554 
REPORT ON THE EXPLORATION OF BRINHAM CAVE. 
than those of the latter, although there are many cases in which, in well-marked sea- 
beaches, there is an entire absence for considerable distances of any shell-remains. The 
bed of cave-earth which covers the shingle to a depth of several feet is attributed, both 
by Mr. Pengelly and Mr. Bristow, to subaerial action ; but the former considers it to 
have been chiefly carried into the cave by running water, whereas the latter considers it 
mainly due “ to the erosion of the limestone in which the cave is formed ; that is to say, 
when the calcareous portion was dissolved and carried away, the insoluble portion was 
thrown down and left behind as a red mud forming the loam in question.” The quantity 
of insoluble residue is, however, seemingly too large to be accounted for by the solution 
of the limestone removed in the formation of the cave, even including that of the fissures 
overhead, as the depth from the surface of the ground does not exceed 30 to 40 feet, 
and the fissures are close or nearly so. It is most probable thahthe greater part of the 
cave-earth was carried in by water from the exterior. Mr. Pengelly is also of opinion 
that the bones so numerous in the cave-earth were likewise drifted in from the exterior 
by the action of water; while Mr. Bristow considers that “ the bones are for the most 
part those of animals which were carried into the cave to be devoured by the beasts of 
prey whose lair it may have been, or they may in some cases have fallen through fissures 
extending to the surface.” 
Mr. Pengelly supports his view by reference to the wear of many of the bones, the 
absence of coprolites, and particularly by the position and arrangement of the bones 
and stones, all of which (except those in the West Chamber) were lying lengthways, fol- 
lowing the direction of the galleries, implying thereby “ that the materials of this deposit 
were introduced and arranged by water flowing constantly in one direction.” 
But it is difficult to suppose this to have been the sole cause ; for a large proportion 
of the bones are little or not at all rolled, very many of them are gnawed, and a few 
limbs have been found entire, while several others were, in the opinion of Mr. Busk, 
introduced with the flesh on them, although the bones were afterwards scattered. 
These facts seem to point to the cave having been inhabited by animals at some time or 
times. The absence of all traces of coprolites is not sufficient evidence to the contrary, 
as in a cave so subject to the irruption of water, the residence of the predatory animals 
could not have been prolonged, and their droppings may not have been placed under 
conditions favourable to their preservation. Even without rolling, the fractured edges 
of the bones also would often, like the angular fragments of limestone, be apt to lose 
their sharp angles by the solvent action of the water so long continued or by weathering. 
Of the 669 bones (omitting the 152 teeth) examined and arranged by Mr. Busk, 
67 are stated to be gnawed. But this refers only to the strongly marked cases ; for, 
speaking of the bones of the Bhinoceros, Mr. Busk says, “ most of the bones showed 
traces of gnawing by Hyeenas and he makes the same remark respecting the bones of 
the Beindeer. A certain proportion of the bones of the older Bears were in the same 
condition, as also were a considerable number of the undeterminable fragments of bones. 
Referring again to the bones of the Bhinoceros, Mr. Busk remarks that “some are very 
