[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dinosaurs: The Encyclopedia
> Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 15:34:04 -0800 (PST)
> From: Waylon Rowley <email@example.com>
> I think it's time that I get a copy of this book or
> one of its supplements. However, I don't know what is
> covered in the supplements or the original book for
> that matter. If the book is composed of familiar taxa
> I might as well get a supplement that has fresh info
> in it. If anyone out there wants to get rid of a copy
> or tell me what to expect if I buy any of these
> titles, the assistance would be very helpful. Thanks
> in advance!
If it helps you, I can tell you that I started with Supplement #1,
which does more or less stand alone. I found it fascinating enough
that I ordered that main volume and supplement #2 for Christmas, and
as I speak they are tantalisingly within my house, but inaccessible
inside wrappings! Arrrgh ... So yes, I'd say that starting with a
supplement is a perfectly sensible way to go.
For what it's worth, the more recent supplement (#2) is substantially
bigger than #1 -- 686 pages as against 442 -- so it's well worth
the extra $15. If I were you, that's where I'd start if I didn't feel
up to splashing the whole $280 in one go (that's $145 for the main
volume, $60 and $75 for the 1st and 2nd supplements.)
If you need any more persuading, here's what Matt Wedel says --
[...] perhaps the most useful book on dinosaurs ever
published. Lavishly illustrated, fully referenced (THE go-to
book for obscure references), and at $145.00 US, definitely a
steal. I push this book on everyone I correspond with. I
honestly use it more than all the other books and journals in
my library combined. None of the other dinosaur dictionaries
or encyclopedias, whatever their provenance, even come close
to this massive tome in terms of sheer volume of information,
or good, scientific illustrations, or references, or anything.
I'm telling you, this is the book.
Allow me to heap some more glowing praise on Glut's book.
Hard to describe. Much more accessible than The Dinosauria in
terms of writing, but it still has the technical stuff for
those who want or need it. The illustrations are all either
high-quality drawings reproduced from the original journal
articles, photographs of the actual material, or skeletal
reconstructions or full restorations of the most completely
Here's a list of the features that I use the book for: Name,
type species, etymology, discoverer, year, geographical
location, stratigraphic interval, geologic time frame,
phylogenetic affinities, *holotype specimen number and
elements included in the holotype* (exTREMEly helpful),
referred elements, *diagnosis of the genus and type species
and any revised diagnoses* (this is nuttin' but jargon),
discussion in ordinary English, including taxonomic history,
features of special interest, synonymies (if any), and
finally, bless Don Glut's soul, key references that include
the original description and all significant work to date.
And keep in mind, this is not for some dinosaurs, or the best
known, this is for (read aloud in low, booming voice) EVERY
DINOSAUR EVER DESCRIBED. Plus at least one illo per taxon,
even if all he can show is the busted-up toe bone that make up
the holotype and only specimen. Plus a glossary and index.
Plus a list of taxa that have been referred to the Dinosauria
at one time or another but turned out not to be dinosaurs.
Plus a list of museums and collections worldwide *and their
If I had the choice between losing all of the rest of my books
or losing that book, I'd stick with D:TE.
... in other words, he likes it :-)
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "We are no longer the knights who say 'Nic' ... We are now
the knights who say 'Ecky Ecky Ecky ph'tang d'zuptoing phlu
...'" -- Monty Python.