The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs

Gregory Paul needs no introduction to readers of this journal. Widely recognized as one of the most influential dinosaur artists of his generation, Paul is often grouped among that select fraternity of luminaries that helped shape the contemporary view of dinosaurs as dynamic, successful creatures, powered by a warmblooded metabolism and sheathed in feathers. His visually stunning and scientifically informed artwork has been a mainstay in the vertebrate paleontology community for several decades, and many young scientists (such as myself) gleefully credit his paintings, papers, and books (especially Predatory Dinosaurs of the World) as integral in stoking our childhood passion for science. Today, although many of us have graduated from teenage enthusiasts to professional dinosaur researchers, I and many of my colleagues still await Paul’s latest art and writings with that same level of childhood glee. The same is surely true of the general public. Paul is among the most visible dinosaur researchers to the public at large, thanks largely to his consultancy work for Jurassic Park and the success of his previous books, so anything new he produces is automatically positioned to influence the public perception of dinosaurs and dinosaur science. Paul’s newest work, The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs, is sure to turn heads in both scientific and popular circles. Billed as “the first authoritative dinosaur book in the style of a field guide,” this large, heavy tome includes over 600 illustrations and entries on over 700 species of extinct dinosaur. It begins with a 65-page introduction to dinosaur anatomy, biology, and evolution, and then transitions into a species-by-species account of nearly every known dinosaur, written in the usual manner of the field guides so popular with birdwatchers and safari goers. In fact, this book is only the latest in a line of 30+ field guides published by Princeton University Press, and immediately stands out as the first in the series to focus on an extinct (and therefore unobservable) group of organisms. Although his subjects have all been dead for more than 65 million years, Paul attempts to describe them as living animals, and provides the same capsules of basic information (anatomical characteristics, habitat, distribution) that are so valuable to naturalists and enthusiasts using field guides when attempting to identify living birds or mammals. Nearly every species capsule is supplemented by illustrations, which range from simple skull and skeletal reconstructions in black and white to vivid life reconstructions in full color. There are many dinosaur books on the market—at least 16,000, according to a quick search of one popular online bookstore. It is clear from the publicity blitz surrounding The Princeton Field Guide that the author and publisher are aiming for this book to become a landmark publication. The dust jacket notes that the book is a “must have” for everyone ranging from the “amateur enthusiast to the professional paleontologist. ” But does this book fulfill its potential and rise to the pinnacle of the crowded book market? My views are mixed. First, the positives. The dust jacket boasts that the book is “distinguished both by its scientific accuracy and the quality and quantity of its illustrations. ” There is no doubt that the latter claim is true: no other dinosaur book features such an extensive catalogue of artistic reconstructions. Nearly every known dinosaur species is included in this book, and many illustrations are presented for the first time in the published literature. Several of these illustrations, especially the skull and skeletal reconstructions, showcase newly described dinosaurs that have not appeared in any other popular or scientific books. All-in-all, this book is an artistic treasure, and for this reason alone it belongs on the bookshelves of anyone with an interest in dinosaurs. There is no other single source that even comes close to providing such a large number of scientifically accurate, beautiful illustrations, and in this sense the book is truly authoritative. This is a major feat, and Paul should be rightfully proud of producing a ‘greatest hits’ album that is both a fitting testament to his legendary career and proof that he is still producing good work. My glowing assessment, however, begins to dim when considering the first half of the dust jacket’s promise. Although Paul’s illustrations and descriptions are scientifically informed, it is exceedingly difficult to tell where defensible, evidence-based interpretation ends and pure speculation begins. Because non-avian dinosaurs are extinct, there is much about their anatomy, biology, behavior, and distribution that we will never know, and much of what we think we know is so laden with qualifiers that it is difficult to explain in just a few sentences (especially to a popular audience). I understand that, in writing a dinosaur field guide, Paul must occasionally cross a line and verge into speculation. But oftentimes this speculation is incredulous, bizarre, and downright unbearable. We are told, for instance, that some dinosaurs may have “produced a ‘milk’-like substance in the digestive tracts that was regurgitated to their (young),” that “presumably (dinosaur) copulation was a quick process,” and that ceratopsians may have “(reared) like a bear” when attacked. This speculation wouldn’t draw many snickers if presented in a fictional movie or children’s book, but The Princeton Field Guide is an academic book published by a respected scholarly press. Not only that, but the book is also not referenced: throughout the text Paul asserts various facts about dinosaur anatomy and biology without backing them up with specific fossil evidence or citations to the technical literature. Again, I understand that scholarly references may not be the norm in a field guide, but by excluding citations and discussions of explicit fossil and quantitative evidence for his assertions, Paul renders his text useless as a piece of scientific literature. Furthermore, there are many scientific inaccuracies in the book, which are nowhere more apparent than at the most basic level, the taxonomic names that Paul uses for the species he describes and illustrates. Paul has a quick trigger finger in synonymizing many well-known dinosaur species or genera into a single taxon, while splitting other species or genera into multiple taxa. As a result, many of the names that Paul uses may be unrecognizable to both scientists and the general public. For instance, the basal sauropodomorphs Plateosaurus, Massospondylus, and Lufengosaurus are all synonymized, as are the ceratopsids Centrosaurus, Styracosaurus, Einiosaurus, Achelousaurus, and Pachyrhinosaurus. Of course, these kinds of taxonomic amendments are not uncommon in the scientific literature, and alpha-level systematics is one of the fundamental points of focus for many dinosaur workers. But, when taxa are synonymized or split, explicit rationale is needed. Paul fails to provide even the faintest justification for his decisions, and dismisses any potential criticism by stating that his taxonomy is “not a formal proposal. ”