Deviation Actions

MattMart's avatar

Monoclonius crassus

Published:
By
48 Comments
7K Views
An adult specimen of the ceratopsian Monoclonius crassus munches on some herbaceous angiosperms in the Dinosaur Park Formation of Montana, 74.8 million years ago. Read more here: [link]
Image details
Image size
3318x3183px 4.45 MB
© 2013 - 2022 MattMart
Comments48
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
AlanGBandala's avatar

I am surprised that, despite being an old illustration, you already removed those cheeks that it turns out that they did not have the ceratopcians

MattMart's avatar

Yes, I've never really been a big proponent of cheeks on ornithischians. It's not a new idea, just one that seems to have gained more traction online in recent years. There's actually at least a few examples of older but still modern, mainstream paleoart like this - see for example the Yale Torosaurus sculpture.

AlanGBandala's avatar

I'm amazed how dinosaurs look, both before and today

Wesdaaman's avatar
MickeyRayRex's avatar
seeing him just sitting there gorging on flowers reminds me of Phil Tippets Prehistoric Beast short film! awesome!
brandon-bowling's avatar
I like this, especially the scutes and spines on the creature's back. Monoclonius reminds me of my childhood when I used to sit around playing with Dino Riders and plastic army men. Ah, the good old days!
Traheripteryx's avatar
The first time, I've seen a new correct version of a Monoclonius! Great job, Martyniuk!
titanlizard's avatar

just 2 words...

PREHISTORIC BEASTS

Dino-Mario's avatar
Bon appetit!!!
EmperorDinobot's avatar
Very nice. I love the old fashioned homage. Are those flowering plants? What medium did you use?
MattMart's avatar
Yup, many flowering herbaceous plants are known form the Dinosaur Park based on pollen, so these are kind of generic. Medium is all digital, Photoshop CS5.
vasix's avatar
Why does this creature look like it lacks cheeks?
MattMart's avatar
Because it does! The presence of cheeks in ornithischians is controversial. I don't think the debate can be resolved without a few good mummies, though good cases have been made that at least they did not necessarily *need* cheeks to process their food. Therefore the burden of proof should be on those who argue that all ornithischians had them. There is compelling evidence that nodosaurs had cheeks, but that doesn't mean all ornithischians did too.

[link]
vasix's avatar
Well, we definitely don't have any ceratopsian mummies, but still, when I saw Witmer's comment about Leptoceratops, I was a little bit surprised actually.
Alexanderlovegrove's avatar
Love the patterning. Interesting post too!
TyrannosaurusPrime's avatar
Nice job! ;) Definitely different from the Monoclonius I grew up with. :)
pilsator's avatar
Very cool post on this, and a great depiction of this enigmatic taxon. Some of my first dino books acquainted me with Monoclonius too, so I get the taxo-nostalgia behind it. Didn't know about where it occurs in the DPF, though.

Just one question - is the nasal horn meant to be somewhat damaged, or is it a speculative reconstruction of what it might have generally looked like?
MattMart's avatar
Just a speculative keratin deformity/adornment playing with the idea that the keratin covering wouldn't necessarily match the underlying bone. I guess it could also show it's still growing (if it's a styracosaur) or maybe resorbing (if it's a pachyrhinosaur).
reminegrest's avatar
Ceratopsian among the flowers, it reminds me of Phil Tippett's 'Prehistoric Beast'. I like it ;)
MattMart's avatar
Definitely intentional, couldn't pass that up with this species! ;)
NinjaMonkey38's avatar
Very nice job, as usual~! I've been wondering for years about Monoclonius's true identity. I really like how he's shown nomming on some flowers as well. Seems like only 50s-70s palaeoart shows Cretaceous dinosaurs with flowers. I like how you remained faithful to the Cretaceous flowers!
MattMart's avatar
Thanks! I think many paleoartists, including myself, aren't confident enough doing flora to really show the diversity in the Mesozoic. Which is why you see many Jurassic sauropods in dry, desert-like settings instead of where they actually lived... [link]
NinjaMonkey38's avatar
Whoa, that rainforest-y place looks way better than the riparian grasslands that I show in one of my books. *sigh* Well, back to the old drawing board, and also time to probably change the protagonist's species from Amphicoelias fragilimus to a different sauropod that was equally as awesome.
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In