The Mortal Remains of Swedenborg. 7 



tion of the corresponding part of the skull. Now, on the contrary, 

 the cast of the skull from Wellclose Square with its atrophied alveolar 

 process shows that the teeth, and especially the canine, and its neigh- 

 bours on the right side, must have been lost a long time before death, 

 whereas the condition of the lower jawbone from Swedenboeg's coffin 

 with manifest remains of the canine and the bicuspids in its well pre- 

 served alveolar process on the right side indicates that they have been 

 used for chewing up to a period not very long before death, which 

 should have been impossible if the opposite teeth in the upper jaw had 

 not been preserved up to about the same time. 



Finally, I shall refer to the oft-quoted characterization of the 

 skull of Sw^EDENBOEG by the sculptor Flaxman, who examined it at the 

 house of Mr. Tulk. An eminent and experienced sculptor is generally 

 not unacquainted with anatomy, and he must in any case be endowed 

 with a fine sense of the normal forms of the human body. It is quite 

 impossible that such a man, if he had in his hands this abnormal, 

 scaphocephalic skull could say: »How beautiful the form! . . . Here 

 is no deficiency!» And Flaxman's further declaration: »Why, I should 

 almost take it for a female head, were it not for the peculiar character 

 of the forehead», is exactly the contrary of what is characteristic for 

 the skull in question. Everyone who is acquainted with the sexual 

 differences of human crania, must admit that this skull is of a decided 

 masculine type, and that if it in any point at all approaches to the 

 female type, it is just in regard to the forehead! 



The facts now related seem fully to justify the conclusion that 

 the Wellclose Square skull is not Swedenboeg's, and the results of our 

 former investigation — the statement that the skull which now 

 lies in Swedenboeg's coffin in the Cathedral of Upsala, with 

 the greatest degree of probability may be regarded as genuine 

 — can still be fully maintained, no invalidating reasons having been 

 forthcoming. 



With regard to the considerable value that a collector of curios 

 may attach to such a rarity as a skull of Emanuel Swedenboeg, I 

 should be very much surprised if not more than one »genuine» skull 

 of the great mystic should make its appearance in the future. Still, 

 judging from the present case, it will probably be fairly awkward to 

 find any real proofs countervailing those on which the opinion ex- 

 pressed in my account is based. 



Upsala, April, 1912. 



