Succeeding these, in Carboniferous times, came a host of shark-like

creatures known mainly from their teeth and spines, for their skeletons

were of cartilage, and belonging to types that have mostly perished,

giving place to others better adapted to the changed conditions wrought

by time. Almost the only living relative of these early fishes is a

little shark, known as the Port Jackson Shark, living in Australian

waters. Like the old sharks, this one has a spine in front of his back

fins, and, like them, he fortunately has a mouthful of diversely shaped

teeth; fortunately, because through their aid we are enabled to form

some idea of the manner in which some of the teeth found scattered

through the rocks were arranged. For the teeth were not planted in

sockets, as they are in higher animals, but simply rested on the jaws,

from which they readily became detached when decomposition set in after

death. To complicate matters, the teeth in different parts of the jaws

were often so unlike one another that when found separately they would

hardly be suspected of having belonged to the same animal. Besides teeth

these fishes, for purposes of offence and defence, were usually armed

with spines, sometimes of considerable size and strength, and often

elaborately grooved and sculptured. As the soft parts perished the teeth

and spines were left to be scattered by waves and currents, a tooth

here, another there, and a spine somewhere else; so it has often

happened that, being found separately, two or three quite different

names have been given to one and the same animal. Now and then some

specimen comes to light that escaped the thousand and one accidents to

which such things were exposed, and that not only shows the teeth and

spines but the faint imprint of the body and fins as well. And from such

rare examples we learn just what teeth and spines go with one another,

and sometimes find that one fish has received names enough for an entire

school.

These ancient sharks were not the large and powerful fishes that we have

to-day--these came upon the scene later--but mostly fishes of small

size, and, as indicated by their spines, fitted quite as much for

defence as offence. Their rise was rapid, and in their turn they became

the masters of the world, spreading in great numbers through the waters

that covered the face of the earth; but their supremacy was of short

duration, for they declined in numbers even during the Carboniferous

Period, and later dwindled almost to extinction. And while sharks again

increased, they never reached their former abundance, and the species

that arose were swift, predatory forms, better fitted for the struggle

for existence.

_REFERENCES_

_The early fishes make but little show in a museum, both on account of

their small size and the conditions under which they have been

preserved. The Museum of Comparative Zooelogy has a large collection of

these ancient vertebrates, and there is a considerable number of fine

teeth and spines of Carboniferous sharks in the United States National

Museum._

_Hugh Miller's "The Old Red Sandstone" contains some charming

descriptions of his discoveries of Pterichthys and related forms, and

this book will ever remain a classic._

[Illustration: Fig. 5.--Pterichthys, the Wing Fish.]

III

IMPRESSIONS OF THE PAST

"_The weird palimpsest, old and vast,

Wherein thou hid'st the spectral past._"

The Rev. H. N. Hutchinson commences one of his interesting books with

Emerson's saying, "that Everything in nature is engaged in writing its

own history;" and, as this remark cannot be improved on, it may well

stand at the head of a chapter dealing with the footprints that the

creatures of yore left on the sands of the sea-shore, the mud of a

long-vanished lake bottom, or the shrunken bed of some water-course. Not

only have creatures that walked left a record of their progress, but the

worms that burrowed in the sand, the shell-fish that trailed over the

mud when the tide was low, the stranded crab as he scuttled back to the

sea--each and all left some mark to tell of their former presence. Even

the rain that fell and the very wind that blew sometimes recorded the

direction whence they came, and we may read in the rocks, also, accounts

of freshets sweeping down with turbid waters, and of long periods of

drouth, when the land was parched and lakes and rivers shrank beneath

the burning sun.

All these things have been told and retold; but, as there are many who

have not read Mr. Hutchinson's books and to whom Buckland is quite

unknown, it may be excusable to add something to what has already been

said in the first chapter of these impressions of the past.

The very earliest suggestion we have of the presence of animal life upon

this globe is in the form of certain long dark streaks below the

Cambrian of England, considered to be traces of the burrows of worms

that were filled with fine mud, and while this interpretation may be

wrong there is, on the other hand, no reason why it may not be correct.

Plant and animal life must have had very lowly beginnings, and it is not

at all probable that we shall find any trace of the simple and minute

forms with which they started,[2] though we should not be surprised at

finding hints of the presence of living creatures below the strata in

which their remains are actually known to occur.

[2] _Within the last few years what are believed to be indications of

bacteria have been described from carboniferous rocks. Naturally such

announcements must be accepted with great caution, for while there is no

reason why this may not be true, it is much more probable that definite

evidence of the effects of bacteria on plants should be found than that

these simple, single-celled organisms should themselves have been

detected._

Worm burrows, to be sure, are hardly footprints, but tracks are found in

Cambrian rocks just above the strata in which the supposed burrows

occur, and from that time onward there are tracks a-plenty, for they

have been made, wherever the conditions were favorable, ever since

animals began to walk. All that was needed was a medium in which

impressions could be made and so filled that there was imperfect

adhesion between mould and matrix. Thus we find them formed not only by

the sea-shore, in sands alternately dry and covered, but by the

river-side, in shallow water, or even on land where tracks might be left

in soft or moist earth into which wind-driven dust or sand might lodge,

or sand or mud be swept by the mimic flood caused by a thunder shower.

So there are tracks in strata of every age; at first those of

invertebrates: after the worm burrows the curious complicated trails of

animals believed to be akin to the king crab; broad, ribbed, ribbon-like

paths ascribed to trilobites; then faint scratches of insects, and the

shallow, palmed prints of salamanders, and the occasional slender sprawl

of a lizard; then footprints, big and little, of the horde of Dinosaurs

and, finally, miles above the Cambrian, marks of mammals. Sometimes,

like the tracks of salamanders and reptiles in the carboniferous rocks

of Pennsylvania and Kansas, these are all we have to tell of the

existence of air-breathing animals. Again, as with the iguanodon, the

foot to fit the track may be found in the same layer of rock, but this

is not often the case.

Although footprints in the rocks must often have been seen, they seem to

have attracted little or no notice from scientific men until about 1830

to 1835, when they were almost simultaneously described both in Europe

and America; even then, it was some time before they were generally

conceded to be actually the tracks of animals, but, like worm burrows

and trails, were looked upon as the impressions of sea-weeds.

The now famous tracks in the "brown stone" of the Connecticut Valley

seem to have first been seen by Pliny Moody in 1802, when he ploughed up

a specimen on his farm, showing small imprints, which later on were

popularly called the tracks of Noah's raven. The discovery passed

without remark until in 1835 the footprints came under the observation

of Dr. James Deane, who, in turn, called Professor Hitchcock's attention

to them. The latter at once began a systematic study of these

impressions, publishing his first account in 1836 and continuing his

researches for many years, in the course of which he brought together

the fine collection in Amherst College. At that time Dinosaurs were

practically unknown, and it is not to be wondered at that these

three-toed tracks, great and small, were almost universally believed to

be those of birds. So it is greatly to the credit of Dr. Deane, who also

studied these footprints, that he was led to suspect that they might

have been made by other animals. This suspicion was partly caused by the

occasional association of four and five-toed prints with the three-toed

impressions, and partly by the rare occurrence of imprints showing the

texture of the sole of the foot, which was quite different from that of

any known bird.

[Illustration: Fig. 6.--Where a Dinosaur Sat Down.]

In the light of our present knowledge we are able to read many things in

these tracks that were formerly more or less obscure, and to see in them

a complete verification of Dr. Deane's suspicion that they were not made

by birds. We see clearly that the long tracks called _Anomoepus_,

with their accompanying short fore feet, mark where some Dinosaur

squatted down to rest or progressed slowly on all-fours, as does the

kangaroo when feeding quietly;[3] and we interpret the curious

heart-shaped depression sometimes seen back of the feet, not as the mark

of a stubby tail, but as made by the ends of the slender pubes, bones

that help form the hip-joints. Then, too, the mark of the inner, or

short first, toe, is often very evident, although it was a long time

before the bones of this toe were actually found, and many of the

Dinosaurs now known to have four toes were supposed to have but three.

[3] _It is to be noted that a leaping kangaroo touches the ground

neither with his heel nor his tail, but that between jumps he rests

momentarily on his toes only; hence impressions made by any creature

that jumped like a kangaroo would be very short._

It seems strange, and it is strange, that while so many hundreds of

tracks should have been found in the limited area exposed to view, so

few bones have been found--our knowledge of the veritable animals that

made the tracks being a blank. A few examples have, it is true, been

found, but these are only a tithe of those known to have existed; while

of the great animals that strode along the shore, leaving tracks fifteen

inches long and a yard apart pressed deeply into the hard sand, not a

bone remains. The probability is that the strata containing their bones

lie out to sea, whither their bodies were carried by tides and currents,

and that we may never see more than the few fragments that were

scattered along the seaside.

That part of the Valley of the Connecticut wherein the footprints are

found seems to have been a long, narrow estuary running southward from

Turner's Falls, Mass., where the tracks are most abundant and most

clear. The topography was such that this estuary was subject to sudden

and great fluctuations of the water-level, large tracts of shore being

now left dry to bake in the sun, and again covered by turbid water which

deposited on the bottom a layer of mud. Over and over again this

happened, forming layer upon layer of what is now stone, sometimes the

lapse of time between the deposits being so short that the tracks of

the big Dinosaurs extend through several sheets of stone; while again

there was a period of drouth when the shore became so dry and firm as to

retain but a single shallow impression.

[Illustration: Fig. 7.--Footprints of Dinosaurs on the Brownstone of the

Connecticut Valley. _From a slab in the museum of Amherst College._]

Something of the wealth of animal life that roamed about this estuary

may be gathered from the number of different footprints recorded on the

sands, and these are so many and so varied that Professor Hitchcock in

two extensive reports enumerated over 150 species, representing various

groups of animals. One little point must, however, be borne in mind,

that mere size is no sure indication of differences in dealing with

reptiles, for these long-lived creatures grow almost continuously

throughout life, so that one animal even may have left his footprints

over and over in assorted sizes from one end of the valley to the other.

The slab shown in Fig. 7 is a remarkably fine example of these

Connecticut River footprints; it shows in relief forty-eight tracks of

the animal called Brontozoum sillimanium and six of a lesser species.

It was quarried near Middletown, in 1778, and for sixty years did duty

as a flagstone, fortunately with the face downwards. When taken up for

repairs the tracks were discovered, and later on the slab, which

measures three by five feet, was transferred to the museum of Amherst

College.

There is an interesting parallel between the history of footprints in

England and America, for they were noticed at about the same time, 1830,

in both countries; in each case the tracks were in rocks of Triassic

age, and, in both instances, the animals that made them have never been

found. In England, however, the tracks first found were those ascribed

to tortoises, though a little later Dinosaur footprints were discovered

in the same locality. Oddly enough these numerous tracks all run one

way, from west to east, as if the animals were migrating, or were

pursuing some well-known and customary route to their feeding grounds.

For some reason Triassic rocks are particularly rich in footprints; for

from strata of this same age in the Rhine Valley come those curious

examples so like the mark of a stubby hand that Dr. Kaup christened the

beast supposed to have made them _Cheirotherium_, beast with a hand,

suggesting that they had been made by some gigantic opossum. As the

tracks measure five by eight inches, it would have been rather a large

specimen, but the mammals had not then arisen, and it is generally

believed that the impressions were made by huge (for their kind)

salamander-like creatures, known as labyrinthodonts, whose remains are

found in the same strata.

Footprints may aid greatly in determining the attitude assumed by

extinct animals, and in this way they have been of great service in

furnishing proof that many of the Dinosaurs walked erect. The

impressions on the sands of the old Connecticut estuary may be said to

show this very plainly, but in England and Belgium is evidence still

more conclusive, in the shape of tracks ascribed to the Iguanodon. These

were made on soft soil into which the feet sank much more deeply than in

the Connecticut sands, and the casts made in the natural moulds show the

impression of toes very clearly. If the animals had walked flat-footed,

as we do, the prints of the toes would have been followed by a long heel

mark, but such is not the case; there are the sharply defined marks of

the toes and nothing more, showing plainly that the Iguanodons walked,

like birds, on the toes alone. More than this, had these Dinosaurs

dragged their tails there would have been a continuous furrow between

the footprints; but nothing of this sort is to be found; on the

contrary, a fine series of tracks, uncovered at Hastings, England, made

by several individuals and running for seventy-five feet, shows

footprints only. Hence it may be fairly concluded that these great

creatures carried their tails clear of the ground, as shown in the

picture of _Thespesius_, the weight of the tail counterbalancing that of

the body. Where crocodilians or some of the short-limbed Dinosaurs have

crept along there is, as we should expect, a continuous furrow between

the imprints of the feet. This is what footprints tell us when their

message is read aright; when improperly translated they only add to the

enormous bulk of our ignorance.

Some years ago we were treated to accounts of wonderful footprints in

the rock of the prison-yard at Carson City, Nev., which, according to

the papers, not only showed that men existed at a much earlier period

than the scientific supposed, but that they were men of giant stature.

This was clearly demonstrated by the footprints, for they were such as

_might_ have been made by huge moccasined feet, and this was all that

was necessary for the conclusion that they _were_ made by just such

feet. For it is a curious fact that the majority of mankind seem to

prefer any explanation other than the most simple and natural,

particularly in the case of fossils, and are always looking for a

primitive race of gigantic men.

Bones of the Mastodon and Mammoth have again and again been eagerly

accepted as those of giants; a salamander was brought forward as

evidence of the deluge (_homo diluvii testis_); ammonites and their

allies pose as fossil snakes, and the "petrified man" flourishes

perennially. However, in this case the prints were recognized by

naturalists as having most probably been made by some great ground

sloth, such as the Mylodon or Morotherium, these animals, though

belonging to a group whose headquarters were in Patagonia, having

extended their range as far north as Oregon. That the tracks seemed to

have been made by a biped, rather than a quadruped, was due to the fact

that the prints of the hind feet fell upon and obliterated the marks of

the fore. Still, a little observation showed that here and there prints

of the fore feet were to be seen, and on one spot were indications of a

struggle between two of the big beasts. The mud, or rather the stone

that had been mud, bears the imprints of opposing feet, one set deeper

at the toes, the other at the heels, as if one animal had pushed and the

other resisted. In the rock, too, are broad depressions bearing the

marks of coarse hair, where one creature had apparently sat on its

haunches in order to use its fore limbs to the best advantage. Other

footprints there are in this prison-yard; the great round "spoor" of the

mammoth, the hoofs of a deer, and the paws of a wolf(?), indicating that

hereabout was some pool where all these creatures came to drink. More

than this, we learn that when these prints were made, or shortly after,

a strong wind blew from the southeast, for on that face of the ridges

bounding the margin of each big footprint, we find sand that lodged

against the squeezed-up mud and stuck there to serve as a perpetual

record of the direction of the wind.

_REFERENCES_

_Almost every museum has some specimen of the Connecticut Valley

footprints, but the largest and finest collections are in the museums of

Amherst College, Mass., and Yale University, although, owing to lack of

room, only a few of the Yale specimens are on exhibition. The collection

at Amherst comprises most of the types described by Professor E.

Hitchcock in his "Ichnology of New England," a work in two fully

illustrated quarto volumes. Other footprints are described and figured

by Dr. J. Deane in "Ichnographs from the Sandstone of the Connecticut

River."_

[Illustration: Fig. 8.--The Track of a Three-toed Dinosaur.]

IV

RULERS OF THE ANCIENT SEAS

"_A time there was when the universe was darkness and water,

wherein certain animals of frightful and compound mien were

generated. There were serpents, and other creatures with the

mixed shapes of one another...._"--_The Archaic Genesis._

History shows us how in the past nation after nation has arisen,

increased in size and strength, extended its bounds and dominion until

it became the ruling power of the world, and then passed out of

existence, often so completely that nothing has remained save a few

mounds of dirt marking the graves of former cities. And so has it been

with the kingdoms of nature. Just as Greece, Carthage, and Rome were

successively the rulers of the sea in the days that we call old, so,

long before the advent of man, the seas were ruled by successive races

of creatures whose bones now lie scattered over the beds of the ancient

seas, even as the wrecks of galleys lie strewn over the bed of the

Mediterranean. For a time the armor-clad fishes held undisputed sway;

then their reign was ended by the coming of the sharks, who in their

turn gave way to the fish-lizards, the Ichthyosaurs and Plesiosaurs.

These, however, were rather local in their rule; but the next group of

reptiles to appear on the scene, the great marine reptiles called

Mosasaurs, practically extended their empire around the world, from New

Zealand to North America.

We properly call these reptiles great, for so they were; but there are

degrees of greatness, and there is a universal tendency to think of the

animals that have become extinct as much greater than those of the

present day, to magnify the reptile that we never saw as well as the

fish that "got away," and it may be safely said that the greatest of

animals will shrink before a two-foot rule. As a matter of fact, no

animals are known to have existed that were larger than the whales; and,

while there are now no reptiles that can compare in bulk with the

Dinosaurs, there were few Mosasaurs that exceeded in size a first-class

Crocodile. An occasional Mosasaur reaches a length of forty feet, but

such are rare indeed, and one even twenty-five feet long is a large

specimen,[4] while the great Mugger, or Man-eating Crocodile, grows, if

permitted, to a length of twenty-five or even thirty feet, and need not

be ashamed to match his bulk and jaws against those of most Mosasaurs.

[4] _It is surprising to find Professor Cope placing the length of the

Mosasaurs at 70, 80, or 100 feet, as there is not the slightest basis

for even the lowest of these figures. Professor Williston, the best

authority on the subject, states, in his volume on the "Cretaceous

Reptiles of Kansas," that there is not in existence any specimen of a

Mosasaur indicating a greater length than 45 feet._

The first of these sea-reptiles to be discovered has passed into

history, and now reposes in the Jardin des Plantes, Paris, after

changing hands two or three times, the original owner being dispossessed

of his treasure by the subtleties of law, while the next holder was

deprived of the specimen by main force. Thus the story is told by M.

Faujas St. Fond, as rendered into English, in Mantell's "Petrifactions

and their Teachings": "Some workmen, in blasting the rock in one of the

caverns of the interior of the mountain, perceived, to their

astonishment, the jaws of a large animal attached to the roof of the

chasm. The discovery was immediately made known to M. Hoffman, who

repaired to the spot, and for weeks presided over the arduous task of

separating the mass of stone containing these remains from the

surrounding rock. His labors were rewarded by the successful extrication

of the specimen, which he conveyed in triumph to his house. This

extraordinary discovery, however, soon became the subject of general

conversation, and excited so much interest that the canon of the

cathedral which stands on the mountain resolved to claim the fossil, in

right of being lord of the manor, and succeeded, after a long and

harassing lawsuit, in obtaining the precious relic. It remained for

years in his possession, and Hoffman died without regaining his

treasure. At length the French Revolution broke out, and the armies of

the Republic advanced to the gates of Maestricht. The town was

bombarded; but, at the suggestion of the committee of savans who

accompanied the French troops to select their share of the plunder, the

artillery was not suffered to play on that part of the city in which the

celebrated fossil was known to be preserved. In the meantime, the canon

of St. Peter's, shrewdly suspecting the reason why such peculiar favor

was shown to his residence, removed the specimen and concealed it in a

vault; but, when the city was taken, the French authorities compelled

him to give up his ill-gotten prize, which was immediately transmitted

to the Jardin des Plantes, at Paris, where it still forms one of the

most interesting objects in that magnificent collection." And there it

remains to this day.

[Illustration: Fig. 9.--A Great Sea Lizard, _Tylosaurus Dyspelor_. _From

a drawing by J. M. Gleeson._]

Animals of the Past · 第 2 / 11 段