250 



PROF. W. BOYD DAWKINS ON THE 



and minimum measurements) vary considerably in size and form, 

 especially the metacarpals, tarsals, and phalanges. These in some 

 cases would be referred to Roe-deer, had they not formed part of 

 this large series. 



The number of individuals indicated by these remains is certainly 

 not less than twenty, and it may range as high as thirty. 



§ 4. Grisly Bear. — The genus Ursus is represented by seven 

 jaws, eight teeth, and 46 fragmentary bones, which, with one ex- 

 ception, belong to adults in the full prime of life ; and the number 

 of individuals indicated is four, and perhaps five. 



The five canines vary considerably in size and form, as may be 

 seen from the following Table, in which I have inserted, for the sake 

 of comparison, the corresponding measurements of teeth of the Cave- 

 bear from Wookey Hole : — 





Max. 



length. 



Length 



of 

 crown. 



Length 



of 



fang. 



Cir- 

 cumfe- 

 rence 



of 

 crown. 



Cir- 

 cumfe- 

 rence 



of 

 fang. 



r c ] Windy Knoll ... 

 Ursus ferox . . . < | c „ 



5-0 

 50 



1-5 

 1-5 



1-5 



35 



3-5 



3-3 



•33 



3-3 



4-0 

 40 





50 



1-5 



3-5 



33 



4-0 



4-0 

 4-2 

 43 

 4-2 

 4-3 







Ursus spelcsus • 



( \c Wookey Hole . . . 

 _£_) 

 \c_ 

 c_\ 



5-5 

 5-6 

 5-8 

 5-8 

 60 



554 



1-5 

 1-4 

 1-5 

 1-6 

 1-7 



1-55 



4-0 

 42 

 4-3 

 4-2 

 43 



4-2 



3-3 

 3-5 

 3-5 

 3-5 

 36 



Av< 



?rage 



348 



4-2 







rr , \\c Windy Knoll ... 

 Ursus jerox ... 1 \ — J 



\o_\ 



Ursus sjpelcBUS ... c 1 Wookey Hole . . . 



.. 



56 



1-3 



1-2 

 1-4 



3-2 



33 

 2-4 

 34 



37 



From this examination of the canines of the upper jaw it is obvious 

 that the species with which we are dealing falls below the standard 

 of size of the teeth of the Cave-bear of Wookey Hole. The lower 

 canines, on the other hand, vary considerably in size, the larger of 

 the two approaching very nearly to that of the Cave-bear. This 

 variation, however, is probably sexual ; and the smaller of the two 

 may be referred with considerable probability to the female, the 

 larger to the male. 



The comparison of the canines of Ursus arctos and U. jpriscut 



