of R$_{σ}$ may produce good fits, as Fig. 13 clearly shows. The large R$_{σ}$ results from the low extrapolated central dispersion σ$_{0}$ of only 37 km s − $^{1}$, much less than found by direct fit in § 2. In scenario E, by contrast, the dispersion scale length of R$_{σ}$ = 0 . 75 kpc is much lower than the adopted photometric scale length of R$_{d}$ = 1 . 3 kpc. Here σ$_{0}$ is also very low, but the bulge dispersion is high enough to contribute much more to the dispersion profile than in the other scenarios, as is apparent from Fig. 7. Both scenarios suggest that σ$_{0}$ and R$_{σ}$ are not well constrained because of the large error bars in the LOS data. For the scale height z$_{d}$ , we find a value of 0 . 14 ± 0 . 01 kpc in scenario K and 0 . 24 ± 0 . 02 kpc in scenario E (Fig. 14). Both of these values are about one-fifth of the photometric scale length in scenarios K and E respectively, and are consistent with observations of the scale height in edge-on disc galaxies (Kregel et al. 2005). The posterior PDFs for the hole radius R$_{h}$ and the Kormendy index α are found in Fig. 15. We find R$_{h}$ = 0 . 7 ± 0 . 1 kpc and α = 0 . 9 ± 0 . 1. Our value for α is in conflict with Kormendy’s (1977) result that α = 3 for most galaxies (Baggett et al. 1998 also use α = 3 for their fits). A value of α = 3 yields a strong hole and therefore a very large bulge would be needed reproduce the SB profile. However, a large bulge would likely make the dispersion profile fit worse because the bulge is not likely to extend farther out than the highest dispersions at ∼ 300 pc. We note that all three runs suggest α ≪ 3; scenarios KL and KG yield α = 0 . 6 and α = 1 . 1, respectively. The results for the bulge parameters are found in Fig. 16. For scenario K, we find a bulge radius r$_{b}$ of 0 . 16 kpc and a S´ ersic index n$_{b}$ of 1 . 1, while scenario E yields a larger bulge with r$_{b}$ = 0 . 35 kpc and n$_{b}$ = 1 . 9. For scenarios KL and KG, the S´ ersic index is ∼ 0 . 9. Scenarios K, KL and KG thus suggest that the bulge of NGC 6503 is nearly exponential. Note that the linear fit n$_{b}$ given in § 2.1 is consistent with a pure exponential bulge. Scenario E suggests a cuspier bulge, but even here n$_{b}$ ≃ 2, within the range of so-called ‘pseudob- ulges’ (Kormendy & Kennicutt 2004). Bulges of this type are thought to be generated via internal secular evolution processes – the gradual buildup of gas in the centre of the galaxy – rather than violent mergers (see, e.g., Kormendy et al. 2006). Given the NGC 6503 is isolated, secular evolution is likely the dominant evolutionary mechanism. These bulges typ- ically resemble small discs embedded in larger discs – their morphologies resemble flattened spheroids more than elliptical galaxies and their kinematics are rotationally dominated, but we cannot constrain the rotation of NGC 6503’s bulge. 6.2. The bulge 20