443 
back, in proportion to its height and transverse diameter. Its ante- 
rior tubercle was entirely wanting, and its posterior hardly perceptible. 
From these characters he is led to think that the fossil hyena had 
the muzzle much shorter in proportion, than the hyena of the Levant, 
by which it must have bitten stronger ; which is not easy to conceive, 
since the hyena is known never to quit its hold. The Arabs, when 
speaking of one obstinate in his opinion, call him the head of a hyena. 
Calculating the size of the hyena to which the last-mentioned fragment 
belonged, M. Cuvier believes that it also must have exceeded the 
common hyena of the Levant one-fifth in size. 
The confirmation of these bones having belonged to a species of 
hyena was obtained by the appearances yielded by the other bones, 
and particularly by the portion of the humerus, and by an astragalus. 
The difference of species, between the fossil hyena and that of the 
Levant, was also plainly shown by these specimens. 
Besides these remains of the hyena, M. Cuvier obtained, from Gay- 
lenreuth, the side jaw, with four grinders, very little injured, and the 
articular condyle and lower edge quite whole. By comparing this 
jaw, which was of an aged animal, with that of the hyena of the Le- 
vant, it was found to exceed it, in the proportion of three to two. . 
There, however, remained two more living species, with which it 
was desirable these fossil remains should be compared. The skin of 
one of these, the hyena of the Cape, being in the Museum, with the 
teeth preserved in it, M. Cuvier made a comparison of the teeth, and 
was very much surprised at finding a precise agreement between the 
fossil teeth and those of this animal. Consequently, as M. Cuvier 
remarks, if the fossil hyena has its analogue in this world, it is to be 
sought for in the hyena of the Cape. 
He then proceeds to observe, that it is hardly necessary to mention 
that the resemblance between the teeth does not absolutely prove the 
perfect identity of the species, and that there might be differences be- 
tween the skeletons, and even between the integuments. But even ad„ 
