TBANS ACTIONS OF SECTION C, 687 



Scelidosawus. 



The second of these restorations is that of Scelidosaurus Ilarrisonii, of Owen, 

 shown natural .size in the diagram. This reptile was an herbivorous Dinosaur of 

 moderate size, related to Stegosaurus, and was its predecessor from a lower geologi- 

 cal horizon in England. This restoration is essentially based upon the orio-inal 

 description and figures of Owen (Palteontographical Society, 1861). These have 

 been supplemented by mj' own notes and sketches, made during examinations of 

 the type specimen, now in the British Museum. 



Scelidosaurus is a near relative, as it were, of one of our American forms, 

 Stegosnurus, now represented by so many specimens that we know the skull, 

 skeleton, and dermal armour, with much certaintj'. Tlie English form known as 

 Omosawus is still more nearly allied to Stegosaurus, perhaps identical. 



A restoration of the skeleton of Scelidosaurus, by Dr. Henry 'vVoodward, will 

 be found in the British Museum Guide to Geology and Palaeontology, 1890, p. 19. 

 The missing parts are restored from Iguanodon, and the animal is represented as 

 bipedal, as in that genus. 



In the present outline restoration of Scelidosaurus, I have endeavoured merely 

 to place on record my idea of the form and position of the skeleton, when the 

 animal was alive, based on tlie remains I have myself examined. In case of doubt, 

 as, for example, in regard to the front of the skull, which is wanting in the type 

 specimen, I have used a dotted outline, based on the nearest allied form. Of the 

 dermal armour, only the row of plates best known is indicated. The position chosen 

 in this figure is one that would be assumed by the animal in walking on all four 

 feet, and this I believe to have been its natural mode of progression. 



Hypsilopliodon. 



The third of these restorations, that of Hypsilophodon Fo.vii. Huxlev, 1870 

 given in outline, natural size, in the diagram, has been made with much care 

 partly from the type specimen, and in part from other material mostly now in the 

 British Museum. The figures and description by the late Mr. flulke ' were of 

 special value, although my own conclusions as to the natural position of the animal 

 when alive do not coincide with those of my honoured friend, who did so much to 

 make tliis genus of Dinosaurs, and others, known to science. The restoration by 

 Mr. Ilulke is shown in another diagram. 



In the case of I£gpsilopkodo>i, a number of specimens are available instead of 

 only one. This makes the problem of restoration in itself a simpler matter than in 

 Scelidosaurus. Moreover, we have in America a closely allied form, Laosaurus, of 

 which several species are known. A study of the genus Laosaurus, and the 

 restoration of one species given on the diagram exhibited will clear up several points 

 long in doubt. 



Huxley and Hulke both .shed much light on this interesting genus, Hi/psilo- 

 jyhodon, indeed, on many of the Dinosauria. The mystery of the Dinosaurian 

 pelvis, which bafiled Cuvier, Mautell, and Owen, was mainly solved by them, the 

 ilium and ischium by Pluxley, and the pubis by Hulke. The more perfect 

 American specimens have demonstrated the correctness of nearly all their ccn- 

 clusions. 



Iffuanodon. 



The fourth restoration exhibited, that of Iguanodon Bernissartensis, Boulen^er, 

 1881, one-fifth natural size, has been made in outline for comparison with American 

 forms. It is based mainly on photographs of the well-known Belgian specimens 

 the originals of which I have studied with con.siderable care during several visits 

 to Brussels. The descriptions and figures of Dollo - have also been used in the 

 preparation of this restoration. A few changes only have been introduced, based 

 mainly upon a study of the original specimens. 



' PJiilosojMcal Transact! 071 s, 1882. 



- Bnllciin Boijal Museum of Belgium, 1882-88. 



