SIWALIK AND NARBADA CARNIVORA. 
37—214 
U. labiatus. On the right side of the specimen (< ground down since the figure was 
made) the alveolus of this tooth shows that it bore two stout fangs on both the outer 
and the inner sides, the hinder one of the latter pair being elongated posteriorly, 
and at the base of the crown united, with the anterior roots of the same side : the 
union of these roots did not, however, extend so deep down as in U. torquatus and 
U. arctos. The dimensions of the whole alveolus of this tooth show that it must 
have attained dimensions proportionately very similar to those of the corresponding 
tooth of U. maritimus , and must have been relatively much narrower than in typical 
macrodont bears like U. arctos and U. torquatus. The early premolars correspond 
precisely with those of U. labiatus. 
These comparisons indicate that the cheek-teeth of the skull under consideration, 
though agreeing in position with those of U. labiatus , must have been intermediate 
in their proportionate size between the latter and the cheek-teeth of typical species 
of bear; and that in this respect they approached nearest to the teeth of 
U. maritimus. This resemblance is not, however, in all probability indicative of any 
direct affinity with that species, since the characters of the palate, and the position 
of the early premolars all point to strong affinity with U. labiatus. Since the 
premaxillse of the specimen have been broken away, it is impossible to determine 
whether the middle pair of incisors was absent, as in the last-named species. That 
portion of the premaxillse still remaining shows, however, that in the fossil, as in 
U. labiatus , there must have been a considerable interval between the canine and the 
outer incisor, which in other bears are approximated : the outer incisor was relatively 
small, as in JJ. labiatus , and quite different from the large size which this tooth 
attains in U. arctos. 
As far as the battered condition of the specimen under consideration admits of 
comparison, the other most important points in which it differs .from the skull of 
JJ. labiatus are, firstly, the form of the glenoid cavity (gl.), which is more produced 
transversely, and has its anterior (preglenoid) process more distinctly developed ; 
probably indicating greater power of jaw, and closely resembling the corresponding 
part in the polar bear ; and, secondly, the vaulting, in place of the flatness, of the 
sphenoidal region ; the latter character being probably correlated with the excessive 
vaulting of the palate. On its superior aspect the fossil skull appears to have the 
profile of the cranial box much less vaulted than in TJ. labiatus ; . and the nasal profile 
less concave: the muzzle appears also broader and flatter: the orbits of the two 
forms agree, however, in having their antero-posterior diameter longer than the 
vertical one, and in this respect differ from other bears. 
Finally it may be said that while the skull under consideration comes nearest to 
that of JJ. labiatus , of all sufficiently described species of bears, given in the above 
list , 1 yet that the points of difference between the two are so strongly marked that 
there cannot be the slightest doubt but that they are specifically distinct. Under 
i Its distinctness from U. mmadicus of Falconer and Cautley will be indicated in the sequel. 
J 
