42 



TIVEREID^. 



Mr. Waterhouse, in the 'Proceedings of the Zoological Society f 

 for 1839, in a paper " On the Dentition of Camivora," observes, 

 " The Vivemdm have the same form of skuU as the Ganidce, but 

 differ in having the posterior portion more produced ; the long palate 

 is carried further back, and the small back molar, observable in the 

 lower jaw of the Dog, is here wanting. They have, therefore, but 

 one true molar on either side of the lower jaw, and two true molars 

 on each side of the upper jaw." The form of the palate here relied 

 on is not found in aU the genera of the family, and sometimes varies 

 in genera which are very nearly aUied both in external characters 

 and dentition. 



The Hyaena Mr. "Waterhouse was inclined to regard as an aberrant 

 form of Viverridse. Its camassier has a large inner lobe, and in 

 this respect also resembles the Yiverra's and not the Cat's. 



(See also some observations by me on the change of the teeth, &c., 

 in some of the genera, in a paper in the • Proceedings of the Zoolo- 

 gical Society' for 1832, pp. 32, 62.) 



There can be no doubt that the skuU affords very important cha- 

 racters, especially for the division of the species into groups or geilera, 

 and also for the distinction of the species ; but no one can examine 

 an extensive series of skulls, even of animals obtained from the same 

 locality, without "being struck with the variation the skull presents 

 during the growth and age of the animal, and also the variation 

 which the specimens of the same age present, showing that the skull 

 and the teeth are qxiite as liable to vary in form in each species 

 (within certain limits, these limits being different in the various 

 species) as any other part of the animal; so that a species cannot be 

 said to be flrrnly established until the external form, the bones, and 

 the habit of the species have been carefully studied, distinctly show- 

 ing that the labours of the palaeontolog^t in a zoological point of 

 view are very unsatisfactory, from the necessary want of material 

 for forming a reliable determination of species. 



The late Mr. Turner made some -very interesting observations on 

 the base of the crania of the Camivora, with a new distribution of 

 the genera (see Proc. Zool. Soc. 1848, p. 63). It is to be regretted 

 that he died so young, and could not continue his researches ; for I 

 have no doubt he would have thrown great light on the structure of 

 the skulls of this group, as he always followed my studies like a 

 shadow. Thus when I published my "Arrangement of the HoUow- 

 horned Euminants " in 1846 (Ann. N. H. xvui. p. 277), he shortly 

 after read his paper on their skuUs (see Proc. Zool. Soc. 1850, p. 164); 

 when I commenced the study of the species of Edentata by a mono- 

 graph of Bradypus in Proc. Zool. Soc. 1849, p. 65, he read his paper 

 on the skuU of Edentata in 1851. Being an observant and (jareful 

 osteologist, he observed many particulars that a general zoologist 

 would have overlooked ; but this limitation of his study confined his 

 views ; so that he would not allow such genera as Saiga, Panthohps, 

 or Tamandua (which have such striking external characters), be- 

 cause he did not observe such differences in the skuUs as he con- 

 sidered of generic importance. 



