122 
trace of disturbance: teeth of rhinoceros, horse, hyzna, and 
bear, surrounded it on all sides. 
The famous Blumenbach* has directed attention to the 
differences presented by the form and the dimensions of 
human crania of different races. This important work 
would have assisted us greatly, if the face, a part essential 
for the determination of race, with more or less accuracy, 
had not been wanting in our fossil cranium. 
We are convinced that even if the skull had been com- 
plete, it would not have been possible to pronounce, with 
certainty, upon a single specimen; for individual variations 
are so numerous in the crania of one and the same race, that 
one cannot, without laying oneself open to large chances of 
error, draw any inference from a single fragment of a cra- 
nium to the general form of the head to which it belonged. 
Nevertheless, in order to neglect no point respecting the 
form of this fossil skull, we may observe that, from the first, 
the elongated and narrow form of the forehead attracted our 
attention. 
In fact, the slight elevation of the frontal, its narrowness, 
and the form of the orbit, approximate it more nearly to 
the cranium of an Ethiopian than to that of an European: 
the elongated form and the produced occiput are also cha- 
racters which we believe to be observable in our fossil cra- 
nium ; but to remove all doubt upon that subject I have 
caused the contours of the cranium of an European and of 
an Ethiopian to be drawn and the foreheads represented. 
Plate II, figs. 1 & 2, and, in the same plate, figs. 3 & 4, 
will render the differences easily distinguishable; and a 
single glance at the figures, will be more instructive than a 
long and wearisome description. 
At whatever conclusion we may arrive as to the origin of 
the man from whence this fossil skull proceeded, we may ex- 
press an opinion without exposing ourselves to a fruitless 
* Decas Collectionis sue craniorum diversarum gentium illustrata. Gottingz, 
1790—1820. : 
