iipio Species of Uritis/f Bear. 495 



respects, nitli a diastema tliat is i-clativcly loii^'ci" than in 

 tlie Oxford jaw, l)iit of the same [)n)portioii as the; diastcnua 

 in the jaw of a recent Brown Bear. Tlie develo[)incnt of 

 tlie snbangle (s.) is inconspicnous (PI. III. fii::. 1-J. 



Neitlier the coni[)lete skeleton of tlie Fen Heai', U. arcloa, 

 nor any of the other bear-sknl!s iii the Camljridge Museum, 

 wliich we were able to examine through the courtesy of 

 Prof. jMarr and of Dr. Foster Cooper, show the extraordinary 

 develoi^ment in the thickness of the lower mandible between 

 the angle and the subaiiglc, which is so striking a feature of 

 the Oxford jaw. 



We have also referred to the paper of Von Reiehenau 

 (Abh. d. Hessisch. Geol. Landesanstalt z. Darmstadt, 190G) 

 and to the excellent summary by Freudenberg (Saugetiere 

 d. iilteren Quartars v. Mittel-Europa, 1914), without, how- 

 ever, finding convincing evidence for referring these British 

 Bears to any Continental species other than the Ursus 

 arctos, L., which we think it expedient to divide. It must, 

 however, be mentioned that some of Yon Reichenau''s figures 

 were taken from IVagmentary specimens. 



The excellent preservation of the taxonomic characters of 

 this lower mandible, their resemblance to those of some 

 other British Pleistocene bear-remains^ and their distinction 

 from those of living U. arctos appear valid reasons for the 

 formation of a new species, based on the Magdalen College 

 jaw as the type. Por this we propose the name Ursus 

 anglicus. 



The special features which are suggested by the Oxford 

 and allied jaws as characteristic of this species are : the 

 relatively long tooth-range, including a large subrectangular 

 third molar instead of one of subtriangular outline; no 

 trace of the [)m2 or pm3, which not infrequently occur in 

 living Brown Bears; an extensive symphysis of great 

 strength ; a rounded alveolar border in the diastema, 

 whereas this border is sharp, in fact a ^' knife-edge^" both 

 in living U. arctos and in U. savini (Andrews, Ann. & Mag. 

 1922); condyles large and wide; great thickness of bone 

 in the region of the angle and the subangular process, 

 which last is conspicuously prominent. 



In this species we should also include the Essex Bear from 

 Grays, B.M. No. 22029, and No. 858 in the College of Sur- 

 geons, both hitherto named U. horribiiis. The ^' U. arctos^'* 

 B.M. No. ^I. 2507, a less poAvei-ful bear, merits farther 

 consideration. 



1£ subsequent materials should indicate the former exist- 

 ence of different local races, I would name the one, of which 



