The skull of a Lidia bull

We have no living specimen of aurochs to study and compare with aurochs-like cattle, and we tend to compare the living animal in flesh with the skeletal material of the aurochs - this is comparing apples to bananas and is prone to errors. That is why I think it is very interesting to compare what is comparable, namely bones to bones. Months ago I found a photo of a mounted skeleton of a Heck bull (go here). Recently I found a photo that is equally interesting, a photo of a Lidia bull skull (go here). Here is a photo of the skull on display the Naturkundemuseum Berlin for comparsion: 

How does the skull of this Spanish fighting bull compare to that of an aurochs? What is striking is that the snout seems to be as long as in the aurochs relative to the distance between the eye sockets, what means that this individual had a snout as long as in the aurochs in life. The postorbital portion, however, is definitely shorter as in the aurochs (I know the perspective is not ideal, but I have seen many aurochs skulls from that perspective and the postorbital region is always longer). This could maybe go hand in hand with the reduced brain volume of domestic cattle and paedomorphy. The eye sockets are not as pronounced and massive as in the aurochs, but I am not sure if that difference would be visible in the living animal. Also, not all aurochs bulls had eye sockets as prominent as in the Berlin skull, f.e. the skull of the Vig skeleton has less prominent eye sockets. The horns of the Lidia skull unfortunately have their sheaths still on, but I think it is obvious that the horns of the Lidia bull are smaller than in the aurochs, less curved and point forwards in a sharper angle as in the aurochs. 

All in all I would say that a Lidia skull is similar to that of the aurochs, but there are differences, most notably in the postorbital region and the horns.