84 NOTES ON A BONE OBJECT.
The great point of difference between the Essex and York
specimens is that the latter have only one transverse hole, this
being at the distal end.
The two portions from Heworth (figs. 3, a and b) have other
variations. One of them (fig. 3a) shows, where it is broken, a
portion of a second scooped cut; while fig. 3b appears to have
had similar cuts on both sides, placed opposite one another, as
well as having a slighter cut at the side near the perfect end. All
these specimens bear signs of flattening at the back.
The fifth example (fig. 4) from York has also been cut on
opposite sides. It was
found in Clifford Street
and, although imperfect,
it is noteworthy, as it was
found, Mr. Oxley Grab-
ham tells me, associated
with a number of Danish
relics, bone combs, pins,
bone skates, beads of
amber, stone - whorls,
pottery, etc.
I am indebted to Mr.
Grabham for having had
these objects photo-
graphed for me, as well
as for his kindness in

Fig. 4.—bone object (length 6 ins.) found
at clifford street, york (york museum).
supplying the particulars

concerning them.
The three London examples (fig. 5) present another
peculiarity of detail. None of them has the transverse piercing,
but they are all characterised by one or more of the scooped cuts.
The most perfect of the three (fig. 5a) was found at Moorfields
in 1865, and although the termination of the distal end has been
broken off, sufficient of the bone remains to show that it is
unlikely that this specimen was pierced.
Fig. 5c represents the proximal half of a similar type to the
last, and is simply recorded as coming from London Wall.
The third London specimen, from Wood Street (fig. 56),
differs from all the rest of the series, inasmuch as it is formed
from a humerus of horse, while all the others are either