
 
		f í  
 !  ¡i  
 u  
 DESCRIPTIONS  OF  CRANIA.  
 Norton  is  separated  from  New Maltón  by  the  river  Derwent.  At  both  places  there  has  
 been  a  Roman  camp,  and  at  both  Roman  antiquities  have  been  frequently found ;  occasionally  
 those  of an  earlier,  British, and likewise  of  a later, Anglo-Saxon, period.  On  this  eastern  bank  of  
 the  Derwent  there  is  also  a  Sutton  close by.  Maltón  has  produced  two  Roman  inscriptions :  
 one,  dug up  in  1753,  is  given  in  Gough's Additions  to  Camden's  " Britannia" *,  and  is  considered  
 to  refer to  one  of the  Equités  Singulares,  "part  of  the  emperor's  body-guard,  probably  of  
 the  emperor  Severus, and this their  appropriate  burying-place."  This  inscription likewise  appears  
 in  Professor  Phillips's  valuable Yorkshire  volume,  which  has  the  charm  of  great  instruction  
 and  very  varied  interest  alsot;  the  otlier  is  flgiu-ed  from  a  di-awing  of  Mr.  Roach  Smith,  in  
 Mr. Wright's  "The  Celt,  the  Roman,  and  the  Saxon J:."  In  these works  the  probable  readings  
 are  given.  
 The former  author  makes  the  following  remarks  upon  Maltón,  in  the British  age.  " The  
 country  all  round Maltón  is  shown  to  have  been  in  early  times  the most  peopled  part  of  Yorkshire, 
   and  so it  remained  tUl  a  comparatively  late  period.  The  range  of  villages which  cling  to  
 the  foot of  the Wolds,  from the  Humber,  round  by Maltón  to  Hunmanby  and  Piley,  is  remarkable  
 ;  a  similar  crowd  of  large villages  runs  from  Scarborough  by Hehnsley  and  Thirsk  to  th?  
 north  of the Tees ; and  ù-om many  circumstances  there  is  reason  to  conclude  these  lines  to  have  
 been  occupied  by  settlements  in  the  earliest  times.  Along  them  flowed  the  finest  springs ;  
 above  them  were  open pastures  for  sheep,  the  bustard,  the  dotterel  and  other  birds,  and  below  
 in  boundless  forests  roamed  red  deer  and  the  wild  boar ;  herons  and wild  fowl frequented  the  
 swamps ;  wolves,  foxes, martens,  and  other  animals  of  some value  for  skins,  afforded  occupation  
 to  the  arrow,  spear,  pit  or net  ;  while, to complete  the  happiness  of  savage  life, the roving pirates  
 or  merchants  of  the  Baltic  and  the  Elbe  might  land  at  the  'Uchel'  (Ocelum  Promontorium,  
 Plamborough),  the  'Dun'  (Dunsley,  near Whitby),  or  the  'Aberach'  (Eburacum,  York),  the  
 coloui-ed  glass  and  amber, which made  them  amulets  and  ornaments§."  
 Further,  in  reference  to  the  Roman  occupation  there,  Mr.  Phillips  says :—" Maltón  was  
 certainly  an  important  Roman  station.  The  coins,  m-ns,  inscriptions,  graves,  baths,  &c.,  suflciently  
 attest  this  fact.  Founded,  as  most  of  the  Roman  stations were,  in  proximity  to  older  
 British  towns,  we  see here, as so often in Yorkshü-e, a  double  town—Old  and  New Maltón  on  one  
 side  of  the  river,  and  Norton  on  the  other.  Roads  of  Roman  use  at  least,  lead  westward  by  
 several  villages  with  the  sufiix  of  'street'  to  Yearsley  Camp  and  Isurium;  southward  to  
 Eburacum,  eastward  by  Wharram  le  Street  to  the  great  road  to  Prsetorium  (Bridlington).  
 Another  route  (Wade's  Causeway) conducted  northward  to Dunum  Sinus,  near Whitby ; and  we  
 may  be confident a  fifth  led  to  the well-havened  bay—the  KÍXTTOC.  eiXi^ei-oc-of  Ptolemy.  Round  
 Maltón  in  several  directions  are important  earthworks,  probably  not  all  of  British  construction.  
 What  was  the  name  of  this  great  station ?  Alas !  lost  with  the  Commentaries,  if  such  ever  
 existed,  of Agricola—Hadrian—Severus  !  Maltón was not  Camulodunum—that  was  a  southern  
 colonia  :  it  could  not  be  Derventio,  as  the  late  Dr.  Young  supposes,  unless  that  was  XVII.  
 instead  of VII.  millia  passuum  from York  ||."  
 The  name  Camulodunum  has  been  somewhat  confusedly appropriated  to Maltón ;  certainly  
 not  that  of  the  "  southern  colonia,"  but  as  the  Camunlodunum  of  Ptolemy,  which  has  been  
 regarded  to  be the same with the Cambodunum  of Antonine.  The  latter  the  learned Mr. Hunter  
 and  other  antiquaries  have  referred  to  the West  Ridingl^.  
 *  2nd  Ed.  vol.  iii.  p.  326.  
 §  P.  226.  
 t  The  Rivers,  Mountains  and  Sea-Coast  of  Yorlishire,  1S53,  p.  90.  
 II  Ibid.  p.  89.  
 t  1S52,  p.  i!i7.  
 H  Ibid.  p.  9;  .  
 (2)  
 ANCIENT  BRITISH—MALTON  {DELGOriTIA?).  
 We  will  now  proceed  to  describe  the  skull,  for  which  we  are  indebted  to  Mr.  Joseph  
 Mayer,  E.S.A.  It  has  belonged  to  a man  well  advanced  in  lifa-:  probably  60  years  of  age  or  
 more.  The  first  peculiarity  which  is noticed  is  the  large massive  face, not  equally  developed  in  
 all  parts,  but  mainly  below  the  orbits.  There  is  great  breadth  in  the  lower  jaw,  and  the  
 alveolar  arch  of the  upper  is  correspondently wide.  But  the  nasal  bones  are very  short,  narrow,  
 abruptly  raised,  twisted  to  the  left  side  and  ungraceful.  A  prominent  superciliary  ridge  
 terminates  the  forehead  below;  above  it  is  narrow,  receding  and  deficient  in  elevation.  
 Ascending  to  the  coronal  region, we  find  it  lofty about  the  fore-part  of  the  sagittal  suture,  and  
 distinctly  so  in  the  middle  of  this  sutme,  whence  the  calvarium  descends  in  an  arch  to  the  
 occiput,  which  is  not  remarkable  for  prominence.  Its  protuberance  and  superior  ridge  are  
 strongly marked.  The  greatest  width  of  the  calvarium  is  a  little  behind  the  auditory  foramen,  
 and  about  an  inch  above the  base  of the mastoids.  When  viewed  vertically, it  is  seen  to  present  
 an  unusuaUy  regular  oval  form, from  the  great  correspondence  in  outline  of  its  anterior  and  
 posterior  extremities,  the  latter  being  slightly  the  narrower  of  the  two.  The  auditory  aperture  
 is  a trifle in  advance  of the middle  of the  calvarium.  
 ^ This  is  a  brachycephalic  cranium,  most  peculiar  for its  elevation  about  the middle  of  the  
 sagittal  suture,  with  an  absence  of  the  parieto-occipital  flatness  seen  in  many  of  the  British  
 series.  It  presents  one if not  two, indications  of  disease.  The fii-st is a  depression,  without  any  
 abrasion  of the  surface of the  bone,  in  the  outer  part  of the  superciUary  arch  over  the  left  orbit,  
 which  descends  into  the  external  orbitary  process  of the  frontal.  It  is not  improbable  that  thil  
 mark  is  one of the  sequences  of  a  morbid  process in  early  life.  In  the  upper  posterior  angle  of  
 the  right  parietal,  about  an  inch  fi-om the junction  of  the  sagittal  and  lambdoidal  sutures,  an  
 effect of  more  recent  disease, most  likely  the  concomitant  if  not  the  immediate  cause  of  delth,  
 is  seen.  This  is  an  oval  apertui-e  in  the  surface  of  the  bone,  about  three-quarters  of  an  inch  
 long,  and  half  an  inch wide;  the  seat  of  a  caries wluch  has  destroyed  the  outer  table  whoUy  
 and  a portion  of the  inner,  which  it  has  penetrated  in  the  centre  of the  depression.  There  is  no  
 sign  of  this  loss  of  bony  tissue  being  the result  of  external  injury.  The  other  depression  leads  
 to  the  inference that  both  are  rather  the  effects of constitutional  disease.  
 ^ This  cranium  derived  from the  cemetery of a Roman  station, from a body interred  in  a  grave  
 which  presented  Christian  orientation,  placed  m  immediate  proximity  to  others  in  the  same  
 position,  and  found with  a  Roman  bronze  fibula  on  the  breast—therefore,  discovered  under  all  
 ch-cumstances which  seem to justify its  appropriation  to  a  Roman—are  we  to  regard  it  as  of  
 Roman  origin?  Craniology  steps  in  to  supply  data  for  the  answer  of  this  question,  which  
 without  its  aid, would  not  admit  of a correct interpretation.  The skuU does not present,  certainly  
 in  any marked  degree,  those  characters which are distinctive of the  Roman  series;  but it  strongly  
 exhibits  some of  those  we have  authenticated  as the  indicia  of  the  ancient  British  race  It''is  
 not  broad  and  square  in  the  fore-part  of  the  calvarium,  neither  has  it,  especially  in  the  upper  
 region,  the  Roman  face.  On the  contrary,  it  has  the  air- of a brachycephalic cranium, an  elevated  
 rather  acummate  vertical  region,  a  great  depth  in  the  perpendicular  descending  from  this  point  
 to  the  mastoid,  and  an  uprightness  in  the  outline  of  the  hind-head-aU  which  are  British  
 characters,  and  agree in  this  respect with  those  facial features by which  it  is  distinguished  We  
 beheve,  therefore,  that  these  evidences  are  adequate  to justify the  very  probable  conclusion  that  
 It  IS, If  of mixed  origin,  mainly  British.  It  is the  skull  of a  Roman  citizen,  the  inhabitant  of  a  
 Roman  station,  who, wliilst  he  was not  reduced  to  the  condition  of  a  slave,  but  probably  had  a  
 37-