THE APPENDICULAR SKELETON.[213]—It is probable that the skeleton of the paired fins and the pectoral and pelvic girdles have been formed from the supporting radialia of the isolated and enlarged anterior and posterior portions of primitively continuous lateral {238}fins, by a sequence of structural modifications in the same direction as in the median fins. The initial stage was probably marked by the fusion of the proximal portions of the radialia to form a basal support or basipterygium for the free distal portions. Subsequently, it may be, a rudiment of the future limb-girdle became segmented off from the inner extremity of the basipterygium, and by its dorsal and ventral growth in the body-wall the lateral half of a girdle was developed. The subsequent union of the two halves across the mid-ventral line resulted in the evolution of the dorsally incomplete hoop of cartilage which is the primary form of the complete limb-girdle in Craniates. The primitive fin skeleton or "archipterygium" was formed from the residue of the basipterygium in conjunction with the free distal radialia which it carried. The precise structure of the archipterygium is purely hypothetical. Possibly it was a biserial fin of the _Pleuracanthus_ or _Neoceratodus_ type, consisting of a cartilaginous segmented axis, fringed along its anterior and posterior, or pre-axial and post-axial margins, by a series of slender, simple, or jointed radialia (Fig. 147); or it may have been a uniserial structure, somewhat resembling the pelvic fin of _Pleuracanthus_, or the pectoral and pelvic fins of existing Elasmobranchs (Figs. 250, 141), in which an axis formed by the residue of the basipterygium or metapterygium had a fringe of radialia on its anterior or preaxial side only. If the archipterygium was biserial then the uniserial fin was probably derived from it by the subsequent suppression of all the post-axial radialia; or, if uniserial, the biserial fin was evolved by a later extension of radialia on to the post-axial margin. The evidence of comparative anatomy is not conclusive as to the nature of the archipterygium, and palaeontology seems to support either view with puzzling impartiality.[214] It may be admitted that the lateral fin theory offers the best solution of the problem of the origin of the paired fins, but it must be borne in mind that no Fish, living or fossil, is known to possess fins of this nature, unless the singular lateral lobes of some Ostracodermi (_e.g._ the Coelolepidae) are kindred organs[215]; neither do continuous lateral fins ever exist as vestiges, unless, indeed, the bilateral series of spines, which extend between the pectoral and pelvic {239}fins, in some of the Lower Devonian Acanthodei (e.g. _Climatius_), may be regarded in that light.