HRDLICKA] SKELETAL REMAINS 91 
time rodents did have access to these pieces, and as none of the speci- 
mens thus marked show weathering, they must have been reached by 
animals burrowing in the mound.* The smaller fragments of bones 
would thus certainly be dragged and displaced, and it is very likely 
that some of them would eventually come to rest at much lower 
levels than before. The results of the caving in of the burrows, 
especially of the spacious chambers characteristic of the dwellings 
of certain rodents, must also be considered in this connection. The 
depth the bits of bone could thus reach would be limited only by the 
depth of the burrowing, and that this may have reached in the fine 
loess 114 feet, or even more, will not be denied. It is apparent that 
this agency is sufficient to account for the presence of some, if not 
of all, of the smaller bones at the lower levels.. 
(d) The presence of knife marks on a number of the bones has an 
important bearing on the question of relationship of the bones of 
different layers to one another. These marks are seen, as has been 
noted, on bones from the more superficial as well as on some from 
the deeper layers. They are of similar character, occurring mostly 
on the edges or margins of the bones and in nearly all cases are 
restricted to the long bones and to the skull. Their similar location 
on the skull—namely, in the rear of the foramen magnum—indicates 
an identity of custom such as might develop, for instance, in the 
not unusual practice of cleaning the bones before secondary burial. 
This peculiar cutting is seen on skull no. 6, which is described as 
representing the ancient loess man, as well as on the child’s skull, 
which is regarded as the most recent, belonging to the topmost layers 
above the baked earth, and also on one of the female skulls taken out 
near the surface in the bank of the road. The advocates of great 
antiquity will need to explain these coincidences. It is difficult to 
imagine peoples, ages apart and in a locality subject, doubtless, to 
changes of population, engaging in exactly the same very peculiar 
and unusual practice of whittling away a particular portion of the 
occipital.” 
@QOn March 14 the writer received from Professor Barbour several teeth, found with 
a crushed skull in one of the blocks of * undisturbed” loess containing pieces of human 
bones, at the depth of 53 feet. All these teeth were identified, with the aid of Dr. M. W. 
Lyon, of the division of mammals, U. 8. National Museum, as those of Geomys bursarius, 
or the common modern pocket gopher. See in this connection Professor Blackman’s 
- statement on p. 74. 
» Superficial cutting is present also, as described in another part of this paper, on the 
left side of the vault of the Rock Bluff skull, from Illinois. Besides this instance, the 
writer found practically identical cuttings in the occipital, back of the foramen magnum, 
in the National Museum skull no. 243017, from a mound at the mouth of the Illinois river 
(shows also cuts about the orbits) ; and in nos. 225252, 228876, 228877, 228878, 228880, 
228881, 228882, 243223, and 243238, parts of Professor Montgomery's collection, from 
mounds in North Dakota. None of these specimens have any claim to geological 
antiquity. Some of the mounds explored by Professor Montgomery and from which the 
above skulls are derived showed also the peculiarity of baked earth above the remains of 
the skeletons. 
