1893. THE RESTORATION OF EXTINCT ANIMALS. 139 
While on the subject of Dinosaurs, we must take exception to 
the author’s throwing any doubt (page 62) on the relationship exis- 
ting between these reptiles and birds, which we venture to consider 
one of the best established zoological facts. Few, however, at the 
present day, would be disposed to assert that the Ratite birds (p. 63) 
—gqua Ratites—are the direct descendants of Dinosaurs. The author 
is still more ‘‘flabby”’ with regard to the relationship between 
Dinosaurs and Crocodiles (p. 63), which is likewise a well-established 
fact; and if his own want of anatomical knowledge did not permit 
his perceiving their connection, he might at least have followed those 
who are entitled to speak with some authority on the subject. 
Instead of this, he goes out of his way to say that, while such con- 
nection may be ‘quite possible, and even probable,” it cannot be 
considered certain. 
To resume our survey of the plates, the restorations of the 
Brontosaur and Megalosaur (pls. iv., vi.) appear to us decidedly 
more successful than that of the Horned Dinosaur ; although in the 
Megalosaur the fore-limbs are not quite satisfactory. In both these 
figures the objectionably prominent heel given to the Horned 
Dinosaur is wanting. As regards the Iguanodon (pl. vil.), it appears 
to us unnatural that, while the elbow-joint is represented as com- 
pletely free from and below the body, the thigh is almost entirely 
enclosed in the integument; and we have also doubts whether the 
creature was really so short-legged as it is represented. When we 
contrast with it the figure of the Scelidosaur (pl. viil.), we are, 
indeed, surprised to find such a marked difference made between the 
two animals in these respects, and we are certainly not prepared to 
admit that, while the one was digitigrade, the other was plantigrade. 
Anyway, the different position of the elbow-joint in the two forms 
clearly shows that at least one of the restorations must be incorrect 
in this particular. With regard to the restoration of the armour in 
the Scelidosaur, we are aware that the artist has followed an 
attempted reconstruction of the skeleton, but, nevertheless, the huge 
spines on the shoulder-blades do not appear altogether natural. 
In putting the creature in an upright posture, we have, however, 
every reason to believe that the artist, in spite of certain criticism to 
the contrary, is fully justified. Judging from the skeleton of the so- 
called Stegosaur, we are inclined to think that in the restoration (pl. 
ix.) the hind-quarters and limbs do not give any adequate idea of 
their immense height and power as compared with the fore-parts. 
Of the other Secondary reptiles, such as the Pterodactyles, 
Plesiosaurs, Ichthyosaurs, and Mosasaurs, the restorations appear, on 
the whole, as satisfactory as the materials on which they are based 
will admit. It was, however, unfortunate that the specimen of an 
Ichthyosaur referred to in an appendix was not described in time to 
admit of its forming the basis for the plate of that group. In treating 
of the Plesiosaur on page 50, we think it might have been well to 
