[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: your first paleo book was:



My first one was some unknown no-name book with pretty pictures and sauropods in deep water. I was probably 7, and I wouldn't even recognize that book anymore because I immediately went on to read all other dinosaur books I was able to get.

The one that got me interested in the science was A Field Guide to
Dinosaurs by David Lambert. It's dated by now, but at the time it
really impressed upon me just how many types of (non-avialan) dinosaur
there were, beyond the half-dozen familiar ones that everyone knows.

Yes, that was very impressive! Such a book should exist on everything. :-) I got it for Christmas... probably 1989 (the German translation came out in 1988, unfortunately not in the least updated from the 1983 original). Very, very nice layout by the anonymous Diagram Group.


Wait. 1989? I _was_ 7 years old at that time. So probably 1990 or even 1991.

(among other things, _Troodon_ was given as an ornithopod!)

Yes, and *Dilophosaurus* and *Proceratosaurus*, like just about everything else, were megalosaurids. Three double pages of megalosaurids -- all other families have at most two! And *Avimimus* was mentioned in quite some detail... got me very excited...


(Though not as much as a more popular book I read... probably earlier. It introduced me to *Protoavis* and claimed it was _Early_ Triassic. Knowing that dinosaurs otherwise start in the Late Triassic, I almost invented BCF. Oh man, the emotions.)

And the teratosaurids were in there... I was quite surprised to find no trace of them in the 1993 follow-up (which, incidentally, was translated in the year the original came out, and which I got to read in the school library immediately). It also took me some time to understand that not everyone considered *Ornitholestes* a junior synonym of *Coelurus*. (The 1983 book mentions a lot of junior synonyms that don't occur anywhere else in the book, along with all genera they are now referred to, not just the one the type species is referred to -- the whole book is at the genus level.)

(Incidentally, on a dinosaur trivia note... this was the book in which Lambert inadvertently erected the name _Coloradisaurus_ for the preoccupied prosauropod genus _Coloradia_. Apparently Lambert was aware that Bonaparte had come up with the replacement name _Coloradisaurus_, but he was unaware that Bonaparte had yet to publish the name. Thus the new name _Coloradisaurus_ came to be attributed to Lambert, not Bonaparte. AFAIK, _Coloradisaurus_ is the first and only valid dinosaur name to be coined in a popular dinosaur book.)

Really? Does he make clear enough that it's a replacement name for *Coloradia* Bonaparte? That's not all that easy. -- Unfortunately, I don't have the book with me here in Paris...