In the middle of the left parietal bone is a small irregular opening, with short radiating lines of fracture proceeding from it; but this appears to have been recently caused, and from the inside. The bone generally is of a brown colour, and, as regards firmness, in a natural condition; and it does not adhere to the tongue. Judging from its aspect alone, it would not appear to be of any very great antiquity; but as it has lain in a dry soil, and sheltered from rain or moisture, this appearance may be deceptive. Its dimensions are given in Table I. (_supra_), from which it will be seen that the cephalic or latitudinal index is ·770, and the altitudinal ·702. It belongs, therefore, to the category of subbrachy-cephalic skulls of Thurnam and Professor Huxley. [Illustration: FIGS. 59, 60, 61.--Skull from Cave at Cefn, St. Asaph.] In the side view (_norma lateralis_--Plate 7, Fig. 59), it so closely resembles, except in one respect, that described and figured by Professor Huxley (_loc. cit._ p. 125, Figs. 60, 61) from the bed of the Nore, at Borris, in Ireland, that we can scarcely refuse to recognize a common character between them, which, since in the present case it cannot be looked upon as denoting a mere family relationship, may reasonably be regarded as indicative of some affinity of race. The chief difference observable in this view of the two skulls is the greater development of the frontal sinuses in the Borris _calvaria_. The occipital view (_norma occipitalis_, Fig. 8) is also very similar, except that in the Borris skull the greatest width appears to be in the temporal, and in the other the parietal region. In the Borris skull, also, there is a shallow groove in the course of the sagittal suture, which does not exist in that from St. Asaph. The Borris skull is said to be of the extraordinary length of 8 inches; and this may account for the much lower cephalic index of the skull, whose absolute width in reality somewhat exceeds the Cefn specimen (5″·9 and 5″·7), whilst the altitudinal as compared with the latitudinal is but very little greater than it would be were the skulls reduced to the same breadth. They may both, therefore, be regarded as “low,” or, as this class of skull might be termed, in the euphonious language of craniologists, “tapinocephalic.” One great peculiarity of the Cefn _cranium_ (which exists also, but apparently not to quite so great a degree, in the other) is the absolute horizontality of the plane of the subinial portion of the occipital bone. And it is to this flattening that the comparative lowness may perhaps be chiefly attributed. The sutures, where visible, appear to be open. The mastoid processes and all other muscular impressions are strongly marked.