into horn at the tip. Top of head more glaucous. Black stripe from
nostril to eye. Black chin stripe prolonged almost to meet on nape of neck.
Most of primaries with dull black patch on inner webs. Middle secondaries
dusky black.
The male was sent to Sir Edward Newton in 1875 by Mr. J. Caldwell.
Total length 16 inches.
Wing 7.5 "
Tail 8.5 "
Probably almost if not quite extinct. Recent investigations about its status
are very desirable.
Habitat: Rodriguez Island.
PALAEORNIS WARDI E. NEWTON.
(Plate 20.)
Page 84
Palaeornis wardi E. Newton, P.Z.S. 1867, p. 346 (Seychelles).
Page 85
T HE translation of Sir Edward Newton's diagnosis is as follows:
"Similar to P. alexandri, but with a stouter bill, purple red shoulder
patches, and the hind neck without a red band.
"Adult Male. Crown of head and throat bluish, cheeks ochraceous green,
chin and line round base of mandible black, continued in a stripe from the
gape to the hind neck; back and wings grass green; rump brighter; a single
wide band (or patch) on the shoulders purplish red; remiges and rectrices
deep green washed with blue, the latter yellowish, the former dusky below;
belly yellowish green; bill vivid scarlet with paler tip; feet dusky. Total
length 16 inches, wings 7.75, tail 9."
Female similar to the male but duller, and with the bill all black, and
without the black mandibular stripe.
Formerly abundant on most of the islands in the Seychelles, especially
Mahé, but now confined to the little islet of Silhouette, where it will in all
probability become extinct. According to E. Newton its name was "Cateau
vert."
Habitat: Seychelles Islands.
PALAEORNIS EQUES (BODD).
Psittaca borbonica torquata Briss., Orn. IV p. 328, pl. XXVII f. 1 (1760). (Bourbon.)
Psittacus alexandri var. γ Linnaeus, S.N. p. 142 (1766).
Perruche à collier de l'Isle de Bourbon Daubenton, Pl. enl. 215.
Perruche à double collier Buff., Hist. Nat. Ois. VI, p. 143 (1779).
Alexandrine Parrakeet var. C. Double Ringed Parrakeet Latham, Syn. I p. 326 (1781).
Psittacus eques Boddaert, Tabl. Pl. Enl. p. 13 (1783).
Psittacus semirostris Hermann, Obs. Zool. p. 125 (1804).
Psittacus bitorquatus Kuhl, Consp. Psitt. p. 92 (1820).
Rose Ringed Parrakeet var. B. Latham, Gen. Hist. II p. 161 (1822).
Psittacus bicollaris Vieillot, Enc. Meth. III p. 1385 (1823).
"Similar to P. alexandri, but with a stouter bill, purple red shoulder
patches, and the hind neck without a red band.
"Adult Male. Crown of head and throat bluish, cheeks ochraceous green,
chin and line round base of mandible black, continued in a stripe from the
gape to the hind neck; back and wings grass green; rump brighter; a single
wide band (or patch) on the shoulders purplish red; remiges and rectrices
deep green washed with blue, the latter yellowish, the former dusky below;
belly yellowish green; bill vivid scarlet with paler tip; feet dusky. Total
length 16 inches, wings 7.75, tail 9."
Female similar to the male but duller, and with the bill all black, and
without the black mandibular stripe.
Formerly abundant on most of the islands in the Seychelles, especially
Mahé, but now confined to the little islet of Silhouette, where it will in all
probability become extinct. According to E. Newton its name was "Cateau
vert."
Habitat: Seychelles Islands.
PALAEORNIS EQUES (BODD).
Psittaca borbonica torquata Briss., Orn. IV p. 328, pl. XXVII f. 1 (1760). (Bourbon.)
Psittacus alexandri var. γ Linnaeus, S.N. p. 142 (1766).
Perruche à collier de l'Isle de Bourbon Daubenton, Pl. enl. 215.
Perruche à double collier Buff., Hist. Nat. Ois. VI, p. 143 (1779).
Alexandrine Parrakeet var. C. Double Ringed Parrakeet Latham, Syn. I p. 326 (1781).
Psittacus eques Boddaert, Tabl. Pl. Enl. p. 13 (1783).
Psittacus semirostris Hermann, Obs. Zool. p. 125 (1804).
Psittacus bitorquatus Kuhl, Consp. Psitt. p. 92 (1820).
Rose Ringed Parrakeet var. B. Latham, Gen. Hist. II p. 161 (1822).
Psittacus bicollaris Vieillot, Enc. Meth. III p. 1385 (1823).
Page 86
Palaeornis bitorquatus Vigors, Zool. Journ. II p. 51 (1825).
Palaeornis borbonicus Bp., Rev. and Mag. Zool. 1854, p. 152. No. 140.
T HERE has been considerable confusion with regard to this parrot. It
was first asserted that it occurred on both Bourbon and Mauritius.
Then Professor Newton separated the Mauritius bird as Pal. echo.
Salvadori, however, in Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. XX, p. 442, reunited the
Bourbon and Mauritius birds, while quite unaccountably stating only
Mauritius as the habitat.
The Abbé Dubois describes this bird as follows: "Green Parrots as large as
pigeons having a black collar."
Now the species of Palaeornis from Rodriguez, the Seychelles, and the
mainland of Africa are all distinct, and the other land birds of Mauritius are
and were different from those of Bourbon. I therefore feel quite certain that
Professor Newton is right, and that his Palaeornis echo is distinct from P.
eques, though, unfortunately, we do not know in which way the two forms
differed.
Habitat: Bourbon or Réunion, but now extinct. No specimens known.
PALAEORNIS ECHO NEWTON.
Palaeornis echo Newton, Ibis 1876, p. 284.
Palaeornis eques Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. XX, p. 442 (1891).
D ESCRIPTION of Male: Green, the occiput tinged with bluish; a
narrow black stripe from the nostrils to the eyes; broad black
mandibular stripes passing down and across the sides of the neck
where they meet a pink collar, which is interrupted on the hind neck; under
wing-coverts yellowish green; central tail feathers scarcely tinged with
bluish; tail below dark yellowish grey; upper mandible red, under mandible
almost black with only a brownish tinge in places. Iris yellow. Naked skin
round eyes orange. Wing 7.5 inches, tail 8.75 inches, bill 9 inches. The
female differs by the absence of the collar, no bluish tint on occiput, and the
bill entirely blackish.
Palaeornis borbonicus Bp., Rev. and Mag. Zool. 1854, p. 152. No. 140.
T HERE has been considerable confusion with regard to this parrot. It
was first asserted that it occurred on both Bourbon and Mauritius.
Then Professor Newton separated the Mauritius bird as Pal. echo.
Salvadori, however, in Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. XX, p. 442, reunited the
Bourbon and Mauritius birds, while quite unaccountably stating only
Mauritius as the habitat.
The Abbé Dubois describes this bird as follows: "Green Parrots as large as
pigeons having a black collar."
Now the species of Palaeornis from Rodriguez, the Seychelles, and the
mainland of Africa are all distinct, and the other land birds of Mauritius are
and were different from those of Bourbon. I therefore feel quite certain that
Professor Newton is right, and that his Palaeornis echo is distinct from P.
eques, though, unfortunately, we do not know in which way the two forms
differed.
Habitat: Bourbon or Réunion, but now extinct. No specimens known.
PALAEORNIS ECHO NEWTON.
Palaeornis echo Newton, Ibis 1876, p. 284.
Palaeornis eques Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. XX, p. 442 (1891).
D ESCRIPTION of Male: Green, the occiput tinged with bluish; a
narrow black stripe from the nostrils to the eyes; broad black
mandibular stripes passing down and across the sides of the neck
where they meet a pink collar, which is interrupted on the hind neck; under
wing-coverts yellowish green; central tail feathers scarcely tinged with
bluish; tail below dark yellowish grey; upper mandible red, under mandible
almost black with only a brownish tinge in places. Iris yellow. Naked skin
round eyes orange. Wing 7.5 inches, tail 8.75 inches, bill 9 inches. The
female differs by the absence of the collar, no bluish tint on occiput, and the
bill entirely blackish.
Page 87
It differs from P. torquatus in the incomplete collar, darker green colour and
broader tail feathers. This bird is still found in the interior of the island, but
is rare and apparently on the verge of extinction.
Habitat: Mauritius.
Three specimens at Tring, four in the British Museum.
CYANORHAMPHUS ZEALANDICUS (LATHAM.)
Red Rumped Parrakeet Latham, Syn. I, p. 249, No. 50 (1781).
Psittacus novae seelandiae Gmelin (nec. Sparrm.), S.N. I, p. 328, No. 83 (1788).
Psittacus zealandicus Latham, Ind. Orn. I, p. 102, No. 58 (1790).
Psittacus novae-zealandiae Kuhl, Consp. Psitt. p. 44, var. 1 (1820).
Psittacus erythronotus Kuhl, Consp. Psitt. p. 45, No. 67 (1820).
Psittacus pacificus var. No. 3, Vieillot, Enc. Méth., p. 1387 (1823).
Platycercus pacificus, part. Vigors, Zool. Journ. I, p. 529 (1825).
Platycercus erythronotus Stephens, Gen. Zool. XIV., p. 129, No. 9 (1826).
Conurus phaeton Des Murs, Rev. Zool. 1845, p. 449.
Platycercus phaeton Des Murs, Icon. Orn. pl. 16 (1845).
Cyanorhamphus pacificus Bonaparte, Rev. et. Mag. 1854, p. 153, No. 184.
Cyanorhamphus erythronotus Gray, Hand-list II, p. 140, No. 8029 (1870).
Cyanorhamphus forsteri Finsch, Papag. II, p. 270 (1868).
T HIS bird has received a variety of names owing to the adult bird being
very different to the younger and quite young birds. Adult, forehead
black; stripe from lores passing through eye almost to hind-neck
scarlet; rump scarlet; back and breast dull green; cheeks, head, neck, belly,
under-tail coverts and wing coverts, bright green. Flight-feathers blue on
outer, brown on inner, webs; bend of wing blue; tail feathers blue, edged
with green.
Young differs in having a dull bluish-black forehead, brownish head, back
mixed brown and green, rump and eye stripe chestnut red, and the
broader tail feathers. This bird is still found in the interior of the island, but
is rare and apparently on the verge of extinction.
Habitat: Mauritius.
Three specimens at Tring, four in the British Museum.
CYANORHAMPHUS ZEALANDICUS (LATHAM.)
Red Rumped Parrakeet Latham, Syn. I, p. 249, No. 50 (1781).
Psittacus novae seelandiae Gmelin (nec. Sparrm.), S.N. I, p. 328, No. 83 (1788).
Psittacus zealandicus Latham, Ind. Orn. I, p. 102, No. 58 (1790).
Psittacus novae-zealandiae Kuhl, Consp. Psitt. p. 44, var. 1 (1820).
Psittacus erythronotus Kuhl, Consp. Psitt. p. 45, No. 67 (1820).
Psittacus pacificus var. No. 3, Vieillot, Enc. Méth., p. 1387 (1823).
Platycercus pacificus, part. Vigors, Zool. Journ. I, p. 529 (1825).
Platycercus erythronotus Stephens, Gen. Zool. XIV., p. 129, No. 9 (1826).
Conurus phaeton Des Murs, Rev. Zool. 1845, p. 449.
Platycercus phaeton Des Murs, Icon. Orn. pl. 16 (1845).
Cyanorhamphus pacificus Bonaparte, Rev. et. Mag. 1854, p. 153, No. 184.
Cyanorhamphus erythronotus Gray, Hand-list II, p. 140, No. 8029 (1870).
Cyanorhamphus forsteri Finsch, Papag. II, p. 270 (1868).
T HIS bird has received a variety of names owing to the adult bird being
very different to the younger and quite young birds. Adult, forehead
black; stripe from lores passing through eye almost to hind-neck
scarlet; rump scarlet; back and breast dull green; cheeks, head, neck, belly,
under-tail coverts and wing coverts, bright green. Flight-feathers blue on
outer, brown on inner, webs; bend of wing blue; tail feathers blue, edged
with green.
Young differs in having a dull bluish-black forehead, brownish head, back
mixed brown and green, rump and eye stripe chestnut red, and the
Page 88
underside greyish green.
This species was confined to the Society Islands, where it was obtained
during Cook's Voyage by Ellis and by Forster, and lastly by Lieutenant de
Marolles in 1844. We only know for certain at the present day of the
existence of two specimens, one in the British Museum, ex Massena
collection, whose origin is doubtful, and one in Paris, collected by
Lieutenant de Marolles. What became of the other two specimens of the
latter's collecting, and of Forster's and Ellis' specimens, I cannot say.
Habitat: Society Islands.
Evidently extinct.
CYANORHAMPHUS ULIETANUS (GM.)
Society Parrot Latham, Syn. I p. 250 (1781).
Psittacus ulietanus Gmelin, S.N. I p. 328, n. 85 (1788).
Platycercus ulietanus Vig., Zool. I p. 533, Suppl. pl. 3 (1825).
Cyanorhamphus ulietanus Bonaparte, Rev. et Mag. de Zool. 1854, p. 153, n. 188.
Platycercus tannaensis Finsch, Papag. II, p. 272 (1868).
Psittacus fuscatus Pelz., Ibis 1873, p. 30.
A DULT: "Olive brown, the head brown-black; rump and basal upper
tail-coverts brown-red, the longest upper tail-coverts olive brown like
the back; underparts olive-yellow; quills, primary-coverts, under wing
coverts and tail-feathers grey; bill black, base of upper mandible grey; feet
brown." (Salvadori, Cat. B. XX p. 579). Wing 5.3 inches, bill 0.8 inches,
tarsus 0.8 inches, tail 5 inches.
Habitat: Ulietea, Society Islands (fide Latham).
The type from the Leverian Museum is in Vienna, and a specimen from
Bullock's collection is in the British Museum. These are the only two
specimens known, and as it is now more than a hundred years since anyone
has procured a specimen, we may suppose that this is an extinct species.
This species was confined to the Society Islands, where it was obtained
during Cook's Voyage by Ellis and by Forster, and lastly by Lieutenant de
Marolles in 1844. We only know for certain at the present day of the
existence of two specimens, one in the British Museum, ex Massena
collection, whose origin is doubtful, and one in Paris, collected by
Lieutenant de Marolles. What became of the other two specimens of the
latter's collecting, and of Forster's and Ellis' specimens, I cannot say.
Habitat: Society Islands.
Evidently extinct.
CYANORHAMPHUS ULIETANUS (GM.)
Society Parrot Latham, Syn. I p. 250 (1781).
Psittacus ulietanus Gmelin, S.N. I p. 328, n. 85 (1788).
Platycercus ulietanus Vig., Zool. I p. 533, Suppl. pl. 3 (1825).
Cyanorhamphus ulietanus Bonaparte, Rev. et Mag. de Zool. 1854, p. 153, n. 188.
Platycercus tannaensis Finsch, Papag. II, p. 272 (1868).
Psittacus fuscatus Pelz., Ibis 1873, p. 30.
A DULT: "Olive brown, the head brown-black; rump and basal upper
tail-coverts brown-red, the longest upper tail-coverts olive brown like
the back; underparts olive-yellow; quills, primary-coverts, under wing
coverts and tail-feathers grey; bill black, base of upper mandible grey; feet
brown." (Salvadori, Cat. B. XX p. 579). Wing 5.3 inches, bill 0.8 inches,
tarsus 0.8 inches, tail 5 inches.
Habitat: Ulietea, Society Islands (fide Latham).
The type from the Leverian Museum is in Vienna, and a specimen from
Bullock's collection is in the British Museum. These are the only two
specimens known, and as it is now more than a hundred years since anyone
has procured a specimen, we may suppose that this is an extinct species.
Page 89
The specimen in Vienna, which I have recently been able to examine, has
the head, back, wings, and tail deep umber-brown, the rump dark-crimson,
upper tail-coverts olive, underside brownish yellow.
CYANORHAMPHUS SUBFLAVESCENS SALVADORI.
Parrot from Lord Howe Island Phillips, Bot. Bay, p. 225 (1789).
Cyanorhamphus subflavescens Salvadori, Ann. & Mag. (6) VII, p. 68 (1891).
V ERY similar to C. cooki and C. saisseti and intermediate in size.
Above more yellowish than C. saisseti, below more greenish, tail
shorter than in either of the latter.
This species is believed to be extinct. Last year I received some specimens
of a Cyanorhamphus from an inhabitant of Lord Howe's Island, but from
subsequent letters these appear to have been collected on Norfolk or Philip
Island, and they certainly are C. cooki.
Habitat: Lord Howe's Island.
A pair in the British Museum appear to be the only known specimens.
BUBO(?) LEGUATI NOM. NOV.
Strix sp. Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX p. 13 (art. 3.) 1874.
M ILNE-EDWARDS had only a single tibio-tarsus of this form and
described this bone, but refrained from giving it a specific name,
though he stated it was probably a small Bubo, in the hopes of
getting more material.
As, however, we have no further specimens, I think I am justified in naming
it after Leguat, who first mentions Owls on Rodriguez. Milne-Edwards'
description of this tibio-tarsus is that it equals in length that bone in Asio
the head, back, wings, and tail deep umber-brown, the rump dark-crimson,
upper tail-coverts olive, underside brownish yellow.
CYANORHAMPHUS SUBFLAVESCENS SALVADORI.
Parrot from Lord Howe Island Phillips, Bot. Bay, p. 225 (1789).
Cyanorhamphus subflavescens Salvadori, Ann. & Mag. (6) VII, p. 68 (1891).
V ERY similar to C. cooki and C. saisseti and intermediate in size.
Above more yellowish than C. saisseti, below more greenish, tail
shorter than in either of the latter.
This species is believed to be extinct. Last year I received some specimens
of a Cyanorhamphus from an inhabitant of Lord Howe's Island, but from
subsequent letters these appear to have been collected on Norfolk or Philip
Island, and they certainly are C. cooki.
Habitat: Lord Howe's Island.
A pair in the British Museum appear to be the only known specimens.
BUBO(?) LEGUATI NOM. NOV.
Strix sp. Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX p. 13 (art. 3.) 1874.
M ILNE-EDWARDS had only a single tibio-tarsus of this form and
described this bone, but refrained from giving it a specific name,
though he stated it was probably a small Bubo, in the hopes of
getting more material.
As, however, we have no further specimens, I think I am justified in naming
it after Leguat, who first mentions Owls on Rodriguez. Milne-Edwards'
description of this tibio-tarsus is that it equals in length that bone in Asio
Page 90
accipitrinus, but was distinguished from the latter by the strong inward
curvature and the great development in width of its distal extremity.
Tibio-tarsus.
Total length 77 mm.
Length from the proximal extremity to the
top of the peronial ridge 25 "
Width at distal extremity 10.5 "
Width at proximal extremity 9 "
Width of shaft 3.7 "
Habitat: Rodriguez.
SCOPS COMMERSONI OUST.
Scops commersoni Oustalet, Ann. Sci. Nat. (8) III, p. 35 fig. 3 (1896).
T HIS owl, I believe, is not a true Scops, being much too big, but we
must leave it in that genus for the present, as there are no specimens or
bones extant, and only Jossigny's drawing to guide us as to its
appearance. The first mention of owls on Mauritius was in the year 1606,
when Admiral Matlief says that owls were common in the Island. Monsieur
Desjardins, in 1837, gave the first accurate description of the bird, of which
I here reproduce the translation. "The digits and even the tarsi are not
feathered, only on the front portion of these latter one sees some short, stiff
feathers running down to a point nearly to the centre. The digits are very
strong, they being armed with hooked nails.
The beak is very stout, arched from its base; the upper mandible, which is
much longer than the other and covering it, is as if cut square at the point.
The nostrils pierce the bill pretty high up in the horny portion. The eyes, of
which I could not see the colour, are round, and placed, like in the entire
family, in front. They are surrounded by a circle or disc of stiff, thread-like
feathers, which is interrupted at the sides. A sort of collar is perceptible on
curvature and the great development in width of its distal extremity.
Tibio-tarsus.
Total length 77 mm.
Length from the proximal extremity to the
top of the peronial ridge 25 "
Width at distal extremity 10.5 "
Width at proximal extremity 9 "
Width of shaft 3.7 "
Habitat: Rodriguez.
SCOPS COMMERSONI OUST.
Scops commersoni Oustalet, Ann. Sci. Nat. (8) III, p. 35 fig. 3 (1896).
T HIS owl, I believe, is not a true Scops, being much too big, but we
must leave it in that genus for the present, as there are no specimens or
bones extant, and only Jossigny's drawing to guide us as to its
appearance. The first mention of owls on Mauritius was in the year 1606,
when Admiral Matlief says that owls were common in the Island. Monsieur
Desjardins, in 1837, gave the first accurate description of the bird, of which
I here reproduce the translation. "The digits and even the tarsi are not
feathered, only on the front portion of these latter one sees some short, stiff
feathers running down to a point nearly to the centre. The digits are very
strong, they being armed with hooked nails.
The beak is very stout, arched from its base; the upper mandible, which is
much longer than the other and covering it, is as if cut square at the point.
The nostrils pierce the bill pretty high up in the horny portion. The eyes, of
which I could not see the colour, are round, and placed, like in the entire
family, in front. They are surrounded by a circle or disc of stiff, thread-like
feathers, which is interrupted at the sides. A sort of collar is perceptible on
Page 91
the throat. Two tufts, similar to those of the Eagle Owls and Eared Owls,
and very apparent, are behind the eyes and towards the top of the occiput.
The wings are a little longer than the tail, the fourth and fifth primaries
being the longest, the third and sixth are shorter, and the second still shorter,
being equal to the eighth, and the first is shortest of all. The tail reaches to
the end of the digits; it is rounded and not much lengthened: all the retrices
are equal in length. The ear-tufts are brown, with some slight buff shading,
the discal plumes being white marked with buff. All the upper side is of a
dark brown colour, the feathers of the head, the neck and the back are edged
with rufous, but not very distinctly so; this rufous colour is more apparent
on the scapulars, and some of these even have on the outer web one or two
whitish patches surrounded with brown.
The large tail feathers are less brown and more rufous in colour, with lighter
rufous marbling mixed with brown.
The tertials and secondaries have a darker brown bar towards the centre,
and their outer web is pleasantly marked with somewhat square ocelli or
irregular bands of white, pale buff, and brown. The large primaries or flight
feathers present the same ornamentation, but more strongly developed, and
the blotches are buffy white on the inner web, which produces a regular
spotting on a brown ground colour; the tip of these large feathers is finely
stippled with brown on a fairly pale ground; and there is a large patch of
white on the wings in addition.
The throat and abdomen are nicely adorned with dark buff feathers, which
have a black brown centre and two to four large round white spots. The
large feathers on the flanks are whitish, with a brown shaft line and marked
with buff. All the well feathered parts, underneath the feathers are covered
by a very thick black down."
The colour of bill and feet is reddish brown. Total length, 13½ inches = 345
mm. Desjardins says the specimen he described was killed at the end of
October, 1836, in the forest crowning the hills close to "Bamboo Creek." In
1837 several were still seen near "La Savane," and one was killed at
Curepipe by Dr. Dobson of the 99th Regiment. This latter is believed to
have been one of, if not the last of this species, so we have to thank that
and very apparent, are behind the eyes and towards the top of the occiput.
The wings are a little longer than the tail, the fourth and fifth primaries
being the longest, the third and sixth are shorter, and the second still shorter,
being equal to the eighth, and the first is shortest of all. The tail reaches to
the end of the digits; it is rounded and not much lengthened: all the retrices
are equal in length. The ear-tufts are brown, with some slight buff shading,
the discal plumes being white marked with buff. All the upper side is of a
dark brown colour, the feathers of the head, the neck and the back are edged
with rufous, but not very distinctly so; this rufous colour is more apparent
on the scapulars, and some of these even have on the outer web one or two
whitish patches surrounded with brown.
The large tail feathers are less brown and more rufous in colour, with lighter
rufous marbling mixed with brown.
The tertials and secondaries have a darker brown bar towards the centre,
and their outer web is pleasantly marked with somewhat square ocelli or
irregular bands of white, pale buff, and brown. The large primaries or flight
feathers present the same ornamentation, but more strongly developed, and
the blotches are buffy white on the inner web, which produces a regular
spotting on a brown ground colour; the tip of these large feathers is finely
stippled with brown on a fairly pale ground; and there is a large patch of
white on the wings in addition.
The throat and abdomen are nicely adorned with dark buff feathers, which
have a black brown centre and two to four large round white spots. The
large feathers on the flanks are whitish, with a brown shaft line and marked
with buff. All the well feathered parts, underneath the feathers are covered
by a very thick black down."
The colour of bill and feet is reddish brown. Total length, 13½ inches = 345
mm. Desjardins says the specimen he described was killed at the end of
October, 1836, in the forest crowning the hills close to "Bamboo Creek." In
1837 several were still seen near "La Savane," and one was killed at
Curepipe by Dr. Dobson of the 99th Regiment. This latter is believed to
have been one of, if not the last of this species, so we have to thank that
Page 92
excellent naturalist, Desjardins, and Monsieur Jossigny, the companion of
Commerson, that we know what this extinct species was like.
Habitat: Mauritius.
ATHENE MURIVORA MILNE-EDWARDS.
Strix (Athene) murivora Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX p. 13 (Art. 3.) (1874).
P ROFESSOR MILNE-EDWARDS described this bird from a tibio-
tarsus and a tarso-metatarsus collected in Rodriguez by Sir Edward
Newton, and says that he considers it to belong to the genus Athene,
because the proportions of the tibio-tarsus and tarso-metatarsus agree with
those of that genus. The most remarkable specific characters appear to be
that the ridge to which the fibula is articulated is stout, and extends very far
along the outer edge of the bone. The diaphysis is large and nearly straight;
the distal extremity is furnished with two equal condyles separated by a
deep channel.
Tibio-tarsus.
Total length 71 mm.
Length from proximal extremity to end of peronial ridge 25 "
Width of distal extremity 10 "
Width of proximal extremity 9 "
Width of shaft 4 "
Tarso-metatarsus.
Total length 46 mm.
Width at proximal extremity 10 "
Width at distal extremity 15 "
Width of shaft 5 "
Habitat: Rodriguez.
Commerson, that we know what this extinct species was like.
Habitat: Mauritius.
ATHENE MURIVORA MILNE-EDWARDS.
Strix (Athene) murivora Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX p. 13 (Art. 3.) (1874).
P ROFESSOR MILNE-EDWARDS described this bird from a tibio-
tarsus and a tarso-metatarsus collected in Rodriguez by Sir Edward
Newton, and says that he considers it to belong to the genus Athene,
because the proportions of the tibio-tarsus and tarso-metatarsus agree with
those of that genus. The most remarkable specific characters appear to be
that the ridge to which the fibula is articulated is stout, and extends very far
along the outer edge of the bone. The diaphysis is large and nearly straight;
the distal extremity is furnished with two equal condyles separated by a
deep channel.
Tibio-tarsus.
Total length 71 mm.
Length from proximal extremity to end of peronial ridge 25 "
Width of distal extremity 10 "
Width of proximal extremity 9 "
Width of shaft 4 "
Tarso-metatarsus.
Total length 46 mm.
Width at proximal extremity 10 "
Width at distal extremity 15 "
Width of shaft 5 "
Habitat: Rodriguez.
Page 93
SCELOGLAUX RUFIFACIES BULLER.
Sceloglaux rufifacies Buller, Ibis 1904, p. 639; id. Suppl. B. New Zealand II, p. 65, pl. VII
(1906).
O RIGINAL description: "Adult female: Similar to Sceloglaux
albifacies, but appreciably smaller; face dull rufous brown, instead of
being white; crown and nape blackish brown; entire upper surface
strongly suffused with rufous; quills marked with regular transverse bars
and a terminal edging of rufous brown; tail-feathers uniform yellowish
brown, obscurely barred with pale brown; bill lemon-yellow; feet dull
yellow."
"Wairarapa district, near Wellington, North Island, in the summer 1868-9."
This supposed "species" is a very doubtful one. A close examination in the
Tring Museum of the type (which was offered me for such a high price that
I did not feel justified in buying it, fond as I am of possessing extinct forms,
types and varieties) by Messrs. Hartert, Hellmayr and myself proved
beyond doubt to all three of us that the specimen was not fully adult, but
showed signs of immaturity. If I said to Sir Walter Buller that it was an
extremely young, hardly fledged Sceloglaux this was certainly incorrect,
and was perhaps just an exclamation after a hasty preliminary examination,
for the bird is of course fully fledged and has passed, at least partially,
through one moult of the feathers. On the other hand, both Professor
Newton's and Dr. Sharpe's reputed statements that the owl in question is
fully adult are not correct. It certainly shows unmistakable signs of
immaturity, as noticed at once by Dr. Gadow (cf. Newton's letter on p. 66,
l.c.), by Hartert, Hellmayr and myself. Moreover Professor Newton—
though Buller says he "pronounced it to be an adult bird"—also admits that
the bird "had moulted, though not necessarily to be in adult plumage," and
he continues that he thinks the character of the markings continues to be
juvenile.
Having thus discussed the age of this owl, the question must be considered
if it is different from S. albifacies from the South Island. This is less easily
done. Buller described it as a "new species," and mentions among the
distinctive characters (see above) the colour of the tail. The tail, however, is
"skillfully" (as Buller calls it, though I should use a less complimentary
Sceloglaux rufifacies Buller, Ibis 1904, p. 639; id. Suppl. B. New Zealand II, p. 65, pl. VII
(1906).
O RIGINAL description: "Adult female: Similar to Sceloglaux
albifacies, but appreciably smaller; face dull rufous brown, instead of
being white; crown and nape blackish brown; entire upper surface
strongly suffused with rufous; quills marked with regular transverse bars
and a terminal edging of rufous brown; tail-feathers uniform yellowish
brown, obscurely barred with pale brown; bill lemon-yellow; feet dull
yellow."
"Wairarapa district, near Wellington, North Island, in the summer 1868-9."
This supposed "species" is a very doubtful one. A close examination in the
Tring Museum of the type (which was offered me for such a high price that
I did not feel justified in buying it, fond as I am of possessing extinct forms,
types and varieties) by Messrs. Hartert, Hellmayr and myself proved
beyond doubt to all three of us that the specimen was not fully adult, but
showed signs of immaturity. If I said to Sir Walter Buller that it was an
extremely young, hardly fledged Sceloglaux this was certainly incorrect,
and was perhaps just an exclamation after a hasty preliminary examination,
for the bird is of course fully fledged and has passed, at least partially,
through one moult of the feathers. On the other hand, both Professor
Newton's and Dr. Sharpe's reputed statements that the owl in question is
fully adult are not correct. It certainly shows unmistakable signs of
immaturity, as noticed at once by Dr. Gadow (cf. Newton's letter on p. 66,
l.c.), by Hartert, Hellmayr and myself. Moreover Professor Newton—
though Buller says he "pronounced it to be an adult bird"—also admits that
the bird "had moulted, though not necessarily to be in adult plumage," and
he continues that he thinks the character of the markings continues to be
juvenile.
Having thus discussed the age of this owl, the question must be considered
if it is different from S. albifacies from the South Island. This is less easily
done. Buller described it as a "new species," and mentions among the
distinctive characters (see above) the colour of the tail. The tail, however, is
"skillfully" (as Buller calls it, though I should use a less complimentary
Page 94
adverb) stuck in, and does not belong to a Sceloglaux, but to an Australian
Ninox, and also some feathers on the neck are foreign. The wings being
abraded, its slightly smaller length is not very significant. Certainly,
however, the colouration in general is slightly more rufous than in S.
albifacies, though some of my specimens approach it almost completely,
and the face is more rufescent. Professor Newton cautiously warned Sir
Walter Buller, suggesting that S. albifacies might possibly have a red
"phase," like Syrnium aluco, and this North Island specimen represented the
latter. As for myself, I do not think that S. albifacies has two phases, as I
have seen too many specimens, and found them to vary but little. I have
now in my collection eight specimens from the South Island. On the other
hand, I have not seen juvenile examples; but it is very likely that the rufous
face of the North Island specimen is a character peculiar to the North Island
form, which would then be a sub-species of S. albifacies from the South
Island, and should be called S. albifacies rufifacies. The type from
Wairapara is said to have been killed in the summer of 1868-9, and, since
no further evidence of its existence has come forth, I presume that the North
Island race of this owl must be extinct by this time.
STRIX NEWTONI NOM. NOV.
Strix sp. Newton and Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 287 (1893).
M ESSRS. NEWTON AND GADOW give the measurements of, and
describe a pair of metatarsi procured with the remains described as
Strix sauzieri, and state that they do not fit in with that species. For,
as they are fully adult bones, it is impossible to attribute their much smaller
size to youth. They then add a sentence of which this is the first part:
"Unless we assume, what is unlikely, that the Island of Mauritius possessed
two different species of Strix, we have to conclude that the short pair of
metatarsals belonged to a small individual of Strix sauzieri, ——."
Evidently Messrs. Gadow and Newton, when they wrote this, did not
remember the fact that throughout a very large portion of the range of Strix
flammea, its various geographical races are found side by side with another
species of the group of Strix, namely, S. candida and S. capensis, popularly
Ninox, and also some feathers on the neck are foreign. The wings being
abraded, its slightly smaller length is not very significant. Certainly,
however, the colouration in general is slightly more rufous than in S.
albifacies, though some of my specimens approach it almost completely,
and the face is more rufescent. Professor Newton cautiously warned Sir
Walter Buller, suggesting that S. albifacies might possibly have a red
"phase," like Syrnium aluco, and this North Island specimen represented the
latter. As for myself, I do not think that S. albifacies has two phases, as I
have seen too many specimens, and found them to vary but little. I have
now in my collection eight specimens from the South Island. On the other
hand, I have not seen juvenile examples; but it is very likely that the rufous
face of the North Island specimen is a character peculiar to the North Island
form, which would then be a sub-species of S. albifacies from the South
Island, and should be called S. albifacies rufifacies. The type from
Wairapara is said to have been killed in the summer of 1868-9, and, since
no further evidence of its existence has come forth, I presume that the North
Island race of this owl must be extinct by this time.
STRIX NEWTONI NOM. NOV.
Strix sp. Newton and Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 287 (1893).
M ESSRS. NEWTON AND GADOW give the measurements of, and
describe a pair of metatarsi procured with the remains described as
Strix sauzieri, and state that they do not fit in with that species. For,
as they are fully adult bones, it is impossible to attribute their much smaller
size to youth. They then add a sentence of which this is the first part:
"Unless we assume, what is unlikely, that the Island of Mauritius possessed
two different species of Strix, we have to conclude that the short pair of
metatarsals belonged to a small individual of Strix sauzieri, ——."
Evidently Messrs. Gadow and Newton, when they wrote this, did not
remember the fact that throughout a very large portion of the range of Strix
flammea, its various geographical races are found side by side with another
species of the group of Strix, namely, S. candida and S. capensis, popularly
Page 95
called "Grass owls"; these in nearly every case have the legs considerably
longer than in the true Barn Owls (Strix flammea and its races).
Therefore I consider it not in the least unlikely that two species of Strix
inhabited Mauritius, and that Strix sauzieri was the Mauritian representative
of the "Grass Owls," while these two short metatarsals belonged to the
representative of the "Barn Owls." I therefore have much pleasure in
naming this form after the collector of these bones, the late Sir Edward
Newton.
Length of tarso-metatarsi, 56 mm.
Habitat: Mauritius.
STRIX SAUZIERI NEWT. & GAD.
Strix sauzieri Newton & Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 286, pl. XXXIII, figs. 11-18
(1893).
M ESSRS. NEWTON AND GADOW describe this species from four
metatarsi, three tibiae, and two humeri. They state that the relative
length of the tibia to the metatarsus is very constant and
characteristic of the various families and genera of owls. In the present
instance this comparison indicates a species of Strix.
The longer and higher cnemial process of the tibia and the shortness of the
humerus serve amply to justify the specific separation of this Mauritian
owl.
The following are the measurements:—
Humerus, length 71 mm.
Tibia-tarsus, length 90-93 "
Tarso-metatarsus, length 63-66 "
Habitat: Mauritius.
longer than in the true Barn Owls (Strix flammea and its races).
Therefore I consider it not in the least unlikely that two species of Strix
inhabited Mauritius, and that Strix sauzieri was the Mauritian representative
of the "Grass Owls," while these two short metatarsals belonged to the
representative of the "Barn Owls." I therefore have much pleasure in
naming this form after the collector of these bones, the late Sir Edward
Newton.
Length of tarso-metatarsi, 56 mm.
Habitat: Mauritius.
STRIX SAUZIERI NEWT. & GAD.
Strix sauzieri Newton & Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 286, pl. XXXIII, figs. 11-18
(1893).
M ESSRS. NEWTON AND GADOW describe this species from four
metatarsi, three tibiae, and two humeri. They state that the relative
length of the tibia to the metatarsus is very constant and
characteristic of the various families and genera of owls. In the present
instance this comparison indicates a species of Strix.
The longer and higher cnemial process of the tibia and the shortness of the
humerus serve amply to justify the specific separation of this Mauritian
owl.
The following are the measurements:—
Humerus, length 71 mm.
Tibia-tarsus, length 90-93 "
Tarso-metatarsus, length 63-66 "
Habitat: Mauritius.
Page 96
"CIRCUS HAMILTONI" FORBES.
Circus hamiltoni Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 186 (1892—no proper description).
A VERY large harrier, much larger than Circus gouldi, but not so big as
Harpagornis.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
"CIRCUS TEAUTEENSIS" FORBES.
Circus teauteensis Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 186 (1892—no proper description).
A NOTHER very large harrier from Teaute, which has never yet been
properly described.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
ASTUR ALPHONSI NEWT. & GAD.
Astur sp. Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX, Art. II, pp. 25, 26, pl. 15 fig. 2. (1874).
Astur alphonsi Newton and Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII p. 285, pl. XXXIII, figs. 9, 10.
(1893).
M ESSRS. NEWTON AND GADOW bestowed the name Astur
alphonsi on a pair of tibiae, a pair of metatarsals, and the
metacarpals of the left side of a goshawk apparently of the same size
and relative proportions as A. melanoleucus of South Africa. They justified
their description of this goshawk as a distinct species, first of all by the fact
that most of the Mascarene extinct species were distinct; and then because
the bony ridge for the M. flexor digitorum communis was more strongly
developed, the fibula reached further down the tibia, the peroneal crest was
straighter and longer, and the cnemial crest slanted more gradually into the
anterior inner edge of the shaft of the tibia.
Circus hamiltoni Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 186 (1892—no proper description).
A VERY large harrier, much larger than Circus gouldi, but not so big as
Harpagornis.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
"CIRCUS TEAUTEENSIS" FORBES.
Circus teauteensis Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 186 (1892—no proper description).
A NOTHER very large harrier from Teaute, which has never yet been
properly described.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
ASTUR ALPHONSI NEWT. & GAD.
Astur sp. Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX, Art. II, pp. 25, 26, pl. 15 fig. 2. (1874).
Astur alphonsi Newton and Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII p. 285, pl. XXXIII, figs. 9, 10.
(1893).
M ESSRS. NEWTON AND GADOW bestowed the name Astur
alphonsi on a pair of tibiae, a pair of metatarsals, and the
metacarpals of the left side of a goshawk apparently of the same size
and relative proportions as A. melanoleucus of South Africa. They justified
their description of this goshawk as a distinct species, first of all by the fact
that most of the Mascarene extinct species were distinct; and then because
the bony ridge for the M. flexor digitorum communis was more strongly
developed, the fibula reached further down the tibia, the peroneal crest was
straighter and longer, and the cnemial crest slanted more gradually into the
anterior inner edge of the shaft of the tibia.
Page 97
Milne-Edwards gives the measurements of the solitary tarso-metatarsus of
this bird which he had for examination as follows:—
Total length 80 mm.
Width at proximal extremity 11 "
Width at distal extremity 13 "
Width at smallest part of shaft 6 "
Messrs. Gadow and Newton give the length of their tarso-metatarsi as 81
mm., of their tibiae as 117 mm., and of the metacarpals as 55 mm.
Habitat: Mauritius.
Seven tarsi in the Tring Museum.
HARPAGORNIS HAAST.
A LLIED to Aquila, from which it is distinguished by the ulna being
relatively shorter and the tarso-metatarsus stouter.
HARPAGORNIS MOOREI HAAST.
Harpagornis moorei Haast, Trans. N.Z. Inst. IV, p. 192 (1872).
D ESCRIPTION of femur (from Haast): The cylindrical shaft bent
forward, and above the distal extremity it is slightly curved back. The
hollow on the top of the head is very large and measures .42 inch
across.
The trochanteric ridge is well developed and the outer side is very rough,
showing that muscles of great strength and thickness must have been
attached to it.
The inter-muscular linear ridges are well raised above the shaft, of which
the one extending from the fore and outer angle of the epitrochanteric
this bird which he had for examination as follows:—
Total length 80 mm.
Width at proximal extremity 11 "
Width at distal extremity 13 "
Width at smallest part of shaft 6 "
Messrs. Gadow and Newton give the length of their tarso-metatarsi as 81
mm., of their tibiae as 117 mm., and of the metacarpals as 55 mm.
Habitat: Mauritius.
Seven tarsi in the Tring Museum.
HARPAGORNIS HAAST.
A LLIED to Aquila, from which it is distinguished by the ulna being
relatively shorter and the tarso-metatarsus stouter.
HARPAGORNIS MOOREI HAAST.
Harpagornis moorei Haast, Trans. N.Z. Inst. IV, p. 192 (1872).
D ESCRIPTION of femur (from Haast): The cylindrical shaft bent
forward, and above the distal extremity it is slightly curved back. The
hollow on the top of the head is very large and measures .42 inch
across.
The trochanteric ridge is well developed and the outer side is very rough,
showing that muscles of great strength and thickness must have been
attached to it.
The inter-muscular linear ridges are well raised above the shaft, of which
the one extending from the fore and outer angle of the epitrochanteric
Page 98
articular surface to the outer condyle is the most prominent. The pits for the
attachment of the ligaments in the inter-condyloid fossa are strongly
marked. The femur is pneumatic, the proximal orifice is large and ear-
shaped, resembling in form most closely that of the Australian Sea Eagle.
Total length 6.66 inches.
Circumference at proximal end 4.66 "
Circumference at distal end 5.58 "
Circumference at thinnest part of shaft 2.50 "
Ungual phalanx (probably of left hallux):
Length 2.92 inches.
Circumference at articular end 3.17 "
Ungual phalanx (probably of right second toe):
Length 2.75 inches.
Circumference 2.92 "
Type locality: Glenmark Swamp.
Habitat: New Zealand.
Type bones: 1 left femur, 2 ungual phalanges, and 1 rib.
For a more detailed description my readers must refer to the Transactions of
the New Zealand Institute VI, pp. 64-75 (1874).
CARBO PERSPICILLATUS (PALL.)
(Plate 39.)
Phalacrocorax perspicillatus Pallas, Zoogr. Rosso.-Asiat. II, p. 305 (1827—Berings Island);
Gould, Zool. Voy. Sulphur, p. 49, pl. XXXII (1844); Stejneger, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus.,
No. 29, p. 180 (1885); id. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. XII, pp. 83-94, pls. II-IV (1889—
Osteology); Grant, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXVI, p. 357 (1898).
Graculus perspicillatus Elliot, New and heret. unfig. sp. N. Amer. B. II, part 14, No. 3, text
and plate (1869).
Pallasicarbo perspicillatus Coues, Osprey III, p. 144 (1899).
attachment of the ligaments in the inter-condyloid fossa are strongly
marked. The femur is pneumatic, the proximal orifice is large and ear-
shaped, resembling in form most closely that of the Australian Sea Eagle.
Total length 6.66 inches.
Circumference at proximal end 4.66 "
Circumference at distal end 5.58 "
Circumference at thinnest part of shaft 2.50 "
Ungual phalanx (probably of left hallux):
Length 2.92 inches.
Circumference at articular end 3.17 "
Ungual phalanx (probably of right second toe):
Length 2.75 inches.
Circumference 2.92 "
Type locality: Glenmark Swamp.
Habitat: New Zealand.
Type bones: 1 left femur, 2 ungual phalanges, and 1 rib.
For a more detailed description my readers must refer to the Transactions of
the New Zealand Institute VI, pp. 64-75 (1874).
CARBO PERSPICILLATUS (PALL.)
(Plate 39.)
Phalacrocorax perspicillatus Pallas, Zoogr. Rosso.-Asiat. II, p. 305 (1827—Berings Island);
Gould, Zool. Voy. Sulphur, p. 49, pl. XXXII (1844); Stejneger, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus.,
No. 29, p. 180 (1885); id. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. XII, pp. 83-94, pls. II-IV (1889—
Osteology); Grant, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXVI, p. 357 (1898).
Graculus perspicillatus Elliot, New and heret. unfig. sp. N. Amer. B. II, part 14, No. 3, text
and plate (1869).
Pallasicarbo perspicillatus Coues, Osprey III, p. 144 (1899).
Page 99
P ALLAS gives the first recognizable description of this bird, which, as
translated from the Latin, is as follows: "Of the size of a very large
goose. Of the shape of the former (sc. Cormorants), which it also
resembles in the white patches on the flanks. The body is entirely black. A
few long, white, narrow pendant plumes round the neck, as in Herons.
Occiput with a huge tuft, doubly crested. Skin round the base of the bill
bare, red, blue and white, mixed, as in a turkey. Round the eyes a thick, bare
white patch of skin, about six lines wide, like a pair of spectacles. Weight
12 to 14 pounds. Female smaller, without crest and spectacles. (From
Steller.)"
Steller, who was shipwrecked on Bering Island in 1741, was the discoverer
of C. perspicillatus, and Pallas took his diagnosis from Steller's notes.
The Spectacled or Pallas's Cormorant is one of the rarest of all birds. It is
generally said that four specimens are known, but five are really in
existence: Two in the St. Petersburg Museum, one in Leyden, and two in
London. One of these latter is perfect, while the other has no tail. Probably
all five have been obtained by Kuprianoff, the Russian Governor at Sitka,
who, in 1839, gave one to Captain Belcher, and sent some others to St.
Petersburg. The careful researches of Stejneger and others on Bering Island
have clearly shown that this Cormorant exists no longer. Formerly it is said
to have been numerous, but the natives were fond of its flesh, which formed
their principal diet when other meat was difficult to obtain. Probably it
would not so soon have become extinct if it had not been that their rather
short wings resulted in a certain slowness of locomotion on land and in the
air. A good description is given in the Catalogue of Birds, and a still more
detailed one by Stejneger (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1899, p. 86) from Brandt's
manuscript.
Habitat: Bering Island.
CARBO MAJOR (FORBES).
Phalacrocorax novaezealandiae var. major Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 189 (1892—
no proper description).
translated from the Latin, is as follows: "Of the size of a very large
goose. Of the shape of the former (sc. Cormorants), which it also
resembles in the white patches on the flanks. The body is entirely black. A
few long, white, narrow pendant plumes round the neck, as in Herons.
Occiput with a huge tuft, doubly crested. Skin round the base of the bill
bare, red, blue and white, mixed, as in a turkey. Round the eyes a thick, bare
white patch of skin, about six lines wide, like a pair of spectacles. Weight
12 to 14 pounds. Female smaller, without crest and spectacles. (From
Steller.)"
Steller, who was shipwrecked on Bering Island in 1741, was the discoverer
of C. perspicillatus, and Pallas took his diagnosis from Steller's notes.
The Spectacled or Pallas's Cormorant is one of the rarest of all birds. It is
generally said that four specimens are known, but five are really in
existence: Two in the St. Petersburg Museum, one in Leyden, and two in
London. One of these latter is perfect, while the other has no tail. Probably
all five have been obtained by Kuprianoff, the Russian Governor at Sitka,
who, in 1839, gave one to Captain Belcher, and sent some others to St.
Petersburg. The careful researches of Stejneger and others on Bering Island
have clearly shown that this Cormorant exists no longer. Formerly it is said
to have been numerous, but the natives were fond of its flesh, which formed
their principal diet when other meat was difficult to obtain. Probably it
would not so soon have become extinct if it had not been that their rather
short wings resulted in a certain slowness of locomotion on land and in the
air. A good description is given in the Catalogue of Birds, and a still more
detailed one by Stejneger (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1899, p. 86) from Brandt's
manuscript.
Habitat: Bering Island.
CARBO MAJOR (FORBES).
Phalacrocorax novaezealandiae var. major Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 189 (1892—
no proper description).
Page 100
D R. FORBES only informed us that this shag was of greater
dimensions than Ph. novaezealandiae (a very closely allied form of
Ph. carbo). It would be interesting to know more about it, and,
especially, if this extinct form was incapable of flight, like Ph. harrisi of the
Galápagos Islands.
Habitat: New Zealand.
PLOTUS NANUS NEWT. & GAD.
Plotus nanus Newton and Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII p. 288, pl. XXXIV figs 1-5. (1893).
T HE humerus, the pelvis with sacrum, and the tibia were the materials
on which our authors founded this new species. They state that all the
strongly developed characters in these bones leave no possible doubt
as to its being a species of Plotus, and its diminutive size at once
distinguishes it from the three known species—P. anhinga, P. melanogaster,
and P. novaehollandiae.
The measurements are as follows:—
Left humerus, length 89 mm.
Left tibia, length 61 "
Distance from acetabular axis to anterior end of sacrum 30 mm.
Distance between ventral inner margins of the acetabula 14.5 mm.
Habitat: Mauritius. (Also recorded from Madagascar.)
"CHENOPIS SUMNERENSIS" FORBES.
Chenopis sumnerensis Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 188 (1892) (Nomen nudum).
HIS appears to have been a very large species, with not very great powers
of flight, if not flightless.
dimensions than Ph. novaezealandiae (a very closely allied form of
Ph. carbo). It would be interesting to know more about it, and,
especially, if this extinct form was incapable of flight, like Ph. harrisi of the
Galápagos Islands.
Habitat: New Zealand.
PLOTUS NANUS NEWT. & GAD.
Plotus nanus Newton and Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII p. 288, pl. XXXIV figs 1-5. (1893).
T HE humerus, the pelvis with sacrum, and the tibia were the materials
on which our authors founded this new species. They state that all the
strongly developed characters in these bones leave no possible doubt
as to its being a species of Plotus, and its diminutive size at once
distinguishes it from the three known species—P. anhinga, P. melanogaster,
and P. novaehollandiae.
The measurements are as follows:—
Left humerus, length 89 mm.
Left tibia, length 61 "
Distance from acetabular axis to anterior end of sacrum 30 mm.
Distance between ventral inner margins of the acetabula 14.5 mm.
Habitat: Mauritius. (Also recorded from Madagascar.)
"CHENOPIS SUMNERENSIS" FORBES.
Chenopis sumnerensis Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 188 (1892) (Nomen nudum).
HIS appears to have been a very large species, with not very great powers
of flight, if not flightless.
Page 101
T Habitat: New Zealand and Chatham Islands.
Bones from Chatham Islands in my collection.
CHENALOPEX SIRABENSIS ANDREWS.
Chenalopex sirabensis Andrews, Ibis 1897, p. 355, pl. IX, figs. 1-3.
T HIS species of which skull, sternum, pelvis, the bones of fore and hind
limbs, &c., are preserved, appears to be closely allied to Chenalopex
aegyptiacus, but has such a number of small differences that Mr.
Andrews is, I think, quite justified in separating it; I do not, however, agree
with him when he suggests that perhaps it is the same as Newton and
Gadow's Sarcidiornis mauritianus, although many of the bones agree. Of
course, his line of comparison was strengthened by the fact of subfossil
bones of Plotus nanus occurring both in Mauritius and Madagascar; but it
does not follow that because in one family of birds the same species
occurred in two places the others must do likewise, and, therefore, one must
not necessarily regard a certain similarity of osteological characters as proof
of identity. I must here again refer my readers to Mr. Andrews' very full
description.
Habitat: Sirabé in C. Madagascar.
The measurements are:—
Coracoid 67- 75 mm.
Humerus 132-147 "
Radius 126-134 "
Ulna 129-142 "
Metacarpus 76- 85 "
The smaller bones, undoubtedly, belonged to female, and the larger to male
individuals.
Bones from Chatham Islands in my collection.
CHENALOPEX SIRABENSIS ANDREWS.
Chenalopex sirabensis Andrews, Ibis 1897, p. 355, pl. IX, figs. 1-3.
T HIS species of which skull, sternum, pelvis, the bones of fore and hind
limbs, &c., are preserved, appears to be closely allied to Chenalopex
aegyptiacus, but has such a number of small differences that Mr.
Andrews is, I think, quite justified in separating it; I do not, however, agree
with him when he suggests that perhaps it is the same as Newton and
Gadow's Sarcidiornis mauritianus, although many of the bones agree. Of
course, his line of comparison was strengthened by the fact of subfossil
bones of Plotus nanus occurring both in Mauritius and Madagascar; but it
does not follow that because in one family of birds the same species
occurred in two places the others must do likewise, and, therefore, one must
not necessarily regard a certain similarity of osteological characters as proof
of identity. I must here again refer my readers to Mr. Andrews' very full
description.
Habitat: Sirabé in C. Madagascar.
The measurements are:—
Coracoid 67- 75 mm.
Humerus 132-147 "
Radius 126-134 "
Ulna 129-142 "
Metacarpus 76- 85 "
The smaller bones, undoubtedly, belonged to female, and the larger to male
individuals.
Page 102
CENTRORNIS ANDREWS.
A LLIED to Chenalopex and Chenopis, but differs from Chenalopex in
the form and proportion of its metatarsus, and from all other Anserine
forms by the extreme length and slenderness of the shaft of the tibio-
tarsus and the relative shortness of the fibular crest. From Chenopis it
differs in several respects, and the very long fibular crest of the latter at
once separates them.
CENTRORNIS MAJORI ANDREWS.
Centrornis majori Andrews, Ibis 1897, p. 344, pl. VIII.
T HIS species was discovered by Dr. Forsyth Major and Monsieur
Robert in the bed of an old lake at Sirabé, Central Madagascar, in
1896-1897. It was similar in many respects to Sarcidiornis and
Chenalopex but differed in its large size and the great length of its legs.
Indeed, judging from the slenderness of the metatarsus and femur and the
slight degree of inflection of the lower end of the long tibia, it seems
probable that this bird was ill adapted for swimming, though a good runner.
The wings were long and powerful and armed with a long spur. I must refer
my readers for a fuller description to Mr. Andrews, as quoted above.
The measurements are:—
Tibia.
Length (exclusive of cnemial crest) 213-215 mm.
Width of upper articular surface 20- 21 "
Width of middle of shaft 11-11.5 "
Thickness of shaft 8.5- 9 "
Width of distal extremity 20- 21 "
Femur.
Length 103-107 mm.
Width of proximal extremity 25- 26 "
Width of distal extremity 26 "
A LLIED to Chenalopex and Chenopis, but differs from Chenalopex in
the form and proportion of its metatarsus, and from all other Anserine
forms by the extreme length and slenderness of the shaft of the tibio-
tarsus and the relative shortness of the fibular crest. From Chenopis it
differs in several respects, and the very long fibular crest of the latter at
once separates them.
CENTRORNIS MAJORI ANDREWS.
Centrornis majori Andrews, Ibis 1897, p. 344, pl. VIII.
T HIS species was discovered by Dr. Forsyth Major and Monsieur
Robert in the bed of an old lake at Sirabé, Central Madagascar, in
1896-1897. It was similar in many respects to Sarcidiornis and
Chenalopex but differed in its large size and the great length of its legs.
Indeed, judging from the slenderness of the metatarsus and femur and the
slight degree of inflection of the lower end of the long tibia, it seems
probable that this bird was ill adapted for swimming, though a good runner.
The wings were long and powerful and armed with a long spur. I must refer
my readers for a fuller description to Mr. Andrews, as quoted above.
The measurements are:—
Tibia.
Length (exclusive of cnemial crest) 213-215 mm.
Width of upper articular surface 20- 21 "
Width of middle of shaft 11-11.5 "
Thickness of shaft 8.5- 9 "
Width of distal extremity 20- 21 "
Femur.
Length 103-107 mm.
Width of proximal extremity 25- 26 "
Width of distal extremity 26 "
Page 103
Width of shaft 11 "
Metatarsus.
Length 130 mm. approx.
Width of shaft 8.5 "
Width of middle trochlea 10 "
Coracoid.
Length 31 mm.
Width of glenoidal surface 13 "
Scapula.
Width at proximal extremity 23 mm.
Radius.
Length 24 mm.
Ulna.
Width at middle of shaft 10 mm.
Metacarpus.
Greatest width at proximal extremity 31 mm.
Length of spur 26 "
Width of second metacarpal 9 "
Habitat: Madagascar.
CNEMIORNIS OWEN.
S KULL short and massive, with beak rounded and stout. Carina of
sternum aborted. Limb-bones short and very stout, the ulna being
shorter than the humerus, and having very prominent tubercles for the
secondaries; cnemial crest of tibia greatly developed. No foramen between
third and fourth trochleae of tarso-metatarsus. Spines of dorsal vertebrae
tall. The power of flight was absent. The chief differences from Cereopsis
were the presence of extra pre-sacral vertebrae, so that two only instead of
three ribs articulate with the sacrum; and an elevated pent-roof arrangement
of the ossa innominata, which indicate more decided cursorial habits.
Metatarsus.
Length 130 mm. approx.
Width of shaft 8.5 "
Width of middle trochlea 10 "
Coracoid.
Length 31 mm.
Width of glenoidal surface 13 "
Scapula.
Width at proximal extremity 23 mm.
Radius.
Length 24 mm.
Ulna.
Width at middle of shaft 10 mm.
Metacarpus.
Greatest width at proximal extremity 31 mm.
Length of spur 26 "
Width of second metacarpal 9 "
Habitat: Madagascar.
CNEMIORNIS OWEN.
S KULL short and massive, with beak rounded and stout. Carina of
sternum aborted. Limb-bones short and very stout, the ulna being
shorter than the humerus, and having very prominent tubercles for the
secondaries; cnemial crest of tibia greatly developed. No foramen between
third and fourth trochleae of tarso-metatarsus. Spines of dorsal vertebrae
tall. The power of flight was absent. The chief differences from Cereopsis
were the presence of extra pre-sacral vertebrae, so that two only instead of
three ribs articulate with the sacrum; and an elevated pent-roof arrangement
of the ossa innominata, which indicate more decided cursorial habits.
Page 104
CNEMIORNIS CALCITRANS OWEN.
Cnemiornis calcitrans Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. V, p. 396 (1865).
"
T HE type species. Very considerably larger than the existing Cereopsis
novaehollandiae, with the limbs relatively much stouter and shorter"
(Lydekker).
Height of back from ground 26 inches.
Length from beak to tail 34 "
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
For full description see Trans. N. Z. Inst. VI, pp. 76-84, pls. X-XII (1874).
"CNEMIORNIS GRACILIS" FORBES.
Cnemiornis gracilis Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 187 (1892) (Nomen nudum).
"
A MOST elegantly moulded goose from the North Island."
Unfortunately this is all that has been published about this form!
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
CNEMIORNIS MINOR FORBES.
Cnemiornis minor Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 187 (1892); vide also Trans. N.Z. Inst.
VI, pp. 76-84 (Hector).
T HIS species appears to be distinguished from Cnemiornis calcitrans
by its very small size, being hardly bigger than Cereopsis
novaehollandiae.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Cnemiornis calcitrans Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. V, p. 396 (1865).
"
T HE type species. Very considerably larger than the existing Cereopsis
novaehollandiae, with the limbs relatively much stouter and shorter"
(Lydekker).
Height of back from ground 26 inches.
Length from beak to tail 34 "
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
For full description see Trans. N. Z. Inst. VI, pp. 76-84, pls. X-XII (1874).
"CNEMIORNIS GRACILIS" FORBES.
Cnemiornis gracilis Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 187 (1892) (Nomen nudum).
"
A MOST elegantly moulded goose from the North Island."
Unfortunately this is all that has been published about this form!
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
CNEMIORNIS MINOR FORBES.
Cnemiornis minor Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 187 (1892); vide also Trans. N.Z. Inst.
VI, pp. 76-84 (Hector).
T HIS species appears to be distinguished from Cnemiornis calcitrans
by its very small size, being hardly bigger than Cereopsis
novaehollandiae.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Page 105
CEREOPSIS NOVAEZEALANDIAE FORBES.
Cereopsis novaezealandiae Forbes, Trans. N. Zealand Inst. XXIV, p. 188 (1892).
T HIS species was founded on an incomplete skull, and differed from C.
novaehollandiae by its slightly larger size.
Habitat: New Zealand.
SARCIDIORNIS MAURITIANUS NEWT. & GAD.
Sarcidiornis mauritianus Newton & Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 290, pl. XXXIV, figs.
9-10.
T HE evidence on which this species is founded is a single left
metacarpal and an incomplete left half of the pelvis. Its specific
character is the very large size as compared to the two existing
species.
Habitat: Mauritius.
In an old work entitled "Memorandums concerning India" by J. Marshall
(1668) in the article on the Island of Mauritius, there occurs this passage:
"They are many Geese; the halfe of their wings towards the end are black
and the other halfe white; they are not large, but fat and good. Plenty of
Ducks." As there is no mention of the caruncle on the bill here or in other
authors alluding to geese in Mauritius, Oustalet doubted that these geese
were this Sarcidiornis, but I believe this merely to have been an oversight
of Marshall's and that his description goes far to prove the distinctness of
Newton and Gadow's species.
The allusion to the small size also points to the geese of Marshall being the
Sarcidiornis. L'Abbé Dubois in "Les Voyages du Sieur D.B." records the
fact that on Bourbon were some wild geese slightly smaller than the geese
of Europe but having the same plumage. Their bill and feet were red. It is
also probable that wild geese were found on Rodriguez. There is nothing to
show what these Bourbon geese were, and as no osseous remains of such
Cereopsis novaezealandiae Forbes, Trans. N. Zealand Inst. XXIV, p. 188 (1892).
T HIS species was founded on an incomplete skull, and differed from C.
novaehollandiae by its slightly larger size.
Habitat: New Zealand.
SARCIDIORNIS MAURITIANUS NEWT. & GAD.
Sarcidiornis mauritianus Newton & Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 290, pl. XXXIV, figs.
9-10.
T HE evidence on which this species is founded is a single left
metacarpal and an incomplete left half of the pelvis. Its specific
character is the very large size as compared to the two existing
species.
Habitat: Mauritius.
In an old work entitled "Memorandums concerning India" by J. Marshall
(1668) in the article on the Island of Mauritius, there occurs this passage:
"They are many Geese; the halfe of their wings towards the end are black
and the other halfe white; they are not large, but fat and good. Plenty of
Ducks." As there is no mention of the caruncle on the bill here or in other
authors alluding to geese in Mauritius, Oustalet doubted that these geese
were this Sarcidiornis, but I believe this merely to have been an oversight
of Marshall's and that his description goes far to prove the distinctness of
Newton and Gadow's species.
The allusion to the small size also points to the geese of Marshall being the
Sarcidiornis. L'Abbé Dubois in "Les Voyages du Sieur D.B." records the
fact that on Bourbon were some wild geese slightly smaller than the geese
of Europe but having the same plumage. Their bill and feet were red. It is
also probable that wild geese were found on Rodriguez. There is nothing to
show what these Bourbon geese were, and as no osseous remains of such
Page 106
birds have been found as yet it is impossible to do more than mention the
fact of such birds having been recorded.
ANAS FINSCHI VAN BENEDEN.
Anas finschi Van Beneden, Journ. Zool. IV, p. 267 (1875); Ann. de la Soc. Geol. Belg. II, p.
123 (1876).
T HIS duck is most peculiar, as it stands intermediate between
Querquedula and Dendrocygna in structure, and its nearest known ally
seems to be the extinct A. blanchardi of Europe, and of living forms
apparently Clangula clangula.
Skull nearest to that of Clangula clangula but wider, nostrils more
elongated, eye-sockets smaller, and the whole skull more regularly rounded
off. Sternum differs from that of C. clangula by having the notch lower,
more faint behind and shorter in front. Clavicle and coracoid resemble those
of Fuligula marila. Humerus larger and stronger than in F. marila and C.
clangula, as are the femur, tibio-tarsus and tarso-metatarsus, which are
almost double as long and thick.
Judging from the shape of its leg-bones this bird must have been a strong
runner, and probably at the same time was a poor flyer.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
ANAS THEODORI NEWT. & GAD.
Anas theodori Newton & Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 291, pl. XXXIV, figs 11-17
(1893—Mauritius).
M ESSRS. NEWTON AND GADOW founded this species on a
fragment of a sternum, a pair of coracoids, eight humeri, and a pair
of tarso-metatarsi. These are referable to a duck of larger size than
fact of such birds having been recorded.
ANAS FINSCHI VAN BENEDEN.
Anas finschi Van Beneden, Journ. Zool. IV, p. 267 (1875); Ann. de la Soc. Geol. Belg. II, p.
123 (1876).
T HIS duck is most peculiar, as it stands intermediate between
Querquedula and Dendrocygna in structure, and its nearest known ally
seems to be the extinct A. blanchardi of Europe, and of living forms
apparently Clangula clangula.
Skull nearest to that of Clangula clangula but wider, nostrils more
elongated, eye-sockets smaller, and the whole skull more regularly rounded
off. Sternum differs from that of C. clangula by having the notch lower,
more faint behind and shorter in front. Clavicle and coracoid resemble those
of Fuligula marila. Humerus larger and stronger than in F. marila and C.
clangula, as are the femur, tibio-tarsus and tarso-metatarsus, which are
almost double as long and thick.
Judging from the shape of its leg-bones this bird must have been a strong
runner, and probably at the same time was a poor flyer.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
ANAS THEODORI NEWT. & GAD.
Anas theodori Newton & Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 291, pl. XXXIV, figs 11-17
(1893—Mauritius).
M ESSRS. NEWTON AND GADOW founded this species on a
fragment of a sternum, a pair of coracoids, eight humeri, and a pair
of tarso-metatarsi. These are referable to a duck of larger size than
Page 107
Nettion bernieri, and somewhat intermediate between N. punctata and Anas
melleri.
The sternum differs from that of A. melleri by the lesser height of the keel
and by the shape and direction of the anterior margin of the latter. The
coracoid is longer and larger than in N. bernieri, but is much shorter than in
A. melleri, though agreeing with that of the latter in shape, and by the plain
almost ridgeless ventral surface of the shaft. The seven humeri vary in
length from 70-78 mm., and agree in size with those of N. punctata, thus
proving our species to be smaller than A. melleri.
The two tarso-metatarsi are in poor condition; the right one measuring 42
mm. in length, thus indicating that A. theodori was a bird with a shorter foot
than A. melleri.
Habitat: Mauritius.
CAMPTOLAIMUS LABRADORIA (GM.)
(Plate 36.)
Anas labradoria Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, 2, p. 537 (1788—"Habitat gregaria in America,
boreali." Ex Pennant and Latham.)
Anas labradora Latham, Ind. Orn. II, p. 859 (1790).
Rhynchaspis labradora Stephens, in Shaw's Gen. Zool. XII, 2, p. 121 (1824).
Fuligula labradora Bonaparte, Ann. Lyceum N.Y. II, p. 391 (1826).
Somateria labradora Boie, Isis 1828, p. 329.
Kamptorhynchus labradorus Eyton, Mon. Anat. p. 151 (1838).
Fuligula grisea Leib, Journ. Acad. Sc. Philad. VIII, p. 170 (1840—young bird).
Camptolaimus labradorus Gray, List. Gen. B. ed. 2, p. 95 (1841); Dutcher, Auk. 1891, p.
201, pl. II; 1894, pp. 4-12; Hartl. Abh. naturw. Ver. Bremen XVI, p. 23 (1895).
Camptolaemus labradorius Baird, B.N. Amer. p. 803 (1858); Baird, Brewer and Ridgway,
Water—B. N. Amer. II, p. 63 (1884); Milne-Edw. and Oustalet, Centen. Mus. d'Hist.
Nat., Notice Ois. éteint. p. 51, pl. IV (1893); Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXVII, p.
416 (1895).
melleri.
The sternum differs from that of A. melleri by the lesser height of the keel
and by the shape and direction of the anterior margin of the latter. The
coracoid is longer and larger than in N. bernieri, but is much shorter than in
A. melleri, though agreeing with that of the latter in shape, and by the plain
almost ridgeless ventral surface of the shaft. The seven humeri vary in
length from 70-78 mm., and agree in size with those of N. punctata, thus
proving our species to be smaller than A. melleri.
The two tarso-metatarsi are in poor condition; the right one measuring 42
mm. in length, thus indicating that A. theodori was a bird with a shorter foot
than A. melleri.
Habitat: Mauritius.
CAMPTOLAIMUS LABRADORIA (GM.)
(Plate 36.)
Anas labradoria Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, 2, p. 537 (1788—"Habitat gregaria in America,
boreali." Ex Pennant and Latham.)
Anas labradora Latham, Ind. Orn. II, p. 859 (1790).
Rhynchaspis labradora Stephens, in Shaw's Gen. Zool. XII, 2, p. 121 (1824).
Fuligula labradora Bonaparte, Ann. Lyceum N.Y. II, p. 391 (1826).
Somateria labradora Boie, Isis 1828, p. 329.
Kamptorhynchus labradorus Eyton, Mon. Anat. p. 151 (1838).
Fuligula grisea Leib, Journ. Acad. Sc. Philad. VIII, p. 170 (1840—young bird).
Camptolaimus labradorus Gray, List. Gen. B. ed. 2, p. 95 (1841); Dutcher, Auk. 1891, p.
201, pl. II; 1894, pp. 4-12; Hartl. Abh. naturw. Ver. Bremen XVI, p. 23 (1895).
Camptolaemus labradorius Baird, B.N. Amer. p. 803 (1858); Baird, Brewer and Ridgway,
Water—B. N. Amer. II, p. 63 (1884); Milne-Edw. and Oustalet, Centen. Mus. d'Hist.
Nat., Notice Ois. éteint. p. 51, pl. IV (1893); Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXVII, p.
416 (1895).
Page 108
T HE adult male and a young male, both in my museum, are represented
on plate 36, but the young bird became too rufous, through the colour
type reproduction, and should be somewhat more mouse-gray. Though
first technically named by Gmelin in 1788, this duck was first described in
1785 by Pennant, in the Arctic Zoology II, p. 559, as follows:—
"Pied Duck. With the lower part of the bill black, the upper yellow, on the
summit of the head is an oblong black spot; forehead, cheeks, rest of the
head and neck, white; the lower part encircled with black; scapulars and
coverts of wings white; back, breast, belly, and primaries, black; tail
cuneiform, and dusky; legs black. The bill of the supposed female?
resembles that of the male, head and neck mottled with cinereous brown
and dirty white; primaries dusky; speculum white; back, breast, and belly
clouded with different shades of ash-colour; tail dusky and cuneiform; legs
black. Size of a common Wild Duck.
"Sent from Connecticut, to Mrs. Blackburn. Possibly the great flocks of
pretty Pied Ducks, which whistled as they flew, or as they fed, seen by Mr.
Lawson in the western branch of Cape Fear inlet, were of this kind."
The Labrador-Duck is one of those birds, the disappearance of which is not
easily explained. As Mr. Dutcher truly said, "we can speculate as to the
cause of its disappearance, but we have no facts to warrant a conclusion."
Formerly Camptolaimus was of regular occurrence along the northern
Atlantic shores of North America, in winter south to New Jersey and New
York. It has often been sold on the markets of New York and Baltimore, and
nobody anticipated even fifty years ago that they might become extinct, but
they appear never to have been very numerous, at least we have no proof of
this. It is true that Professor Newton tells us that this duck used to breed on
rocky islets, and that "its fate is easily understood," since "man began
yearly to visit its breeding haunts, and, not content in plundering its nests,
mercilessly to shoot the birds." This, however, seems to be mere conjecture,
as we do not know for certain where the breeding haunts of this Duck have
been, and that anyone has ever visited them. All information known about
the breeding of this bird is that of Audubon, who says that his son was
shown empty nests on the top of bushes, which a clerk of the fishing
establishment told him were those of the Labrador Duck. This information
is certainly too uncertain to draw any conclusions from, but the breeding
on plate 36, but the young bird became too rufous, through the colour
type reproduction, and should be somewhat more mouse-gray. Though
first technically named by Gmelin in 1788, this duck was first described in
1785 by Pennant, in the Arctic Zoology II, p. 559, as follows:—
"Pied Duck. With the lower part of the bill black, the upper yellow, on the
summit of the head is an oblong black spot; forehead, cheeks, rest of the
head and neck, white; the lower part encircled with black; scapulars and
coverts of wings white; back, breast, belly, and primaries, black; tail
cuneiform, and dusky; legs black. The bill of the supposed female?
resembles that of the male, head and neck mottled with cinereous brown
and dirty white; primaries dusky; speculum white; back, breast, and belly
clouded with different shades of ash-colour; tail dusky and cuneiform; legs
black. Size of a common Wild Duck.
"Sent from Connecticut, to Mrs. Blackburn. Possibly the great flocks of
pretty Pied Ducks, which whistled as they flew, or as they fed, seen by Mr.
Lawson in the western branch of Cape Fear inlet, were of this kind."
The Labrador-Duck is one of those birds, the disappearance of which is not
easily explained. As Mr. Dutcher truly said, "we can speculate as to the
cause of its disappearance, but we have no facts to warrant a conclusion."
Formerly Camptolaimus was of regular occurrence along the northern
Atlantic shores of North America, in winter south to New Jersey and New
York. It has often been sold on the markets of New York and Baltimore, and
nobody anticipated even fifty years ago that they might become extinct, but
they appear never to have been very numerous, at least we have no proof of
this. It is true that Professor Newton tells us that this duck used to breed on
rocky islets, and that "its fate is easily understood," since "man began
yearly to visit its breeding haunts, and, not content in plundering its nests,
mercilessly to shoot the birds." This, however, seems to be mere conjecture,
as we do not know for certain where the breeding haunts of this Duck have
been, and that anyone has ever visited them. All information known about
the breeding of this bird is that of Audubon, who says that his son was
shown empty nests on the top of bushes, which a clerk of the fishing
establishment told him were those of the Labrador Duck. This information
is certainly too uncertain to draw any conclusions from, but the breeding
Page 109
places might just as well have been much further to the north, and probably
were.
The number of specimens extant is 48.
Amiens, Town Museum: 1 ♂ ad. (Auk. 1897, p. 87).
Berlin Museum: 1, bought from Salmin (Hartl. p. 23).
Paris: ♂ adult, presented 1810 by M. Hyde de Neuville.
London, British Museum: 2, a ♂ ad. and a ♀ ad., neither of them with exact locality or date.
Liverpool: 2 ♂ ad., 1 ♀, 1 ♂ jun.
Cambridge: 1 ♂
Dublin: 1 fine mounted ♂ (Dr. Scharff in litt.)
Tring: 1 ♂ ad., 1 ♂ jun. (See below.)
Brussels: 1 ♂ ad.
St. Petersburg: 1 ♂ ad., purchased from Salmin.
Heine Museum in Germany: 1 poor specimen.
Munich: The Museum possesses a male from the collection of the Duke of Leuchtenberg.
Dresden: 1 ♂ and two doubtful eggs—the latter doubtless wrong I should say.
Vienna: 1 ♂ ad., exchanged from Baron von Lederer in 1830. Locality New York; 1 ♀ ad.,
bought from Brandt in Hamburg in 1846, for 4 Gulden!
Leiden Museum: ♂ ♀, from the Prince of Wied.
American Museum, New York: 7, three of which formerly belonged to George N. Lawrence.
Long Island Historical Society, Brooklyn: 1 ♂ ad.
Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, N. York: 1 ♂ ad.
New York State Museum, Albany: ♂ ♀ ad.
Cory collection: ♂ ♀ ad.
University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont: 1 ♂ ad.
Philadelphia: 2 ♂ jun., 1 ♀
U.S. National Museum, Washington: 2 ♂, 1 ♀, 1 ♂ jun.
Collection of Mr. William Brewster: 1 ♂ jun., 1 ♀
Boston Society of Natural History: 1 ♂ jun.
Collection of Dalhousie College, Halifax: ♂ ♀
were.
The number of specimens extant is 48.
Amiens, Town Museum: 1 ♂ ad. (Auk. 1897, p. 87).
Berlin Museum: 1, bought from Salmin (Hartl. p. 23).
Paris: ♂ adult, presented 1810 by M. Hyde de Neuville.
London, British Museum: 2, a ♂ ad. and a ♀ ad., neither of them with exact locality or date.
Liverpool: 2 ♂ ad., 1 ♀, 1 ♂ jun.
Cambridge: 1 ♂
Dublin: 1 fine mounted ♂ (Dr. Scharff in litt.)
Tring: 1 ♂ ad., 1 ♂ jun. (See below.)
Brussels: 1 ♂ ad.
St. Petersburg: 1 ♂ ad., purchased from Salmin.
Heine Museum in Germany: 1 poor specimen.
Munich: The Museum possesses a male from the collection of the Duke of Leuchtenberg.
Dresden: 1 ♂ and two doubtful eggs—the latter doubtless wrong I should say.
Vienna: 1 ♂ ad., exchanged from Baron von Lederer in 1830. Locality New York; 1 ♀ ad.,
bought from Brandt in Hamburg in 1846, for 4 Gulden!
Leiden Museum: ♂ ♀, from the Prince of Wied.
American Museum, New York: 7, three of which formerly belonged to George N. Lawrence.
Long Island Historical Society, Brooklyn: 1 ♂ ad.
Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, N. York: 1 ♂ ad.
New York State Museum, Albany: ♂ ♀ ad.
Cory collection: ♂ ♀ ad.
University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont: 1 ♂ ad.
Philadelphia: 2 ♂ jun., 1 ♀
U.S. National Museum, Washington: 2 ♂, 1 ♀, 1 ♂ jun.
Collection of Mr. William Brewster: 1 ♂ jun., 1 ♀
Boston Society of Natural History: 1 ♂ jun.
Collection of Dalhousie College, Halifax: ♂ ♀
Page 110
This makes a total of 48 known specimens.
The last specimens killed were those shot in May, 1871, at Grand Manan
Island, the date of which is absolutely certain, and the specimen bought
from a Mr. J. G. Bell in 1879, for the Smithsonian Institution, which is said
to have been shot in 1875, but this date seems not quite certain (Cf. Auk,
1894, p. 9). That several other specimens were shot later than 1852 is
perfectly certain. As the specimen of 1875, or thereabouts, is a young male,
Mr. Lawrence's question about the old birds is certainly justified. As,
however, no Labrador Duck has been recorded later than 1871 or 1875 we
may suppose that it is now extinct.
My young male was bought in the Fulton Market, New York, about 1860,
and probably came from Long Island. It was mounted by John Bell, a bird-
stuffer, through whose hands several Labrador Ducks have gone, and is in
the finest possible condition. I bought this bird from the late Gordon
Plummer, shortly before his death. He died at his home in Brookline, Mass.,
in November, 1893. (Cf. Auk, 1891, p. 206.)
My adult male is the one of which the history is given in Auk, 1894, p. 176.
It is described there in detail and then added: "Shot in the bay of Laprairie
this spring (1862) by a habitant, and purchased by Mr. Thompson of this
city, who has kindly placed it at my disposal for examination." Mr. William
Dutcher of New York City bought this specimen from the widow of the Mr.
Thompson, mentioned in the above note as the original owner, and I
purchased it from Mr. William Dutcher, who informs me that "the Bay of
Laprairie" is simply a name given to a wide part of the River St. Lawrence,
just south of Montreal, Quebec. The name is found on good maps of
Quebec.
"BIZIURA LAUTOURI" FORBES.
Biziura lautouri Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 188 (1892—nomen nudum).
D R. FORBES, unfortunately, gives no description whatever of this
bird. It would be interesting to know something about it, and
The last specimens killed were those shot in May, 1871, at Grand Manan
Island, the date of which is absolutely certain, and the specimen bought
from a Mr. J. G. Bell in 1879, for the Smithsonian Institution, which is said
to have been shot in 1875, but this date seems not quite certain (Cf. Auk,
1894, p. 9). That several other specimens were shot later than 1852 is
perfectly certain. As the specimen of 1875, or thereabouts, is a young male,
Mr. Lawrence's question about the old birds is certainly justified. As,
however, no Labrador Duck has been recorded later than 1871 or 1875 we
may suppose that it is now extinct.
My young male was bought in the Fulton Market, New York, about 1860,
and probably came from Long Island. It was mounted by John Bell, a bird-
stuffer, through whose hands several Labrador Ducks have gone, and is in
the finest possible condition. I bought this bird from the late Gordon
Plummer, shortly before his death. He died at his home in Brookline, Mass.,
in November, 1893. (Cf. Auk, 1891, p. 206.)
My adult male is the one of which the history is given in Auk, 1894, p. 176.
It is described there in detail and then added: "Shot in the bay of Laprairie
this spring (1862) by a habitant, and purchased by Mr. Thompson of this
city, who has kindly placed it at my disposal for examination." Mr. William
Dutcher of New York City bought this specimen from the widow of the Mr.
Thompson, mentioned in the above note as the original owner, and I
purchased it from Mr. William Dutcher, who informs me that "the Bay of
Laprairie" is simply a name given to a wide part of the River St. Lawrence,
just south of Montreal, Quebec. The name is found on good maps of
Quebec.
"BIZIURA LAUTOURI" FORBES.
Biziura lautouri Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 188 (1892—nomen nudum).
D R. FORBES, unfortunately, gives no description whatever of this
bird. It would be interesting to know something about it, and
Page 111
especially if its powers of flight were impaired, as it seems to have been the
case in so many extinct birds.
ARDEA MEGACEPHALA MILNE-EDWARDS.
Butors Leguat, Relation du Voyage (1708).
Ardea megacephala Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX, 1874, p. 10.
L EGUAT'S description, here translated, is as follows:—"We had
Bitterns as big and as fat as capons. They are tamer and more easily
caught than the 'gelinotes.'" He also says, "The lizards often serve as
prey for the birds, especially for the Bitterns. When we shook them down
from the branches with a pole, these birds ran up and gobbled them down in
front of us, in spite of all we could do to prevent them; and even if we only
pretended to do so they came in the same manner and always followed us
about."
Milne-Edwards remarks, among other notes, that "This bird is not a true
Bittern, but its head is so large and its feet so short that it is easy to
understand that Leguat should have called it so."
The bony structure of the head is remarkable on account of its massive and
thick proportions; the skull itself is strongly enlarged posteriorly, and the
temporal fossae are bordered by very pronounced ridges, especially those
on the occipital region. The upper side of the skull is hardly convex, and the
interorbital region is large, but only slightly depressed along its middle line.
The bill is stout, almost straight, a good deal enlarged at its base and
rounded beneath. The nostrils are large and preceded by a large groove,
which extends very far towards the tip.
It is impossible to confound this skull with that of any Bittern, the latter
having the beak relatively slender and only barely exceeding the skull in
length. These also have the skull much constricted at the temporal region.
The fossil skull from Rodriguez therefore presents characters essentially
those of a Heron, but differs from all known species in its massive
appearance. In the Grey, Purple and Goliath Herons, as well as in the
case in so many extinct birds.
ARDEA MEGACEPHALA MILNE-EDWARDS.
Butors Leguat, Relation du Voyage (1708).
Ardea megacephala Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX, 1874, p. 10.
L EGUAT'S description, here translated, is as follows:—"We had
Bitterns as big and as fat as capons. They are tamer and more easily
caught than the 'gelinotes.'" He also says, "The lizards often serve as
prey for the birds, especially for the Bitterns. When we shook them down
from the branches with a pole, these birds ran up and gobbled them down in
front of us, in spite of all we could do to prevent them; and even if we only
pretended to do so they came in the same manner and always followed us
about."
Milne-Edwards remarks, among other notes, that "This bird is not a true
Bittern, but its head is so large and its feet so short that it is easy to
understand that Leguat should have called it so."
The bony structure of the head is remarkable on account of its massive and
thick proportions; the skull itself is strongly enlarged posteriorly, and the
temporal fossae are bordered by very pronounced ridges, especially those
on the occipital region. The upper side of the skull is hardly convex, and the
interorbital region is large, but only slightly depressed along its middle line.
The bill is stout, almost straight, a good deal enlarged at its base and
rounded beneath. The nostrils are large and preceded by a large groove,
which extends very far towards the tip.
It is impossible to confound this skull with that of any Bittern, the latter
having the beak relatively slender and only barely exceeding the skull in
length. These also have the skull much constricted at the temporal region.
The fossil skull from Rodriguez therefore presents characters essentially
those of a Heron, but differs from all known species in its massive
appearance. In the Grey, Purple and Goliath Herons, as well as in the
Page 112
Egrettes, the head is narrower, more elongated, the bill less conical and less
strong. In Ardea atricollis, now inhabiting Madagascar, the beak much
resembles that of our extinct species, but it is longer and less enlarged at the
base. The interorbital area is much wider, while on the other hand the hinder
portion of the skull is narrower and more elongated, which gives to the
skull a totally different aspect.
The feet relatively to the head are extremely short, and from this I conclude
that we know no species of Heron which can be compared to that of
Rodriguez. Nevertheless, the tarso-metatarsus presents all the characters of
Ardea, and is far removed from that of Botaurus. The tibia is big and short;
it surpasses in length the tarso-metatarsus by about a third, as is usual in the
Herons; but the femur on the contrary is strongly developed, being quite as
large as in the Ardea cinerea; which shows us that the body of this creature
was of large size, and that the reduction in size of the feet had only taken
place at their extremities.
The sternum is puny and small as compared with the creature's size. It is
clearly that of a bird not furnished with powerful wings, and is even much
less elongated than in the Bittern, but the coracoidal bones are very long
and slender. The wings also were short and feeble, the humerus being
hardly as big as in Butorides atricapilla. It is conspicuously slenderer and
shorter than in the Bittern. The main body of the bone is slightly curved on
the outside, and the lower articular condyle is large and flattened. I have not
been able to examine any bone of the "manus," but the metacarpal bone
shows exactly the same proportions for the wing as does the humerus, as it
also barely reaches the size of that of Butorides atricapilla. The
measurements are as follows:—
Skull.
Total length 154 mm.
Length of upper mandible 94 "
Width of upper mandible at base 22 "
Width of interorbital region 22 "
Space between the mastoid apophyses 40 "
Width of skull at level of postorbital apophyses 40 "
Length of lower mandible 147 "
strong. In Ardea atricollis, now inhabiting Madagascar, the beak much
resembles that of our extinct species, but it is longer and less enlarged at the
base. The interorbital area is much wider, while on the other hand the hinder
portion of the skull is narrower and more elongated, which gives to the
skull a totally different aspect.
The feet relatively to the head are extremely short, and from this I conclude
that we know no species of Heron which can be compared to that of
Rodriguez. Nevertheless, the tarso-metatarsus presents all the characters of
Ardea, and is far removed from that of Botaurus. The tibia is big and short;
it surpasses in length the tarso-metatarsus by about a third, as is usual in the
Herons; but the femur on the contrary is strongly developed, being quite as
large as in the Ardea cinerea; which shows us that the body of this creature
was of large size, and that the reduction in size of the feet had only taken
place at their extremities.
The sternum is puny and small as compared with the creature's size. It is
clearly that of a bird not furnished with powerful wings, and is even much
less elongated than in the Bittern, but the coracoidal bones are very long
and slender. The wings also were short and feeble, the humerus being
hardly as big as in Butorides atricapilla. It is conspicuously slenderer and
shorter than in the Bittern. The main body of the bone is slightly curved on
the outside, and the lower articular condyle is large and flattened. I have not
been able to examine any bone of the "manus," but the metacarpal bone
shows exactly the same proportions for the wing as does the humerus, as it
also barely reaches the size of that of Butorides atricapilla. The
measurements are as follows:—
Skull.
Total length 154 mm.
Length of upper mandible 94 "
Width of upper mandible at base 22 "
Width of interorbital region 22 "
Space between the mastoid apophyses 40 "
Width of skull at level of postorbital apophyses 40 "
Length of lower mandible 147 "
Page 113
Tarso-metatarsus.
Total length 95-162 mm.
Width at proximal extremity 14 "
Width at distal extremity 13.5-14 "
Width of shaft 6.2-7 "
Tibio-tarsus.
Total length 140-210 mm.
Width at distal extremity 12-13 "
Width at proximal extremity 13-14 "
Width of shaft 6-6.5 "
Femur.
Total length 90-92 mm.
Width of distal extremity 15-16 "
Width of proximal extremity 14-16 "
Width of shaft 6.2-7 "
Sternum.
Total length 64-88 mm.
Width in front 35-48 "
Width behind costal facets 26-36 "
Width at posterior border 27-35 "
Coracoidals.
Total length 59-67 mm.
Width at lower extremity 17-18 "
Humerus.
Total length 118-180 mm.
Width of proximal extremity 20-27 "
Width of distal extremity 16.5-24 "
Width of shaft 7-11 "
Metacarpals.
Total length 62-98 mm.
Width of proximal extremity 12-17 "
Width of distal extremity 7-11 " "
The anonymous author of the manuscript "Rélation de l'île Rodrigue" (see
Ann. Sci. Nat. (6) II p. 133 et seq. 1875) about the year 1830 mentions this
Total length 95-162 mm.
Width at proximal extremity 14 "
Width at distal extremity 13.5-14 "
Width of shaft 6.2-7 "
Tibio-tarsus.
Total length 140-210 mm.
Width at distal extremity 12-13 "
Width at proximal extremity 13-14 "
Width of shaft 6-6.5 "
Femur.
Total length 90-92 mm.
Width of distal extremity 15-16 "
Width of proximal extremity 14-16 "
Width of shaft 6.2-7 "
Sternum.
Total length 64-88 mm.
Width in front 35-48 "
Width behind costal facets 26-36 "
Width at posterior border 27-35 "
Coracoidals.
Total length 59-67 mm.
Width at lower extremity 17-18 "
Humerus.
Total length 118-180 mm.
Width of proximal extremity 20-27 "
Width of distal extremity 16.5-24 "
Width of shaft 7-11 "
Metacarpals.
Total length 62-98 mm.
Width of proximal extremity 12-17 "
Width of distal extremity 7-11 " "
The anonymous author of the manuscript "Rélation de l'île Rodrigue" (see
Ann. Sci. Nat. (6) II p. 133 et seq. 1875) about the year 1830 mentions this
Page 114
bird as follows:—"There are not a few Bitterns which are birds which only
fly a very little, and run uncommonly well when they are chased. They are
of the size of an Egret and something like them."
Habitat: Rodriguez Island.
2 Humeri, 2 Femora, 2 Tibiae, and 2 Metatarsi in the Tring Museum.
ARDEA DUBOISI NOM. NOV.
Butors ou Grands Gauziers Dubois, Les Voyages faits par le Sieur D.B. (1674) p. 169.
L 'ABBÉ DUBOIS is the only author who has, as far as I can ascertain,
told us that the Island of Réunion also had a large almost flightless
Heron as well as Mauritius and Rodriguez; and so feeling sure that it,
like most other birds of this island, was distinct I name it after him.
The translation of his original description is as follows:—"Bitterns or Great
Egrets, large as capons, but very fat and good. They have grey plumage,
each feather spotted with white, the neck and beak like a Heron, and the
feet green, made like the feet of Poullets d'Inde (Porphyrio, W.R.). This bird
lives on fish."
Habitat: Réunion or Bourbon.
ARDEA MAURITIANA (NEWT. & GAD.)
Butorides mauritianus Newton & Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. XIII, p. 289 (1893).
T HE bones on which this species is founded are a pair of ulnae, one
radius, four metatarsi, and one coracoid. The description is as
follows:—"The bones in question are all considerably shorter than the
corresponding bones of A. (Nycticorax) megacephala. The metatarsi agree
otherwise in every detail with those of the latter species; this relative
stoutness indicates that they belonged to a Night-Heron or Bittern like A.
fly a very little, and run uncommonly well when they are chased. They are
of the size of an Egret and something like them."
Habitat: Rodriguez Island.
2 Humeri, 2 Femora, 2 Tibiae, and 2 Metatarsi in the Tring Museum.
ARDEA DUBOISI NOM. NOV.
Butors ou Grands Gauziers Dubois, Les Voyages faits par le Sieur D.B. (1674) p. 169.
L 'ABBÉ DUBOIS is the only author who has, as far as I can ascertain,
told us that the Island of Réunion also had a large almost flightless
Heron as well as Mauritius and Rodriguez; and so feeling sure that it,
like most other birds of this island, was distinct I name it after him.
The translation of his original description is as follows:—"Bitterns or Great
Egrets, large as capons, but very fat and good. They have grey plumage,
each feather spotted with white, the neck and beak like a Heron, and the
feet green, made like the feet of Poullets d'Inde (Porphyrio, W.R.). This bird
lives on fish."
Habitat: Réunion or Bourbon.
ARDEA MAURITIANA (NEWT. & GAD.)
Butorides mauritianus Newton & Gadow, Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. XIII, p. 289 (1893).
T HE bones on which this species is founded are a pair of ulnae, one
radius, four metatarsi, and one coracoid. The description is as
follows:—"The bones in question are all considerably shorter than the
corresponding bones of A. (Nycticorax) megacephala. The metatarsi agree
otherwise in every detail with those of the latter species; this relative
stoutness indicates that they belonged to a Night-Heron or Bittern like A.
Page 115
megacephala. The two ulnae cannot, unfortunately, be compared with those
of A. megacephala; their length, 110 mm., compared with the length of the
humerus of A. megacephala, 119 mm., shows, however, likewise that they
were those of a considerably smaller bird. The single left coracoid agrees in
all the features of its dorsal or scapular half with A. megacephala, but its
ventral or sternal half differs considerably, first by the much more strongly
marked ridge of the linea intermuscularis on its ventral surface, secondly
by the almost straight instead of inwardly curved margin between the
processus lateralis and the lateral distal corner of the sternal articulation,
thirdly by a very low but very distinct and sharp ridge, which arises from
the median margin of the coracoid, a little above its median articulating
corner. This roughness or prominent ridge is entirely absent in A.
megacephala and in all other Herons which we have been able to examine,
but at least a slight indication of it occurs in an individually varying degree
in Nycticorax and Botaurus. That this coracoid bone belonged, however, to
an Ardeine bird is clearly indicated by its whole configuration, notably by
the shape and position of the precoracoid process, the various articulating
facets at the dorsal end, and the prominent lip on the visceral or internal
surface of the median portion of the sternal articulating facet."
The following are the measurements:—
Length of ulna 111-112 mm.
Length of metatarsus 81-87 "
Length of coracoid 48 "
Habitat: Mauritius.
Although megacephala and mauritiana have been placed in Ardea and
Butorides respectively, from the short, stout legs and general build, I am
inclined to think that all three of these Herons belong to the genus
Nycticorax.
PROSOBONIA BP.
of A. megacephala; their length, 110 mm., compared with the length of the
humerus of A. megacephala, 119 mm., shows, however, likewise that they
were those of a considerably smaller bird. The single left coracoid agrees in
all the features of its dorsal or scapular half with A. megacephala, but its
ventral or sternal half differs considerably, first by the much more strongly
marked ridge of the linea intermuscularis on its ventral surface, secondly
by the almost straight instead of inwardly curved margin between the
processus lateralis and the lateral distal corner of the sternal articulation,
thirdly by a very low but very distinct and sharp ridge, which arises from
the median margin of the coracoid, a little above its median articulating
corner. This roughness or prominent ridge is entirely absent in A.
megacephala and in all other Herons which we have been able to examine,
but at least a slight indication of it occurs in an individually varying degree
in Nycticorax and Botaurus. That this coracoid bone belonged, however, to
an Ardeine bird is clearly indicated by its whole configuration, notably by
the shape and position of the precoracoid process, the various articulating
facets at the dorsal end, and the prominent lip on the visceral or internal
surface of the median portion of the sternal articulating facet."
The following are the measurements:—
Length of ulna 111-112 mm.
Length of metatarsus 81-87 "
Length of coracoid 48 "
Habitat: Mauritius.
Although megacephala and mauritiana have been placed in Ardea and
Butorides respectively, from the short, stout legs and general build, I am
inclined to think that all three of these Herons belong to the genus
Nycticorax.
PROSOBONIA BP.
Page 116
T HIS genus is, in the Catalogue of Birds, placed in a section with
somewhat long tarsus, the latter being longer than the culmen,
containing in addition to Prosobonia the genera Tringites, and
Aechmorhynchus (see afterwards), and it differs from the latter by its long
hind toe, from the former by its square tail. The position of this singular
bird is, however, not quite certain. The late Henry Seebohm placed it in the
genus Phegornis, though the latter has no hind toe whatever, and it has even
—but doubtless wrongly—been suggested that it belonged to the Rallidae,
rather than to the Charadriidae. We know only one species. It is true that
Dr. Sharpe bestowed a new name on the figure of Ellis, which is said to
have been taken from an Eimeo-specimen, but it is hardly creditable that it
belongs to a different species. Latham appears to have had three specimens,
which were all three different from each other. Both Forster and Ellis, in
their unpublished drawings in the British Museum, as well as Latham,
evidently considered all three to belong to the same species, and it is not
advisable now to over-rule their verdict, given with the specimens before
them, merely on account of the different plumages, since we all know that
most waders, and especially brightly-coloured ones, differ considerably in
plumage, according to age and seasons. We are convinced that "P. ellisi" has
been a younger bird. Sharpe attaches importance to the different habitat, but
this is no argument in this instance, because Eimeo is, at the nearest point,
not more than seven and a half miles from Tahiti,[2] and it is quite against
all precedents among Charadriidae and beyond all plausibility that two
such closely situated islands have closely allied forms of a Wader.
PROSOBONIA LEUCOPTERA (GM.)
(Plate 35.)
White-winged Sandpiper Latham, Gen. Syn. III, pt. 1, p. 172, pl. LXXXII (1785—Otaheite
and Eimeo).
Tringa leucoptera Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 678 (1788—ex Latham!); Westermann, Bijdr.
Dierk. I, p. 51, pl. 15 (1854—Figure of the type).
Totanus leucopterus Vieillot, Nouv. Dict. d'Hist. Nat. (Ed. II) VI, p. 396 (1817).
Calidris leucopterus Cuvier, Règne Anim. I, p. 526 (1829).
somewhat long tarsus, the latter being longer than the culmen,
containing in addition to Prosobonia the genera Tringites, and
Aechmorhynchus (see afterwards), and it differs from the latter by its long
hind toe, from the former by its square tail. The position of this singular
bird is, however, not quite certain. The late Henry Seebohm placed it in the
genus Phegornis, though the latter has no hind toe whatever, and it has even
—but doubtless wrongly—been suggested that it belonged to the Rallidae,
rather than to the Charadriidae. We know only one species. It is true that
Dr. Sharpe bestowed a new name on the figure of Ellis, which is said to
have been taken from an Eimeo-specimen, but it is hardly creditable that it
belongs to a different species. Latham appears to have had three specimens,
which were all three different from each other. Both Forster and Ellis, in
their unpublished drawings in the British Museum, as well as Latham,
evidently considered all three to belong to the same species, and it is not
advisable now to over-rule their verdict, given with the specimens before
them, merely on account of the different plumages, since we all know that
most waders, and especially brightly-coloured ones, differ considerably in
plumage, according to age and seasons. We are convinced that "P. ellisi" has
been a younger bird. Sharpe attaches importance to the different habitat, but
this is no argument in this instance, because Eimeo is, at the nearest point,
not more than seven and a half miles from Tahiti,[2] and it is quite against
all precedents among Charadriidae and beyond all plausibility that two
such closely situated islands have closely allied forms of a Wader.
PROSOBONIA LEUCOPTERA (GM.)
(Plate 35.)
White-winged Sandpiper Latham, Gen. Syn. III, pt. 1, p. 172, pl. LXXXII (1785—Otaheite
and Eimeo).
Tringa leucoptera Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 678 (1788—ex Latham!); Westermann, Bijdr.
Dierk. I, p. 51, pl. 15 (1854—Figure of the type).
Totanus leucopterus Vieillot, Nouv. Dict. d'Hist. Nat. (Ed. II) VI, p. 396 (1817).
Calidris leucopterus Cuvier, Règne Anim. I, p. 526 (1829).
Page 117
Tringa pyrrhetraea Lichtenstein, Forster's descr. anim. p. 174 (1844—Otaheiti).
Prosobonia leucoptera Bonaparte, Compt. Rend. XXXI, p. 562 (1850); Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit.
Mus. XXIV, p. 525 (1896).
Tringoides leucopterus Gray, Handl. B. III, p. 46 (1871).
Phegornis leucopterus Seebohm, Geogr. Distrib. Charad. p. 452 pl. 18 (1888).
Prosobonia ellisi Sharpe, Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 86 (1906—"Eimeo").
D R. SHARPE'S description, made from the type in the Leyden
Museum, is as follows: "Adult. General colour of upper surface
blackish brown; the lower back and rump ferruginous; centre tail-
feathers blackish, the rest rufous, banded with black, less distinctly on the
two next the middle pair; wing-coverts blackish, with a white spot near the
carpal bend of the wing, formed by some of the lesser coverts; crown of
head blackish, the hind-neck browner, mixed with black; sides of face
brown, the lores and ear-coverts slightly more reddish, behind the eye a
little white spot; cheeks and under surface of body ferruginous red, the
throat buffy white. Length 6.7 inches, culmen 0.9, wing 4.45, tail 2.15,
tarsus 1.3 (Mus. Lugd.)"
We know nothing of this bird, but the one specimen in the Leyden Museum,
which is the type, or at least one of the types. As no other specimens have
been obtained for nearly a century and a quarter, there is every reason to
fear that this bird is extinct. My plate has been made up by Mr. Lodge from
the unpublished drawings of Ellis and Forster in the British Museum.
Habitat: Tahiti, and the adjacent islet of Eimeo.
AECHMORHYNCHUS COUES.
T HIS genus appears to be closely allied to Prosobonia, but has a much
shorter hind toe. Its colouration is very different, and quite that of a
Sandpiper, while the pattern of Prosobonia is most singular. Seebohm
placed Aechmorhynchus, together with Prosobonia, in the genus Phegornis.
We know only one species.
Prosobonia leucoptera Bonaparte, Compt. Rend. XXXI, p. 562 (1850); Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit.
Mus. XXIV, p. 525 (1896).
Tringoides leucopterus Gray, Handl. B. III, p. 46 (1871).
Phegornis leucopterus Seebohm, Geogr. Distrib. Charad. p. 452 pl. 18 (1888).
Prosobonia ellisi Sharpe, Bull. B.O.C. XVI, p. 86 (1906—"Eimeo").
D R. SHARPE'S description, made from the type in the Leyden
Museum, is as follows: "Adult. General colour of upper surface
blackish brown; the lower back and rump ferruginous; centre tail-
feathers blackish, the rest rufous, banded with black, less distinctly on the
two next the middle pair; wing-coverts blackish, with a white spot near the
carpal bend of the wing, formed by some of the lesser coverts; crown of
head blackish, the hind-neck browner, mixed with black; sides of face
brown, the lores and ear-coverts slightly more reddish, behind the eye a
little white spot; cheeks and under surface of body ferruginous red, the
throat buffy white. Length 6.7 inches, culmen 0.9, wing 4.45, tail 2.15,
tarsus 1.3 (Mus. Lugd.)"
We know nothing of this bird, but the one specimen in the Leyden Museum,
which is the type, or at least one of the types. As no other specimens have
been obtained for nearly a century and a quarter, there is every reason to
fear that this bird is extinct. My plate has been made up by Mr. Lodge from
the unpublished drawings of Ellis and Forster in the British Museum.
Habitat: Tahiti, and the adjacent islet of Eimeo.
AECHMORHYNCHUS COUES.
T HIS genus appears to be closely allied to Prosobonia, but has a much
shorter hind toe. Its colouration is very different, and quite that of a
Sandpiper, while the pattern of Prosobonia is most singular. Seebohm
placed Aechmorhynchus, together with Prosobonia, in the genus Phegornis.
We know only one species.
Page 118
AECHMORHYNCHUS CANCELLATA (GM.)
(Plate 35.)
Barred Phalarope Latham, Gen. Syn. III. pt. 1, p. 274 (1785—Christmas Island in the Pacific
Ocean).
Tringa cancellata Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 675 (1788—ex Latham).
Tringa parvirostris Peale, U.S. Expl. Exp., Birds p. 235, pl. LXVI, 2 (1848—Paumotu)
Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exp. p. 321, pl. 38, 2 (1858—Paumotu).
Totanus (Tryngites?) cancellatus Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Islands Pac. Ocean, p. 51 (1859).
Phegornis cancellatus Seebohm, Geogr. Distrib. Charadr. p. 451, pl. 17 (1888).
Aechmorhynchus cancellatus Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXIV, p. 525 (1896).
"
B ILL short, straight, and slender; wings long, first, second, and third
quills very nearly equal; tertiaries but very little longer than the
secondaries; tail rather long, wide, rounded; legs and toes long, the
former robust; tibia feathered for more than half its length. A distinct stripe
over and behind the eye ashy-white. Entire upper parts umber-brown,
unspotted on the top of the head, but on the other upper parts edged and
tipped with ashy-white and reddish fulvous. Tail-feathers umber-brown,
with irregular and imperfect transverse narrow bands of ashy and pale
reddish-white, and tipped with the same. Underparts white, with a tinge of
ashy; throat and middle of the abdomen unspotted; breast, sides, and under
coverts of the tail spotted, and with irregular transverse bars of brown, the
latter most apparent on the sides, flanks, and under tail-coverts. Under
wing-coverts ashy-white, irregularly spotted with brown. Bill greenish,
darker at the tip; legs dark green. Sexes very nearly alike, female slightly
paler. (Cassin.)"
I have here given the synonymy of this bird, as it has now been generally
accepted by Seebohm, Sharpe, and others. An actual comparison of the
types would, however, be very desirable, but, unfortunately, we do not
know where the type of Latham is, and if it still exists. Christmas Island lies
much to the north of the Paumotu group! As no specimens have been
obtained since the U.S. Exploring Expedition, we may safely suppose that
the species has ceased to exist for some reason.
Habitat: "Christmas Island in the Pacific Ocean and Paumotu Islands."
(Plate 35.)
Barred Phalarope Latham, Gen. Syn. III. pt. 1, p. 274 (1785—Christmas Island in the Pacific
Ocean).
Tringa cancellata Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 675 (1788—ex Latham).
Tringa parvirostris Peale, U.S. Expl. Exp., Birds p. 235, pl. LXVI, 2 (1848—Paumotu)
Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exp. p. 321, pl. 38, 2 (1858—Paumotu).
Totanus (Tryngites?) cancellatus Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Islands Pac. Ocean, p. 51 (1859).
Phegornis cancellatus Seebohm, Geogr. Distrib. Charadr. p. 451, pl. 17 (1888).
Aechmorhynchus cancellatus Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXIV, p. 525 (1896).
"
B ILL short, straight, and slender; wings long, first, second, and third
quills very nearly equal; tertiaries but very little longer than the
secondaries; tail rather long, wide, rounded; legs and toes long, the
former robust; tibia feathered for more than half its length. A distinct stripe
over and behind the eye ashy-white. Entire upper parts umber-brown,
unspotted on the top of the head, but on the other upper parts edged and
tipped with ashy-white and reddish fulvous. Tail-feathers umber-brown,
with irregular and imperfect transverse narrow bands of ashy and pale
reddish-white, and tipped with the same. Underparts white, with a tinge of
ashy; throat and middle of the abdomen unspotted; breast, sides, and under
coverts of the tail spotted, and with irregular transverse bars of brown, the
latter most apparent on the sides, flanks, and under tail-coverts. Under
wing-coverts ashy-white, irregularly spotted with brown. Bill greenish,
darker at the tip; legs dark green. Sexes very nearly alike, female slightly
paler. (Cassin.)"
I have here given the synonymy of this bird, as it has now been generally
accepted by Seebohm, Sharpe, and others. An actual comparison of the
types would, however, be very desirable, but, unfortunately, we do not
know where the type of Latham is, and if it still exists. Christmas Island lies
much to the north of the Paumotu group! As no specimens have been
obtained since the U.S. Exploring Expedition, we may safely suppose that
the species has ceased to exist for some reason.
Habitat: "Christmas Island in the Pacific Ocean and Paumotu Islands."
Page 119
GALLINAGO CHATHAMICA FORBES.
Gallinago chathamica Forbes, Ibis 1893, p. 545.
E VIDENTLY a species allied to G. pusilla, but very much larger. Bill
three inches long.
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
Several skulls and a few bones in the Tring Museum. This is a snipe only a
little larger than the existing Gallinago aucklandica.
HYPOTAENIDIA (?) PACIFICUS (GM.)
(Plate 26.)
Pacific rail Latham, Gen. Syn. III, pt. I, p. 255 (1785).
Rallus pacificus Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 717 (1788).
F ORSTER'S description is as follows, in translation: "Black with white
spots or bars; abdomen, throat, and eyebrow white; hind neck
ferruginous; breast grey; bill blood-red; iris red. Bill straight,
compressed, narrowed at the top, thicker at the base, and blood-red. The
mandibles subequal, pointed; the upper slightly curved, with the tip pale
fuscous; gape medium. Nostrils almost at the base of bill, linear. Eyes
placed above the gape of the mouth. Iris blood-red. Feet four-toed, split,
built for running, flesh coloured. Femora semi-bare, slender, of medium
length.
"Tibiae slightly compressed, shorter than the femora. Four toes, slender, of
which three point forward (are front toes). The middle one almost as long as
the Tibia, the side ones of equal length shorter, the back one short, raised
from the ground. Nails short, small, slightly incurved, pointed, and light
coloured. Head oval, slightly depressed, fuscous. A superciliary line from
bill to occiput whitish. Throat white. Hindneck ferruginous. Neck very
short. Back and rump black, sparsely dotted with minute white dots. Breast
bluish grey. Abdomen, crissum, and loins white. Wings short, wholly black,
Gallinago chathamica Forbes, Ibis 1893, p. 545.
E VIDENTLY a species allied to G. pusilla, but very much larger. Bill
three inches long.
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
Several skulls and a few bones in the Tring Museum. This is a snipe only a
little larger than the existing Gallinago aucklandica.
HYPOTAENIDIA (?) PACIFICUS (GM.)
(Plate 26.)
Pacific rail Latham, Gen. Syn. III, pt. I, p. 255 (1785).
Rallus pacificus Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 717 (1788).
F ORSTER'S description is as follows, in translation: "Black with white
spots or bars; abdomen, throat, and eyebrow white; hind neck
ferruginous; breast grey; bill blood-red; iris red. Bill straight,
compressed, narrowed at the top, thicker at the base, and blood-red. The
mandibles subequal, pointed; the upper slightly curved, with the tip pale
fuscous; gape medium. Nostrils almost at the base of bill, linear. Eyes
placed above the gape of the mouth. Iris blood-red. Feet four-toed, split,
built for running, flesh coloured. Femora semi-bare, slender, of medium
length.
"Tibiae slightly compressed, shorter than the femora. Four toes, slender, of
which three point forward (are front toes). The middle one almost as long as
the Tibia, the side ones of equal length shorter, the back one short, raised
from the ground. Nails short, small, slightly incurved, pointed, and light
coloured. Head oval, slightly depressed, fuscous. A superciliary line from
bill to occiput whitish. Throat white. Hindneck ferruginous. Neck very
short. Back and rump black, sparsely dotted with minute white dots. Breast
bluish grey. Abdomen, crissum, and loins white. Wings short, wholly black,
Page 120
variegated with broken white bands. Remiges short. Rectrices extremely
short, black spotted with white, hardly to be distinguished from the coverts.
Total length from bill to tail 9 inches.
Total length to middle toe 12¾ "
Bill 11⁄10 "
Tibiae 2 "
Middle toe 13⁄10 " "
Mr. Keulemans' plate was done from Forster's unpublished drawing in the
British Museum, and no specimen is in existence. The legs should,
however, be less bright red, more flesh-colour.
Habitat: Tahiti, but evidently long extinct.
This bird, according to Forster, was called "Oomnaa" or "Eboonaa," on
Otaheite, and the neighbouring islands.
NESOLIMNAS ANDREWS.
D IFFERS from Cabalus by the relatively shorter bill; by having the
whole culmen convex with the tip sharply decurved, by having a
close instead of a loose plumage, and a much less reduced sternum,
with a well-developed instead of almost obsolete keel. Type of genus
Nesolimnas dieffenbachi (Gray).
NESOLIMNAS DIEFFENBACHII GRAY.
(Plate 27.)
Rallus Dieffenbachii Gray, Dieffenb., Trav. N.Z. II App. p. 197 (1843).
Ocydromus dieffenbachi Gray, Voy. Ereb. and Terr., Birds p. 14, pl. 15 (1846).
Hypotaenidia dieffenbachi Bonaparte, C. R. XLIII, p. 599 (1856).
short, black spotted with white, hardly to be distinguished from the coverts.
Total length from bill to tail 9 inches.
Total length to middle toe 12¾ "
Bill 11⁄10 "
Tibiae 2 "
Middle toe 13⁄10 " "
Mr. Keulemans' plate was done from Forster's unpublished drawing in the
British Museum, and no specimen is in existence. The legs should,
however, be less bright red, more flesh-colour.
Habitat: Tahiti, but evidently long extinct.
This bird, according to Forster, was called "Oomnaa" or "Eboonaa," on
Otaheite, and the neighbouring islands.
NESOLIMNAS ANDREWS.
D IFFERS from Cabalus by the relatively shorter bill; by having the
whole culmen convex with the tip sharply decurved, by having a
close instead of a loose plumage, and a much less reduced sternum,
with a well-developed instead of almost obsolete keel. Type of genus
Nesolimnas dieffenbachi (Gray).
NESOLIMNAS DIEFFENBACHII GRAY.
(Plate 27.)
Rallus Dieffenbachii Gray, Dieffenb., Trav. N.Z. II App. p. 197 (1843).
Ocydromus dieffenbachi Gray, Voy. Ereb. and Terr., Birds p. 14, pl. 15 (1846).
Hypotaenidia dieffenbachi Bonaparte, C. R. XLIII, p. 599 (1856).
Page 121
Cabalus dieffenbachi Sharpe, Voy. Ereb. and Terr., Birds p. 29, pl. 15 (1875), id., Cat. B.
Brit. Mus. XXIII p. 47 (1894).
Nesolimnas dieffenbachi Andrews, Novit. Zool. III. p. 266, pl. X, figs 3-15 (1896).
A DULT: "General colour above, brown, banded on the mantle and
scapulars, and spotted on the upper back with ochreous buff, these
buff markings being margined with black, which takes the form of
broad bars on the mantle; lower back and rump uniform brown; upper tail
coverts brown, barred across with light rufous and black; lesser wing
coverts like the back; median and greater coverts, as well as the primary
coverts and quills, light chestnut, barred with black, the inner secondaries
spotted and barred with ochre and black, like the back; tail feathers brown,
mottled with chestnut near the base; crown of the head and nape uniform
brown, followed by an indistinct patch of chestnut on the hindneck; lores
dull rufous, surmounted by a broad line of bluish grey, extending from the
base of the nostrils to the sides of the nape; rest of the sides of the face
bluish grey, extending on to the lower throat; this grey area of the face
separated from the grey eyebrow by a broad band of dark chestnut, which
extends from the lores through the eye along the upper part of the ear-
coverts; chin and upper throat white; lower throat black, barred across with
white; fore neck and chest ochreous buff, banded rather narrowly with
black, this pattern of colouration extending up the sides of the neck to the
chestnut on the ear coverts; lower breast and abdomen black, banded with
white, the light bars on the flanks and vent feathers being tinged with
ochreous; under-tail coverts broadly banded with black and ochre; under-
wing coverts and axillaries blackish, barred with white; under surface of
quills chestnut, with broad black bars.
Wing 4.8 inches, culmen 1.35, tail 2.7" (Sharpe).
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
The type and only known specimen is that in the British Museum.
CABALUS HUTTON.
Brit. Mus. XXIII p. 47 (1894).
Nesolimnas dieffenbachi Andrews, Novit. Zool. III. p. 266, pl. X, figs 3-15 (1896).
A DULT: "General colour above, brown, banded on the mantle and
scapulars, and spotted on the upper back with ochreous buff, these
buff markings being margined with black, which takes the form of
broad bars on the mantle; lower back and rump uniform brown; upper tail
coverts brown, barred across with light rufous and black; lesser wing
coverts like the back; median and greater coverts, as well as the primary
coverts and quills, light chestnut, barred with black, the inner secondaries
spotted and barred with ochre and black, like the back; tail feathers brown,
mottled with chestnut near the base; crown of the head and nape uniform
brown, followed by an indistinct patch of chestnut on the hindneck; lores
dull rufous, surmounted by a broad line of bluish grey, extending from the
base of the nostrils to the sides of the nape; rest of the sides of the face
bluish grey, extending on to the lower throat; this grey area of the face
separated from the grey eyebrow by a broad band of dark chestnut, which
extends from the lores through the eye along the upper part of the ear-
coverts; chin and upper throat white; lower throat black, barred across with
white; fore neck and chest ochreous buff, banded rather narrowly with
black, this pattern of colouration extending up the sides of the neck to the
chestnut on the ear coverts; lower breast and abdomen black, banded with
white, the light bars on the flanks and vent feathers being tinged with
ochreous; under-tail coverts broadly banded with black and ochre; under-
wing coverts and axillaries blackish, barred with white; under surface of
quills chestnut, with broad black bars.
Wing 4.8 inches, culmen 1.35, tail 2.7" (Sharpe).
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
The type and only known specimen is that in the British Museum.
CABALUS HUTTON.
Page 122
Cabalus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. Vol. VI p. 108, pl. XX (1874—Type and unique species
Cabalus modestus).
C APTAIN HUTTON characterized his new genus as follows: "Bill
longer than the head, moderately slender and slightly curved,
compressed in the middle and slightly expanding towards the tip;
nostrils placed in a membranous groove which extends beyond the middle
of the bill, openings exposed, oval, near the middle of the groove. Wings
very short, rounded; quills soft, the outer webs as soft as the inner, fourth
and fifth the longest, first nearly as long as the second; a short, compressed
claw at the end of the thumb. Tail very short and soft, hidden by the coverts.
Tarsi moderate, shorter than the middle toe, flattened in front, and covered
with transverse scales; toes long and slender, inner nearly as long as the
outer, hind toe short, very slender, and placed on the inner side of the tarsus;
claws short, compressed, blunt.
"The bird is incapable of flight, and the stomach of the specimen, dissected
by Dr. Knox, contained only the legs and elytra of beetles."
Captain Hutton also adds, l.c., a valuable description of the skeleton.
One species known.
CABALUS MODESTUS (HUTTON).
(Plate 28.)
Rallus modestus Hutton, Ibis 1872, p. 247. (Mangare, Chatham Islands.)
Cabalus modestus Hutton, Trans. New Zeal. Inst. VI p. 108. (The genus Cabalus
established.)
Rallus dieffenbachii juv. Buller, B. New Zealand, Ed. I pp. 179, 180; Ed. II p. 121 (1888).
Cabalus dieffenbachii (part., juv.!) Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXIII p. 47 (1894); corr. p.
331.
Cabalus modestus Forbes, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club. No. IV. p. XX (Dec. 1892); Salvadori, op.
cit. V p. XXIII (Jan., 1893); Forbes, Ibis 1893, pp. 532, 544, pl. XIV, fig. 4, egg;
Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXIII p. 331 (1893); Buller, Suppl. B.N.Z. I p. 45, pl. III
(1905).
Cabalus modestus).
C APTAIN HUTTON characterized his new genus as follows: "Bill
longer than the head, moderately slender and slightly curved,
compressed in the middle and slightly expanding towards the tip;
nostrils placed in a membranous groove which extends beyond the middle
of the bill, openings exposed, oval, near the middle of the groove. Wings
very short, rounded; quills soft, the outer webs as soft as the inner, fourth
and fifth the longest, first nearly as long as the second; a short, compressed
claw at the end of the thumb. Tail very short and soft, hidden by the coverts.
Tarsi moderate, shorter than the middle toe, flattened in front, and covered
with transverse scales; toes long and slender, inner nearly as long as the
outer, hind toe short, very slender, and placed on the inner side of the tarsus;
claws short, compressed, blunt.
"The bird is incapable of flight, and the stomach of the specimen, dissected
by Dr. Knox, contained only the legs and elytra of beetles."
Captain Hutton also adds, l.c., a valuable description of the skeleton.
One species known.
CABALUS MODESTUS (HUTTON).
(Plate 28.)
Rallus modestus Hutton, Ibis 1872, p. 247. (Mangare, Chatham Islands.)
Cabalus modestus Hutton, Trans. New Zeal. Inst. VI p. 108. (The genus Cabalus
established.)
Rallus dieffenbachii juv. Buller, B. New Zealand, Ed. I pp. 179, 180; Ed. II p. 121 (1888).
Cabalus dieffenbachii (part., juv.!) Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXIII p. 47 (1894); corr. p.
331.
Cabalus modestus Forbes, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club. No. IV. p. XX (Dec. 1892); Salvadori, op.
cit. V p. XXIII (Jan., 1893); Forbes, Ibis 1893, pp. 532, 544, pl. XIV, fig. 4, egg;
Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXIII p. 331 (1893); Buller, Suppl. B.N.Z. I p. 45, pl. III
(1905).
Page 123
Ocydromus pygmaeus Forbes, Nature XLVI, p. 252 (1892—nomen nudum! cf. Ibis 1893, p.
544).
C APTAIN HUTTON (Ibis 1872, p. 247) described this interesting
species as follows: "Olivaceous brown, bases of the feathers
plumbeous; feathers of the breast slightly tipped with pale fulvous,
those of the abdomen and flanks with two narrow bars of the same colour;
throat dark grey, each feather slightly tipped with brown. Quills soft brown,
the first three faintly barred with reddish fulvous, fourth and fifth the
longest. Tail very soft and short, brown. Irides light brown, bill and legs
light brown. Length 8.75 inches, wing 3.15, bill from gape 1.4, tarsus 1,
middle toe and claw 1.4.
Young. Uniform brownish black.
A single specimen and young from Mangare; also a specimen in spirits."
The author knew perfectly well what he was doing when he described this
excellent species. Sir Walter Buller afterwards (B. New Zealand, Ed. I, pp.
179, 180) declared "after carefully comparing it with the type of Rallus
dieffenbachii, and submitting the matter to the judgment of other competent
ornithologists, I have no hesitation in considering it the same species, in an
immature state of plumage." (Sic!) Unfortunately, Dr. Sharpe, in the
Catalogue of Birds XXIII, repeated Buller's error, and, on Plate VI, figured
Cabalus modestus under the name of Cabalus dieffenbachii, though the
latter is not congeneric with C. modestus, and must be called Nesolimnas
dieffenbachii, while the third form included in Cabalus by Dr. Sharpe, viz.
sylvestris of Lord Howe's Island, must also be separated genetically from
Cabalus.
Formerly Cabalus modestus inhabited Great Chatham Island, as Dr. Forbes
proved by bones found by himself at Warekauri, but when the species was
discovered it existed there no more, though being plentiful on the little
outlying island of Mangare. Unfortunately even there it is evidently extinct
now, this island being overrun with cats and rats, besides which, according
to Buller, the original vegetation has been ruthlessly burnt down for the
purpose of sowing grass-seed, as even this bleak little island has been
claimed by an enterprising sheep-farmer. Fortunately a good many
specimens have been secured by the late W. Hawkins. I have fifteen in my
544).
C APTAIN HUTTON (Ibis 1872, p. 247) described this interesting
species as follows: "Olivaceous brown, bases of the feathers
plumbeous; feathers of the breast slightly tipped with pale fulvous,
those of the abdomen and flanks with two narrow bars of the same colour;
throat dark grey, each feather slightly tipped with brown. Quills soft brown,
the first three faintly barred with reddish fulvous, fourth and fifth the
longest. Tail very soft and short, brown. Irides light brown, bill and legs
light brown. Length 8.75 inches, wing 3.15, bill from gape 1.4, tarsus 1,
middle toe and claw 1.4.
Young. Uniform brownish black.
A single specimen and young from Mangare; also a specimen in spirits."
The author knew perfectly well what he was doing when he described this
excellent species. Sir Walter Buller afterwards (B. New Zealand, Ed. I, pp.
179, 180) declared "after carefully comparing it with the type of Rallus
dieffenbachii, and submitting the matter to the judgment of other competent
ornithologists, I have no hesitation in considering it the same species, in an
immature state of plumage." (Sic!) Unfortunately, Dr. Sharpe, in the
Catalogue of Birds XXIII, repeated Buller's error, and, on Plate VI, figured
Cabalus modestus under the name of Cabalus dieffenbachii, though the
latter is not congeneric with C. modestus, and must be called Nesolimnas
dieffenbachii, while the third form included in Cabalus by Dr. Sharpe, viz.
sylvestris of Lord Howe's Island, must also be separated genetically from
Cabalus.
Formerly Cabalus modestus inhabited Great Chatham Island, as Dr. Forbes
proved by bones found by himself at Warekauri, but when the species was
discovered it existed there no more, though being plentiful on the little
outlying island of Mangare. Unfortunately even there it is evidently extinct
now, this island being overrun with cats and rats, besides which, according
to Buller, the original vegetation has been ruthlessly burnt down for the
purpose of sowing grass-seed, as even this bleak little island has been
claimed by an enterprising sheep-farmer. Fortunately a good many
specimens have been secured by the late W. Hawkins. I have fifteen in my
Page 124
museum, and there are specimens in the British Museum, in Liverpool, and
one in Cambridge. Henry Palmer failed to get specimens when he visited
Mangare.
I have also the egg described and figured in the Ibis by Dr. Forbes. It
measures 40 by 21.4 mm., and is creamy white, with faint pale reddish and
purplish roundish spots.
Habitat: Chatham Islands, east of New Zealand.
OCYDROMUS MINOR HAMILTON.
Ocydromus sp. Hamilton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 103 (1893).
Ocydromus minor Hamilton (nec. Forbes) l.c.
T HIS species is nearest allied to sylvestris Scl., which has quite
erroneously been placed in the genus Cabalus by Dr. Sharpe;
sylvestris will have to form the type of a new genus, but until the skull
of minor is known I prefer to leave the latter temporarily in Ocydromus.
The present species is known from two pelves, seven femora, six tibiae, and
five metatarsi, as well as the front portion of a sternum. The measurements
all show that minor was a slightly larger form than sylvestris, but owing to
having a much shorter tibio-tarsus it must have been a much stumpier bird.
Minor. Sylvestris.
Pelvis extreme length 65 mm. 62.5 mm.
Pelvis extreme breadth 28 " 25 "
Femur length 64 " 63 "
Tibio-tarsus length 93 " 98 "
Tarso-metatarsus length 53 " 51 "
Sternum greatest width 24.5 " 24.5 "
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand. Extinct.
one in Cambridge. Henry Palmer failed to get specimens when he visited
Mangare.
I have also the egg described and figured in the Ibis by Dr. Forbes. It
measures 40 by 21.4 mm., and is creamy white, with faint pale reddish and
purplish roundish spots.
Habitat: Chatham Islands, east of New Zealand.
OCYDROMUS MINOR HAMILTON.
Ocydromus sp. Hamilton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 103 (1893).
Ocydromus minor Hamilton (nec. Forbes) l.c.
T HIS species is nearest allied to sylvestris Scl., which has quite
erroneously been placed in the genus Cabalus by Dr. Sharpe;
sylvestris will have to form the type of a new genus, but until the skull
of minor is known I prefer to leave the latter temporarily in Ocydromus.
The present species is known from two pelves, seven femora, six tibiae, and
five metatarsi, as well as the front portion of a sternum. The measurements
all show that minor was a slightly larger form than sylvestris, but owing to
having a much shorter tibio-tarsus it must have been a much stumpier bird.
Minor. Sylvestris.
Pelvis extreme length 65 mm. 62.5 mm.
Pelvis extreme breadth 28 " 25 "
Femur length 64 " 63 "
Tibio-tarsus length 93 " 98 "
Tarso-metatarsus length 53 " 51 "
Sternum greatest width 24.5 " 24.5 "
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand. Extinct.
Page 125
OCYDROMUS INSIGNIS FORBES.
Ocydromus insignis Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 188 (1892—insufficient description).
T HIS bird "far exceeded in size any of the existing species of
Ocydromus." That is all that is published about this bird.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
APHANAPTERYX FRAUENFELD.
B ILL produced, not cut short, rather curved. The nostrils are exposed
and situated at the base of the bill. Halluces of the naked fowl-like
legs of moderate length. Front of legs apparently scutellated. Wings
abortive, no rectrices apparent.
APHANAPTERYX BONASIA SELYS.
(Plate 29.)
A Hen Sir Thomas Herbert, A relation of some years' Travaile (1626).
Velt-hoenders Reyer Cornelisz, Van der Hagen's voyage (1646).
Poules rouges au bec de Becasse Cauche, Rélations véritables et curieuses de l'Isle de
Madagascar (1651).
Apterornis bonasia Edm. de Sélys-Longchamps, Revue Zoologique, p. 292 (1848).
Didus herberti Schlegel, Vers. Med. Ak. Wetensch., II, p. 256 (1854).
Didus broecki Schlegel, l.c.
Aphanapteryx imperialis Frauenfeld, Neu aufgef. Abbild. Dronte, p. 6 (1868).
Aphanapteryx broeckii Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5), X, pp. 325-346, pls. 15-18 (1868).
Pezophaps broeckii Schlegel, Mus. Pays-Bas, Struthiones, p. 4 (1873).
HERE give a translation of Frauenfeld's original diagnosis: "Of the size of a
fowl, of a uniform brown red all over. Bill and legs dark. Iris yellowish.
Ocydromus insignis Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 188 (1892—insufficient description).
T HIS bird "far exceeded in size any of the existing species of
Ocydromus." That is all that is published about this bird.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
APHANAPTERYX FRAUENFELD.
B ILL produced, not cut short, rather curved. The nostrils are exposed
and situated at the base of the bill. Halluces of the naked fowl-like
legs of moderate length. Front of legs apparently scutellated. Wings
abortive, no rectrices apparent.
APHANAPTERYX BONASIA SELYS.
(Plate 29.)
A Hen Sir Thomas Herbert, A relation of some years' Travaile (1626).
Velt-hoenders Reyer Cornelisz, Van der Hagen's voyage (1646).
Poules rouges au bec de Becasse Cauche, Rélations véritables et curieuses de l'Isle de
Madagascar (1651).
Apterornis bonasia Edm. de Sélys-Longchamps, Revue Zoologique, p. 292 (1848).
Didus herberti Schlegel, Vers. Med. Ak. Wetensch., II, p. 256 (1854).
Didus broecki Schlegel, l.c.
Aphanapteryx imperialis Frauenfeld, Neu aufgef. Abbild. Dronte, p. 6 (1868).
Aphanapteryx broeckii Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5), X, pp. 325-346, pls. 15-18 (1868).
Pezophaps broeckii Schlegel, Mus. Pays-Bas, Struthiones, p. 4 (1873).
HERE give a translation of Frauenfeld's original diagnosis: "Of the size of a
fowl, of a uniform brown red all over. Bill and legs dark. Iris yellowish.
Page 126
I Feathers decomposed, as in the Apteryx, somewhat lengthened on the
nape."
This description was made by Frauenfeld from a drawing by G. Hoefnagels,
in the Imperial Library, Vienna, executed about the year 1610, and, together
with that of the Dodo, apparently drawn from life in the Imperial Menagerie
at Ebersdorf. This drawing proves Van den Broecke, Herbert, and Cauche's
descriptions to have been correct, though their drawings are somewhat
startlingly different in shape. Only known from these four drawings and
osseous remains. 18 fragments of beaks, 5 pelves, 35 tibiae, 1 sacrum and
fragments, and 1 vertebra in the Tring Museum.
Habitat: Mauritius.
DIAPHORAPTERYX FORBES.
T HIS genus is closely allied to Aphanapteryx and Erythromachus, but,
on the whole, is nearer to Aphanapteryx. It differs from both these
genera and Ocydromus in the large protuberances on the basi-temporal
region of the skull, and the tarso-metatarsus was much shorter than in
Aphanapteryx. For complete diagnosis of this genus see Andrews in
Novitates Zoologicae, Vol. III, pp. 73-76 (1896).
DIAPHORAPTERYX HAWKINSI (FORBES).
Aphanapteryx hawkinsi Forbes, Nature XLVI, p. 252.
Diaphorapteryx hawkinsi Forbes, Bull. B.O.C.I. p. XXI, 1893.
T HE remains of this bird were first sent to Dr. H. O. Forbes in 1892 by
the late W. Hawkins, from the Chatham Islands, 500 miles E.S.E. of
New Zealand. It appears to have been confined to the Island of
Wharekauri. Dr. Forbes subsequently went to the Chathams himself and
collected a large number of bones of various extinct birds, including those
nape."
This description was made by Frauenfeld from a drawing by G. Hoefnagels,
in the Imperial Library, Vienna, executed about the year 1610, and, together
with that of the Dodo, apparently drawn from life in the Imperial Menagerie
at Ebersdorf. This drawing proves Van den Broecke, Herbert, and Cauche's
descriptions to have been correct, though their drawings are somewhat
startlingly different in shape. Only known from these four drawings and
osseous remains. 18 fragments of beaks, 5 pelves, 35 tibiae, 1 sacrum and
fragments, and 1 vertebra in the Tring Museum.
Habitat: Mauritius.
DIAPHORAPTERYX FORBES.
T HIS genus is closely allied to Aphanapteryx and Erythromachus, but,
on the whole, is nearer to Aphanapteryx. It differs from both these
genera and Ocydromus in the large protuberances on the basi-temporal
region of the skull, and the tarso-metatarsus was much shorter than in
Aphanapteryx. For complete diagnosis of this genus see Andrews in
Novitates Zoologicae, Vol. III, pp. 73-76 (1896).
DIAPHORAPTERYX HAWKINSI (FORBES).
Aphanapteryx hawkinsi Forbes, Nature XLVI, p. 252.
Diaphorapteryx hawkinsi Forbes, Bull. B.O.C.I. p. XXI, 1893.
T HE remains of this bird were first sent to Dr. H. O. Forbes in 1892 by
the late W. Hawkins, from the Chatham Islands, 500 miles E.S.E. of
New Zealand. It appears to have been confined to the Island of
Wharekauri. Dr. Forbes subsequently went to the Chathams himself and
collected a large number of bones of various extinct birds, including those
Page 127
of Diaphorapteryx. In 1895 I received a consignment of bones through the
agency of Mr. Dannefaerd, from the Chathams, such as has never been
equalled from any deposit elsewhere, for literally there were many hundreds
of thousands of bones of a considerable number of species of birds. From
this collection Mr. C. W. Andrews was able to draw up a most minute
description of the skeleton of Diaphorapteryx, founded on several
practically complete skeletons, some thirty or more skulls, and several
thousand individual bones of various portions of the skeleton. This
description, published in Novitates Zoologicae, Vol. III, pp. 73-84, is too
long for reproduction here, and so I must refer my readers to it.
This bird, as well as the Palaeolimnas, shows an apparent relationship
between the Chatham Islands and the Mascarene Islands; but I believe that
this is not a real relationship, as has been asserted, due to a former land-
connection, but merely a case of parallel development owing to similar
conditions of existence.
Habitat: Wharekauri Island, Chatham Islands.
In the Tring Museum are two complete skeletons, more than a thousand
bones, and about fifteen skulls.
One almost complete skeleton, and the type, skull, and bones, are in the
British Museum.
ERYTHROMACHUS MILNE-EDWARDS.
"
L EGS stout, made for running, and from a quarter to one-fifth shorter
than in Ocydromus, the three anterior digits well developed and the
hallux very small. Body less massive than in Ocydromus, with the
wings slightly more developed, but not serviceable for flight. Head small;
bill red, straight, pointed, and about 60 mm. = 2.4 inches. A red naked patch
round the eye; plumage pale grey."
agency of Mr. Dannefaerd, from the Chathams, such as has never been
equalled from any deposit elsewhere, for literally there were many hundreds
of thousands of bones of a considerable number of species of birds. From
this collection Mr. C. W. Andrews was able to draw up a most minute
description of the skeleton of Diaphorapteryx, founded on several
practically complete skeletons, some thirty or more skulls, and several
thousand individual bones of various portions of the skeleton. This
description, published in Novitates Zoologicae, Vol. III, pp. 73-84, is too
long for reproduction here, and so I must refer my readers to it.
This bird, as well as the Palaeolimnas, shows an apparent relationship
between the Chatham Islands and the Mascarene Islands; but I believe that
this is not a real relationship, as has been asserted, due to a former land-
connection, but merely a case of parallel development owing to similar
conditions of existence.
Habitat: Wharekauri Island, Chatham Islands.
In the Tring Museum are two complete skeletons, more than a thousand
bones, and about fifteen skulls.
One almost complete skeleton, and the type, skull, and bones, are in the
British Museum.
ERYTHROMACHUS MILNE-EDWARDS.
"
L EGS stout, made for running, and from a quarter to one-fifth shorter
than in Ocydromus, the three anterior digits well developed and the
hallux very small. Body less massive than in Ocydromus, with the
wings slightly more developed, but not serviceable for flight. Head small;
bill red, straight, pointed, and about 60 mm. = 2.4 inches. A red naked patch
round the eye; plumage pale grey."
Page 128
ERYTHROMACHUS LEGUATI MILNE-EDWARDS.
Gelinote Leguat, t. II p. 71 (1708).
Erythromachus leguati Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX, pp. 6, 7, pls. XI, XII (1874).
Aphanopteryx leguati Günther & E. Newton, Phil. Trans. Vol. 168, pp. 431-432, pl. XLIII
(1879).
O F the older writers only Leguat appears to have described the
Rodriguez flightless rail. There are several references to "Hens,"
"Veld Hoenders," &c., but all appear to refer to the Mauritius bird
Aphanapteryx bonasia. Leguat's description is as follows:—
"Our 'gelinotes' are fat all the year round and of a most delicate taste. Their
colour is always of a bright grey, and there is very little difference in
plumage between the two sexes. They hide their nests so well that we could
not find them out, and consequently did not taste their eggs. They have a
red naked area round their eyes, their beaks are straight and pointed, near
two and two-fifths inches long, and red also. They cannot fly, their fat
makes them too heavy for it. If you offer them anything red, they are so
angry they will fly at you to catch it out of your hand, and in the heat of the
combat we had an opportunity to take them with ease."
Quite extinct. Only known from descriptions and osseous remains. One
tibia in the Tring Museum.
Habitat: Rodriguez Island.
PENNULA DOLE.
Pennula Dole, Hawaiian Alman. 1879 p. 54 (Reprint in Ibis 1880 p. 241).
I BELIEVE that the genus Pennula should be placed near Porzanula, but
its wings are softer, the rectrices are next to invisible, but can be felt, as
they have stiff shafts and are about 13 mm. long, though being entirely
hidden by the soft tail-coverts. The tibia is bare for about 7 mm., the
metatarsus covered in front with nearly a dozen transverse, very distinct
Gelinote Leguat, t. II p. 71 (1708).
Erythromachus leguati Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XIX, pp. 6, 7, pls. XI, XII (1874).
Aphanopteryx leguati Günther & E. Newton, Phil. Trans. Vol. 168, pp. 431-432, pl. XLIII
(1879).
O F the older writers only Leguat appears to have described the
Rodriguez flightless rail. There are several references to "Hens,"
"Veld Hoenders," &c., but all appear to refer to the Mauritius bird
Aphanapteryx bonasia. Leguat's description is as follows:—
"Our 'gelinotes' are fat all the year round and of a most delicate taste. Their
colour is always of a bright grey, and there is very little difference in
plumage between the two sexes. They hide their nests so well that we could
not find them out, and consequently did not taste their eggs. They have a
red naked area round their eyes, their beaks are straight and pointed, near
two and two-fifths inches long, and red also. They cannot fly, their fat
makes them too heavy for it. If you offer them anything red, they are so
angry they will fly at you to catch it out of your hand, and in the heat of the
combat we had an opportunity to take them with ease."
Quite extinct. Only known from descriptions and osseous remains. One
tibia in the Tring Museum.
Habitat: Rodriguez Island.
PENNULA DOLE.
Pennula Dole, Hawaiian Alman. 1879 p. 54 (Reprint in Ibis 1880 p. 241).
I BELIEVE that the genus Pennula should be placed near Porzanula, but
its wings are softer, the rectrices are next to invisible, but can be felt, as
they have stiff shafts and are about 13 mm. long, though being entirely
hidden by the soft tail-coverts. The tibia is bare for about 7 mm., the
metatarsus covered in front with nearly a dozen transverse, very distinct
Page 129
scales, and distinctly reticulated behind. The bill much as in Poliolimnas
and Porzanula.
Two species can be recognized: Pennula millsi, with a uniform upper
surface, and Pennula sandwichensis, with a distinctly spotted upper side.
Both forms are now extinct.
PENNULA MILLSI DOLE.
MOHO OF THE NATIVES.
(Plate 26, Fig. 3.)
Pennula millei (misprint for millsi) Dole, Hawaiian Almanac 1879 p. 54 (reprint in Ibis 1880
p. 241. "Uplands of Hawaii: named in honour of Mr. Mills, spec. in Mills's Coll., nearly
extinct"); Rothsch., Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 241 pl. LXXVI.
Pennula ecaudata apud Wilson & Evans, Aves. Hawaii., part V, text and plate.
A LL we know of this bird are the five specimens caught by an old
native bird-catcher named Hawelu for the late Mr. Mills of Hawaii.
Two of these are now in my Museum, one in Cambridge, and two in
the Bishop-Pauahi Museum in Honolulu. There can be no doubt that this
bird is now extinct. All recent attempts to find specimens have been futile.
Mr. Palmer, whom I sent a specially trained dog, also failed to find even
traces of it. It lived formerly in the country between Hilo and the volcano
Kilauea, in places where thick grass, Vaccinium and Dianella, forms the
thickest cover possible. In former times the "Moho" was a dainty on the
tables of the Hawaiian kings, but its disappearance is probably due to the
introduction of the obnoxious mongoose and to bush fires.
PENNULA SANDWICHENSIS (GM.)
(Plate 26, Fig. 2.)
and Porzanula.
Two species can be recognized: Pennula millsi, with a uniform upper
surface, and Pennula sandwichensis, with a distinctly spotted upper side.
Both forms are now extinct.
PENNULA MILLSI DOLE.
MOHO OF THE NATIVES.
(Plate 26, Fig. 3.)
Pennula millei (misprint for millsi) Dole, Hawaiian Almanac 1879 p. 54 (reprint in Ibis 1880
p. 241. "Uplands of Hawaii: named in honour of Mr. Mills, spec. in Mills's Coll., nearly
extinct"); Rothsch., Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 241 pl. LXXVI.
Pennula ecaudata apud Wilson & Evans, Aves. Hawaii., part V, text and plate.
A LL we know of this bird are the five specimens caught by an old
native bird-catcher named Hawelu for the late Mr. Mills of Hawaii.
Two of these are now in my Museum, one in Cambridge, and two in
the Bishop-Pauahi Museum in Honolulu. There can be no doubt that this
bird is now extinct. All recent attempts to find specimens have been futile.
Mr. Palmer, whom I sent a specially trained dog, also failed to find even
traces of it. It lived formerly in the country between Hilo and the volcano
Kilauea, in places where thick grass, Vaccinium and Dianella, forms the
thickest cover possible. In former times the "Moho" was a dainty on the
tables of the Hawaiian kings, but its disappearance is probably due to the
introduction of the obnoxious mongoose and to bush fires.
PENNULA SANDWICHENSIS (GM.)
(Plate 26, Fig. 2.)
Page 130
Rallus Sandwichensis Gmelin, Syst. Nat I p. 717 (1788—ex Latham! "Habitat exilis in
insulis Sandwich").
Pennula Wilsoni Finsch, Notes Leyden Mus. XX p. 77 (1898—Finsch explains that the
specimen in the Leyden Museum is not the type of Latham—and therefore of Gmelin's
name—and therefore renames it).
For full synonymy and explanations of name, etc., cf. Avifauna of Laysan, p. 239, 240 and
243, also plate LXXVI.
L ATHAM'S description—from which Gmelin's diagnosis was taken—
distinctly says that the feathers were "darkest in the middle," and in
the Index Ornith. "supra maculis obscuris." Moreover, the unpublished
drawing of Ellis, well reproduced in Mr. Scott Wilson's book, shows beyond
doubt the identity of the bird of the old authors with the specimen in the
Leyden Museum.
The Leyden specimen is all we are acquainted with, and of the history of
this bird we know nothing but Latham's statement that it came from the
Sandwich Islands.
TRIBONYX ROBERTI ANDREWS.
Tribonyx roberti Andrews, Ibis 1897, p. 356, pl. IX, figs 4-7.
T HIS bird is described from an imperfect pelvis, a perfect left tibio-
tarsus and a femur. The pelvis differs from that of T. mortieri in not
having the deep depression in the ilia in front of the acetabulum and
above the pectineal process. It also differs in having a rather wider pelvic
escutcheon and wider renal fossal, and the supra-acetabular ridges of the
ilia are smaller than in the Australian bird. The beautifully-preserved left
tibia differs from that of T. mortieri in having the intercondylar groove
wider and shallower, the inner condyle less massive, thus making the
difference between the inner and outer condyle more marked; T. roberti also
has the shaft immediately above the extensor bridge wider, the bridge itself
less oblique, and the fibular crest is longer.
The measurements are:—
Pelvis.
insulis Sandwich").
Pennula Wilsoni Finsch, Notes Leyden Mus. XX p. 77 (1898—Finsch explains that the
specimen in the Leyden Museum is not the type of Latham—and therefore of Gmelin's
name—and therefore renames it).
For full synonymy and explanations of name, etc., cf. Avifauna of Laysan, p. 239, 240 and
243, also plate LXXVI.
L ATHAM'S description—from which Gmelin's diagnosis was taken—
distinctly says that the feathers were "darkest in the middle," and in
the Index Ornith. "supra maculis obscuris." Moreover, the unpublished
drawing of Ellis, well reproduced in Mr. Scott Wilson's book, shows beyond
doubt the identity of the bird of the old authors with the specimen in the
Leyden Museum.
The Leyden specimen is all we are acquainted with, and of the history of
this bird we know nothing but Latham's statement that it came from the
Sandwich Islands.
TRIBONYX ROBERTI ANDREWS.
Tribonyx roberti Andrews, Ibis 1897, p. 356, pl. IX, figs 4-7.
T HIS bird is described from an imperfect pelvis, a perfect left tibio-
tarsus and a femur. The pelvis differs from that of T. mortieri in not
having the deep depression in the ilia in front of the acetabulum and
above the pectineal process. It also differs in having a rather wider pelvic
escutcheon and wider renal fossal, and the supra-acetabular ridges of the
ilia are smaller than in the Australian bird. The beautifully-preserved left
tibia differs from that of T. mortieri in having the intercondylar groove
wider and shallower, the inner condyle less massive, thus making the
difference between the inner and outer condyle more marked; T. roberti also
has the shaft immediately above the extensor bridge wider, the bridge itself
less oblique, and the fibular crest is longer.
The measurements are:—
Pelvis.
Page 131
Length of Ilium 82 mm. approx.
Least width of acetabular region of Pelvis 14 "
Width at Antitrochanter 40 "
Width at anterior angle of Pelvic Escutcheon 36 "
Width at Posterior angle of Pelvic Escutcheon 40 "
Length of Sacrum 68 "
Tibia.
Length 143 mm.
Width at distal extremity 12 "
Width at middle of shaft 7 "
Femur.
Length 83 mm.
Width at distal extremity 17 "
Width at middle of shaft 7 "
Habitat: Sirabé in C. Madagascar.
NOTORNIS OWEN.
D IFFERS from Porphyrio by the secondaries being nearly as long as
the primaries, and the wing-coverts more or less elongated,
sometimes nearly hiding the quills.
Type: Notornis mantelli.
NOTORNIS MANTELLI OWEN.
Notornis mantelli Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 377, pl. LVI, figs. 7-11 (1848).
T HIS species was founded on a nearly entire skull, collected by Walter
Mantell at Waingongoro, North Island, New Zealand. This skull is
more than twice the size of that of Porphyrio melanotus. The
basisphenoidal surface, however, is flatter, the anterior angle projects below
Least width of acetabular region of Pelvis 14 "
Width at Antitrochanter 40 "
Width at anterior angle of Pelvic Escutcheon 36 "
Width at Posterior angle of Pelvic Escutcheon 40 "
Length of Sacrum 68 "
Tibia.
Length 143 mm.
Width at distal extremity 12 "
Width at middle of shaft 7 "
Femur.
Length 83 mm.
Width at distal extremity 17 "
Width at middle of shaft 7 "
Habitat: Sirabé in C. Madagascar.
NOTORNIS OWEN.
D IFFERS from Porphyrio by the secondaries being nearly as long as
the primaries, and the wing-coverts more or less elongated,
sometimes nearly hiding the quills.
Type: Notornis mantelli.
NOTORNIS MANTELLI OWEN.
Notornis mantelli Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 377, pl. LVI, figs. 7-11 (1848).
T HIS species was founded on a nearly entire skull, collected by Walter
Mantell at Waingongoro, North Island, New Zealand. This skull is
more than twice the size of that of Porphyrio melanotus. The
basisphenoidal surface, however, is flatter, the anterior angle projects below
Page 132
the base of the presphenoid, and there is a slender ridge continued from
each paroccipital to the lateral angles of the platform, the posterior angles
being hemispheric tubercles as in Palapteryx.
The occipital region inclines forwards as it rises, while the same is more
vertical in Porphyrio. The post-frontal is broader than in Porphyrio. The
chief distinction from that of Porphyrio is, however, the almost regular
four-sided figure of the skull. The breadth of the anterior part is almost
exactly that of the occipital region, and the extent of the sides is not much
more than that of the front and back part. The parieto-frontal region of the
skull is very unlike that of Porphyrio, being convex and oblong, and
Notornis also lacks cerebral or hemispheric convexities. Owen gives a large
number of other differences, but I refer my readers to the original article as
above, pp. 366-371. I, however, must state here, as is already mentioned by
Mr. Hamilton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 176, 1892, that the Dinornis skull,
with which Professor Owen compared Notornis, referred by him to D.
casuarinus is really that of Aptornis defossor (vide Trans. Zool. Soc. III, pl.
52, figs. 1-7), and, therefore, it is quite natural that Professor Owen found a
great likeness to Dinornis in Notornis, as the skull he compared it with was
really that of the Ralline Aptornis, and not the Struthious Dinornis at all.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
Dr. H. O. Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst., discusses at length measurements of
tibiae and femora of Notornis, provisionally naming the skeleton in the
Otago Museum Notornis parkeri, as a new species, but I consider we must
wait for confirmation till we get an associated skeleton of N. mantelli.
NOTORNIS HOCHSTETTERI A.B.M.
(Plate 34.)
Notornis Hochstetteri A. B. Meyer, Abbild. Vogelskelett, Lief. IV & V, p. 28, pl. XXXIV-
XXXVII (1883—South Island, New Zealand); Zeitschr. ges. Orn. II, p. 45, pl. I (1885—
figures of the bird).
Notornis mantelli (non Owen 1848!) Gould, P.Z.S. London, 1850, pl. 21; Trans. Zool. Soc.
London IV, pl. 25 (1850); Gould, B. Austr. Suppl., pl. 76 (1869); Buller, B. New
each paroccipital to the lateral angles of the platform, the posterior angles
being hemispheric tubercles as in Palapteryx.
The occipital region inclines forwards as it rises, while the same is more
vertical in Porphyrio. The post-frontal is broader than in Porphyrio. The
chief distinction from that of Porphyrio is, however, the almost regular
four-sided figure of the skull. The breadth of the anterior part is almost
exactly that of the occipital region, and the extent of the sides is not much
more than that of the front and back part. The parieto-frontal region of the
skull is very unlike that of Porphyrio, being convex and oblong, and
Notornis also lacks cerebral or hemispheric convexities. Owen gives a large
number of other differences, but I refer my readers to the original article as
above, pp. 366-371. I, however, must state here, as is already mentioned by
Mr. Hamilton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 176, 1892, that the Dinornis skull,
with which Professor Owen compared Notornis, referred by him to D.
casuarinus is really that of Aptornis defossor (vide Trans. Zool. Soc. III, pl.
52, figs. 1-7), and, therefore, it is quite natural that Professor Owen found a
great likeness to Dinornis in Notornis, as the skull he compared it with was
really that of the Ralline Aptornis, and not the Struthious Dinornis at all.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
Dr. H. O. Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst., discusses at length measurements of
tibiae and femora of Notornis, provisionally naming the skeleton in the
Otago Museum Notornis parkeri, as a new species, but I consider we must
wait for confirmation till we get an associated skeleton of N. mantelli.
NOTORNIS HOCHSTETTERI A.B.M.
(Plate 34.)
Notornis Hochstetteri A. B. Meyer, Abbild. Vogelskelett, Lief. IV & V, p. 28, pl. XXXIV-
XXXVII (1883—South Island, New Zealand); Zeitschr. ges. Orn. II, p. 45, pl. I (1885—
figures of the bird).
Notornis mantelli (non Owen 1848!) Gould, P.Z.S. London, 1850, pl. 21; Trans. Zool. Soc.
London IV, pl. 25 (1850); Gould, B. Austr. Suppl., pl. 76 (1869); Buller, B. New
Page 133
Zealand, pl. (1873); Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXIII, p. 208 (1894).
T HE name Notornis mantelli having been based on a cranium and some
leg-bones from the North Island, and the bones of a specimen from the
South Island, showing marked differences, Dr. A. B. Meyer was fully
justified in describing the latter form as different, under the name of N.
hochstetteri.
According to the describer there are considerable differences in the cranial
bones, but the comparison of the leg-bones shows such differences in size
that these alone would be sufficient to separate the North and South Island
forms. The femur of N. hochstetteri measures 109, that of N. mantelli 122,
the tibia of the former 165, the tarso-metatarsus 109, the tibia of the latter
200, the tarso-metatarsus 129 mm. For further measurements see A. B.
Meyer, Abbild. Vogelskelett I, p. 30.
The upper surface is olive-green with some slaty-blue shading, the quills
are black with purplish blue outer webs; rectrices blackish, green on the
outer webs. Head, neck, and under surface purplish blue, thighs more
blackish. Under tail-coverts white, frontal plate and bill bright red, yellow
towards the tip of both mandibles. Feet red.
Although this bird is evidently not extinct, a specimen having been captured
as late as 1898, it seems that not many examples live at present in New
Zealand, as they have been sought after a good deal, and yet only four have
been taken so far, i.e., the two in the British Museum, one in the Dresden
Museum, and the last-mentioned one.
Full accounts of the capture of this last specimen have been given in the
Trans. New Zealand Institute, XXXI, pp. 146-150, and in Sir Walter
Buller's Supplement to the Birds of New Zealand, I, pp. 66-74, where,
however, the year of the capture is not mentioned, though one can guess
that it must have taken place shortly before the articles on it appeared.
Habitat: Middle Island, usually called South Island, apparently nearly
extinct.
T HE name Notornis mantelli having been based on a cranium and some
leg-bones from the North Island, and the bones of a specimen from the
South Island, showing marked differences, Dr. A. B. Meyer was fully
justified in describing the latter form as different, under the name of N.
hochstetteri.
According to the describer there are considerable differences in the cranial
bones, but the comparison of the leg-bones shows such differences in size
that these alone would be sufficient to separate the North and South Island
forms. The femur of N. hochstetteri measures 109, that of N. mantelli 122,
the tibia of the former 165, the tarso-metatarsus 109, the tibia of the latter
200, the tarso-metatarsus 129 mm. For further measurements see A. B.
Meyer, Abbild. Vogelskelett I, p. 30.
The upper surface is olive-green with some slaty-blue shading, the quills
are black with purplish blue outer webs; rectrices blackish, green on the
outer webs. Head, neck, and under surface purplish blue, thighs more
blackish. Under tail-coverts white, frontal plate and bill bright red, yellow
towards the tip of both mandibles. Feet red.
Although this bird is evidently not extinct, a specimen having been captured
as late as 1898, it seems that not many examples live at present in New
Zealand, as they have been sought after a good deal, and yet only four have
been taken so far, i.e., the two in the British Museum, one in the Dresden
Museum, and the last-mentioned one.
Full accounts of the capture of this last specimen have been given in the
Trans. New Zealand Institute, XXXI, pp. 146-150, and in Sir Walter
Buller's Supplement to the Birds of New Zealand, I, pp. 66-74, where,
however, the year of the capture is not mentioned, though one can guess
that it must have taken place shortly before the articles on it appeared.
Habitat: Middle Island, usually called South Island, apparently nearly
extinct.
Page 134
NOTORNIS STANLEYI (ROWLEY).
White gallinule, Voy. of Gov. Phillip to N.S.W., p. 273, cum tab. (1789).
Porphyrio stanleyi Rowley, Orn. Misc. I, p. 36, pl. IX (1875).
Porphyrio melanotus (part.) Sharpe, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. XXIII, p. 205 (1894).
Porphyrio alba G. R. Gray, List Birds N.Z., &c., Ibis 1862, p. 214.
T HE first to point out the differences between the bird now in the
Liverpool Museum and the specimen in Vienna was Mr. Dawson
Rowley. The original description of the anonymous author of Phillip's
Voyage is as follows:—
"This beautiful bird greatly resembles the purple Gallinule in shape and
make, but is much superior in size, being as large as a dunghill fowl. The
length from end of bill to that of the claws is two feet three inches. The bill
is very stout, and the colour of it, the whole of the top of the head and the
irides red; the sides of the head round the eyes are reddish, very thinly
sprinkled with white feathers; the whole of the plumage is, without
exception, white. The legs the colour of the bill. This species is pretty
common on Lord Howe Island, Norfolk Island, and other places, and is a
very tame species. The other sex, supposed to be the male, is said to have
some blue on the wings."
Gray states under Porphyrio alba, in Ibis 1862, p. 214: "It is stated that a
similar kind was found on Lord Howe Island which was incapable of flight.
The wings of the male were beautifully mottled with blue."
Dr. H. O. Forbes, in the Bulletin of the Liverpool Museums, Vol. III, No. 2,
pp. 62-68 (1901), gives an exhaustive account of Rowley's type, in which
he comes to the conclusion that the bird is not a Porphyrio but a Notornis,
and that it is also probably a specimen of Notornis alba. That it is a
Notornis I equally believe; but I think the length of the wing-coverts in the
type of N. alba, puts it out of the question that the two birds could be the
same. Moreover, the two original pictures of Phillip and White show this
difference of the wings very well. I have therefore kept the two separate,
and I feel sure if we had other specimens with exact data we should find
this a parallel case to that of Nesonetta aucklandica of the Auckland Islands
and Anas chlorotis of New Zealand, and that Notornis alba of Norfolk
White gallinule, Voy. of Gov. Phillip to N.S.W., p. 273, cum tab. (1789).
Porphyrio stanleyi Rowley, Orn. Misc. I, p. 36, pl. IX (1875).
Porphyrio melanotus (part.) Sharpe, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. XXIII, p. 205 (1894).
Porphyrio alba G. R. Gray, List Birds N.Z., &c., Ibis 1862, p. 214.
T HE first to point out the differences between the bird now in the
Liverpool Museum and the specimen in Vienna was Mr. Dawson
Rowley. The original description of the anonymous author of Phillip's
Voyage is as follows:—
"This beautiful bird greatly resembles the purple Gallinule in shape and
make, but is much superior in size, being as large as a dunghill fowl. The
length from end of bill to that of the claws is two feet three inches. The bill
is very stout, and the colour of it, the whole of the top of the head and the
irides red; the sides of the head round the eyes are reddish, very thinly
sprinkled with white feathers; the whole of the plumage is, without
exception, white. The legs the colour of the bill. This species is pretty
common on Lord Howe Island, Norfolk Island, and other places, and is a
very tame species. The other sex, supposed to be the male, is said to have
some blue on the wings."
Gray states under Porphyrio alba, in Ibis 1862, p. 214: "It is stated that a
similar kind was found on Lord Howe Island which was incapable of flight.
The wings of the male were beautifully mottled with blue."
Dr. H. O. Forbes, in the Bulletin of the Liverpool Museums, Vol. III, No. 2,
pp. 62-68 (1901), gives an exhaustive account of Rowley's type, in which
he comes to the conclusion that the bird is not a Porphyrio but a Notornis,
and that it is also probably a specimen of Notornis alba. That it is a
Notornis I equally believe; but I think the length of the wing-coverts in the
type of N. alba, puts it out of the question that the two birds could be the
same. Moreover, the two original pictures of Phillip and White show this
difference of the wings very well. I have therefore kept the two separate,
and I feel sure if we had other specimens with exact data we should find
this a parallel case to that of Nesonetta aucklandica of the Auckland Islands
and Anas chlorotis of New Zealand, and that Notornis alba of Norfolk
Page 135
Island was a still further degenerate form to the already flightless N.
stanleyi of Lord Howe Island. Wing nine inches.
Habitat: Lord Howe Island.
NOTORNIS ALBA (WHITE).
(Plate 33.)
? White gallinule Callam, Voy. Botany Bay (1783?) (teste Gray).
Fulica alba White, Journ. Voy. N.S.W., p. 238 and plate (1790).
Gallinula alba Latham, Ind. Orn. I, p. 768 (1790).
Porphyrio albus Temminck, Man. d'Orn. II, p. 701 (1820).
Porphyrio melanotus var. alba Gray, Voy. Ereb. and Terror, Birds, p. 19 (1844).
Porphyrio melanotus Gray, Voy. Ereb. and Terror, Ed. II (1846), p. 14.
Notornis ? alba Pelzeln, Sitz. k. Akad. Wiss. Wien. XLI, p. 328 (1860).
Notornis alba Salvin, Ibis 1873, p. 295, pl. X.
T HERE has been considerable confusion in connection with this bird
and the following species, owing to the fact of White not having given
any locality for the specimen on which Latham founded his Gallinula
alba, and which is now in the Vienna Museum. That the Vienna specimen is
really White's bird is proved because it was bought at the sale of the
Leverian Museum, and White expressly states that all his birds were
deposited in the Leverian Museum.
It is quite impossible to say with certainty which of the two forms, Notornis
alba or N. stanleyi, came from Norfolk Island, as we have no indication of
the origin of the Liverpool specimen. But seeing that in the anonymous
work, "The Voyage of Governor Phillip to Botany Bay," the first mentioned
habitat is Lord Howe Island, and the figure shows a bird with the shorter
wing-coverts of N. stanleyi, I think I am justified in taking the bird with
longer wing-coverts—viz., Notornis alba, to be the bird from Norfolk
Island.
stanleyi of Lord Howe Island. Wing nine inches.
Habitat: Lord Howe Island.
NOTORNIS ALBA (WHITE).
(Plate 33.)
? White gallinule Callam, Voy. Botany Bay (1783?) (teste Gray).
Fulica alba White, Journ. Voy. N.S.W., p. 238 and plate (1790).
Gallinula alba Latham, Ind. Orn. I, p. 768 (1790).
Porphyrio albus Temminck, Man. d'Orn. II, p. 701 (1820).
Porphyrio melanotus var. alba Gray, Voy. Ereb. and Terror, Birds, p. 19 (1844).
Porphyrio melanotus Gray, Voy. Ereb. and Terror, Ed. II (1846), p. 14.
Notornis ? alba Pelzeln, Sitz. k. Akad. Wiss. Wien. XLI, p. 328 (1860).
Notornis alba Salvin, Ibis 1873, p. 295, pl. X.
T HERE has been considerable confusion in connection with this bird
and the following species, owing to the fact of White not having given
any locality for the specimen on which Latham founded his Gallinula
alba, and which is now in the Vienna Museum. That the Vienna specimen is
really White's bird is proved because it was bought at the sale of the
Leverian Museum, and White expressly states that all his birds were
deposited in the Leverian Museum.
It is quite impossible to say with certainty which of the two forms, Notornis
alba or N. stanleyi, came from Norfolk Island, as we have no indication of
the origin of the Liverpool specimen. But seeing that in the anonymous
work, "The Voyage of Governor Phillip to Botany Bay," the first mentioned
habitat is Lord Howe Island, and the figure shows a bird with the shorter
wing-coverts of N. stanleyi, I think I am justified in taking the bird with
longer wing-coverts—viz., Notornis alba, to be the bird from Norfolk
Island.
Page 136
White's description is as follows:—"White Fulica, with bill and front red,
shoulders spined, legs and feet yellow." White's figure clearly shows the
long wing coverts characteristic of the genus Notornis. Von Pelzeln says in
his account of this bird that there is a label on it bearing the number 102,
and giving as place of origin Norfolk Island, but White makes no mention
of this. There are traces of a bluish shade, and two or three dark spots on the
plumage, which has led many ornithologists to consider N. alba an albino.
Gray, in "A List of Birds from New Zealand, &c.,"[3] remarked that some
Norfolk Island specimens had blue between the shoulders, and the back
spotted with the same colour. He also states that the young are said to be
black, then become bluish grey, and afterwards pure white. From these and
other authors' similar remarks I believe we have not here a case of albinism,
but a bird which was in a stage of evolution towards becoming a fixed
white species. Wing 9 inches (measured by myself in the Vienna Museum).
Habitat: Norfolk Island.
APTERORNIS SELYS.
"
D IFFERED widely from Didus and Pezophaps in its long beak, which
resembles a little that of a woodcock, but is much stronger. These
birds were high on the leg, ran swiftly, and were far removed from
pigeons like the Dodo and the Solitaire, but to which they had a certain
resemblance, owing to their rudimentary wings, apology for a tail, and the
disposition of their digits."
The above is a translation of de Selys-Longchamps' diagnosis of the genus,
but owing to his inclusion therein of Didus solitarius and Aphanapteryx
bonasia, it does not fit when restricted to the "Oyseau bleu" of Le Sieur
D.B. It might be described as: Resembling Aptornis, but with shorter bill
and feet, thus more approaching Notornis.
One species.
shoulders spined, legs and feet yellow." White's figure clearly shows the
long wing coverts characteristic of the genus Notornis. Von Pelzeln says in
his account of this bird that there is a label on it bearing the number 102,
and giving as place of origin Norfolk Island, but White makes no mention
of this. There are traces of a bluish shade, and two or three dark spots on the
plumage, which has led many ornithologists to consider N. alba an albino.
Gray, in "A List of Birds from New Zealand, &c.,"[3] remarked that some
Norfolk Island specimens had blue between the shoulders, and the back
spotted with the same colour. He also states that the young are said to be
black, then become bluish grey, and afterwards pure white. From these and
other authors' similar remarks I believe we have not here a case of albinism,
but a bird which was in a stage of evolution towards becoming a fixed
white species. Wing 9 inches (measured by myself in the Vienna Museum).
Habitat: Norfolk Island.
APTERORNIS SELYS.
"
D IFFERED widely from Didus and Pezophaps in its long beak, which
resembles a little that of a woodcock, but is much stronger. These
birds were high on the leg, ran swiftly, and were far removed from
pigeons like the Dodo and the Solitaire, but to which they had a certain
resemblance, owing to their rudimentary wings, apology for a tail, and the
disposition of their digits."
The above is a translation of de Selys-Longchamps' diagnosis of the genus,
but owing to his inclusion therein of Didus solitarius and Aphanapteryx
bonasia, it does not fit when restricted to the "Oyseau bleu" of Le Sieur
D.B. It might be described as: Resembling Aptornis, but with shorter bill
and feet, thus more approaching Notornis.
One species.
Page 137
APTERORNIS COERULESCENS SELYS.
(Plate 32.)
Oyseaux bleus Le Sieur D.B., Les Voyages aux Isles Dauphine and Bourbon, pp. 170, 171
(1674).
Apterornis coerulescens Selys-Longchamps, Rev. Zool. 1848, p. 294.
T HE original description of the Sieur D.B. (Dubois) is as follows
(translated):—"Oyseaux bleus: As big as the Solitaires; they have the
plumage entirely blue, the beak and the feet red and made like those of
fowls; they do not fly at all, but run extremely quickly, so that a dog can
hardly catch them; they are very good."
Habitat: Bourbon or Réunion.
Dubois gives the size of these birds as the same as that of a big goose and
the feet as being like those of a fowl: I have, therefore, in reconstructing the
plate of this bird, had it made intermediate in structure between the New
Zealand Notornis and Aptornis, which were evidently its nearest allies.
APTORNIS OWEN.
D IFFERS from Dinornis, Palapteryx and Notornis in having an
articular surface for a very strong hind toe, and the tarso-metatarsus
of a conformation more nearly resembling that found in the Dodo, but
shorter and thicker than in the latter. In addition, the strong calcaneal
process, perforated by a complete bony canal for the tendon at the back part
of the proximal end of the tarso-metatarsus; the perforation above the
interspace between the condyles for the middle and outer toes; and the more
posterior position for the condyle for the inner toe all prove the distinctness
of this genus.
Type: Aptornis otidiformis.
(Plate 32.)
Oyseaux bleus Le Sieur D.B., Les Voyages aux Isles Dauphine and Bourbon, pp. 170, 171
(1674).
Apterornis coerulescens Selys-Longchamps, Rev. Zool. 1848, p. 294.
T HE original description of the Sieur D.B. (Dubois) is as follows
(translated):—"Oyseaux bleus: As big as the Solitaires; they have the
plumage entirely blue, the beak and the feet red and made like those of
fowls; they do not fly at all, but run extremely quickly, so that a dog can
hardly catch them; they are very good."
Habitat: Bourbon or Réunion.
Dubois gives the size of these birds as the same as that of a big goose and
the feet as being like those of a fowl: I have, therefore, in reconstructing the
plate of this bird, had it made intermediate in structure between the New
Zealand Notornis and Aptornis, which were evidently its nearest allies.
APTORNIS OWEN.
D IFFERS from Dinornis, Palapteryx and Notornis in having an
articular surface for a very strong hind toe, and the tarso-metatarsus
of a conformation more nearly resembling that found in the Dodo, but
shorter and thicker than in the latter. In addition, the strong calcaneal
process, perforated by a complete bony canal for the tendon at the back part
of the proximal end of the tarso-metatarsus; the perforation above the
interspace between the condyles for the middle and outer toes; and the more
posterior position for the condyle for the inner toe all prove the distinctness
of this genus.
Type: Aptornis otidiformis.
Page 138
APTORNIS OTIDIFORMIS (OWEN).
Dinornis otidiformis Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 247, pls. XXV and XXVI, fig. 5 (1844).
Aptornis otidiformis Owen, ibidem p. 347 (1848).
T HIS is the North Island form, and I must refer my readers to Owen's
description, only remarking that Mr. Hamilton, Trans. N.Z. Inst.
XXIV, p. 179, says the vertebrae assigned by Owen to Cnemiornis all
belong to Aptornis.
Locality of type tibia: Poverty Bay, North Island, New Zealand; collected
by Rev. Wm. Williams in 1842.
APTORNIS DEFOSSOR OWEN.
Aptornis defossor Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VII, pp. 353 to 366, pls. 40-44 (1871).
T HE skull differs from that of A. otidiformis by the vertical surface of
the descending part of the occiput being less deeply concave, the
occipital foramen relatively smaller. The hind part of the base of the
alisphenoid is more produced and tuberous outside the end of the hyoid
process of the paroccipital in A. defossor.
The chief other differences in size, according to Owen, are as follows:—
A. defossor. A. otidiformis.
Skull.
Length 7.2 inches. 6.2 inches.
Breadth across paroccipitals 3.3 " 2.9 "
Breadth across postfrontals 3.2 " 2.10 "
Breadth across temporal fossae 2.3 " 1.1 "
Breadth of base of upper mandible 1.6 " 1.3 "
Breadth of middle of upper mandible 1.4 " 1.1 "
Breadth of fore end of upper mandible 0.7 " 0.6 "
Length of premaxillary 5.0 " 4.3 "
Dinornis otidiformis Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 247, pls. XXV and XXVI, fig. 5 (1844).
Aptornis otidiformis Owen, ibidem p. 347 (1848).
T HIS is the North Island form, and I must refer my readers to Owen's
description, only remarking that Mr. Hamilton, Trans. N.Z. Inst.
XXIV, p. 179, says the vertebrae assigned by Owen to Cnemiornis all
belong to Aptornis.
Locality of type tibia: Poverty Bay, North Island, New Zealand; collected
by Rev. Wm. Williams in 1842.
APTORNIS DEFOSSOR OWEN.
Aptornis defossor Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VII, pp. 353 to 366, pls. 40-44 (1871).
T HE skull differs from that of A. otidiformis by the vertical surface of
the descending part of the occiput being less deeply concave, the
occipital foramen relatively smaller. The hind part of the base of the
alisphenoid is more produced and tuberous outside the end of the hyoid
process of the paroccipital in A. defossor.
The chief other differences in size, according to Owen, are as follows:—
A. defossor. A. otidiformis.
Skull.
Length 7.2 inches. 6.2 inches.
Breadth across paroccipitals 3.3 " 2.9 "
Breadth across postfrontals 3.2 " 2.10 "
Breadth across temporal fossae 2.3 " 1.1 "
Breadth of base of upper mandible 1.6 " 1.3 "
Breadth of middle of upper mandible 1.4 " 1.1 "
Breadth of fore end of upper mandible 0.7 " 0.6 "
Length of premaxillary 5.0 " 4.3 "
Page 139
Femur.
Length 7.6 " 6.2 "
Breadth of proximal end 2.2 " 1.9 "
Breadth of distal end 2.2 " 1.9 "
Circumference of middle of shaft 2.9 " 2.3 "
Tibia.
Length 10.3 " 8.9 "
Breadth of proximal end 2.3 " 1.9 "
Breadth of distal end 1.10 " 1.3 "
Circumference of middle of shaft 2.6 " 1.11 "
Metatarsus.
Length 4.4 " 3.10 "
Breadth of proximal end 1.8 " 1.5 "
Breadth of distal end 1.9 " 1.6 "
Breadth of middle of shaft 1.6 " 1.4 "
Locality of type: Oamaru.
Habitat: South Island.
A nearly perfect skeleton in the Tring Museum, collected by Mr. W. S.
Mitchel in limestone cave on Oreti River, Southland.
PALAEOLIMNAS FORBES.
D IFFERS from Fulica by the much more curved shape of the skull, the
deeply marked glandular impressions over the eyes, and the great
pneumaticity of the frontal bones.
PALAEOLIMNAS CHATHAMENSIS (FORBES).
Fulica chathamensis H. O. Forbes, Nature, vol. XLVI p. 252 (1892).
Length 7.6 " 6.2 "
Breadth of proximal end 2.2 " 1.9 "
Breadth of distal end 2.2 " 1.9 "
Circumference of middle of shaft 2.9 " 2.3 "
Tibia.
Length 10.3 " 8.9 "
Breadth of proximal end 2.3 " 1.9 "
Breadth of distal end 1.10 " 1.3 "
Circumference of middle of shaft 2.6 " 1.11 "
Metatarsus.
Length 4.4 " 3.10 "
Breadth of proximal end 1.8 " 1.5 "
Breadth of distal end 1.9 " 1.6 "
Breadth of middle of shaft 1.6 " 1.4 "
Locality of type: Oamaru.
Habitat: South Island.
A nearly perfect skeleton in the Tring Museum, collected by Mr. W. S.
Mitchel in limestone cave on Oreti River, Southland.
PALAEOLIMNAS FORBES.
D IFFERS from Fulica by the much more curved shape of the skull, the
deeply marked glandular impressions over the eyes, and the great
pneumaticity of the frontal bones.
PALAEOLIMNAS CHATHAMENSIS (FORBES).
Fulica chathamensis H. O. Forbes, Nature, vol. XLVI p. 252 (1892).
Page 140
Fulica newtoni H. O. Forbes, l.c. (non Milne-Edwards).
Palaeolimnas newtoni H. O. Forbes, Ibis 1893, p. 544.
Palaeolimnas chathamensis Milne Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (VIII) 2, 1896 p. 130.
D R. FORBES says in Nature "I procured from the same beds which
contained Aphanapteryx a certain number of bones of a Fulica which
much resemble those of Fulica newtoni; like the bones of
Aphanapteryx (should be Diaphorapteryx, W.R.) they vary much in size,
some being equal to, while others were considerably larger than similar
bones of Fulica newtoni. This variation is so great that I am inclined to
consider them as belonging to different species, or at least different races. I
have given the name Fulica chathamensis" to the larger species.
Later, in the Ibis, Dr. Forbes says, "The limb-bones and pelvis correspond
so closely to those of F. newtoni that I am not able to separate them. The
head of the type is, however, unknown."
Professor Milne-Edwards, however, points out numerous differences. In the
humerus the sub-trochanterial groove is bigger, and particularly wider than
in typical Fulica. The iliac grooves are larger than in Fulica newtoni, the
pelvic knob is more extended, and the sciatic foramen is larger. The first
sacral vertebrae are stunted below the median sinus, while in the Mauritius
species one observes a very stout one, occupying the four first vertebrae of
the pelvis. The feet were also larger and stronger than in the latter.
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
An almost complete skeleton and numerous bones in the Tring Museum,
and an almost complete skeleton in the British Museum.
PALAEOLIMNAS NEWTONI (MILNE-EDWARDS).
Poules d'eau Sieur D.B., Voyages 1674.
Fulica newtoni Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) VIII pp. 194-220, pls. 10-13 (1867).
HE translation of the Sieur D.B.'s (Abbé Dubois) description is as
follows:—"Waterhens which are as large as fowls. They are always black,
Palaeolimnas newtoni H. O. Forbes, Ibis 1893, p. 544.
Palaeolimnas chathamensis Milne Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (VIII) 2, 1896 p. 130.
D R. FORBES says in Nature "I procured from the same beds which
contained Aphanapteryx a certain number of bones of a Fulica which
much resemble those of Fulica newtoni; like the bones of
Aphanapteryx (should be Diaphorapteryx, W.R.) they vary much in size,
some being equal to, while others were considerably larger than similar
bones of Fulica newtoni. This variation is so great that I am inclined to
consider them as belonging to different species, or at least different races. I
have given the name Fulica chathamensis" to the larger species.
Later, in the Ibis, Dr. Forbes says, "The limb-bones and pelvis correspond
so closely to those of F. newtoni that I am not able to separate them. The
head of the type is, however, unknown."
Professor Milne-Edwards, however, points out numerous differences. In the
humerus the sub-trochanterial groove is bigger, and particularly wider than
in typical Fulica. The iliac grooves are larger than in Fulica newtoni, the
pelvic knob is more extended, and the sciatic foramen is larger. The first
sacral vertebrae are stunted below the median sinus, while in the Mauritius
species one observes a very stout one, occupying the four first vertebrae of
the pelvis. The feet were also larger and stronger than in the latter.
Habitat: Chatham Islands.
An almost complete skeleton and numerous bones in the Tring Museum,
and an almost complete skeleton in the British Museum.
PALAEOLIMNAS NEWTONI (MILNE-EDWARDS).
Poules d'eau Sieur D.B., Voyages 1674.
Fulica newtoni Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) VIII pp. 194-220, pls. 10-13 (1867).
HE translation of the Sieur D.B.'s (Abbé Dubois) description is as
follows:—"Waterhens which are as large as fowls. They are always black,
Page 141
T and have a large white crest on the head." For the anatomical
description I must refer my readers to Professor Milne-Edwards.
Habitat: Bourbon.
Milne-Edwards gives so many details in which Fulica newtoni agrees with
Palaeolimnas chathamensis that I feel convinced that the former is not a
true Fulica, and, until we know its skull and can decide for certain, I think it
is best to include it in the genus Palaeolimnas. 16 tibiae, 30 metatarsi, 8
humeri, 2 sternums, 4 fragments and an entire pelvis and sacrum, and 3
cervical vertebrae in the Tring Museum.
PALAEOLIMNAS PRISCA (HAMILTON).
Fulica prisca Hamilton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 98 (1893).
T HIS bird was nearly as large as Notornis, but with a very small head
and with a frontal shield. It was probably a poor flier, though not
flightless, as Fulica chathamensis was. It was smaller than the latter.
Measurements, according to Hamilton:—
prisca. newtoni. chathamensis.
Femur: Length 78-93 mm. — 85 mm.
Tibio-tarsus: Length 143-162 " 144 mm. 152-163 "
Tarso-metatarsus: Length 81-98 " 88 " 96 "
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
LEGUATIA SCHLEGEL.
B ODY not larger than that of a goose; wings rather short but still fitted
for flight; feathers of the legs reaching down almost to the top of the
tarso-metatarsus; toes long and completely free, middle toe almost as
description I must refer my readers to Professor Milne-Edwards.
Habitat: Bourbon.
Milne-Edwards gives so many details in which Fulica newtoni agrees with
Palaeolimnas chathamensis that I feel convinced that the former is not a
true Fulica, and, until we know its skull and can decide for certain, I think it
is best to include it in the genus Palaeolimnas. 16 tibiae, 30 metatarsi, 8
humeri, 2 sternums, 4 fragments and an entire pelvis and sacrum, and 3
cervical vertebrae in the Tring Museum.
PALAEOLIMNAS PRISCA (HAMILTON).
Fulica prisca Hamilton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 98 (1893).
T HIS bird was nearly as large as Notornis, but with a very small head
and with a frontal shield. It was probably a poor flier, though not
flightless, as Fulica chathamensis was. It was smaller than the latter.
Measurements, according to Hamilton:—
prisca. newtoni. chathamensis.
Femur: Length 78-93 mm. — 85 mm.
Tibio-tarsus: Length 143-162 " 144 mm. 152-163 "
Tarso-metatarsus: Length 81-98 " 88 " 96 "
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
LEGUATIA SCHLEGEL.
B ODY not larger than that of a goose; wings rather short but still fitted
for flight; feathers of the legs reaching down almost to the top of the
tarso-metatarsus; toes long and completely free, middle toe almost as
Page 142
long as tarso-metatarsus. Bill with a naked shield reaching back beyond the
eye. Height about 6 feet.
LEGUATIA GIGANTEA SCHLEGEL.
(Plate 31.)
Le Géant Leguat, Voyages (1708), p. 171, English edition.
Leguatia gigantea Schlegel, Versl. Med. Akad. Wetensch. Amst. VII, p. 142 (1858).
L EGUAT'S description is as follows: "... and many of those birds called
giants, because they are six feet high. They are extremely high
mounted, and have very long necks. Their bodies are not bigger than
that of a goose. They are all white, except a little place under their wings,
which is reddish. They have a goose's bill, only a little sharper; their claws
are very long and divided." This bird was apparently confined to the island
of Mauritius.
Professor Newton asserts that Leguat's "Géants" were Flamingos,
principally because bones of Flamingos have been found in Mauritius and
not a single bone has ever been got of the "géant." This argument is, in my
opinion, insufficient, and no evidence at all. We know that a Didine bird
and a gigantic rail existed on Réunion, but no bones are yet known of these.
I think, like Professor Schlegel, that Leguat's figure and description cannot
be meant for a Flamingo and that they prove the former existence of a
gigantic ralline bird in Mauritius.
The figure is made up from Leguat's description. The bill is drawn like that
of a gigantic moorhen, and so are the feet.
Habitat: Mauritius.
ALCA IMPENNIS L.
eye. Height about 6 feet.
LEGUATIA GIGANTEA SCHLEGEL.
(Plate 31.)
Le Géant Leguat, Voyages (1708), p. 171, English edition.
Leguatia gigantea Schlegel, Versl. Med. Akad. Wetensch. Amst. VII, p. 142 (1858).
L EGUAT'S description is as follows: "... and many of those birds called
giants, because they are six feet high. They are extremely high
mounted, and have very long necks. Their bodies are not bigger than
that of a goose. They are all white, except a little place under their wings,
which is reddish. They have a goose's bill, only a little sharper; their claws
are very long and divided." This bird was apparently confined to the island
of Mauritius.
Professor Newton asserts that Leguat's "Géants" were Flamingos,
principally because bones of Flamingos have been found in Mauritius and
not a single bone has ever been got of the "géant." This argument is, in my
opinion, insufficient, and no evidence at all. We know that a Didine bird
and a gigantic rail existed on Réunion, but no bones are yet known of these.
I think, like Professor Schlegel, that Leguat's figure and description cannot
be meant for a Flamingo and that they prove the former existence of a
gigantic ralline bird in Mauritius.
The figure is made up from Leguat's description. The bill is drawn like that
of a gigantic moorhen, and so are the feet.
Habitat: Mauritius.
ALCA IMPENNIS L.
Page 143
THE GREAT AUK.
(Plate 38.)
Penguin Hore, in Hakluyt's Coll. Voyages III p. 129 (Ed. 1600—ex Hore).
Anser Magelanicus s. Pinguinus Worm, Museum Wormianum, Lib. III, Cap. 19, p. 300,
301 (1655—Figured from a specimen from the Faröe Islands).
Penguin Willoughby, Orn. Lib. III p. 242 pl. 65 (1676).
Northern Penguin Edwards, Nat. Hist. Uncommon B. etc., III p. 147 pl. 147 (1750—
First good coloured plate, from a specimen from Newfoundland).
Geyervogel Linnaeus, Fauna Suecica p. 43 no. 119 (1746).
Alca impennis Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. X p. 130 (1758—Ex fauna Sueciva no. 119,
Mus. Worm. l.c., Willoughby l.c., and Edwards l.c.); Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. XII, I, p.
210 (1766); Naumann, Nat. Voy. Deutschl. XII p. 630 pl. 337 (1844); Dresser, B.
Europe VIII p. 563, pl. 620 (1880); Seebohm, Hist. Brit. B. III p. 371 (1885).
Alca borealis Forster, Syn. Cat. Brit. B. p. 29 (1817—nomen nudum).
Plautus impennis Brünnich, Zool. Fundamenta p. 78 (1772); Baird, Brewer and
Ridgway, Water Birds N. Amer., II p. 467 (1884); Grant, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXVI p.
563 (1898).
FOR FULL DESCRIPTIONS, LITERATURE, HISTORY, LIST OF REMAINS, SEE:—
Japetus Steenstrup: Bidrag til Geirfuglens Naturhistorie etc., Kjöbenhavn (Copenhagen)
1857 (In Naturh-Forening. Vidensk. Meddel. 1855, nos. 3-7).
Alfred Newton: Abstract of Mr. Wolley's Researches in Iceland respecting the Gare-
fowl. (In Ibis, 1861, pp. 374-399).
William Preyer: Ueber Plautus impennis. (In Journal f. Orn. 1862 pp. 110-124, 337-
356.)
Alfred Newton: The Gare-fowl and its Historians. (In Natural History Review XII, 1865
pp. 467-488); id. in Encycl. Britannica Ed. IX vol. III; id. Dict. B. p. 220-221.
Wilhelm Blasius: Zur Geschichte von Alca impennis. Journ. f. Orn. 1884 pp. 58-176.
Symington Grieve: The Great Auk, or Garefowl. Its History, Archaeology, and Remains.
London 1885; Supplem. note on the Great Auk; in Trans. Edinburgh Field Nat. Soc.
(1897) p. 238-273.
Wilhelm Blasius: Der Riesenalk, Alca impennis L. (In the New Edition of Naumann
Naumann, Naturg. d. Vögel Mitteleuropas) Vol. XII p. 169-208, plates 17, 17a-17d
(1903).
ROBABLY the first mention of Great Auks is that in André Thevet's book
"Les singularitéz de la France antarctique ...," Anvers 1558, where a large
(Plate 38.)
Penguin Hore, in Hakluyt's Coll. Voyages III p. 129 (Ed. 1600—ex Hore).
Anser Magelanicus s. Pinguinus Worm, Museum Wormianum, Lib. III, Cap. 19, p. 300,
301 (1655—Figured from a specimen from the Faröe Islands).
Penguin Willoughby, Orn. Lib. III p. 242 pl. 65 (1676).
Northern Penguin Edwards, Nat. Hist. Uncommon B. etc., III p. 147 pl. 147 (1750—
First good coloured plate, from a specimen from Newfoundland).
Geyervogel Linnaeus, Fauna Suecica p. 43 no. 119 (1746).
Alca impennis Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. X p. 130 (1758—Ex fauna Sueciva no. 119,
Mus. Worm. l.c., Willoughby l.c., and Edwards l.c.); Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. XII, I, p.
210 (1766); Naumann, Nat. Voy. Deutschl. XII p. 630 pl. 337 (1844); Dresser, B.
Europe VIII p. 563, pl. 620 (1880); Seebohm, Hist. Brit. B. III p. 371 (1885).
Alca borealis Forster, Syn. Cat. Brit. B. p. 29 (1817—nomen nudum).
Plautus impennis Brünnich, Zool. Fundamenta p. 78 (1772); Baird, Brewer and
Ridgway, Water Birds N. Amer., II p. 467 (1884); Grant, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXVI p.
563 (1898).
FOR FULL DESCRIPTIONS, LITERATURE, HISTORY, LIST OF REMAINS, SEE:—
Japetus Steenstrup: Bidrag til Geirfuglens Naturhistorie etc., Kjöbenhavn (Copenhagen)
1857 (In Naturh-Forening. Vidensk. Meddel. 1855, nos. 3-7).
Alfred Newton: Abstract of Mr. Wolley's Researches in Iceland respecting the Gare-
fowl. (In Ibis, 1861, pp. 374-399).
William Preyer: Ueber Plautus impennis. (In Journal f. Orn. 1862 pp. 110-124, 337-
356.)
Alfred Newton: The Gare-fowl and its Historians. (In Natural History Review XII, 1865
pp. 467-488); id. in Encycl. Britannica Ed. IX vol. III; id. Dict. B. p. 220-221.
Wilhelm Blasius: Zur Geschichte von Alca impennis. Journ. f. Orn. 1884 pp. 58-176.
Symington Grieve: The Great Auk, or Garefowl. Its History, Archaeology, and Remains.
London 1885; Supplem. note on the Great Auk; in Trans. Edinburgh Field Nat. Soc.
(1897) p. 238-273.
Wilhelm Blasius: Der Riesenalk, Alca impennis L. (In the New Edition of Naumann
Naumann, Naturg. d. Vögel Mitteleuropas) Vol. XII p. 169-208, plates 17, 17a-17d
(1903).
ROBABLY the first mention of Great Auks is that in André Thevet's book
"Les singularitéz de la France antarctique ...," Anvers 1558, where a large
Page 144
P bird was mentioned under the name of "Aponars," Apponatz or
"Aponath." But evidently this name covered several other sea-birds,
and it is at least doubtful if it was solely applied to the Great Auk. The
same applies to the remarks by Jacques Cartier, as translated in R. Hakluyt's
collection of voyages. On the other hand there is no doubt that the
"Penguin" mentioned by Robert Hore in 1536 (Hakluyt, Collection of
Voyages III, p. 129—1600, and other Editions) was actually the Great Auk.
In fact "Penguin" has been the name usually applied to the Great Auk and is
even now used for it by the French, while in most other languages it has
been transferred, from an early date, to the Antarctic flightless birds, the
Spheniscidae.
All the first reports are from Newfoundland and thereabout, and even
Clusius (Exoticorum libri decem, Lib. V, p. 103—1605), who gives a rather
poor but perfectly recognizable figure, describes it first (p. 103) as a native
of America, under the name of "Mergus Americanus." Later on, however, in
the "Auctarium," on p. 367, he mentions it, on the authority of Henricus
Hojerus, as found in the Faröe Islands, under the name "Goirfugel." Hojerus
was also the authority for the account given in Nieremberg, Hist. Nat., etc.,
p. 215 (1635). The first comparatively good figure was published in 1655,
in the "Museum Wormianum," on p. 301, from a specimen brought alive
from the Faröe Islands. Curiously enough the figure shows a white ring
round the neck, which no Great Auk, of course, possesses.
Linnaeus, when first bestowing a scientific name on the Great Auk, in 1758,
l.c., gave the following short diagnosis and references:—
"Alca rostro compresso—ancipiti sulcato, macula ovata utrinque ante oculos. Fn. Svec. 119.
Anser magellanicus. Worm. mus. 300 t. 301.
Penguin. Will. ornith. 244 t. 65 Edw. av. 147 t. 147.
Habitat in Europa arctica."
From referring to the literature he quotes, there can, of course, be no doubt
as to what species he refers.
The most detailed descriptions are probably those given in the New Edition
of Naumann (see above), where also a list of literature and figures is given,
fully seven folio pages long! As regards the difference in the sexes little is
"Aponath." But evidently this name covered several other sea-birds,
and it is at least doubtful if it was solely applied to the Great Auk. The
same applies to the remarks by Jacques Cartier, as translated in R. Hakluyt's
collection of voyages. On the other hand there is no doubt that the
"Penguin" mentioned by Robert Hore in 1536 (Hakluyt, Collection of
Voyages III, p. 129—1600, and other Editions) was actually the Great Auk.
In fact "Penguin" has been the name usually applied to the Great Auk and is
even now used for it by the French, while in most other languages it has
been transferred, from an early date, to the Antarctic flightless birds, the
Spheniscidae.
All the first reports are from Newfoundland and thereabout, and even
Clusius (Exoticorum libri decem, Lib. V, p. 103—1605), who gives a rather
poor but perfectly recognizable figure, describes it first (p. 103) as a native
of America, under the name of "Mergus Americanus." Later on, however, in
the "Auctarium," on p. 367, he mentions it, on the authority of Henricus
Hojerus, as found in the Faröe Islands, under the name "Goirfugel." Hojerus
was also the authority for the account given in Nieremberg, Hist. Nat., etc.,
p. 215 (1635). The first comparatively good figure was published in 1655,
in the "Museum Wormianum," on p. 301, from a specimen brought alive
from the Faröe Islands. Curiously enough the figure shows a white ring
round the neck, which no Great Auk, of course, possesses.
Linnaeus, when first bestowing a scientific name on the Great Auk, in 1758,
l.c., gave the following short diagnosis and references:—
"Alca rostro compresso—ancipiti sulcato, macula ovata utrinque ante oculos. Fn. Svec. 119.
Anser magellanicus. Worm. mus. 300 t. 301.
Penguin. Will. ornith. 244 t. 65 Edw. av. 147 t. 147.
Habitat in Europa arctica."
From referring to the literature he quotes, there can, of course, be no doubt
as to what species he refers.
The most detailed descriptions are probably those given in the New Edition
of Naumann (see above), where also a list of literature and figures is given,
fully seven folio pages long! As regards the difference in the sexes little is
Page 145
known, because very few specimens exist of which the sex has been
ascertained. We find, however, some with the grooves and ridges on the bill
more marked, and the grooves purer white, while others have the grooves of
a dirtier white and less strongly developed; as these latter are apparently
mostly smaller, I think they must be females, the former males. In this case
my two specimens would be females, and the one now in Professor
Koenig's possession an adult male. Probably somewhat similar seasonal
changes took place as in Alca torda, and Professor Blasius (l.c.) has
described them. It must, however, be remembered, that the date of capture
is known of but a few examples, and that by far the majority of all those
that exist in collections have been killed in spring, on their breeding-places.
Nobody can doubt that the Great Auk is extinct. The last specimens were
obtained on Eldey, near Iceland, in 1844, and the seas and islands where the
great bird used to live are frequented by vessels every year. It is true that a
certain Lorenz Brodtkorb told that in April, 1848, he saw four Great Auks,
of which he shot one, near the Varanger Fjord, east of the North-Cape, but
Professor Newton and Wolley have, in 1855, had an interview with
Brodtkorb, and came to the conclusion that he saw and shot the Great
Northern Diver. This is the more likely to be the case, as the occurrence
north of the Arctic Circle is as yet uncertain, the finding of Great Auks both
on the island of Disco (west-coast of Greenland) and on Grimsey and
Mevenklint on the north coast of Iceland being open to doubt.
From sub-fossil and prehistoric finds, we know that the Great Auk formerly
inhabited Norway and Sweden, Denmark, with Seeland, Sejerö and Havnö,
the British Islands (Cleadon Hills in County Durham, Scotland, Ireland), the
east coast of North America from Labrador to Florida.
In historic times we know of the occurrence on the islands near Labrador,
Greenland—where it certainly used to breed on the east coast, but was
probably only of rare and exceptional occurrence on the west coast—
Iceland, the Faröe Islands, Fair Island between the Orkney and Shetland
Islands (doubtful), Orkneys (Papa Westra), St. Kilda, Skye, and Waterford
Harbour in Ireland. But as breeding stations within historic times the
following only are absolutely certain:—
ascertained. We find, however, some with the grooves and ridges on the bill
more marked, and the grooves purer white, while others have the grooves of
a dirtier white and less strongly developed; as these latter are apparently
mostly smaller, I think they must be females, the former males. In this case
my two specimens would be females, and the one now in Professor
Koenig's possession an adult male. Probably somewhat similar seasonal
changes took place as in Alca torda, and Professor Blasius (l.c.) has
described them. It must, however, be remembered, that the date of capture
is known of but a few examples, and that by far the majority of all those
that exist in collections have been killed in spring, on their breeding-places.
Nobody can doubt that the Great Auk is extinct. The last specimens were
obtained on Eldey, near Iceland, in 1844, and the seas and islands where the
great bird used to live are frequented by vessels every year. It is true that a
certain Lorenz Brodtkorb told that in April, 1848, he saw four Great Auks,
of which he shot one, near the Varanger Fjord, east of the North-Cape, but
Professor Newton and Wolley have, in 1855, had an interview with
Brodtkorb, and came to the conclusion that he saw and shot the Great
Northern Diver. This is the more likely to be the case, as the occurrence
north of the Arctic Circle is as yet uncertain, the finding of Great Auks both
on the island of Disco (west-coast of Greenland) and on Grimsey and
Mevenklint on the north coast of Iceland being open to doubt.
From sub-fossil and prehistoric finds, we know that the Great Auk formerly
inhabited Norway and Sweden, Denmark, with Seeland, Sejerö and Havnö,
the British Islands (Cleadon Hills in County Durham, Scotland, Ireland), the
east coast of North America from Labrador to Florida.
In historic times we know of the occurrence on the islands near Labrador,
Greenland—where it certainly used to breed on the east coast, but was
probably only of rare and exceptional occurrence on the west coast—
Iceland, the Faröe Islands, Fair Island between the Orkney and Shetland
Islands (doubtful), Orkneys (Papa Westra), St. Kilda, Skye, and Waterford
Harbour in Ireland. But as breeding stations within historic times the
following only are absolutely certain:—
Page 146
1. Funk Islands near Newfoundland.
2. Iceland (Geirfuglasker, Grimsey, Eldey).
3. Faröe Islands.
4. St. Kilda.
5. Orkney Islands.
While we know of regular occurrence and may assume that the bird has
been breeding on the north and west side of Newfoundland, and in east
Greenland (opposite Iceland).
The remains of the Great Auk and its eggs in collections are more numerous
than one would think, considering the enormous prices paid for mounted
specimens and eggs. There are at present known 79 or 80 skins, 26 or 27
skeletons, a great quantity of detached bones, and about 73 eggs.
I HAVE IN MY MUSEUM:
1. One adult female, formerly in the collection of the late Comte de Riocour at Vitry-le-
François, in France. I bought this specimen from the late Alphonse Boucard, together
with the bulk of the birds of the Riocour collection. It is evidently an adult female,
having the white lines on the bill not very much developed, and showing a distinct grey
tinge on the flanks. This shade is present in both my Great Auks; the feathers of the
flanks, just under the wing, are nearly white, with a conspicuous, very light grey border.
This grey tinge is present in all females, but appears to be absent in adult males. My
bird is apparently in worn breeding plumage. As it was not very well mounted and the
feet slightly damaged, I had it reduced to a "skin."
2. Another adult female. I purchased this from Mr. Rowland Ward, who had it from Mr.
Leopold Field in London, in 1897. According to a letter, dated Paris le 20 Jan., 1890,
written by the late A. Boucard, who sold it in that year to Mr. Field, the history is as
follows: "This bird was captured in Iceland in 1837, did first belong to Mr. Eimbeck of
Brunswick and afterwards in the collection of Mr. Bruch from Mayence." We must
accept this information by the late A. Boucard as correct, though it is difficult to
understand that in the most painstaking and exact list of remains of the Great Auk, by
Prof. Wilhelm Blasius of Braunschweig, or anywhere else, no mention is made of a
specimen in the possession of the late Eimbeck, or the late Bruch. Moreover, we have
no explanation where this Auk has been between the time of Bruch's death and 1890,
when Boucard sold it to Mr. Field in London.
This specimen has been described as "immature," but this is a mistake. Evidently it arose
from some white speckles being visible on the neck in the photograph (see Symington
Grieve, Trans. Edinburgh Field Nat. and Micros. Society, explanation to plate III, on
page 269). The specimen itself, however, shows no white speckles, but only worn
feathers, out of which the illusion arose in the photograph. This error has also been
transferred to the admirable treatise on the Great Auk in the New Edition of Naumann.
The grey shade "on the body lower than the wing," mentioned by Mr. Symington
2. Iceland (Geirfuglasker, Grimsey, Eldey).
3. Faröe Islands.
4. St. Kilda.
5. Orkney Islands.
While we know of regular occurrence and may assume that the bird has
been breeding on the north and west side of Newfoundland, and in east
Greenland (opposite Iceland).
The remains of the Great Auk and its eggs in collections are more numerous
than one would think, considering the enormous prices paid for mounted
specimens and eggs. There are at present known 79 or 80 skins, 26 or 27
skeletons, a great quantity of detached bones, and about 73 eggs.
I HAVE IN MY MUSEUM:
1. One adult female, formerly in the collection of the late Comte de Riocour at Vitry-le-
François, in France. I bought this specimen from the late Alphonse Boucard, together
with the bulk of the birds of the Riocour collection. It is evidently an adult female,
having the white lines on the bill not very much developed, and showing a distinct grey
tinge on the flanks. This shade is present in both my Great Auks; the feathers of the
flanks, just under the wing, are nearly white, with a conspicuous, very light grey border.
This grey tinge is present in all females, but appears to be absent in adult males. My
bird is apparently in worn breeding plumage. As it was not very well mounted and the
feet slightly damaged, I had it reduced to a "skin."
2. Another adult female. I purchased this from Mr. Rowland Ward, who had it from Mr.
Leopold Field in London, in 1897. According to a letter, dated Paris le 20 Jan., 1890,
written by the late A. Boucard, who sold it in that year to Mr. Field, the history is as
follows: "This bird was captured in Iceland in 1837, did first belong to Mr. Eimbeck of
Brunswick and afterwards in the collection of Mr. Bruch from Mayence." We must
accept this information by the late A. Boucard as correct, though it is difficult to
understand that in the most painstaking and exact list of remains of the Great Auk, by
Prof. Wilhelm Blasius of Braunschweig, or anywhere else, no mention is made of a
specimen in the possession of the late Eimbeck, or the late Bruch. Moreover, we have
no explanation where this Auk has been between the time of Bruch's death and 1890,
when Boucard sold it to Mr. Field in London.
This specimen has been described as "immature," but this is a mistake. Evidently it arose
from some white speckles being visible on the neck in the photograph (see Symington
Grieve, Trans. Edinburgh Field Nat. and Micros. Society, explanation to plate III, on
page 269). The specimen itself, however, shows no white speckles, but only worn
feathers, out of which the illusion arose in the photograph. This error has also been
transferred to the admirable treatise on the Great Auk in the New Edition of Naumann.
The grey shade "on the body lower than the wing," mentioned by Mr. Symington
Page 147
Grieve, is not a sign of immaturity, but appears in all adult females, though it is said to
be absent in males.
Some years ago an extraordinary rumour was current in Germany about the
Great Auk in the Brehm collection; it was said to have been exchanged by
the widow of Pastor C. L. Brehm for a rare Dresden cup, and that its present
resting-place was unknown. I do not know who invented this story, or how
it arose, but suffice it to say, that the Auk which was in the Brehm
collection was sold to the late King of Italy, in 1868 or 1869. The business
was concluded by Dr. Otto Finsch, and the money was used for the benefit
of a brother of the late Dr. A. E. Brehm, as it had been the wish of his father,
Pastor Brehm. The specimen was re-stuffed by the late taxidermist
Schwerdtfeger in Bremen and forwarded to a professor in Florence. It was
kept for years at the "Veneria Reale," and recently, when the collection at
that castle was dissolved, was placed in the Museum at Rome. It is one of
the finest Great Auks known.
AESTRELATA CARIBBAEA (CARTE).
(Plate 37.)
Procellaria jamaicensis Bancroft, Zoological Journal V, p. 81 (1835—Nomen nudum!).
Pterodroma caribbaea Carte, P.Z.S. 1866, p. 93, pl. 10 ("Blue Mountains in insula Jamaica").
Aestrelata caribbaea Giglioli & Salvadori, Ibis 1869, p. 66.
Fulmarus caribbaeus Gray, Handlist B. III, p. 107 (1871).
Aestrelata jamaicensis Ridgway, Man. N. Am. B., p. 67; Cory, Cat. West-Indian B., p. 84
(1892).
Oestrelata jamaicensis Salvin, Cat. B. Brit. Mus, p. 403 (1896).
I T is surprising that the name jamaicensis has generally been adopted for
this species, as Bancroft gave no description whatever. The first
description is that of Carte, in 1866, which is as follows:—"Head, neck,
back, and wings of a uniform dark sooty brown; vertex and external webs
of the primaries a shade or so darker; abdominal feathers and under tail-
coverts a shade or two lighter than those of the back; upper tail-coverts and
basal portion of tail-feathers of a light grey or dirty white. The light-
be absent in males.
Some years ago an extraordinary rumour was current in Germany about the
Great Auk in the Brehm collection; it was said to have been exchanged by
the widow of Pastor C. L. Brehm for a rare Dresden cup, and that its present
resting-place was unknown. I do not know who invented this story, or how
it arose, but suffice it to say, that the Auk which was in the Brehm
collection was sold to the late King of Italy, in 1868 or 1869. The business
was concluded by Dr. Otto Finsch, and the money was used for the benefit
of a brother of the late Dr. A. E. Brehm, as it had been the wish of his father,
Pastor Brehm. The specimen was re-stuffed by the late taxidermist
Schwerdtfeger in Bremen and forwarded to a professor in Florence. It was
kept for years at the "Veneria Reale," and recently, when the collection at
that castle was dissolved, was placed in the Museum at Rome. It is one of
the finest Great Auks known.
AESTRELATA CARIBBAEA (CARTE).
(Plate 37.)
Procellaria jamaicensis Bancroft, Zoological Journal V, p. 81 (1835—Nomen nudum!).
Pterodroma caribbaea Carte, P.Z.S. 1866, p. 93, pl. 10 ("Blue Mountains in insula Jamaica").
Aestrelata caribbaea Giglioli & Salvadori, Ibis 1869, p. 66.
Fulmarus caribbaeus Gray, Handlist B. III, p. 107 (1871).
Aestrelata jamaicensis Ridgway, Man. N. Am. B., p. 67; Cory, Cat. West-Indian B., p. 84
(1892).
Oestrelata jamaicensis Salvin, Cat. B. Brit. Mus, p. 403 (1896).
I T is surprising that the name jamaicensis has generally been adopted for
this species, as Bancroft gave no description whatever. The first
description is that of Carte, in 1866, which is as follows:—"Head, neck,
back, and wings of a uniform dark sooty brown; vertex and external webs
of the primaries a shade or so darker; abdominal feathers and under tail-
coverts a shade or two lighter than those of the back; upper tail-coverts and
basal portion of tail-feathers of a light grey or dirty white. The light-
Page 148
coloured patch on the rump is conspicuous when the wings are expanded,
but completely concealed when they are closed. Irides dark hazel. Tarsi,
toes, webs, and nails jet-black.
"Length about 12¾ inches; expanse of wings 34 inches; length from carpal
joint to tip of first primary 10¾ inches; length of bill, measured from gape,
1⅝ inches; length of nasal tubes 5⁄16 inch; length of interval between nostrils
and commencement of apical curve of upper mandible ¼ inch; length of
tarsi 15⁄10 inches; length of toes, outer and middle, sub-equal 2 inches; length
of inner toe 1⅝ inches. First and second primaries sub-equal, and about ½
inch longer than the third. Tail about 4½ inches long and round at extremity.
The closed wings extend about 1½ inches beyond the tail. Hallux small, and
in shape triangular."
"With respect to the habits of the bird, Mr. March has most kindly furnished
me with the following interesting details:—
"It is a night-bird, living in burrows in the marly clefts of the mountains at
the east and north-east end of the island. The burrows form a gallery 6 to 10
feet long, terminating in a chamber sufficiently commodious to
accommodate the pair; from this they sally forth at night, flying over the sea
in search of food (fishes), returning before dawn. It is often seen on
moonlight nights and at sunrise running about the neighbourhood of its
domicile, and sometimes crossing the road, regardless of the labourers
going to their work. I know nothing of its nidification."
The type of "Pterodroma caribbaea" is preserved in the Dublin Museum,
and three specimens are in the British Museum. This bird is one of the
rarest in collections, and all modern collectors have failed to obtain
specimens. Quite recently (1906) Mr. B. Hyatt Verrill published a pamphlet
entitled "Additions to the Avifauna of Dominica." In this unpaginated essay
he said under the heading "Aestrelata jamaicensis": "Not uncommon (on
Dominica), but seldom seen during the day. Breeds at La Bime, Pointe
Guignarde, and Lance Bateaux, as well as at Morne Rouge and Scott's
Head. In many of the above localities the musky odour of these birds is very
pronounced when passing the cliffs, wherein they breed, on a calm evening.
At dusk they may often be seen flying about the cliffs in company with
myriads of bats that spend the day in the fissures and crevices. They are
but completely concealed when they are closed. Irides dark hazel. Tarsi,
toes, webs, and nails jet-black.
"Length about 12¾ inches; expanse of wings 34 inches; length from carpal
joint to tip of first primary 10¾ inches; length of bill, measured from gape,
1⅝ inches; length of nasal tubes 5⁄16 inch; length of interval between nostrils
and commencement of apical curve of upper mandible ¼ inch; length of
tarsi 15⁄10 inches; length of toes, outer and middle, sub-equal 2 inches; length
of inner toe 1⅝ inches. First and second primaries sub-equal, and about ½
inch longer than the third. Tail about 4½ inches long and round at extremity.
The closed wings extend about 1½ inches beyond the tail. Hallux small, and
in shape triangular."
"With respect to the habits of the bird, Mr. March has most kindly furnished
me with the following interesting details:—
"It is a night-bird, living in burrows in the marly clefts of the mountains at
the east and north-east end of the island. The burrows form a gallery 6 to 10
feet long, terminating in a chamber sufficiently commodious to
accommodate the pair; from this they sally forth at night, flying over the sea
in search of food (fishes), returning before dawn. It is often seen on
moonlight nights and at sunrise running about the neighbourhood of its
domicile, and sometimes crossing the road, regardless of the labourers
going to their work. I know nothing of its nidification."
The type of "Pterodroma caribbaea" is preserved in the Dublin Museum,
and three specimens are in the British Museum. This bird is one of the
rarest in collections, and all modern collectors have failed to obtain
specimens. Quite recently (1906) Mr. B. Hyatt Verrill published a pamphlet
entitled "Additions to the Avifauna of Dominica." In this unpaginated essay
he said under the heading "Aestrelata jamaicensis": "Not uncommon (on
Dominica), but seldom seen during the day. Breeds at La Bime, Pointe
Guignarde, and Lance Bateaux, as well as at Morne Rouge and Scott's
Head. In many of the above localities the musky odour of these birds is very
pronounced when passing the cliffs, wherein they breed, on a calm evening.
At dusk they may often be seen flying about the cliffs in company with
myriads of bats that spend the day in the fissures and crevices. They are
Page 149
very difficult to procure, and although shot at repeatedly only two
specimens have been obtained."
From all former evidence we might have well considered this species to be
extinct, but if Mr. Verrill's statement is correct it would be far from
exterminated. I do not, however, know if the Dominica specimens have
been compared with Jamaica examples, and if Mr. Verrill's determination
(apparently made on Dominica) is therefore correct.
Habitat: Jamaica.
AESTRELATA HASITATA (KUHL).
Procellaria hasitata (sic) Kuhl, Beitr. z. Zool. Temminck, Pl. Col. 416 (1826); Gould, B
Australia VII, pl. 47 (1845).
Procellaria diabolica Lafresnaye, Rev. Zool. 1844, p. 168.
Procellaria meridionalis Lawrence, Ann. Lyceum N.Y. IV, p. 475 (1848— ), V, pl. 15, p. 220
(1852).
Procellaria rubritarsi Newton, Zoologist 1852, p. 3692 (ex Gould's MS., descr. nulla).
Aestrelata haesitata Bonaparte, Compt. Rend. XLII, p. 768 (1856), Elliot, B. N. America II.
pl. 60, fig. 1 (1868); Rothsch. & Hart, New Edition of "Naumann" XII, p. 20 (1903).
Aestrelata diabolica Bonap., Consp. Av. II, p. 189 (1855).
Oestrelata haesitata Newton, Ibis 1870, p. 277; Dresser, B. Europe VIII, p. 545, pl. 618
(1880); Stevens, B. of Norfolk, III, p. 361, pl. 4 (1890); Salvin, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXV,
p. 403 (1896).
M R. SAUNDERS describes this bird as follows: "The adult has the
crown and nape dark brown, hind-neck white, cheeks and ear-
coverts greyish; mantle dark brown; upper tail-coverts white; central
tail-feathers chiefly brownish-black, the rest more or less white on their
basal portions but broadly edged with brown; forehead and under-parts
white; bill black; legs and feet dusky-yellow. Length 16 inches, wing 11.3
inches. The immature bird is believed to be mottled with brown on the
forehead and to be duller in tint on the upper parts."
specimens have been obtained."
From all former evidence we might have well considered this species to be
extinct, but if Mr. Verrill's statement is correct it would be far from
exterminated. I do not, however, know if the Dominica specimens have
been compared with Jamaica examples, and if Mr. Verrill's determination
(apparently made on Dominica) is therefore correct.
Habitat: Jamaica.
AESTRELATA HASITATA (KUHL).
Procellaria hasitata (sic) Kuhl, Beitr. z. Zool. Temminck, Pl. Col. 416 (1826); Gould, B
Australia VII, pl. 47 (1845).
Procellaria diabolica Lafresnaye, Rev. Zool. 1844, p. 168.
Procellaria meridionalis Lawrence, Ann. Lyceum N.Y. IV, p. 475 (1848— ), V, pl. 15, p. 220
(1852).
Procellaria rubritarsi Newton, Zoologist 1852, p. 3692 (ex Gould's MS., descr. nulla).
Aestrelata haesitata Bonaparte, Compt. Rend. XLII, p. 768 (1856), Elliot, B. N. America II.
pl. 60, fig. 1 (1868); Rothsch. & Hart, New Edition of "Naumann" XII, p. 20 (1903).
Aestrelata diabolica Bonap., Consp. Av. II, p. 189 (1855).
Oestrelata haesitata Newton, Ibis 1870, p. 277; Dresser, B. Europe VIII, p. 545, pl. 618
(1880); Stevens, B. of Norfolk, III, p. 361, pl. 4 (1890); Salvin, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXV,
p. 403 (1896).
M R. SAUNDERS describes this bird as follows: "The adult has the
crown and nape dark brown, hind-neck white, cheeks and ear-
coverts greyish; mantle dark brown; upper tail-coverts white; central
tail-feathers chiefly brownish-black, the rest more or less white on their
basal portions but broadly edged with brown; forehead and under-parts
white; bill black; legs and feet dusky-yellow. Length 16 inches, wing 11.3
inches. The immature bird is believed to be mottled with brown on the
forehead and to be duller in tint on the upper parts."
Page 150
Though evidently not quite extinct, it seems certain that the fate of this bird
is sealed. In former times it used to breed in great numbers on several of the
West Indian Islands: Hayti, Guadeloupe, and Dominica. Its last breeding
place was the Morne au Diable or Morne Diablotin on Dominica. There it
was searched for in vain by Colonel Feilden, in 1889, who wrote a lengthy
article about it in the "Trans. Norfolk and Norwich Nat. Society" V. p. 24-
39. Mr. Selwyn Branch again, ten years later, ascended La Morne au Diable,
and found the old breeding places deserted. The "Manicou," evidently an
introduced North-American Opossum, Mongoose and rats had entirely
extirpated the "Diable."
Two-and-a-half centuries ago Père du Tertre found this Petrel breeding on
Guadeloupe, and Père Labat, about forty years later, found it in great
numbers, and gave a long, graphic description of it in his "Nouveau Voyage
aux isles de l'Amérique" (Edit. I, Vol. II, pp. 349-353). These birds were
then known as the "Diable" or "Diablotin," and their flesh was highly
esteemed, and they were even salted and exported to Martinique and other
French islands in great numbers.
In 1876 Mr. F. A. Ober searched already unsuccessfully for our birds.
It seems that the disturbance and destruction on their breeding places has
scattered these Petrels about, for specimens have at various times been
taken on the coast of Florida and Virginia, and even as late as 1893 and
1895, inland of the State of New York on Oneida Lake, in Ulster County,
Vermont and Ontario; moreover, a specimen has been killed in 1850 in
Norfolk, England, and an example in the Museum of Boulogne is said to
have been killed in the neighbourhood of that town.
In an undated and unpaginated pamphlet, received last year in Europe, Mr.
A. Hyatt Verrill informs us that this bird is "not uncommon on the fishing
grounds and in Martinique and Guadeloupe channels," and that he took a
specimen in September, 1904. This statement requires confirmation.
In collections this bird is very rare. I have the male (in moult) which was
caught on August 28th, 1893 on Oneida Lake, in the State of New York.
Habitat: West Indian Islands.
is sealed. In former times it used to breed in great numbers on several of the
West Indian Islands: Hayti, Guadeloupe, and Dominica. Its last breeding
place was the Morne au Diable or Morne Diablotin on Dominica. There it
was searched for in vain by Colonel Feilden, in 1889, who wrote a lengthy
article about it in the "Trans. Norfolk and Norwich Nat. Society" V. p. 24-
39. Mr. Selwyn Branch again, ten years later, ascended La Morne au Diable,
and found the old breeding places deserted. The "Manicou," evidently an
introduced North-American Opossum, Mongoose and rats had entirely
extirpated the "Diable."
Two-and-a-half centuries ago Père du Tertre found this Petrel breeding on
Guadeloupe, and Père Labat, about forty years later, found it in great
numbers, and gave a long, graphic description of it in his "Nouveau Voyage
aux isles de l'Amérique" (Edit. I, Vol. II, pp. 349-353). These birds were
then known as the "Diable" or "Diablotin," and their flesh was highly
esteemed, and they were even salted and exported to Martinique and other
French islands in great numbers.
In 1876 Mr. F. A. Ober searched already unsuccessfully for our birds.
It seems that the disturbance and destruction on their breeding places has
scattered these Petrels about, for specimens have at various times been
taken on the coast of Florida and Virginia, and even as late as 1893 and
1895, inland of the State of New York on Oneida Lake, in Ulster County,
Vermont and Ontario; moreover, a specimen has been killed in 1850 in
Norfolk, England, and an example in the Museum of Boulogne is said to
have been killed in the neighbourhood of that town.
In an undated and unpaginated pamphlet, received last year in Europe, Mr.
A. Hyatt Verrill informs us that this bird is "not uncommon on the fishing
grounds and in Martinique and Guadeloupe channels," and that he took a
specimen in September, 1904. This statement requires confirmation.
In collections this bird is very rare. I have the male (in moult) which was
caught on August 28th, 1893 on Oneida Lake, in the State of New York.
Habitat: West Indian Islands.
Page 151
HEMIPHAGA SPADICEA (LATH.)
(Plate 21.)
Chestnut-shouldered Pigeon Latham, Gen. Syn. Suppl. II, add. p. 375 (1802—Norfolk
Island).
Columba spadicea Latham, Ind. Orn., Suppl. p. LX, No. 7 (1802—Norfolk Island);
Temminck and Knip, Pigeons, II, p. 1, pl. 1 (1808—"Friendly Islands."—Errore).
Columba gigas Ranzani, Elementi di Zool. III, 1, p. 223 (1821—"Friendly Islands."—
Errore).
Columba princeps Vigors, P.Z.S. 1833, p. 78 (Australia—errore).
Columba leucogaster Wagler, Syst. Av., Columba spec. 12 (1827—Norfolk Island).
Hemiphaga spadicea Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXI, p. 238 (1893).
T HE Norfolk Island Pigeon, Hemiphaga spadicea spadicea, is very
similar to the New Zealand Pigeon, Hemiphaga spadicea
novaezealandiae, but differs in having the hind-neck coppery or
metallic green, sharply defined from the chestnut back, the wings and upper
wing-coverts more greyish, less greenish, also the lower back and rump
somewhat more greyish.
As far as we know this pigeon was only found on Norfolk Island, the
locality "Australia" being doubtless erroneous. Like so many other birds it
became extinct on Norfolk Island, probably more than half a century ago.
There are evidently quite a number of specimens in various museums, many
of which have never been recorded. I am aware of the following examples:
1 in the British Museum (Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXI, p. 238).
3 in the Liverpool Museum (Bull. Liverp. Mus. I, p. 35).
1 in my own collection (Proc. IV. Orn. Congress, p. 215).
1 in Philadelphia, U.S. America (Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exp. B,
p. 225).
1 in Frankfurt a.M. (Hartert, Kat. Vogelsamml., p. 189).
1 in Wiesbaden (Lampe, Jahrb. Nassau Ver. 58).
1 in Bremen (Hartlaub, Verz. Museum, p. 98).
1 in Lisbon (Forbes and Rob., Bull. Liverp. Mus. II, p. 130).
1 in Leyden (Schlegel, Mus. Pays-Bas).
(Plate 21.)
Chestnut-shouldered Pigeon Latham, Gen. Syn. Suppl. II, add. p. 375 (1802—Norfolk
Island).
Columba spadicea Latham, Ind. Orn., Suppl. p. LX, No. 7 (1802—Norfolk Island);
Temminck and Knip, Pigeons, II, p. 1, pl. 1 (1808—"Friendly Islands."—Errore).
Columba gigas Ranzani, Elementi di Zool. III, 1, p. 223 (1821—"Friendly Islands."—
Errore).
Columba princeps Vigors, P.Z.S. 1833, p. 78 (Australia—errore).
Columba leucogaster Wagler, Syst. Av., Columba spec. 12 (1827—Norfolk Island).
Hemiphaga spadicea Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXI, p. 238 (1893).
T HE Norfolk Island Pigeon, Hemiphaga spadicea spadicea, is very
similar to the New Zealand Pigeon, Hemiphaga spadicea
novaezealandiae, but differs in having the hind-neck coppery or
metallic green, sharply defined from the chestnut back, the wings and upper
wing-coverts more greyish, less greenish, also the lower back and rump
somewhat more greyish.
As far as we know this pigeon was only found on Norfolk Island, the
locality "Australia" being doubtless erroneous. Like so many other birds it
became extinct on Norfolk Island, probably more than half a century ago.
There are evidently quite a number of specimens in various museums, many
of which have never been recorded. I am aware of the following examples:
1 in the British Museum (Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXI, p. 238).
3 in the Liverpool Museum (Bull. Liverp. Mus. I, p. 35).
1 in my own collection (Proc. IV. Orn. Congress, p. 215).
1 in Philadelphia, U.S. America (Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exp. B,
p. 225).
1 in Frankfurt a.M. (Hartert, Kat. Vogelsamml., p. 189).
1 in Wiesbaden (Lampe, Jahrb. Nassau Ver. 58).
1 in Bremen (Hartlaub, Verz. Museum, p. 98).
1 in Lisbon (Forbes and Rob., Bull. Liverp. Mus. II, p. 130).
1 in Leyden (Schlegel, Mus. Pays-Bas).
Page 152
1 in Vienna (Ibis 1860, p. 422).
1 in Naples, seen by myself.
1 in Milan, examined by myself.
The specimen at Tring was bought at the auction of the "Cumberland
Museum" at Distington.
ALECTROENAS NITIDISSIMA (SCOP.)
(Plate 22.)
Pigeon hollandais Sonnerat, Voy. Ind. Orient. II, p. 175, pl. 101 (1782).
Hackled Pigeon Latham, Syn. B. II, 2, p. 641, No. 36 (1783).
Columba nitidissima Scopoli, Del. Flor. and Faun. Insubr. II, p. 93, No. 89 (1786) (ex
Sonnerat).
Columba franciae Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, 2, p. 779, No. 51 (1788). (ex Sonnerat).
Columba botanica Bonnaterre, Enc. Méth. I, p. 233 (1790).
Ramier périssé Levaillant, Ois. d'Afr. VI, p. 74, pl. 267 (1808).
Columba jubata Wagler, Syst. Av., Columba, sp. 22 (1827).
Alectroenas nitidissima G. R. Gray, List Gen. B., p. 58 (1840).
Alectroenas franciae Reichenbach, Syn. Av., Columbariae, p. 2, f. 1302 (1847).
Columbigallus franciae Des Murs, Encycl. d'Hist. Nat., Ois. VI., p. 31, (1854?).
Ptilopus nitidissimus Schlegel and Pollen, Rech. Faun. Madag., p. 159 (1868).
Alectroenas nitidissimus G. R. Gray, Hand-list II, p. 228, No. 9164 (1870).
Alectoroenas nitidissimus A. Newton, P. Z. S. 1879, pp. 2-4.
S ONNERAT'S original description, translated into English, is as
follows: "It is much larger than the European Woodpigeon; the feathers
of the head, neck and breast are long, narrow, and end in a point. These
feathers are rather curiously constructed, they have the polish, brilliancy,
and feel of a cartilaginous blade. I could not, with the aid of a lens,
distinguish whether these blades were formed by the conglomeration of the
barbules, but we may take it for granted that they are constituted in a like
1 in Naples, seen by myself.
1 in Milan, examined by myself.
The specimen at Tring was bought at the auction of the "Cumberland
Museum" at Distington.
ALECTROENAS NITIDISSIMA (SCOP.)
(Plate 22.)
Pigeon hollandais Sonnerat, Voy. Ind. Orient. II, p. 175, pl. 101 (1782).
Hackled Pigeon Latham, Syn. B. II, 2, p. 641, No. 36 (1783).
Columba nitidissima Scopoli, Del. Flor. and Faun. Insubr. II, p. 93, No. 89 (1786) (ex
Sonnerat).
Columba franciae Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, 2, p. 779, No. 51 (1788). (ex Sonnerat).
Columba botanica Bonnaterre, Enc. Méth. I, p. 233 (1790).
Ramier périssé Levaillant, Ois. d'Afr. VI, p. 74, pl. 267 (1808).
Columba jubata Wagler, Syst. Av., Columba, sp. 22 (1827).
Alectroenas nitidissima G. R. Gray, List Gen. B., p. 58 (1840).
Alectroenas franciae Reichenbach, Syn. Av., Columbariae, p. 2, f. 1302 (1847).
Columbigallus franciae Des Murs, Encycl. d'Hist. Nat., Ois. VI., p. 31, (1854?).
Ptilopus nitidissimus Schlegel and Pollen, Rech. Faun. Madag., p. 159 (1868).
Alectroenas nitidissimus G. R. Gray, Hand-list II, p. 228, No. 9164 (1870).
Alectoroenas nitidissimus A. Newton, P. Z. S. 1879, pp. 2-4.
S ONNERAT'S original description, translated into English, is as
follows: "It is much larger than the European Woodpigeon; the feathers
of the head, neck and breast are long, narrow, and end in a point. These
feathers are rather curiously constructed, they have the polish, brilliancy,
and feel of a cartilaginous blade. I could not, with the aid of a lens,
distinguish whether these blades were formed by the conglomeration of the
barbules, but we may take it for granted that they are constituted in a like
Page 153
manner to the wing appendages of the Bohemian Waxwing and the
cartilaginous blades of Sonnerat's Jungle Fowl. The eye is surrounded by
naked skin of a deep red; the back, the wings and the belly are of a dark
blue; the rump and tail are of a very bright carmine red; the beak and iris
are of the same colour, and the feet are black."
Undoubtedly quite extinct. Only three specimens are known of this bird:
one in Edinburgh, one in Paris, and one in Mauritius. Some bones were
collected by the Rev. H. H. Slater.
Habitat: Mauritius.
ALECTROENAS(?) RODERICANA (MILNE-EDWARDS).
Columba rodericana Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sc. Nat. (5) XIX art. 3, p. 16, pl. 12, ff. 1, 1a, 1b,
1c (1874).
T HE original description of the sternum is as follows:—"It belongs to a
species small in size, barely as large as T. tympanistria, but evidently
much better built for flight. In fact the most striking characters of this
sternum are the large size of the bouclier, the large size of the lateral
notches, and the shape of the keel, whose anterior angle is not much
produced in front. The coracoidal grooves are large and only slightly
oblique. The lateral branches detach themselves from the bone in front of
the costal facets—they are very widely spread, and stretch more directly
outwards than in the remainder of the species of the family. The lower
lateral branches are equally divergent, and the median blade of the posterior
edge is remarkable from its enlargement. The keel is moderately prominent,
its anterior angle is much rounded, and does not reach the level of the
episternal apophysis, as is the case, as a rule, in the pigeons. All these
peculiarities, to which must be added the general flattening of the bone
which is hardly at all sloped like a roof, separate the pigeon of Rodriguez
very widely, not only from Erythroena and Turtur, but also from Vinago. In
its shape in general, by the little pronounced keel and the direction of the
latter, this sternum presents certain analogies to the essentially arboreal
species such as those of the genus Carpophaga, but they all differ in having
cartilaginous blades of Sonnerat's Jungle Fowl. The eye is surrounded by
naked skin of a deep red; the back, the wings and the belly are of a dark
blue; the rump and tail are of a very bright carmine red; the beak and iris
are of the same colour, and the feet are black."
Undoubtedly quite extinct. Only three specimens are known of this bird:
one in Edinburgh, one in Paris, and one in Mauritius. Some bones were
collected by the Rev. H. H. Slater.
Habitat: Mauritius.
ALECTROENAS(?) RODERICANA (MILNE-EDWARDS).
Columba rodericana Milne-Edwards, Ann. Sc. Nat. (5) XIX art. 3, p. 16, pl. 12, ff. 1, 1a, 1b,
1c (1874).
T HE original description of the sternum is as follows:—"It belongs to a
species small in size, barely as large as T. tympanistria, but evidently
much better built for flight. In fact the most striking characters of this
sternum are the large size of the bouclier, the large size of the lateral
notches, and the shape of the keel, whose anterior angle is not much
produced in front. The coracoidal grooves are large and only slightly
oblique. The lateral branches detach themselves from the bone in front of
the costal facets—they are very widely spread, and stretch more directly
outwards than in the remainder of the species of the family. The lower
lateral branches are equally divergent, and the median blade of the posterior
edge is remarkable from its enlargement. The keel is moderately prominent,
its anterior angle is much rounded, and does not reach the level of the
episternal apophysis, as is the case, as a rule, in the pigeons. All these
peculiarities, to which must be added the general flattening of the bone
which is hardly at all sloped like a roof, separate the pigeon of Rodriguez
very widely, not only from Erythroena and Turtur, but also from Vinago. In
its shape in general, by the little pronounced keel and the direction of the
latter, this sternum presents certain analogies to the essentially arboreal
species such as those of the genus Carpophaga, but they all differ in having
Page 154
the space for the costal facets on the sides of the sternum much more
extended, the superior lateral branches larger, and the latter arising further
back, so that the lateral notches are smaller. Up to the present I do not know
any genus of the family of Columbidae in which the sternum can at all be
likened to that found recently in Rodriguez, and therefore in all probability
this fossil remainder is of yet another vanished species, which I propose to
call Columba rodericana." (Translated.)
It is probable that Milne-Edwards's C. rodericana belonged to the genus
Alectroenas, and was the representative on Rodriguez of the Alectroenas
nitidissima of Mauritius. 1 humerus in the Tring Museum.
Habitat: Rodriguez.
NESOENAS SALVAD.
S OLES normal, not very broad, only the hind toe with the skin
prominently expanded on the sides. First primary about equal to the
sixth. Tail entirely rufous, composed of twelve feathers.
NESOENAS MAYERI (PREVOST).
(Plate 3, Fig. 3.)
Columba mayeri Prévost & Knip, Pigeons II, pl. 60 (1843).
Columba meyeri Schlegel & Pollen, Rech. Faun. Mad. p. 111, pl. 36 (1868).
Peristera meyeri G. R. Gray, Gen. B. III App. p. 24 (1849).
Carpophaga meyeri G. R. Gray, fide Bp. Consp. Av. II p. 45 (1854).
Trocaza meyeri Bonaparte, Consp. Av. II p. 45 (1854).
Trocaza meijeri Pollen, N.T.D. I p. 318 (1863).
Nesoenas mayeri Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. vol. XXI p. 327 (1893).
extended, the superior lateral branches larger, and the latter arising further
back, so that the lateral notches are smaller. Up to the present I do not know
any genus of the family of Columbidae in which the sternum can at all be
likened to that found recently in Rodriguez, and therefore in all probability
this fossil remainder is of yet another vanished species, which I propose to
call Columba rodericana." (Translated.)
It is probable that Milne-Edwards's C. rodericana belonged to the genus
Alectroenas, and was the representative on Rodriguez of the Alectroenas
nitidissima of Mauritius. 1 humerus in the Tring Museum.
Habitat: Rodriguez.
NESOENAS SALVAD.
S OLES normal, not very broad, only the hind toe with the skin
prominently expanded on the sides. First primary about equal to the
sixth. Tail entirely rufous, composed of twelve feathers.
NESOENAS MAYERI (PREVOST).
(Plate 3, Fig. 3.)
Columba mayeri Prévost & Knip, Pigeons II, pl. 60 (1843).
Columba meyeri Schlegel & Pollen, Rech. Faun. Mad. p. 111, pl. 36 (1868).
Peristera meyeri G. R. Gray, Gen. B. III App. p. 24 (1849).
Carpophaga meyeri G. R. Gray, fide Bp. Consp. Av. II p. 45 (1854).
Trocaza meyeri Bonaparte, Consp. Av. II p. 45 (1854).
Trocaza meijeri Pollen, N.T.D. I p. 318 (1863).
Nesoenas mayeri Salvadori, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. vol. XXI p. 327 (1893).
Page 155
T HE following is the description by Salvadori in the "Catalogue of
Birds":—"Head, neck and underparts pale pink, fading into whitish
towards the forehead, cheeks and upper throat, and passing into rather
darker pink on the mantle; remainder of the upper back and the entire wings
brown, with a slight shade of olive and rufous; lower back and rump
greyish, the latter mottled with chestnut; upper tail coverts and tail
cinnamon, the outer tail feathers fading into buff on the outer webs and
towards the tips; undertail-coverts pink, like the mantle; undersurface of the
wings ashy brown, slightly pale on the axillaries, and under wing-coverts
iris yellow; bill yellow, shaded with red towards the base; legs red (fide
Shelley). Total length about 15.5 inches, wing 8.5, tail 6.5, bill 0.86, tarsus
1.3."
In the live bird the pink soon fades away almost entirely, and the olive
shade on the wings is strongly developed.
This bird was not found by the Rev. H. H. Slater, during his visit to
Mauritius. As observed by Mons. Paul Carié (Ornis XII, p. 127), the idea
that it is extinct is, however, incorrect, as it can still easily be procured,
though it is rare. M. Georges Antelme, of Mauritius, possesses the eggs of
this pigeon. That it still exists is also evident from two specimens which
were sent to the Zoological Gardens, London, last year, and are still living
there.
Habitat: Mauritius.
NESOENAS DUBOISI SP. NOV.
Pigeons sauvages d'un rouge roussastre Le Sieur D.B., Voyages aux Iles Dauphine ou
Madagascar, etc., p. 171 (1674—Bourbon).
T ALKING of Wild Pigeons, "Le Sieur D.B." tells us that there were on
the island of Bourbon "others of a russet red colour, a little larger than
European pigeons, with the beak larger, red at base near the head, the
eyes surrounded by a fiery colour, as in the pheasants. At a certain season
they are so fat 'qu'on ne leur voit point de croupion;' they taste very good."
Birds":—"Head, neck and underparts pale pink, fading into whitish
towards the forehead, cheeks and upper throat, and passing into rather
darker pink on the mantle; remainder of the upper back and the entire wings
brown, with a slight shade of olive and rufous; lower back and rump
greyish, the latter mottled with chestnut; upper tail coverts and tail
cinnamon, the outer tail feathers fading into buff on the outer webs and
towards the tips; undertail-coverts pink, like the mantle; undersurface of the
wings ashy brown, slightly pale on the axillaries, and under wing-coverts
iris yellow; bill yellow, shaded with red towards the base; legs red (fide
Shelley). Total length about 15.5 inches, wing 8.5, tail 6.5, bill 0.86, tarsus
1.3."
In the live bird the pink soon fades away almost entirely, and the olive
shade on the wings is strongly developed.
This bird was not found by the Rev. H. H. Slater, during his visit to
Mauritius. As observed by Mons. Paul Carié (Ornis XII, p. 127), the idea
that it is extinct is, however, incorrect, as it can still easily be procured,
though it is rare. M. Georges Antelme, of Mauritius, possesses the eggs of
this pigeon. That it still exists is also evident from two specimens which
were sent to the Zoological Gardens, London, last year, and are still living
there.
Habitat: Mauritius.
NESOENAS DUBOISI SP. NOV.
Pigeons sauvages d'un rouge roussastre Le Sieur D.B., Voyages aux Iles Dauphine ou
Madagascar, etc., p. 171 (1674—Bourbon).
T ALKING of Wild Pigeons, "Le Sieur D.B." tells us that there were on
the island of Bourbon "others of a russet red colour, a little larger than
European pigeons, with the beak larger, red at base near the head, the
eyes surrounded by a fiery colour, as in the pheasants. At a certain season
they are so fat 'qu'on ne leur voit point de croupion;' they taste very good."
Page 156
This passage cannot be meant for a turtle-dove, but the description of the
bill and surrounding of the eyes shows that it refers to a form allied to
Nesoenas mayeri. The latter, however, is not entirely russet red, but the
head, neck, underside and back are creamy white, washed with a greyish-
rose colour. Therefore the bird mentioned by Le Sieur D.B. was evidently a
representative of N. mayeri or Bourbon. I name it in memory of Monsieur
Dubois, who was the author of the Voyages of the "Sieur D.B."
Habitat: Bourbon or Réunion.
ECTOPISTES SWAINS.
Ectopistes Swainson, Zoological Journal III p. 362 (1827—Partim! Columba speciosa and C.
migratoria mentioned as types, but ten years later the genus Ectopistes was restricted to
C. migratoria by the same author).
T AIL very long and excessively cuneate, the central rectrices sharply
pointed. First primary of the wing longest. Tarsus very short, in front
half covered with feathers. Now, only the Passenger Pigeon is
included in this genus, while formerly the Zenaidura carolinensis auct. used
to be associated with it.
ECTOPISTES MACROURA (L.)
PASSENGER PIGEON.
Columba macroura Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. X p. 164 (1758—Ex Catesby, Carolina I p. 23,
pl. 23 [1754]. "Habitat in Canada, hybernat in Carolina." Regarding the necessity of
accepting this name see Bangs, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington XIX p. 42, and Auk 1906,
pp. 474, 475. The conclusions of Messrs. Bangs and Allen are perfectly correct).
Columba canadensis Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. XII, p. 284 (1766—Ex Brisson, Orn. I p. 118.
Habitat in Canada. Cf. note of Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXI, p. 369).
Columba migratoria Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. XII p. 285 (Ex Frisch, pl. 142, Kalm., Brisson
I, p. 100, Catesby. "Habitat in America Septentrionali copiosissima ..."); Wilson, Amer.
Orn. I p. 102, pl. XLIX (1808); Temminck & Knip, Pigeons I, seconde fam., pls. 48, 49
bill and surrounding of the eyes shows that it refers to a form allied to
Nesoenas mayeri. The latter, however, is not entirely russet red, but the
head, neck, underside and back are creamy white, washed with a greyish-
rose colour. Therefore the bird mentioned by Le Sieur D.B. was evidently a
representative of N. mayeri or Bourbon. I name it in memory of Monsieur
Dubois, who was the author of the Voyages of the "Sieur D.B."
Habitat: Bourbon or Réunion.
ECTOPISTES SWAINS.
Ectopistes Swainson, Zoological Journal III p. 362 (1827—Partim! Columba speciosa and C.
migratoria mentioned as types, but ten years later the genus Ectopistes was restricted to
C. migratoria by the same author).
T AIL very long and excessively cuneate, the central rectrices sharply
pointed. First primary of the wing longest. Tarsus very short, in front
half covered with feathers. Now, only the Passenger Pigeon is
included in this genus, while formerly the Zenaidura carolinensis auct. used
to be associated with it.
ECTOPISTES MACROURA (L.)
PASSENGER PIGEON.
Columba macroura Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. X p. 164 (1758—Ex Catesby, Carolina I p. 23,
pl. 23 [1754]. "Habitat in Canada, hybernat in Carolina." Regarding the necessity of
accepting this name see Bangs, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington XIX p. 42, and Auk 1906,
pp. 474, 475. The conclusions of Messrs. Bangs and Allen are perfectly correct).
Columba canadensis Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. XII, p. 284 (1766—Ex Brisson, Orn. I p. 118.
Habitat in Canada. Cf. note of Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXI, p. 369).
Columba migratoria Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. XII p. 285 (Ex Frisch, pl. 142, Kalm., Brisson
I, p. 100, Catesby. "Habitat in America Septentrionali copiosissima ..."); Wilson, Amer.
Orn. I p. 102, pl. XLIX (1808); Temminck & Knip, Pigeons I, seconde fam., pls. 48, 49
Page 157
(1808-11); Audubon, Orn. Biogr. I, p. 319 (1831); Baird, Brewer & Ridgway, Hist.
N.A.B., Land-Birds III, p. 368, pl. 57, 4 (1874).
Pigeon de Passage Buffon, Hist. Nat. Ois. II, p. 527 (1771).
Tourterelle du Canada Daubenton, Pl. Enl. 176.
Columba Histrio P.L.S. Müller, Natursyst. Suppl. p. 134 (1776—ex Buffon).
Columba ventralis id., l.c. p. 134 (1776—ex Buffon).
Ectopistes migratoria Swainson, Zool. Journal III, p. 362 (1827); Gould, B. Europe, pl. 247
(1848); Coues, B. North-West, p. 387 (1874); Maynard, B. E. North America, p. 335
(1881).
Trygon migratoria Brehm, Handb. Naturg. Vög. Deutschl., p. 495 (1831).
Ectopistes migratorius G. R. Gray, Gen. B. II, p. 471 (1844); Brewster, Auk 1889, pp. 286-
291; Bendire, Life-History N. Amer. B., p. 132; Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXI, p.
370; Proc. Delaware Valley Ornith. Club II, p. 17 (1898); A.O.U. Check-List (Ed. II) p.
120, No. 315 (1895); Wintle, B. Montreal, p. 51 (1896); Minot, B. New England, p. 395
(1895); Auk 1903, p. 66.
Trygon gregaria Brehm, Vogelfang, p. 258 (1855).
I T is true that Linnaeus' diagnosis of his Columba macroura is very short,
reading, as it does, as follows: "Columba cauda cuneiformi longa,
pectore purpurascente." These words, however, are clearly taken from
Catesby, who gives an excellent figure and description, as is also the
"Habitat," viz.: Habitat in Canada, hybernat in Carolina, though Linnaeus
first quotes Edwards 15, pl. 15, where an entirely different bird is described
and figured. (Cf. Bangs, l.c.)
The Passenger Pigeon in former times occurred throughout North America
in great abundance, from the Atlantic to the great Central Plains, and from
the Southern States, where it rarely occurred, north to at least 62° northern
latitude. Being a migrant, this bird used to migrate southwards after the
breeding season, and to return to their homes in spring, but it also shifted its
quarters according to the abundance or scarcity of food, like our Pigeons.
Sometimes incredible numbers flocked together. Such stupendous flights
have been described independently by Audubon, Wilson and others. In 1813
Audubon says that during his whole journey from Hardensburg to
Louisville, fifty-five miles, countless masses of Pigeons continued to pass
over, and also did so during the three following days. "At times they flew so
low, that multitudes were destroyed, and for many days the entire
population seemed to eat nothing else but Pigeons." Where they roosted in
N.A.B., Land-Birds III, p. 368, pl. 57, 4 (1874).
Pigeon de Passage Buffon, Hist. Nat. Ois. II, p. 527 (1771).
Tourterelle du Canada Daubenton, Pl. Enl. 176.
Columba Histrio P.L.S. Müller, Natursyst. Suppl. p. 134 (1776—ex Buffon).
Columba ventralis id., l.c. p. 134 (1776—ex Buffon).
Ectopistes migratoria Swainson, Zool. Journal III, p. 362 (1827); Gould, B. Europe, pl. 247
(1848); Coues, B. North-West, p. 387 (1874); Maynard, B. E. North America, p. 335
(1881).
Trygon migratoria Brehm, Handb. Naturg. Vög. Deutschl., p. 495 (1831).
Ectopistes migratorius G. R. Gray, Gen. B. II, p. 471 (1844); Brewster, Auk 1889, pp. 286-
291; Bendire, Life-History N. Amer. B., p. 132; Salvadori, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XXI, p.
370; Proc. Delaware Valley Ornith. Club II, p. 17 (1898); A.O.U. Check-List (Ed. II) p.
120, No. 315 (1895); Wintle, B. Montreal, p. 51 (1896); Minot, B. New England, p. 395
(1895); Auk 1903, p. 66.
Trygon gregaria Brehm, Vogelfang, p. 258 (1855).
I T is true that Linnaeus' diagnosis of his Columba macroura is very short,
reading, as it does, as follows: "Columba cauda cuneiformi longa,
pectore purpurascente." These words, however, are clearly taken from
Catesby, who gives an excellent figure and description, as is also the
"Habitat," viz.: Habitat in Canada, hybernat in Carolina, though Linnaeus
first quotes Edwards 15, pl. 15, where an entirely different bird is described
and figured. (Cf. Bangs, l.c.)
The Passenger Pigeon in former times occurred throughout North America
in great abundance, from the Atlantic to the great Central Plains, and from
the Southern States, where it rarely occurred, north to at least 62° northern
latitude. Being a migrant, this bird used to migrate southwards after the
breeding season, and to return to their homes in spring, but it also shifted its
quarters according to the abundance or scarcity of food, like our Pigeons.
Sometimes incredible numbers flocked together. Such stupendous flights
have been described independently by Audubon, Wilson and others. In 1813
Audubon says that during his whole journey from Hardensburg to
Louisville, fifty-five miles, countless masses of Pigeons continued to pass
over, and also did so during the three following days. "At times they flew so
low, that multitudes were destroyed, and for many days the entire
population seemed to eat nothing else but Pigeons." Where they roosted in
Page 158
millions, the dung soon covered the ground and destroyed the grass and
undergrowth, limbs and even small trees broke down from the weight of the
birds. "One of the breeding places visited by Wilson, not far from
Shelbyville, Kentucky, stretched through the forest in nearly a north and
south direction. This was several miles in breadth, and upwards of forty
miles in extent. In this immense tract nearly every tree was furnished with
nests wherever there were branches to accommodate them. He was
informed by those who sought to plunder the nests of the squabs, that the
noise in the woods was so great as to terrify their horses, and that it was
difficult for one person to hear another speak. The ground was strewed with
broken limbs, eggs and young Pigeons. Hawks were sailing about in great
numbers, while from twenty feet upwards to the tops of the trees there was
a perpetual tumult of crowding and fluttering multitudes of Pigeons, their
wings resounding like thunder, and mingled with the frequent crash of
falling trees. In one instance he counted ninety nests in a single tree."
It is only natural that man took advantage of such vast multitudes, and that
they were killed in great numbers, for food, and, maybe, sometimes
wantonly destroyed. Yet it is difficult to understand what brought on their
total destruction, as their power of flight was great, and their vision
remarkably keen. In 1874 Messrs. Baird, Brewer and Ridgway considered
them still common birds, though "their abundance in large extents of the
country had been very sensibly reduced." At that time "in the New England
States and in the more cultivated part of the country, these birds no longer
bred in large communities. The instance near Montpelier, in 1849, is the
only marked exception that has come within my knowledge. They now
breed in isolated pairs, their nests being scattered through the woods and
seldom near one another." In 1895, in the A.O.U. check-list, the authors say:
"Breeding range now mainly restricted to portions of the Canadas and the
northern borders of the United States, as far west as Manitoba and the
Dakotas."
At the present time the Passenger Pigeon seems to have entirely
disappeared, a small flock in an aviary apparently being all that is left of it
alive. Mr. James H. Fleming, of Toronto, kindly sends me the following
notes, which I think are of the greatest interest:—
undergrowth, limbs and even small trees broke down from the weight of the
birds. "One of the breeding places visited by Wilson, not far from
Shelbyville, Kentucky, stretched through the forest in nearly a north and
south direction. This was several miles in breadth, and upwards of forty
miles in extent. In this immense tract nearly every tree was furnished with
nests wherever there were branches to accommodate them. He was
informed by those who sought to plunder the nests of the squabs, that the
noise in the woods was so great as to terrify their horses, and that it was
difficult for one person to hear another speak. The ground was strewed with
broken limbs, eggs and young Pigeons. Hawks were sailing about in great
numbers, while from twenty feet upwards to the tops of the trees there was
a perpetual tumult of crowding and fluttering multitudes of Pigeons, their
wings resounding like thunder, and mingled with the frequent crash of
falling trees. In one instance he counted ninety nests in a single tree."
It is only natural that man took advantage of such vast multitudes, and that
they were killed in great numbers, for food, and, maybe, sometimes
wantonly destroyed. Yet it is difficult to understand what brought on their
total destruction, as their power of flight was great, and their vision
remarkably keen. In 1874 Messrs. Baird, Brewer and Ridgway considered
them still common birds, though "their abundance in large extents of the
country had been very sensibly reduced." At that time "in the New England
States and in the more cultivated part of the country, these birds no longer
bred in large communities. The instance near Montpelier, in 1849, is the
only marked exception that has come within my knowledge. They now
breed in isolated pairs, their nests being scattered through the woods and
seldom near one another." In 1895, in the A.O.U. check-list, the authors say:
"Breeding range now mainly restricted to portions of the Canadas and the
northern borders of the United States, as far west as Manitoba and the
Dakotas."
At the present time the Passenger Pigeon seems to have entirely
disappeared, a small flock in an aviary apparently being all that is left of it
alive. Mr. James H. Fleming, of Toronto, kindly sends me the following
notes, which I think are of the greatest interest:—
Page 159
"The disappearance of the Passenger Pigeon in Ontario dates back at least
forty years, though as late as 1870 some of the old roosts were still
frequented, but the incredible flocks, of which so much has been said, had
gone long before that date, and by 1880 the pigeon was practically
exterminated, not only in Ontario, but over the greater part of its old range.
There are however occasional records of birds taken, for some years later.
An immature bird taken September 9, 1887, in Chester County,
Pennsylvania, is said to be the last for that part of the State[4]; a bird, also
immature, is in my collection, taken in December, 1888, at Montreal,
Quebec. There are other Montreal records of the same date,[5] but with the
exception of one taken at Tadousac, July 26, 1889,[6] these are the last
Quebec records of birds actually taken. In Ontario two were taken at
Toronto in 1890, on September 20, and October 11, both immature females,
the latter is in my collection, as is an adult female taken by Mr. Walter
Brett, at Riding Mountain, Manatoba, May 12, 1892, one of a pair seen. I
also have an adult male taken at Waukegon, Illinois, December 19, 1892. I
was in New York in the latter part of November, 1892, and was then assured
by Mr. Rowland, a well known taxidermist, that he had recently seen
several barrels of pigeons that had been condemned as unfit for food; they
had come to New York from Indian Territory, and I believe had had their
tails pulled out to permit tighter packing. Mr. William Brewster has
recorded the sending of several hundred dozens of pigeons to the Boston
market in December of the same year, and in January, 1893; these were also
from Indian Territory[7]; these are the last records we have of the Passenger
Pigeon as anything more than a casual migrant. The records ceased after
this till 1898, when three birds were taken at points widely apart, an adult
male at Winnipegosis, Manatoba, on April 14,[8] an immature male at
Owensboro, Kentucky, on July 27, now in the Smithsonian Institution, and
another immature bird taken at Detroit, Michigan, on September 14, now in
my collection; these are the last records that can be based on specimens.
"In 1903 I published a list including sight records, one as late as May, 1902;
this latter is possibly open to doubt, but the ones I gave for 1900 are, I feel
confident, correct, as the birds were seen more than once and by different
observers. For all practical purposes, the close of the Nineteenth Century
saw the final extinction of the Passenger Pigeon in a wild state, and there
remained only the small flock, numbering in 1903 not more than a dozen,
forty years, though as late as 1870 some of the old roosts were still
frequented, but the incredible flocks, of which so much has been said, had
gone long before that date, and by 1880 the pigeon was practically
exterminated, not only in Ontario, but over the greater part of its old range.
There are however occasional records of birds taken, for some years later.
An immature bird taken September 9, 1887, in Chester County,
Pennsylvania, is said to be the last for that part of the State[4]; a bird, also
immature, is in my collection, taken in December, 1888, at Montreal,
Quebec. There are other Montreal records of the same date,[5] but with the
exception of one taken at Tadousac, July 26, 1889,[6] these are the last
Quebec records of birds actually taken. In Ontario two were taken at
Toronto in 1890, on September 20, and October 11, both immature females,
the latter is in my collection, as is an adult female taken by Mr. Walter
Brett, at Riding Mountain, Manatoba, May 12, 1892, one of a pair seen. I
also have an adult male taken at Waukegon, Illinois, December 19, 1892. I
was in New York in the latter part of November, 1892, and was then assured
by Mr. Rowland, a well known taxidermist, that he had recently seen
several barrels of pigeons that had been condemned as unfit for food; they
had come to New York from Indian Territory, and I believe had had their
tails pulled out to permit tighter packing. Mr. William Brewster has
recorded the sending of several hundred dozens of pigeons to the Boston
market in December of the same year, and in January, 1893; these were also
from Indian Territory[7]; these are the last records we have of the Passenger
Pigeon as anything more than a casual migrant. The records ceased after
this till 1898, when three birds were taken at points widely apart, an adult
male at Winnipegosis, Manatoba, on April 14,[8] an immature male at
Owensboro, Kentucky, on July 27, now in the Smithsonian Institution, and
another immature bird taken at Detroit, Michigan, on September 14, now in
my collection; these are the last records that can be based on specimens.
"In 1903 I published a list including sight records, one as late as May, 1902;
this latter is possibly open to doubt, but the ones I gave for 1900 are, I feel
confident, correct, as the birds were seen more than once and by different
observers. For all practical purposes, the close of the Nineteenth Century
saw the final extinction of the Passenger Pigeon in a wild state, and there
remained only the small flock, numbering in 1903 not more than a dozen,
Page 160
that had been bred in captivity by Prof. C. O. Whitman, of Chicago; these
birds are the descendants of a single pair, and have long ago ceased to
breed. It was in an effort to obtain fresh blood for this flock that I started a
newspaper enquiry that brought many replies, none of which could be
substantiated as records of the Passenger Pigeon, and many referred to the
Mourning Dove. I am aware that there has been lately wide-spread and
persistent rumours of the return of the pigeons, but no rumour has borne
investigation, and I feel that Prof. Whitman's small flock, now reduced (in
1906) to five birds, are the last representatives of a species around whose
disappearance mystery and fable will always gather."
FAMILY DIDIDAE. (L.)
I NCLUDES very large and massively-built forms, agreeing with the
Columbidae in the truncation of the angle of the mandible, but with the
extremity of the cranial rostrum strongly hooked. They were totally
incapable of flight, the wing-bones being small, the carina of the sternum
aborted, and the caracoidal grooves shallow and separated from one
another.
Two genera: Didus and Pezophaps.
DIDUS LINN.
S KULL with a very large and deeply hooked rostrum, and the nasal and
maxillary processes of the praemaxilla converging anteriorly; the front
region inflated into a sub-conical prominence of cancellous tissue.
Neck and feet shorter than in the succeeding genus. Delto-pectoral crest of
humerus distinct.
Two species: Didus cucullatus and Didus solitarius.
birds are the descendants of a single pair, and have long ago ceased to
breed. It was in an effort to obtain fresh blood for this flock that I started a
newspaper enquiry that brought many replies, none of which could be
substantiated as records of the Passenger Pigeon, and many referred to the
Mourning Dove. I am aware that there has been lately wide-spread and
persistent rumours of the return of the pigeons, but no rumour has borne
investigation, and I feel that Prof. Whitman's small flock, now reduced (in
1906) to five birds, are the last representatives of a species around whose
disappearance mystery and fable will always gather."
FAMILY DIDIDAE. (L.)
I NCLUDES very large and massively-built forms, agreeing with the
Columbidae in the truncation of the angle of the mandible, but with the
extremity of the cranial rostrum strongly hooked. They were totally
incapable of flight, the wing-bones being small, the carina of the sternum
aborted, and the caracoidal grooves shallow and separated from one
another.
Two genera: Didus and Pezophaps.
DIDUS LINN.
S KULL with a very large and deeply hooked rostrum, and the nasal and
maxillary processes of the praemaxilla converging anteriorly; the front
region inflated into a sub-conical prominence of cancellous tissue.
Neck and feet shorter than in the succeeding genus. Delto-pectoral crest of
humerus distinct.
Two species: Didus cucullatus and Didus solitarius.
Page 161
DIDUS CUCULLATUS (L.)
DODO.
(Plates 24, 24a, 24b, 24c.)
Walchvoghel Van Neck, Voy., p. 7, pl. 2 (1601).
Walchvögel De Bry, Orient. Ind. pt. VIII, t. 11 (1606).
Gallinaceus gallus peregrinus Clusius, Exot. Libr. V p. 99 t. 100 (1605).
Dod-eersen or Valgh-vogel Herbert's travels 1st ed. (1634) t. page 212.
Cygnus cucullatus Nieremberg, Nat p. 231 (with fig. ex. Clus.) (1635).
Dronte Bontius, Ind. Orient t. p. 70 (1658).
Raphus Moehring, Av. gen. 57 (1752).
Dodo Edwards, Glean. Nat Hist. III p. 179 pl. 296 (1757).
Struthio cucullatus Linn., S. N. I p. 155 No. 4 (1758).
Didus ineptus Linn., S. N. I p. 267 No. 1 (1766).
T HE first description of this very remarkable bird was given in the
account of the voyage of Admiral Jacob van Neck in 1598, which was
published by Corneille Nicolas at Amsterdam in 1601. It is as
follows:—"Blue parrots are very numerous there, as well as other birds;
among which are a kind, conspicuous for their size, larger than our swans,
with huge heads only half covered with skin as if clothed with a hood.
These birds lack wings, in the place of which 3 or 4 blackish feathers
protrude. The tail consists of a few soft incurved feathers, which are ash
coloured. These we used to call 'Walghvögel,' for the reason that the longer
and oftener they were cooked, the less soft and more insipid eating they
became. Nevertheless their belly and breast were of a pleasant flavour and
easily masticated."
In a large number of works on travel and voyages published in the 17th and
18th Centuries we find all sorts of notices about the Dodo, and numerous
pictures of which I have given outline drawings. From these sources it
appears that the Dodo became extinct about the end of the 17th Century,
i.e., 1680-1690. The causes of the extermination of this, perhaps the best
known and most talked about of the recently extinct birds, are not far to
DODO.
(Plates 24, 24a, 24b, 24c.)
Walchvoghel Van Neck, Voy., p. 7, pl. 2 (1601).
Walchvögel De Bry, Orient. Ind. pt. VIII, t. 11 (1606).
Gallinaceus gallus peregrinus Clusius, Exot. Libr. V p. 99 t. 100 (1605).
Dod-eersen or Valgh-vogel Herbert's travels 1st ed. (1634) t. page 212.
Cygnus cucullatus Nieremberg, Nat p. 231 (with fig. ex. Clus.) (1635).
Dronte Bontius, Ind. Orient t. p. 70 (1658).
Raphus Moehring, Av. gen. 57 (1752).
Dodo Edwards, Glean. Nat Hist. III p. 179 pl. 296 (1757).
Struthio cucullatus Linn., S. N. I p. 155 No. 4 (1758).
Didus ineptus Linn., S. N. I p. 267 No. 1 (1766).
T HE first description of this very remarkable bird was given in the
account of the voyage of Admiral Jacob van Neck in 1598, which was
published by Corneille Nicolas at Amsterdam in 1601. It is as
follows:—"Blue parrots are very numerous there, as well as other birds;
among which are a kind, conspicuous for their size, larger than our swans,
with huge heads only half covered with skin as if clothed with a hood.
These birds lack wings, in the place of which 3 or 4 blackish feathers
protrude. The tail consists of a few soft incurved feathers, which are ash
coloured. These we used to call 'Walghvögel,' for the reason that the longer
and oftener they were cooked, the less soft and more insipid eating they
became. Nevertheless their belly and breast were of a pleasant flavour and
easily masticated."
In a large number of works on travel and voyages published in the 17th and
18th Centuries we find all sorts of notices about the Dodo, and numerous
pictures of which I have given outline drawings. From these sources it
appears that the Dodo became extinct about the end of the 17th Century,
i.e., 1680-1690. The causes of the extermination of this, perhaps the best
known and most talked about of the recently extinct birds, are not far to
Page 162
seek. The total inability of flight, the heavy slow gait, and the utter
fearlessness from long immunity from enemies, led to a continual slaughter
for food by the sailors and others who came to and dwelt on Mauritius. But
the final cause of the extermination of this and many other birds in the
Mascarene Islands was probably the introduction of pigs, and also of the
Ceylon Monkey. These animals increased enormously in numbers, ran wild
in the woods, and soon destroyed all the eggs and young birds they could
find.
It is strange that for many years after great attention had been paid to the
Dodo, ornithologists differed conspicuously as to what family it and the
other two Didine species belonged. Many asserted that it was a Struthious
bird, in fact Linnaeus called it calmly Struthio cucullatus, while others just
as forcibly declared it to be an abnormal Vulture. The truth is, that although
the Didunculus strigirostis of Samoa, which was supposed to be its near
representative, is not at all closely allied, yet the two species of Didus and
Pezophaps solitarius form a group of very specialized pigeons.
THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF THE PAINTINGS REPRESENTING THE DODO.
1. Vienna, in the Library of the Emperor Francis. By Hufnagel, 1626, reproduced by von
Frauenfeldt in his book, 1868.
2. Berlin. "Altes Museum," Cabinet 3, Division 2, No. 710. By Roelandt Savery, 1626.
3. Sion House. Duke of Northumberland. By John Goeimare, 1627.
4. Vienna. Kunsthistorisches Hofmuseum, formerly Belvedere. By Roelandt Savery, 1628
5. London. Zoological Society, formerly Broderip. By Roelandt Savery, undated.
6. Pommersfelden, Bavaria. Count Schönborn, "Orpheus charming the Beasts." By
Roelandt Savery, undated.
7. Haag. Mauritshuis. "Orpheus charming the Beasts." By Roelandt Savery.
8. Stuttgart. Formerly Dr. Seyffer, but sold at his death and since disappeared. By Roelandt
Savery.
9. London. British Museum, formerly belonging to G. Edwards. Probably by Roelandt
Savery.
10. Emden. Galerie der Gesellschaft für Bildende Kunst. "Orpheus charming the Beasts." By
Roelandt Savery.
11. Oxford. Ashmolean Museum. By John Savery, 1651.
12. Haarlem. Dr. A. van der Willigen, Pz. By Pieter Holsteyn (1580-1662), not dated.
fearlessness from long immunity from enemies, led to a continual slaughter
for food by the sailors and others who came to and dwelt on Mauritius. But
the final cause of the extermination of this and many other birds in the
Mascarene Islands was probably the introduction of pigs, and also of the
Ceylon Monkey. These animals increased enormously in numbers, ran wild
in the woods, and soon destroyed all the eggs and young birds they could
find.
It is strange that for many years after great attention had been paid to the
Dodo, ornithologists differed conspicuously as to what family it and the
other two Didine species belonged. Many asserted that it was a Struthious
bird, in fact Linnaeus called it calmly Struthio cucullatus, while others just
as forcibly declared it to be an abnormal Vulture. The truth is, that although
the Didunculus strigirostis of Samoa, which was supposed to be its near
representative, is not at all closely allied, yet the two species of Didus and
Pezophaps solitarius form a group of very specialized pigeons.
THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF THE PAINTINGS REPRESENTING THE DODO.
1. Vienna, in the Library of the Emperor Francis. By Hufnagel, 1626, reproduced by von
Frauenfeldt in his book, 1868.
2. Berlin. "Altes Museum," Cabinet 3, Division 2, No. 710. By Roelandt Savery, 1626.
3. Sion House. Duke of Northumberland. By John Goeimare, 1627.
4. Vienna. Kunsthistorisches Hofmuseum, formerly Belvedere. By Roelandt Savery, 1628
5. London. Zoological Society, formerly Broderip. By Roelandt Savery, undated.
6. Pommersfelden, Bavaria. Count Schönborn, "Orpheus charming the Beasts." By
Roelandt Savery, undated.
7. Haag. Mauritshuis. "Orpheus charming the Beasts." By Roelandt Savery.
8. Stuttgart. Formerly Dr. Seyffer, but sold at his death and since disappeared. By Roelandt
Savery.
9. London. British Museum, formerly belonging to G. Edwards. Probably by Roelandt
Savery.
10. Emden. Galerie der Gesellschaft für Bildende Kunst. "Orpheus charming the Beasts." By
Roelandt Savery.
11. Oxford. Ashmolean Museum. By John Savery, 1651.
12. Haarlem. Dr. A. van der Willigen, Pz. By Pieter Holsteyn (1580-1662), not dated.
Page 163
13. Dresden. Kgl. Gemälde-Galerie. "Circe and Ulysses." By C. Ruthart, 1666.
14. Dresden. Kgl. Gemälde-Galerie. "The Creation of the Animals." Supposed to be by Franz
Francken (1581-1642), no date, and said to be by a different artist.
At least 2 Mauritius Dodos have been exhibited alive in Europe, one
brought back by Van Neck in 1599, and which most likely served as the
model for nearly all Roelandt Savery's pictures, and one exhibited in
London in the year 1638, mentioned by Sir Hamon Lestrange. This is
almost certainly the bird afterwards preserved in Tradescant's Museum
(1656), and finally in Oxford (Ashmolean Museum), and probably served
for the model of the supposed Savery picture in the British Museum.
The Dodo inhabited Mauritius.
NOTE.—Didus nazarenus Gmelin, based on the "Oiseau de Nazareth" of Cauche (Descr. de
l'ile de Madagascar, p. 130, ff, 1651) is evidently founded on a mistaken and partly
fictitious description of a Dodo, or rather a mixture of that of the Dodo and a
Cassowary. The name was, perhaps, also a mistake, derived from that of "Oiseau de
nausée," which has a similar meaning as "Walghvogel."
Explanation of Plates of Dodo.
Plate 24.
This was taken from the picture by Roelandt Savery in Berlin, but the wings, tail and bill
have been altered, partly from Pierre Witthoos' picture of the Bourbon Dodo, and partly
from anatomical examination. The tail, however, appears to have been curled over the
back in life, according to most authors.
Plate 24 (a).
Fig. 1. Reproduction in outline of the Dodo in Savery's Orpheus at Haag. Vide antea No. 7 in
the List of Paintings.
Fig. 2. Outline of Dodo (and Pelican?) in Ruthart's "Circe and Ulysses" at Dresden. Vide
antea No. 13 in the List of Paintings.
Fig. 3. Outline of Dodo (and Pelican?) in Frans Franckens (?) picture in Dresden. Vide antea
No. 14 in the List of Paintings.
Plates 24 (b and c).
No. 1. Outline of Dodo in Roelandt Savery's picture at Berlin. Vide antea No. 2 in the List of
Paintings.
14. Dresden. Kgl. Gemälde-Galerie. "The Creation of the Animals." Supposed to be by Franz
Francken (1581-1642), no date, and said to be by a different artist.
At least 2 Mauritius Dodos have been exhibited alive in Europe, one
brought back by Van Neck in 1599, and which most likely served as the
model for nearly all Roelandt Savery's pictures, and one exhibited in
London in the year 1638, mentioned by Sir Hamon Lestrange. This is
almost certainly the bird afterwards preserved in Tradescant's Museum
(1656), and finally in Oxford (Ashmolean Museum), and probably served
for the model of the supposed Savery picture in the British Museum.
The Dodo inhabited Mauritius.
NOTE.—Didus nazarenus Gmelin, based on the "Oiseau de Nazareth" of Cauche (Descr. de
l'ile de Madagascar, p. 130, ff, 1651) is evidently founded on a mistaken and partly
fictitious description of a Dodo, or rather a mixture of that of the Dodo and a
Cassowary. The name was, perhaps, also a mistake, derived from that of "Oiseau de
nausée," which has a similar meaning as "Walghvogel."
Explanation of Plates of Dodo.
Plate 24.
This was taken from the picture by Roelandt Savery in Berlin, but the wings, tail and bill
have been altered, partly from Pierre Witthoos' picture of the Bourbon Dodo, and partly
from anatomical examination. The tail, however, appears to have been curled over the
back in life, according to most authors.
Plate 24 (a).
Fig. 1. Reproduction in outline of the Dodo in Savery's Orpheus at Haag. Vide antea No. 7 in
the List of Paintings.
Fig. 2. Outline of Dodo (and Pelican?) in Ruthart's "Circe and Ulysses" at Dresden. Vide
antea No. 13 in the List of Paintings.
Fig. 3. Outline of Dodo (and Pelican?) in Frans Franckens (?) picture in Dresden. Vide antea
No. 14 in the List of Paintings.
Plates 24 (b and c).
No. 1. Outline of Dodo in Roelandt Savery's picture at Berlin. Vide antea No. 2 in the List of
Paintings.
Page 164
No. 2. Outline of picture by Roelandt Savery in the British Museum. Vide antea No. 9 in the
List of Paintings.
No. 3. Outline of Dodo in Jacob van Neck's Voyage, Plate 2 (1598).
No. 4. Outline of Roelandt Savery's Dodo, Vienna. Vide antea No. 4 in the List of Paintings.
No. 5. Outline of Dodo in Broeck's Voyage (Peter van Broeck's Voyage, 1617).
No. 6. Outline of Dodo in Piso's additions to Jacob Bontiu's Oriental Natural History, 1658.
No. 7. Outline of Dodo in Sir Thomas Herbert's Relation of some yeares Travels, 1626.
No. 8. Outline of Dodo in Clusius Exoticorum libri decem, 1605.
No. 9. Outline of Dodo in Joan Nievhof's Gedenkwaerdige Zee and Lantreize, 1682.
No. 10. Outline of Dodo in John Goeimare's picture at Sion House, 1627. Vide antea No. 3 in
the List of Paintings.
No. 11. Outline of Dodo in Roelandt Savery's picture at Pommersfelden. Vide antea No. 6 in
the List of Paintings.
No. 12. Outline of Dr. H. Schlegel's restoration of the Dodo in Transactions, &c., of the
Amsterdam Academy, vol. 2, 1854.
No. 13. Outline of Dodo in Roelandt Savery's picture, Zoological Society, London. Vide
antea No. 5 in the List of Paintings.
DIDUS SOLITARIUS (SELYS).
RÉUNION DODO.
(Plates 25, 25a, 25b.)
Great Fowl Tatton, Voy. Castleton, Purchas his Pilgrimes, ed. (1625) I p. 331 (Bourbon or
Réunion).
Dod-eersen Bontekoe, Journ. ofte gedenck. beschr. van de Ost. Ind. Reyse Haarlem (1646) p.
6.
Oiseau Solitaire Carré, Voy. Ind. Or. I p. 12 (1699).
Solitaire Voy. fait par Le Sieur D.B. (1674) p. 170.
Apterornis solitarius de Selys, Rev. Zool (1848) p. 293.
Didus apterornis Schlegel, Ook een Wordje over den Dodo p. 15 f. 2 (1854).
Pezophaps borbonica Bp., Consp. Av. II p. 2 (1854).
List of Paintings.
No. 3. Outline of Dodo in Jacob van Neck's Voyage, Plate 2 (1598).
No. 4. Outline of Roelandt Savery's Dodo, Vienna. Vide antea No. 4 in the List of Paintings.
No. 5. Outline of Dodo in Broeck's Voyage (Peter van Broeck's Voyage, 1617).
No. 6. Outline of Dodo in Piso's additions to Jacob Bontiu's Oriental Natural History, 1658.
No. 7. Outline of Dodo in Sir Thomas Herbert's Relation of some yeares Travels, 1626.
No. 8. Outline of Dodo in Clusius Exoticorum libri decem, 1605.
No. 9. Outline of Dodo in Joan Nievhof's Gedenkwaerdige Zee and Lantreize, 1682.
No. 10. Outline of Dodo in John Goeimare's picture at Sion House, 1627. Vide antea No. 3 in
the List of Paintings.
No. 11. Outline of Dodo in Roelandt Savery's picture at Pommersfelden. Vide antea No. 6 in
the List of Paintings.
No. 12. Outline of Dr. H. Schlegel's restoration of the Dodo in Transactions, &c., of the
Amsterdam Academy, vol. 2, 1854.
No. 13. Outline of Dodo in Roelandt Savery's picture, Zoological Society, London. Vide
antea No. 5 in the List of Paintings.
DIDUS SOLITARIUS (SELYS).
RÉUNION DODO.
(Plates 25, 25a, 25b.)
Great Fowl Tatton, Voy. Castleton, Purchas his Pilgrimes, ed. (1625) I p. 331 (Bourbon or
Réunion).
Dod-eersen Bontekoe, Journ. ofte gedenck. beschr. van de Ost. Ind. Reyse Haarlem (1646) p.
6.
Oiseau Solitaire Carré, Voy. Ind. Or. I p. 12 (1699).
Solitaire Voy. fait par Le Sieur D.B. (1674) p. 170.
Apterornis solitarius de Selys, Rev. Zool (1848) p. 293.
Didus apterornis Schlegel, Ook een Wordje over den Dodo p. 15 f. 2 (1854).
Pezophaps borbonica Bp., Consp. Av. II p. 2 (1854).
Page 165
Ornithaptera borbonica Bp., Consp. Av. II. p. 2 (1854).
Didine Bird of the Island of Bourbon (Réunion) A. Newt. Tr. Zool. Soc. VI pp. 373-376, pl.
62 (1867).
Apterornis solitaria Milne-Edw., Ibis (1869) p. 272.
? Didus borbonica Schleg., Mus. P.B. Struthiones p. 3 (1873).
Solitaire of Réunion A. Newton, Enc. Brit. II p. 732 (1875).
T HE Didine bird of Réunion was first mentioned by Mr. Tatton, the
Chief Officer of Captain Castleton, in his account of their voyage
given in Purchas his Pilgrimes. His account is as follows:—
"There is store of land fowle both small and great, plenty of Doves, great
Parrats, and such like; and a great fowle of the bignesse of a Turkie, very
fat, and so short winged, that they cannot fly, being white, and in a manner
tame: and so be all other fowles, as having not been troubled nor feared
with shot. Our men did beat them down with sticks and stones. Ten men
may take fowle enough to serve fortie men a day."
We then find frequent mention of this bird by Bontekoe in 5 separate
treatises or editions, from 1646 to 1650, and by Carré in 1699. But the first
more detailed description is given by the Sieur D.B. (Dubois) in 1674,
which is as follows:—
"Solitaires. These birds are thus named because they always go alone. They
are as big as a big goose and have white plumage, black at the extremity of
the wings and of the tail. At the tail there are some feathers resembling
those of the Ostrich. They have the neck long and the beak formed like that
of the Woodcocks (he refers to the woodrails, Erythromachus—W.R.), but
larger, and the legs and feet like those of Turkey-chicks. This bird betakes
itself to running, only flying but very little. It is the best game on the
Island."
It will be seen that, while Dubois says the wings and tail are black, Pierre
Witthoos's picture, from which the accompanying plate was partly drawn,
shows the wings yellow. This may either be due to Dubois' faulty
description, or, what is much more probable, the bird brought to
Amsterdam, which Witthoos painted, was somewhat albinistic. The bill in
the picture by Witthoos shows a distinctly mutilated bill, evidently done by
Didine Bird of the Island of Bourbon (Réunion) A. Newt. Tr. Zool. Soc. VI pp. 373-376, pl.
62 (1867).
Apterornis solitaria Milne-Edw., Ibis (1869) p. 272.
? Didus borbonica Schleg., Mus. P.B. Struthiones p. 3 (1873).
Solitaire of Réunion A. Newton, Enc. Brit. II p. 732 (1875).
T HE Didine bird of Réunion was first mentioned by Mr. Tatton, the
Chief Officer of Captain Castleton, in his account of their voyage
given in Purchas his Pilgrimes. His account is as follows:—
"There is store of land fowle both small and great, plenty of Doves, great
Parrats, and such like; and a great fowle of the bignesse of a Turkie, very
fat, and so short winged, that they cannot fly, being white, and in a manner
tame: and so be all other fowles, as having not been troubled nor feared
with shot. Our men did beat them down with sticks and stones. Ten men
may take fowle enough to serve fortie men a day."
We then find frequent mention of this bird by Bontekoe in 5 separate
treatises or editions, from 1646 to 1650, and by Carré in 1699. But the first
more detailed description is given by the Sieur D.B. (Dubois) in 1674,
which is as follows:—
"Solitaires. These birds are thus named because they always go alone. They
are as big as a big goose and have white plumage, black at the extremity of
the wings and of the tail. At the tail there are some feathers resembling
those of the Ostrich. They have the neck long and the beak formed like that
of the Woodcocks (he refers to the woodrails, Erythromachus—W.R.), but
larger, and the legs and feet like those of Turkey-chicks. This bird betakes
itself to running, only flying but very little. It is the best game on the
Island."
It will be seen that, while Dubois says the wings and tail are black, Pierre
Witthoos's picture, from which the accompanying plate was partly drawn,
shows the wings yellow. This may either be due to Dubois' faulty
description, or, what is much more probable, the bird brought to
Amsterdam, which Witthoos painted, was somewhat albinistic. The bill in
the picture by Witthoos shows a distinctly mutilated bill, evidently done by
Page 166
the bird's keeper to prevent being injured by the formidable hook of the
untrimmed bill. In addition to two pictures (the one formerly in the
possession of Mr. C. Dare, of Clatterford, in the Isle of Wight, and a second
in Holland, both by Pieter Witthoos, painted about the year 1670), we know
of this bird only the drawing given in Zaagman's edition of Bontekoe, 1646.
In all these drawings the first four primaries point down and forward, which
is probably owing to the injured condition of the specimen figured, so in the
accompanying plate I had the wing drawn like the true Dodo's and the bill
reconstructed.
Habitat: Island of Bourbon or Réunion.
Only known from the above-mentioned descriptions and two drawings. No
specimens existing.
This bird became extinct between the years 1735 and 1801, because in the
latter year Monsieur Bory St. Vincent made his scientific survey of the
Island, and no such bird existed then; while we know that Monsieur de la
Bourdonnaye, who was governor of the Mascarene Islands from 1735 to
1746, sent one alive to one of the directors of the French East Indian
Company. Of this, the second living specimen brought to Europe, we
unfortunately have neither drawing nor history.
Explanation of Plates.
Plate 25.
Drawing of White Dodo from Pierre Witthoos' picture, the bill and tail being reconstructed
from the model of the common Dodo.
Plate 25 (a).
Fig. 5. Outline of figure of White Dodo in the picture by Pieter Witthoos circa 1670 vide
supra.
Fig. 8. Outline of Woodcut in Zaagman's edition of Bontekoe van Hoorn, 1646.
Fig. 7. Outline of figure of White Dodo in an edition of Plinius Secundus about 1643 but
without date.
Fig. 4. Outline of Dr. H. Schlegel's reconstruction of the Réunion Dodo.
untrimmed bill. In addition to two pictures (the one formerly in the
possession of Mr. C. Dare, of Clatterford, in the Isle of Wight, and a second
in Holland, both by Pieter Witthoos, painted about the year 1670), we know
of this bird only the drawing given in Zaagman's edition of Bontekoe, 1646.
In all these drawings the first four primaries point down and forward, which
is probably owing to the injured condition of the specimen figured, so in the
accompanying plate I had the wing drawn like the true Dodo's and the bill
reconstructed.
Habitat: Island of Bourbon or Réunion.
Only known from the above-mentioned descriptions and two drawings. No
specimens existing.
This bird became extinct between the years 1735 and 1801, because in the
latter year Monsieur Bory St. Vincent made his scientific survey of the
Island, and no such bird existed then; while we know that Monsieur de la
Bourdonnaye, who was governor of the Mascarene Islands from 1735 to
1746, sent one alive to one of the directors of the French East Indian
Company. Of this, the second living specimen brought to Europe, we
unfortunately have neither drawing nor history.
Explanation of Plates.
Plate 25.
Drawing of White Dodo from Pierre Witthoos' picture, the bill and tail being reconstructed
from the model of the common Dodo.
Plate 25 (a).
Fig. 5. Outline of figure of White Dodo in the picture by Pieter Witthoos circa 1670 vide
supra.
Fig. 8. Outline of Woodcut in Zaagman's edition of Bontekoe van Hoorn, 1646.
Fig. 7. Outline of figure of White Dodo in an edition of Plinius Secundus about 1643 but
without date.
Fig. 4. Outline of Dr. H. Schlegel's reconstruction of the Réunion Dodo.
Page 167
Plate 25 (b).
Drawing from description of the Sieur D.B. (Dubois), 1674.
PEZOPHAPS STRICKLAND & MELVILLE.
S KULL with a moderate rostrum, slightly hooked, and the nasal and
maxillary processes of the praemaxillae diverging anteriorly; the
frontal region flat with but little cancellous tissue. Coracoid stout.
Manus armed with an ossified tuberosity. Neck and feet long. Delto-
pectoral crest of humerus aborted.
This genus connects Didus with the Columbidae. The male is much larger
than the female.
PEZOPHAPS SOLITARIUS (GM.)
THE SOLITAIRE.
(Plate 23, 25a, Figs. 1, 2, 3.)
Solitaire Leguat, Voy. deux iles désertes Ind. Or. I pp. 98. 102 (1708).
Didus solitarius Gmelin, S. N. I p. 728, n. 2 (1788).
Pezophaps solitaria Strickland, the Dodo, &c., p. 46 (1848).
Didus nazarenus Bartl. (nec. Gmel.), P. Z. S. 1851, p. 284, pl. XLV.
Pezophaps minor Strickland, Contr. to Orn. 1852, p. 19 (?).
T HIS bird was first made known by Leguat in 1708, but some
confusion seems to have arisen, owing to his applying the same name
to them as the Sieur D.B. (Dubois) gave to the Bourbon Dodo in 1674.
This is the original description:—
Drawing from description of the Sieur D.B. (Dubois), 1674.
PEZOPHAPS STRICKLAND & MELVILLE.
S KULL with a moderate rostrum, slightly hooked, and the nasal and
maxillary processes of the praemaxillae diverging anteriorly; the
frontal region flat with but little cancellous tissue. Coracoid stout.
Manus armed with an ossified tuberosity. Neck and feet long. Delto-
pectoral crest of humerus aborted.
This genus connects Didus with the Columbidae. The male is much larger
than the female.
PEZOPHAPS SOLITARIUS (GM.)
THE SOLITAIRE.
(Plate 23, 25a, Figs. 1, 2, 3.)
Solitaire Leguat, Voy. deux iles désertes Ind. Or. I pp. 98. 102 (1708).
Didus solitarius Gmelin, S. N. I p. 728, n. 2 (1788).
Pezophaps solitaria Strickland, the Dodo, &c., p. 46 (1848).
Didus nazarenus Bartl. (nec. Gmel.), P. Z. S. 1851, p. 284, pl. XLV.
Pezophaps minor Strickland, Contr. to Orn. 1852, p. 19 (?).
T HIS bird was first made known by Leguat in 1708, but some
confusion seems to have arisen, owing to his applying the same name
to them as the Sieur D.B. (Dubois) gave to the Bourbon Dodo in 1674.
This is the original description:—
Page 168
"The feathers of the males are of a brown-grey colour, the feet and beak are
like a turkey's, but a little more crooked. They have scarce any tail, but their
hind part covered with feathers is roundish, like the crupper of a hare. They
are taller than turkeys. Their neck is straight, and a little longer in
proportion than a turkey's when it lifts up his head. Its eye is black and
lively, and its head without comb on cop. They never fly, their wings are too
little to support the weight of their bodies; they serve only to beat
themselves and flutter when they call one another. They will whirl about for
twenty or thirty times together on the same side during the space of 4 or 5
minutes. The motions of their wings make then a noise very like that of a
rattle, and one may hear it two hundred paces off. The bone of their wings
grows greater towards the extremity, and forms a little round mass under the
feathers as big as a musket ball. That and its beak are the chief defences of
this bird. 'Tis very hard to catch in the woods, but easy in open places,
because we run faster than they, and sometimes we approach them without
much trouble. From March to September they are very fat, and taste
admirably well, especially while they are young, some of the males weigh
45 pounds. The females are wonderfully beautiful, some fair, some brown. I
call them fair, because they are the colour of fair hair; they have a sort of
peak like a widow's, upon their breasts, which is of a dun colour. No one
feather is straggling from the other all over their bodies, they being very
careful to adjust themselves, and make them all even with their beaks. The
feathers on their thighs are round like shells at the end, and being there very
thick, have an agreeable effect. They have two risings on their craws, and
the feathers are whiter there than the rest, which livelily represents the fine
neck of a beautiful woman. They walk with so much stateliness and good
grace that one cannot help admiring them and loving them, by which means
their fine mien often saves their lives."
The unfortunate Solitaires, owing to the depredations by the pigs and
monkeys introduced by the settlers, and the unceasing slaughter by the
latter, became extinct between the years 1760 and 1780.
Of their habits we only have the accounts of Leguat:—
"Though these birds will sometimes very familiarly come up near enough to
one, when we do not run after them, yet they will never grow tame, as soon
like a turkey's, but a little more crooked. They have scarce any tail, but their
hind part covered with feathers is roundish, like the crupper of a hare. They
are taller than turkeys. Their neck is straight, and a little longer in
proportion than a turkey's when it lifts up his head. Its eye is black and
lively, and its head without comb on cop. They never fly, their wings are too
little to support the weight of their bodies; they serve only to beat
themselves and flutter when they call one another. They will whirl about for
twenty or thirty times together on the same side during the space of 4 or 5
minutes. The motions of their wings make then a noise very like that of a
rattle, and one may hear it two hundred paces off. The bone of their wings
grows greater towards the extremity, and forms a little round mass under the
feathers as big as a musket ball. That and its beak are the chief defences of
this bird. 'Tis very hard to catch in the woods, but easy in open places,
because we run faster than they, and sometimes we approach them without
much trouble. From March to September they are very fat, and taste
admirably well, especially while they are young, some of the males weigh
45 pounds. The females are wonderfully beautiful, some fair, some brown. I
call them fair, because they are the colour of fair hair; they have a sort of
peak like a widow's, upon their breasts, which is of a dun colour. No one
feather is straggling from the other all over their bodies, they being very
careful to adjust themselves, and make them all even with their beaks. The
feathers on their thighs are round like shells at the end, and being there very
thick, have an agreeable effect. They have two risings on their craws, and
the feathers are whiter there than the rest, which livelily represents the fine
neck of a beautiful woman. They walk with so much stateliness and good
grace that one cannot help admiring them and loving them, by which means
their fine mien often saves their lives."
The unfortunate Solitaires, owing to the depredations by the pigs and
monkeys introduced by the settlers, and the unceasing slaughter by the
latter, became extinct between the years 1760 and 1780.
Of their habits we only have the accounts of Leguat:—
"Though these birds will sometimes very familiarly come up near enough to
one, when we do not run after them, yet they will never grow tame, as soon
Page 169
as they are caught they shed tears, without crying, and refuse all manner of
sustenance till they die.
When these birds build their nests, they choose a clean place, gather
together some palm leaves for that purpose, and heap them up a foot and a
half high from the ground, on which they sit. They never lay but one egg,
which is much bigger than that of a goose. The male and female both cover
it in their turns, and the young is not hatched till at 7 weeks end. All the
while they are sitting upon it, or are bringing up their young one, which is
not able to provide for itself in several months, they will not suffer any
other bird of their species to come within two hundred yards round of the
place. But what is very singular is, the males will never drive away the
females, only when they perceive one they make a noise with their wings to
call their own female—she drives away the unwelcome stranger, not
leaving it till it was without her bounds. The female does the same as to
males, which she leaves to the male who drives them away. We have
observed this several times, and I affirm it to be true. The combats between
them on this occasion last sometimes pretty long, because the stranger only
turns about, and does not fly directly from the nest. However, the others do
not forsake it till they have quite driven it out of their limits. After these
birds have raised their young one, and left it to itself, they are always
together, which the other birds are not, and though they happen to mingle
with other birds of the same species, these two companions never disunite.
We have often remarked, that some days after the young one leaves the
nest, a company of 30 or 40 bring another young one to it, and the new
fledged bird, joining the band with its father and mother, they march to
some bye place. We frequently followed them, and found that afterwards
the old ones went each their way alone, or in couples, and left the two
young ones together, which we called a marriage."
Leguat's, d'Heguerty's, and the Abbé Pingré's descriptions were all we had
of this great ground pigeon down to 1866, except a few bones. When Mr.
Strickland proved its distinctness from the Dodo of Mauritius in 1844, and
up to 1852, these bones numbered 18. In 1864 Mr. E. Newton and Captain
Barclay got 3 more bones, in 1865 Mr. Jenner, the resident magistrate,
collected 8 bones, and in 1866 nearly 2,000 bones were collected, but
sustenance till they die.
When these birds build their nests, they choose a clean place, gather
together some palm leaves for that purpose, and heap them up a foot and a
half high from the ground, on which they sit. They never lay but one egg,
which is much bigger than that of a goose. The male and female both cover
it in their turns, and the young is not hatched till at 7 weeks end. All the
while they are sitting upon it, or are bringing up their young one, which is
not able to provide for itself in several months, they will not suffer any
other bird of their species to come within two hundred yards round of the
place. But what is very singular is, the males will never drive away the
females, only when they perceive one they make a noise with their wings to
call their own female—she drives away the unwelcome stranger, not
leaving it till it was without her bounds. The female does the same as to
males, which she leaves to the male who drives them away. We have
observed this several times, and I affirm it to be true. The combats between
them on this occasion last sometimes pretty long, because the stranger only
turns about, and does not fly directly from the nest. However, the others do
not forsake it till they have quite driven it out of their limits. After these
birds have raised their young one, and left it to itself, they are always
together, which the other birds are not, and though they happen to mingle
with other birds of the same species, these two companions never disunite.
We have often remarked, that some days after the young one leaves the
nest, a company of 30 or 40 bring another young one to it, and the new
fledged bird, joining the band with its father and mother, they march to
some bye place. We frequently followed them, and found that afterwards
the old ones went each their way alone, or in couples, and left the two
young ones together, which we called a marriage."
Leguat's, d'Heguerty's, and the Abbé Pingré's descriptions were all we had
of this great ground pigeon down to 1866, except a few bones. When Mr.
Strickland proved its distinctness from the Dodo of Mauritius in 1844, and
up to 1852, these bones numbered 18. In 1864 Mr. E. Newton and Captain
Barclay got 3 more bones, in 1865 Mr. Jenner, the resident magistrate,
collected 8 bones, and in 1866 nearly 2,000 bones were collected, but
Page 170
during the Transit of Venus expedition in 1874, a thorough search was
made, and a number of complete skeletons was collected.
Habitat: Island of Rodriguez.
Represented in Museums by a number of complete skeletons and a large
number of bones.
Explanation of Plates.
Plate 23.
Coloured drawing made from Leguat's description and figure.
Plate 25 (a).
Fig. 1. Outline of figure in Leguat's Voyage, 1708.
Fig. 2. Outline of Schlegel's reconstructed figure of the Solitaire, 1854.
Fig. 3. Outline of Solitaire in Frontispiece to Leguat's Voyage, 1708.
TYMPANUCHUS CUPIDO (L.)
HEATH HEN.
Tetrao cupido Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. X, p. 160 (1758—ex Catesby, Carolina II, App. p. 1,
pl. 1, 1743. "Habitat in Virginia"); Vieillot, Gal. Ois. II, p. 55, p. 219 (1825).
Pinnated Grouse Latham, Gen. Syn. II, 2, p. 740 (1783).
Bonasa cupido Stephens, in Shaw's Gen. Zool. XI, p. 299 (1819—New Jersey and Long
Island).
Cupidonia cupido Baird, B. N. Am. p. 628 (1860—partim); Maynard, B. E. Massach. p. 138
(1870—Martha's Vineyard and Naushon Island); Brewster, Auk 1885, p. 82
(Massachusetts).
Cupidonia cupido var. cupido Baird, Brewer & Ridgway, N. Amer. B. III, p. 440 (1874).
Cupidonia cupido brewsteri Coues, Key N.A.B., App. p. 884 (1887).
made, and a number of complete skeletons was collected.
Habitat: Island of Rodriguez.
Represented in Museums by a number of complete skeletons and a large
number of bones.
Explanation of Plates.
Plate 23.
Coloured drawing made from Leguat's description and figure.
Plate 25 (a).
Fig. 1. Outline of figure in Leguat's Voyage, 1708.
Fig. 2. Outline of Schlegel's reconstructed figure of the Solitaire, 1854.
Fig. 3. Outline of Solitaire in Frontispiece to Leguat's Voyage, 1708.
TYMPANUCHUS CUPIDO (L.)
HEATH HEN.
Tetrao cupido Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. Ed. X, p. 160 (1758—ex Catesby, Carolina II, App. p. 1,
pl. 1, 1743. "Habitat in Virginia"); Vieillot, Gal. Ois. II, p. 55, p. 219 (1825).
Pinnated Grouse Latham, Gen. Syn. II, 2, p. 740 (1783).
Bonasa cupido Stephens, in Shaw's Gen. Zool. XI, p. 299 (1819—New Jersey and Long
Island).
Cupidonia cupido Baird, B. N. Am. p. 628 (1860—partim); Maynard, B. E. Massach. p. 138
(1870—Martha's Vineyard and Naushon Island); Brewster, Auk 1885, p. 82
(Massachusetts).
Cupidonia cupido var. cupido Baird, Brewer & Ridgway, N. Amer. B. III, p. 440 (1874).
Cupidonia cupido brewsteri Coues, Key N.A.B., App. p. 884 (1887).
Page 171
Tympanuchus cupido Ridgway, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. VIII, p. 355 (1885); Bendire, Life-Hist.
N. Amer. B. I, p. 93 (1892); Grant, Cat. B. Brit. B. XXII, p. 77; Check-List N. Amer. B.
Ed. II, p. 115, No. 306 (1895); Hartlaub, Abh. Naturw. Ver. Bremen XIV, 1 (second ed.
of separate copy, p. 15) (1896).
L INNAEUS' brief diagnosis is: "Tetrao pedibus hirsutis alis
succenturiatis cervicalibus." After the habitat he adds: "Color Tetricis
feminae; vertex subcristatus; a tergo colli duae parvae alae: singulae
pennis quinque." This diagnosis is taken from Catesby, who gives a fairly
good description and a recognizable coloured plate. He specially mentions
that the neck-tufts are composed of five feathers, and in his figure they are
shown to be much pointed. Catesby expressly states that he does not know
exactly from which part of America his specimen came—yet Linnaeus says
"Habitat in Virginia."
Formerly the Heath Hen inhabited New England and part of the Middle
States (Southern Connecticut, Long Island, New Jersey, Nantucket, Eastern
Pennsylvania), but in 1887 Ridgway stated already that it was then
apparently extinct, except on Martha's Vineyard. About that time it was still
common on that island, inhabiting the woods and chiefly haunting oak
scrub and feeding on acorns. They were then "strictly protected by law," but
this protection seems not to have been effectual, as from 1893 to 1897 a
number were killed, skinned, and sold to various museums. This was,
perhaps, fortunate rather than unfortunate, because Mr. Hoyle (the man who
collected them) told us that in 1894 a fire destroyed many of them, and in
the fall of 1897 they were practically gone. But almost worse than this,
perhaps, two pairs of "Prairie Chicken" (Tympanuchus americanus) were
liberated and broods of young (of the latter apparently) were seen, so that it
is to be feared that birds shot now on Martha's Vineyards Island may have
blood of T. americanus in them, the two forms being closely related,
somewhat difficult to distinguish, and evidently sub-species of each other.
Nevertheless, a bird taken in 1901 was pronounced to be typical cupido by
Mr. Brewster.
From these facts it is pretty clear that the Heath Hen is among the birds the
fate of which is sealed, and which, if not already exterminated or mixed
with foreign blood, will soon have disappeared. The footnote in the
Proceedings of the IV. International Ornithological Congress, p. 203, is
herewith corrected.
N. Amer. B. I, p. 93 (1892); Grant, Cat. B. Brit. B. XXII, p. 77; Check-List N. Amer. B.
Ed. II, p. 115, No. 306 (1895); Hartlaub, Abh. Naturw. Ver. Bremen XIV, 1 (second ed.
of separate copy, p. 15) (1896).
L INNAEUS' brief diagnosis is: "Tetrao pedibus hirsutis alis
succenturiatis cervicalibus." After the habitat he adds: "Color Tetricis
feminae; vertex subcristatus; a tergo colli duae parvae alae: singulae
pennis quinque." This diagnosis is taken from Catesby, who gives a fairly
good description and a recognizable coloured plate. He specially mentions
that the neck-tufts are composed of five feathers, and in his figure they are
shown to be much pointed. Catesby expressly states that he does not know
exactly from which part of America his specimen came—yet Linnaeus says
"Habitat in Virginia."
Formerly the Heath Hen inhabited New England and part of the Middle
States (Southern Connecticut, Long Island, New Jersey, Nantucket, Eastern
Pennsylvania), but in 1887 Ridgway stated already that it was then
apparently extinct, except on Martha's Vineyard. About that time it was still
common on that island, inhabiting the woods and chiefly haunting oak
scrub and feeding on acorns. They were then "strictly protected by law," but
this protection seems not to have been effectual, as from 1893 to 1897 a
number were killed, skinned, and sold to various museums. This was,
perhaps, fortunate rather than unfortunate, because Mr. Hoyle (the man who
collected them) told us that in 1894 a fire destroyed many of them, and in
the fall of 1897 they were practically gone. But almost worse than this,
perhaps, two pairs of "Prairie Chicken" (Tympanuchus americanus) were
liberated and broods of young (of the latter apparently) were seen, so that it
is to be feared that birds shot now on Martha's Vineyards Island may have
blood of T. americanus in them, the two forms being closely related,
somewhat difficult to distinguish, and evidently sub-species of each other.
Nevertheless, a bird taken in 1901 was pronounced to be typical cupido by
Mr. Brewster.
From these facts it is pretty clear that the Heath Hen is among the birds the
fate of which is sealed, and which, if not already exterminated or mixed
with foreign blood, will soon have disappeared. The footnote in the
Proceedings of the IV. International Ornithological Congress, p. 203, is
herewith corrected.
Page 172
COTURNIX NOVAEZELANDIAE QUOY & GAIM.
(Plate 28, Fig. 2.)
Coturnix Novae-Zelandiae Quoy and Gaimard, Voy. Astrolabe, Zool. I. p. 242, pl. 24, fig. 1
(1830—"Il habit la baie Chouraki (rivière Tamise de Cook), à la Nouvelle-Zélande");
Gould, Syn. B. Austr., text and pl. fig 2 (1837-38); Buller, B. New Zealand, p. 161, pl.
(1873); Hist. B. New Zealand, 2nd ed. I, p. 225, pl. XXIII (1888); Grant, Cat. B. Brit.
Mus. XXII p. 245 (1893).
T HIS Quail, though a typical Coturnix, is easily distinguished from all
other species. The male has the upper-side almost black, each feather
bordered and indistinctly barred with rufous-brown, and with a wide,
creamy white shaft-line. The throat and sides of the head are rufous-
cinnamon, the feathers of the chest and breast at their basal half buff with a
broken black cross-bar, the distal half black, with two pale buff spots near
the tip, or with a continuous white border.
This sole representative of the "gamebirds" in New Zealand was in former
days very numerous in both islands, but especially so in the South Island,
wherever there was open grass-land, but is now evidently extinct. Its
disappearance is apparently not due to excessive shooting, but rather to the
introduction of rats, cats, and dogs, and last, but not least, to bush-fires and
to the regular burning of the sheep-runs, according to Sir Walter Buller. No
doubt the establishment itself of extensive sheep-farms in the once, more or
less, uninhabited grass-land was ominous for the future of the Quail.
It is not quite clear when the Quail disappeared. The last on the North
Island was shot by Captain Mair at Whangarei in 1860. Specimens were
recorded in 1867 and 1869, but were apparently not procured. In Haast's
"Journal of Exploration in the Nelson Province" it is said to be still very
abundant in 1861 on the grassy plains of the interior.
Sir Walter Buller mentions two specimens said to be from an island in Blue
Skin Bay, shot in "1867 or 1868." In his Second Edition of the Birds of
New Zealand he informs us that it was found occasionally in the South
Island down to 1875, but in the "Supplement" he speaks of a specimen said
to have been shot in 1871, but adds, "There is no absolute evidence of it,"
and "if true, this individual bird must have been about the last of its race."
Therefore, evidently the note about 1875 was erroneous.
(Plate 28, Fig. 2.)
Coturnix Novae-Zelandiae Quoy and Gaimard, Voy. Astrolabe, Zool. I. p. 242, pl. 24, fig. 1
(1830—"Il habit la baie Chouraki (rivière Tamise de Cook), à la Nouvelle-Zélande");
Gould, Syn. B. Austr., text and pl. fig 2 (1837-38); Buller, B. New Zealand, p. 161, pl.
(1873); Hist. B. New Zealand, 2nd ed. I, p. 225, pl. XXIII (1888); Grant, Cat. B. Brit.
Mus. XXII p. 245 (1893).
T HIS Quail, though a typical Coturnix, is easily distinguished from all
other species. The male has the upper-side almost black, each feather
bordered and indistinctly barred with rufous-brown, and with a wide,
creamy white shaft-line. The throat and sides of the head are rufous-
cinnamon, the feathers of the chest and breast at their basal half buff with a
broken black cross-bar, the distal half black, with two pale buff spots near
the tip, or with a continuous white border.
This sole representative of the "gamebirds" in New Zealand was in former
days very numerous in both islands, but especially so in the South Island,
wherever there was open grass-land, but is now evidently extinct. Its
disappearance is apparently not due to excessive shooting, but rather to the
introduction of rats, cats, and dogs, and last, but not least, to bush-fires and
to the regular burning of the sheep-runs, according to Sir Walter Buller. No
doubt the establishment itself of extensive sheep-farms in the once, more or
less, uninhabited grass-land was ominous for the future of the Quail.
It is not quite clear when the Quail disappeared. The last on the North
Island was shot by Captain Mair at Whangarei in 1860. Specimens were
recorded in 1867 and 1869, but were apparently not procured. In Haast's
"Journal of Exploration in the Nelson Province" it is said to be still very
abundant in 1861 on the grassy plains of the interior.
Sir Walter Buller mentions two specimens said to be from an island in Blue
Skin Bay, shot in "1867 or 1868." In his Second Edition of the Birds of
New Zealand he informs us that it was found occasionally in the South
Island down to 1875, but in the "Supplement" he speaks of a specimen said
to have been shot in 1871, but adds, "There is no absolute evidence of it,"
and "if true, this individual bird must have been about the last of its race."
Therefore, evidently the note about 1875 was erroneous.
Page 173
The statement of Mr. Cheeseman, that he took eggs on Three Kings Islands
is erroneous. The eggs belonged to a Synoecus, and the egg given to Sir
Walter Buller is now in my collection.
I have, however, also two eggs of Coturnix novaezealandiae, brought home
by Dr. H. O. Forbes. They have a brownish-white shell, covered and
washed all over with deep brown patches and lighter brown underlying
markings. They show distinctly the character of Quails' eggs, but, besides
being much larger, are easily distinguished from eggs of Coturnix coturnix.
They measure 34.3 by 25 and 34.5 by 21.3 mm.
Of birds I have in my collection: One ♂ ad. Shot at Whangarei, North
Island, by Major Mair, in 1860. (This is the specimen figured in the Second
Edition of the "Birds of New Zealand." I bought it with Sir Walter Buller's
collection eighteen years ago. By a curious lapsus memoriae Sir Walter
Buller, in the "Supplement," p. 35, in 1905, states that this bird was in his
son's collection.) One ♀ ad. and one ♂ in the first year's plumage, shot by
Messrs. Walter Buller and E. French near Kaiapoi, South Island, in the
summer of 1859.
Seven specimens are in the British Museum, the types in Paris, three in
Cambridge, a pair in Christchurch in New Zealand, some in the Canterbury
Museum, and doubtless many others, most of which have never been
recorded.
DINORNITHIDAE.
DINORNITHIDAE.
MOAS.
T HE first announcement of the former existence of large Struthious
birds in New Zealand was made by Mr. J. S. Polack in 1838. In his
is erroneous. The eggs belonged to a Synoecus, and the egg given to Sir
Walter Buller is now in my collection.
I have, however, also two eggs of Coturnix novaezealandiae, brought home
by Dr. H. O. Forbes. They have a brownish-white shell, covered and
washed all over with deep brown patches and lighter brown underlying
markings. They show distinctly the character of Quails' eggs, but, besides
being much larger, are easily distinguished from eggs of Coturnix coturnix.
They measure 34.3 by 25 and 34.5 by 21.3 mm.
Of birds I have in my collection: One ♂ ad. Shot at Whangarei, North
Island, by Major Mair, in 1860. (This is the specimen figured in the Second
Edition of the "Birds of New Zealand." I bought it with Sir Walter Buller's
collection eighteen years ago. By a curious lapsus memoriae Sir Walter
Buller, in the "Supplement," p. 35, in 1905, states that this bird was in his
son's collection.) One ♀ ad. and one ♂ in the first year's plumage, shot by
Messrs. Walter Buller and E. French near Kaiapoi, South Island, in the
summer of 1859.
Seven specimens are in the British Museum, the types in Paris, three in
Cambridge, a pair in Christchurch in New Zealand, some in the Canterbury
Museum, and doubtless many others, most of which have never been
recorded.
DINORNITHIDAE.
DINORNITHIDAE.
MOAS.
T HE first announcement of the former existence of large Struthious
birds in New Zealand was made by Mr. J. S. Polack in 1838. In his
Page 174
book New Zealand, he states that he found large bird bones near East Cape
in the North Island. The first specimen, however, that came into the hands
of a scientific man was the bone sent to Professor Owen in 1839 by Mr.
Rule, who reported that the natives had told him that it was the bone of a
large Eagle which they called "Movie." Professor Owen, with his
extraordinary knowledge, at once saw that far from any connection with the
Raptores, Mr. Rule's bone was a portion of a femur of a gigantic Struthious
bird. He described it on November 12th, 1839, at a meeting of the
Zoological Society, and it was figured on Plate 3 of Volume III of the
Transactions of the Zoological Society.
The next notice of the Moas takes the form of a letter, received by Professor
Owen from the Rev. W. C. Cotton, dated Waimate, near the Bay of Islands,
New Zealand, July 11th, 1842; and in it the writer gives an account of his
meeting with the Rev. Mr. Wm. Williams, a fellow missionary at East Cape.
The latter had collected a lot of "Moa" bones and sent them to a Dr.
Buckland. Mr. Williams also reported a conversation with two Englishmen,
who declared they had been taken out by a native at night and had seen a
Moa alive, but had been too frightened to shoot it.
On January 24th, 1843, Professor Owen exhibited a number of bones from
Mr. Williams' collection, and described them, giving the bird the name of
"Megalornis novaezealandiae," afterwards changing the generic title into
Dinornis, as Megalornis was preoccupied. Afterwards, when describing
these bones and those contained in the second box of Mr. Williams'
collection more fully, he somewhat inconsistently changed the specific
name to struthioides, which Captain Hutton, in his later classification,
retained. Following the laws of priority, however (novaezealandiae has 10
months' priority over struthioides), we must reinstate the name
novaezealandiae.
A number of other finds occurred between 1842 and 1847, but by far the
largest and most important collections were made and sent home between
1847 and 1852 by the Hon. W. Mantell, who sent to Professor Owen many
hundreds of bones and eggshells, from which the Professor was enabled to
determine and describe a large number of species, and even as early as this
to separate some genera.
in the North Island. The first specimen, however, that came into the hands
of a scientific man was the bone sent to Professor Owen in 1839 by Mr.
Rule, who reported that the natives had told him that it was the bone of a
large Eagle which they called "Movie." Professor Owen, with his
extraordinary knowledge, at once saw that far from any connection with the
Raptores, Mr. Rule's bone was a portion of a femur of a gigantic Struthious
bird. He described it on November 12th, 1839, at a meeting of the
Zoological Society, and it was figured on Plate 3 of Volume III of the
Transactions of the Zoological Society.
The next notice of the Moas takes the form of a letter, received by Professor
Owen from the Rev. W. C. Cotton, dated Waimate, near the Bay of Islands,
New Zealand, July 11th, 1842; and in it the writer gives an account of his
meeting with the Rev. Mr. Wm. Williams, a fellow missionary at East Cape.
The latter had collected a lot of "Moa" bones and sent them to a Dr.
Buckland. Mr. Williams also reported a conversation with two Englishmen,
who declared they had been taken out by a native at night and had seen a
Moa alive, but had been too frightened to shoot it.
On January 24th, 1843, Professor Owen exhibited a number of bones from
Mr. Williams' collection, and described them, giving the bird the name of
"Megalornis novaezealandiae," afterwards changing the generic title into
Dinornis, as Megalornis was preoccupied. Afterwards, when describing
these bones and those contained in the second box of Mr. Williams'
collection more fully, he somewhat inconsistently changed the specific
name to struthioides, which Captain Hutton, in his later classification,
retained. Following the laws of priority, however (novaezealandiae has 10
months' priority over struthioides), we must reinstate the name
novaezealandiae.
A number of other finds occurred between 1842 and 1847, but by far the
largest and most important collections were made and sent home between
1847 and 1852 by the Hon. W. Mantell, who sent to Professor Owen many
hundreds of bones and eggshells, from which the Professor was enabled to
determine and describe a large number of species, and even as early as this
to separate some genera.
Page 175
The bulk of later finds were made by Sir Julius von Haast, Captain Hutton,
and Mr. Aug. Hamilton, and the two most famous deposits were Glenmark
Swamp and Te Aute; but it would take too much space to give here an
account of all the other extraordinary discoveries of Moa deposits made by
such men as Dr. Thomson, Mr. Earl, Mr. Thorne, Dr. H. O. Forbes, and
many others. Besides many fragments of eggshell, a number of eggs have
been found, which will be enumerated elsewhere.
Feathers have been found at Clutha River, near Roxburgh, and also in caves
near Queenstown. Those from Clutha are mostly dark, being black with
white tips; while the Queenstown ones resemble feathers of Apteryx
australis in colours. Professor Owen has shown that Megalapteryx huttoni
was feathered down to the toes, and in the plate I have represented it
clothed with feathers similar to the Clutha ones, which I believe belong to
this species. The Moas at one time must have been extraordinarily
numerous, both in numbers and species, and they varied in height from 2½
feet to 12 feet. Professor Parker has shown that some of the species had
crests of long feathers on the head, and, as some adult skulls of the same
forms show no signs of this, he infers that the males alone had this
appendage. There has been much discussion as to the time when the Moas
became extinct, and we know for certain that the two species, Dinornis
maximus and Anomalopteryx antiquus, belong to a much earlier geological
epoch than the bulk of the other species. It would be too lengthy for my
purpose to go into the arguments, but we can, by the study of the "kitchen
middens" of Maoris and their traditions, fairly adduce that the Maoris
arrived in the North Island some 600 years ago, that they hunted Moas, and
that they exterminated them about 100 to 150 years after their arrival. In the
South, or rather Central, Island, the Maoris appear to have arrived about
100 years later, and to have exterminated the Moas about 350 years ago. It
is only fair to say, however, that Monsieur de Quatrefages adduces evidence
in his paper which goes far to prove that Moas existed down to the end of
the 18th or even beginning of the 19th century in those parts of the Middle
Island not, or scantily, inhabited by Maoris.
The Dinornithidae form a separate group of the order Ratitae, in no way
closely related to the Australian Emu (Dromaius), as many ornithologists
have asserted, but nearer to the South American Nandu (Rhea) than any
other living Ratitae, though exhibiting many characters in common with the
and Mr. Aug. Hamilton, and the two most famous deposits were Glenmark
Swamp and Te Aute; but it would take too much space to give here an
account of all the other extraordinary discoveries of Moa deposits made by
such men as Dr. Thomson, Mr. Earl, Mr. Thorne, Dr. H. O. Forbes, and
many others. Besides many fragments of eggshell, a number of eggs have
been found, which will be enumerated elsewhere.
Feathers have been found at Clutha River, near Roxburgh, and also in caves
near Queenstown. Those from Clutha are mostly dark, being black with
white tips; while the Queenstown ones resemble feathers of Apteryx
australis in colours. Professor Owen has shown that Megalapteryx huttoni
was feathered down to the toes, and in the plate I have represented it
clothed with feathers similar to the Clutha ones, which I believe belong to
this species. The Moas at one time must have been extraordinarily
numerous, both in numbers and species, and they varied in height from 2½
feet to 12 feet. Professor Parker has shown that some of the species had
crests of long feathers on the head, and, as some adult skulls of the same
forms show no signs of this, he infers that the males alone had this
appendage. There has been much discussion as to the time when the Moas
became extinct, and we know for certain that the two species, Dinornis
maximus and Anomalopteryx antiquus, belong to a much earlier geological
epoch than the bulk of the other species. It would be too lengthy for my
purpose to go into the arguments, but we can, by the study of the "kitchen
middens" of Maoris and their traditions, fairly adduce that the Maoris
arrived in the North Island some 600 years ago, that they hunted Moas, and
that they exterminated them about 100 to 150 years after their arrival. In the
South, or rather Central, Island, the Maoris appear to have arrived about
100 years later, and to have exterminated the Moas about 350 years ago. It
is only fair to say, however, that Monsieur de Quatrefages adduces evidence
in his paper which goes far to prove that Moas existed down to the end of
the 18th or even beginning of the 19th century in those parts of the Middle
Island not, or scantily, inhabited by Maoris.
The Dinornithidae form a separate group of the order Ratitae, in no way
closely related to the Australian Emu (Dromaius), as many ornithologists
have asserted, but nearer to the South American Nandu (Rhea) than any
other living Ratitae, though exhibiting many characters in common with the
Page 176
Apterygidae. There have been a number of classifications set up of this
family. The first by Reichenbach, in 1850, with 7 species and 7 genera! The
next was by Von Haast, in 1873, who enumerated 10 species, divided into 4
genera. The third was Lydekker's, in 1891, who acknowledged 23 species,
divided into 5 genera. Then came Hutton's, in 1892, which left out
Megalapteryx, with its then known 2 species, and acknowledged 26 species,
divided into 7 genera. Lastly we have Professor Parker's, in 1895, in which
again Megalapteryx is left out, and 21 species are acknowledged, divided
into 5 genera. There has been a great amount of controversy as to the
number of species of Moas which really ought to be distinguished, and of
late years there has been a tendency to unite most of the species as
synonyms, the authors declaring that bones vary to such a degree that all the
characters relied on for the distinguishing of the various species were
individual variations, and that, besides, it was impossible that so many
distinct forms could have occurred in such a small area. The extreme of this
lumping was reached when Professor Forbes, in the Bulletin of the
Liverpool Museums, III, pp. 27 and 28 (1900), divided the Moas into six
genera, each with a single species. He thus ignores the fact that by doing so
he has united forms which were founded on FULLY ADULT bones, and yet
some of them were only about half or two-thirds the size of the others. I
personally think that too many species have been made, and at least 7 of
Captain Hutton's forms must be sunk. On the other hand some have been
described since 1895 and 1900, and I have been obliged to name others
rather against my will, so that in spite of uniting so many species of others I
find I am obliged to acknowledge more species than anyone else. I have
divided these into genera according to Professor Parker's classification, only
adding Palaeocasuarius of Forbes, with 3 species, and Megalapteryx, with
5, which brings my number up to 38 species, divided into 7 genera. My
reasons for not uniting these into 7 species and 7 genera, as those of the
"lumping school" do, are twofold,—first, the bones of the Ratitae are much
more solid than those of other birds, and are not given to so much
individual variation; and, secondly, in the face of the great number of
species of Paradise Birds and Cassowaries found on New Guinea, the
contention that there could not be so many species of Moa on so small an
area is not easily maintained. Moreover, we have strong support in the
present fauna and flora for the presumption that, when the Moas first came
into existence and differentiated into species, New Zealand was a much
family. The first by Reichenbach, in 1850, with 7 species and 7 genera! The
next was by Von Haast, in 1873, who enumerated 10 species, divided into 4
genera. The third was Lydekker's, in 1891, who acknowledged 23 species,
divided into 5 genera. Then came Hutton's, in 1892, which left out
Megalapteryx, with its then known 2 species, and acknowledged 26 species,
divided into 7 genera. Lastly we have Professor Parker's, in 1895, in which
again Megalapteryx is left out, and 21 species are acknowledged, divided
into 5 genera. There has been a great amount of controversy as to the
number of species of Moas which really ought to be distinguished, and of
late years there has been a tendency to unite most of the species as
synonyms, the authors declaring that bones vary to such a degree that all the
characters relied on for the distinguishing of the various species were
individual variations, and that, besides, it was impossible that so many
distinct forms could have occurred in such a small area. The extreme of this
lumping was reached when Professor Forbes, in the Bulletin of the
Liverpool Museums, III, pp. 27 and 28 (1900), divided the Moas into six
genera, each with a single species. He thus ignores the fact that by doing so
he has united forms which were founded on FULLY ADULT bones, and yet
some of them were only about half or two-thirds the size of the others. I
personally think that too many species have been made, and at least 7 of
Captain Hutton's forms must be sunk. On the other hand some have been
described since 1895 and 1900, and I have been obliged to name others
rather against my will, so that in spite of uniting so many species of others I
find I am obliged to acknowledge more species than anyone else. I have
divided these into genera according to Professor Parker's classification, only
adding Palaeocasuarius of Forbes, with 3 species, and Megalapteryx, with
5, which brings my number up to 38 species, divided into 7 genera. My
reasons for not uniting these into 7 species and 7 genera, as those of the
"lumping school" do, are twofold,—first, the bones of the Ratitae are much
more solid than those of other birds, and are not given to so much
individual variation; and, secondly, in the face of the great number of
species of Paradise Birds and Cassowaries found on New Guinea, the
contention that there could not be so many species of Moa on so small an
area is not easily maintained. Moreover, we have strong support in the
present fauna and flora for the presumption that, when the Moas first came
into existence and differentiated into species, New Zealand was a much
Page 177
larger area, stretching at least from the Macquarie Islands in the south to the
Kermadecs in the north, and from Lord Howe's Island on the west to the
Chatham Islands on the east. So that, like the giant tortoises on the
Galápagos Islands, they only got driven so closely together after their
specific differentiation, when the land gradually subsided, owing to
volcanic action. The differentiation of the family is as follows:—
DINORNITHIDAE.
Skull with a short and wide beak. Pectoral girdle very small or absent, wing
absent, only an indication in Dinornis dromioides. Hallux absent or present.
An extension bridge to the tibio-tarsus, which is placed near the inner
border of the bone. No superior notch to the sternum. Most of the species of
very large size. The tarso-metatarsus is either long and slender or short and
wide, and its anterior surface may or may not be grooved. The second
trochlea is longer than the fourth, the third is not pedunculated, and there is
no perforation in the groove between the third and fourth trochlea. In the
tibio-tarsus the cnemial crest rises well above the head; the extensor groove
is separated by a considerable interval from the inner border of the bone.
There is a well-defined intercondylar tubercle; the intercondylar gorge is
deep, and there is no deep pit on the lateral surface of the entocondyle. The
femur may be either slender or stout, but is not markedly curved forwards.
The popliteal depression is deep, and the summit of the great trochanter
rises considerably above the level of the head. The pelvis approximates to
that of the Apterygidae, but the pectineal process of the pubis is less
developed, and the ischium and pubis may be longer and more slender. The
coracoid and scapula are aborted and may be absent. The sternum, which
may be either long and narrow, or broad and short, differs from that of the
Apterygidae by the absence of the superior notch, the divergent lateral
processes, and the reduction of the coracoidal grooves to small facets or
their total disappearance. The cervical vertebrae are relatively short, an
expanded neural platform as far as the sixth.
In Anomalopteryx and Megalapteryx the number of cervical vertebrae is 21,
and there are 2 cervico-dorsal and 4 free dorsal vertebrae, so it is fair to
assume that this is the correct number throughout the family.
Kermadecs in the north, and from Lord Howe's Island on the west to the
Chatham Islands on the east. So that, like the giant tortoises on the
Galápagos Islands, they only got driven so closely together after their
specific differentiation, when the land gradually subsided, owing to
volcanic action. The differentiation of the family is as follows:—
DINORNITHIDAE.
Skull with a short and wide beak. Pectoral girdle very small or absent, wing
absent, only an indication in Dinornis dromioides. Hallux absent or present.
An extension bridge to the tibio-tarsus, which is placed near the inner
border of the bone. No superior notch to the sternum. Most of the species of
very large size. The tarso-metatarsus is either long and slender or short and
wide, and its anterior surface may or may not be grooved. The second
trochlea is longer than the fourth, the third is not pedunculated, and there is
no perforation in the groove between the third and fourth trochlea. In the
tibio-tarsus the cnemial crest rises well above the head; the extensor groove
is separated by a considerable interval from the inner border of the bone.
There is a well-defined intercondylar tubercle; the intercondylar gorge is
deep, and there is no deep pit on the lateral surface of the entocondyle. The
femur may be either slender or stout, but is not markedly curved forwards.
The popliteal depression is deep, and the summit of the great trochanter
rises considerably above the level of the head. The pelvis approximates to
that of the Apterygidae, but the pectineal process of the pubis is less
developed, and the ischium and pubis may be longer and more slender. The
coracoid and scapula are aborted and may be absent. The sternum, which
may be either long and narrow, or broad and short, differs from that of the
Apterygidae by the absence of the superior notch, the divergent lateral
processes, and the reduction of the coracoidal grooves to small facets or
their total disappearance. The cervical vertebrae are relatively short, an
expanded neural platform as far as the sixth.
In Anomalopteryx and Megalapteryx the number of cervical vertebrae is 21,
and there are 2 cervico-dorsal and 4 free dorsal vertebrae, so it is fair to
assume that this is the correct number throughout the family.
Page 178
The feathers had after-shafts.
THE GENERA ARE AS FOLLOWS:
Dinornis Owen. Megalapteryx Haast.
Palapteryx Owen, part. Anomalopteryx Lydekker, part.
Palapteryx Hutton. *Mesopteryx Hutton.
Tylapteryx Hutton.
Cela Reichenbach. Pachyornis Lydekker.
Dinornis Owen, part. Palapteryx Haast.
Meionornis Haast. Dinornis Owen, part.
Anomalopteryx Lydekker. Euryapteryx Hutton.
Mesopteryx Parker.
Palaeocasuarius Forbes.
Emeus Reichenbach. *Megalapteryx Forbes, part.
Euryapteryx Haast.
Syornis Hutton. Anomalopteryx Reichenbach.
Dinornis Owen, part. Meionornis Haast.
Dinornis Owen, part.
I have adopted Professor Parker's classification in the genera, only
substituting Cela Reichenbach for Mesapteryx Hutton, which is a synonym
of Megalapteryx Haast. As to the species I have used my own judgment; I
felt obliged to name a number of species acknowledged by Parker and
Lydekker but not named, because this system of indicating species by the
letters A, B, C, &c., which has crept into our nomenclature, will make all
understanding impossible, as not always the same species is denoted by the
same letter. A few of these species will naturally later have to be sunk, as
some have been founded on skulls and others on leg bones, or so, which,
when we get perfect individual skeletons may prove to be identical, but I do
not think these will be many.
Besides a number of imperfect eggs, particulars of which will be found in
Dr. A. B. Meyer's article in the Ibis, 1903, pp. 188-196, there are known two
perfect Moa eggs and one almost perfect one.
1. Otago Museum. Molyneux River, 1901. Pachyornis pondorosus.
2. Tring Museum. Molyneux River, 1901. Megalapteryx huttoni.
THE GENERA ARE AS FOLLOWS:
Dinornis Owen. Megalapteryx Haast.
Palapteryx Owen, part. Anomalopteryx Lydekker, part.
Palapteryx Hutton. *Mesopteryx Hutton.
Tylapteryx Hutton.
Cela Reichenbach. Pachyornis Lydekker.
Dinornis Owen, part. Palapteryx Haast.
Meionornis Haast. Dinornis Owen, part.
Anomalopteryx Lydekker. Euryapteryx Hutton.
Mesopteryx Parker.
Palaeocasuarius Forbes.
Emeus Reichenbach. *Megalapteryx Forbes, part.
Euryapteryx Haast.
Syornis Hutton. Anomalopteryx Reichenbach.
Dinornis Owen, part. Meionornis Haast.
Dinornis Owen, part.
I have adopted Professor Parker's classification in the genera, only
substituting Cela Reichenbach for Mesapteryx Hutton, which is a synonym
of Megalapteryx Haast. As to the species I have used my own judgment; I
felt obliged to name a number of species acknowledged by Parker and
Lydekker but not named, because this system of indicating species by the
letters A, B, C, &c., which has crept into our nomenclature, will make all
understanding impossible, as not always the same species is denoted by the
same letter. A few of these species will naturally later have to be sunk, as
some have been founded on skulls and others on leg bones, or so, which,
when we get perfect individual skeletons may prove to be identical, but I do
not think these will be many.
Besides a number of imperfect eggs, particulars of which will be found in
Dr. A. B. Meyer's article in the Ibis, 1903, pp. 188-196, there are known two
perfect Moa eggs and one almost perfect one.
1. Otago Museum. Molyneux River, 1901. Pachyornis pondorosus.
2. Tring Museum. Molyneux River, 1901. Megalapteryx huttoni.
Page 179
3. Rowley Collection. South Island, 1859. Dinornis novaezealandiae.
DINORNIS.
T HE skull is broad and much depressed, with a comparatively wide,
somewhat pointed and deflected beak. Breadth at the squamosals
twice the height at basi-temporal. It has a flattened frontal region, and
a wide median ridge on the upper surface of the praemaxillae. The mandible
is in the form of a narrow U, with the angle much inflected, no distinct
anticular process, and the symphysis moderately wide, narrowing anteriorly,
with a prominent and broad inferior ridge, widest in front. The quadrate is
elongated, with a very large pneumatic foramen. The sternum is nearly as
long as broad, very convex, with distinct coracoidal facets, 3 costal
articulations, very small and reflected costal processes, the lateral processes
very broad and widely divergent, and a wide xiphisternal notch. The pelvis
is narrow with a high ilium, in which the inferior border of the
postacetabular portion is flat, and does not descend as a sharp ridge below
the level of the anterior postacetabular vertebrae. The pubis has a small
pectineal process; and the ventral aspect of the true and postacetabular
vertebrae is very broad and much flattened.
The distal extremity of the tibio-tarsus is not inflected. A hallux is present in
some species. The tibio-tarsus and tarso-metatarsus are long and slender,
the length of the latter equalling and more often exceeding the length of the
femur, and also exceeding half the length of the tibio-tarsus. The femur is
comparatively long and slender, with a short neck, the head rising but
slightly and projecting only a small distance, the linear aspera in the form of
a long irregular line, the outer side of the distal extremity moderately
expanded, the popliteal depression small, deep, and sharply defined, the
profile of the inner condyle semi-ovoid and narrow, and the interior
trochlear surface nearly flat. The phalangeals of the pes are long and
comparatively slender, the proximal surface of the terminal segments not
being trefoil-shaped. In the vertebral column the middle cervicals are long
and narrow, with the postzygapophyses directed much outwardly and
DINORNIS.
T HE skull is broad and much depressed, with a comparatively wide,
somewhat pointed and deflected beak. Breadth at the squamosals
twice the height at basi-temporal. It has a flattened frontal region, and
a wide median ridge on the upper surface of the praemaxillae. The mandible
is in the form of a narrow U, with the angle much inflected, no distinct
anticular process, and the symphysis moderately wide, narrowing anteriorly,
with a prominent and broad inferior ridge, widest in front. The quadrate is
elongated, with a very large pneumatic foramen. The sternum is nearly as
long as broad, very convex, with distinct coracoidal facets, 3 costal
articulations, very small and reflected costal processes, the lateral processes
very broad and widely divergent, and a wide xiphisternal notch. The pelvis
is narrow with a high ilium, in which the inferior border of the
postacetabular portion is flat, and does not descend as a sharp ridge below
the level of the anterior postacetabular vertebrae. The pubis has a small
pectineal process; and the ventral aspect of the true and postacetabular
vertebrae is very broad and much flattened.
The distal extremity of the tibio-tarsus is not inflected. A hallux is present in
some species. The tibio-tarsus and tarso-metatarsus are long and slender,
the length of the latter equalling and more often exceeding the length of the
femur, and also exceeding half the length of the tibio-tarsus. The femur is
comparatively long and slender, with a short neck, the head rising but
slightly and projecting only a small distance, the linear aspera in the form of
a long irregular line, the outer side of the distal extremity moderately
expanded, the popliteal depression small, deep, and sharply defined, the
profile of the inner condyle semi-ovoid and narrow, and the interior
trochlear surface nearly flat. The phalangeals of the pes are long and
comparatively slender, the proximal surface of the terminal segments not
being trefoil-shaped. In the vertebral column the middle cervicals are long
and narrow, with the postzygapophyses directed much outwardly and
Page 180
separated by a very deep channel, and the posterior face of the centrum low
and wide. The dorsals have short transverse processes and neural spine, the
anterior and middle ones (those with a haemal spine or carina) having a
large anterior pneumatic foramen between the nib-facet, the foramen being
triangular in shape. All the species of this genus are of comparatively large
size, and include the tallest members of the family.
Type of the genus: Dinornis novaezealandiae (Owen).
Number of species: 7.
DINORNIS MAXIMUS OWEN.
Dinornis maximus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VI. p. 497 (1868).
D. excelsus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV. p. 110 (1892).
D. giganteus Haast, Trans. N.Z. Inst. I p. 88, No. 20 part.
T HIS is the largest species of Moa, the tibio-tarsus being from 37.5 to
39.2 inches in length, while that of the largest D. giganteus does not
exceed 35 inches, but by far the largest number of the latter are
considerably shorter.
The type bones were obtained in Glenmark Swamp, Middle Island of New
Zealand, and were sent to Professor Owen by Major J. Michael of the
Madras Staff Corps. Casts of these bones are in the British Museum, No. A
161 in the Palaeontological Department.
This bird was the tallest of all known birds, though it must have been
considerably exceeded in bulk by Aepyornis ingens and Aepyornis titan of
Madagascar.
Locality: Glenmark Swamp, Middle Island, New Zealand.
DINORNIS ALTUS OWEN.
and wide. The dorsals have short transverse processes and neural spine, the
anterior and middle ones (those with a haemal spine or carina) having a
large anterior pneumatic foramen between the nib-facet, the foramen being
triangular in shape. All the species of this genus are of comparatively large
size, and include the tallest members of the family.
Type of the genus: Dinornis novaezealandiae (Owen).
Number of species: 7.
DINORNIS MAXIMUS OWEN.
Dinornis maximus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VI. p. 497 (1868).
D. excelsus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV. p. 110 (1892).
D. giganteus Haast, Trans. N.Z. Inst. I p. 88, No. 20 part.
T HIS is the largest species of Moa, the tibio-tarsus being from 37.5 to
39.2 inches in length, while that of the largest D. giganteus does not
exceed 35 inches, but by far the largest number of the latter are
considerably shorter.
The type bones were obtained in Glenmark Swamp, Middle Island of New
Zealand, and were sent to Professor Owen by Major J. Michael of the
Madras Staff Corps. Casts of these bones are in the British Museum, No. A
161 in the Palaeontological Department.
This bird was the tallest of all known birds, though it must have been
considerably exceeded in bulk by Aepyornis ingens and Aepyornis titan of
Madagascar.
Locality: Glenmark Swamp, Middle Island, New Zealand.
DINORNIS ALTUS OWEN.
Page 181
Dinornis maximus Owen, Ext. Birds N.Z. p. 253 (Dr. Lillie's specimen) (1879).
D. altus Owen, Ext. Birds N.Z. (1879) p. 361.
D. giganteus var maximus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VI p. 497 (1868).
O NLY known by a tarso-metatarsus, femur and tibio-tarsus from the
Middle Island, New Zealand. The bones at once noticeable by their
great length, and are more slender than the same bones in D.
maximus. This form must therefore, till further material comes to hand, be
treated as a separate species.
Locality: Middle Island, New Zealand. Collected by Dr. Lillie.
DINORNIS GIGANTEUS OWEN.
Dinornis giganteus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 237 (1843) and p. 307 (1846).
Moa giganteus Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. XXX (1850).
Dinornis maximus (non D. maximus Owen of 1867!) Trans. Zool. Soc. X p. 147 (1877).
D. validus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. p. 111 (1892).
T HIS is, as regards size, one of the more variable forms in the tarso-
metatarsus, while the tibio-tarsus is remarkably constant. The tibio-
tarsus is almost invariably 35 inches in length, while the tarso-
metatarsus varies from 17.5 to 19 inches in length.
The type of D. giganteus Owen is from Poverty Bay; the type of D. validus
is from Glenmark.
Habitat: North and Middle Islands, New Zealand.
Portion of skeleton in Tring Museum, from Kopua Swamps, Canterbury,
New Zealand.
DINORNIS INGENS OWEN.
D. altus Owen, Ext. Birds N.Z. (1879) p. 361.
D. giganteus var maximus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VI p. 497 (1868).
O NLY known by a tarso-metatarsus, femur and tibio-tarsus from the
Middle Island, New Zealand. The bones at once noticeable by their
great length, and are more slender than the same bones in D.
maximus. This form must therefore, till further material comes to hand, be
treated as a separate species.
Locality: Middle Island, New Zealand. Collected by Dr. Lillie.
DINORNIS GIGANTEUS OWEN.
Dinornis giganteus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 237 (1843) and p. 307 (1846).
Moa giganteus Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. XXX (1850).
Dinornis maximus (non D. maximus Owen of 1867!) Trans. Zool. Soc. X p. 147 (1877).
D. validus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. p. 111 (1892).
T HIS is, as regards size, one of the more variable forms in the tarso-
metatarsus, while the tibio-tarsus is remarkably constant. The tibio-
tarsus is almost invariably 35 inches in length, while the tarso-
metatarsus varies from 17.5 to 19 inches in length.
The type of D. giganteus Owen is from Poverty Bay; the type of D. validus
is from Glenmark.
Habitat: North and Middle Islands, New Zealand.
Portion of skeleton in Tring Museum, from Kopua Swamps, Canterbury,
New Zealand.
DINORNIS INGENS OWEN.
Page 182
(Plate 42.)
Dinornis ingens Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 237 (1843).
Movia ingens Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. xxx (1850).
D. ingens var. robustus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 307 (1846).
Palapteryx robustus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 345 (1848).
D. firmus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV p. 114 (1892).
D. potens Hutton, l.c. p. 115.
D. INGENS shows considerable variation in size, but the inter-gradation
is so complete that it seems impossible to retain the four species
ingens, firmus, potens and robustus, which Captain Hutton admits. This
form was widely distributed over the North and Middle Islands. The type
skull of P. robustus came from Timaru, the type of firmus from Wanganui,
that of ingens from Poverty Bay, while that of potens is quoted from the
East side of Middle Island, without specific type locality.
Habitat: North and Middle Islands.
The plate of this species was reconstructed by Mr. Frohawk from the
skeleton and feathers in my museum, and the feathers found with the
skeleton now in the York Museum. The only criticism that might be made in
connection with this picture is that the feathers are drawn a little too much
like those of Apteryx australis, but this is not of any consequence, as the
Moa feathers in the Tring Museum and elsewhere vary considerably in
appearance, though being more or less coloured like Apteryx feathers.
There is an almost perfect skeleton in the Tring Museum.
DINORNIS GRACILIS OWEN.
Dinornis gracilis Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. IV (1855) p. 141.
D. torosus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV p. 117 (1892).
I F we acknowledge that D. novaezealandiae occurs both on the North
and Middle Islands, then I feel sure that the distinctness of D. gracilis
Dinornis ingens Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 237 (1843).
Movia ingens Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. xxx (1850).
D. ingens var. robustus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 307 (1846).
Palapteryx robustus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 345 (1848).
D. firmus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV p. 114 (1892).
D. potens Hutton, l.c. p. 115.
D. INGENS shows considerable variation in size, but the inter-gradation
is so complete that it seems impossible to retain the four species
ingens, firmus, potens and robustus, which Captain Hutton admits. This
form was widely distributed over the North and Middle Islands. The type
skull of P. robustus came from Timaru, the type of firmus from Wanganui,
that of ingens from Poverty Bay, while that of potens is quoted from the
East side of Middle Island, without specific type locality.
Habitat: North and Middle Islands.
The plate of this species was reconstructed by Mr. Frohawk from the
skeleton and feathers in my museum, and the feathers found with the
skeleton now in the York Museum. The only criticism that might be made in
connection with this picture is that the feathers are drawn a little too much
like those of Apteryx australis, but this is not of any consequence, as the
Moa feathers in the Tring Museum and elsewhere vary considerably in
appearance, though being more or less coloured like Apteryx feathers.
There is an almost perfect skeleton in the Tring Museum.
DINORNIS GRACILIS OWEN.
Dinornis gracilis Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. IV (1855) p. 141.
D. torosus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV p. 117 (1892).
I F we acknowledge that D. novaezealandiae occurs both on the North
and Middle Islands, then I feel sure that the distinctness of D. gracilis
Page 183
and D. torosus cannot be maintained, as the measurements intergrade
completely.
The type of D. gracilis came from Wanganui, while that of D. torosus is a
nearly perfect skeleton found in a cave at Takaka, near Nelson.
Habitat: New Zealand.
There is an imperfect skeleton in the Tring Museum, from a limestone cave
at Takaka, near Motueka, Province of Nelson, New Zealand.
DINORNIS DROMIOIDES OWEN.
Dinornis dromioides Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III. p. 235 (1843).
Palapteryx dromioides Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. XXX (1850).
Palapteryx plenus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV p. 122 (1892).
T HIS form also inhabited both islands, but was probably one of the
rarest. The type of D. dromioides came from Poverty Bay, and that of
P. plenus from Glenmark.
Habitat: New Zealand.
DINORNIS NOVAEZEALANDIAE OWEN.
Dinornis novaezealandiae Owen, P.Z.S. (1843) p. 8.
D. struthioides Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 244 (1844).
D. strennus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV p. 8 (1893).
P ROFESSOR OWEN changed the name of this form, but we cannot
accept this change, as it is against the laws of nomenclatorial priority,
though we all appreciate the motive the Professor had in making this
change. The type came from Poverty Bay, but the bird inhabits both islands.
completely.
The type of D. gracilis came from Wanganui, while that of D. torosus is a
nearly perfect skeleton found in a cave at Takaka, near Nelson.
Habitat: New Zealand.
There is an imperfect skeleton in the Tring Museum, from a limestone cave
at Takaka, near Motueka, Province of Nelson, New Zealand.
DINORNIS DROMIOIDES OWEN.
Dinornis dromioides Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III. p. 235 (1843).
Palapteryx dromioides Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. XXX (1850).
Palapteryx plenus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV p. 122 (1892).
T HIS form also inhabited both islands, but was probably one of the
rarest. The type of D. dromioides came from Poverty Bay, and that of
P. plenus from Glenmark.
Habitat: New Zealand.
DINORNIS NOVAEZEALANDIAE OWEN.
Dinornis novaezealandiae Owen, P.Z.S. (1843) p. 8.
D. struthioides Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III p. 244 (1844).
D. strennus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV p. 8 (1893).
P ROFESSOR OWEN changed the name of this form, but we cannot
accept this change, as it is against the laws of nomenclatorial priority,
though we all appreciate the motive the Professor had in making this
change. The type came from Poverty Bay, but the bird inhabits both islands.
Page 184
This species had wings.
Habitat: New Zealand.
A nearly perfect skeleton in the Tring Museum from Waitomo district,
Auckland, New Zealand.
MEGALAPTERYX HAAST.
O RIGINALLY distinguished by Haast from the Dinornithidae as an
ancient form of the Apterygidae, but afterwards united by Lydekker
with the Dinornithidae. Mr. Lydekker's diagnosis of the genus is as
follows:—
"Distinguished from Dinornis by the extreme slenderness and length of the
femur and tibio-tarsus, and the relatively shorter tarso-metatarsus, of which
latter the length is considerably shorter than that of the femur. The pelvis is
much narrower than in Dinornis, with the ventral surface of the
postacetabular sacrals ridged and narrower, and a more developed pectineal
process to the pubis. The femur is markedly curved forwards, with the distal
extremity moderately expanded, the popliteal depression larger and less
defined, the linea aspera narrower and sharper, and a more distinct anterior
intermuscular ridge."
The following additional diagnostic characters are taken from Mr. Charles
W. Andrews' description of the complete skeleton of Megalapteryx tenuipes
in the Tring Museum (Nov. Zool. IV, pp. 188-194, fig. 1-2 in text and pl.
VI):—
Width of cranium at paroccipital processes less than half the length of the
basis cranii. Length of premaxilla less than two-and-a-half times that of the
basis cranii. Body of the premaxilla pointed and slightly decurved; its
length and breadth less than the basis cranii. The occipital plane slightly
declined backwards. Occipital condyle projecting slightly beyond the
paroccipital processes. Anterior and posterior lambdoidal ridges separated
by a very narrow interval in their middle region only. Width at squamosals
Habitat: New Zealand.
A nearly perfect skeleton in the Tring Museum from Waitomo district,
Auckland, New Zealand.
MEGALAPTERYX HAAST.
O RIGINALLY distinguished by Haast from the Dinornithidae as an
ancient form of the Apterygidae, but afterwards united by Lydekker
with the Dinornithidae. Mr. Lydekker's diagnosis of the genus is as
follows:—
"Distinguished from Dinornis by the extreme slenderness and length of the
femur and tibio-tarsus, and the relatively shorter tarso-metatarsus, of which
latter the length is considerably shorter than that of the femur. The pelvis is
much narrower than in Dinornis, with the ventral surface of the
postacetabular sacrals ridged and narrower, and a more developed pectineal
process to the pubis. The femur is markedly curved forwards, with the distal
extremity moderately expanded, the popliteal depression larger and less
defined, the linea aspera narrower and sharper, and a more distinct anterior
intermuscular ridge."
The following additional diagnostic characters are taken from Mr. Charles
W. Andrews' description of the complete skeleton of Megalapteryx tenuipes
in the Tring Museum (Nov. Zool. IV, pp. 188-194, fig. 1-2 in text and pl.
VI):—
Width of cranium at paroccipital processes less than half the length of the
basis cranii. Length of premaxilla less than two-and-a-half times that of the
basis cranii. Body of the premaxilla pointed and slightly decurved; its
length and breadth less than the basis cranii. The occipital plane slightly
declined backwards. Occipital condyle projecting slightly beyond the
paroccipital processes. Anterior and posterior lambdoidal ridges separated
by a very narrow interval in their middle region only. Width at squamosals
Page 185
slightly more than double the length of the basis cranii. Mammillary
tuberosities not very prominent. Margin of tympanic cavity evenly curved.
Temporal fossae very large. The distance between the temporal ridges about
four-fifths the width of the cranium at the fossae. The posterior temporal
ridge confluent with the lambdoidal ridge. Post-temporal fossae very large.
The inferior temporal ridge is strongly marked, and there is a pretympanic
process. The zygomatic process is well developed. Rostrum dilated towards
its anterior end, compressed and carinate beneath the large presphenoid
fossae. Mandible very slender. Posterior angular process small. Sternum
very convex, and with a very nearly straight anterior border between the
tuberosities for the coracoscapular ligaments. Costal processes short but
large, with distinct coracoidal facets. The lateral processes are long and
distally expanded. The sternum is just as wide as it is long. There are three
costal articulations. The most notable character is the enormous length of
the toes, the middle one being longer than the tarso-metatarsus. The ungual
phalanges are peculiarly long, narrow and curved, instead of being
comparatively short and broad, as in most other Moas.
Type of the genus Megalapteryx hectori, Haast.
Number of species 4.
MEGALAPTERYX HECTORI HAAST.
Megalapteryx hectori Haast, Trans. Zool. Soc. XII, p. 161 (1886); Lydekker, Cat. Fossil B.
Brit. Mus., p. 252.
T HIS form was described by Sir Julius von Haast as a gigantic Apteryx.
This error arose from the absence of the skull. There is, however, no
doubt now, since the skulls of Megalapteryx are known, that although
sufficiently aberrant to form a distinct sub-family, the birds included in this
genus are Dinornithidae and not Apterygidae.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
tuberosities not very prominent. Margin of tympanic cavity evenly curved.
Temporal fossae very large. The distance between the temporal ridges about
four-fifths the width of the cranium at the fossae. The posterior temporal
ridge confluent with the lambdoidal ridge. Post-temporal fossae very large.
The inferior temporal ridge is strongly marked, and there is a pretympanic
process. The zygomatic process is well developed. Rostrum dilated towards
its anterior end, compressed and carinate beneath the large presphenoid
fossae. Mandible very slender. Posterior angular process small. Sternum
very convex, and with a very nearly straight anterior border between the
tuberosities for the coracoscapular ligaments. Costal processes short but
large, with distinct coracoidal facets. The lateral processes are long and
distally expanded. The sternum is just as wide as it is long. There are three
costal articulations. The most notable character is the enormous length of
the toes, the middle one being longer than the tarso-metatarsus. The ungual
phalanges are peculiarly long, narrow and curved, instead of being
comparatively short and broad, as in most other Moas.
Type of the genus Megalapteryx hectori, Haast.
Number of species 4.
MEGALAPTERYX HECTORI HAAST.
Megalapteryx hectori Haast, Trans. Zool. Soc. XII, p. 161 (1886); Lydekker, Cat. Fossil B.
Brit. Mus., p. 252.
T HIS form was described by Sir Julius von Haast as a gigantic Apteryx.
This error arose from the absence of the skull. There is, however, no
doubt now, since the skulls of Megalapteryx are known, that although
sufficiently aberrant to form a distinct sub-family, the birds included in this
genus are Dinornithidae and not Apterygidae.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Page 186
MEGALAPTERYX HAMILTONI SPEC. NOV.
Lydekker, Cat. Fossil Birds in Brit. Mus., p. 252, under M. tenuipes (1891).
T HE type is a left femur, No. 32145 in the British Museum. It is smaller
and relatively narrower than the femur, of either M. hectori or M.
tenuipes. This is most noticeable at the distal extremity.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand. (Type locality Waingongoro.)
Named after Mr. A. Hamilton, who did so much in discovering deposits of
extinct New Zealand birds.
MEGALAPTERYX TENUIPES LYD.
Megalapteryx tenuipes Lydekker, Cat. Foss. Birds Brit. Mus. p. 251 (1891).
T HIS species was described from the tibio-tarsus, which is longer and
relatively more slender than in M. hectori. Its distal width is about
one-ninth of its length, while in M. hectori it is about one-seventh. The
length of the tibio-tarsus is approximately 0.405 mm. = 16 inches, and
width of distal extremity about 0.044 = 1.74 inches. Type specimens Nos.
49989 and 49990, British Museum.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand, and perhaps North Island. (Type
locality Lake Wakatipa, Queenstown, Otago.)
Complete skeleton in the Tring Museum.
Mr. Lydekker mentions also a right femur from the North Island, of the
same proportions as those of M. tenuipes and 0.255 m. (= 10.1 inches) long.
It may probably belong to a different form, as we know M. tenuipes
otherwise only from the Middle Island.
MEGALAPTERYX HUTTONII (OWEN).
Lydekker, Cat. Fossil Birds in Brit. Mus., p. 252, under M. tenuipes (1891).
T HE type is a left femur, No. 32145 in the British Museum. It is smaller
and relatively narrower than the femur, of either M. hectori or M.
tenuipes. This is most noticeable at the distal extremity.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand. (Type locality Waingongoro.)
Named after Mr. A. Hamilton, who did so much in discovering deposits of
extinct New Zealand birds.
MEGALAPTERYX TENUIPES LYD.
Megalapteryx tenuipes Lydekker, Cat. Foss. Birds Brit. Mus. p. 251 (1891).
T HIS species was described from the tibio-tarsus, which is longer and
relatively more slender than in M. hectori. Its distal width is about
one-ninth of its length, while in M. hectori it is about one-seventh. The
length of the tibio-tarsus is approximately 0.405 mm. = 16 inches, and
width of distal extremity about 0.044 = 1.74 inches. Type specimens Nos.
49989 and 49990, British Museum.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand, and perhaps North Island. (Type
locality Lake Wakatipa, Queenstown, Otago.)
Complete skeleton in the Tring Museum.
Mr. Lydekker mentions also a right femur from the North Island, of the
same proportions as those of M. tenuipes and 0.255 m. (= 10.1 inches) long.
It may probably belong to a different form, as we know M. tenuipes
otherwise only from the Middle Island.
MEGALAPTERYX HUTTONII (OWEN).
Page 187
(Plate 41.)
Dinornis huttonii Owen, Ext. Birds, N.Z., p. 430 (1879).
Dinornis didinus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. XI, p. 257 (1883).
D. didiformis Haast, (non Owen 1844) Trans. N.Z. Inst. I, p. 83, Nos. 5 & 6 (1869).
Mesopteryx didinus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 129 (1892).
T HE synonymy of this form is somewhat confused, but I think it is clear
that huttonii of Owen is its proper name. Professor Owen (Ext. B. p.
430) says:
"In the collection from the Glenmark Swamp, South Island, are bones that
scarcely differ, save in size, from the dimensions (? W.R.) of the type bones
of Dinornis didiformis from the North Island. They are noted as of a large
variety of that species." Captain Hutton remarks: "The bones that I have
arranged under the name D. didiformis belong probably to a new species.
The tibia is well marked and quite distinct, but the femur and metatarsus,
that I have associated with it, pass almost into D. casuarinus, but are rather
smaller. D. casuarinus is undoubtedly a good species, easily distinguished
by its tibia." Possibly the Dinornis of the South Island, with the tibia
characteristic of D. didiformis of the North Island, may need to be noted
for the convenience of naming the bones as Dinornis huttonii.
When describing his D. didinus, Professor Owen failed to recognise its
identity with his previously named D. huttonii, doubtless owing to the leg
bones being hidden by the dry integument. This being the case, it is
necessary to reinstate the name huttonii, as it has four years' priority over
didinus.
Captain Hutton says that a few bones of this form have been obtained in the
North Island at Poverty Bay and Te Aute; but I am convinced he is in error
and that these bones are aberrant individual bones of A. didiformis and that
M. huttonii is confined to the South or rather Middle Island. The plate of
this species has been reconstructed by Mr. Lodge from the mummified
remains which form the type specimen of Didornis didinus, and the feathers
found in the alluvial sands of the Clutha River. The type of Dinornis
didinus was found at Queenstown by Mr. Squires.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Dinornis huttonii Owen, Ext. Birds, N.Z., p. 430 (1879).
Dinornis didinus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. XI, p. 257 (1883).
D. didiformis Haast, (non Owen 1844) Trans. N.Z. Inst. I, p. 83, Nos. 5 & 6 (1869).
Mesopteryx didinus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 129 (1892).
T HE synonymy of this form is somewhat confused, but I think it is clear
that huttonii of Owen is its proper name. Professor Owen (Ext. B. p.
430) says:
"In the collection from the Glenmark Swamp, South Island, are bones that
scarcely differ, save in size, from the dimensions (? W.R.) of the type bones
of Dinornis didiformis from the North Island. They are noted as of a large
variety of that species." Captain Hutton remarks: "The bones that I have
arranged under the name D. didiformis belong probably to a new species.
The tibia is well marked and quite distinct, but the femur and metatarsus,
that I have associated with it, pass almost into D. casuarinus, but are rather
smaller. D. casuarinus is undoubtedly a good species, easily distinguished
by its tibia." Possibly the Dinornis of the South Island, with the tibia
characteristic of D. didiformis of the North Island, may need to be noted
for the convenience of naming the bones as Dinornis huttonii.
When describing his D. didinus, Professor Owen failed to recognise its
identity with his previously named D. huttonii, doubtless owing to the leg
bones being hidden by the dry integument. This being the case, it is
necessary to reinstate the name huttonii, as it has four years' priority over
didinus.
Captain Hutton says that a few bones of this form have been obtained in the
North Island at Poverty Bay and Te Aute; but I am convinced he is in error
and that these bones are aberrant individual bones of A. didiformis and that
M. huttonii is confined to the South or rather Middle Island. The plate of
this species has been reconstructed by Mr. Lodge from the mummified
remains which form the type specimen of Didornis didinus, and the feathers
found in the alluvial sands of the Clutha River. The type of Dinornis
didinus was found at Queenstown by Mr. Squires.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Page 188
Mr. C. W. Andrews, in his description of my complete skeleton of
Megalapteryx tenuipes has shown that Owen's type specimens of his
Dinornis didinus are certainly of a species of the genus Megalapteryx, and
closely allied to M. tenuipes. Mr. Andrews, however, throws some doubt as
to whether the pelvis and femora, referred to this species by Hutton, really
belong to it.
A complete egg which I consider must be of this species is preserved in the
Tring Museum. Its measurements are as follows:—
Large circumference, 21.4 inches = 535 mm.
Small " 17.5 " = 437.5 mm.
This egg was dredged up on the Molyneux River, near Otago, during gold
dredging operations in 1901; a second perfect egg was dredged up a few
months before in the same river, and was referred by Dr. Benham to
Pachyornis ponderosus.
ANOMALOPTERYX REICHENBACH.
T HE skull is narrow and vaulted, with a long, sharp and slightly
deflected beak. Breadth at the squamosals 1½ times the height at basi-
temporal, which has a constricted praemaxillary ridge, and the
quadrate with a very small pneumatic foramen. The mandible is V-shaped,
with a slight inflection of the angle, and a distinct postarticular process. The
symphysis is very narrow and pointed, with a long and narrow inferior
ridge, not expanding markedly at either extremity. The sternum is longer,
flatter and narrower than in Dinornis, having no distinct xiphisternal notch,
three costal articulations, long and narrow costal processes, slender lateral
processes which are often elongated, and usually no coracoidal facets. The
pelvis is wider and lower than in Dinornis, with the lower border of the
postacetabular portion of the ilium descending as a sharp ridge much below
the level of the sacral ribs, and without any distinct pectineal process. A
hallux is present. The tibio-tarsus and tarso-metatarsus are relatively shorter
and stouter than in Dinornis, the latter being shorter than the femur, which
is usually stouter and relatively shorter than in Megalapteryx. The length of
Megalapteryx tenuipes has shown that Owen's type specimens of his
Dinornis didinus are certainly of a species of the genus Megalapteryx, and
closely allied to M. tenuipes. Mr. Andrews, however, throws some doubt as
to whether the pelvis and femora, referred to this species by Hutton, really
belong to it.
A complete egg which I consider must be of this species is preserved in the
Tring Museum. Its measurements are as follows:—
Large circumference, 21.4 inches = 535 mm.
Small " 17.5 " = 437.5 mm.
This egg was dredged up on the Molyneux River, near Otago, during gold
dredging operations in 1901; a second perfect egg was dredged up a few
months before in the same river, and was referred by Dr. Benham to
Pachyornis ponderosus.
ANOMALOPTERYX REICHENBACH.
T HE skull is narrow and vaulted, with a long, sharp and slightly
deflected beak. Breadth at the squamosals 1½ times the height at basi-
temporal, which has a constricted praemaxillary ridge, and the
quadrate with a very small pneumatic foramen. The mandible is V-shaped,
with a slight inflection of the angle, and a distinct postarticular process. The
symphysis is very narrow and pointed, with a long and narrow inferior
ridge, not expanding markedly at either extremity. The sternum is longer,
flatter and narrower than in Dinornis, having no distinct xiphisternal notch,
three costal articulations, long and narrow costal processes, slender lateral
processes which are often elongated, and usually no coracoidal facets. The
pelvis is wider and lower than in Dinornis, with the lower border of the
postacetabular portion of the ilium descending as a sharp ridge much below
the level of the sacral ribs, and without any distinct pectineal process. A
hallux is present. The tibio-tarsus and tarso-metatarsus are relatively shorter
and stouter than in Dinornis, the latter being shorter than the femur, which
is usually stouter and relatively shorter than in Megalapteryx. The length of
Page 189
the tarso-metatarsus is less than half that of the tibio-tarsus. The femur,
besides being usually relatively shorter is readily distinguished from that of
Dinornis by its more expanded extremities, the rather longer neck, and the
much larger and ill-defined popliteal depression.
The vertebrae are of the general type of those of Pachyornis, but the
anterior pneumatic foramen commences in the third dorsal. The phalangeals
are intermediate between those of Dinornis and Pachyornis. Haast
considered that the coracoid was aborted and often absent in this genus, in
Emeus, and Pachyornis. As additional characters of the skull it may be
mentioned that there is a prominent supra-occipital protuberance, and a
depression on the squamosal above the quadrate; the par-occipital processes
are pointed, and the basi-occipital processes only slightly prominent; so that
the posterior profile of the basi-occipital is nearly straight. The quadrate has
a very short anterior process.
All the species of the genus are small, in fact parvus is the smallest but one
of the family.
Type of the genus: Anomalopteryx didiformis (Owen).
Number of species: 4.
ANOMALOPTERYX DIDIFORMIS (OWEN.)
Dinornis didiformis Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 242 (1844).
Anomalopteryx didiformis Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. 30 (1850).
A. didiformis Lydekker, Cat. Fossil B. Brit. Mus., p. 275.
T HE present form is confined to the North Island. Owen's type was
collected by the Revd. Wm. Williams, and came from Poverty Bay.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
Portion of skeleton in Tring Museum.
besides being usually relatively shorter is readily distinguished from that of
Dinornis by its more expanded extremities, the rather longer neck, and the
much larger and ill-defined popliteal depression.
The vertebrae are of the general type of those of Pachyornis, but the
anterior pneumatic foramen commences in the third dorsal. The phalangeals
are intermediate between those of Dinornis and Pachyornis. Haast
considered that the coracoid was aborted and often absent in this genus, in
Emeus, and Pachyornis. As additional characters of the skull it may be
mentioned that there is a prominent supra-occipital protuberance, and a
depression on the squamosal above the quadrate; the par-occipital processes
are pointed, and the basi-occipital processes only slightly prominent; so that
the posterior profile of the basi-occipital is nearly straight. The quadrate has
a very short anterior process.
All the species of the genus are small, in fact parvus is the smallest but one
of the family.
Type of the genus: Anomalopteryx didiformis (Owen).
Number of species: 4.
ANOMALOPTERYX DIDIFORMIS (OWEN.)
Dinornis didiformis Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 242 (1844).
Anomalopteryx didiformis Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. 30 (1850).
A. didiformis Lydekker, Cat. Fossil B. Brit. Mus., p. 275.
T HE present form is confined to the North Island. Owen's type was
collected by the Revd. Wm. Williams, and came from Poverty Bay.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
Portion of skeleton in Tring Museum.
Page 190
ANOMALOPTERYX PARVUS (OWEN.)
Dinornis parvus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. XI, pp. 233-256, pls. LI-LVII (1883).
Anomalopteryx didiformis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 123 (1892), part.
A. parva Lydekker, t.c., p. 278.
T HIS small form is confined to the Middle Island. The type, a skeleton
in almost complete condition, was dug up in a cave at Takaka, near
Nelson, and is now in the British Museum. A much less perfect
skeleton is in my museum at Tring.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
ANOMALOPTERYX ANTIQUUS HUTT.
Avian Remains Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIII, p. 369 (1891).
Anomalopteryx antiquus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 124 (1892).
A. ANTIQUUS was named by Captain Hutton from the photographs of
bones described by Dr. Forbes in the above-quoted article. The
evidence is very slight on which to found a species, but I prefer to treat it as
one, for the bones were discovered in the Upper Miocene, a much older
stratum than most remains of Dinornithidae occur in.
Locality: Timaru, Middle Island, New Zealand.
ANOMALOPTERYX FORTIS HUTT.
Anomalopteryx fortis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 9 (1893).
T HIS is the largest of the genus, and the type bones came from
Glenmark. I append comparative table of Measurements:
Tarso-metatarsus. Tibio-tarsus. Femur.
Dinornis parvus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. XI, pp. 233-256, pls. LI-LVII (1883).
Anomalopteryx didiformis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 123 (1892), part.
A. parva Lydekker, t.c., p. 278.
T HIS small form is confined to the Middle Island. The type, a skeleton
in almost complete condition, was dug up in a cave at Takaka, near
Nelson, and is now in the British Museum. A much less perfect
skeleton is in my museum at Tring.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
ANOMALOPTERYX ANTIQUUS HUTT.
Avian Remains Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIII, p. 369 (1891).
Anomalopteryx antiquus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 124 (1892).
A. ANTIQUUS was named by Captain Hutton from the photographs of
bones described by Dr. Forbes in the above-quoted article. The
evidence is very slight on which to found a species, but I prefer to treat it as
one, for the bones were discovered in the Upper Miocene, a much older
stratum than most remains of Dinornithidae occur in.
Locality: Timaru, Middle Island, New Zealand.
ANOMALOPTERYX FORTIS HUTT.
Anomalopteryx fortis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 9 (1893).
T HIS is the largest of the genus, and the type bones came from
Glenmark. I append comparative table of Measurements:
Tarso-metatarsus. Tibio-tarsus. Femur.
Page 191
A. fortis 8.0 inches. 17.5 inches. 9.8 inches.
A. didiformis 6.3 " 13.3 " 8.0 "
A. parvus 6.3 " 13.7 " 8.5 "
Locality of Type: Glenmark.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
CELA REICHENBACH.
S KULL convex, the temporal fossae very large. Breadth at the
squamosals 1.6-1.7 times the height at the basi-temporal. Length from
the supra-occipital to the nasals rather less than the breadth at the
squamosals. Occipital condyle hidden by the supra-occipital. Ridge
between temporal fossae and supra-occipital narrow. Beak short, slightly
compressed and rounded at the tip, though more pointed than in
Anomalopteryx. Lower mandible nearly straight and rather slighter than in
Anomalopteryx, V-shaped. Sternum with coracoid pits faintly indicated or
absent; length less than breadth. Costal processes well developed, lateral
processes diverging at different angles.
Pelvis broader in proportion than in Dinornis, the acetabula set more
forward. Tarso-metatarsus shorter than the femur, and less than half the
length of the tibio-tarsus. Hallux present in some species. The smallest
species of Moa is Cela curtus.
Type of the genus: Cela curtus.
Number of species: 5.
CELA CURTUS (OWEN.)
Dinornis curtus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 325 (1846).
Cela curtus Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. 30 (1850).
A. didiformis 6.3 " 13.3 " 8.0 "
A. parvus 6.3 " 13.7 " 8.5 "
Locality of Type: Glenmark.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
CELA REICHENBACH.
S KULL convex, the temporal fossae very large. Breadth at the
squamosals 1.6-1.7 times the height at the basi-temporal. Length from
the supra-occipital to the nasals rather less than the breadth at the
squamosals. Occipital condyle hidden by the supra-occipital. Ridge
between temporal fossae and supra-occipital narrow. Beak short, slightly
compressed and rounded at the tip, though more pointed than in
Anomalopteryx. Lower mandible nearly straight and rather slighter than in
Anomalopteryx, V-shaped. Sternum with coracoid pits faintly indicated or
absent; length less than breadth. Costal processes well developed, lateral
processes diverging at different angles.
Pelvis broader in proportion than in Dinornis, the acetabula set more
forward. Tarso-metatarsus shorter than the femur, and less than half the
length of the tibio-tarsus. Hallux present in some species. The smallest
species of Moa is Cela curtus.
Type of the genus: Cela curtus.
Number of species: 5.
CELA CURTUS (OWEN.)
Dinornis curtus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 325 (1846).
Cela curtus Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög. p. 30 (1850).
Page 192
Cela curta Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIX, p. 550, pl. XLVII, Fig. B.
T HIS and the following are the two smallest species of Moa, having
been about the size of a large turkey. It also is the most abundant
species at Whangarei, and appears to have been most common in the
North of the Island. The type is from Poverty Bay.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
CELA OWENI (HAAST).
Dinornis oweni Haast, Trans. Zool. Soc. XII, p. 171, pl. XXXI, XXXII (1886).
Cela curtus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst., XXIV, p. 127 (1892), portion.
D R. VON HAAST (Sir Julius von Haast) took as his type of Dinornis
oweni the almost complete skeleton collected by Mr. Cheeseman in a
cave at Patana, Whangarei, and now in the Auckland Museum. While
referring my readers to the original diagnosis for the specific characters, I
wish to specially draw attention to the fact that Dr. von Haast says that in
the collections he examined, made by Mr. Thorne and Mr. Cheeseman,
there are bones belonging to at least 20 skeletons of his D. oweni, and that
some were even smaller than the type, and the only difference was the
constant average difference due to sex. I draw special notice to this, as
Captain Hutton has united this form with curtus, saying Haast's type is only
a small individual of that species. The fact of bones of at least 20 different
individuals, showing the same characters and the same differences from
curtus, is quite sufficient evidence for me to consider Dr. von Haast's D.
oweni as a distinct species. I append measurements of the leg bones of the
types of Cela curtus and C. oweni:—
Tarso-metatarsus. Tibio-tarsus. Femur.
Cela curtus 5.0 inches 11.25 inches 5.65 inches
Cela oweni 4.4 " 9.6 " 6.5 "
Locality: Whangarei.
T HIS and the following are the two smallest species of Moa, having
been about the size of a large turkey. It also is the most abundant
species at Whangarei, and appears to have been most common in the
North of the Island. The type is from Poverty Bay.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
CELA OWENI (HAAST).
Dinornis oweni Haast, Trans. Zool. Soc. XII, p. 171, pl. XXXI, XXXII (1886).
Cela curtus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst., XXIV, p. 127 (1892), portion.
D R. VON HAAST (Sir Julius von Haast) took as his type of Dinornis
oweni the almost complete skeleton collected by Mr. Cheeseman in a
cave at Patana, Whangarei, and now in the Auckland Museum. While
referring my readers to the original diagnosis for the specific characters, I
wish to specially draw attention to the fact that Dr. von Haast says that in
the collections he examined, made by Mr. Thorne and Mr. Cheeseman,
there are bones belonging to at least 20 skeletons of his D. oweni, and that
some were even smaller than the type, and the only difference was the
constant average difference due to sex. I draw special notice to this, as
Captain Hutton has united this form with curtus, saying Haast's type is only
a small individual of that species. The fact of bones of at least 20 different
individuals, showing the same characters and the same differences from
curtus, is quite sufficient evidence for me to consider Dr. von Haast's D.
oweni as a distinct species. I append measurements of the leg bones of the
types of Cela curtus and C. oweni:—
Tarso-metatarsus. Tibio-tarsus. Femur.
Cela curtus 5.0 inches 11.25 inches 5.65 inches
Cela oweni 4.4 " 9.6 " 6.5 "
Locality: Whangarei.
Page 193
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
CELA GERANOIDES (OWEN.)
Palapteryx geranoides Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 345 (1848).
Cela geranoides Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 126 (1892).
T HIS species is confined to the North Island. The type came from
Waingongoro. It is most commonly found in the South of the Island.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
CELA RHEIDES (OWEN).
Dinornis rheides Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. IV, p. 8 (1850—partim).
Syornis rheides Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 131 (1892).
T HIS is a very difficult form to consider, as the type bones consisted of
those of three different forms. Whether Professor Owen, were he now
alive, would concur in Captain Hutton's treatment is very
questionable, and I doubt if it ought not to be united to Emeus crassus,
while Haast united it to P. gravis. I have kept it separate as no bones of a
single individual united are known, and it might prove sufficiently distinct
if a good skeleton were obtained. The type bones were sent from
Waikawaite, Middle Island, by Colonel Wakefield, in 1849.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
CELA CASUARINUS (OWEN).
Dinornis casuarinus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 307 (1846).
Syornis casuarinus Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög, p. XXX (1850).
CELA GERANOIDES (OWEN.)
Palapteryx geranoides Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 345 (1848).
Cela geranoides Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 126 (1892).
T HIS species is confined to the North Island. The type came from
Waingongoro. It is most commonly found in the South of the Island.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
CELA RHEIDES (OWEN).
Dinornis rheides Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. IV, p. 8 (1850—partim).
Syornis rheides Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 131 (1892).
T HIS is a very difficult form to consider, as the type bones consisted of
those of three different forms. Whether Professor Owen, were he now
alive, would concur in Captain Hutton's treatment is very
questionable, and I doubt if it ought not to be united to Emeus crassus,
while Haast united it to P. gravis. I have kept it separate as no bones of a
single individual united are known, and it might prove sufficiently distinct
if a good skeleton were obtained. The type bones were sent from
Waikawaite, Middle Island, by Colonel Wakefield, in 1849.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
CELA CASUARINUS (OWEN).
Dinornis casuarinus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 307 (1846).
Syornis casuarinus Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög, p. XXX (1850).
Page 194
Meionornis casuarinus Haast, Trans. N.Z. Inst., VII, pp. 54-91 (1875).
Syornis casuarinus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst., XXIV, p. 133 (1892).
C. CASUARINUS
Island.
is found in both Islands, and is abundant in the Middle
The type came from Waikowaiti.
Habitat: New Zealand.
Portions of one skeleton and two almost complete skeletons in Tring
Museum; one of the latter from Kapua Swamps.
EMEUS REICHENBACH.
T HE skull is very short and wide, with a blunt and slightly deflected
rostrum, and a very small pneumatic foramen to the quadrate. The
mandible is in the shape of a wide U, with a slightly inflected angle,
and a large post-articular process. The symphysis is very wide and deeply
excavated, with a broad and slightly prominent inferior ridge narrowing in
front. The sternum resembles that of Anomalopteryx, but the pelvis is much
wider and approaches that of Pachyornis. The tibio-tarsus and tarso-
metatarsus are relatively shorter and thicker than in Anomalopteryx, but less
stout than in Pachyornis; the distal extremity of the tibio-tarsus is not
inflected. A hallux is present. The length of the tarso-metatarsus is
considerably less than that of the femur, and than half that of the tibio-
tarsus, its width at the middle of the shaft being rather more than one-fourth
of its length.
The vertebrae are of the type of Anomalopteryx. The species are larger than
most of those of Cela and Anomalopteryx. Additional cranial characters are
that the skull usually has very broad and blunt paroccipital processes; there
is no distinct supraoccipital prominence, and no well-marked depression
upon the frontal aspect of the squamosal above the head of the quadrate.
The basi-occipital tubercles are prominent, and give an arched posterior
profile to this bone. The quadrate is elongated with a long anterior bar; the
Syornis casuarinus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst., XXIV, p. 133 (1892).
C. CASUARINUS
Island.
is found in both Islands, and is abundant in the Middle
The type came from Waikowaiti.
Habitat: New Zealand.
Portions of one skeleton and two almost complete skeletons in Tring
Museum; one of the latter from Kapua Swamps.
EMEUS REICHENBACH.
T HE skull is very short and wide, with a blunt and slightly deflected
rostrum, and a very small pneumatic foramen to the quadrate. The
mandible is in the shape of a wide U, with a slightly inflected angle,
and a large post-articular process. The symphysis is very wide and deeply
excavated, with a broad and slightly prominent inferior ridge narrowing in
front. The sternum resembles that of Anomalopteryx, but the pelvis is much
wider and approaches that of Pachyornis. The tibio-tarsus and tarso-
metatarsus are relatively shorter and thicker than in Anomalopteryx, but less
stout than in Pachyornis; the distal extremity of the tibio-tarsus is not
inflected. A hallux is present. The length of the tarso-metatarsus is
considerably less than that of the femur, and than half that of the tibio-
tarsus, its width at the middle of the shaft being rather more than one-fourth
of its length.
The vertebrae are of the type of Anomalopteryx. The species are larger than
most of those of Cela and Anomalopteryx. Additional cranial characters are
that the skull usually has very broad and blunt paroccipital processes; there
is no distinct supraoccipital prominence, and no well-marked depression
upon the frontal aspect of the squamosal above the head of the quadrate.
The basi-occipital tubercles are prominent, and give an arched posterior
profile to this bone. The quadrate is elongated with a long anterior bar; the
Page 195
cavity of the squamosal for the reception of its head is inclined much more
outwardly than in either of the other genera.
Type of genus: Emeus crassus (Owen).
Number of species: 6.
EMEUS CRASSUS (OWEN).
Dinornis crassus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 307 (1846—partim).
Emeus crassus Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög., p. XXX (1850).
Syornis crassus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 132 (1892).
T HIS species has led to much confusion, owing to Professor Owen
having associated with the real portions of crassus in his possession
bones of elephantopus, ponderosus and struthioides. The type came
from Waikouaiti.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Imperfect skeleton in Tring Museum.
EMEUS BOOTHI NOM. NOV.
Emeus, Species Α, Parker, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 379 (1895), pl. XVI.
E ASILY distinguished by the shorter and narrower beak. Type specimen
—the skull found by Mr. R. S. Booth at Stag Point—now in Otago
University Museum, figured as above.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
outwardly than in either of the other genera.
Type of genus: Emeus crassus (Owen).
Number of species: 6.
EMEUS CRASSUS (OWEN).
Dinornis crassus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, p. 307 (1846—partim).
Emeus crassus Reichenbach, Nat. Syst. der Vög., p. XXX (1850).
Syornis crassus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 132 (1892).
T HIS species has led to much confusion, owing to Professor Owen
having associated with the real portions of crassus in his possession
bones of elephantopus, ponderosus and struthioides. The type came
from Waikouaiti.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Imperfect skeleton in Tring Museum.
EMEUS BOOTHI NOM. NOV.
Emeus, Species Α, Parker, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 379 (1895), pl. XVI.
E ASILY distinguished by the shorter and narrower beak. Type specimen
—the skull found by Mr. R. S. Booth at Stag Point—now in Otago
University Museum, figured as above.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Page 196
EMEUS GRAVIPES LYD.
Emeus gravipes Lydekker, Cat. Foss. Birds Brit. Mus., p. 298 (1891) Nos. A95, on p. 299, to
47444d, on p. 300.
Dinornis gravis (portion) Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VIII, p. 361 (1872).
Euryapteryx gravis Haast, Ibis 1874, p. 213.
T HE present species is smaller than E. crassus and has the tarso-
metatarsus relatively wider. Length, 198 mm. = 7.8 inches; width at
middle of shaft, 51 mm. = 2 inches.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
EMEUS HAASTI NOM. NOV.
Emeus species Β, Parker, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII p. 379 (1895).
Emeus gravipes Lydekker, Cat. Foss. Birds Brit. Mus. p. 301 Nos. 32017, 32016, a-e and c to
32044 e on p. 307 (1891).
S IR J. VON HAAST united this form with Dinornis gravis, and the
skull which is the type of E. haasti is put on a skeleton of D. gravis in
the Canterbury Museum. The measurements of this species are much
smaller than those of the other species.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
EMEUS PARKERI NOM. NOV.
Emeus species Γ, Parker, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 380 (1895).
T HIS species is at once distinguished from the other species of the
genus by having right-angled orbits. The type is a skull from Hamilton
Swamp, named Euryapteryx gravis, by Prof. Hutton, in the Otago
Museum.
Emeus gravipes Lydekker, Cat. Foss. Birds Brit. Mus., p. 298 (1891) Nos. A95, on p. 299, to
47444d, on p. 300.
Dinornis gravis (portion) Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. VIII, p. 361 (1872).
Euryapteryx gravis Haast, Ibis 1874, p. 213.
T HE present species is smaller than E. crassus and has the tarso-
metatarsus relatively wider. Length, 198 mm. = 7.8 inches; width at
middle of shaft, 51 mm. = 2 inches.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
EMEUS HAASTI NOM. NOV.
Emeus species Β, Parker, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII p. 379 (1895).
Emeus gravipes Lydekker, Cat. Foss. Birds Brit. Mus. p. 301 Nos. 32017, 32016, a-e and c to
32044 e on p. 307 (1891).
S IR J. VON HAAST united this form with Dinornis gravis, and the
skull which is the type of E. haasti is put on a skeleton of D. gravis in
the Canterbury Museum. The measurements of this species are much
smaller than those of the other species.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
EMEUS PARKERI NOM. NOV.
Emeus species Γ, Parker, Trans. Zool. Soc. XIII, p. 380 (1895).
T HIS species is at once distinguished from the other species of the
genus by having right-angled orbits. The type is a skull from Hamilton
Swamp, named Euryapteryx gravis, by Prof. Hutton, in the Otago
Museum.
Page 197
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
EMEUS EXILIS (HUTT.)
Dinornis didiformis Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, pl. 24 (1846), part.
Euryapteryx exilis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIX, p. 552, pl. XLVIII, Fig. C (1897).
D IFFERS from E. crassus in the tibia being more convex on the
anterior surface. The skull, among other differences, has a very slight
frontal rising to the cranial roof, as opposed to the very conspicuous
one in the remaining species. The type is a nearly complete skeleton in the
Wanganui Museum. For full description see Hutton, l.c.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
PACHYORNIS LYDEKKER.
T HE skull is either vaulted or flattened, with a sharp and narrow beak.
The paroccipital processes are shorter and more rounded, and the basi-
occipital tubercles more prominent than in Anomalopteryx, while the
quadrate and mandible resemble the same bones in that genus somewhat
closely. The sternum is flat and very broad and short, with no coracoidal
facets, a very small xiphisternal notch, broad and short costal processes, and
widely divergent lateral processes; while there are only two costal
articulations. The pelvis is extremely low and wide, with the anterior wall
of the acetabulum very deeply concave, the ventral surface of all the
vertebrae behind the true sacrals narrow and convex, and from which the
very broad sacral ribs ascend to join the ilium, of which the inferior
postacetabular border is very sharp, and descends far below the level of the
ribs. There is no pectineal process to the pubis. The tibio-tarsus is very
short, with the shaft curved outwards, the distal extremity markedly
inflected, and the fibular ridge much shorter than in the other genera. The
fibular border below the smooth space at the distal extremity of the fibular
EMEUS EXILIS (HUTT.)
Dinornis didiformis Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. III, pl. 24 (1846), part.
Euryapteryx exilis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIX, p. 552, pl. XLVIII, Fig. C (1897).
D IFFERS from E. crassus in the tibia being more convex on the
anterior surface. The skull, among other differences, has a very slight
frontal rising to the cranial roof, as opposed to the very conspicuous
one in the remaining species. The type is a nearly complete skeleton in the
Wanganui Museum. For full description see Hutton, l.c.
Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.
PACHYORNIS LYDEKKER.
T HE skull is either vaulted or flattened, with a sharp and narrow beak.
The paroccipital processes are shorter and more rounded, and the basi-
occipital tubercles more prominent than in Anomalopteryx, while the
quadrate and mandible resemble the same bones in that genus somewhat
closely. The sternum is flat and very broad and short, with no coracoidal
facets, a very small xiphisternal notch, broad and short costal processes, and
widely divergent lateral processes; while there are only two costal
articulations. The pelvis is extremely low and wide, with the anterior wall
of the acetabulum very deeply concave, the ventral surface of all the
vertebrae behind the true sacrals narrow and convex, and from which the
very broad sacral ribs ascend to join the ilium, of which the inferior
postacetabular border is very sharp, and descends far below the level of the
ribs. There is no pectineal process to the pubis. The tibio-tarsus is very
short, with the shaft curved outwards, the distal extremity markedly
inflected, and the fibular ridge much shorter than in the other genera. The
fibular border below the smooth space at the distal extremity of the fibular
Page 198
ridge is extremely rough; and the distal extensor tubercle is very prominent,
being situated partly on the line of the upper half of the extensor groove,
instead of being altogether external to the same.
The tarso-metatarsus is still shorter and wider than in Emeus, the width at
the middle of the shaft being usually rather more than one third of the
length. The third trochlea is more prominent than in the other genera, and
rises very abruptly from the shaft, the outer border of the anterior surface
usually expanding suddenly at the proximal extremity, and the outer ridge
of this surface being always more prominent than the inner, whereas in the
other genera the opposite condition obtains. The femur, as compared with
that of Dinornis, is very much shorter and thicker, with a longer neck, and
the head rising and projecting very considerably, the linea aspera mainly
forming a rough nodule near the distal end of the shaft, the outer surface of
the distal extremity more suddenly expanded, and the popliteal depression
larger, more open, and leading to the inner surface of the shaft by a more
distinct channel. The profile of the inner condyle is wider antero-
posteriorly, and more rounded, the anterior intertrochlear surface being
deeply channelled.
The phalangeals of the pes are much shorter and stouter than in Dinornis,
the proximal surface of the terminal segments generally presenting a trefoil-
shaped contour. The length of the tarso-metatarsus is very much less than
half that of the tibio-tarsus. In the vertebral column the cervicals are short
with very stout centra, the prezygopophyses in the middle region being
nearly horizontal and separated from one another by a wide channel. The
posterior face of the centra is tall and narrow, and the neural spines of the
last two vertebrae much inclined forward. In the dorsals there is usually no
anterior pneumatic foramen till the fourth (or the last with a distinct haemal
carina), this foramen being situated on the line of the anterior border of the
rib-facet. The third and fourth dorsals are extremely compressed.
Throughout the series also the neural spines and transverse processes are
comparatively long. Additional characters of the skull are that the
sphenoidal rostrum is expanded in a lance-like shape at the anterior
extremity, in a manner unlike that of any of the other genera.
Then the supraoccipital never has a very strongly developed median
prominence, and the temporal fossae are comparatively short. The mandible
being situated partly on the line of the upper half of the extensor groove,
instead of being altogether external to the same.
The tarso-metatarsus is still shorter and wider than in Emeus, the width at
the middle of the shaft being usually rather more than one third of the
length. The third trochlea is more prominent than in the other genera, and
rises very abruptly from the shaft, the outer border of the anterior surface
usually expanding suddenly at the proximal extremity, and the outer ridge
of this surface being always more prominent than the inner, whereas in the
other genera the opposite condition obtains. The femur, as compared with
that of Dinornis, is very much shorter and thicker, with a longer neck, and
the head rising and projecting very considerably, the linea aspera mainly
forming a rough nodule near the distal end of the shaft, the outer surface of
the distal extremity more suddenly expanded, and the popliteal depression
larger, more open, and leading to the inner surface of the shaft by a more
distinct channel. The profile of the inner condyle is wider antero-
posteriorly, and more rounded, the anterior intertrochlear surface being
deeply channelled.
The phalangeals of the pes are much shorter and stouter than in Dinornis,
the proximal surface of the terminal segments generally presenting a trefoil-
shaped contour. The length of the tarso-metatarsus is very much less than
half that of the tibio-tarsus. In the vertebral column the cervicals are short
with very stout centra, the prezygopophyses in the middle region being
nearly horizontal and separated from one another by a wide channel. The
posterior face of the centra is tall and narrow, and the neural spines of the
last two vertebrae much inclined forward. In the dorsals there is usually no
anterior pneumatic foramen till the fourth (or the last with a distinct haemal
carina), this foramen being situated on the line of the anterior border of the
rib-facet. The third and fourth dorsals are extremely compressed.
Throughout the series also the neural spines and transverse processes are
comparatively long. Additional characters of the skull are that the
sphenoidal rostrum is expanded in a lance-like shape at the anterior
extremity, in a manner unlike that of any of the other genera.
Then the supraoccipital never has a very strongly developed median
prominence, and the temporal fossae are comparatively short. The mandible
Page 199
may be readily distinguished from that of the other genera by the low
position of the inner aperture of the dental canal, which pierces the bone
obliquely to join the small lateral vacuity.
Type of the genus: Pachyornis elephantopus (Owen).
Number of species: 8.
PACHYORNIS ELEPHANTOPUS (OWEN.)
Dinornis elephantopus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. IV, p. 149 (1853).
Palapteryx elephantopus Haast, Ibis, Ser. 3, vol. IV, p. 212 (1874).
Euryapteryx elephantopus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 135 (1892).
U NTIL Mr. Lydekker described Pachyornis immanis, and Mr. Andrews
Aepyornis titan, this was undoubtedly the most bulky and ponderous
of all known Ratitae, extinct and living.
Type: Awamoa, near Oamanu.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Two imperfect skeletons in the Tring Museum; one from Kapua Swamps.
PACHYORNIS IMMANIS LYD.
Pachyornis immanis Lydekker, Cat. Foss. Birds Brit. Mus., p. 343 (1891).
T HIS is the most bulky and largest member of the genus, and also of all
Dinornithidae. Its living parallel to-day is Casuarius philipi
Rothschild, which, though by no means the tallest species of
Casuarius, is the most bulky, and has the shortest and stoutest legs—the
tarso-metatarsus is specially short and stout.
position of the inner aperture of the dental canal, which pierces the bone
obliquely to join the small lateral vacuity.
Type of the genus: Pachyornis elephantopus (Owen).
Number of species: 8.
PACHYORNIS ELEPHANTOPUS (OWEN.)
Dinornis elephantopus Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. IV, p. 149 (1853).
Palapteryx elephantopus Haast, Ibis, Ser. 3, vol. IV, p. 212 (1874).
Euryapteryx elephantopus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 135 (1892).
U NTIL Mr. Lydekker described Pachyornis immanis, and Mr. Andrews
Aepyornis titan, this was undoubtedly the most bulky and ponderous
of all known Ratitae, extinct and living.
Type: Awamoa, near Oamanu.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Two imperfect skeletons in the Tring Museum; one from Kapua Swamps.
PACHYORNIS IMMANIS LYD.
Pachyornis immanis Lydekker, Cat. Foss. Birds Brit. Mus., p. 343 (1891).
T HIS is the most bulky and largest member of the genus, and also of all
Dinornithidae. Its living parallel to-day is Casuarius philipi
Rothschild, which, though by no means the tallest species of
Casuarius, is the most bulky, and has the shortest and stoutest legs—the
tarso-metatarsus is specially short and stout.
Page 200
The type tarso-metatarsus measures 228 mm. = 8.9 inches, and in width
(shaft) 84 mm. = 3.3 inches, while the type tarso-metatarsus of
elephantopus measures 239 mm. = 9.4 inches and 65 mm. = 2.55 inches.
The skull is much more depressed than in elephantopus and with deeper
temporal fossae and a shorter post orbital region.
Type: No. A168 British Museum.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
PACHYORNIS ROTHSCHILDI LYD.
Pachyornis rothschildi Lydekker, P.Z.S. 1891, pp. 479-482, pl. XXXVIII.
T HE bones in the Tring Museum, which form the type of this species,
unfortunately have no history and their locality is unknown. It differs
from the other species of the genus by the slenderer proportions of the
tibio-tarsus, which is 22 inches long by 2.9 inches distal width, as opposed
to 24 inches by 4.2 in elephantopus and 20 inches by 3.5 in ponderosus, the
two nearest in size. Femur: length 10.6 as opposed to 12.5 inches in
elephantopus.
PACHYORNIS PONDEROSUS (HUTT.)
Euryapteryx ponderosus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst., p. 137 (1892).
T HIS species is slightly smaller than P. elephantopus, the tarso-
metatarsus varying from 8.25 to 8.0 inches, as opposed to from 9.4 to
9.25 in elephantopus; the tibio-tarsus varies from 18.5 to 18.6, as
opposed to 24 to 24.1; femur, 10, as opposed to 13 to 11.8.
The skull can be distinguished by the processes at the hinder angles of the
basi-sphenoid, which are higher and rounder in ponderosus, flatter and
more elongated in elephantopus. Type: Hamilton.
(shaft) 84 mm. = 3.3 inches, while the type tarso-metatarsus of
elephantopus measures 239 mm. = 9.4 inches and 65 mm. = 2.55 inches.
The skull is much more depressed than in elephantopus and with deeper
temporal fossae and a shorter post orbital region.
Type: No. A168 British Museum.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
PACHYORNIS ROTHSCHILDI LYD.
Pachyornis rothschildi Lydekker, P.Z.S. 1891, pp. 479-482, pl. XXXVIII.
T HE bones in the Tring Museum, which form the type of this species,
unfortunately have no history and their locality is unknown. It differs
from the other species of the genus by the slenderer proportions of the
tibio-tarsus, which is 22 inches long by 2.9 inches distal width, as opposed
to 24 inches by 4.2 in elephantopus and 20 inches by 3.5 in ponderosus, the
two nearest in size. Femur: length 10.6 as opposed to 12.5 inches in
elephantopus.
PACHYORNIS PONDEROSUS (HUTT.)
Euryapteryx ponderosus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst., p. 137 (1892).
T HIS species is slightly smaller than P. elephantopus, the tarso-
metatarsus varying from 8.25 to 8.0 inches, as opposed to from 9.4 to
9.25 in elephantopus; the tibio-tarsus varies from 18.5 to 18.6, as
opposed to 24 to 24.1; femur, 10, as opposed to 13 to 11.8.
The skull can be distinguished by the processes at the hinder angles of the
basi-sphenoid, which are higher and rounder in ponderosus, flatter and
more elongated in elephantopus. Type: Hamilton.
Page 201
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Cast of egg in Tring Museum, taken from specimen in Otago Museum,
dredged up in 1901 in the Molyneux River, also incomplete skeleton from
Kapua Swamps.
PACHYORNIS INHABILIS HUTT.
Pachyornis inhabilis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 11 (1893).
D IFFERS from ponderosus by having the great inward expansion at the
distal end of the tibio-tarsus. This expansion has induced some
ornithologists to separate the species of Pachyornis into two genera—
Euryapteryx and Pachyornis—but I do not think this expansion of sufficient
importance to warrant generic separation.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
PACHYORNIS VALGUS (HUTT.)
Euryapteryx valgus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 12 (1893).
T HIS species is at once distinguishable from all others by the
extraordinary internal expansion of the distal end of the tibio-tarsus.
The tarso-metatarsus is 8.5 inches = 216 mm. in length and the
proximal width 3.5 inches = 89 mm., and does not differ much from crassus
except in the great proximal width, necessary to articulate with the distal
internal expansion described above.
The type came from Enfield in New Zealand.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Cast of egg in Tring Museum, taken from specimen in Otago Museum,
dredged up in 1901 in the Molyneux River, also incomplete skeleton from
Kapua Swamps.
PACHYORNIS INHABILIS HUTT.
Pachyornis inhabilis Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 11 (1893).
D IFFERS from ponderosus by having the great inward expansion at the
distal end of the tibio-tarsus. This expansion has induced some
ornithologists to separate the species of Pachyornis into two genera—
Euryapteryx and Pachyornis—but I do not think this expansion of sufficient
importance to warrant generic separation.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
PACHYORNIS VALGUS (HUTT.)
Euryapteryx valgus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 12 (1893).
T HIS species is at once distinguishable from all others by the
extraordinary internal expansion of the distal end of the tibio-tarsus.
The tarso-metatarsus is 8.5 inches = 216 mm. in length and the
proximal width 3.5 inches = 89 mm., and does not differ much from crassus
except in the great proximal width, necessary to articulate with the distal
internal expansion described above.
The type came from Enfield in New Zealand.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
Page 202
PACHYORNIS PYGMAEUS (HUTT.)
Euryapteryx pygmaeus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 739 (1892).
A S implied by its name, this is the smallest species of Pachyornis, the
tarso-metatarsus only measuring 6 inches in length. The type came
from Takaka.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
PACHYORNIS COMPACTA (HUTT.)
Euryapteryx compacta Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 11 (1893).
A PPROACHES nearest to pygmaeus in size, but can be at once
distinguished by the distal extremity of the tibio-tarsus not being
expanded inwards. The tarso-metatarsus has the trochleae
considerably more expanded than in pygmaeus.
Type from Enfield in New Zealand.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
PALAEOCASUARIUS FORBES.
D R. FORBES founded this genus of Dinornithidae on remains of Moas
of three distinct sizes as regards femora collected by him at Manitoto.
Dr. Forbes has kindly placed these bones at my disposal, and the
following summarises the results of my examination. I find that Dr. Forbes'
original idea as to the distinctness of Palaeocasuarius is perfectly justified,
as not only are his characters of the tibio-tarsus, as opposed to those in the
other genera, correct, but the proportions between femur, tibio-tarsus and
tarso-metatarsus are quite different to those of other genera. I give the
proportions of the three bones in Palaeocasuarius elegans, Megalapteryx
Euryapteryx pygmaeus Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 739 (1892).
A S implied by its name, this is the smallest species of Pachyornis, the
tarso-metatarsus only measuring 6 inches in length. The type came
from Takaka.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
PACHYORNIS COMPACTA (HUTT.)
Euryapteryx compacta Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXV, p. 11 (1893).
A PPROACHES nearest to pygmaeus in size, but can be at once
distinguished by the distal extremity of the tibio-tarsus not being
expanded inwards. The tarso-metatarsus has the trochleae
considerably more expanded than in pygmaeus.
Type from Enfield in New Zealand.
Habitat: Middle Island, New Zealand.
PALAEOCASUARIUS FORBES.
D R. FORBES founded this genus of Dinornithidae on remains of Moas
of three distinct sizes as regards femora collected by him at Manitoto.
Dr. Forbes has kindly placed these bones at my disposal, and the
following summarises the results of my examination. I find that Dr. Forbes'
original idea as to the distinctness of Palaeocasuarius is perfectly justified,
as not only are his characters of the tibio-tarsus, as opposed to those in the
other genera, correct, but the proportions between femur, tibio-tarsus and
tarso-metatarsus are quite different to those of other genera. I give the
proportions of the three bones in Palaeocasuarius elegans, Megalapteryx
Page 203
tenuipes, and Pachyornis elephantopus, which are the three most nearly
allied genera:
Pal. elegans. M. tenuipes. Pach. elephantopus.
Femur, length 10⅝ inches 11 inches 12 inches
Width over condyles 3½ " 3½ " 5 "
Tibio-tarsus, length 16 " 15½ " 33 "
Width at distal end 2 " 2¼ " 3½ "
Tarso-metatarsus, length 7 " 6 " 9 "
Width at centre 1½ " 1¼ " 2¼ "
The original diagnosis was as follows, being founded on the tibio-tarsus:
"The tibio-tarsus differs from that of all other genera in being straighter and
less twisted on itself, so that the position of the ridge forming the inner wall
of the groove for the tendons of the extensor muscles run along the inner
side of the bone as in Casuarius. As in the latter genus it takes a marked
turn inwards and backwards before joining the epicnemial crest, while a
line joining the centre point between the distal condyles and the epicnemial
ridge leaves a considerable space between it and the wall of the groove.
There is no intercondylar eminence in the intercondylar channel, and the
orifice of the extensor foramen opens more longitudinally than in the other
genera, and points downwards."
Type of the genus: Palaeocasuarius haasti Forbes.
Number of species: 3.
In the following descriptions of the three species I only rely on the
measurements of the femora, as not all the other leg bones of the three
species are available.
PALAEOCASUARIUS HAASTI FORBES.
Palaeocasuarius haasti Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 189 (1892).
allied genera:
Pal. elegans. M. tenuipes. Pach. elephantopus.
Femur, length 10⅝ inches 11 inches 12 inches
Width over condyles 3½ " 3½ " 5 "
Tibio-tarsus, length 16 " 15½ " 33 "
Width at distal end 2 " 2¼ " 3½ "
Tarso-metatarsus, length 7 " 6 " 9 "
Width at centre 1½ " 1¼ " 2¼ "
The original diagnosis was as follows, being founded on the tibio-tarsus:
"The tibio-tarsus differs from that of all other genera in being straighter and
less twisted on itself, so that the position of the ridge forming the inner wall
of the groove for the tendons of the extensor muscles run along the inner
side of the bone as in Casuarius. As in the latter genus it takes a marked
turn inwards and backwards before joining the epicnemial crest, while a
line joining the centre point between the distal condyles and the epicnemial
ridge leaves a considerable space between it and the wall of the groove.
There is no intercondylar eminence in the intercondylar channel, and the
orifice of the extensor foramen opens more longitudinally than in the other
genera, and points downwards."
Type of the genus: Palaeocasuarius haasti Forbes.
Number of species: 3.
In the following descriptions of the three species I only rely on the
measurements of the femora, as not all the other leg bones of the three
species are available.
PALAEOCASUARIUS HAASTI FORBES.
Palaeocasuarius haasti Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 189 (1892).
Page 204
F EMUR: length approximately 8.5 inches; width across head and great
trochanter 2.25 inches. Tarso-metatarsus: length 7 inches; width in
centre 1.15 inches, at distal end 2.75 inches.
Type from Manitoto in Liverpool Museum.
This bird exceeded considerably the cassowary in size, is all the author tells
us of this bird. It is a pity that Dr. Forbes did not insist on the publication in
full of his paper, as proper descriptions of all the twelve new species are
wanting.
Habitat: New Zealand.
PALAEOCASUARIUS VELOX FORBES.
Palaeocasuarius velox Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 189 (1892).
F EMUR: length 9.5 inches; width across head and trochanter 2.75
inches, across distal end 2.5 inches. Tarso-metatarsus: length 7 inches;
width in centre 1.5 inches, across distal end 3 inches.
Type specimen from Manitoto in Liverpool Museum.
Habitat: New Zealand.
PALAEOCASUARIUS ELEGANS FORBES.
Palaeocasuarius elegans Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 189 (1892).
F EMUR: length 10.75 inches; width across head and trochanter 3.25
inches, across distal end 3.4 inches. Tarso-metatarsus: length 7.8
inches, width over centre 1.75, over distal end about 3.3 inches.
Type specimen from Manitoto in the Liverpool Museum.
Habitat: New Zealand.
trochanter 2.25 inches. Tarso-metatarsus: length 7 inches; width in
centre 1.15 inches, at distal end 2.75 inches.
Type from Manitoto in Liverpool Museum.
This bird exceeded considerably the cassowary in size, is all the author tells
us of this bird. It is a pity that Dr. Forbes did not insist on the publication in
full of his paper, as proper descriptions of all the twelve new species are
wanting.
Habitat: New Zealand.
PALAEOCASUARIUS VELOX FORBES.
Palaeocasuarius velox Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 189 (1892).
F EMUR: length 9.5 inches; width across head and trochanter 2.75
inches, across distal end 2.5 inches. Tarso-metatarsus: length 7 inches;
width in centre 1.5 inches, across distal end 3 inches.
Type specimen from Manitoto in Liverpool Museum.
Habitat: New Zealand.
PALAEOCASUARIUS ELEGANS FORBES.
Palaeocasuarius elegans Forbes, Trans. N.Z. Inst. XXIV, p. 189 (1892).
F EMUR: length 10.75 inches; width across head and trochanter 3.25
inches, across distal end 3.4 inches. Tarso-metatarsus: length 7.8
inches, width over centre 1.75, over distal end about 3.3 inches.
Type specimen from Manitoto in the Liverpool Museum.
Habitat: New Zealand.
Page 205
AEPYORNITHIDAE.
T HE first notice we have from a scientific man of the existence on
Madagascar of large Struthious birds is the description by Isidore
Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire of two eggs and a few osseous remains, in the
Annales des Sciences naturelles III, Zoologie, vol. XIV (1850). These
important objects were sent to the describer by a colonist of Réunion,
Monsieur de Malavois, but were obtained from the natives in Madagascar
by Captain M. Abadie. A third egg arrived smashed. The name given on this
evidence was Aepyornis maximus.
Since then some 40 eggs at least and a large number of odd bones have
been collected by Monsieur Grandidier, Messrs. Last and others, and Dr.
Forsyth Major, but only one practically complete, and one less complete
skeleton of a smaller species, named Aepyornis hildebrandti by Dr.
Burckhardt.
A large number of species has been diagnosed on the evidence of these
bones and eggs by Professor Milne-Edwards, Mr. Dawson Rowley and Mr.
Andrews, and a second genus, Mullerornis, established.
The following is the diagnosis of the family
AEPYORNITHIDAE.
H EAD less flattened than in the Dinornithidae, much longer and
narrower. Brain case much greater in volume. Occipital condyle
strongly pedunculate. Temporal fossae deep and narrow. The
basisphenoid has on each side a well marked pterygoidal apophysis. The
lower mandible is straight and stout, recalling somewhat that of Rhea, but
the maxillary branches are higher and stouter. The symphysis is long,
contracted, and hollowed out in the shape of a ladle. The sternum presents
many affinities to that of Apteryx. It is a thin plastron, flattened, and much
widened. The coracoidal articular surfaces similar to those of Apteryx. The
Coraco-scapulars are feeble, and have so faint an articular surface that the
humerus must have been rudimentary. Hallux absent, outer digit has five,
the middle digit four, and the inner digit three phalanges.
T HE first notice we have from a scientific man of the existence on
Madagascar of large Struthious birds is the description by Isidore
Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire of two eggs and a few osseous remains, in the
Annales des Sciences naturelles III, Zoologie, vol. XIV (1850). These
important objects were sent to the describer by a colonist of Réunion,
Monsieur de Malavois, but were obtained from the natives in Madagascar
by Captain M. Abadie. A third egg arrived smashed. The name given on this
evidence was Aepyornis maximus.
Since then some 40 eggs at least and a large number of odd bones have
been collected by Monsieur Grandidier, Messrs. Last and others, and Dr.
Forsyth Major, but only one practically complete, and one less complete
skeleton of a smaller species, named Aepyornis hildebrandti by Dr.
Burckhardt.
A large number of species has been diagnosed on the evidence of these
bones and eggs by Professor Milne-Edwards, Mr. Dawson Rowley and Mr.
Andrews, and a second genus, Mullerornis, established.
The following is the diagnosis of the family
AEPYORNITHIDAE.
H EAD less flattened than in the Dinornithidae, much longer and
narrower. Brain case much greater in volume. Occipital condyle
strongly pedunculate. Temporal fossae deep and narrow. The
basisphenoid has on each side a well marked pterygoidal apophysis. The
lower mandible is straight and stout, recalling somewhat that of Rhea, but
the maxillary branches are higher and stouter. The symphysis is long,
contracted, and hollowed out in the shape of a ladle. The sternum presents
many affinities to that of Apteryx. It is a thin plastron, flattened, and much
widened. The coracoidal articular surfaces similar to those of Apteryx. The
Coraco-scapulars are feeble, and have so faint an articular surface that the
humerus must have been rudimentary. Hallux absent, outer digit has five,
the middle digit four, and the inner digit three phalanges.
Page 206
There are three genera and twelve species.
A striking character is that in the genus Aepyornis the proximal extremity of
the tarso-metatarsus is larger than the distal extremity, a feature not found in
the majority of other birds.
Monsieur Grandidier has expressly pointed out that Aepyornis had only
three toes, I cannot, therefore, understand why Messrs. Lydekker and Evans
both state that the hallux is present.
In spite of the researches of Messrs. Grandidier, Last, and Forsyth Major
and the large collections sent home by them, the number of Aepyornis
bones is infinitesimal compared with the vast masses of bones of the
Dinornithidae contained in the museums. This paucity of material quite
prohibits us from making a critical study of the described species, so that
we are at present unable to say if too many or too few species have been
diagnosed. I am inclined, however, to think that if we ever get complete
skeletons of the larger forms, Ae. grandidieri and Ae. cursor will prove to
be sexes of one species, and also Ae. titan and Ae. maximus. For the present,
however, the measurements are too different to allow of their being united
without further investigation.
The three genera are as follows:—
AEPYORNIS T. GEOFF.
Aepyornis Geoffroy Saint Hilaire.
Epiornis Geoffroy Saint Hilaire.
Epyornis Auct.
MULLERORNIS MILNE-EDWARDS & GRANDIDIER.
Mullerornis Milne-Edwards and Grandidier.
FLACOURTIA ANDREWS.
Flacourtia Andrews.
Mullerornis Milne-Edwards and Grandidier (part).
A striking character is that in the genus Aepyornis the proximal extremity of
the tarso-metatarsus is larger than the distal extremity, a feature not found in
the majority of other birds.
Monsieur Grandidier has expressly pointed out that Aepyornis had only
three toes, I cannot, therefore, understand why Messrs. Lydekker and Evans
both state that the hallux is present.
In spite of the researches of Messrs. Grandidier, Last, and Forsyth Major
and the large collections sent home by them, the number of Aepyornis
bones is infinitesimal compared with the vast masses of bones of the
Dinornithidae contained in the museums. This paucity of material quite
prohibits us from making a critical study of the described species, so that
we are at present unable to say if too many or too few species have been
diagnosed. I am inclined, however, to think that if we ever get complete
skeletons of the larger forms, Ae. grandidieri and Ae. cursor will prove to
be sexes of one species, and also Ae. titan and Ae. maximus. For the present,
however, the measurements are too different to allow of their being united
without further investigation.
The three genera are as follows:—
AEPYORNIS T. GEOFF.
Aepyornis Geoffroy Saint Hilaire.
Epiornis Geoffroy Saint Hilaire.
Epyornis Auct.
MULLERORNIS MILNE-EDWARDS & GRANDIDIER.
Mullerornis Milne-Edwards and Grandidier.
FLACOURTIA ANDREWS.
Flacourtia Andrews.
Mullerornis Milne-Edwards and Grandidier (part).
Page 207
AEPYORNIS GEOFF.
C HARACTERS same as those of the family; but in opposition to
Mullerornis the species are very heavy, ponderous, and clumsy, the
bones being both actually and comparatively much stouter. Differs
from Flacourtia in not having an ossified boney bridge over lower end of
groove for adductor of outer digit.
Type: Aepyornis maximus Geoff.
Number of species: 9.
AEPYORNIS TITAN ANDR.
Aepyornis titan Andrews, Geol. Mag. 1895, p. 303.
T HIS appears to be the largest species of the genus, though Ae.
maximus is considerably stouter. In the original description of Ae.
ingens, however, the tibio-tarsi referred to that species are really those
of Ae. titan:—
Smallest Femur.
Length about 430 mm.
Circumference, narrowest point 280 "
Width, distal end 190 "
Width of shaft at narrowest part 97 "
Largest Femur.
Length 470 mm.
Circumference at narrowest point 280 "
Width, distal end 210 "
Distal part of tibio-tarsus.
Width at distal end 180 mm.
Width of shaft at narrowest point 77 "
Circumference of shaft at narrowest point 210 "
C HARACTERS same as those of the family; but in opposition to
Mullerornis the species are very heavy, ponderous, and clumsy, the
bones being both actually and comparatively much stouter. Differs
from Flacourtia in not having an ossified boney bridge over lower end of
groove for adductor of outer digit.
Type: Aepyornis maximus Geoff.
Number of species: 9.
AEPYORNIS TITAN ANDR.
Aepyornis titan Andrews, Geol. Mag. 1895, p. 303.
T HIS appears to be the largest species of the genus, though Ae.
maximus is considerably stouter. In the original description of Ae.
ingens, however, the tibio-tarsi referred to that species are really those
of Ae. titan:—
Smallest Femur.
Length about 430 mm.
Circumference, narrowest point 280 "
Width, distal end 190 "
Width of shaft at narrowest part 97 "
Largest Femur.
Length 470 mm.
Circumference at narrowest point 280 "
Width, distal end 210 "
Distal part of tibio-tarsus.
Width at distal end 180 mm.
Width of shaft at narrowest point 77 "
Circumference of shaft at narrowest point 210 "
Page 208
Tarso-metatarsus.
Length 480 mm.
Width at proximal end 190 "
Width at distal end 165 "
Width at narrowest point of shaft 80 "
Circumference at narrowest point of shaft 200 "
The skull, pelvis, and most vertebrae, as well as the sternum of this form are
unknown.
Habitat: S. W. Madagascar.
Three Femora, two tarsi-metatarsi, and two incomplete tibia-tarsi are in the
Tring Museum, collected by Last in the Antinosy country.
There are two eggs of this species at Tring, the measurements of which are
as follows:—
No. 1, Antinosy Country, Last.
Large circumference 862.5 mm.
Small circumference 631.5 "
No. 2 (traded).
Large circumference 883 mm.
Small circumference 763 "
The egg mentioned by Mr. Lydekker in Cat. Foss. Birds B.M., page 214,
No. 41847 is, judging from its size, undoubtedly an egg of this species, and
I quote the measurements, as they are very large:—
Largest circumference 921 mm.
Smallest circumference 768 "
The egg purchased in 1854 in the Paris Museum measures:—
Large circumference 925 mm.
Small circumference 753 "
Length 480 mm.
Width at proximal end 190 "
Width at distal end 165 "
Width at narrowest point of shaft 80 "
Circumference at narrowest point of shaft 200 "
The skull, pelvis, and most vertebrae, as well as the sternum of this form are
unknown.
Habitat: S. W. Madagascar.
Three Femora, two tarsi-metatarsi, and two incomplete tibia-tarsi are in the
Tring Museum, collected by Last in the Antinosy country.
There are two eggs of this species at Tring, the measurements of which are
as follows:—
No. 1, Antinosy Country, Last.
Large circumference 862.5 mm.
Small circumference 631.5 "
No. 2 (traded).
Large circumference 883 mm.
Small circumference 763 "
The egg mentioned by Mr. Lydekker in Cat. Foss. Birds B.M., page 214,
No. 41847 is, judging from its size, undoubtedly an egg of this species, and
I quote the measurements, as they are very large:—
Largest circumference 921 mm.
Smallest circumference 768 "
The egg purchased in 1854 in the Paris Museum measures:—
Large circumference 925 mm.
Small circumference 753 "
Page 209
In addition to these four eggs which are undoubtedly of Ae. titan, there are
the following which I consider to belong to that species:—
the following which I consider to belong to that species:—
Page 210
1 Paris Museum, Mr. Armange.
1 Hamburg.
1 Messrs. Gilford, Orange, New Jersey.
1 Rowley collection.
These four eggs range from 900 mm. to 863.5 mm. in large circumference,
and 770 mm. to 736 mm. in small circumference.
AEPYORNIS MAXIMUS GEOFF.
Aepyornis maximus I. Geoffrey St. Hilaire, Ann. Sci. Nat. sér. 3, vol. XIV, p. 209 (1851).
Aepyornis ingens Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, C.R. CXVIII, pp. 122-127 (1894).
T HIS is the stoutest and bulkiest species, though not so tall as Ae. titan.
All the largest eggs next to those of Ae. titan must belong to this
species. It will be argued that I have no right to use the name maximus
for this form, but the name of maximus is based on one of the eggs in the
Paris Museum, and as these evidently belong to this form and not to the
form subsequently called maximus, I must apply to that the name of
grandidieri, given by Mr. Dawson Rowley in 1867 to a portion of eggshell
of the lesser form.
The measurements of the limbs are as follows:—
Femur.
Total length 440 mm.
Width at proximal end 190 "
Width at distal end 200 "
Circumference at narrowest part of shaft 265 "
Tibio-tarsus.
Total length 780 mm.
Width at proximal end 180 "
Width at distal end 160 "
1 Hamburg.
1 Messrs. Gilford, Orange, New Jersey.
1 Rowley collection.
These four eggs range from 900 mm. to 863.5 mm. in large circumference,
and 770 mm. to 736 mm. in small circumference.
AEPYORNIS MAXIMUS GEOFF.
Aepyornis maximus I. Geoffrey St. Hilaire, Ann. Sci. Nat. sér. 3, vol. XIV, p. 209 (1851).
Aepyornis ingens Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, C.R. CXVIII, pp. 122-127 (1894).
T HIS is the stoutest and bulkiest species, though not so tall as Ae. titan.
All the largest eggs next to those of Ae. titan must belong to this
species. It will be argued that I have no right to use the name maximus
for this form, but the name of maximus is based on one of the eggs in the
Paris Museum, and as these evidently belong to this form and not to the
form subsequently called maximus, I must apply to that the name of
grandidieri, given by Mr. Dawson Rowley in 1867 to a portion of eggshell
of the lesser form.
The measurements of the limbs are as follows:—
Femur.
Total length 440 mm.
Width at proximal end 190 "
Width at distal end 200 "
Circumference at narrowest part of shaft 265 "
Tibio-tarsus.
Total length 780 mm.
Width at proximal end 180 "
Width at distal end 160 "
Page 211
Circumference at narrowest part of shaft 210 "
Tarso-metatarsus.
Total length 420 mm.
Width at proximal end 170 "
Width at distal end 160 "
Circumference at narrowest part of shaft 200 "
The description of the foot in the diagnosis of the family is based on the pes
of this species. It is true that the two mounted skeletons in the British and
Tring Museums of Aepyornis hildebrandti show a larger number of
phalanges; but as neither is composed of the bones of a single individual it
is more than likely that the articulator made a mistake.
The dimensions of the type egg are as follows:—
Large diameter 340 mm.
Small diameter 225 "
Large circumference 850 "
Small circumference 710 "
Habitat: S. W. Madagascar.
There are about 16 eggs known of this form, varying from 854 mm. to 816
mm. in large circumference, and from 743 mm. to 715 mm. in small
circumference.
AEPYORNIS GRANDIDIERI ROWLEY.
Aepyornis Maximus Auct.
Aepyornis grandidieri Rowley, P.Z.S. 1867, p. 892.
T HIS is the form which nearly all the bones, referred erroneously to
Geoffroy's Ae. maximus, belong. The original description of Dawson
Rowley was founded on a piece of eggshell, and is as follows:—
Tarso-metatarsus.
Total length 420 mm.
Width at proximal end 170 "
Width at distal end 160 "
Circumference at narrowest part of shaft 200 "
The description of the foot in the diagnosis of the family is based on the pes
of this species. It is true that the two mounted skeletons in the British and
Tring Museums of Aepyornis hildebrandti show a larger number of
phalanges; but as neither is composed of the bones of a single individual it
is more than likely that the articulator made a mistake.
The dimensions of the type egg are as follows:—
Large diameter 340 mm.
Small diameter 225 "
Large circumference 850 "
Small circumference 710 "
Habitat: S. W. Madagascar.
There are about 16 eggs known of this form, varying from 854 mm. to 816
mm. in large circumference, and from 743 mm. to 715 mm. in small
circumference.
AEPYORNIS GRANDIDIERI ROWLEY.
Aepyornis Maximus Auct.
Aepyornis grandidieri Rowley, P.Z.S. 1867, p. 892.
T HIS is the form which nearly all the bones, referred erroneously to
Geoffroy's Ae. maximus, belong. The original description of Dawson
Rowley was founded on a piece of eggshell, and is as follows:—
Page 212
"The granulation is in a marked degree different from that of the other
pieces. The air pores which in the other specimens appear like a comet with
a tail are here only small indentations without any tail; the shell also is only
half the thickness, is much finer, and presents an aspect so diverse that the
difference is detected by the most careless observer, even when the pieces
are all mixed. These fragments belonged to the egg of much smaller birds,
the embryo of which required less strength in the shell. Yet the colour,
quality and locality of that shell clearly point to a bird of the same family as
Aepyornis maximus—in short, a smaller and more delicate Aepyornis. For
this species I propose the name of Aepyornis grandidieri."
The measurements of bones of the hind limb are as follows:—
Femur.
Length 320 mm.
Width at distal end 190 "
Tibio-tarsus.
Length 640 mm.
There are at Tring two eggs of this species.
No. 1, traded.
Length 283.0 mm.
Width 215.0 "
Large circumference 777.5 "
Small circumference 670.0 "
No. 2 Ambondo, Ambovombé in the district of Fort Dauphin.
Large circumference 775 mm.
Small circumference 662.5 "
There are recorded of these eggs, besides the two mentioned above, eight
further specimens, varying from 810 mm. to 771.5 mm. in large
circumference, and 686 mm. to 654 mm. in small circumference.
In addition to these there are in various collections about eight or nine eggs
whose species is doubtful.
pieces. The air pores which in the other specimens appear like a comet with
a tail are here only small indentations without any tail; the shell also is only
half the thickness, is much finer, and presents an aspect so diverse that the
difference is detected by the most careless observer, even when the pieces
are all mixed. These fragments belonged to the egg of much smaller birds,
the embryo of which required less strength in the shell. Yet the colour,
quality and locality of that shell clearly point to a bird of the same family as
Aepyornis maximus—in short, a smaller and more delicate Aepyornis. For
this species I propose the name of Aepyornis grandidieri."
The measurements of bones of the hind limb are as follows:—
Femur.
Length 320 mm.
Width at distal end 190 "
Tibio-tarsus.
Length 640 mm.
There are at Tring two eggs of this species.
No. 1, traded.
Length 283.0 mm.
Width 215.0 "
Large circumference 777.5 "
Small circumference 670.0 "
No. 2 Ambondo, Ambovombé in the district of Fort Dauphin.
Large circumference 775 mm.
Small circumference 662.5 "
There are recorded of these eggs, besides the two mentioned above, eight
further specimens, varying from 810 mm. to 771.5 mm. in large
circumference, and 686 mm. to 654 mm. in small circumference.
In addition to these there are in various collections about eight or nine eggs
whose species is doubtful.
Page 213
AEPYORNIS CURSOR M.-E. & GRAND.
Aepyornis cursor Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, C.R. CXVIII, p. 124 (1894).
O RIGINAL description as follows: Ae. cursor is almost as large as Ae.
grandidieri = maximus auct., nec. Geoffroy, but is more slender.
Length of tarso-metatarsus 380 mm.
Width at proximal end 140 "
Width at distal end 120 "
Circumference of shaft 155 "
Width of shaft 65 "
Habitat: Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS MEDIUS M.-E. & GRAND.
Aepyornis medius Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, Ann. Sci. Nat. ser. V, vol. XII, p. 179
(1869).
Aepyornis medius Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, Rech. Faune. Orn. Et. Masc. & Mad. (1866-
73), p. 97, note 2.
T HIS form was founded on a femur found at Amboulitsate in W.
Madagascar, and is described as follows: "It presents the same general
characters, and evidently belongs to an Aepyornis, but to a different
species, which we will call Aepyornis medius. The femur in question is not
only distinguished by its lesser proportions but by the narrower external
face of the bone; which variation results in causing the whole area between
the trochanter and the base of the femoral neck to be much less depressed.
The intermuscular line, which marks the insertion surface of the deep
portion of the femoral triceps muscle, is hardly indicated, whereas it is very
pronounced in the larger femur. The posterior side is also more rounded,
and the distance which separates the popliteal depression from the proximal
extremity is larger; the shape of this large depression is, however, the same
as in the larger femur, and although the articular surfaces above it do show
Aepyornis cursor Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, C.R. CXVIII, p. 124 (1894).
O RIGINAL description as follows: Ae. cursor is almost as large as Ae.
grandidieri = maximus auct., nec. Geoffroy, but is more slender.
Length of tarso-metatarsus 380 mm.
Width at proximal end 140 "
Width at distal end 120 "
Circumference of shaft 155 "
Width of shaft 65 "
Habitat: Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS MEDIUS M.-E. & GRAND.
Aepyornis medius Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, Ann. Sci. Nat. ser. V, vol. XII, p. 179
(1869).
Aepyornis medius Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, Rech. Faune. Orn. Et. Masc. & Mad. (1866-
73), p. 97, note 2.
T HIS form was founded on a femur found at Amboulitsate in W.
Madagascar, and is described as follows: "It presents the same general
characters, and evidently belongs to an Aepyornis, but to a different
species, which we will call Aepyornis medius. The femur in question is not
only distinguished by its lesser proportions but by the narrower external
face of the bone; which variation results in causing the whole area between
the trochanter and the base of the femoral neck to be much less depressed.
The intermuscular line, which marks the insertion surface of the deep
portion of the femoral triceps muscle, is hardly indicated, whereas it is very
pronounced in the larger femur. The posterior side is also more rounded,
and the distance which separates the popliteal depression from the proximal
extremity is larger; the shape of this large depression is, however, the same
as in the larger femur, and although the articular surfaces above it do show
Page 214
some differences, we know that these characters are not very reliable as
they are subject to individual variations.
Circumference of shaft 215 mm."
Habitat: West Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS HILDEBRANDTI BURCKH.
Aepyornis hildebrandti Burckhardt, Pal. Abh. (VI) II, p. 127 (1893).
I MUST refer my readers to Dr. Burckhardt's description, as it is too long
and too technical to be reproduced here, especially as it is not
comparative. I, however, give here some of his measurements:—
Tibio-tarsus.
A. grandidieri. A. hildebrandti.
Length 640 mm. 480 mm.
Breadth at proximal end 190 " 130 "
Breadth at distal end 135 " 82 "
Tarso-metatarsus.
Length circa 375 mm. 275 mm.
Breadth at proximal end 145 " 103 "
Breadth at distal end 145 " 95 "
The locality of the type is Sirabé.
Habitat: Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS LENTUS M.-E. & GRAND.
Aepyornis lentus Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, C.R. CXVIII, p. 124 (1894).
they are subject to individual variations.
Circumference of shaft 215 mm."
Habitat: West Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS HILDEBRANDTI BURCKH.
Aepyornis hildebrandti Burckhardt, Pal. Abh. (VI) II, p. 127 (1893).
I MUST refer my readers to Dr. Burckhardt's description, as it is too long
and too technical to be reproduced here, especially as it is not
comparative. I, however, give here some of his measurements:—
Tibio-tarsus.
A. grandidieri. A. hildebrandti.
Length 640 mm. 480 mm.
Breadth at proximal end 190 " 130 "
Breadth at distal end 135 " 82 "
Tarso-metatarsus.
Length circa 375 mm. 275 mm.
Breadth at proximal end 145 " 103 "
Breadth at distal end 145 " 95 "
The locality of the type is Sirabé.
Habitat: Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS LENTUS M.-E. & GRAND.
Aepyornis lentus Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, C.R. CXVIII, p. 124 (1894).
Page 215
O RIGINAL description as follows: "Ae. lentus is remarkable from its
short and massive feet.
Length of tarso-metatarsus 360 mm.
Width of proximal end 150 "
Circumference of shaft 170 "
Width of shaft 68 " "
Habitat: Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS MULLERI M.-E. & GRAND.
Aepyornis mulleri Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, C.R. CXVII, pp. 124-125 (1894).
T HE original description commences: "The new species which we owe
to the researches of M. G. Muller, and which we shall name Ae.
mulleri, is smaller. Nevertheless, it is superior in size to Ae.
hildebrandti, described by M. Burckhardt, which also came from Antsirabé.
We possess the almost complete skeleton of this bird, the skull, mandible,
vertebrae, ribs, sternum, a part of the pelvis, the leg bones, and a few
phalanges of the pes; so that we can now exactly define the position and
affinities of the genus Aepyornis." Then follows the diagnosis of the family,
which I have given before.
Habitat: Central Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS MODESTUS M.-E. & GRAND.
Aepyornis modestus Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XII, p. 189 (1869).
M ESSRS. MILNE-EDWARDS & GRANDIDIER state at pages 180-
181 that the bone (a portion of a femur) which is the type of the
above name, had a shaft-circumference of 120 mm., while in Ae.
short and massive feet.
Length of tarso-metatarsus 360 mm.
Width of proximal end 150 "
Circumference of shaft 170 "
Width of shaft 68 " "
Habitat: Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS MULLERI M.-E. & GRAND.
Aepyornis mulleri Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, C.R. CXVII, pp. 124-125 (1894).
T HE original description commences: "The new species which we owe
to the researches of M. G. Muller, and which we shall name Ae.
mulleri, is smaller. Nevertheless, it is superior in size to Ae.
hildebrandti, described by M. Burckhardt, which also came from Antsirabé.
We possess the almost complete skeleton of this bird, the skull, mandible,
vertebrae, ribs, sternum, a part of the pelvis, the leg bones, and a few
phalanges of the pes; so that we can now exactly define the position and
affinities of the genus Aepyornis." Then follows the diagnosis of the family,
which I have given before.
Habitat: Central Madagascar.
AEPYORNIS MODESTUS M.-E. & GRAND.
Aepyornis modestus Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, Ann. Sci. Nat. (5) XII, p. 189 (1869).
M ESSRS. MILNE-EDWARDS & GRANDIDIER state at pages 180-
181 that the bone (a portion of a femur) which is the type of the
above name, had a shaft-circumference of 120 mm., while in Ae.
Page 216
medius this circumference was 215 mm., and in Ae. grandidieri (= maximus
auct. nec. Geoffroy), it was 270 mm.
Type locality: Amboulitsate, in West Madagascar.
MULLERORNIS MILNE-EDWARDS & GRANDIDIER.
B IRDS of medium size, not having the heavy and massive build of
Aepyornis. They appear to resemble more closely the Casuaridae.
Known only from leg bones.
Number of species: 2.
MULLERORNIS BETSILEI MILNE-EDW. & GRAND.
Mullerornis betsilei Milne-Edwards and Grandidier, Compt. Rend., CXVIII, p. 125 (1894).
O RIGINAL description as follows:—"The leg bones are slender, the
tarso-metatarsus is not enlarged as in the preceding genus, and the
section through the shaft shows almost an isosceles triangle. The bone
itself having more the proportion of Dromaius.
"Length of tibio-tarsus 390 mm.
Circumference of tibio-tarsus 90 "
Width of tibio-tarsus 30 "
Width of proximal end 75 "
Width of distal end 60 "
Length of tarso-metatarsus 310 "
Circumference of tarso-metatarsus 80 "
Width of shaft of tarso-metatarsus 27 "
Width of proximal end 70 "
"Mullerornis betsilei inhabited the same area as Ae. mulleri but was much
rarer. (Translated.)"
auct. nec. Geoffroy), it was 270 mm.
Type locality: Amboulitsate, in West Madagascar.
MULLERORNIS MILNE-EDWARDS & GRANDIDIER.
B IRDS of medium size, not having the heavy and massive build of
Aepyornis. They appear to resemble more closely the Casuaridae.
Known only from leg bones.
Number of species: 2.
MULLERORNIS BETSILEI MILNE-EDW. & GRAND.
Mullerornis betsilei Milne-Edwards and Grandidier, Compt. Rend., CXVIII, p. 125 (1894).
O RIGINAL description as follows:—"The leg bones are slender, the
tarso-metatarsus is not enlarged as in the preceding genus, and the
section through the shaft shows almost an isosceles triangle. The bone
itself having more the proportion of Dromaius.
"Length of tibio-tarsus 390 mm.
Circumference of tibio-tarsus 90 "
Width of tibio-tarsus 30 "
Width of proximal end 75 "
Width of distal end 60 "
Length of tarso-metatarsus 310 "
Circumference of tarso-metatarsus 80 "
Width of shaft of tarso-metatarsus 27 "
Width of proximal end 70 "
"Mullerornis betsilei inhabited the same area as Ae. mulleri but was much
rarer. (Translated.)"
Page 217
Habitat: Central Madagascar.
MULLERORNIS AGILIS MILNE-EDW. & GRAND.
Mullerornis agilis Milne-Edwards and Grandidier, Compt. Rend., CXVIII, pp. 125-126
(1894).
O RIGINAL description as follows:—"M. agilis inhabited the South-
west Coast; we only possess, of this species, one tibia, which is
remarkable for the manner in which the intermuscular bony ridges
and the tendon-grooves are marked. The exterior border of the bone above
the lower articular surface has developed into a very pronounced crista."
(Translated.)
"Length of tibio-tarsus 440 mm.
Circumference of tibio-tarsus 97 "
Width of tibio-tarsus 34 "
Width at proximal end 65 "
Width at distal end 75 " "
Habitat: South-west Madagascar.
FLACOURTIA ANDREWS.
D IFFERS from Mullerornis in having a completely ossified bony
bridge over the lower end of the groove for the adductor of the outer
digit, in the tarso-metatarsus.
Number of species: 1.
FLACOURTIA RUDIS (MILNE-EDW. & GRAND.)
MULLERORNIS AGILIS MILNE-EDW. & GRAND.
Mullerornis agilis Milne-Edwards and Grandidier, Compt. Rend., CXVIII, pp. 125-126
(1894).
O RIGINAL description as follows:—"M. agilis inhabited the South-
west Coast; we only possess, of this species, one tibia, which is
remarkable for the manner in which the intermuscular bony ridges
and the tendon-grooves are marked. The exterior border of the bone above
the lower articular surface has developed into a very pronounced crista."
(Translated.)
"Length of tibio-tarsus 440 mm.
Circumference of tibio-tarsus 97 "
Width of tibio-tarsus 34 "
Width at proximal end 65 "
Width at distal end 75 " "
Habitat: South-west Madagascar.
FLACOURTIA ANDREWS.
D IFFERS from Mullerornis in having a completely ossified bony
bridge over the lower end of the groove for the adductor of the outer
digit, in the tarso-metatarsus.
Number of species: 1.
FLACOURTIA RUDIS (MILNE-EDW. & GRAND.)
Page 218
Mullerornis rudis Milne-Edwards & Grandidier, Compt. Rend. CXVIII, p. 126 (1894).
Flacourtia rudis Andrews, Nov. Zool. II, p. 25 (1895).
O RIGINAL description as follows:—"The third species M. rudis (= F.
rudis) was discovered by M. Grevé in the fossiliferous beds of the
West Coast. The tibio-tarsus is of about the same length as in M.
betsilei, but is more massive. The tarso-metatarsus is remarkable on account
of the great enlargement of the distal extremity, and of which the digital
articular attachments are extremely large. Between the middle and outer
ones there is a bony opening for the passage of the adductor muscle of the
outer digit, which passage is not present in Aepyornis (or Mullerornis,
W.R.)." (Translation.)
Length of tibio-tarsus 400 mm.
Circumference of tibio-tarsus 100 "
Width of tibio-tarsus 35 "
Width of distal end 75 "
Habitat: West Madagascar.
DROMAIUS PERONI NOM. NOV.
(Plate 40.)
Casoar de la Nouvelle Hollande Péron, Relat. Voy. Terr. Austr. I p. 467, pl. XXXVI (1807).
Dromoius ater Vieillot, Gal. des Ois, pl. 226 (not text).
Dromaeus ater Blyth, Ibis 1862, p. 93.
I T is most unfortunate that the larger number of authors have neglected to
go carefully into the synonymy of this bird; if they had done so it would
not have been necessary, after 81 years, to reject the very appropriate
name of ater, and to rename the Emu of Kangaroo Island. Vieillot, in the
Nouveau Dictionnaire D'Histoire Naturelle X, page 212, distinctly states
that his Dromaius ater was a name given to Latham's Casuarius
novaehollandiae, and makes no mention of Péron or of the Isle Decrès.
Flacourtia rudis Andrews, Nov. Zool. II, p. 25 (1895).
O RIGINAL description as follows:—"The third species M. rudis (= F.
rudis) was discovered by M. Grevé in the fossiliferous beds of the
West Coast. The tibio-tarsus is of about the same length as in M.
betsilei, but is more massive. The tarso-metatarsus is remarkable on account
of the great enlargement of the distal extremity, and of which the digital
articular attachments are extremely large. Between the middle and outer
ones there is a bony opening for the passage of the adductor muscle of the
outer digit, which passage is not present in Aepyornis (or Mullerornis,
W.R.)." (Translation.)
Length of tibio-tarsus 400 mm.
Circumference of tibio-tarsus 100 "
Width of tibio-tarsus 35 "
Width of distal end 75 "
Habitat: West Madagascar.
DROMAIUS PERONI NOM. NOV.
(Plate 40.)
Casoar de la Nouvelle Hollande Péron, Relat. Voy. Terr. Austr. I p. 467, pl. XXXVI (1807).
Dromoius ater Vieillot, Gal. des Ois, pl. 226 (not text).
Dromaeus ater Blyth, Ibis 1862, p. 93.
I T is most unfortunate that the larger number of authors have neglected to
go carefully into the synonymy of this bird; if they had done so it would
not have been necessary, after 81 years, to reject the very appropriate
name of ater, and to rename the Emu of Kangaroo Island. Vieillot, in the
Nouveau Dictionnaire D'Histoire Naturelle X, page 212, distinctly states
that his Dromaius ater was a name given to Latham's Casuarius
novaehollandiae, and makes no mention of Péron or of the Isle Decrès.
Page 219
The figures in Péron's work of the adult male and female are not good, but
those of the young and nestlings appear to me to be very accurate, and the
plate in the Galérie des Oiseaux is quite excellent. The latter and my own
are taken from the type specimen in the Paris Museum, while the plate in
Péron was done by Lessieur from a series of sketches from life made by
himself on Decrès Island and in the menagerie of the Jardin des Plantes.
The only known specimens of this extinct species are the mounted skin and
skeleton in Paris and the skeleton in the Florence Museum. All these are
what remain of the three living birds brought to Paris by Péron, and no
other authentic specimens exist anywhere. There is in the Museum at
Liverpool a full-grown, though immature Emu of the same size as
Dromaius peronii, but owing to its proportionally longer legs and very
scanty plumage it is not absolutely safe to identify it as a second mounted
specimen of D. peronii. I will recur to this lower down.
Description of adult male (ex Cat. Birds Brit. Mus.): Similar to D.
novaehollandiae, but much smaller, and with feathers of the neck entirely
black; feathers of the body brown fulvous, with the apical half very dark
blackish brown; bill and feet blackish, naked skin of the sides of the neck
blue. Total length about 55 inches, tarsus 11.40, culmen 2.36.
Immature in first plumage entirely sooty black. Nestling whitish with
longitudinal bands of rufous brown. In addition to Decrès or Kangaroo
Island, also Flinders, King Islands, and Tasmania had Emus living on them
at the time of Péron's visit, and I believe, if authentic specimens from these
localities were in existence we should find that each of these islands had
had a distinct species or race of Emus. Taking this for granted, and also
taking into account that it is slightly different from the type of D. peronii, I
have come to the conclusion that the Liverpool specimen is an immature,
though full-grown individual from one of these other islands; but it is not
possible from this one rather poor specimen to separate it from the
Kangaroo Island species, especially as there is absolutely no indication of
the origin of this specimen.
Habitat: Island of Decrès or Kangaroo Island.
One stuffed specimen (Type) and one skeleton in Paris, one skeleton in
Florence, and one stuffed specimen in Liverpool (an species diversa?). Also
those of the young and nestlings appear to me to be very accurate, and the
plate in the Galérie des Oiseaux is quite excellent. The latter and my own
are taken from the type specimen in the Paris Museum, while the plate in
Péron was done by Lessieur from a series of sketches from life made by
himself on Decrès Island and in the menagerie of the Jardin des Plantes.
The only known specimens of this extinct species are the mounted skin and
skeleton in Paris and the skeleton in the Florence Museum. All these are
what remain of the three living birds brought to Paris by Péron, and no
other authentic specimens exist anywhere. There is in the Museum at
Liverpool a full-grown, though immature Emu of the same size as
Dromaius peronii, but owing to its proportionally longer legs and very
scanty plumage it is not absolutely safe to identify it as a second mounted
specimen of D. peronii. I will recur to this lower down.
Description of adult male (ex Cat. Birds Brit. Mus.): Similar to D.
novaehollandiae, but much smaller, and with feathers of the neck entirely
black; feathers of the body brown fulvous, with the apical half very dark
blackish brown; bill and feet blackish, naked skin of the sides of the neck
blue. Total length about 55 inches, tarsus 11.40, culmen 2.36.
Immature in first plumage entirely sooty black. Nestling whitish with
longitudinal bands of rufous brown. In addition to Decrès or Kangaroo
Island, also Flinders, King Islands, and Tasmania had Emus living on them
at the time of Péron's visit, and I believe, if authentic specimens from these
localities were in existence we should find that each of these islands had
had a distinct species or race of Emus. Taking this for granted, and also
taking into account that it is slightly different from the type of D. peronii, I
have come to the conclusion that the Liverpool specimen is an immature,
though full-grown individual from one of these other islands; but it is not
possible from this one rather poor specimen to separate it from the
Kangaroo Island species, especially as there is absolutely no indication of
the origin of this specimen.
Habitat: Island of Decrès or Kangaroo Island.
One stuffed specimen (Type) and one skeleton in Paris, one skeleton in
Florence, and one stuffed specimen in Liverpool (an species diversa?). Also
Page 220
some leg-bones in Adelaide, Australia.
Dr. H. O. Forbes, who kindly lent me the last-named specimen, was the first
to point out the differences of this bird from D. novaehollandiae. It is
certainly totally distinct from birds of similar age of either D.
novaehollandiae or D. n. irroratus.
DROMAIUS MINOR (SPENCER).
Dromaeus minor Baldwin Spencer, Vict. Nat. XXIII, p. 140 (1906).
A S Mr. Bernard H. Woodward, of Perth, West Australia, was organising
an expedition to Kangaroo, Flinders, and King Islands (December,
1906), to hunt for Emu remains on these islands, I had hoped to be
the first to describe what I felt sure would be two new species of Dromaius.
I have, however, been forestalled by Professor Baldwin Spencer in the case
of King Island, whence a collection of 17 femurs, 19 tibio-tarsi, 28 tarso-
metatarsi, and portions of 8 pelves, made by Messrs. Alex. Morton and R.
M. Johnston, T.S.O., formed the material for the description of a new
species.
The diagnosis is as follows: "Smaller than D. ater (= D. peronii mihi). Tibia
not or only slightly exceeding 330 mm. in greatest length. Tarso-metatarsus
not exceeding 280 mm. in greatest length. Pelvis, length not or only slightly
exceeding 280 mm."
D. minor was a smaller but stouter bird than D. peronii. Comparative
dimensions:—
D. peronii. D. minor.
Tibio-tarsus 342 mm. 320- mm.
332
Tarso-metatarsus 290 " 277- "
287
Femur 180 " 170- "
180
Dr. H. O. Forbes, who kindly lent me the last-named specimen, was the first
to point out the differences of this bird from D. novaehollandiae. It is
certainly totally distinct from birds of similar age of either D.
novaehollandiae or D. n. irroratus.
DROMAIUS MINOR (SPENCER).
Dromaeus minor Baldwin Spencer, Vict. Nat. XXIII, p. 140 (1906).
A S Mr. Bernard H. Woodward, of Perth, West Australia, was organising
an expedition to Kangaroo, Flinders, and King Islands (December,
1906), to hunt for Emu remains on these islands, I had hoped to be
the first to describe what I felt sure would be two new species of Dromaius.
I have, however, been forestalled by Professor Baldwin Spencer in the case
of King Island, whence a collection of 17 femurs, 19 tibio-tarsi, 28 tarso-
metatarsi, and portions of 8 pelves, made by Messrs. Alex. Morton and R.
M. Johnston, T.S.O., formed the material for the description of a new
species.
The diagnosis is as follows: "Smaller than D. ater (= D. peronii mihi). Tibia
not or only slightly exceeding 330 mm. in greatest length. Tarso-metatarsus
not exceeding 280 mm. in greatest length. Pelvis, length not or only slightly
exceeding 280 mm."
D. minor was a smaller but stouter bird than D. peronii. Comparative
dimensions:—
D. peronii. D. minor.
Tibio-tarsus 342 mm. 320- mm.
332
Tarso-metatarsus 290 " 277- "
287
Femur 180 " 170- "
180
Page 221
Pelvis 340 " 274- "
280
Pelvis, front width 75 " 64 "
Pelvis, width behind acetabular cavity 92 " 78-86 "
Habitat: King Island, Bass Strait. Now extinct.
INDEX.
PAGE
Aechmorhynchus, 119
Aepyornis, 223
Aepyornithidae, 221
Aestrelata, 157
agilis (Mullerornis), 232
alba (Notornis), 144
alba (Porphyrio), 143
albicilla (Clitonyx), XI
albifacies (Sceloglaux), XI
albifrons (Miro), XI
Alca, 153
Alectroenas, 163
Alopochen, X
alphonsi (Astur), 83
altus (Dinornis), 192
Amazona, 57
americana (Meleagris), XII
americanus (Siphonorhis), 43
Anas, 103
angustipluma (Chaetoptila), 29
anna (Ciridops), 41
Anomalopteryx, 201
antiquus (Anomalopteryx), 202
280
Pelvis, front width 75 " 64 "
Pelvis, width behind acetabular cavity 92 " 78-86 "
Habitat: King Island, Bass Strait. Now extinct.
INDEX.
PAGE
Aechmorhynchus, 119
Aepyornis, 223
Aepyornithidae, 221
Aestrelata, 157
agilis (Mullerornis), 232
alba (Notornis), 144
alba (Porphyrio), 143
albicilla (Clitonyx), XI
albifacies (Sceloglaux), XI
albifrons (Miro), XI
Alca, 153
Alectroenas, 163
Alopochen, X
alphonsi (Astur), 83
altus (Dinornis), 192
Amazona, 57
americana (Meleagris), XII
americanus (Siphonorhis), 43
Anas, 103
angustipluma (Chaetoptila), 29
anna (Ciridops), 41
Anomalopteryx, 201
antiquus (Anomalopteryx), 202
Page 222
antipodum (Palaeocorax), 1
Aphanapteryx, 131
apicalis (Moho), 27
Apterornis, 145
Aptornis, 147
Ara, 51
Ardea, 111
Astur, 83
ater (Dromaeus), 235
Athene, 75
aucklandica (Nesonetta), XI
augusta (Amazona), XII
australis (Mergus), XI
australis (Miro), XI
benedeni (Anas), IX
betsilei (Mullerornis), 231
bifrons (Metapteryx), X
Biziura, 109
bonasia (Aphanapteryx), 131
boothi (Emeus), 210
borbonica (Emberiza), 7
borbonica (Pezophaps), 175
borbonica (Phedina), XI
borbonicus (Fregilupus), 3
borbonicus (Necropsittacus), 62
borbonicus (Palaeornis), 67
borbonicus (Trochocercus), XI
bouqueti (Amazona), XII
Bowdleria, 21
brachyurus (Rhamphocinclus), XI
Branta, X
brewsteri (Tympanuchus), 181
broeckii (Aphanapteryx), 131
Aphanapteryx, 131
apicalis (Moho), 27
Apterornis, 145
Aptornis, 147
Ara, 51
Ardea, 111
Astur, 83
ater (Dromaeus), 235
Athene, 75
aucklandica (Nesonetta), XI
augusta (Amazona), XII
australis (Mergus), XI
australis (Miro), XI
benedeni (Anas), IX
betsilei (Mullerornis), 231
bifrons (Metapteryx), X
Biziura, 109
bonasia (Aphanapteryx), 131
boothi (Emeus), 210
borbonica (Emberiza), 7
borbonica (Pezophaps), 175
borbonica (Phedina), XI
borbonicus (Fregilupus), 3
borbonicus (Necropsittacus), 62
borbonicus (Palaeornis), 67
borbonicus (Trochocercus), XI
bouqueti (Amazona), XII
Bowdleria, 21
brachyurus (Rhamphocinclus), XI
Branta, X
brewsteri (Tympanuchus), 181
broeckii (Aphanapteryx), 131
Page 223
bruante (Foudia), 7
Bubo, 71
Cabalus, 127
caeruleus (Anadorhynchus), 54
calcitrans (Cnemiornis), 97
californianus (Pseudogryphus), XII
Camptolaimus, 105
canadensis (Columba), 167
cancellata (Aechmorhynchus), 119
capensis (Upupa), 3
Carbo, 87
carribbaea (Aestrelata), 157
carolinensis (Conurus), XII
Casuarius, X
casuarinus (Cela), 207
Cela, 205
Centrornis, 95
Cereopsis, 99
Chaetoptila, 29
chathamensis (Palaeolimnas), 149
chathamica (Gallinago), 121
Chaunoproctus, 9
Chenalopex, 93
Chenopis, 91
Cinclocerthia, XI
cincta (Pogonornis), XI
Circus, 81
Ciridops, 41
Clitonyx, XI
Cnemiornis, 97
coerulescens (Apterornis), 145
commersoni (Scops), 73
compacta (Pachyornis), 217
Bubo, 71
Cabalus, 127
caeruleus (Anadorhynchus), 54
calcitrans (Cnemiornis), 97
californianus (Pseudogryphus), XII
Camptolaimus, 105
canadensis (Columba), 167
cancellata (Aechmorhynchus), 119
capensis (Upupa), 3
Carbo, 87
carribbaea (Aestrelata), 157
carolinensis (Conurus), XII
Casuarius, X
casuarinus (Cela), 207
Cela, 205
Centrornis, 95
Cereopsis, 99
Chaetoptila, 29
chathamensis (Palaeolimnas), 149
chathamica (Gallinago), 121
Chaunoproctus, 9
Chenalopex, 93
Chenopis, 91
Cinclocerthia, XI
cincta (Pogonornis), XI
Circus, 81
Ciridops, 41
Clitonyx, XI
Cnemiornis, 97
coerulescens (Apterornis), 145
commersoni (Scops), 73
compacta (Pachyornis), 217
Page 224
Conurus, 59
cooki (Cyanorhamphus), XI
Coturnix, 183
coudoni (Anser), X
crassus (Emeus), 209
cucullatus (Didus), 172
cupido (Tympanuchus), 181
cursor (Aepyornis), 227
curtus (Cela), 205
Cyanorhamphus, 69
defossor (Aptornis), 148
dentirostris (Geospiza), 12
deppei (Psittirostra), 37
diabolica (Aestrelata), 159
Diaphorapteryx, 133
Dididae, 171
didiformis (Anomalopteryx), 202
didiformis (Dinornis), 199
didinus (Dinornis), 199
Didus, 171
dieffenbachii (Nesolimnas), 125
dimidiata (Monarcha), XI
Dinornis, 191
Dinornithidae, 185
Drepanis, 31
Dromaius, X, 235
dromioides (Dinornis), 194
duboisi (Ardea), 114
duboisi (Mascarinus), 64
duboisi (Nesoenas), 166
ecaudata (Pennula), 137
echo (Palaeornis), 68
cooki (Cyanorhamphus), XI
Coturnix, 183
coudoni (Anser), X
crassus (Emeus), 209
cucullatus (Didus), 172
cupido (Tympanuchus), 181
cursor (Aepyornis), 227
curtus (Cela), 205
Cyanorhamphus, 69
defossor (Aptornis), 148
dentirostris (Geospiza), 12
deppei (Psittirostra), 37
diabolica (Aestrelata), 159
Diaphorapteryx, 133
Dididae, 171
didiformis (Anomalopteryx), 202
didiformis (Dinornis), 199
didinus (Dinornis), 199
Didus, 171
dieffenbachii (Nesolimnas), 125
dimidiata (Monarcha), XI
Dinornis, 191
Dinornithidae, 185
Drepanis, 31
Dromaius, X, 235
dromioides (Dinornis), 194
duboisi (Ardea), 114
duboisi (Mascarinus), 64
duboisi (Nesoenas), 166
ecaudata (Pennula), 137
echo (Palaeornis), 68
Page 225
Ectopistes, 167
effluxus (Microtribonyx), X
elapsa (Anas), IX
elegans (Palaeocasuarius), 220
elephantopus (Pachyornis), 214
ellisi (Prosobonia), 118
ellisianus (Hemignathus), 33
Emeus, 209
eques (Palaeornis), 67
erythrocephala (Ara), 53
Erythromachus, 135
erythronotus (Cyanorhamphus), 69
erythrotis (Cyanorhamphus), XI
erythrura (Ara), 54
excelsus (Dinornis), 192
exilis (Emeus), 211
exsul (Palaeornis), 65
falconeri (Cygnus), X
ferreorostris (Chaunoproctus), 9
finschi (Anas), 103
firmus (Dinornis), 193
Flacourtia, 233
flaviceps (Telespiza), XI
Foudia, XI
forsteri (Cyanorhamphus), 69
fortis (Anomalopteryx), 203
franciae (Columba), 163
francicus (Necropsittacus), 62
Fregilupus, 3
fuscatus (Psittacus), 70
fusco-fulvus (Nesacanthis), 7
gallinacea (Progura), X
effluxus (Microtribonyx), X
elapsa (Anas), IX
elegans (Palaeocasuarius), 220
elephantopus (Pachyornis), 214
ellisi (Prosobonia), 118
ellisianus (Hemignathus), 33
Emeus, 209
eques (Palaeornis), 67
erythrocephala (Ara), 53
Erythromachus, 135
erythronotus (Cyanorhamphus), 69
erythrotis (Cyanorhamphus), XI
erythrura (Ara), 54
excelsus (Dinornis), 192
exilis (Emeus), 211
exsul (Palaeornis), 65
falconeri (Cygnus), X
ferreorostris (Chaunoproctus), 9
finschi (Anas), 103
firmus (Dinornis), 193
Flacourtia, 233
flaviceps (Telespiza), XI
Foudia, XI
forsteri (Cyanorhamphus), 69
fortis (Anomalopteryx), 203
franciae (Columba), 163
francicus (Necropsittacus), 62
Fregilupus, 3
fuscatus (Psittacus), 70
fusco-fulvus (Nesacanthis), 7
gallinacea (Progura), X
Page 226
Gallinago, 121
gigantea (Leguatia), 151
giganteus (Dinornis), 193
genibarbis (Myadestes), XI
Geospiza, 11, 12
geranoides (Cela), 206
gossei (Ara), 52
gracilipes (Dromaius), X
gracilis (Cnemiornis), 98
gracilis (Dinornis), 194
grandidieri (Aepyornis), 226
gravipes (Emeus), 210
Grus, X
guadaloupensis (Ara), 54
guildingi (Amazona), XII
gutturalis (Cinclocerthia), XI
haasti (Emeus), 210
haasti (Palaeocasuarius), 220
habroptilus (Stringops), XII
haesitata (Aestrelata), 159
hamiltoni (Circus), 81
hamiltoni (Megalapteryx), 197
Harpagornis, 85
harrisi (Phalacrocorax), XII
hasitata (Aestrelata), 159
hawkinsi (Diaphorapteryx), 133
hectori (Megalapteryx), 197
Hemignathus, 33
Hemiphaga, 161
herberti (Didus), 131
Heterorhynchus, 35
hildebrandti (Aepyornis), 228
hochstetteri (Notornis), 142
gigantea (Leguatia), 151
giganteus (Dinornis), 193
genibarbis (Myadestes), XI
Geospiza, 11, 12
geranoides (Cela), 206
gossei (Ara), 52
gracilipes (Dromaius), X
gracilis (Cnemiornis), 98
gracilis (Dinornis), 194
grandidieri (Aepyornis), 226
gravipes (Emeus), 210
Grus, X
guadaloupensis (Ara), 54
guildingi (Amazona), XII
gutturalis (Cinclocerthia), XI
haasti (Emeus), 210
haasti (Palaeocasuarius), 220
habroptilus (Stringops), XII
haesitata (Aestrelata), 159
hamiltoni (Circus), 81
hamiltoni (Megalapteryx), 197
Harpagornis, 85
harrisi (Phalacrocorax), XII
hasitata (Aestrelata), 159
hawkinsi (Diaphorapteryx), 133
hectori (Megalapteryx), 197
Hemignathus, 33
Hemiphaga, 161
herberti (Didus), 131
Heterorhynchus, 35
hildebrandti (Aepyornis), 228
hochstetteri (Notornis), 142
Page 227
huttonii (Megalapteryx), 199
Hypotaenidia, 123
hypsibata (Branta), IX
immanis (Pachyornis), 215
impennis (Alca), 153
imperialis (Aphanapteryx), 131
ineptus (Didus), 172
ingens (Dinornis), 193
inhabilis (Pachyornis), 216
insignis (Ocydromus), 129
insularis (Xenicus), 23
Ixocincla, XI
jamaicensis (Aestrelata), 157
labati (Conurus), 59
labradoria (Camptolaimus), 105
lanaiensis (Hemignathus), XII
lautouri (Biziura), 109
leguati (Bubo), 71
leguati (Erythromachus), 135
leguati (Necropsar), 6
Leguatia, 151
lentus (Aepyornis), 228
leucopogon (Strigiceps), 30
leucoptera (Prosobonia), 118
Lithophaps, X
Lophopsittacus, 49
Loxops, 39
lucidus (Heterorhynchus), 35
lyalli (Traversia), 23
lydekkeri (Casuarius), X
lydekkeri (Prociconia), X
Hypotaenidia, 123
hypsibata (Branta), IX
immanis (Pachyornis), 215
impennis (Alca), 153
imperialis (Aphanapteryx), 131
ineptus (Didus), 172
ingens (Dinornis), 193
inhabilis (Pachyornis), 216
insignis (Ocydromus), 129
insularis (Xenicus), 23
Ixocincla, XI
jamaicensis (Aestrelata), 157
labati (Conurus), 59
labradoria (Camptolaimus), 105
lanaiensis (Hemignathus), XII
lautouri (Biziura), 109
leguati (Bubo), 71
leguati (Erythromachus), 135
leguati (Necropsar), 6
Leguatia, 151
lentus (Aepyornis), 228
leucopogon (Strigiceps), 30
leucoptera (Prosobonia), 118
Lithophaps, X
Lophopsittacus, 49
Loxops, 39
lucidus (Heterorhynchus), 35
lyalli (Traversia), 23
lydekkeri (Casuarius), X
lydekkeri (Prociconia), X
Page 228
mackintoshi (Porphyrio), X
macroura (Ectopistes), 167
madagascariensis (Mascarinus), 64
madagascariensis (Upupa), 3, 4
magnirostris (Geospiza), 11
major (Carbo), 88
majori (Centrornis), 95
mantelli (Notornis), 141
martinicana (Amazona), 57
martinicus (Ara), 53
Mascarinus, 63
mascarinus (Mascarinus), 64
mauritiana (Ardea), 115
mauritianus (Lophopsittacus), 49
mauritianus (Sarcidiornis), 101
maximus (Aepyornis), 225
maximus (Dinornis), 192
mayeri (Nesoenas), 165
medius (Aepyornis), 227
megacephala (Ardea), 111
Megalapteryx, 195
melanocephala (Anthornis), XII
melitensis (Columba), X
melitensis (Grus), X
melitensis (Strix), IX
melitensis (Vultur), IX
Metapteryx, X
meyeri (Columba), 165
Microtribonyx, X
migratoria (Ectopistes), 167
millsi (Pennula), 137
minor (Cnemiornis), 98
minor (Dromaius), 237
macroura (Ectopistes), 167
madagascariensis (Mascarinus), 64
madagascariensis (Upupa), 3, 4
magnirostris (Geospiza), 11
major (Carbo), 88
majori (Centrornis), 95
mantelli (Notornis), 141
martinicana (Amazona), 57
martinicus (Ara), 53
Mascarinus, 63
mascarinus (Mascarinus), 64
mauritiana (Ardea), 115
mauritianus (Lophopsittacus), 49
mauritianus (Sarcidiornis), 101
maximus (Aepyornis), 225
maximus (Dinornis), 192
mayeri (Nesoenas), 165
medius (Aepyornis), 227
megacephala (Ardea), 111
Megalapteryx, 195
melanocephala (Anthornis), XII
melitensis (Columba), X
melitensis (Grus), X
melitensis (Strix), IX
melitensis (Vultur), IX
Metapteryx, X
meyeri (Columba), 165
Microtribonyx, X
migratoria (Ectopistes), 167
millsi (Pennula), 137
minor (Cnemiornis), 98
minor (Dromaius), 237
Page 229
minor (Ocydromus), 129
minor (Pezophaps), 177
Miro, XI, 15
modestus (Aepyornis), 229
modestus (Cabalus), 127
Moho, 27
Monarcha, XI
moorei (Harpagornis), 85
moriorum (Palaeocorax), 1
mulleri (Aepyornis), 229
mülleri (Hypotaenidia), XI
Mullerornis, 231
murina (Pyrrhula), XII
murivora (Athene), 75
murivora (Strix), 75
nanus (Plotus), 89
nazarenus (Didus), 177
Necropsar, 5
Necropsittacus, 61
Nesoenas, 165
Nesolimnas, 125
Nestor, 45
newelli (Puffinus), XI
newtoni (Foudia), XI
newtoni (Genyornis), X
newtoni (Palaeolimnas), 149, 150
newtoni (Strix), 79
nigra (Pomarea), 13
nitidissima (Alectroenas), 163
nobilis (Palaeopelargus), X
norfolcensis (Nestor), 47
Notornis, 141
novaezealandiae (Cereopsis), 99
minor (Pezophaps), 177
Miro, XI, 15
modestus (Aepyornis), 229
modestus (Cabalus), 127
Moho, 27
Monarcha, XI
moorei (Harpagornis), 85
moriorum (Palaeocorax), 1
mulleri (Aepyornis), 229
mülleri (Hypotaenidia), XI
Mullerornis, 231
murina (Pyrrhula), XII
murivora (Athene), 75
murivora (Strix), 75
nanus (Plotus), 89
nazarenus (Didus), 177
Necropsar, 5
Necropsittacus, 61
Nesoenas, 165
Nesolimnas, 125
Nestor, 45
newelli (Puffinus), XI
newtoni (Foudia), XI
newtoni (Genyornis), X
newtoni (Palaeolimnas), 149, 150
newtoni (Strix), 79
nigra (Pomarea), 13
nitidissima (Alectroenas), 163
nobilis (Palaeopelargus), X
norfolcensis (Nestor), 47
Notornis, 141
novaezealandiae (Cereopsis), 99
Page 230
novaezealandiae (Coturnix), 183
novaezealandiae (Dinornis), 194
novaezealandiae (Psittacus), 69
novaezealandiae (Thinornis), XII
oahensis (Phaeornis), 19
Ocydromus, 129
Oestrelata, 157
olivacea (Ixocincla), XI
olivacea (Psittirostra), 37
otidiformis (Aptornis), 147
oweni (Cela), 206
Oxynotus, XI
Pachyornis, 213
pacifica (Drepanis), 31
pacifica (Hypotaenidia), 123
pacificus (Cyanorhamphus), 69
pacificus (Pareudiastes), XII
Palaeocasuarius, 219
Palaeocorax, 1
Palaeolimnas, 149
Pelaeopelargus, X
Palaeornis, 65
papa (Fringilla), 9
parkeri (Emeus), 211
parvus (Anomalopteryx), 202
patricius (Dromaius), X
Pelecanus, X
Pennula, 137
peralata (Gallinula), X
peroni (Dromaius), 235
perspicillatus (Carbo), 87
perspicillatus (Phalacrocorax), 87
novaezealandiae (Dinornis), 194
novaezealandiae (Psittacus), 69
novaezealandiae (Thinornis), XII
oahensis (Phaeornis), 19
Ocydromus, 129
Oestrelata, 157
olivacea (Ixocincla), XI
olivacea (Psittirostra), 37
otidiformis (Aptornis), 147
oweni (Cela), 206
Oxynotus, XI
Pachyornis, 213
pacifica (Drepanis), 31
pacifica (Hypotaenidia), 123
pacificus (Cyanorhamphus), 69
pacificus (Pareudiastes), XII
Palaeocasuarius, 219
Palaeocorax, 1
Palaeolimnas, 149
Pelaeopelargus, X
Palaeornis, 65
papa (Fringilla), 9
parkeri (Emeus), 211
parvus (Anomalopteryx), 202
patricius (Dromaius), X
Pelecanus, X
Pennula, 137
peralata (Gallinula), X
peroni (Dromaius), 235
perspicillatus (Carbo), 87
perspicillatus (Phalacrocorax), 87
Page 231
Pezophaps, 177
Phaeornis, 19
pisana (Fulica), X
Platibis, X
plenus (Palapteryx), 194
Plotus, 89
Pogonornis, XI
Pomarea, 13
ponderosus (Pachyornis), 216
potens (Dinornis), 193
primigenia (Grus), X
principalis (Campephilus), XII
prior (Fulica), X
prisca (Palaeolimnas), 150
proavus (Grus), X
proavus (Pelecanus), IX
productus (Nestor), 45
propinqua (Branta), IX
Prosobonia, 117
Psittirostra, 37
pugil (Alopochen), IX
purpurascens (Anodorhynchus), 55
pusilla (Gallinago), XII
pygmaeus (Pachyornis), 217
pygmaeus (Ocydromus), 127
pyrrhetraea (Tringa), 118
queenslandiae (Dromaius), X
Rhamphocinclus, XI
rheides (Cela), 207
roberti (Tribonyx), 139
robusta (Aythya), IX
robustus (Dinornis), 193
Phaeornis, 19
pisana (Fulica), X
Platibis, X
plenus (Palapteryx), 194
Plotus, 89
Pogonornis, XI
Pomarea, 13
ponderosus (Pachyornis), 216
potens (Dinornis), 193
primigenia (Grus), X
principalis (Campephilus), XII
prior (Fulica), X
prisca (Palaeolimnas), 150
proavus (Grus), X
proavus (Pelecanus), IX
productus (Nestor), 45
propinqua (Branta), IX
Prosobonia, 117
Psittirostra, 37
pugil (Alopochen), IX
purpurascens (Anodorhynchus), 55
pusilla (Gallinago), XII
pygmaeus (Pachyornis), 217
pygmaeus (Ocydromus), 127
pyrrhetraea (Tringa), 118
queenslandiae (Dromaius), X
Rhamphocinclus, XI
rheides (Cela), 207
roberti (Tribonyx), 139
robusta (Aythya), IX
robustus (Dinornis), 193
Page 232
rodericana (Alectroenas?), 164
rodericana (Drymoeca), XI
rodericanus (Necropsar), 5
rodricanus (Necropsittacus), 61
rothschildi (Pachyornis), 215
rudis (Flacourtia), 233
rufa (Loxops), 39
rufescens (Bowdleria), 21
rufifacies (Sceloglaux), 77
sandviciensis (Nesochen), XII
sandwichensis (Pennula), 138
Sarcidiornis, 101
sauzieri (Strix), 80
scaldii (Anser), IX
Sceloglaux, 77
Scops, 73
sibilans (Myadestes), XI
Siphonorhis, 43
sirabensis (Chenalopex), 93
solitarius (Didus), 175
solitarius (Pezophaps), 177
spadicea (Hemiphaga), 161
subflavescens (Cyanorhamphus), 70
subtenuis (Platibis), X
sumnerensis (Chenopsis), 91
stanleyi (Notornis), 143
strenuipes (Gallinula), X
strenuus (Dinornis), 194
Strigiceps, 30
Strix, 79
struthioides (Dinornis), 194
sylvestris (Ocydromus), XI
rodericana (Drymoeca), XI
rodericanus (Necropsar), 5
rodricanus (Necropsittacus), 61
rothschildi (Pachyornis), 215
rudis (Flacourtia), 233
rufa (Loxops), 39
rufescens (Bowdleria), 21
rufifacies (Sceloglaux), 77
sandviciensis (Nesochen), XII
sandwichensis (Pennula), 138
Sarcidiornis, 101
sauzieri (Strix), 80
scaldii (Anser), IX
Sceloglaux, 77
Scops, 73
sibilans (Myadestes), XI
Siphonorhis, 43
sirabensis (Chenalopex), 93
solitarius (Didus), 175
solitarius (Pezophaps), 177
spadicea (Hemiphaga), 161
subflavescens (Cyanorhamphus), 70
subtenuis (Platibis), X
sumnerensis (Chenopsis), 91
stanleyi (Notornis), 143
strenuipes (Gallinula), X
strenuus (Dinornis), 194
Strigiceps, 30
Strix, 79
struthioides (Dinornis), 194
sylvestris (Ocydromus), XI
Page 233
tannaensis (Platycercus), 70
tanagra (Turnagra), XI
teauteensis (Circus), 81
tenuipes (Megalapteryx), 198
terrestris (Cichlopasser), 17
terrestris (Geocichla), 17
terrestris (Turdus), 17
theodori (Anas), 103
titan (Aepyornis), 223
torosus (Dinornis), 194
traversi (Miro), 15
Traversia, 23
Tribonyx, 139
tricolor (Ara), 51
trifasciatus (Nesomimus), XII
Turnagra, XI
Turdus, 17
turfa (Grus), X
Tympanuchus, 181
typicus (Oxynotus), XI
valgus (Pachyornis), 216
validipennis (Dendrocygna), IX
validus (Dinornis), 193
varia (Fregilupus), 3
varia (Upupa), 3
velox (Palaeocasuarius), 220
versicolor (Amazona), XII
violaceus (Amazona), 57
ulietanus (Cyanorhamphus), 70
ulnaris (Lithophaps), X
unicolor (Cyanorhamphus), XI
tanagra (Turnagra), XI
teauteensis (Circus), 81
tenuipes (Megalapteryx), 198
terrestris (Cichlopasser), 17
terrestris (Geocichla), 17
terrestris (Turdus), 17
theodori (Anas), 103
titan (Aepyornis), 223
torosus (Dinornis), 194
traversi (Miro), 15
Traversia, 23
Tribonyx, 139
tricolor (Ara), 51
trifasciatus (Nesomimus), XII
Turnagra, XI
Turdus, 17
turfa (Grus), X
Tympanuchus, 181
typicus (Oxynotus), XI
valgus (Pachyornis), 216
validipennis (Dendrocygna), IX
validus (Dinornis), 193
varia (Fregilupus), 3
varia (Upupa), 3
velox (Palaeocasuarius), 220
versicolor (Amazona), XII
violaceus (Amazona), 57
ulietanus (Cyanorhamphus), 70
ulnaris (Lithophaps), X
unicolor (Cyanorhamphus), XI
Page 234
wardi (Palaeornis), 66
wilsoni (Pennula), 138
wolstenholmei (Loxops), 39
zealandicus (Cyanorhamphus), 69
PLATES.
Plate 1
PREGILUPUS VARIUS
(Natural Size)
Plate 2
wilsoni (Pennula), 138
wolstenholmei (Loxops), 39
zealandicus (Cyanorhamphus), 69
PLATES.
Plate 1
PREGILUPUS VARIUS
(Natural Size)
Plate 2
Page 235
1. FOUDIA 2. NECROPSAR 3. NECROPSAR
BRUANTE RODERICANUS LEGUATI
(Natural Size) (Two-Thirds Natural Size—from (Two-Thirds Natural Size)
description)
Plate 3
1. GEOSPIZA 3. NESOENAS MEYERI
MAGNIROSTRIS 4. CHAUNOPROCTUS
2. GEOSPIZA STRENUA FERREIROSTRIS
(All Three-Fourths Natural Size—from skins)
BRUANTE RODERICANUS LEGUATI
(Natural Size) (Two-Thirds Natural Size—from (Two-Thirds Natural Size)
description)
Plate 3
1. GEOSPIZA 3. NESOENAS MEYERI
MAGNIROSTRIS 4. CHAUNOPROCTUS
2. GEOSPIZA STRENUA FERREIROSTRIS
(All Three-Fourths Natural Size—from skins)
Page 236
Plate 4
1. HEMIGNATHUS 3. PSITTIROSTRA PSITTACEA
ELLISIANUS DEPPEI
2. HETERORHYNCHUS 4. CIRIDOPS ANNA
LUCIDUS
(All Three-Fourths Natural Size—from skins)
Plate 4a
1. HEMIGNATHUS 3. PSITTIROSTRA PSITTACEA
ELLISIANUS DEPPEI
2. HETERORHYNCHUS 4. CIRIDOPS ANNA
LUCIDUS
(All Three-Fourths Natural Size—from skins)
Plate 4a
Page 237
1. MOHO APICALIS 2. CHAETOPTILA ANGUSTIPLUMA
(Four-Fifths Natural Size—from skin) (Four-Fifths Natural Size—from skin)
Plate 5
1. MIRO 2 & 2a. TRAVERSIA 3. BOWDLERIA
TRAVERSI LYALLI ♂ ♀ RUFESCENS
(Four-Fifths Natural (Four-Fifths Natural Size)
Size)
Plate 5a
(Four-Fifths Natural Size—from skin) (Four-Fifths Natural Size—from skin)
Plate 5
1. MIRO 2 & 2a. TRAVERSIA 3. BOWDLERIA
TRAVERSI LYALLI ♂ ♀ RUFESCENS
(Four-Fifths Natural (Four-Fifths Natural Size)
Size)
Plate 5a
Page 238
SIPHONORHIS AMERICANA
(Natural Size)
Plate 6
Fig. 1. NESTOR Fig. 2. HEAD OF NESTOR
NORFOLCENSIS PRODUCTUS
From the plate in the Bulletin of the Liverpool From the specimen in the Tring Museum
Museum (Five-Sixths Natural Size)
(Natural Size)
Plate 6
Fig. 1. NESTOR Fig. 2. HEAD OF NESTOR
NORFOLCENSIS PRODUCTUS
From the plate in the Bulletin of the Liverpool From the specimen in the Tring Museum
Museum (Five-Sixths Natural Size)
Page 239
Plate 7
LOPHOPSITTACUS MAURITIANUS
(Eleven Twenty-Nineths Natural Size—from drawing and description)
Plate 8
NECROPSITTACUS BORBONICUS
(Two-Fifths Natural Size—from a description)
Plate 9
LOPHOPSITTACUS MAURITIANUS
(Eleven Twenty-Nineths Natural Size—from drawing and description)
Plate 8
NECROPSITTACUS BORBONICUS
(Two-Fifths Natural Size—from a description)
Plate 9
Page 240
MASCARINUS MASCARINUS
(Three-Quarters Natural Size)
Plate 10
ARA TRICOLOR
(Eleven-Thirteenths Natural Size—from specimen in Liverpool Museum)
(Three-Quarters Natural Size)
Plate 10
ARA TRICOLOR
(Eleven-Thirteenths Natural Size—from specimen in Liverpool Museum)
Page 241
Plate 11
ARA GOSSEI
(Four-Fifths Natural Size—from Gosse's description)
Plate 12
ARA GOSSEI
(Four-Fifths Natural Size—from Gosse's description)
Plate 12
Page 242
ARA ERYTHROCEPHALA
(Six-Tenths Natural Size—from Gosse's description)
Plate 13
ANADORHYNCHUS PURPURASCENS
(Two-Fifths Natural Size—from a description)
(Six-Tenths Natural Size—from Gosse's description)
Plate 13
ANADORHYNCHUS PURPURASCENS
(Two-Fifths Natural Size—from a description)
Page 243
Plate 14
ARA MARTINICUS
(Two-Fifths Natural Size—from description)
Plate 15
ARA MARTINICUS
(Two-Fifths Natural Size—from description)
Plate 15
Page 244
ARA ERYTHRURA
(One-Half Natural Size—from description)
Plate 16
CONURUS LABATI
(Natural Size—from Labat's description)
(One-Half Natural Size—from description)
Plate 16
CONURUS LABATI
(Natural Size—from Labat's description)
Page 245
Plate 17
AMAZONA VIOLACEUS
(Two-Thirds Natural Size—from description)
Plate 18
AMAZONA VIOLACEUS
(Two-Thirds Natural Size—from description)
Plate 18
Page 246
AMAZONA MARTINICANA
(Two-Thirds Natural Size—from Labat's description)
Plate 19
PALAEORNIS EXSUL
(Three-Quarters Natural Size)
(Two-Thirds Natural Size—from Labat's description)
Plate 19
PALAEORNIS EXSUL
(Three-Quarters Natural Size)
Page 247
Plate 20
PALAEORNIS WARDI
(Three-Quarters Natural Size)
Plate 21
PALAEORNIS WARDI
(Three-Quarters Natural Size)
Plate 21
Page 248
HEMIPHAGA SPADICEA
(Two-Thirds Natural Size)
Plate 22
ALECTROENAS NITIDISSIMA
(Natural Size)
(Two-Thirds Natural Size)
Plate 22
ALECTROENAS NITIDISSIMA
(Natural Size)
Page 249
Plate 23
PEZOPHAPS SOLITARIA
(About One-Third Natural Size—from descriptions and drawings)
Plate 24
DIDUS CUCULLATUS
(One-Third Natural Size—from drawings)
PEZOPHAPS SOLITARIA
(About One-Third Natural Size—from descriptions and drawings)
Plate 24
DIDUS CUCULLATUS
(One-Third Natural Size—from drawings)
Page 250
Plate 24a
1, 2, 3. DIDUS CUCULLATUS (see explanation)
Plate 24b
1, 2, 3. DIDUS CUCULLATUS (see explanation)
Plate 24b
Page 251
1-9. DIDUS CUCULLATUS
Plate 24c
10-13. DIDUS CUCULLATUS
Plate 25
DIDUS SOLITARIUS
(One-Third Natural Size—from a Dutch picture taken from living bird in Amsterdam, beak and
Plate 24c
10-13. DIDUS CUCULLATUS
Plate 25
DIDUS SOLITARIUS
(One-Third Natural Size—from a Dutch picture taken from living bird in Amsterdam, beak and
Page 252
wing restored)
Plate 25a
DIDUS SOLITARIUS
(One-Third Natural Size—from Dubois' description)
Plate 25b
Plate 25a
DIDUS SOLITARIUS
(One-Third Natural Size—from Dubois' description)
Plate 25b
Page 253
Fig. 1, 2, 3. PEZOPHAPS SOLITARIA
Fig. 4, 5, 7, 8. DIDUS SOLITARIUS
Plate 26
1. HYPOTAENIDIA 2. PENNULA 3. PENNULA
PACIFICA SANDWICHENSIS MILLSI
(Two-Thirds Natural Size—from (Three-Fifths Natural Size— (Three-Fifths
Forster's drawing in British from skin) Natural Size—from
Museum) skin)
Fig. 4, 5, 7, 8. DIDUS SOLITARIUS
Plate 26
1. HYPOTAENIDIA 2. PENNULA 3. PENNULA
PACIFICA SANDWICHENSIS MILLSI
(Two-Thirds Natural Size—from (Three-Fifths Natural Size— (Three-Fifths
Forster's drawing in British from skin) Natural Size—from
Museum) skin)
Page 254
Plate 27
NESOLIMNAS DIEFFENBACHI
(Seven-Eighths Natural Size)
Plate 28
1. CABALUS MODESTUS 2. COTURNIX NOVAEZEALANDIAE
(Natural Size) (Seven-Eighths Natural Size)
Plate 29
NESOLIMNAS DIEFFENBACHI
(Seven-Eighths Natural Size)
Plate 28
1. CABALUS MODESTUS 2. COTURNIX NOVAEZEALANDIAE
(Natural Size) (Seven-Eighths Natural Size)
Plate 29
Page 255
APHANAPTERYX BONASIA
(One-Half Natural Size—from a drawing)
Plate 30
ERYTHROMACHUS LEGUATI
(One-Half Natural Size—from a description and a tracing)
Plate 31
(One-Half Natural Size—from a drawing)
Plate 30
ERYTHROMACHUS LEGUATI
(One-Half Natural Size—from a description and a tracing)
Plate 31
Page 256
LEGUATIA GIGANTEA
(One-Sixth Natural Size—from description and drawings)
Plate 32
(One-Sixth Natural Size—from description and drawings)
Plate 32
Page 257
APTERORNIS COERULESCENS
(One-Half Natural Size—from descriptions)
Plate 33
NOTORNIS ALBA
(Five-Nineths Natural Size)
(One-Half Natural Size—from descriptions)
Plate 33
NOTORNIS ALBA
(Five-Nineths Natural Size)
Page 258
Plate 34
NOTORNIS HOCHSTETTERI
(One-Half Natural Size)
Plate 35
1. AECHMORHYNCHUS 2. PROSOBONIA
CANCELLATUS LEUCOPTERA
(Natural Size) (Natural Size)
NOTORNIS HOCHSTETTERI
(One-Half Natural Size)
Plate 35
1. AECHMORHYNCHUS 2. PROSOBONIA
CANCELLATUS LEUCOPTERA
(Natural Size) (Natural Size)
Page 259
Plate 36
CAMPTOLAEMUS LABRADORIUS
(One-Half Natural Size—from Nature)
Plate 37
AESTRELATA CARIBBAEA
(Five-Sixths Natural Size—from stuffed specimen in Dublin Museum)
Plate 38
CAMPTOLAEMUS LABRADORIUS
(One-Half Natural Size—from Nature)
Plate 37
AESTRELATA CARIBBAEA
(Five-Sixths Natural Size—from stuffed specimen in Dublin Museum)
Plate 38
Page 260
ALCA IMPENNIS
(Five-Eighths Natural Size—from stuffed specimen)
Plate 39
CARBO PERSPICILLATUS
(Seven-Sixteenths Natural Size)
(Five-Eighths Natural Size—from stuffed specimen)
Plate 39
CARBO PERSPICILLATUS
(Seven-Sixteenths Natural Size)
Page 261
Plate 40
DROMAIUS PERONI
(One-Third Natural Size—from type specimen)
Plate 41
MEGALAPTERYX HUTTONI
(One-Quarter Natural Size—restored drawing from feathers and mummified remains)
DROMAIUS PERONI
(One-Third Natural Size—from type specimen)
Plate 41
MEGALAPTERYX HUTTONI
(One-Quarter Natural Size—restored drawing from feathers and mummified remains)
Page 262
Plate 42
DINORNIS INGENS
(One-Eleventh Natural Size—restoration from skeleton and feathers)
NOTES
[1] "Psittacus brachyurus fuscus, facie nigra, cauda albente.
Habitat in Mascarina. Rostrum incarnatum. Caput caerulescens."
[2] See Findlay's South Pacific Ocean Directory, p. 642.
[3] Ibis 1862, p. 214.
[4] Proceedings of the Delaware Valley Ornithological Club, II,
1898, 17.
[5] Wintle, Birds of Montreal, 1896, 51.
[6] In collection of Dr. J. Dwight, Jr.
[7] Minot, Birds of New England, 1895, 395.
DINORNIS INGENS
(One-Eleventh Natural Size—restoration from skeleton and feathers)
NOTES
[1] "Psittacus brachyurus fuscus, facie nigra, cauda albente.
Habitat in Mascarina. Rostrum incarnatum. Caput caerulescens."
[2] See Findlay's South Pacific Ocean Directory, p. 642.
[3] Ibis 1862, p. 214.
[4] Proceedings of the Delaware Valley Ornithological Club, II,
1898, 17.
[5] Wintle, Birds of Montreal, 1896, 51.
[6] In collection of Dr. J. Dwight, Jr.
[7] Minot, Birds of New England, 1895, 395.
Page 263
[8] Auk, XX, 1903, 66.
Corrections made to printed original.
Page xvii, entry 1674. In "et Bourbon", the original ampersand in the title of
the French work was incongruously expanded to "and" in the present work.
So also in the same title on Pages 3 & 64, an on page xviii, entry 1773, in
"et sur les hommes".
Page xvii, entry 1707:—"Compagnons", printed as "Compagnos" in
original.
Page xviii, entry 1782 at "aux iles orientales":—"aux", printed as "aus" in
original.
Page xix, entry 1830 (also on p. 184 and Plate 28). "Coturnix
novaezealandiae" retained as printed, but the correct spelling is
"novaezelandiae" as printed in the species heading.
Page xx, entry 1861:—"1861", printed as "1681" in original.
Page xx, entry 1868 (Millies):—"Verhandelingen", printed as
"Verhandlingen" in original.
Page xxv, entry 1896 (Hartlaub) in "Ein Beitrag":—"Ein", printed as "En"
in original.
Page xxv, entry 1902 (Henshaw):—first occurence of "Hawaiian" printed as
"Hawaian" in original.
Page 3, in "Dauphine ou Madagascar":—"ou", printed as "on" in original.
Page 15, in "disappeared from Warekauri":—"disappeared", printed as
"disapppeared" in original.
Page 64, in "identified by himself with the Mascarine Parrot":
—"Mascarine", printed as "Marcarine" in original.
Page 74. "13½ inches = 345 mm": this seems the most likely intention of
the erroneous conversion "13½ inches = 365 mm" of the original.
Corrections made to printed original.
Page xvii, entry 1674. In "et Bourbon", the original ampersand in the title of
the French work was incongruously expanded to "and" in the present work.
So also in the same title on Pages 3 & 64, an on page xviii, entry 1773, in
"et sur les hommes".
Page xvii, entry 1707:—"Compagnons", printed as "Compagnos" in
original.
Page xviii, entry 1782 at "aux iles orientales":—"aux", printed as "aus" in
original.
Page xix, entry 1830 (also on p. 184 and Plate 28). "Coturnix
novaezealandiae" retained as printed, but the correct spelling is
"novaezelandiae" as printed in the species heading.
Page xx, entry 1861:—"1861", printed as "1681" in original.
Page xx, entry 1868 (Millies):—"Verhandelingen", printed as
"Verhandlingen" in original.
Page xxv, entry 1896 (Hartlaub) in "Ein Beitrag":—"Ein", printed as "En"
in original.
Page xxv, entry 1902 (Henshaw):—first occurence of "Hawaiian" printed as
"Hawaian" in original.
Page 3, in "Dauphine ou Madagascar":—"ou", printed as "on" in original.
Page 15, in "disappeared from Warekauri":—"disappeared", printed as
"disapppeared" in original.
Page 64, in "identified by himself with the Mascarine Parrot":
—"Mascarine", printed as "Marcarine" in original.
Page 74. "13½ inches = 345 mm": this seems the most likely intention of
the erroneous conversion "13½ inches = 365 mm" of the original.
Page 264
Page 112-3, table. Width at distal extremity "13.5" printed "0135". Four
other entries similarly.
Page 144, date for "Porphyrio melanotus var. alba":—"1844", printed as
"1144" in original.
Page 167, authors for "Columba migratoria":—"Audubon", printed as
"Andubon" in original.
Page 188, in "cervical vertebrae":—"cervical", printed as "cervicle" in
original.
Page 191, in "profile of the inner condyle":—"condyle", printed as
"cordyle" in original.
Page 215. "228 mm. = 8.9 inches": this seems the most likely intention of
the erroneous conversion "228 mm. = 9.9 inches" of the original.
Page 216, in "24 to 24.1":—"24.1", printed as "21-1" in original.
Page 217, synonymy of "Pachyornis pygmaeus":—"Euryapteryx", printed
as "Euryapterxy" in original.
Page 237, Tarso-metatarsus upper limit:—"287", printed as "277" in
original.
other entries similarly.
Page 144, date for "Porphyrio melanotus var. alba":—"1844", printed as
"1144" in original.
Page 167, authors for "Columba migratoria":—"Audubon", printed as
"Andubon" in original.
Page 188, in "cervical vertebrae":—"cervical", printed as "cervicle" in
original.
Page 191, in "profile of the inner condyle":—"condyle", printed as
"cordyle" in original.
Page 215. "228 mm. = 8.9 inches": this seems the most likely intention of
the erroneous conversion "228 mm. = 9.9 inches" of the original.
Page 216, in "24 to 24.1":—"24.1", printed as "21-1" in original.
Page 217, synonymy of "Pachyornis pygmaeus":—"Euryapteryx", printed
as "Euryapterxy" in original.
Page 237, Tarso-metatarsus upper limit:—"287", printed as "277" in
original.
Page 265
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EXTINCT BIRDS
***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright royalties.
Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license,
apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and
trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not
be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of
the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project
Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may
use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative
works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks
may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically
ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S.
copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright royalties.
Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license,
apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and
trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not
be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of
the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project
Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may
use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative
works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks
may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically
ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S.
copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
Page 266
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic
work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept
all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg electronic works in your possession. If
you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this
agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom
you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic
work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept
all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg electronic works in your possession. If
you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this
agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom
you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
Page 267
collection of Project Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg works
in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project
Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can easily comply with
the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format
with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you share it
without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which
the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase
“Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg works
in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project
Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can easily comply with
the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format
with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you share it
without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which
the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase
“Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with
Page 268
this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located
in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the
country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived
from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United
States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or
providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”
associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with
the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain
permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide
access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the
country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived
from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United
States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or
providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”
associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with
the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain
permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide
access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
Page 269
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of
obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided
that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of
obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided
that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
Page 270
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth
in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the
Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in
Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend
considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and
proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the
Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be
stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete,
inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -
Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH
OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES
of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth
in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the
Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in
Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend
considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and
proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the
Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be
stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete,
inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -
Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH
OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES
Page 271
EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return
the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that
provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu
of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a
refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If
any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law
of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly
from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a)
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return
the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that
provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu
of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a
refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If
any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law
of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly
from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a)
Page 272
distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b) alteration,
modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg work,
and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg
Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals
and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely
available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and
permanent future for Project Gutenberg and future generations. To
learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and
the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state
of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue
Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is
64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S.
federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza
#516, Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact
modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg work,
and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg
Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals
and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely
available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and
permanent future for Project Gutenberg and future generations. To
learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and
the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state
of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue
Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is
64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S.
federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza
#516, Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact
Page 273
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable
effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have
not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable
effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have
not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Page 274
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including
how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including
how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
Page 275
Page 276
back
Page 277
back
Page 278
Page 279
back
Page 280
Page 281
back
Page 282
Page 283
back
Page 284
Page 285
back
Page 286
back
Page 287
Page 288
back
Page 289
back
Page 290
back
Page 291
Page 292
back
Page 293
Page 294
back
Page 295
Page 296
back
Page 297
Page 298
back
Page 299
Page 300
back
Page 301
Page 302
back
Page 303
Page 304
back
Page 305
Page 306
back
Page 307
Page 308
back
Page 309
Page 310
back
Page 311
Page 312
back
Page 313
Page 314
back
Page 315
Page 316
back
Page 317
Page 318
back
Page 319
Page 320
back
Page 321
back
Page 322
Page 323
back
Page 324
Page 325
back
Page 326
Page 327
back
Page 328
back
Page 329
Page 330
back
Page 331
Page 332
back
Page 333
back
Page 334
back
Page 335
back
Page 336
back
Page 337
back
Page 338
Page 339
back
Page 340
Page 341
back
Page 342
Page 343
back
Page 344
back
Page 345
Page 346
back
Page 347
back
Page 348
back
Page 349
Page 350
back
Page 351
Page 352
back
Page 353
back
Page 354
Page 355
back
Page 356
Page 357
back