Editing Dodo (section)

=== Contemporary depictions ===
[[File:Dodo (VOC Gelderland, 1602).jpg|thumb|upright=1.3|alt=Several pages of a journal containing sketches of live and dead dodos|left|Compilation of the ''Gelderland'' ship's journal sketches from 1601 of live and recently killed dodos, attributed to Joris Laerle]]

The travel journal of the Dutch ship ''Gelderland'' (1601–1603), rediscovered in the 1860s, contains the only known sketches of living or recently killed specimens drawn on Mauritius. They have been attributed to the professional artist Joris Joostensz Laerle, who also drew other now-extinct Mauritian birds, and to a second, less refined artist.<ref name=Hume2003>{{cite journal| doi = 10.3366/anh.2003.30.1.13| last = Hume | first = J. P.| author-link = Julian Pender Hume| year = 2003| title = The journal of the flagship ''Gelderland''&nbsp;– dodo and other birds on Mauritius 1601| journal = Archives of Natural History| volume = 30| issue = 1| pages = 13–27}}</ref> Apart from these sketches, it is unknown how many of the twenty or so 17th-century illustrations of the dodos were drawn from life or from stuffed specimens, which affects their reliability.<ref name=Hume2006/> Since dodos are otherwise only known from limited physical remains and descriptions, contemporary artworks are important to reconstruct their appearance in life. While there has been an effort since the mid-19th century to list all historical illustrations of dodos, previously unknown depictions continue to be discovered occasionally.<ref name="GermanPaintings">{{cite journal |last1=Teixeira |first1=D. M. |title=The German painter Carl Borromäus Andreas Ruthart (ca. 1630–1703) and some still unregistered images of the extinct dodo, ''Raphus cucullatus'' (Linnaeus, 1758) (Aves, Columbiformes) |journal=Arquivos de Zoologia |date=2019 |volume=50 |issue=4 |pages=191–200 |issn=2176-7793 |url=https://www.revistas.usp.br/azmz/article/view/159603 |access-date=25 July 2022 |archive-date=25 July 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220725221046/https://www.revistas.usp.br/azmz/article/view/159603 |url-status=live }}</ref>

The traditional image of the dodo is of a very fat and clumsy bird, but this view may be exaggerated. The general opinion of scientists today is that many old European depictions were based on overfed captive birds or crudely stuffed specimens.<ref>{{cite journal| doi = 10.3366/anh.1993.20.2.279| last = Kitchener | first = A. C.| date=June 1993 | title = On the external appearance of the dodo, ''Raphus cucullatus'' (L, 1758)| journal = Archives of Natural History| volume = 20| issue = 2| pages = 279–301| ref = {{sfnRef|Kitchener June 1993}} }}</ref> It has also been suggested that the images might show dodos with puffed feathers, as part of display behaviour.<ref name=Angst2011/> The Dutch painter [[Roelant Savery]] was the most prolific and influential illustrator of the dodo, having made at least twelve depictions, often showing it in the lower corners. A famous painting of his from 1626, now called ''Edwards's Dodo'' as it was once owned by the ornithologist [[George Edwards (naturalist)|George Edwards]], has since become the standard image of a dodo. It is housed in the [[Natural History Museum, London|Natural History Museum]], London. The image shows a particularly fat bird and is the source for many other dodo illustrations.<ref>{{cite book | last = Mason | first = A. S. | year = 1992 | title = George Edwards: The Bedell and His Birds | publisher = Royal College of Physicians of London | location = London | isbn = 978-1-873240-48-9 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=UjQYrxdHFp0C&q=George+Edwards+savery+dodo&pg=PA47 | access-date = 12 May 2012 | archive-date = 15 March 2023 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20230315014512/https://books.google.com/books?id=UjQYrxdHFp0C&q=George+Edwards+savery+dodo&pg=PA47 | url-status = live }} pp.&nbsp;46{{ndash}}49.</ref><ref name="early depiction">{{cite journal |last1=Parish |first1=J. C. |last2=Cheke |first2=A. S. |title=A newly-discovered early depiction of the Dodo (Aves: Columbidae: ''Raphus cucullatus'') by Roelandt Savery, with a note on another previously unnoticed Savery Dodo |journal=Historical Biology |date=2018 |pages=1–10 |doi=10.1080/08912963.2018.1457658|s2cid=89661119 }}</ref>

[[File:Edwards' Dodo.jpg|thumb|alt=Painting of a dodo, with a red parrot on its left side, and a blue one at its right|The famous ''[[George Edwards (naturalist)|Edwards]]'s Dodo'', painted by [[Roelant Savery]] in 1626]]
An Indian [[Mughal painting]] rediscovered in the [[Hermitage Museum]], [[St. Petersburg]], in 1955 shows a dodo along with native Indian birds.<ref>{{cite journal| doi=10.1007/BF01671614| last=Iwanow| first=A.| date=October 1958 | title=An Indian picture of the Dodo| journal=Journal of Ornithology| volume=99| issue=4| pages=438–440| bibcode= 1958JOrn...99..438I| s2cid=23510175}}</ref> It depicts a slimmer, brownish bird, and its discoverer Aleksander Iwanow and British palaeontologist [[Julian Hume]] regarded it as one of the most accurate depictions of the living dodo; the surrounding birds are clearly identifiable and depicted with appropriate colouring.<ref>{{cite journal |last= Dissanayake |first= R. |year= 2004 |title        = What did the dodo look like? |journal= The Biologist |volume= 51 |issue= 3 |pages= 165–168 |url= http://web.mac.com/rajith/rajith/About_Me_files/What%20did%20the%20dodo%20look%20like%3F.PDF |access-date  = 14 September 2011 |url-status = dead |archive-url  = https://web.archive.org/web/20110917160155/http://web.mac.com/rajith/rajith/About_Me_files/What%20did%20the%20dodo%20look%20like%3F.PDF |archive-date = 17 September 2011}}</ref> It is believed to be from the 17th century and has been attributed to the [[Mughal painter]] [[Ustad Mansur]]. The bird depicted probably lived in the [[menagerie]] of the [[Mughal Emperor]] [[Jahangir]], located in [[Surat]], where the English traveller [[Peter Mundy]] also claimed to have seen two dodos sometime between 1628 and 1633.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.1007/BF01671615|title=Wie hat die Dronte (''Raphus cucullatus'' L.) ausgesehen?|journal=Journal of Ornithology|volume=99|issue=4|pages=441–459|year=1958|last1=Stresemann|first1=Erwin|bibcode= 1958JOrn...99..441S|s2cid=28617863|language=de}}</ref><ref name=Hume2006/> In 2014, another Indian illustration of a dodo was reported, but it was found to be derivative of an 1836 German illustration.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Richon|first1=E. |last2=Winters|first2=R. |title=The intercultural dodo: a drawing from the School of Bundi, Rājasthān |journal=Historical Biology |volume=28 |issue=3 |year=2014 |pages=1–8 |doi= 10.1080/08912963.2014.961450|s2cid=85387209 }}</ref>

All post-1638 depictions appear to be based on earlier images, around the time reports mentioning dodos became rarer. Differences in the depictions led ornithologists such as [[Anthonie Cornelis Oudemans]] and [[Masauji Hachisuka]] to speculate about sexual dimorphism, [[ontogenic]] traits, seasonal variation, and even the existence of different species, but these theories are not accepted today. Because details such as markings of the beak, the form of the tail feathers, and colouration vary from account to account, it is impossible to determine the exact morphology of these features, whether they signal age or sex, or if they even reflect reality.{{sfn|Fuller|2002|pp=76–77}} Hume argued that the nostrils of the living dodo would have been slits, as seen in the ''Gelderland'', [[Cornelis Saftleven]], Savery's [[Crocker Art Gallery]], and Mansur images. According to this claim, the gaping nostrils often seen in paintings indicate that [[taxidermy]] specimens were used as models.<ref name=Hume2006/> Most depictions show that the wings were held in an extended position, unlike flighted pigeons, but similar to [[ratites]] such as the ostrich and [[Kiwi (bird)|kiwi]].<ref name=ClaessensMeijer2016/>