539 
flatter, and there are others I have observed to which 1 
shall shortly allude. 
In the specimen to which I have to call your attention, 
the characters of the Wolf are not developed, and it con- 
sequently suggests the probability of its having belonged 
to a Do°r. The absence of these characters does not arise 
from age, as the animal appears to have been mature. The 
sutures of the cranium are perfectly united, the teeth full 
formed, and if we may judge by comparison of the skull, 
the animal has been rather larger than the Greyhound of 
the present day ; probably more resembling the ancient 
Irish Staghound, remains of which occur in the bogs in 
Ireland, and I believe in similar situations with those of the 
Wolf and Gigantic Deer. 
When compared with the skull of a young Wolf of equal 
size, the difference in form is very perceptible. The greater 
length and narrowness of the intermaxillaries and nasal 
bones, the smaller size of the canine teeth, and the still 
smaller size of the molar teeth, the latter of which are at 
most only about one half the size of those of the young 
Wolf. Although our specimen, as I have already stated, 
has been a mature individual, which is an important point 
to bear in mind, as, supposing it to have belonged to a Wolf, 
these characters ought to have been just the reverse. The 
incisors, also, are much smaller in our specimen. In the 
young Wolf s head, I observe a greater breadth of the 
nasal cavity, one inch wider than in the Dog, and, 
consequently, more space for the turbinated bones, upon 
which are spread the olfactory nerves or organs of scent, 
a faculty peculiarly acute in the Wolf, but the reverse in 
Dogs of the Greyhound tribe, which chase more by sight. 
The orbital projections are more acute, the width across 
this portion of the head being greater by half an inch, and 
the occipital ridge more elevated than in the Wolf, with 
t t 2 
