URSUS SPEL^US. 95 



it is most probably, therefore, as Dr. Schmerling* and Pro- 

 fessor de Blainville -f conjecture, an accidental anomaly. 

 But the differential characters which both the imperforate 

 and perforate humeri of the great Cave Bear present, when 

 compared with those of any recent species, cannot be re- 

 conciled by the hypothesis, that these are merely degenerat- 

 ed descendants of the Ursus spelaus. 



The nearly entire humerus of the bear from the Cave of 

 PavilandJ presents all the characters of that of the Ursus 

 spel&us above described. 



The ulna of the Cave Bear (Ursus spelaeus)^ compared 

 with one of the same length from the Polar Bear, is less 

 straight, being more convex towards the radius ; is thicker, 

 particularly at the anterior part of the shaft ; the ridge on 

 the outside of the distal end of the bone is more produced ; 

 the styloid process is more pointed ; and the concavity on 

 the inner side of the proximal articular surface is deeper. 



The ulna of the Bear from the freshwater deposit near 

 Bacton (fig. 27, a), as well as a larger ulna from Rentes 

 Hole, agree with that of the Ursus spelteus from the 

 German caves. 



The upper extremity of the radius of the Cave Bear, 

 from a bone-cave in the Mendips, and the gnawed shaft and 

 lower end of a radius from Rentes Hole, match the largest 

 specimens from the German caverns in size, and equally 

 demonstrate the oval form of the upper articular surface 

 which rotates on the humerus and ulna, and the larger 

 oblique oval surface at the distal end, which distinguish 

 the radius of the great extinct Bear from the corresponding 

 bone in the great feline animals. 



The scapho-lunar bone, the os magnum with its charac- 



* Loc. cit. p. 130. t Loc. cit. p. 71. 



I Buckland, Reliquiae Diluvianse, p. 82. 



