QUATERNARY FAUNA OF GIBRALTAR. 87 
process in front, or very nearly so. In the pattern of the teeth the median cusp of 
pm. 2 is thicker in the Gibraltar specimen, though the tooth is of exactly the same 
length at the base. In neither is there any distinct trace of a hinder cusp or even of the 
anterior, though there has probably been a small one in both. They both differ altogether 
from Chaus servalinus (133, B. M.) from Senegal, in which the teeth are not only 
much larger, but the pm. 5 and pm. 4 have a large anterior and two small hinder 
cusps, as in most of the Felide. 
In Chaus libycus (1172 6, B. M.), whose mandible is of the same size, the coronoid 
process is less reclined, and the teeth, except pm. 3, longer, with a much more strongly 
marked cingulum behind. 
Another strong point of resemblance between the Cape and the Gibraltar specimens 
consists in the configuration of the masseteric fossa, which is very deep, and has an 
abrupt narrow elevated ridge bounding it below; whilst in Chaus libycus the fossa is 
much shallower, and the ridge less elevated. In the Cape and Gibraltar jaws the 
“crochet” is much incurved, but scarcely at all so in Chaus libycus, The distance 
also from the lower border of the “crochet” to the under surface of the condyle is 
the same in the Cape and Gibraltar specimens, and considerably greater than in Ch. 
libycus. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the Gibraltar and Cape species are one 
and the same; nor can there, I think, be any doubt that the Indian form named Chaus 
libycus in the British-Museum Catalogue is distinct. 
The parietal width in C. libycus is 1-9; in C. caffer 1-95, or nearly the same; so 
that the animals are probably of nearly equal bulk. But the orbit in C. caffer is 2'-3 
in its vertical diameter, and that of C. libycus only 1-9. The bony orbit is almost 
complete in C. caffer, and much less complete in C. libycus, in which also the infra- 
orbital foramen is smaller and more elliptical, and larger and rounder in C. caffer. In 
Chaus caffer, again, the nasals are equal with the maxillaries, whilst in C. lidycus they 
exceed the maxillaries, as in the Lion. In C. libycus the lacrymo-maxillary suture is in 
front of the edge of the orbit, and in C. caffer coincident with or rather behind it. 
In the narrowness and reclination of the coronoid process the Gibraltar jaw re- 
sembles (among the species above named), besides F. bubastes, F. maniculata and 
Felis catus ferus, and, it may be added, the Domestic Cat also; but it is distinguished 
from the three latter, not only by its greater size, but also by the far greater thinness 
of the inferior boundary of the masseteric fossa; and from /. maniculata by the less 
abrupt or defined termination of the fossa anteriorly. In F. maniculata also the 
“crochet” does not project so far backwards, though this may probably be an uncertain 
character. 
From these considerations there appears to be every reason for believing that the 
smaller fossil Cat of Gibraltar is F. caligata, a species which appears to have a very 
extensive range from one end of Africa to the other, and to have formed one of the 
three feline species which were regarded as sacred by the ancient Egyptians, and were 
N2 
