NATURE 



i:s1 



THURSDAY, AUGUST ii, 1898. 



^ THE PAL^IONTOLOGY OF VERTEBRATES. 



) Outlines of Vertebrate Paleontology. By A. Smith 

 Woodward. (Cambridge Natural Science Manuals.) 

 Pp. xvi + 470 ; illustrated. (Cambridge : University 

 Press, 1898.) 



IT is now thirty-eight years since the appearance of 

 the first edition of Owen's " Palaeontology," which 

 may be regarded as the first systematic treatise on that 

 subject issued in this country. And if the section of 

 that work devoted to the vertebrates be contrasted with 

 the volume now before us, some idea of the enormous 

 strides made in this branch of biological science during 

 the period will be self-apparent. At the time that Owen 

 wrote, our knowledge of fossil fishes remained much in 

 the state it was left by the labours of Georges Cuvier 

 and Hugh Miller ; the restoration of the armour-plated 

 fish-like types appearing as more or less grotesque 

 caricatures of what we now know to be their true form ; 

 while the classification was as crude as it was un- 

 philosophical. 



The group now termed the Stegosauria was at that 

 time placed among the Reptilia, and was represented 

 chiefly by the true Labyrinthodonts and the Archego- 

 sauriis ; the latter of which still figured as the repre- 

 sentative of the so-called "archetype." Although among 

 the true reptiles the Ichthyosaurs, Plesiosaurs, and 

 Pterodactyles were already fairly well known, the 

 .Anomodonts were in evidence mainly by a few skulls, 

 and their apparent relationship to mammals was un- 

 dreamt of. North America and Belgium had not yet 

 opened to our view the marvellous array of Dinosaurs ; 

 while among birds Archceopteryx was still an unknown 

 quantity. To attempt to point out the deficiencies which 

 then prevailed in our knowledge of the Mammalia 

 would far exceed our space, but it may be mentioned 

 that the Creodont Carnivora, and the Amblypod Ungu- 

 lates, together with several other American groups of 

 the latter order, had not yet been recognised. And 

 whole mammalian faunas, such as those of Quercy, Samos, 

 Maragha, the " Bad Lands " of North America, and 

 Patagonia, were quite unheaird of. 



The advance during this period of considerably less 

 than half a century, both in the amount of material avail- 

 able for work and in the work actually accomplished, has, 

 indeed, been so vast that the vertebrate palaeontology of 

 i860 is scarcely comparable with that of 1898. The one 

 hardly merited the name of a science at all, while the 

 other is entitled to rank with modern vertebrate zoology, 

 of which, indeed, it is but the complement and keystone. 

 As we have probably already explored most of the bone- 

 beds of the world the science is unlikely to advance 

 during the next forty years by the leaps and bounds which 

 have marked its progress in the past, but even at a much 

 lower rate of speed our successors at the end of that 

 period will probably be surprised at the imperfection of 

 our own knowledge. 



With the advantage of all the labours— and failures — 

 of his predecessors in this field at his disposal, it is not to 

 be wondered at that Mr. Woodward has succeeded in 

 NO. 1502, VOL. 58] 



producing a volume that will eclipse or throw into the 

 shade all previous works on the subject. In bringing the 

 classification of fossil fishes up to its present state of 

 comparative perfection the author himself occupies the 

 foremost place among palaeontologists ; and in regard to 

 this portion of the subject criticism would be almost an 

 impertinence. He has also contributed important original 

 information with regard to the structure and affinities of 

 the extinct crocodiles and certain other groups of reptiles. 

 With regard to the remaining groups of vertebrates, the 

 author's position in the British Museum afifords him ex- 

 ceptional opportunities of not only keeping abreast with 

 modern discovery, but also of verifying and criticising 

 the work of his fellow labourers by an examination of 

 many of the actual specimens on which such work is 

 "based. And when he has seen reason so to do, he has 

 not hesitated to propose new interpretations. 



In his preface Mr. Woodward states that the main 

 object of his work has been to produce a volume suitable 

 to the requirements of " students of vertebrate morphology 

 and zoology who are desirous of examining in detail the 

 palaeontological aspect of their subject." And how im- 

 portant it is to bring the workers in the zoology of the 

 present time into closer touch with those who devote 

 themselves to the same study in the past, needs no urging 

 on our part. While, therefore, the work is not to be 

 regarded as one that will satisfy all the needs of the 

 advanced student of vertebrate palaeontology, it will be 

 invaluable even to him ; and for those for whom it is 

 specially designed it appears, in the main, to be all that 

 can be desired. 



One highly important feature in the trealise is the selec- 

 tion of a few of the better-known types of each group 

 to indicate the leading structural peculiarities thereof ; 

 and the reader is accordingly spared all mention of the 

 imperfect and unsatisfactory specimens which too fre- 

 quently render palaeontology so unattractive to workers 

 in recent zoology. So far as we are capable of judging, 

 Mr. Woodward appears to have attained remarkable 

 accuracy in regard to the facts connected with the 

 animals he describes. And what makes his descriptions 

 particularly valuable is that the details of structure are 

 arranged in each instance, so far as practicable, in the 

 same order ; thus rendering the comparison of one major 

 or minor group with another of the same rank as easy as 

 possible. The admirable illustrations, many of which 

 are original, while others are borrowed from the writings 

 of well-known specialists, serve to explain and accentuate 

 the descriptions ; and if the careful reader fails to grasp 

 the leading morphological traits of the groups and 

 genera described, it will certainly not be the fault of the 

 author. 



One point that strikes the critic is that the author 

 is somewhat too apt to describe groups or genera with 

 a somewhat over-degree of confidence as to their affin- 

 ities, and in regard to the remains which have been 

 referred to them. 



Take, for example, the genus Hotnalodontotherium^ 

 originally described by Sir W. H. Flower, on the evidence 

 of an imperfect skull from the Tertiaries of Patagonia, 

 now in the British Museum. No one reading the descrip- 

 tion would imagine that there are paljeontologists who 

 believe that the reference of this genus to the " Ancylo- 



Q 



