NOTES ON A BONE OBJECT. 83
It will be well, therefore, to commence by describing the
Braintree specimen, and subsequently to point out in what
respects the other examples correspond.
The nature of the object from Braintree will best be under-
stood by reference to fig. 1 (pl. xi.), where it is shown by photo-
graphs of its front, back, and side. It is formed from a meta-carpal
bone of horse, having a scooped cut in the shaft running
longitudinally on the front, but inclining to the side, and nearer
to the proximal end of the bone. This cut passes right through
the wall of the bone, exposing the medullary canal. On either
side of the cut and near the ends, the bone is pierced transversely
with a neatly-drilled hole. The back of the bone has been
flattened by its having the projecting processes roughly cut away,
making its under surface fairly flat.
Of the examples from other localities, that from Colchester
(fig. 2, pl. xi.) comes first, not only because it is an Essex
specimen, but also because it agrees, in most particulars, more
nearly with the Braintree object. In addition to this, it is the
most carefully made and highly finished example of the whole
series, and may be taken as the best type.
It differs principally from the Braintree object in having the
scooped cut deeper and narrower, while its position is fairly
central and full on the front.
It has the two transverse holes arranged similarly, one on
each side of the central cut, while the ends have been sawn off,
one in the solid bone, the other cutting through the hollow
interior, and the back has been flattened. The bone is a meta-
tarsal of ox. Unfortunately, there are no recorded particulars of
its discovery. By the courtesy of Dr. Henry Laver, I have
been able to photograph and make drawings of this object,
while I am also indebted to Mr. A. G. Wright for making an
excellent cast of it, which I am pleased to add to the Club's
collection.
Passing to the York specimens: four of these (fig. 3, pl. xii.)
were found together at Heworth (one mile north-east of York)
and were unassociated with other relics.
Two of these only are perfect (fig. 3, c and d), and both are
very similar, having the longitudinal cut closely resembling that
on the Braintree object, it being long, irregular, and inclining to
one side. This is the same in all three cases.