l66 ON RAINS CAVE, LONGCLIFFE, DERBYSHIRE. 



in that part of the cave, it is clear that it must have previously 

 lain, as a potsherd, elsewhere. It is by such little details as these 

 that the history of a cave is built up. 



The fragments of Skull E failed to reconstruct into more than 

 an imperfect calvaria, the face and basilar parts being lost or not 

 identified. The left half of the frontal and all the right temporal 

 are also missing, and the occipital is much broken. The tabular 

 bones generally are thick, but are not very dense. The general 

 outer surface is much decayed, and to a great extent the glossiness 

 of the inner surface has disappeared by the same cause. The 

 mastoids and the angular processes of the frontal are large and 

 rugged. The sutures are more often open, than not. That known 

 as the lamdoidal is extremely intricate ; and the sagittal but little 

 less so. The general contour is rounded, fairly well filled, and 

 typically dolichocephalic. The horizontal outline is an elongated 

 and symmetrical oval, closely resembling that of the Harborough 

 Rocks Skull, D 4 (Plate III., Vol. XII. of this " Journal ") except 

 that the present one is more full and rounded in front. The side 

 view presents a low but vertical forehead, with moderately de- 

 veloped superciliary ridges. The rest of the curve is very similar 

 to that of Skull D 5 (Plate IV. in the same volume). Viewed from 

 behind and before, the calvarial vault is seen to be shallow and 

 slightly carinated ; the parietal eminences but slightly developed ; 

 and the sides, vertical, hence parallel. Owing to the extremely 

 broken condition of this skull, only a few measurements can be 

 given, and these must be accepted as only approximately correct. 

 [See on next page.] 



Fragments of at least two other calvaria of similar thickness 

 and character were found scattered in the Refuse Layer, and, 

 presumably, both were of the earlier sepulchral period. Those 

 of one of them were blackened by fire, one fragment being so 

 much burnt as to be partially calcined. This is no proof of 

 cannibalism, nor even of a cremated interment, for in either case 

 we must surely have found some fragments of the rest of the 

 skull or of the bones of the trunk and limbs, also burnt. We know 

 that fire was a frequent concomitant of prehistoric burials, 



