"Matrilineal" dinosaurs

["Williams, Tim" <TiJaWi@agron.iastate.edu>]

Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. wrote:

>Additionally, "matrilinearity" (an odd concept for non-human animals, as
>this term as used generally includes societal concepts of wealth,
>"name", "title", and so forth) is rare among mammalian herd animals.  

A *very* odd concept indeed in a zoological context - and probably entirely
inappropriate for Stephan's example of sexual selection in dinosaurs.  The
term "matrilinear" means "based on or tracing descent through the female
line"; it really has very little do with females selecting their partners. 

Many ancient civilizations (such as certain kingdoms in the Mediterranean
region during the Bronze Age) practised matrilinear inheritance in the
choice of their kings.  Under a matrilinear system, a king was succeeded by
the husband of his eldest daughter, rather than by his son (this is
patrilinear succession).  Under a typical matrilinear system, the king's
daughter did *not* choose her consort; it was the king himself who chose who
his daughter's husband would be.  (There is some vestige of this system in
Homer's _Iliad_, in the pedigree of King Sarpedon of Lycia, in southern Asia
Minor.  By contrast, most Hellenic/Greek kingdoms at the time were
patrilinear.)

The rationale behind a matrilinear succession was that a person could always
be certain of the identity of his or her mother; but a person could not
always be certain of his or her paternity.  Ironically, the "matrilinear"
system was effectively a statement on female morality.  However, matrilinear
succession did have the advantage of kings being able to choose their
successor on the basis of merit, rather than the crapshoot of genetics.

But I digress...  This historical stuff is *way* off topic.  Nevertheless,
it illustrates my point that the term matrinear/matrilineal is probably
extremely misleading in the current discussion of dinosaur behavior.   



Tim