116 The American Naturalist. [February, 
height, composed of the same material as the shell deposit, 
namely shell and powdered shell. An excavation was made 
in the center of the mound, and within a foot of the surface 
were found various parts of a skeleton, apparently of a woman, 
The jaws and all other facial bones were missing, as were one 
femur, one humerus, both tibiæ and all bones of the feet. 
Many of the bones had fractures not caused during the excava- 
tion, the area of the fracture being of the same color as the re- 
mainder of the bone. With the remains were several bits of 
pottery which seemed to be wanting in the mound, save in 
association with the bones, and this fact would indicate a burial, 
as would the symmetrical shape of the mound. The fractures 
ean readily be explained by the proximity to the surface, where 
the tramping of feet could without difficulty separate and 
fracture the bones. On the other hand, the absence of so 
many important bones—for which very careful search was 
made—would seem to indicate that the entire body was not 
placed within the mound. The various conflicting facts con- 
nected with this case offer one of those questions, unfortunately 
without solution, which from time to time confront the 
explorer of the shell heaps. 
Near this point Mr. Dease, of Volusia, found a small earthen- 
ware bowl clinging to the roots of an overturned palmetto, 
and presented it to the writer. 
NOTE A. 
As To A NATURAL ORIGIN OF ANY OF THE FRESH-WATER 
SHELL HEAPS OF THE RIVER. 
It will be remembered that at the time when Professor Wy- 
man wrote, the agency of man in connection with the shell 
heaps of the St. John’s was nowhere admitted. It is therefore 
quite natural that taking the initiative in this matter he 
should have been averse to making any sweeping assertions. 
There is, however, little room to doubt that all the shell heaps 
are the work of man. Of the shell bluff near Astor, (Fort 
Butler) he says? (page 38) “taken by itself, in view of the 
2 Op. cit. 
