ORDO CARNIVORA. 349 
As remarked by Prof. Th. Studer, to whom I gave simply the occipital bone 
and piece of skull of the still unreconstructed cranium for examination, this piece 
of the skull possesses in a high degree the peculiarity and character of the dingo 
or the pariah dog. However, after closer comparison made later with the com- 
pletely reconstructed skull, I was able to decide that it has a very strongly marked 
resemblance to the European shepherd-dog, especially in the facial part. The 
only differences that this skull shows from the Canis matris optime of Jeitteles 
are that the upper jaw is less pointed and the palate a little broader than in the 
latter. This means that the muzzle of the Anau dog was somewhat shorter and 
broader than that of the prehistoric European shepherd-dog. As appears from 
the measurements, indeed, the skulls of the dingo and pariah dog agree very well 
with those of the Anau dog. Here, too, the muzzle is always a little longer and 
narrower, and the zygomatic arch a little wider than in our dog. Nevertheless, 
these differences are not great. They are even smaller than those produced by 
the difference in sex between two upper Egyptian pariah dogs published by Studer. 
That the Anau dog belongs to the shepherd-dog or to the pariah dog, which 
resembles the shepherd-dog, will be made clear by the following relations of the 
basicranial axis to the basifacial axis. 
Table showing relations between the basicramal axis and the bastfacial axis expressed in proportions to 100, 









. | Anau dog, | 
gx opent pene Pariah dog. Dingo. Shepherd-dog. | North— 
‘sma iste Kurgan. 
30.5 36.3 36.5 Nepaul. 281 40 Germany. 41.8 
36.8 38.3 39.0 Egypt. Ala3 41.9 France. 
B77 ONG, 39.1 Egypt. 41.9 41.9 Canis matris optime fossil. | 
85.7 39.4 39.8 Bengal. 
B0n1 39.8 Sumatra. 
40.8 Egypt. | 


Here again it is clear that the Anau dog can have nothing to do with the 
wolves or wolf-dogs, in which the basicranial axis is 36 to 39 per cent of the basi- 
facial axis, or with the hound, in which this is 35 to 37 per cent. 
What we deduced, from direct measurements as to the form and size of the 
skull, is thus clearly illustrated in these very constant ratios; and it appears that 
our dog, standing near to the dingo as well as to the small Russian fossil wild dog, 
(Cams poutiatint), must be assigned to the shepherd-dogs or to the pariah dogs 
which resemble them. This relation is very well shown further in the ratio between 
the cranial height and length, which is clearly expressed in the following table: 
Table showing the cranial height expressed in percentages of the length. 



Indian wolf. Dingo. Shepherd-dog. Pariah dog, 
Bibel Pe 30.9 32.7 Canis matris optima, fossil dog. 31.7 Nepaul. 
27.8 hen 32.9 Anau dog. 33.8 Egypt. 
28 ion 33.5 France. 35.0 Egypt. 
30.2 Sialece 34.5 Germany. ae 






