CANIS LUPUS. isa 
In regard to the Dingo, M. de Blainville’s observation is 
accurate in respect of the configuration of the skull and 
the relative capacity of the cerebral cavity: the skull of 
this wild species of Canis is, however, always smaller than 
that of the Wolf, in so far as the entire animal is less. 
And it might be contended that the Dingo was a variety of 
the Wolf rather than of the Dog. 
However this may be, the cranial characters of the 
Wolf pointed out by Cuvier are good and available in its 
determination when compared with those of a Dog of equal 
size, and a cranium, therefore, was the most desirable fossil 
for the resolution of the question of the nature of the anci- 
ent species of Canis, associated in Great Britain with spe- 
lean Bears and Hyzenas. 
The rich cavernous depositary of the Mammalian remains 
of that epoch, called Kent’s Hole, has afforded, thanks to 
the persevering explorations of Mr. Mac Enery, the desired 
evidence, viz., an almost entire skull with the teeth (jig. 45). 
This specimen exactly equals in size the skull of a fine 
male Arctic Wolf, has the same flat and narrow triangular 
frontal space, an equally deve- Fig. 49. 
loped occipito-sagittal crest, and 
as large canines. The only 
differences worth mentioning, 
which a close comparison has 
yielded, are, that the antepen- 
ultimate or sectorial molar is 
a little larger in the fossil, and 
the lower border of the jaw 
rather more convex. 
Sectorial molar, nat. size. 
The latter character is not, 
however, appreciable in the Oreston fossils, and the secto- 
rial molar varies as much in size in different individuals of 
K 2 
“ 
