after about three days of it they became exhausted and died, though previously they had appeared to be in excellent health.— R. Davis, Jun.; Clonmel, March 3rd, 1846.
Is the Black Rat strictly a native of Great Britain, or was it like its ally, the Brown Rat, introduced into Europe from Asia? And if so introduced, at what period? I shall be much obliged if you would be good enough to give me some inforaiation on tliesc points. These are to me questions of considerable interest, in consequence of my having discovered in some Romano-British tumuli,' which I opened in this neighbour- hood, several skulls and other bones of rats, mice, and birds, which I believe to have been placed in the graves at the time of the interment of the bodies. From the elon- gation of the upper jaw, and the general shape and appearance of the skulls, I think they were decidedly not those of the Arvicola amphibius, but of a true rat. From the discoveries made in these barrows, there can be no doubt that they were part of a Ro- manized British burying ground, and that it was used afterwaras by the Anglo-Saxons, was proved from the fact of my discovering in a grave, as a deposit, some Anglo-Saxon Sceattas. Now we know that at the commencement of the 8th century, sepulture within the walls of towns was introduced, and burial in tumuli abandoned, therefore, supposing the tenants of the graves in which the rats were deposited to have been Anglo-Saxons, and allowing that they were placed there, even at the latest period of sepulture in barrows, this will make them a thousand years old. I am aware that some antiquarians are of opinion that the bones of these animals which are found in barrows, were not placed there as deposits at the time of the interment of the bodies, but that at a much more recent period, they either inhabited the graves, or were carried there as the prey of some member of the stoat tribe. It strikes me, however, there is a strong objection to each of these theories. Granting that the first assertion might be true, in the case of the rats and mice, how are we to account for the bones of birds being in such situations, they could never have inhabited the graves ! To this it may be replied, the birds were carried there by some polecat or weasel, which is certainly possible, but I hardly think probable, as all the bones, and particularly the skulls, which I found, were quite perfect, which surely would not have been the case, had they been the prey of animals of a class, whose peculiar characteristic in killing their victims, is springing at them and biting them on the head. Now had the animals in question been thus treated, their skulls would not have been in the perfect state they were found to be. The bones of dogs, horses, deer, and other animals are frequently found in barrows, and the fact of their being placed there as deposits is not doubted. Why then should we have one law for them, and another for "rats and mice and such small deer?" I found myself, in some of the Tumuli which I opened, the tusks of boars, the bones and teeth of dogs and horses, and the bones of some cloven-footed animal, none of which did I, for a moment, doubt had been placed there at the time of the interments. And I confess I see no good reason for suspecting that the bones of the rats, birds, and mice which were found in an adjoining grave, were not deposited there at the same pe- riod, especially as they were found placed on each side of the human skeleton, and sometimes extending through the entire length of the grave at intervals, with a much greater appearance of care and order than there would have been had they been dragged there by some beast of prey. The fact of the soil being a peculiarly dry chalk, will account for their preservation for so long a time. As the rat is known to have been an object of worship to some of the ancients, it might also have been held in ve- neration by the Pagan inhabitants of our island. In Guernsey limpets are frequently found as deposits in barrows. A spider enclosed in a metal box was sometimes placed
