SIWALIK AND NARBADA CARNIVORA. 
123—300 
pm. 3 are wanting, the shape of their alveoli shows that these teeth were remarkably 
long and narrow ; no other species of the genus of which the skull is known having 
teeth of similar proportions. Pm. 4 is preserved in a somewhat damaged condition on 
the right side, and is relatively short; with the proportions of the corresponding tooth 
of II. striata ; the hind lobe not being relatively as large as in H. colvini and IT. crocuta. 
M. 1 is unusually large ; agreeing almost exactly in size with the corresponding 
tooth of II. ( Hycenidis ) grceca. 1 2 3 * On the right side this tooth is situated almost 
entirely behind pm. 4 : — a peculiarity known only in this and the next species. On 
the opposite side the homologous tooth is also placed unusually far back. 
In respect of all the dental characters indicated above (vis., the elongated 
premolars, the long interval between the canine and pm. 2 , and the large size and 
backward position of m. 1 ) the skull under consideration makes a marked step from 
typical hyaenas in the direction of Canis and the Viverridce. The long narrow palate 
is also another character indicating affinity in the same direction. 
The form of the posterior free border of the palate (pal.) is different from that 
of any other species of hyaena of which the skull is known ; in all of which this 
part forms a regular U-shaped notch. In the present specimen, however, the centre 
of this part forms a straight line, at either extremity of which the lateral borders of 
the posterior nares (partly broken in the specimen) commence nearly at right angles, 
and continue with a marked inward inclination towards the pterygoids. In this 
respect the specimen agrees exactly with Canis 2, ; and if a skull of that genus had 
m. 2 removed, and m. 1 reduced in size, and placed internally to pm. 4 , it would be 
almost impossible to distinguish its palate from that of the present specimen. In 
Iditheriumf the form of this part is as in Bycena : in Viverra it is also very similar, 
the lateral borders of the nares running, however, antero-posteriorly in place of 
inclining inwards. In Cynodidis 4 the free border of the palatines and the form of 
the posterior nares appears to be very similar to that obtaining in Canis and the 
fossil under consideration. 
The other parts of the base of the fossil skull do not present any very striking 
features : but, as in other hyaenas, there is no postglenoid foramen. On its superior 
aspect the skull is distinguished from all other hyaenas by the small development of 
the sagittal crest (see plate XXXVI., fig. 2) ; in this respect nearly resembling the 
skull of an immature individual of a typical hyaena (ibid., fig. I). 5 The profile of 
the sagittal crest is markedly convex ; — more so than in any allied genus. The 
orbit is relatively large (the vertical diameter in the fossil and II. striata being 
respectively T5, and 1*33 inches); and the postorbital processes of the frontal are 
small. The anterior nasal aperture is oval and relatively large ; and the nasals are 
unusually long, their respective inner diameters in the fossil and II. striata being 
1 Gaudry, “ Animaux Fossiles et Geologie de l’Attique,” pi. XV., fig. 6. 
2 The median prominence for muscular attachment may he disregarded : it has probably been broken away in the fossil. 
3 Gaudry, op. cit., pi. VII. 4 Filhol, “Phosphorites du Quercy,” figs. 60, 63. 
5 Fig. 1 has the occipital region more elevated than it is in fig. 2. 
