﻿UJRSUS. 3 



In 1810 Golclfuss 1 published a memoir in which he attempted to distinguish a 

 third species of fossil bears, named 77. prisms. This was accepted by Cuvier. 3 

 Meanwhile the fossil bones of bears were being discovered in several localities in 

 England, notably in the caves of Kirkdale, Yorkshire (whence Buckland 3 described 

 rare fragments), and Oreston, near Plymouth (Clift and Whidbey). 4 



In 1825 Cuvier in the third edition of ' Ossemens Fossiles ' reverted 5 to the 

 conclusion that the forms called 77. spelseus and arctoideus were only varieties of 

 the same species. De Blainville, however, remarked that Cuvier' s unfortunate 

 establishment of a new species on insufficient evidence gave an impulse to this 

 practice, which was exaggerated in the hands of less skilful palaeontologists. In 

 proof of this he referred to Croizet and Jobert 7 (1828) who believed they could 

 recognise 77. cultridcns by a single canine, and sought to establish a new species 

 77. arvernensis on a fragment of the anterior part of the skull, a humerus and 

 other isolated bones. The work of M. de Serres 8 is an instance of the same 

 method. 



P. C. Schmerling 9 (1833), although he corrected certain mistakes of Cuvier, 

 was led by his example to establish several new species on material more or less 

 incomplete. He concluded that no less than fiye species of bears lived in the 

 Liege district — viz., 77. sjpeleeus and arctoideus, Blum., 77. prisons, Goldf., and two 

 new species, 77. giganteus and leodiensis. In 1842 Owen 10 described a fine skull of 

 the brown bear from Manea fen, Cambridge. 



"With the increase of knowledge and facilities for comparison, the extreme 

 difficulty of recognising specific distinctions between the various bears began to be 

 apparent, with a tendency to group together several forms which had previously 

 been regarded as distinct species. This tendency was first shown by de Blainville 11 

 who in 1844 gave a detailed and critical account of the different kinds of fossil 

 bears with splendid illustrations. Further reference to his conclusions follows 

 later, but it may be mentioned here that he considered all the bears, living and 

 fossil, found in Europe to belong to one species, but thought there were two races 

 of fossil bears, a larger race the male of which was represented by 77. giganteus and 

 77. spelseus major and the female by 77. arctoideus and 77. leodiensis, and a smaller 

 race in which the male was represented by 77. spelseus minor and the female by 

 77. prisons. He considered that a second small species wr* represented by Ursus 



1 ' Verb audi, kaiserl. Leopold. -Karolin. Akad. der Naturforscher,' x, 2, p. 260. 



2 ' Oss. Foss.,' ed. 3, 1825, iv, p. 380. 



» ' Reliquiae diluvianae,' ed. 2, p. 17; and 'Phil. Trans.,' 1822, p. 171. 

 * ' Phil. Trans.,' cxiii, 1823, p. 88. 5 Tom. iv, p. 358. 



c ' Osteographie,' Carnassiers, p. 50. 7 ' Eech. Oss. foss. Puy de Dome,' p. 628. 



s 'Bull. univ. des Sci. Nat.,' 1830, xii, no. 19, p. 161. 

 9 ' Eecherclies Oss. foss. Cavernes de Liege.' 

 10 ' Eep. Brit. Assoc.,' 1842, p. 69. n ' Osteographie,' Carnassiers, p. 38. 



