[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
On Sun, 7 Jan 1996 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:
> The earliest tyrannosaurians also have no lacrimal horns, which
> is the character state right up through tribe Tarbosaurini. The
> lacrimal horns appear only in tribe Albertosaurini, the genera
> _Albertosaurus_, _Gorgosaurus_, _Daspletosaurus_, and the unnamed
> genus for FMNH PR308. Then they were secondarily subdued in tribe
Which brings up a question I've been meaning to ask for a while(although
I realize this is drifting into a semi-hated thread, I promise not to
stay too long). I've noticed in various representations of tyrannosaurids
a disparity in the length or overall size of these lacrimal horns.
Just how large were these and how much are they overrrepresented in
current illos and models?
The Dinosauria skulls in the carnosaur section(pg. 170, fig H) and The
Ultimate Dinosaur Book(pg. 54 ) show them as noticeable, but nothing like
the near horns they are shown to be in such works as JP and The James
Gurney books. I have always assumed that these were grossly exaggerated
in JP for that "evil tyrannosaur" look, but then that look started
showing up in "The Ultimate Dinosaur" and "Dinotopia", which, while still
popular works, I had thought to be grounded in a bit more paleo-reality
that the Hollywood-generated stuff.
Also, what exactly is being exaggerated here? Is it the lacrimals or the
superorbitals or both?