<h2><SPAN name="VIII"></SPAN>VIII</h2>
<p class="h3">FEATHERED GIANTS</p>
<div class="inset20">
<p><i>"There were giants in the earth in those days."</i><br/></p>
</div>
<p>Nearly every group of animals has its giants,
its species which tower above their fellows as
Goliath of Gath stood head and shoulders
above the Philistine hosts; and while some of
these are giants only in comparison with their
fellows, belonging to families whose members
are short of stature, others are sufficiently
great to be called giants under any circumstances.
Some of these giants live to-day,
some have but recently passed away, and some
ceased to be long ages before man trod this
earth. The most gigantic of mammals—the
whales—still survive, and the elephant of to-day
suffers but little in comparison with the
mammoth of yesterday; the monstrous Dinosaurs,
greatest of all reptiles—greatest, in
fact, of all animals that have walked the<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_139">[139]</SPAN></span>
earth—flourished thousands upon thousands
of years ago. As for birds, some of the giants
among them are still living, some existed long
geologic periods ago, and a few have so recently
vanished from the scene that their
memory still lingers amid the haze of tradition.
The best known among these, as well as the
most recent in point of time, are the Moas of
New Zealand, first brought to notice by the
Rev. W. Colenso, later on Bishop of New
Zealand, one of the many missionaries to
whom Science is under obligations. Early in
1838, Bishop Colenso, while on a missionary
visit to the East Cape region, heard from the
natives of Waiapu tales of a monstrous bird,
called Moa, having the head of a man, that
inhabited the mountain-side some eighty miles
away. This mighty bird, the last of his race,
was said to be attended by two equally huge
lizards that kept guard while he slept, and on
the approach of man wakened the Moa, who
immediately rushed upon the intruders and
trampled them to death. None of the Maoris
had seen this bird, but they had seen and
somewhat irreverently used for making parts<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_140">[140]</SPAN></span>
of their fishing tackle, bones of its extinct relatives,
and these bones they declared to be as
large as those of an ox.</p>
<p>About the same time another missionary,
the Rev. Richard Taylor, found a bone ascribed
to the Moa, and met with a very similar tradition
among the natives of a near-by district,
only, as the foot of the rainbow moves away
as we move toward it, in his case the bird was
said to dwell in quite a different locality from
that given by the natives of East Cape. While,
however, the Maoris were certain that the
Moa still lived, and to doubt its existence was
little short of a crime, no one had actually seen
it, and as time went on and the bird still remained
unseen by any explorer, hope became
doubt and doubt certainty, until it even became
a mooted question whether such a bird
had existed within the past ten centuries, to
say nothing of having lived within the memory
of man.</p>
<p>But if we do not know the living birds, their
remains are scattered broadcast over hillside
and plain, concealed in caves, buried in the
mud of swamps, and from these we gain a good
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_141">[141]</SPAN></span>
idea of their size and structure, while chance
has even made it possible to know something
of their color and general appearance. This
chance was the discovery of a few specimens,
preserved in exceptionally dry caves on the
South Island, which not only had some of the
bones still united by ligaments, but patches of
skin clinging to the bones, and bearing numerous
feathers of a chestnut color tipped with
white. These small, straggling, rusty feathers
are not much to look at, but when we reflect
that they have been preserved for centuries
without any care whatever, while the buffalo
bugs have devoured our best Smyrna rugs in
spite of all possible precautions, our respect for
them increases.</p>
<div class="figcenter"> <ANTIMG src="images/i_188.jpg" width-obs="400" height-obs="221" alt="" /> Fig. 28.—Relics of the Moa.</div>
<p>From the bones we learn that there were a
great many kinds of Moas, twenty at least,
ranging in size from those little larger than a
turkey to that giant among giants, <i>Dinornis
maximus</i>, which stood at least ten feet high,<SPAN name="FNanchor_10_10"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</SPAN>
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_142">[142]</SPAN></span>
or two feet higher than the largest ostrich, and
may well claim the distinction of being the
tallest of all known birds. We also learn from
the bones that not only were the Moas flightless,
but that many of them were absolutely
wingless, being devoid even of such vestiges of
wings as we find in the Cassowary or Apteryx.
But if Nature deprived these birds of wings,
she made ample amends in the matter of legs,
those of some species, the Elephant-footed
Moa, <i>Pachyornis elephantopus</i>, for example,
being so massively built as to cause one to
wonder what the owner used them for, although
the generally accepted theory is that
they were used for scratching up the roots of
ferns on which the Moas are believed to have
fed. And if a blow from an irate ostrich is
sufficient to fell a man, what must have been
the kicking power of an able-bodied Moa?
Beside this bird the ostrich would appear as
slim and graceful as a gazelle beside a prize ox.</p>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_10_10"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></SPAN> <i>The height of the Moas, and even of some species of
Æpyornis, is often stated to be twelve or fourteen feet, but such
a height can only be obtained by placing the skeleton in a wholly
unnatural attitude.</i></p>
</div>
<p>The Moas were confined to New Zealand,
some species inhabiting the North Island, some
the South, very few being common to both,
and from these peculiarities of distribution<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_143">[143]</SPAN></span>
geologists deduce that at some early period in
the history of the earth the two islands formed
one, that later on the land subsided, leaving
the islands separated by a strait, and that since
this subsidence there has been sufficient time
for the development of the species peculiar to
each island. Although Moas were still numerous
when man made his appearance in this
part of the world, the large deposits of their
bones indicate that they were on the wane, and
that natural causes had already reduced the
feathered population of these islands. A glacial
period is believed to have wrought their
destruction, and in one great morass, abounding
in springs, their bones occur in such enormous
numbers, layer upon layer, that it is
thought the birds sought the place where the
flowing springs might afford their feet at least
some respite from the biting cold, and there
perished miserably by thousands.</p>
<p>What Nature spared man finished, and
legends of Moa hunts and Moa feasts still lingered
among the Maoris when the white man
came and began in turn the extermination of
the Maori. The theory has been advanced,<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_144">[144]</SPAN></span>
with much to support it, that the big birds
were eaten off the face of the earth by an earlier
race than the Maoris, and that after the
extirpation of the Moas the craving for flesh
naturally led to cannibalism. But by whomsoever
the destruction was wrought, the result
was the same, the habitat of these feathered
giants knew them no longer, while multitudes
of charred bones, interspersed with fragments
of egg-shells, bear testimony to former barbaric
feasts.</p>
<p>It is a far cry from New Zealand to Madagascar,
but thither must we go, for that island
was, pity we cannot say is, inhabited by a
race of giant birds from whose eggs it has been
thought may have been hatched the Roc of
Sindbad. Arabian tales, as we all know, locate
the Roc either in Madagascar or in some
adjacent island to the north and east, and it is
far from unlikely that legends of the Æpyornis,
backed by the substantial proof of its
enormous eggs, may have been the slight
foundation of fact whereon the story-teller
erected his structure of fiction. True, the Roc
of fable was a gigantic bird of prey capable of<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_145">[145]</SPAN></span>
bearing away an elephant in its talons, while
the Æpyornis has shed its wings and shrunk
to dimensions little larger than an ostrich, but
this is the inevitable result of closer acquaintance
and the application of a two-foot rule.</p>
<p>Like the Moa the Æpyornis seems to have
lived in tradition long after it became extinct,
for a French history of Madagascar, published
as early as 1658 makes mention of a large bird,
or kind of ostrich, said to inhabit the southern
end of the island. Still, in spite of bones having
been found that bear evident traces of the
handiwork of man, it is possible that this and
other reports were due to the obvious necessity
of having some bird to account for the presence
of the eggs.</p>
<p>The actual introduction of the Æpyornis to
science took place in 1834, when a French
traveller sent Jules Verreaux, the ornithologist,
a sketch of a huge egg, saying that he had
seen two of that size, one sawed in twain to
make bowls, the other, traversed by a stick,
serving in the preparation of rice uses somewhat
in contrast with the proverbial fragility
of egg-shells. A little later another traveller<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_146">[146]</SPAN></span>
procured some fragments of egg-shells, but it
was not until 1851 that any entire eggs were
obtained, when two were secured, and with a
few bones sent to France, where Geoffroy St.
Hilaire bestowed upon them the name of
<i>Æpyornis maximus</i> (the greatest lofty bird).
Maximus the eggs remain, for they still hold
the record for size; but so far as the bird that
is supposed to have laid them is concerned, the
name was a little premature, for other and
larger species subsequently came to hand.
Between the Æpyornithes and the Moas Science
has had a hard time, for the supply of big
words was not large enough to go around, and
some had to do duty twice. In the way of
generic names we have Dinornis, terrible bird;
Æpyornis, high bird; Pachyornis, stout bird;
and Brontornis, thunder bird, while for specific
names there are robustus, maximus, titan;
gravis, heavy; immanis, enormous; crassus,
stout; ingens, great; and elephantopus, elephant-footed—truly
a goodly array of large-sounding
words. But to return to the big
eggs! Usually we look upon those of the ostrich
as pretty large, but an ostrich egg measures<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_147">[147]</SPAN></span>
4-1/2 by 6 inches, while that of the Æpyornis
is 9 by 13 inches; or, to put it another
way, it would hold the contents of six ostrichs'
eggs, or one hundred and forty-eight hens' eggs,
or thirty thousand humming birds' eggs; and
while this is very much smaller than a waterbutt,
it is still as large as a bucket, and one or
two such eggs might suffice to make an omelet
for Gargantua himself.</p>
<p>The size of an egg is no safe criterion of the
size of the bird that laid it, for a large bird
may lay a small egg, or a small bird a large
one. Comparing the egg of the great Moa
with that of our Æpyornis one might think
the latter much the larger bird, say twelve feet
in height, when the facts in the case are that
while there was no great difference in the
weight of the two, that difference, and a superiority
of at least two feet in height, are in
favor of the bird that laid the smaller egg.
The record of large eggs, however, belongs to
the Apteryx, a New Zealand bird smaller
than a hen, though distantly related to the
Moas, which lays an egg about one-third of
its own weight, measuring 3 by 5 inches; perhaps<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_148">[148]</SPAN></span>
it is not to be wondered at that the bird
lays but two.</p>
<p>Although most of the eggs of these big
birds that have been found have literally been
unearthed from the muck of swamps, now and
then one comes to light in a more interesting
manner as, for example, when a perfect egg of
Æpyornis was found afloat after a hurricane,
bobbing serenely up and down with the waves
near St. Augustine's Bay, or when an egg of
the Moa was exhumed from an ancient Maori
grave, where for years it had lain unharmed,
safely clasped between the skeleton fingers of
the occupant. So far very few of these huge
eggs have made their way to this country, and
the only egg of Æpyornis now on this side of
the water is the property of a private individual.</p>
<p>Most recent in point of discovery, but oldest
in point of time, are the giant birds from Patagonia,
which are burdened with the name of
Phororhacidæ, a name that originated in an
error, although the error may well be excused.
The first fragment of one of these great birds
to come to light was a portion of the lower
jaw, and this was so massive, so un-bird-like,
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_149">[149]</SPAN></span>
that the finder dubbed it <i>Phororhacos</i>, and so
it must remain.</p>
<div class="figcenter"> <ANTIMG src="images/i_198.jpg" width-obs="400" height-obs="231" alt="" /> Fig. 29.—Eggs of Feathered Giants, Æpyornis, Ostrich, Moa, Compared with a Hen's Egg.</div>
<p>It is a pity that all the large names were
used up before this group of birds was discovered,
and it is particularly unfortunate that
Dinornis, terrible bird, was applied to the root-eating
Moas, for these Patagonian birds, with
their massive limbs, huge heads and hooked
beaks, were truly worthy of such a name; and
although in nowise related to the eagles, they
may in habit have been terrestrial birds of prey.
Not all the members of this family are giants,
for as in other groups, some are big and some
little, but the largest among them might be
styled the Daniel Lambert of the feathered
race. <i>Brontornis</i>, for example, the thunder
bird, or as the irreverent translate it, the thundering
big bird, had leg-bones larger than those
of an ox, the drumstick measuring 30 inches in
length by 2-1/2 inches in diameter, or 4-1/4 inches
across the ends, while the tarsus, or lower bone
of the leg to which the toes are attached, was
16-1/2 inches long and 5-1/2 inches wide where the
toes join on. Bear this in mind the next time
you see a large turkey, or compare these bones
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_150">[150]</SPAN></span>
with those of an ostrich: but lest you may forget,
it may be said that the same bone of a
fourteen-pound turkey is 5-1/2 inches long, and
one inch wide at either end, while that of an
ostrich measures 19 inches long and 2 inches
across the toes, or 3 at the upper end.</p>
<p>If Brontornis was a heavy-limbed bird, he
was not without near rivals among the Moas,
while the great Phororhacos, one of his contemporaries,
was not only nearly as large, but
quite unique in build. Imagine a bird seven
or eight feet in height from the sole of his big,
sharp-clawed feet, to the top of his huge head,
poise this head on a neck as thick as that of a
horse, arm it with a beak as sharp as an icepick
and almost as formidable, and you have a
fair idea of this feathered giant of the ancient
pampas. The head indeed was truly colossal
for that of a bird, measuring 23 inches in
length by 7 in depth, while that of the racehorse
Lexington, and he was a good-sized
horse, measures 22 inches long by 5-1/2 inches
deep. The depth of the jaw is omitted because
we wish to make as good a case as possible
for the bird, and the jaw of a horse is so<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_151">[151]</SPAN></span>
deep as to give him an undue advantage in that
respect.</p>
<div class="figcenter"> <ANTIMG src="images/i_202.jpg" width-obs="400" height-obs="266" alt="" /> Fig. 30.—Skull of Phororhacos Compared with that of the Race-horse Lexington.</div>
<p>We can only speculate on the food of these
great birds, and for aught we know to the
contrary they may have caught fish, fed upon
carrion, or used their powerful feet and huge
beaks for grubbing roots; but if they were not
more or less carnivorous, preying upon such
reptiles, mammals and other birds as came
within reach, then nature apparently made a
mistake in giving them such a formidable
equipment of beak and claw. So far as habits<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_152">[152]</SPAN></span>
go we might be
justified in calling
them cursorial
birds of prey.</p>
<div class="figcenter300">
<ANTIMG src="images/i_203.jpg" width-obs="300" height-obs="652" alt="" />
Fig. 31.—Leg of a Horse Compared
with that of the Giant Moa.</div>
<p>We really know
very little about
these Patagonian
giants, but they
are interesting not
only from their
great size and astounding
skulls,
but because of the
early age (Miocene)
at which
they lived and because
in spite of
their bulk they are
in nowise related
to the ostriches,
but belong near
the heron family.
As usual, we have
no idea why they
became extinct,<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_153">[153]</SPAN></span>
but in this instance man is guiltless, for they
lived and died long before he made his appearance,
and the ever-convenient hypothesis
"change of climate" may be responsible for
their disappearance.</p>
<p>Something, perhaps, remains to be said concerning
the causes which seem to have led to
the development of these giant birds, as well
as the reasons for their flightless condition and
peculiar distribution, for it will be noticed
that, with the exception of the African and
South American ostriches the great flightless
birds as a rule are, and were, confined to uninhabited
or sparsely populated islands, and this
is equally true of the many small, but equally
flightless birds. It is a seemingly harsh law
of nature that all living beings shall live in a
more or less active struggle with each other
and with their surroundings, and that those
creatures which possess some slight advantage
over their fellows in the matter of speed, or
strength, or ability to adapt themselves to surrounding
conditions, shall prosper at the expense
of the others. In the power of flight,
birds have a great safeguard against changes of<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_154">[154]</SPAN></span>
climate with their accompanying variations in
the supply of food, and, to a lesser extent,
against their various enemies, including man.
This power of flight, acquired early in their
geological history, has enabled birds to spread
over the length and breadth of the globe as no
other group of animals has done, and to thrive
under the most varying conditions, and it
would seem that if this power were lost it
must sooner or later work harm. Now to-day
we find no great wingless birds in thickly
populated regions, or where beasts of prey
abound; the ostriches roam the desert wastes
of Arabia, Africa and South America where
men are few and savage beasts scarce, and
against these is placed a fleetness of foot inherited
from ancestors who acquired it before
man was. The heavy cassowaries dwell in the
thinly inhabited, thickly wooded islands of
Malaysia, where again there are no large carnivores
and where the dense vegetation is some
safeguard against man; the emu comes from
the Australian plains, where also there are no
four-footed enemies<SPAN name="FNanchor_11_11"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</SPAN> and where his ancestors
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_155">[155]</SPAN></span>dwelt in peace before the advent of man.
And the same things are true of the Moas, the
Æpyornithes, the flightless birds of Patagonia,
the recent dodo of Mauritius and the solitaire
of Rodriguez, each and all of which flourished
in places where there were no men and practically
no other enemies. Hence we deduce
that absence of enemies is the prime factor in
the existence of flightless birds,<SPAN name="FNanchor_12_12"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</SPAN> although
presence of food is an essential, while isolation,
or restriction to a limited area, plays an important
part by keeping together those birds,
or that race of birds, whose members show a
tendency to disuse their wings. It will be
seen that such combinations of circumstances
will most naturally be found on islands whose
geological history is such that they have had
no connection with adjacent continents, or
such a very ancient connection that they were
not then peopled with beasts of prey, while
subsequently their distance from other countries
has prevented them from receiving such
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_156">[156]</SPAN></span>population by accident in recent times and has
also retarded the arrival of man.</p>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_11_11"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></SPAN> <i>The dingo, or native dog, is not forgotten, but, like man,
it is a comparatively recent animal.</i></p>
</div>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_12_12"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></SPAN> <i>Note that in Tasmania, which is very near Australia, both
in space and in the character of its animals, there are two carnivorous
mammals, the Tasmanian "Wolf" and the Tasmanian
Devil, and no flightless birds.</i></p>
</div>
<p>Once established, flightlessness and size play
into one another's hands; the flightless bird
has no limit placed on its size<SPAN name="FNanchor_13_13"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</SPAN> while granted
a food supply and immunity from man; the
larger the bird the less the necessity for wings
to escape from four-footed foes. So long as
the climate was favorable and man absent, the
big, clumsy bird might thrive, but upon the
coming of man, or in the face of any unfavorable
change of climate, he would be at a serious
disadvantage and hence whenever either
of these two factors has been brought to bear
against them the feathered giants have vanished.</p>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_13_13"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></SPAN> <i>While we do not know the limit of size to a flying creature,
none has as yet been found whose wings would spread over
twenty feet from tip to tip, and it is evident that wings larger
than this would demand great strength for their manipulation.</i></p>
</div>
<h3><i>REFERENCES</i></h3>
<p><i>There is a fine collection of mounted skeletons of various
species of Moas in the Museum of Comparative
Zoology at Cambridge, Mass., and another in the American
Museum of Natural History, New York. A few</i>
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_157">[157]</SPAN></span>
<i>other skeletons and numerous bones are to be found in
other institutions, but the author is not aware of any egg
being in this country. Specimens of the Æpyornis are
rare in this country, but Mr. Robert Gilfort, of Orange,
N.J., is the possessor of a very fine egg. A number of
eggs have been sold in London, the prices ranging from
£200 down to £42, this last being much less than prices
paid for eggs of the great auk. But then, the great
auk is somewhat of a fad, and there are just enough
eggs in existence to bring one into the market every
little while. Besides, the number of eggs of the great
auk is a fixed quantity, while no one knows how many
more of Æpyornis remain to be discovered in the swamps
of Madagascar. No specimens of the gigantic Patagonian
birds are now in this country, but a fine example
of one of the smaller forms, Pelycornis, including
the only breast-bone yet found, is in the Museum of
Princeton University.</i></p>
<p><i>The largest known tibia of a Moa, the longest bird-bone
known, is in the collection of the Canterbury Museum,
Christchurch, New Zealand; it is 3 feet 3 inches
long. This, however, is exceptional, the measurements
of the leg-bones of an ordinary Dinornis maximus
being as follows: Femur, 18 inches; tibia, 32 inches;
tarsus, 19 inches, a total of 5 feet 9 inches. The egg
measures 10-1/2 by 6-1/2 inches.</i></p>
<p><i>There is plenty of literature, and very interesting<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_158">[158]</SPAN></span>
literature, about the Moas, but, unfortunately, the best
of it is not always accessible, being contained in the
"New Zealand Journal of Science" and the "Transactions
of the New Zealand Institute." The volume of
"Transactions" for 1893, being vol. xxvi., contains a
very full list of articles relating to the Moas, compiled
by Mr. A. Hamilton; it will be found to commence on
page 229. There is a good article on Moa in Newton's
"Dictionary of Birds," a book that should be in every
library.</i></p>
<div class="figcenter"> <ANTIMG src="images/i_209.jpg" width-obs="400" height-obs="304" alt="" /> Fig. 32.—The Three Giants, Phororhacos, Moa, Ostrich.</div>
<hr class="chapter" />
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_159">[159]</SPAN></span></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />