The Chain of Life in Geological Time: A Sketch of the Origin and Succession of Animals and PlantsDawson, John William, Sir
Science
The Chain of Life in Geological Time: A Sketch of the Origin and Succession of Animals and Plants
Dawson, John William, Sir
Paleobotany; Paleontology
If we inquire as to the first connection above stated, we may define it
briefly in the words of Prof. Phillips, with reference to
_Megalosaurus_, which “was not a ground-crawler, like the alligator, but
moving with free steps, chiefly, if not solely, on the hind limbs, and
claiming a curious analogy, if not some degree of affinity, with the
ostrich.”[70] But the question arises, Was this resemblance merely that
of two oviparous bipeds, or anything more? and when we set off, against
the resemblance in haunch bones and hind limbs, the entire dissimilarity
in head, in fore limbs, in vertebræ, in tail, and probably in external
covering, we are disposed to agree with Huxley in his statement, with
respect to the Struthious birds, that their “total amount of
approximation to the reptilian type is but small; and the gap between
reptiles and birds is but very slightly narrowed by their existence.”
There is therefore here a great gap, even in the linking together of the
types, independently of any question of derivation.
The second line of connection appears at first sight more promising.
_Archæopteryx_ has a reptilian tail, and claws on the wing; and, as it had
toothed jaws, like some of the birds in the Cretaceous, must have
altogether made a much nearer approach to a reptile than any modern bird
does. The remarkable “fish-bird” (_Ichthyornis_) of Marsh is also very
reptilian in some of its characters. But when we compare these reptilian
birds with the Pterodactyls and their allies, a vast gap at once becomes
apparent. Disregarding the external clothing, we find the wing in the
two groups entirely dissimilar in details of construction, and this
dissimilarity extends to the hind limbs as well, so that the
Pterodactyls resemble bats rather than birds.
Without committing ourselves to any doctrine of development, we might
have rejoiced if our geological discoveries had established a continuous
chain, or two continuous chains, of being between the reptiles and the
birds; but this end is evidently still far from being attained, though
some approximation has undoubtedly been made. To quote again the
admission of Huxley: “Birds are no more modified reptiles than reptiles
are modified birds, the reptilian and ornithic types being both in
reality somewhat different superstructures, raised upon one and the same
ground-plan”—that ground-plan being the idea of the air-breathing
oviparous vertebrate, and the reptile representing the less specialized
and less ornate building. As yet the origin of that idea, and the mode
of carrying it out to completion, remain unknown, except to the
Architect and Builder, who may reveal them to earnest seekers for truth
in His own good time.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account