Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Dinomaniac

Hi, I'm new here. I found this interesting Nanosaurus Rex skull for sale. The Seller says it is from Emery, Utah and he says it is real. Sorry for my English because I am from China. Please help me identify if this real. Thanks!

IMG_2011.JPG

IMG_2012.JPG

IMG_2013.JPG

IMG_2014.JPG

IMG_2015.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnBrewer

Welcome to the forum. :)

 

 Out of interest did you buy from the main auction site on the internet? What did you pay? Higher resolution images will be needed. 

 

@Troodon among others will be able to help you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Purely an old casting. Not a real skull.

Used to be sold as a skeletal panel mount (which I own) and also just the skull. 

 

The original "Nanosaurus rex" skeleton was headless if I recall. A skull was reconstructed using partial skull material and the rest by sculpting. 

 

The skeleton is catalogued at BYU as:

BYU ESM 163

  • I found this Informative 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
LordTrilobite

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Othnielosaurus

 

Cast of the skull of Othnielosaurus. A hypsylophodont.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Othnielia

 

Nanosaurus or Othnielia rex is technically correct. Just outdated.

As hxmendoza said. Othnielia was found without a head.

 

And it appears now these two specimens have been separated into 2 different names.

 

Definitely not real. It's a cast. But still a nice looking piece.

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LordTrilobite said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Othnielosaurus

 

Cast of the skull of Othnielosaurus. A hypsylophodont.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Othnielia

 

Nanosaurus or Othnielia rex is technically correct. Just outdated.

As hxmendoza said. Othnielia was found without a head.

 

And it appears now these two specimens have been separated into 2 different names.

 

Definitely not real. It's a cast. But still a nice looking piece.

Yup, which is why I used the quotes. The skull and plaques used to be sold as "Nanosaurus" but are considered Othnielosaurus now. Though there still is some disagreement on proper classification and therefore naming. 

 

Thanks for the added info LordTrilobite.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...