This article was downloaded by: [Mr Darren Naish] On: 04 October 2011, At: 02:17 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Historical Biology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ghbi20 The second Jurassic dinosaur rush: museums and paleontology in America at the turn of the twentieth century Darren Naish a a School of Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of Portsmouth, Burnaby Building, Burnaby Road, Portsmouth, PO1 3QL, UK Available online: 03 Oct 2011 To cite this article: Darren Naish (2011): The second Jurassic dinosaur rush: museums and paleontology in America at the turn of the twentieth century, Historical Biology, DOI:10.1080/08912963.2011.614404 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2011.614404 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Historical Biology iFirst article, 2011, 1–3 BOOK REVIEW The second Jurassic dinosaur rush: museums and The age of open public feuding may have been a thing of paleontology in America at the turn of the twentieth the past (Henry Osborn claimed that American vertebrate century, by Paul D. Brinkman, University of Chicago paleontology was a ‘kinder, gentler science’ in the post- Press, 2010, 345 pp., ISBN 978-0-226-07472-6 Cope–Marsh era), but rivalry, ambition and animosity remained important themes. Indeed, Osborn’s ambition to Anyone who has ever opened a dinosaur book will be undermine Marsh’s research programme at Yale, his familiar with the ‘bone wars’ of the American west. published criticisms of Marsh’s work and his successful During the latter decades of the nineteenth century, attack on Marsh’s federal funding show that he was hardly Edward D. Cope (1840–1897) and Othniel C. Marsh neutral or friendly. And some of Osborn’s ideas on dinosaur (1831–1899) competed bitterly in a rush to describe and form and function (his description, for example, of name Jurassic dinosaurs. Their rivalry was often petty, Diplodocus as light-limbed and relatively agile (Osborn resulting in a messy literature consisting in part of short, 1899)) ‘had as much to do with contradicting Marsh’s claim hastily written articles. But while the Cope and Marsh ... as it did with skeletal anatomy’ (Brinkman 2010, p. 230). story is fascinating, it is arguably over-familiar. As Brinkman explains, Osborn’s research programme at the Rather less well known is the historic episode that AMNH was, in part, motivated by his desire to overturn immediately followed the Cope–Marsh feud, coined the Marsh’s published body of work and especially to correct or second Jurassic dinosaur rush by American sauropod update the conclusions and reconstructions of Marsh’s 1896 expert John McIntosh. Extending from 1899 to 1905, this magnum opus The Dinosaurs of North America. Osborn phase saw competition between university and museum apparently filled a notebook with gossip about Marsh, much teams – in particular, those of the American Museum of of it obtained from William Reed; a habit that recalls Cope’s Natural History in New York, the Carnegie Museum in collection of similar material, dubbed ‘Marshiana’. Pittsburgh and the Field Columbian Museum in Chicago – Important sociological changes were occurring in the as they raced to find display-quality Jurassic sauropods. It American museum world during the post-Cope–Marsh era is this important but previously little-analysed phase in the of the 1890s and early 1900s. Emphasis shifted during this history of museum science that forms the focus of Paul phase from the entrepreneurial Cope and Marsh to wealthy D. Brinkman’s excellent and extraordinarily detailed new philanthropists such as Andrew Carnegie and Marshall Field. book. Brinkman is an accomplished science historian, Inspired by the publicity that surrounded giant sauropods, already well known for his fascinating articles on the these men sought not only to increase the educational and history of science at American museums and the recreational opportunities available to the underprivileged, Downloaded by [Mr Darren Naish] at 02:17 04 October 2011 personalities involved (e.g. Brinkman 2000, 2005). As a but also to achieve a sort of immortality. Public education historian of science, Brinkman is arguably better placed to came to be increasingly recognised as an important role that discuss the issues of interest here than many who have museums should play. Museum directors also knew by this gone before; the fact that most texts on the history of time that what has been referred to as the ‘monstrous American paleontology have been written by paleontol- aesthetic’ caused visitors to flock to museums to see giant ogists might explain why so many of them essentially re- objects. The demand for high-quality giant dinosaur hash the same stories and fail to incorporate much new specimens suddenly became high and the pressure was on source material. for administrators to employ skilled, hard-working individ- The Cope–Marsh feud serves as the inevitable uals able to find, excavate and ship the specimens now background to Brinkman’s analysis. Cope and Marsh’s required (and there is a whole host of reasons why this did not public feuding, culminating in an 1890 slugging match occur sooner, one of them being that Marsh questioned the splattered about the pages of the New York Herald, more or value of mounted dinosaur skeletons). less corresponded with a cessation in Jurassic dinosaur The story begins in 1895 when university groups set out collecting. The intellectual landscape of American to collect Jurassic dinosaurs in Wyoming. By the summer of vertebrate paleontology was by now inexorably structured 1899, rival collecting efforts involved the AMNH, Reed’s around allegiances with Cope and Marsh. team from the Carnegie, Wilbur Knight and Charles ISSN 0891-2963 print/ISSN 1029-2381 online q 2011 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/08912963.2011.614404 http://www.informaworld.com 2 Book Review Gilmore from the University of Wyoming, Elmer Riggs and Apatosaurus and Brontosaurus (Riggs 1903b) and Harold Menke from the Field, and Samuel Williston’s party Hatcher’s description of Haplocanthosaurus (Hatcher from the University of Kansas. Some of the men involved in 1903) all result from discoveries made in this period. this race were ambitious upstarts; others were experienced Incidentally, Rigg’s argument that Brontosaurus was veterans. Understandably, some of this collecting effort synonymous with Apatosaurus was never accepted by was regarded as a little too close for comfort and Osborn in Osborn, meaning that the name Brontosaurus remained particular (writing from the comfort of his New York office, attached to the AMNH exhibits (everybody knows about of course) pressurised his team to step up their prospecting Gould’s ‘Bully for Brontosaurus’; less well known is that and collecting. All the teams met with success, and this Brinkman published a 2006 article titled ‘Bully for crucial period resulted in the discovery of numerous Apatosaurus’). Riggs was surprised, but seemed not to Morrison Formation dinosaurs including not only saur- carry the clout required to convince Osborn. opods but also allosaurs, the coelurosaur Ornitholestes, An enormous amount of preparatory work had to be camptosaurs and stegosaurs, in addition to Jurassic carried out on all the bones that arrived back in Chicago, crocodilians and ichthyosaurs. Pittsburgh and New York. Finding adequate storage space Again, Brinkman argues that Osborn’s personal desire was sometimes a problem and the AMNH definitely led to prove Marsh wrong was one motivational factor behind the way: this was due not only to its prior establishment of part of this collecting effort. Osborn thought that Marsh’s a successful programme on fossil mammals, but also to its Atlantosaurus, Apatosaurus and Brontosaurus were all 1899 remodelling of its entire workspace. With electricity, synonymous with Cope’s Camarasaurus (he regarded it as better lighting and ventilation and an overhead trolley ‘a priori improbable that so many different genera of system, Osborn’s Department of Vertebrate Paleontology gigantic Saurians of similar size co-existed’; Brinkman laboratory served as the model for modern fossil 2010, p. 232), and he also thought that Marsh’s famous workshops. Finding the staff required to do the preparation Brontosaurus excelsus reconstruction was incorrect and in work was sometimes difficult, and William Holland’s need of major revision. peculiar pickiness at the Carnegie led him to dismiss some Brinkman follows his highly detailed account of the applicants for being ‘too sullen’ or ‘too raw’! Low wages initial events of Wyoming with those that occurred in meant that many staff were dissatisfied and sometimes not Colorado. While making inquiries relevant to his interests especially loyal. in Eocene mammals, Riggs learnt of a previously It is sometimes difficult to determine whether the cross unexploited rich site near Grand Junction in far western words and disputes described throughout this book were the Colorado (very close to Fruita). Accompanied by Menke, result of personal disagreements or grievances, or represent he met success with the discovery of a partial Morosaurus; feelings of competition between the different institutions.