410 CANNIBALISM IN AMERICA. 
that the ancient inhabitants of the St. John’s were cannibals may 
be stated as follows: 
1. The bones, an account of which has just been given, were 
not deposited there at an ordinary burial of a dead body. In this 
case after the decay of the flesh there would have remained a cer- 
tain order in the position of the parts of the skeleton, especially _ 
in the pelvis, the long bones of the limbs, the vertebral column 
and the head. The bones would be entire as in other burials. In 
the cases here described, they were, on the contrary, scattered in & 
disorderly manner, broken into many fragments, and often some 
important portions were missing, as the head at one of the mounds — 
near Blue Spring, the bones of an arm and leg at the other, and 
in other mounds a still larger number of bones. The fractures 48 
well as the disorder in which the bones were found evidently exist- 
ed at the time they were covered up, as is shown by the condition 
of the broken ends, which had the same discoloration as the 
natural surfaces. A 
he bones were broken as in the case of those of edible 
animals, as the deer, alligator, ete. This would be necessay 
to reduce the parts to a size corresponding with the vessels a 
which they were cooked, or suitable for roasting, or even for od E 
ing raw. a 
3. The breaking up of the bones had a certain amount of . 
method ; the heads of the humerus and femur were detached as if a 
. to avoid the trouble, or from ignorance as to the way, of disarticu- 
lating the joints. The shafts of these bones, as also those of Oe | 
forearm and leg, were regularly broken through the middle. bes : 
olecranon process of the ulna, was in some cases detached in o 
d to be m 
same manner as the corresponding part has been foun 
the deer. 
4. There is no evidence that the bones were 
while lying exposed upon the ground by wild animals, nie er 
wolves and bears. If they were thus broken one might ro 
ably expect to find the marks of teeth, but after a careful we ‘ 
ination of hundreds of pieces they have not been seen 1n a? 9 
instance. As a general rule dogs, and the same is true of T 
_ gnaw chiefly the ends of the bones, which are of a soft and spe™ 
texture, leaving the shaft, which is solid and unyielding * p the 
intact, or at any rate to the last. This is the case eve? bse 
bones of birds, which are so much smaller. In the bones 
broken up 
