Having examined the changing image of Tyrannosaurus in 2023’s The Tyrannosaur’s Feathers, Adam Smith, Jonathan Emmett and Stieven van der Poorten have returned with a similarly-themed follow-up book – only this time, featuring a whole range of prehistoric animals. That’s right – in spite of the title, this book isn’t confined to our favourite Mesozoic reptile pals (it’s just that Great Dinosaur andotherprehistoricanimal Mistakes wasn’t quite as snappy). Can it maintain the difficult balance between nuanced scientific accuracy, child-friendly brevity, and pun-laden dialogue between two possibly time-traveling palaeo-buddies? Will it mention “Scrotum humanum” and ammonites sailing along with expansive fleshy appendages like nightmarish cephalopod-yachts? Let’s have a look.

The book follows two characters representing the Past and Present of palaeo. The present-day palaeontologist is a lady based on Susie Maidment, who works at the Natural History Museum and is important enough to have her own Wikipedia page, unlike the likes of you and I. (Shut up, Darren.) It’s wonderful to see some representation for female palaeontologists, particularly in light of Chelsey Knyff’s talk at this year’s DinoCon (more on which soon, I’m sure). The Ghost of Palaeo Past, meanwhile, is based on Edward Drinker Cope (at least in terms of dress sense and approximate hair stylings), and thankfully not Richard Owen as in that NHM video I reviewed once. Speaking of DinoCon, this does seem like the perfect opportunity to plug the Marsh and Cope ‘Palaeontological Monster in my Pocket’ figures by Splendidhand that I picked up there, just because I think they’re awesome. They’re available to buy online, you know!

Back to the book, though. Our not-Maidment modern palaeontologist is having a giggle at a vintage illustration of Stegosaurus, prompting the appearance of not-Cope, who then wonders which other animals have had a dramatic shift in our understanding of them over the years, as new evidence came to light. The reader is then bounced around prehistory, with greyscale outdated reconstructions of animals presented alongside their modern-day equivalents, which are of course shown in glorious van der Poorten-o-vision. I remain a huge fan of van der Poorten’s work, which inevitably finds the ideal compromise between appealing, mildly cartoonish stylisation and scientific rigour. In spite of their stylisation, you’d be hard pressed to find any serious anatomical errors in any of these pieces (the claw count on Stegosaurus‘ hands isn’t serious. Shhhh). The modern reconstructions manage to be gloriously vibrant and colourful while also sporting remarkably plausible skin patterns, often reminiscent of modern-day lizards. One huge advantage this book has over its predecessor is that van der Poorten is given the freedom to illustrate an assortment of animals in their environments, adding hugely to Great Dinosaur Mistakes‘ overall appeal.

As with The Tyrannosaur’s Feathers, I’m a big fan of the idea of taking what was often a funny footnote in the dinosaur books of my childhood – early palaeontologists got all this stuff wrong, ha ha ha, aren’t we so superior now – and building an entire book around it, only in such a way that the endeavours of past scientists are celebrated. The explanatory text here makes it very clear that 19th Century (and occasionally later, but it’s mostly 19th Century) scientists did extraordinarily well given the limited resources available to them, and manages to do so in a manner succinct enough to be understood by children (probably; I don’t know any). Of course, there’s no denying that the old-school reconstructions are quite amusing to look at, but it’s telling that van der Poorten lavishes as much love on them, ghostly greyscale as they are, as he does on the more up-to-date versions. For adult nerds, there’s bonus fun to be had in working out the sources of the retro incarnations (although no points shall be awarded for knowing about the Crystal Palace dinosaurs).

Beyond the obvious dinosaurs, such treats await in here as bat-like pterosaurs, back-to-front Elasmosaurus and smooth surface sailing ammonites (an especially obscure one). Even Anomalocaris gets a mention, in the context of it originally having been thought of as three separate creatures, which is perhaps the most remarkable story of all. In each case, competing ideas about the relevant animal are mentioned, providing an insight into the scientific process of (I’m sure very respectful) disagreement based on the available evidence; for example, while the bat-like Pterodactylus is based on Newman’s work from 1843, it’s mentioned that “Georges Cuvier had correctly identified the animal as a flying reptile in 1801”, with an explanation then following of changing views on the animal’s head crest. All the while, our Past Palaeontologist is consistently impressed with how science has marched on since his time, and readily accepts the new interpretation of things. Except when it comes to feathered dinosaurs, where he insists that birds can’t possibly be related to dinosaurs and that Longisquama is the key to everything. (Just kidding. Who does that?)

If there’s one spread that I’d quite like to go back in time, appear as a monochrome ghost (which is close to my everyday clobber most of the time anyway) and persuade them to change somewhat, it’d be the one featuring Deinocheirus. The text mentions that “palaeontologists thought that Deinocheirus looked like a giant version of an ordinary ‘ostrich dinosaur'”, which is generally true, although of course some restorations depicted it as either a generic big theropod with long arms or some kind of sauropod-slashing, flesh-rending Ultimate Theropod. The old-school version that van der Poorten depicts is very generic-looking, whereas I’d preferred to have seen something more akin to a big Gallimimus, the better to emphasise that the consensus view turned out to be correct in terms of the animal’s affinities, but that it turned out to be far, far weirder than anyone could possibly have imagined. It’d be making a similar point to (at least one of the points made in) All Yesterdays, I suppose; that while we need to be careful about getting things wildly wrong (like restoring Therizinosaurus as a turtle), the weirdness of nature shouldn’t be underestimated.

Still, that’s just one spread, and in a picture book aimed at kids compromises must be made. Overall, this book is to be applauded for many of the same attributes that made The Tyrannosaur’s Feathers so worthy – it not only introduces kids to the idea of the views of these animals changing over time (which they are probably already familiar with), but does so while laying out the key discoveries in an accessibly way and not belittling the scientists of the past. In fact, the point is made at the end that many of the views we have today will also change as new evidence comes to light. Once again, if you know any kids who are into dinosaurs (beyond just liking movies from The Franchise) or are just a fan of Stieven van der Poorten’s work (and why wouldn’t you be?), I’d highly recommend buying a copy.