260 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 52 



conviction that it is impossible to deduce from the study of this 

 material any far-reaching conclusions. It would seem that previously 

 the skeleton, and especially the skull, were in better state. . . . 



"The petrifaction of all the skeletal parts is complete [?] ; the loess 

 which still adheres to them is so hard and so firmly attached to the 

 bones that it can not be separated except by the action of heat or 

 acids. 



"The larger part of the skeleton has been submitted to strong 

 pressure, as the result of which one of the femurs, for example, pre- 

 sents to-day more than 60 fragments. These are solidly reunited [by 

 the loess] but not exactly in their natural positions, from which has 

 resulted an important modification in the original form of the bones. 

 On the basis of this fact, I do not believe that I can follow Roth's 

 opinion, which is that the present eroded and cracked condition of 

 the bones is due to weathering. In my opinion it is more probable 

 that the bones were thus broken within the ground. 



"The remains of the skeleton consist of the following parts: Frag- 

 ments of the skull, formed of small pieces of the vault in very irregular 

 agglomeration. The majority of the fragments belong to the frontal 

 and the parietals," others representing parts of the occipital and the 

 right temporal bones. There are- present also a portion of the upper 

 jaw, two parts of the lower jaw, the shafts of the two femora, the 

 tibiae and fibulae (broken and much compressed), and a fragment of 

 the left OS calcis. 



All the better-preserved parts indicate, according to Martin, that 

 the skeleton was that of an adult male, of stature well above the 

 medium for whites. 



The remnants of the skull are in such condition that no safe con- 

 clusions can be drawn from them as to the cranial form. The bones 

 are not thick. The dental arches were evidently massive and strongly 

 developed. The lower jaw is stout, short, and high. Below the 

 oblique line and in front of the insertion of the masseter, there is a 

 strong protuberance or lateral mandibular eminence. The surface of 

 the insertion of the masseter is deeply grooved. The height of the 

 horizontal ramus in the region of the second molars amounts to 3 cm., 

 its thickness at the same point to 1.6 cm. The molar teeth, all of 

 which are preserved, although showing extreme wear, are large but 

 their characteristics are typically human. 



"The dimensions of the teeth are without doubt superior to those 

 which we encounter in Eui-opean skulls, but they would not surprise 

 us in the Indians of South America, who belong almost without 

 exception to macrodont varieties." 



The bicond^dar length of the femur has been fixed by Martin at 47.2 

 cm., which corresponds to the stature of about 1.70 meters. The 

 middle part of the shaft gave the diameters of 3.2 by 2.9 cm, on the 



