CAPT, W. SMEE ON THE MANELESS LION OF GUZERAT, 169 
had again the opportunity of observing the various living Lions from Africa now or 
lately to be seen in London. My impression, however, is that the Lion of Guzerat is 
comparatively more rounded and bulky in its body, and rather shorter in its limbs ; 
and that its head especially is shorter, has less of the square form which distinguishes 
the open face of the male African Lion, and is more rounded on the fore-head. But it 
is by no means impossible that this difference in physiognomy may be chiefly owing to 
the existence in the one case of long hairs concealing the upper part of the fore-head, 
which in the other is defined and visible, having on it none beyond the ordinary co- 
vering of the animal. 
The cranium of the Lion of Guzerat generally resembles that of the African race, 
being less rounded in its contour than that of the Tiger: its fronto-facial suture has 
also the form that it possesses in the former, the frontal processes of the nasal and 
maxillary bones being both prolonged backwards to the same level’. But the space 
between the postorbital processes is flattened only, and not concave; and the facial 
plane of the bones is comparatively longer than the cranial, and is also somewhat 
1 It is to Mr. Owen that I am indebted for the knowledge of this important distinctive character between the 
crania of the two largest of the Carnivorous Mammalia; and he has kindly allowed me to add the following 
remarks from his pen 
“ On the Differences observable in the Skulls of the Lion and Tiger. 
“ On comparing together the crania of seven Lions with those of thirteen Tigers, the first character of the 
Lion’s skull assigned by Cuvier (the straightness of the outline from the midspace of the postorbital processes 
to the end of the nasal bones in one direction, and to the occiput in the opposite,) is to a certain extent appre- 
ciable; the occipital and interparietal crest forms a concave line in the Tiger, and is generally straight in the 
Lion: but the difference is so slight on comparing the skull of a large male Tiger where the crest is strongly 
developed, that it would be an unsatisfactory ground of distinction if unsupported by any other character. 
«The flattening of the interorbital space in the Lion, and its convexity in the Tiger, especially in the trans- 
verse direction, occasioned by the down-sloping of the supraorbital ridges, is a more constant and appreciable 
character, and I think would serve alone to distinguish two crania of similar dimensions of the Lion and Tiger. 
«But there is in the extent and contour of the nasal processes of the maxillary bones, a difference which is 
constant and well marked. 
«In eight Lion’s skulls, of which five were accurately certified to be Lion, and the remaining three I no 
longer doubt to be such from their accordance with the other five in this and other distinctive characters, I 
find that the nasal processes of the maxillary bones extend to the same transverse line which is attained by the 
coronal or superior ends of the nasal bones, never falling short of this line, and in six out of the eight passing 
beyond it; the terminal contour of the nasal processes of the maxillary bones being, moreover, rounded, but 
more or less tending to a point. 
“The nasal processes of the maxillary bones in the Tiger never extend nearer the transverse plane attained 
by the nasal bones than one third of an inch, and sometimes fall short two thirds of an inch; terminating 
broadly in a straight or angular outline, just as if the rounded ends, which we see in the Lion, had been cut off. 
“ This character is so obvious and constant, and the comparison with reference to it is so easily made, that I 
regard it as the most unfailing and valuable means of distinguishing the skulls of these giants of the Carnivora, 
