SAUROnXlTHES r-J\i 



Groli' SAURUR/E 



SAURORNITHES 



As there is but a single genus, and in all probability but 

 a single species,' in this group, it is useless to attempt any 

 formal definitions of family or other characters. I shall 

 merely give the more important facts in its structure, as I 

 have with the foregoing groups. As to external chtracters, 

 the Archmopteryx has an anisodactyle foot, like that of the 

 Passeres. The feet and the digits of the manus have been 

 stated to have been covered with scales. That scales may have 

 been present, at least on the foot, is very probable, but there 

 is not the faintest evidence of their having been there. Of 

 feathers the remiges and rectrices are plain, while of the 

 general body feathering there is not so much evidence. 

 With the exception of a circle of feathers upon the neck, 

 suggestive of those of the condor, and similar rings of 

 feathers upon the ankle, it is thought by some that the 

 Archceopteryx was naked. Most of the restorations, how- 

 ever, admit a general feathering. The chief criticism to be 

 offered is the extreme perfection of the remains of such 

 feathers as are visible in the slab of stone in which the dead 

 bird was originally imbedded. This being the case, the 

 apparent absence of feathers over the general body surface 

 gains more weight. That they may have been present and 

 of the nature of down feathers is believed by reason of 

 certain faint indications of something to round the contours 

 of the body ; the group of contour feathers upon the leg are 

 plainly visible even in photographs of the Berlin example. 

 This example is much better than the specimen in London, 

 which is the only other skeleton in existence. The rectrices 

 are quite obvious, a pair to each of the separate vertebrse of 

 the tail. There appear to have been not fewer than thirty 



' It has been argued that speoifio and even generic differences exist between 

 the London and Berlin examples. 



