222 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bdll. 52 



not accompanied by exact measurements and photograpliic records, 

 both of wliich in cases of this nature must be regarded as indis- 

 pensable. We are told that there was only a part of the carapace, 

 but are left in doubt as to how large that part was, how deep it lay, 

 exactly how it was related to the human bones, and exactly how deep 

 these were buried. 



The barren surface in which the find was made is mentioned as 

 "exposed through denudation," but it is not clear how deep this 

 denudation was and whether it was recent or of ancient date. Most 

 of the points here cited may not be of paramount importance, but in 

 a case hke this full and precise data relating to every particular are 

 needed. 



The carapace of the glyptodon, which lay inverted over the human 

 bones, affords some means of estimating the depth of the latter be- 

 neath the surface at the time of the discovery. The complete cara- 

 pace of a full grown glyptodon measures about 3 feet in height, but as 

 in this case only part of the shield was present and as the border of 

 tliis, moreover, protruded from the ground, the human bones must 

 have been buried less than 3 feet deep. Even if it be granted that 

 the locality had been denuded of its humus layer and perhaps even of 

 the uppermost layers of the soil beneath, the depth at which the 

 human bones lay must be regarded as having been moderate. 



The different parts of the skeleton were somewhat scattered, yet 

 larger or smaller fragments of practically all the bones remained. 

 This does not seem to warrant the conclusion that the body lay until 

 decomposed on the surface of the ground. If left thus, it would have 

 fallen in all probability a prey to carnivorous animals and the body, 

 or parts of it, would have been scattered, destroyed, or carried away. 

 It appears much more probable that the body was buried and that 

 most if not all the dissociation, fragmentation, and loss of parts of 

 the bones, occurred subsequently beneath the surface, through the 

 agency of inundations or other forces. 



The theory of accidental burial, advanced by Roth, encounters^ 

 however, another serious objection. If the remains of the body were 

 covered through natural means, as claimed, we must ask how the 

 empty and overturned glytodon carapace came to lie directly over 

 the human skeleton. Glyptodon skeletons occupying inverted posi- 

 tions may be common enough but here we have the carapace only, 

 with no intimation or evidence that the spot was ever a bed or a 

 gully into which a glyptodon could roll and die, lying on its back, 

 directly over a human skeleton. Moreover, if the human remains 

 had been covered with loess through natural means, it is reasonable 

 to suppose that the same thing would have happened at least in part 

 with the skeletal remains of the glyptodon other than the carapace, 

 but no trace of any of the bones of the animal, or of the scales of the 



