64 ME. G. BFSK ON THE ANCIENT OR 



2. Ursus feeox, Richardson. 



U. horribilis, horridus, richardsoni, Baird. 



U. cinereus, Gray. 



U. piscator. 



3. Ursus abctos, Linn. 



U. fusctis, niger. Alb. Magn. ; Goldf. 



U. norvegicus, pyrenaicus, coUaris, he, F. Cuv. 



U. isabellinus, Horsfiekl. 



U. syTiacus, Hempr. & Elir. 



U. cadaverinus, formicarius, longirostris, Everem. 



4. Ursus laetetianus. 



5. Uestjs faidherbianus. 



6. Ursus letourneuxianus. 



7. Ursus rouvieri. 



Bourguignat. 



1. Ursus fossilis, Goldf. 



From the time of Goldfuss' all paleontogists, except Blumenbach and De Blain- 

 ville, have recognized at least two distinct specific forms amongst the Ursine remains 

 found in caverns. To one of these, basing his description upon a perfect cranium, 

 with the lower jaw, found in the deepest part of the Gailenreuth cavern, Goldfuss 

 applied the term U. fossilis^. This form has appeared to me to coincide so very 

 closely -with the existing U. ferox, or horribilis, of North America, that I was induced 

 some years since to suggest that they might be regarded as specifically the same, so 

 far as cranial and dental characters are concerned. Regarding, tlierefore, this second 

 species of Cave-Bear as undistinguishable by dental and osteological characters from 

 the Grizzly Bear and its varieties, what is here said of the one, in comparing it with 

 U. arctos, will apply to the other. 



I have already observed that some of the most important distinctive characters 

 between these very closely allied forms are found in the cranium and face, parts which 

 are not afi'orded in the the Gibraltar collection ; the comparison, therefore, can be 

 only very incomplete and inconclusive. The parts upon which I have been compelled 

 principally to rely for the means of diagnosis are the horizontal ramus of the lower 

 jaw, the dentition, and to some extent the axis vertebra. With respect to the 

 other bones of the skeleton, my own observation leads me quite to agree with A. 

 Wagner^, who remarks that after twenty years' study of bears, fossil and recent, he 

 considers that no characters can be drawn from any of the bones of the skeleton except 

 the skull and teeth. The only differences, he says, may be regarded as individual, except 

 as respects the metacarpals and metatarsals, and, he might have added, the phalanges. 



' Goldfues, Ac. CsES. Leop. Nova Acta, x. 1821, p. 449. 



° Cuvier {op. cii. vii. p. 242) eaya that Goldfuss had given the name of U. prisciis to this skiill, but upon 

 what authority I am not aware. The term employed by Goldfuss is U. fossilis. 

 ' Wiegm. Archiv, 1843, i. pp. 24-42. 



