ON CUTS ON BONE IN REMOTE AGES. coubey 
peat bog a slight movement had been continuous, so that one bone 
rubbing upon another had produced incised marks, which were 
very similar to those which could have been produced by an 
instrument. Then he might have added examples of the effect of 
fish upon bones. I never heard before what our esteemed friend 
Admiral Selwyn said just now,—that a shark can bite a thigh in 
two. It had escaped my observation; I do not mean _ personal 
observation, but I have read that the flesh would be stripped off the 
thigh-bone by the bite of a shark, and necessarily some scoring 
would be left on the bone even in that simple operation,—simple so 
far as the shark is concerned. Then, again, there are accounts of 
sailors being pulled to pieces by sharks within sight of their vessels, 
and in such cases certainly some of the bones, perhaps many of 
them, must have suffered these scratchings and markings. The 
markings found on the saurian bones are very curious indeed. 
They look artificial in one or two instances, seeming as if little 
crosses had been made. At first sight a cross seems a very artificial 
mark, but if a great saurian or other animal held such a bone in his 
teeth and then just slipped it round, or another pulled it from him, 
there might be such a change in the position of the bone that the 
next scratch upon the bone might cross the older scratch at an 
angle, and the two scratches might then appear like a cross. There 
are a great many crosses upon antique pottery, made as symbols of 
sun-worship no doubt. Long before the Latin cross was used the 
Greek cross was used by our predecessors in connexion with their 
religious faith and the worship of the sun. The crosses on that 
bone are very noticeable. Of course, the history of the Kimmeridge 
Clay is in good hands when dealt with by our learned Professor. 
He can tell you a great deal more about it than I can; and he can 
tell you, no doubt, that there is no probability of the bone having 
been found in anything else but the solid unmoved mass of the clay. 
I think he was rather hard upon one point in the Reliquiw Aquitanice, 
if I understood him rightly. He said that one of the illustrations in 
the book showing some shells strung together as ornaments, the 
holes had been naturally made on the sea-shore by wear and tear. 
I do not see how those sheils could have naturally received the 
holes (which were necessary for allowing the thread, sinew thread, 
of course, in those days, to be passed through them) in that nice, 
symmetrical manner which is necessary for making a necklace, 
except they were made by man; and, as people in those days did 
really use flint tools for making holes in bone and antlers and 
