26 



BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY 



'nr.M.. :-: 



age. It is not a fresh skull ; the hones are quite brittle and seem to be 

 largely devoid of animal matter, but no claim is made that it is very 

 ancient, and there is no probability that it is so. 



This cave skull (figure 3) is in all essential features closely related 

 to the Calaveras specimen. It has similarly strongly developed 

 supraorbital ridges, extending along the entire superior border of the 

 orbits; similar depression between the ridges, over the glabella; simi- 

 larly marked nasal depression below the glabella, and about the same 

 development of the marginal process of the malar, of this bone itself, 

 of the zygoma, and of the nasal spine. There seem to have been pres- 



FIG. 3. Cave skull, Calaveras county, California ; side view. 



ent also slight nasal gutters. The orbits in the specimen catalogued 

 as no. 225172 are slightly more quadrangular, but otherwise are nearly 

 like those in the Calaveras skull. The alveolar process in no. 225172 

 has suffered no absorption ; owing to this fact and to the absence from 

 the cave skull of injuries, the lower parts of the faces of the two speci- 

 mens differ in appearance, but this dissimilarity is not morphological. 

 The forehead in no. 225172, though slightly narrower than that in the 

 Calaveras skull, is very nearly as well arched. On the whole, the 

 structural resemblance between this cave skull and the Cal:iv.-r;i- 

 cranium are close enough not only for racial, but even for tribal, 

 relationship. 



