Memoir on the Dodo (Didus ineptus, Linn.)Owen, Richard
History
Memoir on the Dodo (Didus ineptus, Linn.)
Owen, Richard
Dodo
Dodo (from the painting by Goeimare, 1627, in Sion House).]
“In this picture, which seems to have been intended as a record
of rarities, the foreground represents a sea-shore from which
the tide has retired, leaving empty shells of the following
genera:—_Nautilus_, _Pteroceras_, _Strombus_, _Triton_, _Pyrula_,
_Cassis_, _Cypræa_, _Conus_, _Mitra_, _Turbo_, _Nerita_, _Mytilus_,
_Ostrea_, &c. Behind, on elevated ground, are two Ostriches; and
below, to the right of the spectator, the Dodo is represented as
in the act of picking up something from the strand” (fig. 5). “The
head and body of the bird, covering an area as large as the palm
of a man’s hand, are seen; but the legs are hidden. The painter of
the Dodo, in _my_ picture” (Pl. I. fig. 2), “has given the only
complete foreshortened back view of the bird known to me. In the
Duke’s picture the head and body are presented to the spectator on
a larger scale; and I have nowhere seen the hood or ridge at the
base of the bill, from which the bird obtained the name of _Cygnus
cucullatus_, so clearly represented. Near the Dodo are a Smew and
other aquatic birds, and further off Hoopoes and Terns. In the
distance is the ocean, with a sea-monster awaiting the attack of
Perseus, who descends on a winged steed to the rescue of Andromeda
chained to a rock. Those who have had occasion to describe and
figure new species of Testacea, know how difficult it is to find
a draughtsman who can give a correct design of the shell to be
represented. Unless the artist, like Mr. G. B. Sowerby, jun., is
aware of the internal structure of the shell, and acquainted with
its organization, a lamentable failure is generally the result.
In the picture before us, with one exception—and even in that
the specimen may have been distorted—so accurate was the eye
of the painter, that if he had been aware of the organization
of each shell—knowledge which he probably had not—he could not
have represented the objects more correctly. The _Nautili_[14],
_Strombus gigas_, _Triton_, and _Pyrula_ are painted with great
breadth and power, and all are drawn and coloured with wonderful
truth; indeed a conchologist may name every species. One of the
_Nautili_ is partially uncoated, to show the nacre, and the other
dissected, to display the concamerations. None of the shells have
the epidermis, and all are of the natural size. The artificial
condition of these subjects, and especially of the _Nautili_,
is, it must be allowed, rather out of place in an assemblage of
testaceans left on the sands by the retired tide, unless we are
to suppose that the sea-nymphs had been amusing themselves by
polishing the specimens and displaying the internal structure of
one of them; but this very treatment shows that the designs were
accurately made from real objects then considered as rarities. With
the exception of the Dodo, none of the natural objects represented
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account