<h2><SPAN name="CHAPTER_VIII" id="CHAPTER_VIII"></SPAN><small>CHAPTER VIII</small><br/><br/> THE PLAN OF THE SKELETON</h2>
<p>While these animals are incontestably nearer
to birds than to any other animals in their
plan of organisation, thus far no proof has been
found that they are birds, or can be included in
the same division of vertebrate life with feathered
animals. It is one of the oldest and soundest teachings
of Linnæus that a bird is known by its feathers;
and the record is a blank as to any covering to the
skin in Pterodactyles. There is the strongest probability
against feathers having existed such as are
known in the Archæopteryx, because every Solenhofen
Ornithosaur appears to have the body devoid
of visible or preservable covering, while the two birds
known from the Solenhofen Slate deposit are well
clothed with feathers in perfect preservation. We
turn from the skin to the skeleton.</p>
<p>The plan on which the skeleton is constructed
remains as evidence of the animal's place in nature,
which is capable of affording demonstration on which
absolute reliance would have been placed, if the brain
and pneumatic foramina had remained undiscovered.
With the entire skeleton before us, it is inconceivable
that anatomical science should fail to discover the<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[Pg 59]</SPAN></span>
true nature of the animal to which it belonged, by
the method of comparing one animal with another.
There is no lack of this kind of evidence of Pterodactyles
in the three or four scores of skeletons, and
thousands of isolated or associated bones, preserved
in the public museums of Europe and America.</p>
<p>I may recall the circumstance that the discovery of
skeletons of fossil animals has occasionally followed
upon the interpretation of a single fragment, from
which the animal has been well defined, and sometimes
accurately drawn, before it was ever seen. So
I propose, before drawing any conclusions from the
skeletons in the entirety of their construction, to
examine them bone by bone, and region by region,
for evidence that will manifest the nature of this
brood of Dragons. Their living kindred, and perhaps
their extinct allies, assembled as a jury, may be able
to determine whether resemblances exist between
them, and whether such similarity between the bones
as exists is a common inheritance, or is a common
acquisition due to similar ways of life, and no evidence
of the grade of the organism among vertebrate
animals.</p>
<p>The bones of these Ornithosaurs, when found
isolated, first have to be separated from the organisms
with which they are associated and mixed in the
geological strata. This discrimination is accomplished
in the first instance by means of the texture of the
surface. The density and polish of the bones is
even more marked than in the bones of birds, and is
usually associated with a peculiar thinness of substance
of the bone, which is comparable to the condition
in a bird, though usually a little stouter, so
that the bones resist crushing better. Pterodactyle<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[Pg 60]</SPAN></span>
bones in many instances are recognised by their
straightness and comparatively uniform dimensions,
due to the exceptional number of long bones which
enter into the structure of the wing as compared
with birds. When the bones are unerringly determined
as Ornithosaurian, they are placed side by
side with all the bones which are most like them, till,
judged by the standard of the structures of living
animals, the fossil is found to show a composite construction
as though it were not one animal but many,
while its individual bones often show equally composite
characters, as though parts of the corresponding
bone in several animals had been cunningly fitted
together and moulded into shape.</p>
<h4>THE PLAN OF THE HEAD IN ORNITHOSAURS</h4>
<p>The head is always the most instructive part of an
animal. It is less than an inch long in the small
Solenhofen skeleton named <i>Pterodactylus brevirostris</i>,
and is said to be three feet nine inches long in the
toothless Pterodactyle Ornithostoma from the Chalk
of Kansas. Most of these animals have a long,
slender, conical form of head, tapering to the point
like the beak of a Heron, forming a long triangle
when seen from above or from the side. Sometimes
the head is depressed in front, with the beak flattened
or rounded as in a Duck or Goose, and occasionally in
some Wealden and Greensand species the jaws are
truncated in front in a massive snout quite unlike
any bird. The back of the head is sometimes
rounded as among birds, showing a smooth pear-shaped
posterior convexity in the region of the brain.
Sometimes the back of the head is square and vertical
or oblique. Occasionally a great crest of cellular<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[Pg 61]</SPAN></span>
tissue is extended backward from above the brain
case over the spines of the neck bones.</p>
<p>There are always from two to four lateral openings
in the skull. First, the nostril is nearest to the extremity
of the beak. Secondly, the orbits of the
eyes are placed far backward. These two openings
are always present. The nostril may incline upward.
The orbits of the eyes are usually lateral, though
their upper borders sometimes closely approximate,
as in the woodpecker-like types from the Solenhofen
Slate named <i>Pterodactylus Kochi</i>, now separated
as another genus. In most genera there is an opening
in the side of the head, between the eye hole and the
nostril, known as the antorbital vacuity; and another
opening, which is variable in size and known as the
temporal vacuity, is placed behind the eye. The
former is common in the skulls of birds, the latter is
absent from all birds and found in many reptiles.</p>
<p>The palate is usually imperfectly seen, but English
and American specimens have shown that it has
much in common with the palate in birds, though it
varies greatly in form of the bones in representatives
from the Lias, Oolites, and Cretaceous rocks.</p>
<p>From the scientific aspect the relative size of the
head, its form, and the positions and dimensions of
its apertures and processes, are of little importance
in comparison with its plan of construction, as evidenced
by the positions and relations to each other
of the bones of which it is formed. There usually is
some difficulty in stating the limits of the bones of
the skull, because in Pterodactyles, as among birds,
they usually blend together, so that in the adult
animal the sutures between the bones are commonly
obliterated.<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[Pg 62]</SPAN></span></p>
<p>Bones have relations to each other and places in
the head which can only change as the organs with
which they are associated change their positions. No
matter what the position of a nostril may be—at the
extremity of a long snout, as in an ant-eater, or far
back at the top of the head in a porpoise, or at the
side of the head in a bird—it is always bordered by
substantially the same bones, which vary in length
and size with the changing place of the nostril and
the form of the head. Every region of the head is
defined by this method of construction; so that eye
holes and nose holes, brain case and jaw bones,
palate and teeth, beak, and back of the skull are all
instructive to those who seek out the life-history of
these animals. We may briefly examine the head
of an Ornithosaurian.</p>
<h4>BONES ABOUT THE NOSTRIL</h4>
<p>No matter what its form may be, the head of an
Ornithosaur always terminates in front in a single
bone called the intermaxillary. It sends a bar of
bone backward above the visible nostrils, between
them; and a bar on each side forms the margin of
the jaw in which teeth are implanted. The bone
varies in depth, length, sharpness, bluntness, slenderness,
and massiveness. As the bone becomes long
the jaw is compressed from side to side, and the
openings of the nostrils are removed backward to
an increasing distance from the extremity of the
beak.</p>
<p>The outer and hinder border of the nostril is made
by another bone named the maxillary bone, which is
usually much shorter than the premaxillary. It
contains the hindermost teeth, which rarely differ
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[Pg 63]</SPAN></span>
from those in front, except in sometimes being
smaller.</p>
<p>The nasal bones, which always make the upper
and hinder border of the nostrils, meet each other
above them, in the middle line of the beak.</p>
<div class="figcenter"> <SPAN name="Fig_20" id="Fig_20"></SPAN> <span class="caption">FIG. 20</span> <ANTIMG src="images/i_080.jpg" width-obs="594" height-obs="480" alt="FIG. 20" title="FIG. 20" /> <p class="center">Showing that the extremity of the jaws in Rhamphorhynchus was
sheathed in horn as in the giant Kingfisher, since the jaws
similarly gape in front.<br/>
<br/>
The hyoid bones are below the lower jaw in the Pterodactyle.</p>
</div>
<p>The nostrils are unusually large in the Lias genus
named Dimorphodon, and small in species of the
genus Rhamphorhynchus from Solenhofen. Such
differences result from the relative dimensions and
proportions of these three bones which margin the
nasal vacuity, and by varying growth of their front
margins or of their hinder margins govern the form
of the snout.</p>
<p>The jaws are most massive in the genera known from
the Wealden beds to the Chalk. The palatal surface is
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[Pg 64]</SPAN></span>
commonly flat or convex, and often marked by an
elevated median ridge which corresponds to a groove
in the lower jaw, though the median ridge sometimes
divides the palate into two parallel concave channels.
The jaw is margined with teeth which are rarely
fewer than ten or more than twenty on each side.
They are sharp, compressed from side to side, curved
inward, and never have a saw-like edge on the back
and front margins. No teeth occur upon the bones
of the palate.</p>
<p>In most birds there is a large vacuity in the side
of the head between the nostril and the orbit of the
eye, partly separated from it by the bone which
carries the duct for tears named the lachrymal bone.
The same preorbital vacuity is present in all long-tailed
Pterodactyles, though it is either less completely
defined or absent in the group with short
tails. It affords excellent distinctive characters for
defining the genera. In the long-tailed genus
Scaphognathus from Solenhofen this preorbital opening
is much larger than the nostril, while in Dimorphodon
these vacuities are of about equal size.
Rhamphorhynchus is distinguished by the small size
of the antorbital vacuity, which is placed lower than
the nostril on the side of the face. The aperture is
always imperfectly defined in Pterodactylus, and is
a relatively small vacuity compared with the long
nostril. In Ptenodracon the antorbital vacuity
appears to have no existence separate from the nostril
which adjoins the eye hole. And so far as is known at
present there is no lateral opening in advance of the
eye in the skull in any Ornithosaur from Cretaceous
rocks, though the toothless Ornithostoma is the only
genus with the skull complete. When a separate
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[Pg 65]</SPAN></span>
antorbital vacuity exists, it is bordered by the maxillary
bone in front, and by the malar bone behind.
The prefrontal bone is at its upper angle. That bone
is known in a separate state in reptiles and, I think, in
monotreme mammals. Its identity is soon lost in
the mammal, and its function in the skull is different
from the corresponding bone in Pterodactyles.</p>
<h4>BONES ABOUT THE EYES</h4>
<div class="figcenter"> <SPAN name="Fig_21" id="Fig_21"></SPAN> <span class="caption">FIG. 21. UPPER SURFACE OF SKULL OF THE HERON</span> <p class="center">Compared with the same aspect of the skull of Rhamphorhynchus</p> <ANTIMG src="images/i_082.jpg" width-obs="492" height-obs="480" alt="FIG. 21." title="FIG. 21." /></div>
<p>The third opening in the side of the head, counting
from before backward, is the orbit of the eye. In this
vacuity is often seen the sclerotic circle of overlapping
bones formed in the external membrane of the eye,
like those in nocturnal birds and some reptiles. The
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[Pg 66]</SPAN></span>
eye hole varies in form from an inverted pear-shape
to an oblique or transverse oval, or a nearly circular
outline. It is margined by the frontal bone above;
the tear bone or lachrymal, and the malar or cheek
bone in front; while the bones behind appear to be
the quadrato-jugal and post-frontal bones, though the
bones about the eye are somewhat differently arranged
in different genera.</p>
<p>The eyes were frequently, if not always, in contact
with the anterior walls of the brain case, as in many
birds, and are always far back in the side of the head.
In Dimorphodon they are in front of the articulation
of the lower jaw; in Rhamphorhynchus, above that
articulation; while in Ornithostoma they are behind
the articulation for the jaw. This change is governed
by the position of the quadrate bone, which is vertical
in the Lias genus, inclined obliquely forward in the
fossils from the Oolites, and so much inclined in the
Chalk fossil that the small orbit is thrown relatively
further back.</p>
<p>Thus far the chief difference in the Pterodactyle
skull from that of a bird is in the way in which the
malar arch is prolonged backward on each side. It is
a slender bar of bone in birds, without contributing
ascending processes to border vacuities in the side
of the face, while in these fossil animals the lateral
openings are partly separated by the ascending processes
of these bones. This divergence from birds,
in the malar bone entering the orbit of the eye
is approximated to among reptiles and mammals,
though the conditions, and perhaps the presence of a
bone like the post-orbital bone, are paralleled only
among Reptiles. The Pterodactyles differ among
themselves enough for the head to make a near
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[Pg 67]</SPAN></span>
approach to Reptiles in Dimorphodon, and to Birds
in Pterodactylus. In the Ground Hornbill and the
Shoebill the lachrymal bones in front of the orbits
of the eyes grow down to meet the malar bars without
uniting with them. The post-frontal region also
is prolonged downward almost as far as the malar
bar, as though to show that a bird might have its
orbital circle formed in the same way and by the
same bones as in Pterodactylus. Cretaceous Ornithosaurs
sometimes differ from birds apparently in admitting
the quadrato-jugal bone into the orbit. It
then becomes an expanded plate, instead of a slender
bar as in all birds.</p>
<h4>THE TEMPORAL FOSSA</h4>
<p>A fourth vacuity is known as the temporal fossa.
When the skull of such a mammal as a Rabbit, or
Sheep, is seen from above, there is a vacuity behind
the orbits for the eyes, which in life is occupied by
the muscles which work the lower jaw. It is made
by the malar bone extending from the back of the
orbit and the process of bone, called the zygomatic
process, extending forward from the articulation of
the jaw, which arches out to meet the malar bone.</p>
<p>In birds there is no conspicuous temporal fossa,
because the malar bar is a slender rod of bone in a
line with the lower end of the quadrate bone.</p>
<p>Reptile skulls have sometimes one temporal vacuity
on each side, as among tortoises, formed by a single
lateral bar. These vacuities, which correspond to
those of mammals in position, are seen from the top
of the head, as lateral vacuities behind the orbits
of the eyes, and are termed superior temporal vacuities.
In addition to these there is often in other
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[Pg 68]</SPAN></span>
reptiles a lateral opening behind the eye, termed
the inferior temporal vacuity, seen in Crocodiles, in
Hatteria, and in Lizards; and in such skulls there are
two temporal bars seen in side view, distinguished as
superior and inferior. The superior arch always includes
the squamosal bone, which is at the back
of the single bar in mammals. The lower arch
includes the malar bone, which is in front in the single
arch of mammals. The circumstance that both these
arches are connected with the quadrate bone makes
the double temporal arch eminently reptilian.</p>
<p>In Ornithosaurs the lateral temporal vacuity varies
from a typically reptilian condition to one which,
without becoming avian, approaches the bird type. In
skulls from the Lias, Dimorphodon and Campylognathus,
there is a close parallel to the living New
Zealand reptile Hatteria, in the vertical position
of the quadrate bone and in the large size of the
vacuity behind and below the eye, which extends
nearly the height of the skull. In the species of the
genus Pterodactylus, the forward inclination of the
quadrate bone recalls the Curlew, Snipe, and other
birds. The back of the head is rounded, and the
squamosal bone, which appears to enter into the
wall of the brain case as in birds and mammals,
is produced more outward than in birds, but less
than in mammals, so as to contribute a little to
the arch which is in the position of the post-frontal
bone of reptiles. It is triangular, and stretches from
the outer angle of the frontal bone at the back of the
orbit to the squamosal behind, where it also meets
the quadrate bone. Its third lower branch meets the
quadratojugal, which rests upon the front of the quadrate
bone, as in Iguanodon, and is unlike Dimorphodon
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[Pg 69]</SPAN></span>
in its connexions. In that genus the supra-temporal
bone, or post-orbital bone, appears to rest upon the
post-frontal and connect it with the quadrato-jugal.
In Dimorphodon the malar bone is entirely removed
from the quadrate, but in Pterodactylus it meets its
articular end. Between the post-frontal bone above
and the quadrato-jugal bone below is a small lunate
opening, which represents the lateral temporal
vacuity; and so far, this is a reptilian character.
But if the thin post-frontal bone were absorbed,
Pterodactylus would resemble birds. There is no
evidence that the quadrate bone is free in any
Ornithosaurs, as it is in all birds, while in Dimorphodon
it unites by suture with the squamosal bone.
In Ornithostoma the lateral temporal vacuity is little
more than a slit between the quadrate bone below,
the quadrato-jugal in front, and what may be the
post-frontal bone behind (see <SPAN href="#Fig_2">Fig. 2, p. 12</SPAN>).</p>
<h4>BONES ABOUT THE BRAIN</h4>
<p>The bones containing the brain appear to be the
same as form the brain case in birds. The form of
the back of the skull varies in two ways. First it
may be flat above and flat at the back, when the
back of the head appears to be square. This condition
is seen in all the long-tailed genera, such as
Campylognathus from the Lias and Rhamphorhynchus,
and is associated with a high position for the
upper temporal bar. Secondly, the back of the head
may be rounded convexly, both above and behind.
That condition is seen in the short-tailed genera,
such as Pterodactylus. But in the large Cretaceous
types, such as Ornithocheirus and Ornithostoma,
the superior longitudinal ridge which runs back in
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[Pg 70]</SPAN></span>
the middle line of the face becomes elevated and
compressed from side to side at the back of the head
as a narrow deep crest, prolonged backward over the
neck vertebræ for some inches of length. All these
three types are paralleled more or less in birds which
have the back of the head square like the Heron, or
rounded like the Woodpecker; or crested, though the
crest of the Cormorant is not quite identical with
Ornithocheirus, being a distinct bone at the back of
the head in the bird which never blends with the
skull. In so far as the crest is reptilian it suggests
the remarkable crest of the Chameleon. In the
structure of the back of the skull the bones are a
modification of the reptilian type of Hatteria in
the Lias genus Campylognathus, but the reptilian
characters appear to be lost in the less perfectly
preserved skulls of Cretaceous genera.</p>
<p>The palate is well known in the chief groups of
Ornithosaurs, such as Campylognathus, Scaphognathus,
and Cycnorhamphus.</p>
<p>Mr. E. T. Newton, <small>F.R.S.</small>, has shown that in the
English skull from the Lias of Whitby, the forms of
the bones are similar to the palate in birds and unlike
the conditions in reptiles. There is one feature, however,
which may indicate a resemblance to Dicynodon
and other fossil reptiles from South Africa. A
slender bone extends from the base of the brain case,
named the basi-sphenoid bone, outward and forward
to the inner margin of the quadrate bone (<SPAN href="#Fig_22">Fig. 22</SPAN>).
A bone is found thus placed in those South African
Reptiles, which show many resemblances to the Monotreme
and Marsupial Mammals. It is not an ordinary
element of the skeleton and is unknown in living
animals of any kind in that position. It has been
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[Pg 71]</SPAN></span>
thought possible that it may represent one of the
bones which among mammals are diminutive and
are included in the internal ear. The resemblance
may have some interest hereafter, as helping to show
that certain affinities of the Ornithosaurs may lie
outside the groups of existing reptiles. Instead of
being directed transversely outward, as in the palatal
region of <i>Dicynodon lacerticeps</i>, they diverge outward
and forward to the inner border of the articulation
for the lower jaw which is upon the quadrate
bone.</p>
<div class="figcenter"> <SPAN name="Fig_22" id="Fig_22"></SPAN> <span class="caption">FIG. 22</span> <ANTIMG src="images/i_088.jpg" width-obs="635" height-obs="480" alt="FIG. 22" title="FIG. 22" /></div>
<h4>BONES OF THE PALATE</h4>
<p>There is a pair of bones which extend forward
from these inner articular borders of the quadrate
bones, and converge in a long <b>V</b>-shape till they
merge in the hard palate formed by the bones of the
front of the beak, named intermaxillary and maxillary
bones. The limits of the bones of the palate are<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[Pg 72]</SPAN></span>
not distinct, but there can be no doubt that the front
of the <b>V</b> is the bone named vomer, that the palatine
bones are at its sides, and that its hinder parts are
the pterygoid bones as in birds. There is a long,
wide, four-sided, open space in the middle of the
palate, between the vomer and the basi-sphenoid
bone, unlike anything in birds or other animals.</p>
<p>Professor Marsh, in a figure of the palate in the
great skull of the toothless Pterodactyle named Ornithostoma
(Pteranodon), from the Chalk of Kansas,
found a large oval vacuity in this region of the palate.
In that genus the pterygoid bones meet each other
between the quadrate bones as in Dicynodon (<SPAN href="#Fig_73">Fig. 73,
p. 182</SPAN>). Hence the great palatal vacuity here seen in
the Ornithosaur is paralleled by the small vacuity in
the South African reptile, which is sometimes distinct
and sometimes partly separated from the anterior
part of the vacuity which forms the openings of the
nostrils on the palate.</p>
<p>The Solenhofen skulls which give any evidence of
the palate are exposed in side view only, and the
bones, imperfectly seen through the lateral vacuities,
are displaced by crushing. They include long strips
like the vomerine bones in the Lias fossil, and they
diverge in the same way as they extend back to the
quadrate bones. The oblique division into vomer in
front and pterygoid bone behind is shown by Goldfuss
in his original figure of Scaphognathus. Thus
there is some reason for believing that all Ornithosaurs
have the palate formed upon the same general plan,
which is on the whole peculiar to the group, especially
in not having the palatal openings of the nares
divided in the middle line. It would appear probable
that the short-tailed animals have the pterygoid bones<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[Pg 73]</SPAN></span>
meeting in the middle line and triangular; and that
they are slender rods entirely separate from each
other in the long-tailed genera.</p>
<h4>THE TEETH</h4>
<p>The teeth are all of pointed, elongated shape, without
distinction into the kinds seen in most mammals
and named incisors, canines, and grinders. They are
organs for grasping, like the teeth of the fish-eating
Crocodile of India, and are not unlike the simple teeth
of some Porpoises. They are often implanted in
oblique oval sockets with raised borders, usually at
some distance apart from each other, and have the
crown pointed, flattened more on the outer side than
on the inner side, usually directed forward and curved
inward. As in many extinct animals allied to existing
reptiles, the teeth are reproduced by germs, which
originate on the inner side of the root and grow till
they gradually absorb the substance of the old tooth,
forming a new one in its place. Frequently in Solenhofen
genera, like Scaphognathus and Pterodactylus,
the successional tooth is seen in the jaw on the hinder
border of the tooth in use. There is some variation
in the character of bluntness or sharpness of the
crowns in the different genera, and in their size.</p>
<p>The name Dimorphodon, given to the animal from
the Lias of Lyme Regis, expresses the fact that the
teeth are of two kinds. In the front of the jaw three or
four large long teeth are found in the intermaxillary
bone on each side, as in some Plesiosaurs, while the
teeth found further back in the maxillary bone are
smaller, and directed more vertically downward. This
difference is more marked in the lower jaw than in the
upper jaw. In Rhamphorhynchus the teeth are all<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[Pg 74]</SPAN></span>
relatively long and large, and directed obliquely
forward, but absent from the extremities of the beak,
as in the German genus from the Lias named Dorygnathus,
in which the bone of the lower jaw (which
alone is known) terminates in a compressed spear.
In Scaphognathus the teeth are few, more vertical,
and do not extend backward so far as in Rhamphorhynchus,
but are carried forward to the extremity of
the blunt, deep jaw.</p>
<p>In the short-tailed Pterodactyles the teeth are
smaller, shorter, wider at the base of the crown,
closer together, and do not extend so far backward
in the jaw. In Ornithocheirus two teeth always
project forward from the front of the jaw. Ornithostoma
is toothless.</p>
<h4>SUPPOSED HORNY BEAK</h4>
<p>Sometimes a horny covering has been suggested
for the beak, like that seen in birds or turtles, but no
such structure has been preserved, even in the Solenhofen
Slate, in which such a structure would seem as
likely to be preserved as a wing membrane, though
there is one doubtful exception. There are marks of
fine blood vessels on some of the jaws, indicating a
tough covering to the bone. In Rhamphorhynchus
the jaws appear to gape towards their extremities as
though the interspace had originally been occupied
by organic substance like a horny beak.</p>
<h4>LOWER JAW</h4>
<p>The lower jaw varies in relative length with the
vertical or horizontal position of the quadrate bone in
the skull. In Dimorphodon the jaw is as long as the
skull; but in the genera from the Oolitic rocks the<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[Pg 75]</SPAN></span>
mandible is somewhat shorter, and in Ornithostoma
the discrepancy reaches its maximum. The hinder
part of the jaw is never prolonged backward much
beyond the articulation, differing in this respect from
Crocodiles and Plesiosaurs.</p>
<p>The depth of the jaw varies. It is slender in
Pterodactylus, and is probably stronger relatively to
the skull in Scaphognathus than in any other form.
It fits between the teeth and bones of the alveolar
border in the skull, in all the genera. In Dimorphodon
its hinder border is partly covered by the
descending edge of the malar process which these
animals develop in common with some Dinosaurs,
and some Anomodont reptiles, and many of the lower
mammals. In this hinder region the lower jaw is
sometimes perforated, in the same way as in Crocodiles.
That condition is observed in Dimorphodon,
but is not found in Pterodactylus. The lower jaw is
always composite, being formed by several bones, as
among reptiles and birds. The teeth are in the
dentary bone or bones, and these bones are almost
always blended as in most birds and Turtles, and not
separate from each other as among Crocodiles, Lizards,
and Serpents.</p>
<p>An interesting contour for the lower border of the
jaw is seen in Ornithostoma, as made known in
figures of American examples by Professors Marsh
and Williston. It deepens as it extends backwards
for two-thirds its length, stops at an angle, and then
the depth diminishes to the articulation with the
skull. This angle of the lower jaw is a characteristic
feature of the jaws of Mammals. It is seen in the
monotreme Echidna, and is characteristic of some
Theriodont Reptiles from South Africa, which in
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[Pg 76]</SPAN></span>
many ways resemble Mammals. The character is
not seen in the jaws of specimens from the Oolitic
rocks, but is developed in the toothed Ornithocheirus
from the Cambridge Greensand, and is absent from
the jaws of existing reptiles and birds.</p>
<div class="figcenter"> <SPAN name="Fig_23" id="Fig_23"></SPAN> <span class="caption">FIG. 23. COMPARISON OF THE LOWER JAW IN ECHIDNA AND ORNITHOSTOMA</span> <ANTIMG src="images/i_093.jpg" width-obs="640" height-obs="417" alt="FIG. 23." title="FIG. 23." /></div>
<h4>SUMMARY OF CHARACTERS OF THE HEAD</h4>
<p>Taken as a whole, the head differs from other types
of animals in a blending of characters which at the
present day are found among Birds and Reptiles, with
some structures which occur in extinct groups of
animals with similar affinities, and perhaps a slight
indication of features common to the lowest mammals.
It is chiefly upon the head that the diverse views of
earlier writers have been based. Cuvier was impressed
with the reptilian aspect of the teeth; but in
later times discoveries were made of Birds with teeth—Archæopteryx,
Ichthyornis, Hesperornis. The teeth
are quite reptilian, being not unlike miniature teeth
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[Pg 77]</SPAN></span>
of Mosasaurus. If those birds had been found prior
to the discovery of Pterodactyles, the teeth might
have been regarded as a link with the more ancient
birds, rather than a crucial difference between birds
and reptiles.</p>
<p>All the specimens show a lateral temporal hole in
the bones behind the eye, and this is found in no
bird or mammal, and is typical of such reptiles as
Hatteria. The quadrate bone may not be so decisive
as Cuvier thought it to be, for its form is not unlike
the quadrate of a bird, and different, so far as I have
seen, from that of living reptiles. This region of the
head is reptilian, and if it occurred in a bird the character
would be as astonishing as was the discovery of
teeth in extinct birds. These characters of the head
are also found in fossil animals named Dinosaurs, in
association with many resemblances to birds in their
bones.</p>
<p>The palate might conceivably be derived from
that of Hatteria by enlarging the small opening in
the middle line in that reptile till it extended forward
between the vomera; but it is more easily compared
with a bird, which the animal resembles in its beak,
and in the position of the nares. Excepting certain
Lizards, all true existing Reptiles have the nostrils
far forward and bordered by two premaxillary bones
instead of one intermaxillary, as in Birds and Ornithosaurs.
If nothing were known of the animal but
its head bones, it would be placed between Reptiles
and Birds.</p>
<hr style="width: 65%;" />
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[Pg 78]</SPAN></span></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />