No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Summary. The problem is to decide, given an African elephant's tooth, the position of that tooth in the series of six. This has been done hitherto by reference to the “ridge formula” whose origin is discussed, and which is shown (a) to have been commonly misinterpreted, and (b) to have been inaccurate in any case. The misleading results, including alleged evidence in support of the existence of a “pygmy” elephant, which resulted from this, are discussed. It has been found impossible to construct a ridge formula which would be of any use in the determination of the position of a tooth in the series and other methods are proposed including the use of two new indices—the laminary index and the enamel‐loop index. The conclusion is arrived at that teeth numbers I and II may always be identified with certainty, number III with fair certainty, and number VI with much less certainty. Numbers IV and V are not at all easily to be distinguished.

SUMMARY.A series of one hundred and ninety skulls of mummified cats, excavated at Gizeh, and dating from approximately 600‐200 B. C., has formed the basis of an enquiry into the identity of the cats of ancient Egypt. Statistical analysis of the measurements of these skulls, and a critical examination of the available evidence, lead to the view that two forms of cat were mummified. The larger form, which is not so common as a mummy, and which may or may not have been domesticated, represents Felis chaus. The smaller, and by far the commoner, mummies were thought by Ehrenberg (1833) to represent two forms, one larger than the other, and Ehrenberg's view has been adopted by many subsequent authors. But the evidence does not support this view and, apart from the large chaus, the cats mummified by ancient Egyptians appear to represent one form only, the skulls of which agree closely with those of the wild Felis libyca Forster, from which it was probably derived. If this view is correct this form should be known as Felis libyca bubastis Ehrenberg, 1833.From paintings and figures it seems that bubastis, which was certainly domesticated, was a ginger‐coloured cat, with rather long ears and legs, and with a long, ringed tail.