28 
with the exception of the first left molar of the lower jaw; this latter had 
evidently been extracted during life, as the socket had been quite absorbed, 
leaving but a shallow depression in the bone. The upper central pair of 
incisors are widely separated and slightly divergent, the space between 
them being greater than the width of one of the incisors (6 mm.); they 
measure 5 and 5°50 mm. long respectively; greatest diameter 6 mm., 
shortest 4to 450mm. The second pair are shorter and measure 3°50 and 
4°75 mm. long; all four incisors have flat and broadly ovate crowns, the 
greatest length being from back to front; the canines are of the same 
character, but these and the succeeding teeth on both sides, z.e., premolars 
(2) and molars (1) gradually lengthen, the united edges of all of them 
forming a regular concave line fitting exactly the convex curvature of the 
teeth below (see figs. 2 and 3). The central teeth of the lower jaw are 
crowded and converge towards the centre; the incisors are longer than the 
upper set, and are much more compressed laterally, the crowns being oblong, 
ovate, and flat as in the upper examples; the outer walls of the premolars 
and molars being about half the height of the inner walls. 
The humerous is of exceptional interest in possessing that rarely 
developed bony process known as the supra-condyloid foramen ; which is said 
to be present in only a small percentage of individuals. * 
The character of the bones indicates the individual was a male, between 
the age of 50 and 60 years. 
No analysis of the bones has been made, but certain of them, more 
especially the femora have the appearance of containing a fair percentage 
of gelatine; while the scapule, vertebre, pelvis and ribs, appear much 
drier, and evidently contain an excess of the absorbent Calcareo-phosphatic 
earth, 
The deposit in which the remains were found is of glacial origin, as 
evidenced by the shells of Zurritella and other molluscs, and the presence 
of striated boulders ; but the presence of the land shells (Helix nemoralis), 
and the fragments of charcoal scattered throughout the section, undoubtedly 
point to a subsequent disturbance and reassortment of the deposit during 
much more recent times, and may in this particular locality have been 
brought about by the action of the tidal waves of the Dee Estuary. There 
is every indication also that the stratum of pebbles has been laid down by 
the action of water, similar to that which is going on at the present day 
along the banks of the Dee; and by the evidence of certain fragments of 
Romano-British Pottery associated with them and the superincumbent 
earth, it seems feasible enough to suppose that this part of the deposit 
was laid during the Roman occupation of Deva from the first to the fourth 
centuries. So far as my investigation goes no pottery has occurred below 
the stratum of pebbles; I presume, therefore, it is an older deposit, and 
this view seems to be strengthened by the presence in it of the remains of 
Bos longifrons. 
There is no evidence to prove that the human remains had been arti- 
ficially buried, z.e., by human agency, The stratum of pebbles and the 
clay above the skull showed no trace of disturbance, the latter -being one 
solid homogeneous mass ; and moreover, as has already been pointed out, 
the skull was lying face downwards. Taking all the facts into consideration 
it appears to me that the deposit of the skeleton took place simultaneously 
with the remains of the ox, the land shells and the charcoal; that it was 
probably brought about by the falling of the clay cliff or embankment at 
that particular spot. The water would readily render the clay plastic, which 
would account for the perfect preservation of the delicate shells of Helix 
nemoralis, What then is the age of the human remains? From all the 
evidence before me I think they cannot possibly be later than the Roman 
period, and it is highly probable they are of late neolithic origin. 
* Struthers’ Edin. Med. Jour., 1848. 
Gruber, ‘‘ Canalis supracondyloideus humeri,”” Mem. del’Acad. Imp. de St. Peters- 
burg, 1859, p- 57. 
Hyrtl. Topogr, Anal. VII, p. 283. 
