178 
THE MAMMALS OE EGYPT. 
(1172 d) has the third upper premolar 14‘8 mm. long, while in the Indian cats that 
tooth seldom, if ever, exceeds 13 mm. 
A male from Persia, No. 53.1.6.86 in British Museum, has a basal length of 100 mm., 
and the third upper premolar 14-3 long, thus approaching the Caucasian and Egyptian 
races. 
The skulls of the Indian form are always distinguished by the upper half of the 
nasals being arched when viewed in profile, the area between the arched portion and 
tlieir extremities being concave. In the Egyptian skulls, male and female, the arching 
and concavity are absent, the skull sloping down evenly from the frontal. 
In the British Museum there are the skin and skull of a male cat obtained by Tristram 
at Jericho, No. 64.8.17.4. The skin is exactly the same as that of the Egyptian 
examples of F. chaus. The skull has the same form in the fronto-nasal region as in the 
skull of my Egyptian specimen, but although a much smaller skull, its third upper 
preraolar is considerably larger. The Egyptian male skull has an extreme length of 
129 mm., and the Jericho male skull only 112 mm. The third upper premolar of the 
former measures 16 mm., and that of the latter 18 mm.; the lower premolars of the 
Jericho cat are also absolutely larger than those of the big Egyptian cat. In the 
Egyptian skull the canines are fully through the jaw and finally rooted, whereas in the 
Jericho skull they are only two-thirds through. The latter skull would probably have 
grown considerably larger, whereas the Egyptian skull had evidently attained its limit 
of growth. In the Jericho skull there is a well-pronounced mammillary process at the 
base internally of the first trenchant cusp of the second upper premolar. A similar 
process is also developed in the skull of a female from Egypt, No. 92.5.22.1, but in the 
adult male it is absent on the left and very feebly indicated on the right. In the skull 
1172 (?, from the Caucasus, this process is tolerably well developed, and it is also 
indicated on the left side in the Persian skull 53.1.6.86. 
In ten skulls from India there is no trace of the process in the second upper premolar, 
and all the skulls have a convexity at the middle of the nasals and a concavity in front 
of it, indeed a nez retrousse ; whereas the Egyptian, Palestine, and Persian skulls do not 
show these features ; the convexity is there but not the concavity. 
There is another peculiarity in the dentition of the skull from Jericho, viz., that the 
first upper premolar is placed transversely to the other teeth. In the specimen from 
Persia the first premolar on the left side is placed distinctly obliquely, and that on 
the right less so. 
Undoubtedly the most remarkable skull is the one from Jericho, which has teeth 
absolutely larger than in specimens from Egypt, although the skull is much smaller. 
With only one Palestine skull at my disposal it is impossible to say whether the great 
size of the teeth in this specimen is merely individual or whether it is distinctive of 
the Palestine cats as a whole; I mean those with the external features of F. chaus. 
