initial commit of ebook 18184HEADmain

41 files changed, 7999 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/18184-8.txt b/18184-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d884481
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2331 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Animal Carvings from Mounds of the
+Mississippi Valley, by Henry W. Henshaw
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: Animal Carvings from Mounds of the Mississippi Valley
+       Second Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the
+       Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1880-81,
+       Government Printing Office, Washington, 1883, pages 117-166
+
+Author: Henry W. Henshaw
+
+Release Date: April 17, 2006 [EBook #18184]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANIMAL CARVINGS FROM MOUNDS ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Verity White, PM for Bureau of American
+Ethnology and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
+generously made available by the Bibliothèque nationale
+de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION----BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.
+
+ANIMAL CARVINGS
+
+FROM
+
+MOUNDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY.
+
+BY
+
+HENRY W. HENSHAW.
+
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS.
+
+Introductory                                     123
+  Manatee                                        125
+  Toucan                                         135
+  Paroquet                                       139
+Knowledge of tropical animals by Mound-Builders  142
+  Other errors of identification                 144
+Skill in sculpture of the Mound-Builders         148
+  Generalization not designed                    149
+  Probable totemic origin                        150
+Animal mounds                                    152
+  The "Elephant" mound                           152
+  The "Alligator" mound                          158
+Human sculptures                                 160
+Indian and mound-builders' art compared          164
+  General conclusions                            166
+
+
+
+
+
+ILLUSTRATIONS.
+
+Fig. 4.--Otter from Squier and Davis                    128
+     5.--Otter from Squier and Davis                    128
+     6.--Otter from Rau. Manatee from Stevens           129
+     7.--Manatee from Stevens                           129
+     8.--Lamantin or Sea-Cow from Squier and Davis      130
+     9.--Lamantin or Sea-Cow from Squier                130
+    10.--Manatee (_Manatus Americanus_, Cuv.)           132
+    11.--Manatee (_Manatus Americanus_, Cuv.)           132
+    12.--Cincinnati Tablet--back. From Squier and Davis 133
+    13.--Cincinnati Tablet--back. From Short            134
+    14.--Toucan from Squier and Davis                   135
+    15.--Toucan from Squier and Davis                   135
+    16.--Toucan from Squier and Davis                   136
+    17.--Toucan as figured by Stevens                   137
+    18.--Keel-billed Toucan of Southern Mexico          139
+    19.--Paroquet from Squier and Davis                 140
+    20.--Owl from Squier and Davis                      144
+    21.--Grouse from Squier and Davis                   144
+    22.--Turkey-buzzard from Squier and Davis           145
+    23.--Cherry-bird                                    145
+    24.--Woodpecker                                     146
+    25.--Eagle from Squier and Davis                    146
+    26.--Rattlesnake from Squier and Davis              147
+    27.--Big Elephant Mound in Grant County, Wisconsin  153
+    28.--Elephant Pipe. Iowa                            155
+    29.--Elephant Pipe. Iowa                            156
+    30.--The Alligator Mound near Granville, Ohio       159
+    31.--Carvings of heads                              162
+    32.--Carvings of heads                              162
+    33.--Carvings of heads                              162
+    34.--Carving of head                                163
+    35.--Carving of head                                163
+
+
+
+
+
+ANIMAL CARVINGS FROM MOUNDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY.
+
+BY H. W. HENSHAW.
+
+
+
+
+INTRODUCTORY.
+
+
+The considerable degree of decorative and artistic skill attained by the
+so-called Mound-Builders, as evidenced by many of the relics that have
+been exhumed from the mounds, has not failed to arrest the attention of
+archæologists. Among them, indeed, are found not a few who assert for
+the people conveniently designated as above a degree of artistic skill
+very far superior to that attained by the present race of Indians as
+they have been known to history. In fact, this very skill in artistic
+design, asserted for the Mound-Builders, as indicated by the sculptures
+they have left, forms an important link in the chain of argument upon
+which is based the theory of their difference from and superiority to
+the North American Indian.
+
+Eminent as is much of the authority which thus contends for an artistic
+ability on the part of the Mound-Builders far in advance of the
+attainments of the present Indian in the same line, the question is one
+admitting of argument; and if some of the best products of artistic
+handicraft of the present Indians be compared with objects of a similar
+nature taken from the mounds, it is more than doubtful if the artistic
+inferiority of the latter-day Indian can be substantiated. Deferring,
+however, for the present, any comparison between the artistic ability of
+the Mound-Builder and the modern Indian, attention may be turned to a
+class of objects from the mounds, notable, indeed, for the skill with
+which they are wrought, but to be considered first in another way and
+for another purpose than mere artistic comparison.
+
+As the term Mound-Builders will recur many times throughout this paper,
+and as the phrase has been objected to by some archæologists on account
+of its indefiniteness, it may be well to state that it is employed here
+with its commonly accepted signification, viz: as applied to the people
+who formerly lived throughout the Mississippi Valley and raised the
+mounds of that region. It should also be clearly understood that by its
+use the writer is not to be considered as committing himself in any way
+to the theory that the Mound-Builders were of a different race from the
+North American Indian.
+
+Among the more interesting objects left by the Mound-Builders, pipes
+occupy a prominent place. This is partly due to their number, pipes
+being among the more common articles unearthed by the labors of
+explorers, but more to the fact that in the construction of their pipes
+this people exhibited their greatest skill in the way of sculpture. In
+the minds of those who hold that the Mound-Builders were the ancestors
+of the present Indians, or, at least, that they were not necessarily of
+a different race, the superiority of their pipe sculpture over their
+other works of art excites no surprise, since, however prominent a place
+the pipe may have held in the affections of the Mound-Builders, it is
+certain that it has been an object of no less esteem and reverence among
+the Indians of history. Certainly no one institution, for so it may be
+called, was more firmly fixed by long usage among the North American
+Indians, or more characteristic of them, than the pipe, with all its
+varied uses and significance.
+
+Perhaps the most characteristic artistic feature displayed in the pipe
+sculpture of the Mound-Builders, as has been well pointed out by Wilson,
+in his Prehistoric Man, is the tendency exhibited toward the imitation
+of natural objects, especially birds and animals, a remark, it may be
+said in passing, which applies with almost equal truth to the art
+productions generally of the present Indians throughout the length and
+breadth of North America. As some of these sculptured animals from the
+mounds have excited much interest in the minds of archæologists, and
+have been made the basis of much speculation, their examination and
+proper identification becomes a matter of considerable importance. It
+will therefore be the main purpose of the present paper to examine
+critically the evidence offered in behalf of the identification of the
+more important of them. If it shall prove, as is believed to be the
+case, that serious mistakes of identification have been made, attention
+will be called to these and the manner pointed out in which certain
+theories have naturally enough resulted from the premises thus
+erroneously established.
+
+It may be premised that the writer undertook the examination of the
+carvings with no theories of his own to propose in place of those
+hitherto advanced. In fact, their critical examination may almost be
+said to have been the result of accident. Having made the birds of the
+United States his study for several years, the writer glanced over the
+bird carvings in the most cursory manner, being curious to see what
+species were represented. The inaccurate identification of some of these
+by the authors of "The Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley" led
+to the examination of the series as a whole, and subsequently to the
+discussion they had received at the hands of various authors. The
+carvings are, therefore, here considered rather from the stand-point of
+the naturalist than the archæologist. Believing that the question first
+in importance concerns their actual resemblances, substantially the same
+kind of critical study is applied to them which they would receive were
+they from the hands of a modern zoological artist. Such a course has
+obvious disadvantages, since it places the work of men who were in, at
+best, but a semi-civilized condition on a much higher plane than other
+facts would seem to justify. It may be urged, as the writer indeed
+believes, that the accuracy sufficient for the specific identification
+of these carvings is not to be expected of men in the state of culture
+the Mound-Builders are generally supposed to have attained. To which
+answer may be made that it is precisely on the supposition that the
+carvings were accurate copies from nature that the theories respecting
+them have been promulgated by archæologists. On no other supposition
+could such theories have been advanced. So accurate indeed have they
+been deemed that they have been directly compared with the work of
+modern artists, as will be noticed hereafter. Hence the method here
+adopted in their study seems to be not only the best, but the only one
+likely to produce definite results.
+
+If it be found that there are good reasons for pronouncing the carvings
+not to be accurate copies from nature, and of a lower artistic standard
+than has been supposed, it will remain for the archæologist to determine
+how far their unlikeness to the animals they have been supposed to
+represent can be attributed to shortcomings naturally pertaining to
+barbaric art. If he choose to assume that they were really intended as
+imitations, although in many particulars unlike the animals he wishes to
+believe them to represent, and that they are as close copies as can be
+expected from sculptors not possessed of skill adequate to carry out
+their rude conceptions, he will practically have abandoned the position
+taken by many prominent archæologists with respect to the mound
+sculptors' skill, and will be forced to accord them a position on the
+plane of art not superior to the one occupied by the North American
+Indians. If it should prove that but a small minority of the carvings
+can be specifically identified, owing to inaccuracies and to their
+general resemblance, he may indeed go even further and conclude that
+they form a very unsafe basis for deductions that owe their very
+existence to assumed accurate imitation.
+
+
+MANATEE.
+
+In 1848 Squier and Davis published their great work on the Mounds of the
+Mississippi Valley. The skill and zeal with which these gentlemen
+prosecuted their researches in the field, and the ability and fidelity
+which mark the presentation of their results to the public are
+sufficiently attested by the fact that this volume has proved alike the
+mine from which subsequent writers have drawn their most important
+facts, and the chief inspiration for the vast amount of work in the same
+direction since undertaken.
+
+On pages 251 and 252 of the above-mentioned work appear figures of an
+animal which is there called "Lamantin, Manitus, or Sea Cow,"
+concerning which animal it is stated that "seven sculptured
+representations have been taken from the mounds." When first discovered,
+the authors continue, "it was supposed they were monstrous creations of
+fancy; but subsequent investigations and comparison have shown that they
+are faithful representations of one of the most singular animal
+productions of the world."
+
+These authors appear to have been the first to note the supposed
+likeness of certain of the sculptured forms found in the mounds to
+animals living in remote regions. That they were not slow to perceive
+the ethnological interest and value of the discovery is shown by the
+fact that it was immediately adduced by them as affording a clew to the
+possible origin of the Mound-Builders. The importance they attached to
+the discovery and their interpretation of its significance will be
+apparent from the following quotation (p. 242):
+
+     Some of these sculptures have a value, so far as ethnological
+     research is concerned, much higher than they can claim as mere
+     works of art. This value is derived from the fact that they
+     faithfully represent animals and birds peculiar to other latitudes,
+     thus establishing a migration, a very extensive intercommunication
+     or a contemporaneous existence of the same race over a vast extent
+     of country.
+
+The idea thus suggested fell on fruitful ground, and each succeeding
+writer who has attempted to show that the Mound-Builders were of a race
+different from the North American Indian, or had other than an
+autochthonous origin, has not failed to lay especial stress upon the
+presence in the mounds of sculptures of the manatee, as well as of other
+strange beasts and birds, carved evidently by the same hands that
+portrayed many of our native fauna.
+
+Except that the theories based upon the sculptures have by recent
+writers been annunciated more positively and given a wider range, they
+have been left almost precisely as set forth by the authors of the
+"Ancient Monuments," while absolutely nothing appears to have been
+brought to light since their time in the way of additional sculptured
+evidence of the same character. It is indeed a little curious to note
+the perfect unanimity with which most writers fall back upon the above
+authors as at once the source of the data they adduce in support of the
+several theories, and as their final, nay, their only, authority. Now
+and then one will be found to dissent from some particular bit of
+evidence as announced by Squier and Davis, or to give a somewhat
+different turn to the conclusions derivable from the testimony offered
+by them. But in the main the theories first announced by the authors of
+"Ancient Monuments," as the result of their study of the mound
+sculptures, are those that pass current to-day. Particular attention may
+be called to the deep and lasting impression made by the statements of
+these authors as to the great beauty and high standard of excellence
+exhibited by the mound sculptures. Since their time writers appear to be
+well satisfied to express their own admiration in the terms made use of
+by Squier and Davis. One might, indeed, almost suppose that recent
+writers have not dared to trust to the evidence afforded by the original
+carvings or their fac-similes, but have preferred to take the word of
+the authors of the "Ancient Monuments" for beauties which were perhaps
+hidden from their own eyes.
+
+Following the lead of the authors of the "Ancient Monuments," also, with
+respect to theories of origin, these carvings of supposed foreign
+animals are offered as affording incontestible evidence that the
+Mound-Builders must have migrated from or have had intercourse, direct
+or indirect, with the regions known to harbor these animals. Were it
+not, indeed, for the evident artistic similarity between these carvings
+of supposed foreign animals and those of common domestic forms--a
+similarity which, as Squier and Davis remark, render them
+"indistinguishable, so far as material and workmanship are concerned,
+from an entire class of remains found in the mounds"--the presence of
+most of them could readily be accounted for through the agency of trade,
+the far reaching nature of which, even among the wilder tribes, is well
+understood. Trade, for instance, in the case of an animal like the
+manatee, found no more than a thousand miles distant from the point
+where the sculpture was dug up, would offer a possible if not a probable
+solution of the matter. But independently of the fact that the
+practically identical character of all the carvings render the theory of
+trade quite untenable, the very pertinent question arises, why, if these
+supposed manatee pipes were derived by trade from other regions, have
+not similar carvings been found in those regions, as, for instance, in
+Florida and the Gulf States, a region of which the archæology is fairly
+well known. Primitive man, as is the case with his civilized brother,
+trades usually out of his abundance; so that not seven, but many times
+seven, manatee pipes should be found at the center of trade. As it is,
+the known home of the manatee has furnished no carvings either of the
+manatee or of anything suggestive of it.
+
+The possibility of the manatee having in past times possessed a wider
+range than at present seems to have been overlooked. But as a matter of
+fact the probability that the manatee ever ranged, in comparatively
+modern times at least, as far north as Ohio without leaving other traces
+of its presence than a few sculptured representations at the hands of an
+ancient people is too small to be entertained.
+
+Nor is the supposition that the Mound-Builders held contemporaneous
+possession of the country embraced in the range of the animals whose
+effigies are supposed to have been exhumed from their graves worthy of
+serious discussion. If true, it would involve the contemporaneous
+occupancy by the Mound-Builders, not only of the Southern United States
+but of the region stretching into Southern Mexico, and even, according
+to the ideas of some authors, into Central and South America, an area
+which, it is needless to say, no known facts will for a moment justify
+us in supposing a people of one blood to have occupied
+contemporaneously.
+
+Assuming, therefore, that the sculptures in question are the work of
+the Mound-Builders and are not derived from distant parts through the
+agency of trade, of which there would appear to be little doubt, and,
+assuming that the sculptures represent the animals they have been
+supposed to represent--of which something remains to be said--the theory
+that the acquaintance of the Mound-Builders with these animals was made
+in a region far distant from the one to which they subsequently migrated
+would seem to be not unworthy of attention. It is necessary, however,
+before advancing theories to account for facts to first consider the
+facts themselves, and in this case to seek an answer to the question how
+far the identification of these carvings of supposed foreign animals is
+to be trusted. Before noticing in detail the carvings supposed by Squier
+and Davis to represent the manatee, it will be well to glance at the
+carvings of another animal figured by the same authors which, it is
+believed, has a close connection with them.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 4.--Otter. From Ancient Monuments.]
+
+Figure 4 is identified by the authors of the "Ancient Monuments" (Fig.
+156) as an otter, and few naturalists will hesitate in pronouncing it to
+be a very good likeness of that animal; the short broad ears, broad head
+and expanded snout, with the short, strong legs, would seem to belong
+unmistakably to the otter. Added to all these is the indication of its
+fish-catching habits. Having thus correctly identified this animal, and
+with it before them, it certainly reflects little credit upon the
+zoological knowledge of the authors and their powers of discrimination
+to refer the next figure (Ancient Monuments, Fig. 157) to the same
+animal.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 5.--Otter of Squier and Davis.]
+
+Of a totally different shape and physiognomy, if intended as an otter it
+certainly implies an amazing want of skill in its author. However it is
+assuredly not an otter, but is doubtless an unfinished or rudely
+executed ground squirrel, of which animal it conveys in a general way a
+good idea, the characteristic attitude of this little rodent, sitting
+up with paws extended in front, being well displayed. Carvings of small
+rodents in similar attitudes are exhibited in Stevens's "Flint Chips,"
+p. 428, Figs. 61 and 62. Stevens's Fig. 61 evidently represents the same
+animal as Fig. 157 of Squier and Davis, but is a better executed
+carving.
+
+In illustration of the somewhat vague idea entertained by archæologists
+as to what the manatee is like, it is of interest to note that the
+carving of a second otter with a fish in its mouth has been made to do
+duty as a manatee, although the latter animal is well known never to eat
+fish, but, on the contrary, to be strictly herbivorous. Thus Stevens
+gives figures of two carvings in his "Flint Chips," p. 429, Figs. 65 and
+66, calling them manatees, and says: "In one particular, however, the
+sculptors of the mound-period committed an error. Although the lamantin
+is strictly herbivorous, feeding chiefly upon subaqueous plants and
+littoral herbs, yet upon one of the stone smoking-pipes, Fig. 66, this
+animal is represented with a fish in its mouth." Mr. Stevens apparently
+preferred to credit the mound sculptor with gross ignorance of the
+habits of the manatee, rather than to abate one jot or tittle of the
+claim possessed by the carving to be considered a representation of that
+animal. Stevens's fish-catching manatee is the same carving given by Dr.
+Rau, in the Archæological Collection of the United States National
+Museum, p. 47, Fig. 180, where it is correctly stated to be an otter.
+This cut, which can scarcely be distinguished from one given by Stevens
+(Fig. 66), is here reproduced (Fig. 6), together with the second
+supposed manatee of the latter writer (Fig. 7).
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 6.--Otter of Rau; Manatee of Stevens.]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 7.--Manatee of Stevens.]
+
+To afford a means of comparison, Fig. 154, from the "Ancient Monuments"
+of Squier and Davis, is introduced (Fig. 8). The same figure is also to
+be found in Wilson's Prehistoric Man, vol. i, p. 476, Fig. 22. Another
+of the supposed lamantins, Fig. 9, is taken from Squier's article in the
+Transactions of the American Ethnological Society, vol. ii, p. 188. A
+bad print of the same wood-cut appears as Fig. 153, p. 251, of the
+"Ancient Monuments."
+
+It should be noted that the physiognomy of Fig. 6, above given, although
+unquestionably of an otter, agrees more closely with the several
+so-called manatees, which are represented without fishes, than with the
+fish-bearing otter, first mentioned, Fig. 4.
+
+Fig. 6 thus serves as a connecting link in the series, uniting the
+unmistakable otter, with the fish in its mouth, to the more clumsily
+executed and less readily recognized carvings of the same animal.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 8.--Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier and Davis.]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 9.--Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier.]
+
+It was doubtless the general resemblance which the several specimens of
+the otters and the so-called manatees bear to each other that led
+Stevens astray. They are by no means facsimiles one of the other. On the
+contrary, while no two are just alike, the differences are perhaps not
+greater than is to be expected when it is considered that they doubtless
+embody the conceptions of different artists, whose knowledge of the
+animal, as well as whose skill in carving, would naturally differ
+widely. Recognizing the general likeness, Stevens perhaps felt that what
+one was all were. In this, at least, he is probably correct, and the
+following reasons are deemed sufficient to show that, whether the
+several sculptures figured by one and another author are otters or not,
+as here maintained, they most assuredly are not manatees. The most
+important character possessed by the sculptures, which is not found in
+the manatee, is an external ear. In this particular they all agree. Now,
+the manatee has not the slightest trace of a pinna or external ear, a
+small orifice, like a slit, representing that organ. To quote the
+precise language of Murie in the Proceedings of the London Zoological
+Society, vol. 8, p. 188: "In the absence of pinna, a small orifice, a
+line in diameter, into which a probe could be passed, alone represents
+the external meatus." In the dried museum specimen this slit is wholly
+invisible, and even in the live or freshly killed animal it is by no
+means readily apparent. Keen observer of natural objects, as savage and
+barbaric man certainly is, it is going too far to suppose him capable of
+representing an earless animal--earless at least so far as the purposes
+of sculpture are concerned--with prominent ears. If, then, it can be
+assumed that these sculptures are to be relied upon as in the slightest
+degree imitative, it must be admitted that the presence of ears would
+alone suffice to show that they cannot have been intended to represent
+the manatee. But the feet shown in each and all of them present equally
+unquestionable evidence of their dissimilarity from the manatee. This
+animal has instead of a short, stout fore leg, terminating in flexible
+fingers or paws, as indicated in the several sculptures, a shapeless
+paddle-like flipper. The nails with which the flipper terminates are
+very small, and if shown at all in carving, which is wholly unlikely, as
+being too insignificant, they would be barely indicated and would
+present a very different appearance from the distinctly marked digits
+common to the several sculptures.
+
+Noticing that one of the carvings has a differently shaped tail from the
+others, the authors of the "Ancient Monuments" attempt to reconcile the
+discrepancy as follows: "Only one of the sculptures exhibits a flat
+truncated tail; the others are round. There is however a variety of the
+lamantin (_Manitus Senigalensis_, Desm.) which has a round tail, and is
+distinguished as the "round-tailed manitus." (Ancient Monuments, p.
+252.) The suggestion thus thrown out means, if it means anything, that
+the sculpture exhibiting a flat tail is the only one referable to the
+manatee of Florida and southward, the _M. Americanus_, while those with
+round tails are to be identified with the so-called "Round-tailed
+Lamantin," the _M. Senegalensis_, which lives in the rivers of
+Senegambia and along the coast of Western Africa. It is to be regretted
+that the above authors did not go further and explain the manner in
+which they suppose the Mound-Builders became acquainted with an animal
+inhabiting the West African coast. Elastic as has proved to be the
+thread upon which hangs the migration theory, it would seem to be hardly
+capable of bearing the strain required for it to reach from the
+Mississippi Valley to Africa.
+
+Had the authors been better acquainted with the anatomy of the manatees
+the above suggestion would never have been made, since the tails of the
+two forms are, so far as known, almost exactly alike. A rounded tail is,
+in fact, the first requisite of the genus _Manatus_, to which both the
+manatees alluded to belong, in distinction from the forked tail of the
+genus _Halicore_.
+
+Whether the tails of the sculptured manatees be round or flat matters
+little, however, since they bear no resemblance to manatee tails, either
+of the round or flat tailed varieties, or, for that matter, to tails of
+any sort. In many of the animal carvings the head alone engaged the
+sculptor's attention, the body and members being omitted entirely, or
+else roughly blocked out; as, for instance, in the case of the squirrel
+given above, in which the hind parts are simply rounded off into
+convenient shape, with no attempt at their delineation. Somewhat the
+same method was evidently followed in the case of the supposed manatees,
+only after the pipe cavities had been excavated the block was shaped off
+in a manner best suited to serve the purpose of a handle. Without,
+however, attempting to institute farther comparisons, two views of a
+real manatee are here subjoined, which are fac-similes of Murie's
+admirable photo-lithograph in Trans. London Zoological Society, vol. 8,
+1872-'74. A very brief comparison of the supposed manatees, with a
+modern artistic representation of that animal, will show the
+irreconcilable differences between them better than any number of pages
+of written criticism.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 10.--Manatee (_Manatus Americanus_, Cuv.).
+Side view.]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 11.--Manatee (_Manatus Americanus_, Cuv.).
+Front view.]
+
+There would seem, then, to be no escape from the conclusion that the
+animal sculptures which have passed current as manatees do not really
+resemble that animal, which is so extraordinary in all its aspects and
+so totally unlike any other of the animal creation as to render its
+identification in case it had really served as a subject for sculpture,
+easy and certain.
+
+As the several sculptures bear a general likeness to each other and
+resemble with considerable closeness the otter, the well known
+fish-eating proclivities of this animal being shown in at least two of
+them, it seems highly probable that it is the otter that is rudely
+portrayed in all these sculptures.
+
+The otter was a common resident of all the region occupied by the
+Mound-Builders, and must certainly have been well known to them.
+Moreover, the otter is one of the animals which figures largely in the
+mythology and folk-lore of the natives of America, and has been adopted
+in many tribes as their totem. Hence, this animal would seem to be a
+peculiarly apt subject for embodiment in sculptured form. It matters
+very little, however, whether these sculptures were intended as otters
+or not, the main point in the present connection being that they cannot
+have been intended as manatees.
+
+Before leaving the subject of the manatee, attention may be called to a
+curious fact in connection with the Cincinnati Tablet, "of which a
+wood-cut is given in The Ancient Monuments" (p. 275, Fig. 195). If the
+reverse side as there shown be compared with the same view as presented
+by Short in The North Americans of Antiquity, p. 45, or in MacLean's
+Mound-Builders, p. 107, a remarkable discrepancy between the two will be
+observed.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 12.--Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From Squire
+and Davis.]
+
+In the former, near the top, is indicated what appears to be a shapeless
+depression, formless and unmeaning so far as its resemblance to any
+special object is concerned. The authors remark of this side of the
+tablet, "The back of the stone has three deep longitudinal grooves, and
+several depressions, evidently caused by rubbing,--probably produced in
+sharpening the instrument used, in the sculpture." This explanation of
+the depressions would seem to be reasonable, although it has been
+disputed, and a "peculiar significance" (Short) attached to this side of
+the tablet. In Short's engraving, while the front side corresponds
+closely with the same view given by Squier and Davis, there is a notable
+difference observable on the reverse side. For the formless depression
+of the Squier and Davis cut not only occupies a somewhat different
+position in relation to the top and sides of the tablet, but, as will be
+seen by reference to the figure, it assumes a distinct form, having in
+some mysterious way been metamorphosed into a figure which oddly enough
+suggests the manatee. It does not appear that the attention of
+archæologists has ever been directed to the fact that such a resemblance
+exists; nor indeed is the resemblance sufficiently close to justify
+calling it a veritable manatee. But with the aid of a little
+imagination it may in a rude way suggest that animal, its earless head
+and the flipper being the most striking, in fact the only, point of
+likeness. Conceding that the figure as given by Short affords a rude
+hint of the manatee, the question is how to account for its presence on
+this the latest representation of the tablet which, according to Short,
+Mr. Guest, its owner, pronounces "the first correct representations of
+the stone." The cast of this tablet in the Smithsonian Institution
+agrees more closely with Short's representation in respect to the
+details mentioned than with that given in the "Ancient Monuments."
+Nevertheless, if this cast be accepted as the faithful copy of the
+original it has been supposed to be, the engraving in Short's volume is
+subject to criticism. In the cast the outline of the figure, while
+better defined than Squier and Davis represent it to be, is still very
+indefinite, the outline not only being broken into, but being in places,
+especially toward the head, indistinguishable from the surface of the
+tablet into which it insensibly grades. In the view as found in Short
+there is none of this irregularity and indefiniteness of outline, the
+figure being perfect and standing out clearly as though just from the
+sculptor's hand. As perhaps on the whole the nearest approach to the
+form of a manatee appearing on any object claimed to have originated at
+the hands of the Mound-Builders, and from the fact that artists have
+interpreted its outline so differently, this figure, given by the
+latest commentators on the Cincinnati tablet, is interesting, and has
+seemed worthy of mention. As, however, the authenticity of the tablet
+itself is not above suspicion, but, on the contrary, is believed by many
+archæologists to admit of grave doubts, the subject need not be pursued
+further here.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 13.--Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From
+Short.]
+
+
+TOUCAN.
+
+The _a priori_ probability that the toucan was known to the
+Mound-Builders is, of course, much less than that the manatee was, since
+no species of toucan occurs farther north than Southern Mexico. Its
+distant habitat also militates against the idea that the Mound-Builders
+could have acquired a knowledge of the bird from intercourse with
+southern tribes, or that they received the supposed toucan pipes by way
+of trade. Without discussing the several theories to which the toucan
+pipes have given rise, let us first examine the evidence offered as to
+the presence in the mounds of sculptures of the toucan.
+
+It is a little perplexing to find at the outset that Squier and Davis,
+not content with one toucan, have figured three, and these differing
+from each other so widely as to be referable, according to modern
+ornithological ideas, to very distinct orders.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 14.--Toucan of Squier and Davis.]
+
+The first allusion to the toucan in the Monuments of the Mississippi
+Valley is found on page 194, where the authors guardedly remark of a
+bird's head in terra cotta (Fig. 79), "It represents the head of a bird,
+somewhat resembling the toucan, and is executed with much spirit."
+
+This head is vaguely suggestive of a young eagle, the proportions of the
+bill of which, until of some age, are considerably distorted. The
+position of the nostrils, however, and the contour of the mandibles,
+together with the position of the eyes, show clearly enough that it is a
+likeness of no bird known to ornithology. It is enough for our present
+purpose to say that in no particular does it bear any conceivable
+resemblance to the toucan.
+
+Of the second supposed toucan (Ancient Monuments, p. 260, Fig. 169)
+here illustrated, the authors remark:
+
+     The engraving very well represents the original, which is
+     delicately carved from a compact limestone. It is supposed to
+     represent the toucan--a tropical bird, and one not known to exist
+     anywhere within the limits of the United States. If we are not
+     mistaken in supposing it to represent this bird, the remarks made
+     respecting the sculptures of the manitus will here apply with
+     double force.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 15.--Toucan of Squier and Davis.]
+
+This sculpture is fortunately easy of identification. Among several
+ornithologists, whose opinions have been asked, not a dissenting voice
+has been heard. The bird is a common crow or a raven, and is one of the
+most happily executed of the avian sculptures, the nasal feathers, which
+are plainly shown, and the general contour of the bill being truly
+corvine. It would probably be practically impossible to distinguish a
+rude sculpture of a raven from that of a crow, owing to the general
+resemblance of the two. The proportions of the head here shown are,
+however, those of the crow, and the question of habitat renders it
+vastly more likely that the crow was known to the Mound-Builders of
+Ohio than that the raven was. What possible suggestion of a toucan is to
+be found in this head it is not easy to see.
+
+Turning to page 266 (Fig. 178) another and very different bird is held
+up to view as a toucan.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 16.--Toucan of Squier and Davis.]
+
+Squier and Davis remark of this sculpture:
+
+     From the size of its bill, and the circumstance of its having two
+     toes before and two behind, the bird intended to be represented
+     would seem to belong to the zygodactylous order--probably the
+     toucan. The toucan (Ramphastos of Lin.) is found on this continent
+     only in the tropical countries of South America.
+
+In contradiction to the terms of their description their own figure, as
+will be noticed, shows _three_ toes in front and two behind, or a total
+of five, which makes the bird an ornithological curiosity, indeed.
+However, as the cast in the Smithsonian collection shows three toes in
+front and one behind, it is probably safe to assume that the additional
+hind toe was the result of mistake on the part of the modern artist, so
+that four may be accepted as its proper quota. The mistake then
+chargeable to the above authors is that in their discussion they
+transferred one toe from before and added it behind. In this curious way
+came their zygodactylous bird.
+
+This same pipe is figured by Stevens in Flint Chips, p. 426, Fig. 5. The
+wood-cut is a poor one, and exhibits certain important changes, which,
+on the assumption that the pipe is at all well illustrated by the cast
+in the Smithsonian, reflects more credit on the artist's knowledge of
+what a toucan ought to look like than on his fidelity as an exact
+copyist.
+
+The etchings across the upper surface of the base of the pipe, miscalled
+fingers, are not only made to assume a hand-like appearance but the
+accommodating fancy of the artist has provided a roundish object in the
+palm, which the bird appears about to pick up. The bill, too, has been
+altered, having become rounded and decidedly toucan-like, while the tail
+has undergone abbreviation, also in the direction of likeness to the
+toucan. In short, much that was lacking in the aboriginal artist's
+conception towards the likeness of a toucan has in this figure been
+supplied by his modern interpreter.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 17.--Toucan as figured by Stevens.]
+
+This cut corresponds with the cast in the Smithsonian collection, in
+having the normal number of toes, four--three in front and one behind.
+This departure from the arrangement common to the toucan family, which
+is zygodactylous, seems to have escaped Stevens's attention. At least he
+volunteers no explanation of the discrepancy, being, doubtless,
+influenced in his acceptance of the bird as a toucan by the statements
+of others.
+
+Wilson follows the cut of Squier and Davis, and represents the bird with
+five toes, stating that the toucan is "imitated with considerable
+accuracy." He adds: "The most important deviation from correctness of
+detail is, it has three toes instead of two before, although the two are
+correctly represented behind." How Wilson is guided to the belief that
+the sculptor's mistake consists in adding a toe in front instead of one
+behind it would be difficult to explain, unless, indeed, he felt the
+necessity of having a toucan at all hazards. The truth is that, the
+question of toes aside, this carving in no wise resembles a toucan. Its
+long legs and proportionally long toes, coupled with the rather long
+neck and bill, indicate with certainty a wading bird of some kind, and
+in default of anything that comes nearer, an ibis may be suggested;
+though if intended by the sculptor as an ibis, candor compels the
+statement that the ibis family has no reason to feel complimented.
+
+The identification of this sculpture as a toucan was doubtless due less
+to any resemblance it bears to that bird than to another circumstance
+connected with it of a rather fanciful nature. As in the case of several
+others, the bird is represented in the act of feeding, upon what it
+would be difficult to say. Certainly the four etchings across the base
+of the pipe bear little resemblance to the human hand. Had they been
+intended for fingers they would hardly have been made to extend over the
+side of the pipe, an impossible position unless the back of the hand be
+uppermost. Yet it was probably just this fancied resemblance to a hand,
+out of which the bird is supposed to be feeding, that led to the
+suggestion of the toucan. For, say Squier and Davis, p. 266:
+
+     In those districts (_i.e._, Guiana and Brazil) the toucan was
+     almost the only bird the aborigines attempted to domesticate. The
+     fact that it is represented receiving its food from a human hand
+     would, under these circumstances, favor the conclusion that the
+     sculpture was designed to represent the toucan.
+
+Rather a slender thread one would think upon which to hang a theory so
+far-reaching in its consequences.
+
+Nor was it necessary to go as far as Guiana and Brazil to find instances
+of the domestication of wild fowl by aborigines. Among our North
+American Indians it was a by no means uncommon practice to capture and
+tame birds. Roger Williams, for instance, speaks of the New England
+Indians keeping tame hawks about their dwellings "to keep the little
+birds from their corn." (Williams's Key into the Language of America,
+1643, p. 220.) The Zuñis and other Pueblo Indians keep, and have kept
+from time immemorial, great numbers of eagles and hawks of every
+obtainable species, as also turkies, for the sake of the feathers. The
+Dakotas and other western tribes keep eagles for the same purpose. They
+also tame crows, which are fed from the hand, as well as hawks and
+magpies. A case nearer in point is a reference in Lawson to the
+Congarees of North Carolina. He says, "they are kind and affable, and
+tame the cranes and storks of their savannas." (Lawson's History of
+Carolina, p. 51.) And again (p. 53) "these Congarees have an abundance
+of storks and cranes in their savannas. They take them before they can
+fly, and breed them as tame and familiar as a dung-hill fowl. They had a
+tame crane at one of these cabins that was scarcely less than six feet
+in height."
+
+So that even if the bird, as has been assumed by many writers, be
+feeding from a human hand, of which fact there is no sufficient
+evidence, we are by no means on this account driven to the conclusion,
+as appears to have been believed, that the sculpture could be no other
+than a toucan.
+
+As in the Cass of the manatee, it has been thought well to introduce a
+correct drawing of a toucan in order to afford opportunity for
+comparison of this very striking bird with its supposed representations
+from the mounds. For this purpose the most northern representative of
+the family has been selected as the one nearest the home of the
+Mound-Builders.
+
+The particulars wherein it differs from the supposed toucans are so many
+and striking that it will be superfluous to dwell upon them in detail.
+They will be obvious at a glance.
+
+Thus we have seen that the sculptured representation of three birds,
+totally dissimilar from each other, and not only not resembling the
+toucan, but conveying no conceivable hint of that very marked bird,
+formed the basis of Squier and Davis' speculations as to the presence of
+the toucan in the mounds. These three supposed toucans have been copied
+and recopied by later authors, who have accepted in full the remarks and
+deductions accompanying them.
+
+At least two exceptions to the last statement may be made. It is
+refreshing to find that two writers, although apparently accepting the
+other identifications by Squier and Davis, have drawn the line at the
+toucan. Thus Rau, in The Archæological Collections of the United States
+National Museum, pp. 46-47, states that--
+
+     The figure (neither of the writers mentioned appear to have been
+     aware that there was more than one supposed toucan) is not of
+     sufficient distinctness to identify the original that was before
+     the artist's mind, and it would not be safe, therefore, to make
+     this specimen the subject of far-reaching speculations.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 18.--Keel-Billed Toucan of Southern Mexico
+(_Rhamphastos carinatus_.)]
+
+Further on he adds, "Leaving aside the more than doubtful toucan, the
+imitated animals belong, without exception, to the North American
+fauna." Barber, also, after taking exception to the idea that the
+supposed toucan carving represents a zygodactylous bird, adds in his
+article on Mound Pipes, pp. 280-281 (American Naturalist for April,
+1882), "It may be asserted with a considerable degree of confidence that
+no representative of an exclusively exotic fauna figured in the pipe
+sculptures of the Mound-Builders."
+
+
+PAROQUET.
+
+The presence of a carving of the paroquet in one of the Ohio mounds has
+been deemed remarkable on account of the supposed extreme southern
+habitat of that bird. Thus Squier and Davis remark ("Ancient Monuments
+of the Mississippi Valley," p. 265, Fig. 172), "Among the most spirited
+and delicately executed specimens of ancient art found in the mounds, is
+that of the paroquet here presented."
+
+"The paroquet is essentially a southern bird, and though common along
+the Gulf, is of rare occurrence above the Ohio River." The above
+language would seem to admit of no doubt as to the fact of the decided
+resemblance borne by this carving to the paroquet. Yet the bird thus
+positively identified as a paroquet, upon which identification have,
+without doubt, been based all the conclusions that have been published
+concerning the presence of that bird among the mound sculptures is not
+even distantly related to the parrot family. It has the bill of a
+raptorial bird, as shown by the distinct tooth, and this, in connection
+with the well defined cere, not present in the paroquet, and the open
+nostril, concealed by feathers in the paroquet, places its identity as
+one of the hawk tribe beyond doubt.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 19.--Paroquet of Squier and Davis.]
+
+In fact it closely resembles several of the carvings figured and
+identified as hawks by the above authors, as comparison with figures
+given below will show. The hawks always appear to have occupied a
+prominent place in the interest of our North American Indians,
+especially in association with totemic ideas, and the number of
+sculptured representations of hawks among the mound relics would argue
+for them a similar position in the minds of the Mound-Builders.
+
+A word should be added as to the distribution of the paroquet. The
+statement by Squier and Davis that the paroquet is found as far north as
+the Ohio River would of itself afford an easy explanation of the manner
+in which the Mound-Builders might have become acquainted with the bird,
+could their acquaintance with it be proved. But the above authors appear
+to have had a very incorrect idea of the region inhabited by this once
+widely spread species. The present distribution, it is true, is
+decidedly southern, it being almost wholly confined to limited areas
+within the Gulf States. Formerly, however, it ranged much farther north,
+and there is positive evidence that it occurred in New York,
+Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Nebraska. Up to
+1835 it was extremely abundant in Southern Illinois, and, as Mr. Ridgway
+informs the writer, was found there as late as 1861. Specimens are in
+the Smithsonian collection from points as far north as Chicago and
+Michigan. Over much of the region indicated the exact nature of its
+occurrence is not understood, whether resident or a more or less casual
+visitor. But as it is known that it was found as far north as
+Pennsylvania in winter it may once have ranged even farther north than
+the line just indicated, and have been found in Southern Wisconsin and
+Minnesota.
+
+Occurring, as it certainly did, over most of the mound region, the
+peculiar habits of the paroquet, especially its vociferous cries and
+manner of associating in large flocks, must, it would seem, have made
+it known to the Mound-Builders. Indeed from the ease with which it is
+trapped and killed, it very probably formed an article of food among
+them as it has among the whites and recent tribes of Indians. Probable,
+however, as it is that the Mound-Builders were well acquainted with the
+paroquet, there appears to be no evidence of the fact among their works
+of art.
+
+
+
+
+KNOWLEDGE OF TROPICAL ANIMALS BY MOUND-BUILDERS.
+
+
+The supposed evidence of a knowledge of tropical animals possessed by
+the ancient dwellers of the Mississippi Valley which has just been
+discussed seems to have powerfully impressed Wilson, and in his
+Prehistoric Man he devotes much space to the consideration of the
+matter. His ideas on the subject will be understood from the following
+quotation:
+
+    By the fidelity of the representations of so great a variety of
+    subjects copied from animal life, they furnish evidence of a
+    knowledge in the Mississippi Valley, of the fauna peculiar not only
+    to southern, but to tropical latitudes, extending beyond the Isthmus
+    into the southern continent; and suggestive either of arts derived
+    from a foreign source, and of an intimate intercourse maintained
+    with the central regions where the civilization of ancient America
+    attained its highest development: or else indicative of migration,
+    and an intrusion into the northern continent, of the race of the
+    ancient graves of Central and Southern America, bringing with them
+    the arts of the tropics, and models derived from the animals
+    familiar to their fathers in the parent-land of the race. (Vol. 1,
+    p. 475.)
+
+The author subsequently shows his preference for the theory of a
+migration of the race of the Mound-Builders from southern regions as
+being on the whole more probable. Wilson does not, however, content
+himself with the evidence afforded by the birds and animals which have
+just been discussed, but strengthens his argument by extending the list
+of supposed exotic forms known to the Mound-Builders in the following
+words (vol. 1, p. 477):
+
+     But we must account by other means for the discovery of accurate
+     miniature representations of it (_i.e._ the Manatee) among the
+     sculptures of the far-inland mounds of Ohio; and the same remark
+     equally applies to the jaguar or panther, the cougar, the toucan;
+     to the buzzard possibly, and also to the paroquet. _The majority of
+     these animals are not known in the United States; some of them are
+     totally unknown to within any part of the North American
+     continent._ (Italics of the present writer.) Others may be classed
+     with the paroquet, which, though essentially a southern bird, and
+     common in the Gulf, does occasionally make its appearance inland;
+     and might possibly become known to the untraveled Mound-Builder
+     among the fauna of his own northern home.
+
+The information contained in the above paragraph relative to the range
+of some of the animals mentioned may well be viewed with surprise by
+naturalists. To begin with, the jaguar or panther, by which vernacular
+names the _Felis onca_ is presumably meant, is not only found in
+Northern Mexico, but extends its range into the United States and
+appears as far north as the Red River of Louisiana. (See Baird's Mammals
+of North America.) Hence a sculptured representation of this animal in
+the mounds, although by no means likely, is not entirely out of the
+question. However, among the several carvings of the cat family that
+have been exhumed from the mounds and made known there is not one which
+can, with even a fair degree of probability, be identified as this
+species in distinction from the next animal named, the cougar.
+
+The cougar, to which several of the carvings can with but little doubt
+be referred, was at the time of the discovery of America and is to-day,
+where not exterminated by man, a common resident of the whole of North
+America, including of course the whole of the Mississippi Valley. It
+would be surprising, therefore, if an animal so striking, and one that
+has figured so largely in Indian totemism and folk-lore, should not have
+received attention at the hands of the Mound-Builders.
+
+Nothing resembling the toucan, as has been seen, has been found in the
+mounds; but, as stated, this bird is found in Southern Mexico.
+
+The buzzard is to-day common over almost the entire United States, and
+is especially common throughout most of the Mississippi Valley.
+
+As to the paroquet, there seems to be no evidence in the way of carvings
+to show that it was known to the Mound-Builders, although that such was
+the case is rendered highly probable from the fact that it lived at
+their very doors.
+
+It therefore appears that of the five animals of which Wilson states
+"the majority are not known in the United States," and "some of them are
+totally unknown, within any part of the North American continent," every
+one is found in North America, and all but one within the limits of the
+United States, while three were common residents of the Mississippi
+Valley.
+
+As a further illustration of the inaccurate zoological knowledge to
+which may be ascribed no small share of the theories advanced respecting
+the origin of the Mound-Builders, the following illustration may be
+taken from Wilson, this author, however, being but one of the many who
+are equally in fault. The error is in regard to the habitat of the conch
+shell, _Pyrula (now Busycon) perversa_.
+
+After exposing the blunder of Mr. John Delafield, who describes this
+shell as unknown on the coasts of North and South America, but as
+abundant on the coast of Hindostan, from which supposed fact, coupled
+with its presence in the mounds, he assumes a migration on the part of
+the Mound-Builders from Southern Asia (Prehistoric Man, vol. 1, p. 219,
+_ibid._, p. 272), Wilson states.
+
+     No question can exist as to the tropical and marine origin of the
+     large shells exhumed not only in the inland regions of Kentucky and
+     Tennessee, but in the northern peninsula lying between the Ontario
+     and Huron Lakes, or on the still remoter shores and islands of
+     Georgian Bay, at a distance of upwards of three thousand miles from
+     the coast of Yucatan, on the mainland, _the nearest point where the
+     Pyrula perversa is found in its native locality_. (Italics of the
+     present writer.)
+
+Now the plain facts on the authority of Mr. Dall are that the _Busycon
+(Pyrula) perversa_ is not only found in the United States, but extends
+along the coast up to Charleston, S.C., with rare specimens as far north
+as Beaufort, N.C. Moreover, archæologists have usually confounded this
+species with the _Busycon carica_, which is of common occurrence in the
+mounds. The latter is found as far north as Cape Cod. The facts cited
+put a very different complexion on the presence of these shells in the
+mounds.
+
+
+OTHER ERRORS OF IDENTIFICATION.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 20.--"Owl," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+The erroneous identification of the manatee, the toucan, and of several
+other animals having been pointed out, it may be well to glance at
+certain others of the sculptured animal forms, the identification of
+which by Squier and Davis has passed without dispute, with a view to
+determining how far the accuracy of these authors in this particular
+line is to be trusted, and how successful they have been in interpreting
+the much lauded "fidelity to nature" of the mound sculptures.
+
+Fig. 20 (Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley,
+p. 225, Fig. 123) represents a tube of steatite, upon which is carved,
+as is stated, "in high relief this figure of an owl, attached with its
+back to the tube." This carving, the authors state, is "remarkably bold
+and spirited, and represents the bird with its claws contracted and
+drawn up, and head and beak elevated as if in an attitude of defense and
+defiance."
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 21.--"Grouse," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+This carving differs markedly from any of the avian sculptures, and
+probably was not intended to represent a bird at all. The absence of
+feather etchings and the peculiar shape of the wing are especially
+noticeable. It more nearly resembles, if it can be said to resemble
+anything, a bat, with the features very much distorted.
+
+Fig. 21 (Fig. 170 from Squier and Davis) it is stated, "will readily be
+recognized as intended to represent the head of the grouse."
+
+The cere and plainly notched bill of this carving clearly indicate a
+hawk, of what species it would be impossible to say.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 22.--"Turkey Buzzard," from Squier and
+Davis.]
+
+Fig. 22 (Fig. 171 from Squier and Davis) was, it is said, "probably
+intended to represent a turkey buzzard." If so, the suggestion is a very
+vague one. The notches cut in the mandibles, as in the case of the
+carving of the wood duck (Fig. 168, Ancient Monuments), are perhaps
+meant for serrations, of which there is no trace in the bill of the
+buzzard. As suggested by Mr. Ridgway, it is perhaps nearer the cormorant
+than anything else, although not executed with the detail necessary for
+its satisfactory recognition.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 23.--"Cherry-bird," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+Fig. 23 (Fig. 173 from Squier and Davis) it is claimed "much resembles
+the tufted cherry-bird," which is by no means the case, as the bill
+bears witness. It may pass, however, as a badly executed likeness of the
+tufted cardinal grosbeak or red-bird. The same is true of Figs. 174 and
+175, which are also said to be "cherry-birds."
+
+Fig. 24 (Fig. 179 from Squier and Davis), of which Squier and Davis say
+it is uncertain what bird it is intended to represent, is an
+unmistakable likeness of a woodpecker, and is one of the best executed
+of the series of bird carvings. To undertake to name the species would
+be the merest guess-work.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 24.--Woodpecker, from Squier and Davis.]
+
+The heads shown in Fig. 25, which the authors assert "was probably
+intended to represent the eagle" and "are far superior in point of
+finish, spirit, and truthfulness to any miniature carving, ancient or
+modern, which have fallen under the notice of the authors," cannot be
+identified further than to say they are raptorial birds of some sort,
+probably not eagles but hawks.
+
+Fig. 26 (Fig. 180 from Squier and Davis), according to the authors,
+"certainly represents the rattlesnake." It certainly represents a snake,
+but there is no hint in it of the peculiarities of the rattlesnake;
+which, indeed, it would be difficult to portray in a rude carving like
+this without showing the rattle. This is done in another carving, Fig.
+196.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 25.--"Eagle," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+The extraordinary terms of praise bestowed by the authors on the heads
+of the hawks just alluded to, as well as on many other of the sculptured
+animals, suggest the question whether the illustrations given in the
+Ancient Monuments afford any adequate idea of the beauty and artistic
+excellence asserted for the carvings, and so whether they are fair
+objects for criticism. While of course for the purpose of this paper an
+examination of the originals would have been preferable, yet, in as much
+as the Smithsonian Institution contains casts which attest the general
+accuracy of the drawings given, and, as the illustrations by other
+authors afford no higher idea of their artistic execution, it would seem
+that any criticism applicable to these illustrations must in the main
+apply to the originals. With reference to the casts in the Smithsonian
+collection it may be stated that Dr. Rau, who had abundant opportunity
+to acquaint himself with the originals while in the possession of Mr.
+Davis, informs the writer that they accurately represent the carvings,
+and for purposes of study are practically as good as the originals. The
+latter are, as is well known, in the Blackmore Museum, England.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 26.--"Rattlesnake," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+Without going into further detail the matter may be summed up as
+follows: Of forty-five of the animal carvings, including a few of clay,
+which are figured in Squier and Davis's work, eleven are left unnamed by
+the authors as not being recognizable; nineteen are identified
+correctly, in a general way, as of a wolf, bear, heron, toad, &c.;
+sixteen are demonstrably wrongly identified, leaving but five of which
+the species is correctly given.
+
+From this showing it appears that either the above authors' zoological
+knowledge was faulty in the extreme, or else the mound sculptors'
+ability in animal carving has been amazingly overestimated. However just
+the first supposition may be, the last is certainly true.
+
+
+
+
+SKILL IN SCULPTURE OF MOUND-BUILDERS.
+
+
+In considering the degree of skill exhibited by the mound sculptors in
+their delineation of the features and characteristics of animals, it is
+of the utmost importance to note that the carvings of birds and animals
+which have evoked the most extravagant expressions of praise as to the
+exactness with which nature has been copied are uniformly those which,
+owing to the possession of some unusual or salient characteristic, are
+exceedingly easy of imitation. The stout body and broad flat tail of the
+beaver, the characteristic physiognomy of the wild cat and panther, so
+utterly dissimilar to that of other animals, the tufted head and
+fish-eating habits of the heron, the raptorial bill and claws of the
+hawk, the rattle of the rattlesnake, are all features which the rudest
+skill could scarcely fail to portray.
+
+It is by the delineation of these marked and unmistakable features, and
+not the sculptor's power to express the subtleties of animal
+characteristics, that enables the identity of a comparatively small
+number of the carvings to be established. It is true that the contrary
+has often been asserted, and that almost everything has been claimed for
+the carvings, in the way of artistic execution, that would be claimed
+for the best products of modern skill. Squier and Davis in fact go so
+far in their admiration (Ancient Monuments, p. 272), as to say that, so
+far as fidelity is concerned, many of them (_i.e._, animal carvings)
+deserve to rank by the side of the best efforts of the artist
+naturalists in our own day--a statement which is simply preposterous. So
+far, in point of fact, is this from being true that an examination of
+the series of animal sculptures cannot fail to convince any one, who is
+even tolerably well acquainted with our common birds and animals, that
+it is simply impossible to recognize specific features in the great
+majority of them. They were either not intended to be copies of
+particular species, or, if so intended, the artist's skill was wholly
+inadequate for his purpose.
+
+Some remarks by Dr. Coues, quoted in an article by E. A. Barber on Mound
+Pipes in the American Naturalist for April, 1882, are so apropos to the
+subject that they are here reprinted. The paragraph is in response to a
+request to identify a bird pipe:
+
+     As is so frequently the probable case in such matters, I am
+     inclined to think the sculptor had no particular bird in mind in
+     executing his rude carving. It is not necessary, or indeed,
+     permissible, to suppose that particular species were intended to be
+     represented. Not unfrequently the likeness of some marked bird is
+     so good as to be unmistakable, but the reverse is oftener the case;
+     and in the present instance I can make no more of the carving than
+     you have done, excepting that if any particular species may have
+     been in the carver's mind, his execution does not suffice for its
+     determination.
+
+The views entertained by Dr. Coues as to the resemblances of the
+carvings will thus be seen to coincide with those expressed above.
+Another prominent ornithologist, Mr. Ridgway, has also given verbal
+expression to precisely similar views.
+
+So far, therefore, as the carvings themselves afford evidence to the
+naturalist, their general likeness entirely accords with the supposition
+that they were not intended to be copies of particular species. Many of
+the specimens are in fact just about what might be expected when a
+workman, with crude ideas of art expression, sat down with intent to
+carve out a bird, for instance, without the desire, even if possessed of
+the requisite degree of skill, to impress upon the stone the details
+necessary to make it the likeness of a particular species.
+
+
+GENERALIZATION NOT DESIGNED.
+
+While the resemblances of most of the carvings, as indicated above, must
+be admitted to be of a general and not of a special character, it does
+not follow that their general type was the result of design.
+
+Such an explanation of their general character and resemblances is,
+indeed, entirely inconsistent with certain well-known facts regarding
+the mental operations of primitive or semi-civilized man. To the mind of
+primitive man abstract conceptions of things, while doubtless not
+entirely wanting, are at best but vaguely defined. The experience of
+numerous investigators attests how difficult it is, for instance, to
+obtain from a savage the name of a class of animals in distinction from
+a particular species of that class. Thus it is easy to obtain the names
+of the several kinds of bears known to a savage, but his mind
+obstinately refuses to entertain the idea of a bear genus or class. It
+is doubtless true that this difficulty is in no small part due simply to
+the confusion arising from the fact that the savage's method of
+classification is different from that of his questioner. For, although
+primitive man actually does classify all concrete things into groups,
+the classification is of a very crude sort, and has for a basis a very
+different train of ideas from those upon which modern science is
+established--a fact which many investigators are prone to overlook.
+Still there seems to be good ground for believing that the conception of
+a bird, for instance, in the abstract as distinct from some particular
+kind or species would never be entertained by a people no further
+advanced in culture than their various relics prove the Mound-Builders
+to have been. In his carving, therefore, of a hawk, a bear, a heron, or
+a fish, it seems highly probable that the mound sculptor had in mind a
+distinct species, as we understand the term. Hence his failure to
+reproduce specific features in a recognizable way is to be attributed to
+the fact that his skill was inadequate to transfer the exact image
+present in his mind, and not to his intention to carve out a general
+representative of the avian class.
+
+To carry the imitative idea farther and to suggest, as has been done by
+writers, that the carver of the Mound-Building epoch sat down to his
+work with the animal or a model of it before him, as does the accurate
+zoological artist of our own day, is wholly insupported by evidence
+derivable from the carvings themselves, and is of too imaginative a
+character to be entertained. By the above remarks as to the lack of
+specific resemblances in the animal carvings it is not intended to deny
+that some of them have been executed with a considerable degree of skill
+and spirit as well as, within certain limitations heretofore expressed,
+fidelity to nature. Taking them as a whole it can perhaps be asserted
+that they have been carved with a skill considerably above the general
+average of attainments in art of our Indian tribes, but not above the
+best efforts of individual tribes.
+
+That they will by no means bear the indiscriminate praise they have
+received as works of art and as exact imitations of nature may be
+asserted with all confidence.
+
+
+PROBABLE TOTEMIC ORIGIN.
+
+With reference to the origin of these animal sculptures many writers
+appear inclined to the view that they are purely decorative and
+ornamental in character, _i.e._, that they are attempts at close
+imitations of nature in the sense demanded by high art, and that they
+owe their origin to the artistic instinct alone. But there is much in
+their general appearance that suggests they may have been totemic in
+origin, and that whatever of ornamental character they may possess is of
+secondary importance.
+
+With, perhaps, no exceptions, the North American tribes practiced
+totemism in one or other of its various forms, and, although it by no
+means follows that all the carving and etchings of birds or animals by
+these tribes are totems, yet it is undoubtedly true that the totemic
+idea is traceable in no small majority of their artistic
+representations, whatever their form. As rather favoring the idea of the
+totemic meaning of the carvings, it may be pointed out that a
+considerable number of the recognizable birds and animals are precisely
+the ones known to have been used as totems by many tribes of Indians.
+The hawk, heron, woodpecker, crow, beaver, otter, wild cat, squirrel,
+rattlesnake, and others, have all figured largely in the totemic
+divisions of our North American Indians. Their sacred nature too would
+enable us to understand how naturally pipes would be selected as the
+medium for totemic representations. It is also known to be a custom
+among Indian tribes for individuals to carve out or etch their totems
+upon weapons and implements of the more important and highly prized
+class, and a variety of ideas, superstitious and other, are associated
+with the usage; as, for instance, in the case of weapons of war or
+implements of the chase, to impart greater efficiency to them. The
+etching would also serve as a mark of ownership, especially where
+property of certain kinds was regarded as belonging to the tribe or gens
+and not to the individual. Often, indeed, in the latter case the
+individual used the totem of his gens instead of the symbol or mark for
+his own name.
+
+As a theory to account for the number and character of these animal
+carvings the totemic theory is perhaps as tenable as any. The origin and
+significance of the carvings may, however, involve many different and
+distinct ideas. It is certain that it is a common practice of Indians to
+endeavor to perpetuate the image of any strange bird or beast,
+especially when seen away from home, and in order that it may be shown
+to his friends. As what are deemed the marvellous features of the animal
+are almost always greatly exaggerated, it is in this way that many of
+the astonishing productions noticeable in savage art have originated.
+Among the Esquimaux this habit is very prominent, and many individuals
+can show etchings or carvings of birds and animals exhibiting the most
+extraordinary characters, which they stoutly aver and doubtless have
+come to believe they have actually seen.
+
+
+
+
+ANIMAL MOUNDS.
+
+
+As having, for the purposes of the present paper, a close connection
+with the animal carvings, another class of remains left by the
+Mound-Builders--the animal mounds--may next engage attention. As in the
+case of the carvings, the resemblance of particular mounds to the
+animals whose names they bear is a matter of considerable interest on
+account of the theories to which they have given rise.
+
+The conclusion reached with respect to the carvings that it is safe to
+rely upon their identification only in the case of animals possessed of
+striking and unique characters or presenting unusual forms and
+proportions, applies with far greater force to the animal mounds.
+Perhaps in none of the latter can specific resemblances be found
+sufficient for their precise determination. So general are the
+resemblances of one class that it has been an open question among
+archæologists whether they were intended to represent the bodies and
+arms of men, or the bodies and wings of birds. Other forms are
+sufficiently defined to admit of the statement that they are doubtless
+intended for animals, but without enabling so much as a reasonable guess
+to be made as to the kind. Of others again it can be asserted that
+whatever significance they may have had to the race that built them, to
+the uninstructed eyes of modern investigators they are meaningless and
+are as likely to have been intended for inanimate as animate objects.
+
+There are many examples among the animal shapes that possess
+peculiarities affording no hint of animals living or extinct, but which
+are strongly suggestive of the play of mythologic fancy or of
+conventional methods of representing totemic ideas. As in the case of
+the animal carvings, the latter suggestion is perhaps the one that best
+corresponds with their general character.
+
+
+THE "ELEPHANT" MOUND.
+
+By far the most important of the animal mounds, from the nature of the
+deductions it has given rise to, is the so-called "Elephant Mound," of
+Wisconsin.
+
+By its discovery and description the interesting question was raised as
+to the contemporaneousness of the Mound-Builder and the mastodon, an
+interest which is likely to be further enhanced by the more recent
+bringing to light in Iowa of two pipes carved in the semblance of the
+same animal, as well as a tablet showing two figures asserted by some
+archæologists to have been intended for the same animal.
+
+Although both the mound and pipes have been referred in turn to the
+peccary, the tapir, and the armadillo, it is safe to exclude these
+animals from consideration. It is indeed perhaps more likely that the
+ancient inhabitants of the Upper Mississippi Valley were autoptically
+acquainted with the mastodon than with either of the above-named
+animals, owing to their southern habitat.
+
+Referring to the possibility that the mastodon was known to the
+Mound-Builders, it is impossible to fix with any degree of precision the
+time of its disappearance from among living animals. Mastodon bones have
+been exhumed from peat beds in this country at a depth which, so far as
+is proved by the rate of deposition, implies that the animal may have
+been alive within five hundred years. The extinction of the mastodon,
+geologically speaking, was certainly a very recent event, and, as an
+antiquity of upwards of a thousand or more years has been assigned to
+some of the mounds, it is entirely within the possibilities that this
+animal was living at the time these were thrown up, granting even that
+the time of their erection has been overestimated. It must be admitted,
+therefore, that there are no inherent absurdities in the belief that the
+Mound-Builders were acquainted with the mastodon. Granting that they may
+have been acquainted with the animal, the question arises, what proof is
+there that they actually were? The answer to this question made by
+certain archæologists is--the Elephant Mound, of Wisconsin.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 27.--The Elephant Mound, Grant County,
+Wisconsin.]
+
+Recalling the fact that among the animal mounds many nondescript shapes
+occur which cannot be identified at all, and as many others which have
+been called after the animals they appear to most nearly resemble, carry
+out their peculiarities only in the most vague and general way, it is a
+little difficult to understand the confidence with which this effigy has
+been asserted to represent the mastodon; for the mound (a copy of which
+as figured in the Smithsonian Annual Report for 1872 is here given) can
+by no means be said to closely represent the shape, proportions, and
+peculiarities of the animal whose name it bears. In fact, it is true of
+this, as of so many other of the effigies, the identity of which must be
+guessed, that the resemblance is of the most vague and general kind, the
+figure simulating the elephant no more closely than any one of a score
+or more mounds in Wisconsin, except in one important particular, viz,
+the head has a prolongation or snout-like appendage, which is its chief,
+in fact its only real, elephantine character. If this appendage is too
+long for the snout of any other known animal, it is certainly too short
+for the trunk of a mastodon. Still, so far as this one character goes,
+it is doubtless true that it is more suggestive of the mastodon than of
+any other animal. No hint is afforded of tusks, ears, or tail, and were
+it not for the snout the animal effigy might readily be called a bear,
+it nearly resembling in its general make-up many of the so-called bear
+mounds figured by Squier and Davis from this same county in Wisconsin.
+The latter, too, are of the same gigantic size and proportions.
+
+If it can safely be assumed that an animal effigy without tusks, without
+ears, and without a tail was really intended to represent a mastodon, it
+would be stretching imagination but a step farther to call all the
+large-bodied, heavy-limbed animal effigies hitherto named bears,
+mastodons, attributing the lack of trunks, as well as ears, tusks, and
+tails, to inattention to slight details on the part of the mound artist.
+
+It is true that one bit of good, positive proof is worth many of a
+negative character. But here the one positive resemblance, the trunk of
+the supposed elephant, falls far short of an exact imitation, and, as
+the other features necessary to a good likeness of a mastodon are wholly
+wanting, is not this an instance where the negative proof should be held
+sufficient to largely outweigh the positive?
+
+In connection with this question the fact should not be overlooked that,
+among the great number of animal effigies in Wisconsin and elsewhere,
+this is the only one which even thus remotely suggests the mastodon. As
+the Mound Builders were in the habit of repeating the same animal form
+again and again, not only in the same but in widely distant localities,
+why, if this was really intended for a mastodon, are there no others
+like it? It cannot be doubted that the size and extraordinary features
+of this monster among mammals would have prevented it being overlooked
+by the Mound-Builders when so many animals of inferior interest engaged
+their attention. The fact that the mound is a nondescript, with no
+others resembling it, certainly lessens the probability that it was an
+intentional representation of the mastodon, and increases the likelihood
+that its slight resemblance was accidental; a slide of earth from the
+head, for instance, might readily be interpreted by the modern artist
+as a trunk, and thus the head be made to assume a shape in his sketch
+not intended by the original maker. As is well known, no task is more
+difficult for the artist than to transfer to paper an exact copy of such
+a subject. Especially hard is it for the artist to avoid unconsciously
+magnifying or toning down peculiarities according to his own conceptions
+of what was originally intended, when, as is often the case, time and
+the elements have combined to render shape and outlines obscure.
+Archæologic treatises are full of warning lessons of this kind, and the
+interpretations given to ancient works of art by the erring pencil of
+the modern artist are responsible for many an ingenious theory which the
+original would never have suggested. It may well be that future
+investigations will show that the one peculiarity which distinguishes
+the so-called Elephant Mound from its fellows is really susceptible of a
+much more commonplace explanation than has hitherto been given it.
+
+Even if such explanation be not forthcoming, the "Elephant Mound" of
+Wisconsin should be supplemented by a very considerable amount of
+corroborative testimony before being accepted as proof positive of the
+acquaintance of the Mound-Builders with the mastodon.
+
+As regards likeness to the mastodon, the pipes before alluded to, copies
+of which as given in Barber's articles on Mound Pipes in American
+Naturalist for April, 1882, Figs. 17 and 18, are here presented, while
+not entirely above criticism, are much nearer what they have been
+supposed to be than the mound just mentioned.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 28.--Elephant Pipe, Iowa]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 29.--Elephant Pipe, Iowa.]
+
+Of the two, figure 29 is certainly the most natural in appearance, but,
+if the pipes are intentional imitations of any animal, neither can be
+regarded as having been intended for any other than the mastodon. Yet,
+as pointed out by Barber and others, it is certainly surprising that if
+intended for mastodons no attempt was made to indicate the tusks, which
+with the trunk constitute the most marked external peculiarities of all
+the elephant kind. The tusks, too, as affording that most important
+product in primitive industries, ivory, would naturally be the one
+peculiarity of all others which the ancient artist would have relied
+upon to fix the identity of the animal. It is also remarkable that in
+neither of these pipes is the tail indicated, although a glance at the
+other sculptures will show that in the full-length figures this member
+is invariably shown. In respect to these omissions, the pipes from Iowa
+are strikingly suggestive of the Elephant Mound of Wisconsin, with the
+peculiarities of which the sculptor, whether ancient or modern, might
+almost be supposed to have been acquainted. It certainly must be looked
+upon as a curious coincidence that carvings found at a point so remote
+from the Elephant Mound, and presumably the work of other hands, should
+so closely copy the imperfections of that mound.
+
+In considering the evidence afforded by these pipes of a knowledge of
+the mastodon on the part of the Mound-Builders, it should be borne in
+mind that their authenticity as specimens of the Mound-Builders' art has
+been called seriously in question. Possibly the fact that the same
+person was instrumental in bringing to light both the pipes has had
+largely to do with the suspicion, especially when it was remembered that
+although explorers have been remarkably active in the same region, it
+has fallen to the good fortune of no one else to find anything conveying
+the most distant suggestion of the mastodon. As the manner of discovery
+of such relics always forms an important part of their history, the
+following account of the pipes as communicated to Mr. Barber by Mr.
+W. H. Pratt, president of the Davenport Academy (American Naturalist for
+April, 1882, pp. 275, 276), is here subjoined:
+
+     The first elephant pipe, which we obtained (Fig. 17) a little more
+     than a year ago, was found some six years before by an illiterate
+     German farmer named Peter Mare, while planting corn on a farm in
+     the mound region, Louisa County, Iowa. He did not care whether it
+     was elephant or kangaroo; to him it was a curious 'Indian stone,'
+     and nothing more, and he kept it and smoked it. In 1878 he removed
+     to Kansas, and when he left he gave the pipe to his brother-in-law,
+     a farm laborer, who also smoked it. Mr. Gass happened to hear of
+     it, as he is always inquiring about such things, hunted up the man
+     and borrowed the pipe to take photographs and casts from it. He
+     could not buy it. The man said his brother-in-law gave it to him
+     and as it was a curious thing--he wanted to keep it. We were,
+     however, unfortunate, or fortunate, enough to break it; that
+     spoiled it for him and that was his chance to make some money out
+     of it. He could have claimed any amount, and we would, as in duty
+     bound, have raised it for him, but he was satisfied with three or
+     four dollars. During the first week in April, this month, Rev. Ad.
+     Blumer, another German Lutheran minister, now of Genesee, Illinois,
+     having formerly resided in Louisa County, went down there in
+     company with Mr. Gass to open a few mounds, Mr. Blumer being well
+     acquainted there. They carefully explored ten of them, and found
+     nothing but ashes and decayed bones in any, except one. In that one
+     was a layer of red, hard-burned clay, about five feet across and
+     thirteen inches in thickness at the center, which rested upon a bed
+     of ashes one foot in depth in the middle, the ashes resting upon
+     the natural undisturbed clay. In the ashes, near the bottom of the
+     layer, they found a part of a broken carved stone pipe,
+     representing some bird; a very small beautifully formed copper
+     'axe,' and this last elephant pipe (Fig. 18). This pipe was first
+     discovered by Mr. Blumer, and by him, at our earnest solicitation,
+     turned over to the Academy.
+
+It will be seen from the above that the same gentleman was instrumental
+in bringing to light the two specimens constituting the present supply
+of elephant pipes.
+
+The remarkable archæologic instinct which has guided the finder of these
+pipes has led him to even more important discoveries. By the aid of his
+divining rod he has succeeded in unearthing some of the most remarkable
+inscribed tablets which have thus far rewarded the diligent search of
+the mound explorer. It is not necessary to speak in detail of these
+here, or of the various theories to which they have given rise and
+support, including that of phonetic writing, further than to call
+attention to the fact that by a curious coincidence one of the tablets
+contains, among a number of familiar animals, figures which suggest in a
+rude way the mastodon again, which animal indeed some archæologists have
+confidently asserted them to be. The resemblance they bear to that
+animal is, however, by no means as close as exhibited by the pipe
+carvings; they are therefore not reproduced here. Both figures differ
+from the pipes in having tails; both lack trunks, and also tusks.
+
+Archæologists must certainly deem it unfortunate that outside of the
+Wisconsin mound the only evidence of the co-existence of the
+Mound-Builder and the mastodon should reach the scientific world through
+the agency of one individual. So derived, each succeeding carving of the
+mastodon, be it more or less accurate, instead of being accepted by
+archæologists as cumulative evidence tending to establish the
+genuineness of the sculptured testimony showing that the Mound-Builder
+and mastodon were coeval, will be viewed with ever increasing suspicion.
+
+This part of the subject should not be concluded without allusion to a
+certain class of evidence, which, although of a negative sort, must be
+accorded very great weight in considering this much vexed question. It
+may be asked why if the Mound-Builders and the mastodon were
+contemporaneous, have no traces of the ivory tusks ever been exhumed
+from the mounds? No material is so perfectly adapted for the purposes of
+carving, an art to which we have seen the Mound-Builders were much
+addicted, as ivory, both from its beauty and the ease with which it is
+worked, to say nothing of the other manifold uses to which it is put,
+both by primitive and civilized man. The mastodon affords an abundant
+supply of this highly prized substance, not a particle of which has ever
+been exhumed from the mounds either in the shape of implements or
+carving. Yet the exceedingly close texture of ivory enables it to
+successfully resist the destroying influences of time for very long
+periods--very long indeed as compared with certain articles which
+commonly reward the search of the mound explorer.
+
+Among the articles of a perishable nature that have been exhumed from
+the mounds are large numbers of shell ornaments, which are by no means
+very durable, as well as the perforated teeth of various animals;
+sections of deers' horns have also been found, as well as ornaments made
+of the claws of animals, a still more perishable material. The list also
+includes the bones of the muskrat and turtle, as of other animals, not
+only in their natural shape, but carved into the form of implements of
+small size, as awls, etc. Human bones, too, in abundance, have been
+exhumed in a sufficiently well preserved state to afford a basis for
+various theories and speculations.
+
+But of the mastodon, with which these dead Mound-Builders are supposed
+to have been acquainted, not a palpable trace remains. The tale of its
+existence is told by a single mound in Wisconsin, which the most ardent
+supporter of the mastodon theory must acknowledge to be far from a
+facsimile, and two carvings and an inscribed tablet, the three latter
+the finds of a single explorer.
+
+Bearing in mind the many attempts at archæological frauds that recent
+years have brought to light, archæologists have a right to demand that
+objects which afford a basis for such important deductions as the coeval
+life of the Mound-Builder and the mastodon, should be above the
+slightest suspicion not only in respect to their resemblances, but as
+regards the circumstances of discovery. If they are not above suspicion,
+the science of archæology can better afford to wait for further and more
+certain evidence than to commit itself to theories which may prove
+stumbling-blocks to truth until that indefinite time when future
+investigations shall show their illusory nature.
+
+
+THE "ALLIGATOR" MOUND.
+
+Although of much less importance than the mastodon, a word may be added
+as to the so-called alligator mound, more especially because the
+alligator, owing to its southern habitat, is not likely to have been
+known to the Mound-Builders of Ohio. That it may have been known to them
+either through travel or hearsay is of course possible. A copy of the
+mound from the "Ancient Monuments" is subjoined.
+
+The alligator mound was described under this name for no other reason
+than because it was known in the vicinity as such, this designation
+having been adopted by Squier and Davis, as they frankly say, "for want
+of a better," adding "although the figure bears as close a resemblance
+to the lizard as any other reptile." (Ancient Monuments, p. 99.)
+
+In truth it bears a superficial likeness to almost any long-tailed
+animal which has the power of curling its tail--which, the alligator has
+not--as, for instance, the opossum. It is, however, the merest
+guess-work to attempt to confine its resemblances to any particular
+animal. Nevertheless recent writers have described this as the
+"alligator mound" without suggesting a word of doubt as to its want of
+positive resemblance to that saurian.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 30.--"Alligator" Mound.]
+
+
+
+
+HUMAN SCULPTURES.
+
+
+The conclusion reached in the foregoing pages that the animal sculptures
+are not "exact and faithful copies from nature," but are imitations of a
+general rather than of a special character, such as comport better with
+the state of art as developed among certain of the Indian tribes than
+among a people that has achieved any notable advance in culture is
+important not only in its bearing on the questions previously noticed in
+this paper, but in its relation to another and highly interesting class
+of sculptures.
+
+If a large proportion of the animal carvings are so lacking in artistic
+accuracy as to make it possible to identify positively only the few
+possessing the most strongly marked characters, how much faith is to be
+placed in the ability of the Mound sculptor to fix in stone the features
+and expressions of the human countenance, infinitely more difficult
+subject for portrayal as this confessedly is?
+
+That Wilson regards the human sculptures as affording a basis for sound
+ethnological deductions is evident from the following paragraph, taken
+from Prehistoric Man, vol. 1, p. 461:
+
+     Alike from the minute accuracy of many of the sculptures of
+     animals, hereafter referred to, and from the correspondence to well
+     known features of the modern Red Indian suggested by some of the
+     human heads, these miniature portraits may be assumed, with every
+     probability, to include faithful representations of the predominant
+     physical features of the ancient people by whom they were executed.
+
+Short, too, accepting the popular idea that they are faithful and
+recognizable copies from nature, remarks in the North Americans of
+Antiquity, p. 98, _ibid._, p. 187:
+
+     There is no reason for believing that the people who wrought stone
+     and clay into perfect effigies of animals have not left us
+     sculptures of their own faces in the images exhumed from the
+     mounds;" and again, "The perfection of the animal representations
+     furnish us the assurance that their sculptures of the human face
+     were equally true to nature.
+
+Squier and Davis also appear to have had no doubt whatever of the
+capabilities of the Mound-Builders in the direction of human
+portraiture. They are not only able to discern in the sculptured heads
+niceties of expression sufficient for the discrimination of the sexes,
+but, as well, to enable them to point out such as are undoubtedly
+ancient and the work of the Mound-Builders, and those of a more recent
+origin, the product of the present Indians. Their main criterion of
+origin is, apparently, that all of fine execution and finish were the
+work of the Mound sculptors, and those roughly done and "immeasurably
+inferior to the relics of the mounds," to use their own words, were the
+handicraft of the tribes found in the country by the whites. Conclusions
+so derived, it may strike some, are open to criticism, however well
+suited they may be to meet the necessities of preconceived theories.
+
+After discussing in detail the methods of arranging the hair, the paint
+lines, and tattooing, the features of the human carvings, Squier and
+Davis arrive at the conclusion that the "physiological characteristics
+of these heads do not differ essentially from those of the great
+American family."
+
+Of later writers some agree with Squier and Davis in believing the type
+illustrated by these heads to be Indian; others agree rather with
+Wilson, who dissents from the view expressed by Squier and Davis, and,
+in conformity with the predilections visible throughout his work, is of
+the opinion that the Mound-Builders were of a distinct type from the
+North American Indian, and that "the majority of sculptured human heads
+hitherto recovered from their ancient depositories do not reproduce the
+Indian features." (Wilson's Prehistoric Man, vol. 1, p. 469.) Again,
+Wilson says that the diversity of type found among the human sculptures
+"proves that the Mound-Builders were familiar with the American Indian
+type, but nothing more."--_Ibid._, p. 469.
+
+The varying type of physiognomy represented by these heads would better
+indicate that their resemblances are the result of accident rather than
+of intention. For the same reason that the sculptured animals of the
+same species display great differences of form and expression, according
+to the varying skill of the sculptors or the unexacting demands made by
+a rude condition of art, so the diversified character of the human faces
+is to be ascribed, not to the successful perpetuation in stone by a
+master hand of individual features, but simply to a want of skill on the
+part of the sculptor. The evidence afforded by the animal sculptures all
+tends to the conclusion that exact individual portraiture would have
+been impossible to the mound sculptor had the state of culture he lived
+in demanded it; the latter is altogether improbable. A glance at the
+above quotations will show that it is the assumed fidelity to nature of
+the animal carvings and their fine execution which has been relied upon
+in support of a similar claim for the human sculptures. As this claim is
+seen to have but slight basis in fact the main argument for asserting
+the human sculptures to be faithful representations of physical
+features, and to embody exact racial characters falls to the ground, and
+it must be admitted as in the last degree improbable that the art of the
+mound sculptor was adequate for the task of accurate human portraiture.
+To base important ethnologic deductions upon the evidence afforded by
+the human sculptures in the present state of our knowledge concerning
+them would seem to be utterly unscientific and misleading.
+
+Copies of several of the heads as they appear in "Ancient Monuments"
+(pp. 244-247) are here subjoined to show the various types of
+physiognomy illustrated by them:
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 31. Fig. 32. Fig. 33. Human Carvings from the
+Mounds.]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 34. Fig. 35. Human Carvings from the Mounds.]
+
+Could the many other stone and terra-cotta sculptures of the human face
+which have been ascribed to the Mound-Builders be reproduced here it
+would be seen that the specimens illustrated above are among the very
+best. In not a few, traces of the grotesque are distinctly visible, and
+there is little in their appearance to suggest that they had a different
+origin or contain a deeper meaning than similar productions found among
+present Indians. As each of the many carvings differ more or less from
+every other, it will at once be perceived that the advocates of
+different theories can readily find in the series abundant testimony in
+support of any and all assumptions they may choose to advance.
+
+
+
+
+INDIAN AND MOUND-BUILDERS' ART COMPARED.
+
+
+Turning from special illustrations of the artistic skill of the
+Mound-Builders, brief attention may be paid to their art in its more
+general features, and as compared with art as found among our Indian
+tribes.
+
+Among some of the latter the artistic instinct, while deriving its
+characteristic features, as among the Mound-Builders, from animated
+nature, exhibits a decided tendency towards the production of
+conventional forms, and often finds expression in creations of the most
+grotesque and imaginative character.
+
+While this is true of some tribes it is by no means true of all, nor is
+it true of all the art products of even those tribes most given to
+conventional art. But even were it true in its broadest terms, it is
+more than doubtful if the significance of the fact has not been greatly
+overestimated. Some authors indeed seem to discern in the introduction
+of the grotesque element and the substitution of conventional designs of
+animals for a more natural portrayal, a difference sufficient to mark,
+not distinct eras of art culture merely, but different races with very
+different modes of art expression.
+
+To trace the origin of art among primitive peoples, and to note the
+successive steps by which decorative art grew from its probable origin
+in the readily recognized adornments of nature and in the mere
+"accidents of manufacture," as they have been termed, would be not only
+interesting, but highly instructive. Such a study should afford us a
+clew to the origin and significance of conventional as contrasted with
+imitative art.
+
+The natural process of the evolution of art would seem to be from the
+purely imitative to the conventional, the tendency being for artistic
+expression of a partially or wholly imaginative character to supplant or
+supplement the imitative form only in obedience to external influences,
+especially those of a religious or superstitious kind. In this
+connection it is interesting to note that even among tribes of the
+Northwest, the Haidahs, for instance, whose carvings or paintings of
+birds and animals are almost invariably treated in a manner so highly
+conventional or are so distorted and caricatured as to be nearly or
+quite unrecognizable, it is still some natural object, as a well known
+bird or animal, that underlies and gives primary shape to the design.
+However highly conventionalized or grotesque in appearance such artistic
+productions may be, evidences of an underlying imitative design may
+always be detected; proof, seemingly, that the conventional is a later
+stage of art superimposed upon the more natural by the requirements of
+mythologic fancies.
+
+As it is with any particular example of savage artistic fancy, so is it
+with the art of certain tribes as a whole. Nor does it seem possible
+that the growth of the religions or mythologic sentiment has so far
+preceded or outgrown the development of art as to have had from the
+first a dominating influence over it, and that the art of such tribes as
+most strongly show its effect has never had what may be termed its
+natural phase of development, but has reached the conventional stage
+without having passed through the intermediate imitative era.
+
+It is more natural to suppose, so far, at least as the North American
+Indians are concerned, that the road to conventionalism has always led
+through imitation.
+
+The argument, therefore, that because a tribe or people is less given
+than another to conventional methods of art, it therefore must
+necessarily be in a higher stage of culture, is entitled to much less
+weight than it has sometimes received. Squier and Davis, for instance,
+referring to the Mound-Builders, state that "many of these (_i.e._,
+sculptures) exhibit a close observance of nature such as we could only
+expect to find among a people considerably advanced in the minor arts,
+and to which the elaborate and laborious, but usually clumsy and
+ungraceful, not to say unmeaning, productions of the savage can claim
+but a slight approach."
+
+It is clearly not the intention of the above authors to claim an entire
+absence of the grotesque method of treatment in specimens of the
+Mound-Builder's art, since elsewhere they call attention to what appears
+to be a caricature of the human face, as well as to the disproportionate
+size of the heads of many of the animal carvings. Not only are the heads
+of many of the carvings of disproportionate size, which, in instances
+has the effect of actual distortion, but in not a few of the sculptures
+nature, instead of being copied, has been trifled with and birds and
+animals show peculiarities unknown to science and which go far to prove
+that the Mound-Builders, however else endowed, possessed lively
+imaginations and no little creative fancy.
+
+Decided traces of conventionalism also are to be found in many of the
+animal carvings, and the method of indicating the wings and feathers of
+birds, the scales of the serpent, &c., are almost precisely what is to
+be observed in modern Indian productions of a similar kind.
+
+Few and faint as are these tendencies towards caricaturing and
+conventionalizing as compared with what may be noted in the artistic
+productions of the Haidahs, Chinooks, and other tribes of the Northwest,
+they are yet sufficient to show that in these particulars no hard and
+fast line can be drawn between the art of the Indian and of the
+Mound-Builder.
+
+As showing how narrow is the line that separates the conventional and
+imitative methods of art, it is of interest to note that among the
+Esquimaux the two stages of art are found flourishing side by side. In
+their curious masks, carved into forms the most quaint and grotesque,
+and in many of their carvings of animals, partaking as they do of a half
+human, half animal character, we have abundant evidence of what authors
+have characterized as savage taste in sculpture. But the same tribes
+execute carvings of animals, as seals, sea-lions, whales, bears, &c.,
+which, though generally wanting in the careful modeling necessary to
+constitute fine sculpture, and for absolute specific resemblance, are
+generally recognizable likenesses. Now and then indeed is to be found a
+carving which is noteworthy for spirited execution and faithful
+modeling. The best of them are far superior to the best executed
+carvings from the mounds, and, are much worthier objects for comparison
+with modern artistic work.
+
+As deducible from the above premises it may be observed that, while the
+state of art among primitive peoples as exemplified by their artistic
+productions may be a useful index in determining their relative position
+in the scale of progress, unless used with caution and in connection
+with other and more reliable standards of measurement it will lead to
+very erroneous conclusions. If, for instance, skill and ingenuity in the
+art of carving and etching be accepted as affording a proper idea of a
+people's progress in general culture, the Esquimaux of Alaska should be
+placed in the front rank of American tribes, a position needless to say
+which cannot be accorded them from more general considerations. On the
+other hand, while the evidences of artistic skill left by the Iroquoian
+tribes are in no way comparable to the work produced by the Esquimaux,
+yet the former have usually been assigned a very advanced position as
+compared with other American tribes.
+
+
+GENERAL CONCLUSIONS.
+
+The more important conclusions reached in the foregoing paper may be
+briefly summed up as follows:
+
+That of the carvings from the mounds which can be identified there are
+no representations of birds or animals not indigenous to the Mississippi
+Valley.
+
+And consequently that the theories of origin for the Mound Builders
+suggested by the presence in the mounds of carvings of supposed foreign
+animals are without basis.
+
+Second. That a large majority of the carvings, instead of being, as
+assumed, exact likenesses from nature, possess in reality only the most
+general resemblance to the birds and animals of the region which they
+were doubtless intended to represent.
+
+Third. That there is no reason for believing that the masks and
+sculptures of human faces are more correct likenesses than are the
+animal carvings.
+
+Fourth. That the state of art-culture reached by the Mound Builders, as
+illustrated by their carvings, has been greatly overestimated.
+
+
+
+
+INDEX.
+
+
+  Animal carvings from mounds of the Mississippi Valley,
+                      by H. W. Henshaw, 117
+  Bat, Carving of the, 144
+  Birds domesticated by Indians, 138
+  Buzzard, Range of the, 142
+  Carvings, Animal, from mounds, 117
+  "Cherry Bird", Carving of the, 145
+  Cincinnati tablet, 133
+  Conch shell, Range of the, 143
+  Coues, Dr. E., on bird carvings from mounds, 148
+  Cougar, Range of the, 142
+  Crow, Carvings of the, 136
+  Cushing, F. H., on Zuñi fetiches, 145
+  Dall, W. H., on the conch shell (_Pyrula_), 143
+  Eagle, Carvings of the, 146
+  "Elephant mound", 152
+     pipes, 155
+  "Grouce," Carving of the, 144
+  Henshaw, H. W., Animal Carvings from Mounds of the
+                     Miss. Valley, 117
+  Human sculptures, 160
+  Jaguar, Range of the, 142
+  Manatee, Sculptures of the, 125
+  Mound-builders' art _vs._ Indian art, 164
+     carvings, 117
+     skill in sculpture, 148
+     methods in art, 149
+  Mounds, Animal, 152
+  Otter, Carvings of the, 125
+  Owl, Carvings of the, 144
+  Panther, Range of the, 142
+  Paroquet, Carving of the, 139
+     , Range of the, 140
+  Pipe sculpture of the mounds builders, 124
+  Pipes, "Elephant", 155,157
+  _Pyrula perversa_, Range of the, 143
+  "Rattlesnake," Carving of the, 147
+  Skill in sculpture of the Mounds Builders, 148
+  Squirrel, Ground, Carving of the, 128
+  Totemism, 150
+  Tropical animals known to Mound Builders, 142
+  "Turkey" Buzzard, Carving of the, 145
+  White, C. A., Unios identified by, 129
+  Wilson on the conch shell (_Pyrula_), 143
+     carvings of tropical animals, 142
+  Woodpecker, Carvings of the, 146
+
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Animal Carvings from Mounds of the
+Mississippi Valley, by Henry W. Henshaw
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANIMAL CARVINGS FROM MOUNDS ***
+
+***** This file should be named 18184-8.txt or 18184-8.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/1/8/1/8/18184/
+
+Produced by Verity White, PM for Bureau of American
+Ethnology and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
+generously made available by the Bibliothèque nationale
+de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr)
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+*** END: FULL LICENSE ***
+
diff --git a/18184-8.zip b/18184-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4f3e099
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-8.zip
diff --git a/18184-h.zip b/18184-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2332c83
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h.zip
diff --git a/18184-h/18184-h.htm b/18184-h/18184-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e8775da
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/18184-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,3321 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
+  <head>
+    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" />
+    <title>
+      The Project Gutenberg eBook of Animal Carvings from Mounds of the Mississippi Valley, by Henry W. Henshaw
+    </title>
+    <style type="text/css">
+/*<![CDATA[  XML blockout */
+<!--
+    p {  margin-top: .75em;
+         text-align: justify;
+         margin-bottom: .75em;
+         }
+    h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 {
+         text-align: center; /* all headings centered */
+         clear: both;
+         }
+    hr { width: 33%;
+	 margin-top: 2em;
+	 margin-bottom: 2em;
+         margin-left: auto;
+         margin-right: auto;
+         clear: both;
+       }
+
+    table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;}
+
+    body{margin-left: 10%;
+         margin-right: 10%;
+        }
+
+    .pagenum  { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
+            /*  visibility: hidden;  */
+                position: absolute;
+                left: 1%;
+                font-size: smaller;
+                text-align: right;
+              } /* page numbers */
+
+    .blockquot{margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 10%;}
+
+    .center   {text-align: center;}
+    .smcap    {font-variant: small-caps;}
+
+    .caption  {font-weight: bold; margin-top: 0em; text-align: center;}
+
+    .figcenter   {margin: auto; text-align: center;}
+
+    .figleft     {float: left; clear: left; margin-left: 0; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-top:
+                 1em; margin-right: 1em; padding: 0; text-align: center;}
+
+    .figright    {float: right; clear: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em;
+                 margin-top: 1em; margin-right: 0; padding: 0; text-align: center;}
+
+    // -->
+    /* XML end  ]]>*/
+    </style>
+  </head>
+<body>
+
+
+<pre>
+
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Animal Carvings from Mounds of the
+Mississippi Valley, by Henry W. Henshaw
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: Animal Carvings from Mounds of the Mississippi Valley
+       Second Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the
+              Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1880-81,
+              Government Printing Office, Washington, 1883, pages 117-166
+
+Author: Henry W. Henshaw
+
+Release Date: April 17, 2006 [EBook #18184]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANIMAL CARVINGS FROM MOUNDS ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Verity White, PM for Bureau of American
+Ethnology and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
+generously made available by the Bibliothèque nationale
+de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+</pre>
+
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page117" id="page117">[Pg 117]</a></span></p>
+
+<hr style="width: 95%;" />
+
+<h3>SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION&mdash;BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.</h3>
+
+<hr />
+
+<h2>ANIMAL CARVINGS</h2>
+
+<h4>FROM</h4>
+
+<h1>MOUNDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY.</h1>
+
+<h4>BY</h4>
+
+<h3>HENRY W. HENSHAW.</h3>
+
+<hr style="width: 95%;" />
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page118" id="page118"></a></span></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page119" id="page119">[Pg 119]</a></span></p>
+
+<h2>CONTENTS.</h2>
+
+<table cellspacing="2" cellpadding="2" summary="contents" width="60%">
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td align="right">Page.</td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Introductory</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page123">123</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">Manatee</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page125">125</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">Toucan</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page135">135</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">Paroquet</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page139">139</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Knowledge of tropical animals by Mound-Builders</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page142">142</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">Other errors of identification</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page144">144</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Skill in sculpture of the Mound-Builders</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page148">148</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">Generalization not designed</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page149">149</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">Probable totemic origin</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page150">150</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Animal mounds</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page152">152</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">The "Elephant" mound</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page152">152</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">The "Alligator" mound</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page158">158</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Human sculptures</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page160">160</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Indian and mound-builders' art compared</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page164">164</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">General conclusions</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page166">166</a></td>
+</tr>
+</table>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page120" id="page120"></a></span></p>
+
+<hr style="width: 95%;" />
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page121" id="page121">[Pg 121]</a></span></p>
+
+<h2>ILLUSTRATIONS.</h2>
+
+<table cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2" summary="illustrations" width="60%">
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+<td align="right">Page.</td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td><span class="smcap">Fig.</span></td>
+<td>4.&mdash;Otter from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image1">128</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>5.&mdash;Otter from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image2">128</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>6.&mdash;Otter from Rau. Manatee from Stevens</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image3">129</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>7.&mdash;Manatee from Stevens</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image4">129</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>8.&mdash;Lamantin or Sea-Cow from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image5">130</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>9.&mdash;Lamantin or Sea-Cow from Squier</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image6">130</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>10.&mdash;Manatee (<i>Manatus Americanus</i>, Cuv.)</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image7">132</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>11.&mdash;Manatee (<i>Manatus Americanus</i>, Cuv.)</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image8">132</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>12.&mdash;Cincinnati Tablet&mdash;back. From Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image9">133</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>13.&mdash;Cincinnati Tablet&mdash;back. From Short</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image10">134</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>14.&mdash;Toucan from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image11">135</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>15.&mdash;Toucan from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image12">135</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>16.&mdash;Toucan from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image13">136</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>17.&mdash;Toucan as figured by Stevens</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image14">137</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>18.&mdash;Keel-billed Toucan of Southern Mexico</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image15">139</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>19.&mdash;Paroquet from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image16">140</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>20.&mdash;Owl from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image17">144</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>21.&mdash;Grouse from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image18">144</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>22.&mdash;Turkey-buzzard from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image19">145</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>23.&mdash;Cherry-bird</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image20">145</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>24.&mdash;Woodpecker</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image21">146</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>25.&mdash;Eagle from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image22">146</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>26.&mdash;Rattlesnake from Squier and Davis</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image23">147</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>27.&mdash;Big Elephant Mound in Grant County, Wisconsin</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image24">153</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>28.&mdash;Elephant Pipe. Iowa</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image25">155</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>29.&mdash;Elephant Pipe. Iowa</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image26">156</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>30.&mdash;The Alligator Mound near Granville, Ohio</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image27">159</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>31.&mdash;Carvings of heads</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image28">162</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>32.&mdash;Carvings of heads</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image29">162</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>33.&mdash;Carvings of heads</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image30">162</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>34.&mdash;Carving of head</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image31">163</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td>35.&mdash;Carving of head</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#image32">163</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+</table>
+
+<hr style="width: 95%;" />
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page122" id="page122"></a></span></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page123" id="page123">[Pg 123]</a></span></p>
+
+
+<h2>ANIMAL CARVINGS FROM MOUNDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY.</h2>
+
+<hr />
+
+<h3>BY H. W. HENSHAW.</h3>
+
+<hr />
+
+<h2>INTRODUCTORY.</h2>
+
+<p>The considerable degree of decorative and artistic skill attained by the
+so-called Mound-Builders, as evidenced by many of the relics that have
+been exhumed from the mounds, has not failed to arrest the attention of
+arch&aelig;ologists. Among them, indeed, are found not a few who assert for
+the people conveniently designated as above a degree of artistic skill
+very far superior to that attained by the present race of Indians as
+they have been known to history. In fact, this very skill in artistic
+design, asserted for the Mound-Builders, as indicated by the sculptures
+they have left, forms an important link in the chain of argument upon
+which is based the theory of their difference from and superiority to
+the North American Indian.</p>
+
+<p>Eminent as is much of the authority which thus contends for an artistic
+ability on the part of the Mound-Builders far in advance of the
+attainments of the present Indian in the same line, the question is one
+admitting of argument; and if some of the best products of artistic
+handicraft of the present Indians be compared with objects of a similar
+nature taken from the mounds, it is more than doubtful if the artistic
+inferiority of the latter-day Indian can be substantiated. Deferring,
+however, for the present, any comparison between the artistic ability of
+the Mound-Builder and the modern Indian, attention may be turned to a
+class of objects from the mounds, notable, indeed, for the skill with
+which they are wrought, but to be considered first in another way and
+for another purpose than mere artistic comparison.</p>
+
+<p>As the term Mound-Builders will recur many times throughout this paper,
+and as the phrase has been objected to by some arch&aelig;ologists on account
+of its indefiniteness, it may be well to state that it is employed here
+with its commonly accepted signification, viz: as applied to the people
+who formerly lived throughout the Mississippi Valley and raised the
+mounds of that region. It should also be clearly understood that by its
+use the writer is not to be considered as committing himself in any way
+to the theory that the Mound-Builders were of a different race from the
+North American Indian.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page124" id="page124">[Pg 124]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>Among the more interesting objects left by the Mound-Builders, pipes
+occupy a prominent place. This is partly due to their number, pipes
+being among the more common articles unearthed by the labors of
+explorers, but more to the fact that in the construction of their pipes
+this people exhibited their greatest skill in the way of sculpture. In
+the minds of those who hold that the Mound-Builders were the ancestors
+of the present Indians, or, at least, that they were not necessarily of
+a different race, the superiority of their pipe sculpture over their
+other works of art excites no surprise, since, however prominent a place
+the pipe may have held in the affections of the Mound-Builders, it is
+certain that it has been an object of no less esteem and reverence among
+the Indians of history. Certainly no one institution, for so it may be
+called, was more firmly fixed by long usage among the North American
+Indians, or more characteristic of them, than the pipe, with all its
+varied uses and significance.</p>
+
+<p>Perhaps the most characteristic artistic feature displayed in the pipe
+sculpture of the Mound-Builders, as has been well pointed out by Wilson,
+in his Prehistoric Man, is the tendency exhibited toward the imitation
+of natural objects, especially birds and animals, a remark, it may be
+said in passing, which applies with almost equal truth to the art
+productions generally of the present Indians throughout the length and
+breadth of North America. As some of these sculptured animals from the
+mounds have excited much interest in the minds of arch&aelig;ologists, and
+have been made the basis of much speculation, their examination and
+proper identification becomes a matter of considerable importance. It
+will therefore be the main purpose of the present paper to examine
+critically the evidence offered in behalf of the identification of the
+more important of them. If it shall prove, as is believed to be the
+case, that serious mistakes of identification have been made, attention
+will be called to these and the manner pointed out in which certain
+theories have naturally enough resulted from the premises thus
+erroneously established.</p>
+
+<p>It may be premised that the writer undertook the examination of the
+carvings with no theories of his own to propose in place of those
+hitherto advanced. In fact, their critical examination may almost be
+said to have been the result of accident. Having made the birds of the
+United States his study for several years, the writer glanced over the
+bird carvings in the most cursory manner, being curious to see what
+species were represented. The inaccurate identification of some of these
+by the authors of "The Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley" led
+to the examination of the series as a whole, and subsequently to the
+discussion they had received at the hands of various authors. The
+carvings are, therefore, here considered rather from the stand-point of
+the naturalist than the arch&aelig;ologist. Believing that the question first
+in importance concerns their actual resemblances, substantially the same
+kind of critical study is applied to them which they would receive were
+they from the hands of a modern zoological artist. Such a course has
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page125" id="page125">[Pg 125]</a></span>
+
+obvious disadvantages, since it places the work of men who were in, at
+best, but a semi-civilized condition on a much higher plane than other
+facts would seem to justify. It may be urged, as the writer indeed
+believes, that the accuracy sufficient for the specific identification
+of these carvings is not to be expected of men in the state of culture
+the Mound-Builders are generally supposed to have attained. To which
+answer may be made that it is precisely on the supposition that the
+carvings were accurate copies from nature that the theories respecting
+them have been promulgated by arch&aelig;ologists. On no other supposition
+could such theories have been advanced. So accurate indeed have they
+been deemed that they have been directly compared with the work of
+modern artists, as will be noticed hereafter. Hence the method here
+adopted in their study seems to be not only the best, but the only one
+likely to produce definite results.</p>
+
+<p>If it be found that there are good reasons for pronouncing the carvings
+not to be accurate copies from nature, and of a lower artistic standard
+than has been supposed, it will remain for the arch&aelig;ologist to determine
+how far their unlikeness to the animals they have been supposed to
+represent can be attributed to shortcomings naturally pertaining to
+barbaric art. If he choose to assume that they were really intended as
+imitations, although in many particulars unlike the animals he wishes to
+believe them to represent, and that they are as close copies as can be
+expected from sculptors not possessed of skill adequate to carry out
+their rude conceptions, he will practically have abandoned the position
+taken by many prominent arch&aelig;ologists with respect to the mound
+sculptors' skill, and will be forced to accord them a position on the
+plane of art not superior to the one occupied by the North American
+Indians. If it should prove that but a small minority of the carvings
+can be specifically identified, owing to inaccuracies and to their
+general resemblance, he may indeed go even further and conclude that
+they form a very unsafe basis for deductions that owe their very
+existence to assumed accurate imitation.</p>
+
+
+<h3>MANATEE.</h3>
+
+<p>In 1848 Squier and Davis published their great work on the Mounds of the
+Mississippi Valley. The skill and zeal with which these gentlemen
+prosecuted their researches in the field, and the ability and fidelity
+which mark the presentation of their results to the public are
+sufficiently attested by the fact that this volume has proved alike the
+mine from which subsequent writers have drawn their most important
+facts, and the chief inspiration for the vast amount of work in the same
+direction since undertaken.</p>
+
+<p>On pages 251 and 252 of the above-mentioned work appear figures of an
+animal which is there called "Lamantin, Manitus, or Sea Cow,"
+concerning
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page126" id="page126">[Pg 126]</a></span>
+
+which animal it is stated that "seven sculptured
+representations have been taken from the mounds." When first discovered,
+the authors continue, "it was supposed they were monstrous creations of
+fancy; but subsequent investigations and comparison have shown that they
+are faithful representations of one of the most singular animal
+productions of the world."</p>
+
+<p>These authors appear to have been the first to note the supposed
+likeness of certain of the sculptured forms found in the mounds to
+animals living in remote regions. That they were not slow to perceive
+the ethnological interest and value of the discovery is shown by the
+fact that it was immediately adduced by them as affording a clew to the
+possible origin of the Mound-Builders. The importance they attached to
+the discovery and their interpretation of its significance will be
+apparent from the following quotation (p. 242):</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">Some of these sculptures have a value, so far as ethnological
+research is concerned, much higher than they can claim as mere
+works of art. This value is derived from the fact that they
+faithfully represent animals and birds peculiar to other latitudes,
+thus establishing a migration, a very extensive intercommunication
+or a contemporaneous existence of the same race over a vast extent
+of country.</p>
+
+<p>The idea thus suggested fell on fruitful ground, and each succeeding
+writer who has attempted to show that the Mound-Builders were of a race
+different from the North American Indian, or had other than an
+autochthonous origin, has not failed to lay especial stress upon the
+presence in the mounds of sculptures of the manatee, as well as of other
+strange beasts and birds, carved evidently by the same hands that
+portrayed many of our native fauna.</p>
+
+<p>Except that the theories based upon the sculptures have by recent
+writers been annunciated more positively and given a wider range, they
+have been left almost precisely as set forth by the authors of the
+"Ancient Monuments," while absolutely nothing appears to have been
+brought to light since their time in the way of additional sculptured
+evidence of the same character. It is indeed a little curious to note
+the perfect unanimity with which most writers fall back upon the above
+authors as at once the source of the data they adduce in support of the
+several theories, and as their final, nay, their only, authority. Now
+and then one will be found to dissent from some particular bit of
+evidence as announced by Squier and Davis, or to give a somewhat
+different turn to the conclusions derivable from the testimony offered
+by them. But in the main the theories first announced by the authors of
+"Ancient Monuments," as the result of their study of the mound
+sculptures, are those that pass current to-day. Particular attention may
+be called to the deep and lasting impression made by the statements of
+these authors as to the great beauty and high standard of excellence
+exhibited by the mound sculptures. Since their time writers appear to be
+well satisfied to express their own admiration in the terms made use of
+by Squier and Davis. One might, indeed, almost suppose that recent
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page127" id="page127">[Pg 127]</a></span>
+
+writers have not dared to trust to the evidence afforded by the original
+carvings or their fac-similes, but have preferred to take the word of
+the authors of the "Ancient Monuments" for beauties which were perhaps
+hidden from their own eyes.</p>
+
+<p>Following the lead of the authors of the "Ancient Monuments," also, with
+respect to theories of origin, these carvings of supposed foreign
+animals are offered as affording incontestible evidence that the
+Mound-Builders must have migrated from or have had intercourse, direct
+or indirect, with the regions known to harbor these animals. Were it
+not, indeed, for the evident artistic similarity between these carvings
+of supposed foreign animals and those of common domestic forms&mdash;a
+similarity which, as Squier and Davis remark, render them
+"indistinguishable, so far as material and workmanship are concerned,
+from an entire class of remains found in the mounds"&mdash;the presence of
+most of them could readily be accounted for through the agency of trade,
+the far reaching nature of which, even among the wilder tribes, is well
+understood. Trade, for instance, in the case of an animal like the
+manatee, found no more than a thousand miles distant from the point
+where the sculpture was dug up, would offer a possible if not a probable
+solution of the matter. But independently of the fact that the
+practically identical character of all the carvings render the theory of
+trade quite untenable, the very pertinent question arises, why, if these
+supposed manatee pipes were derived by trade from other regions, have
+not similar carvings been found in those regions, as, for instance, in
+Florida and the Gulf States, a region of which the arch&aelig;ology is fairly
+well known. Primitive man, as is the case with his civilized brother,
+trades usually out of his abundance; so that not seven, but many times
+seven, manatee pipes should be found at the center of trade. As it is,
+the known home of the manatee has furnished no carvings either of the
+manatee or of anything suggestive of it.</p>
+
+<p>The possibility of the manatee having in past times possessed a wider
+range than at present seems to have been overlooked. But as a matter of
+fact the probability that the manatee ever ranged, in comparatively
+modern times at least, as far north as Ohio without leaving other traces
+of its presence than a few sculptured representations at the hands of an
+ancient people is too small to be entertained.</p>
+
+<p>Nor is the supposition that the Mound-Builders held contemporaneous
+possession of the country embraced in the range of the animals whose
+effigies are supposed to have been exhumed from their graves worthy of
+serious discussion. If true, it would involve the contemporaneous
+occupancy by the Mound-Builders, not only of the Southern United States
+but of the region stretching into Southern Mexico, and even, according
+to the ideas of some authors, into Central and South America, an area
+which, it is needless to say, no known facts will for a moment justify
+us in supposing a people of one blood to have occupied
+contemporaneously.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page128" id="page128">[Pg 128]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><a name="image1" id="image1"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 250px;">
+<img src="images/image1.jpg" width="250" height="200"
+alt="Fig. 4.--Otter. From Ancient Monuments."
+title="Fig. 4.--Otter. From Ancient Monuments." />
+<p class="caption">Fig. 4.&mdash;Otter. From Ancient Monuments.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Assuming, therefore, that the sculptures in question are the work of
+the Mound-Builders and are not derived from distant parts through the
+agency of trade, of which there would appear to be little doubt, and,
+assuming that the sculptures represent the animals they have been
+supposed to represent&mdash;of which something remains to be said&mdash;the theory
+that the acquaintance of the Mound-Builders with these animals was made
+in a region far distant from the one to which they subsequently migrated
+would seem to be not unworthy of attention. It is necessary, however,
+before advancing theories to account for facts to first consider the
+facts themselves, and in this case to seek an answer to the question how
+far the identification of these carvings of supposed foreign animals is
+to be trusted. Before noticing in detail the carvings supposed by Squier
+and Davis to represent the manatee, it will be well to glance at the
+carvings of another animal figured by the same authors which, it is
+believed, has a close connection with them.</p>
+
+<p>Figure 4 is identified by the authors of the "Ancient Monuments" (Fig.
+156) as an otter, and few naturalists will hesitate in pronouncing it to
+be a very good likeness of that animal; the short broad ears, broad head
+and expanded snout, with the short, strong legs, would seem to belong
+unmistakably to the otter. Added to all these is the indication of its
+fish-catching habits. Having thus correctly identified this animal, and
+with it before them, it certainly reflects little credit upon the
+zoological knowledge of the authors and their powers of discrimination
+to refer the next figure (Ancient Monuments, Fig. 157) to the same
+animal.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image2" id="image2"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 762px;">
+<img src="images/image2.jpg" width="762" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 5.--Otter of Squier and Davis."
+title=" Fig. 5.--Otter of Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption">Fig. 5.&mdash;Otter of Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Of a totally different shape and physiognomy, if intended as an otter it
+certainly implies an amazing want of skill in its author. However it is
+assuredly not an otter, but is doubtless an unfinished or rudely
+executed ground squirrel, of which animal it conveys in a general way a
+good idea, the characteristic attitude of this little rodent, sitting
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page129" id="page129">[Pg 129]</a></span>
+
+up with paws extended in front, being well displayed. Carvings of small
+rodents in similar attitudes are exhibited in Stevens's "Flint Chips,"
+p. 428, Figs. 61 and 62. Stevens's Fig. 61 evidently represents the same
+animal as Fig. 157 of Squier and Davis, but is a better executed
+carving.</p>
+
+<p>In illustration of the somewhat vague idea entertained by arch&aelig;ologists
+as to what the manatee is like, it is of interest to note that the
+carving of a second otter with a fish in its mouth has been made to do
+duty as a manatee, although the latter animal is well known never to eat
+fish, but, on the contrary, to be strictly herbivorous. Thus Stevens
+gives figures of two carvings in his "Flint Chips," p. 429, Figs. 65 and
+66, calling them manatees, and says: "In one particular, however, the
+sculptors of the mound-period committed an error. Although the lamantin
+is strictly herbivorous, feeding chiefly upon subaqueous plants and
+littoral herbs, yet upon one of the stone smoking-pipes, Fig. 66, this
+animal is represented with a fish in its mouth." Mr. Stevens apparently
+preferred to credit the mound sculptor with gross ignorance of the
+habits of the manatee, rather than to abate one jot or tittle of the
+claim possessed by the carving to be considered a representation of that
+animal. Stevens's fish-catching manatee is the same carving given by Dr.
+Rau, in the Arch&aelig;ological Collection of the United States National
+Museum, p. 47, Fig. 180, where it is correctly stated to be an otter.
+This cut, which can scarcely be distinguished from one given by Stevens
+(Fig. 66), is here reproduced (Fig. 6), together with the second
+supposed manatee of the latter writer (Fig. 7).</p>
+
+<p><a name="image3" id="image3"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 347px">
+<img src="images/image3.jpg" width="347" height="175"
+alt="Fig. 6.&mdash;Otter of Rau; Manatee of Stevens."
+title="Fig. 6.&mdash;Otter of Rau; Manatee of Stevens." />
+<p class="caption">Fig. 6.&mdash;Otter of Rau; Manatee of Stevens.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p><a name="image4" id="image4"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 315px">
+<img src="images/image4.jpg" width="315" height="175"
+alt="Fig. 7.&mdash;Manatee of Stevens."
+title="Fig. 7.&mdash;Manatee of Stevens." />
+<p class="caption">Fig. 7.&mdash;Manatee of Stevens.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>To afford a means of comparison, Fig. 154, from the "Ancient Monuments"
+of Squier and Davis, is introduced (Fig. 8). The same figure is also to
+be found in Wilson's Prehistoric Man, vol. i, p. 476, Fig. 22. Another
+of the supposed lamantins, Fig. 9, is taken from Squier's article in the
+Transactions of the American Ethnological Society, vol. ii, p. 188. A
+bad print of the same wood-cut appears as Fig. 153, p. 251, of the
+"Ancient Monuments."</p>
+
+<p>It should be noted that the physiognomy of Fig. 6, above given, although
+unquestionably of an otter, agrees more closely with the several
+so-called manatees, which are represented without fishes, than with the
+fish-bearing otter, first mentioned, Fig. 4.</p>
+
+<p>Fig. 6 thus serves as a connecting link in the series, uniting the
+unmistakable
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page130" id="page130">[Pg 130]</a></span>
+
+otter, with the fish in its mouth, to the more clumsily
+executed and less readily recognized carvings of the same animal.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image5" id="image5"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 610px;">
+<img src="images/image5.jpg" width="610"
+height="350" alt="Fig. 8.&mdash;Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 8.&mdash;Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption">Fig. 8.&mdash;Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p><a name="image6" id="image6"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 659px;">
+<img src="images/image6.jpg" width="659" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 9.&mdash;Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier."
+title="Fig. 9.&mdash;Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier." />
+<p class="caption">Fig. 9.&mdash;Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>It was doubtless the general resemblance which the several specimens of
+the otters and the so-called manatees bear to each other that led
+Stevens astray. They are by no means facsimiles one of the other. On the
+contrary, while no two are just alike, the differences are perhaps not
+greater than is to be expected when it is considered that they doubtless
+embody the conceptions of different artists, whose knowledge of the
+animal, as well as whose skill in carving, would naturally differ
+widely. Recognizing the general likeness, Stevens perhaps felt that what
+one was all were. In this, at least, he is probably correct, and the
+following reasons are deemed sufficient to show that, whether the
+several sculptures figured by one and another author are otters or not,
+as here maintained, they most assuredly are not manatees. The most
+important character possessed by the sculptures, which is not found in
+the manatee, is an external ear. In this particular they all agree. Now,
+the manatee has not the slightest trace of a pinna or external ear, a
+small orifice, like a slit, representing that organ. To quote the
+precise language of Murie in the Proceedings of the London Zoological
+Society, vol. 8, p. 188: "In the absence of pinna, a small orifice, a
+line in diameter, into which a probe could be passed, alone represents
+the
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page131" id="page131">[Pg 131]</a></span>
+
+external meatus." In the dried museum specimen this slit is wholly
+invisible, and even in the live or freshly killed animal it is by no
+means readily apparent. Keen observer of natural objects, as savage and
+barbaric man certainly is, it is going too far to suppose him capable of
+representing an earless animal&mdash;earless at least so far as the purposes
+of sculpture are concerned&mdash;with prominent ears. If, then, it can be
+assumed that these sculptures are to be relied upon as in the slightest
+degree imitative, it must be admitted that the presence of ears would
+alone suffice to show that they cannot have been intended to represent
+the manatee. But the feet shown in each and all of them present equally
+unquestionable evidence of their dissimilarity from the manatee. This
+animal has instead of a short, stout fore leg, terminating in flexible
+fingers or paws, as indicated in the several sculptures, a shapeless
+paddle-like flipper. The nails with which the flipper terminates are
+very small, and if shown at all in carving, which is wholly unlikely, as
+being too insignificant, they would be barely indicated and would
+present a very different appearance from the distinctly marked digits
+common to the several sculptures.</p>
+
+<p>Noticing that one of the carvings has a differently shaped tail from the
+others, the authors of the "Ancient Monuments" attempt to reconcile the
+discrepancy as follows: "Only one of the sculptures exhibits a flat
+truncated tail; the others are round. There is however a variety of the
+lamantin (<i>Manitus Senigalensis</i>, Desm.) which has a round tail, and is
+distinguished as the "round-tailed manitus." (Ancient Monuments, p.
+252.) The suggestion thus thrown out means, if it means anything, that
+the sculpture exhibiting a flat tail is the only one referable to the
+manatee of Florida and southward, the <i>M. Americanus</i>, while those with
+round tails are to be identified with the so-called "Round-tailed
+Lamantin," the <i>M. Senegalensis</i>, which lives in the rivers of
+Senegambia and along the coast of Western Africa. It is to be regretted
+that the above authors did not go further and explain the manner in
+which they suppose the Mound-Builders became acquainted with an animal
+inhabiting the West African coast. Elastic as has proved to be the
+thread upon which hangs the migration theory, it would seem to be hardly
+capable of bearing the strain required for it to reach from the
+Mississippi Valley to Africa.</p>
+
+<p>Had the authors been better acquainted with the anatomy of the manatees
+the above suggestion would never have been made, since the tails of the
+two forms are, so far as known, almost exactly alike. A rounded tail is,
+in fact, the first requisite of the genus <i>Manatus</i>, to which both the
+manatees alluded to belong, in distinction from the forked tail of the
+genus <i>Halicore</i>.</p>
+
+<p>Whether the tails of the sculptured manatees be round or flat matters
+little, however, since they bear no resemblance to manatee tails, either
+of the round or flat tailed varieties, or, for that matter, to tails of
+any sort. In many of the animal carvings the head alone engaged the
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page132" id="page132">[Pg 132]</a></span>
+
+sculptor's attention, the body and members being omitted entirely, or
+else roughly blocked out; as, for instance, in the case of the squirrel
+given above, in which the hind parts are simply rounded off into
+convenient shape, with no attempt at their delineation. Somewhat the
+same method was evidently followed in the case of the supposed manatees,
+only after the pipe cavities had been excavated the block was shaped off
+in a manner best suited to serve the purpose of a handle. Without,
+however, attempting to institute farther comparisons, two views of a
+real manatee are here subjoined, which are fac-similes of Murie's
+admirable photo-lithograph in Trans. London Zoological Society, vol. 8,
+1872-'74. A very brief comparison of the supposed manatees, with a
+modern artistic representation of that animal, will show the
+irreconcilable differences between them better than any number of pages
+of written criticism.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image7" id="image7"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 887px;">
+<img src="images/image7.jpg" width="887" height="300"
+alt="Fig. 10.&mdash;Manatee (Manatus Americanus, Cuv.). Side view."
+title="Fig. 10.&mdash;Manatee (Manatus Americanus, Cuv.). Side view." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 10.&mdash;Manatee (<i>Manatus Americanus</i>, Cuv.).
+Side view.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>There would seem, then, to be no escape from the conclusion that the
+animal sculptures which have passed current as manatees do not really
+resemble that animal, which is so extraordinary in all its aspects and
+so totally unlike any other of the animal creation as to render its
+identification in case it had really served as a subject for sculpture,
+easy and certain.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image8" id="image8"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 334px;">
+<img src="images/image8.jpg" width="334" height="250"
+alt="Fig. 11.&mdash;Manatee (Manatus Americanus, Cuv.). Front view."
+title="Fig. 11.&mdash;Manatee (Manatus Americanus, Cuv.). Front view." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 11.&mdash;Manatee (<i>Manatus Americanus</i>, Cuv.).
+Front view.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>As the several sculptures bear a general likeness to each other and
+resemble with considerable closeness the otter, the well known
+fish-eating proclivities of this animal being shown in at least two of
+them, it seems highly probable that it is the otter that is rudely
+portrayed in all these sculptures.</p>
+
+<p>The otter was a common resident of all the region occupied by the
+Mound-Builders, and must certainly have been well known to them.
+Moreover, the otter is one of the animals which figures largely in the
+mythology and folk-lore of the natives of America, and has been adopted
+in many tribes as their totem. Hence, this animal would seem to be a
+peculiarly apt subject for embodiment in sculptured form. It matters
+very little, however, whether these sculptures were intended as
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page133" id="page133">[Pg 133]</a></span>
+
+otters
+or not, the main point in the present connection being that they cannot
+have been intended as manatees.</p>
+
+<p>Before leaving the subject of the manatee, attention may be called to a
+curious fact in connection with the Cincinnati Tablet, "of which a
+wood-cut is given in The Ancient Monuments" (p. 275, Fig. 195). If the
+reverse side as there shown be compared with the same view as presented
+by Short in The North Americans of Antiquity, p. 45, or in MacLean's
+Mound-Builders, p. 107, a remarkable discrepancy between the two will be
+observed.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image9" id="image9"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figright" style="width: 250px;">
+<img src="images/image9.jpg" width="250" height="396"
+alt="Fig. 12.&mdash;Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From Squire and Davis."
+title="Fig. 12.&mdash;Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From Squire and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 12.&mdash;Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From Squire and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>In the former, near the top, is indicated what appears to be a shapeless
+depression, formless and unmeaning so far as its resemblance to any
+special object is concerned. The authors remark of this side of the
+tablet, "The back of the stone has three deep longitudinal grooves, and
+several depressions, evidently caused by rubbing,&mdash;probably produced in
+sharpening the instrument used, in the sculpture." This explanation of
+the depressions would seem to be reasonable, although it has been
+disputed, and a "peculiar significance" (Short) attached to this side of
+the tablet. In Short's engraving, while the front side corresponds
+closely with the same view given by Squier and Davis, there is a notable
+difference observable on the reverse side. For the formless depression
+of the Squier and Davis cut not only occupies a somewhat different
+position in relation to the top and sides of the tablet, but, as will be
+seen by reference to the figure, it assumes a distinct form, having in
+some mysterious way been metamorphosed into a figure which oddly enough
+suggests the manatee. It does not appear that the attention of
+arch&aelig;ologists has ever been directed to the fact that such a resemblance
+exists; nor indeed is the resemblance sufficiently close to justify
+calling it a veritable manatee. But with the aid of a little
+imagination it may in a rude way suggest that animal, its earless head
+and the flipper being the most striking, in fact the only, point of
+likeness. Conceding that the figure as given by Short affords a rude
+hint of the manatee, the question is how to account for its presence on
+this the latest representation of the tablet which, according to Short,
+Mr. Guest, its owner, pronounces "the first correct representations of
+the stone." The cast of this tablet in the Smithsonian Institution
+agrees
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page134" id="page134">[Pg 134]</a></span>
+
+more closely with Short's representation in respect to the
+details mentioned than with that given in the "Ancient Monuments."
+Nevertheless, if this cast be accepted as the faithful copy of the
+original it has been supposed to be, the engraving in Short's volume is
+subject to criticism. In the cast the outline of the figure, while
+better defined than Squier and Davis represent it to be, is still very
+indefinite, the outline not only being broken into, but being in places,
+especially toward the head, indistinguishable from the surface of the
+tablet into which it insensibly grades. In the view as found in Short
+there is none of this irregularity and indefiniteness of outline, the
+figure being perfect and standing out clearly as though just from the
+sculptor's hand. As perhaps on the whole the nearest approach to the
+form of a manatee appearing on any object claimed to have originated at
+the hands of the Mound-Builders, and from the fact that artists have
+interpreted its outline so differently,
+this figure, given by the latest commentators on the Cincinnati tablet,
+is interesting, and has seemed worthy of mention. As, however, the
+authenticity of the tablet itself is not above suspicion, but, on the
+contrary, is believed by many arch&aelig;ologists to admit of grave doubts,
+the subject need not be pursued further here.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image10" id="image10"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 350px;">
+<img src="images/image10.jpg" width="350" height="540"
+alt="Fig. 13.&mdash;Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From Short."
+title="Fig. 13.&mdash;Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From Short." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 13.&mdash;Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From
+Short.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page135" id="page135">[Pg 135]</a></span></p>
+
+<h3>TOUCAN.</h3>
+
+<p>The <i>a priori</i> probability that the toucan was known to the
+Mound-Builders is, of course, much less than that the manatee was, since
+no species of toucan occurs farther north than Southern Mexico. Its
+distant habitat also militates against the idea that the Mound-Builders
+could have acquired a knowledge of the bird from intercourse with
+southern tribes, or that they received the supposed toucan pipes by way
+of trade. Without discussing the several theories to which the toucan
+pipes have given rise, let us first examine the evidence offered as to
+the presence in the mounds of sculptures of the toucan.</p>
+
+<p>It is a little perplexing to find at the outset that Squier and Davis,
+not content with one toucan, have figured three, and these differing
+from each other so widely as to be referable, according to modern
+ornithological ideas, to very distinct orders.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image11" id="image11"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figright" style="width: 250px;">
+<img src="images/image11.jpg" width="250" height="254"
+alt="Fig. 14.&mdash;Toucan of Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 14.&mdash;Toucan of Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 14.&mdash;Toucan of Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>The first allusion to the toucan in the Monuments of the Mississippi
+Valley is found on page 194, where the authors guardedly remark of a
+bird's head in terra cotta (Fig. 79), "It represents the head of a bird,
+somewhat resembling the toucan, and is executed with much spirit."</p>
+
+<p>This head is vaguely suggestive of a young eagle, the proportions of the
+bill of which, until of some age, are considerably distorted. The
+position of the nostrils, however, and the contour of the mandibles,
+together with the position of the eyes, show clearly enough that it is a
+likeness of no bird known to ornithology. It is enough for our present
+purpose to say that in no particular does it bear any conceivable
+resemblance to the toucan.</p>
+
+<p>Of the second supposed toucan (Ancient Monuments, p. 260, Fig. 169)
+here illustrated, the authors remark:</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">The engraving very well represents the original, which is
+delicately carved from a compact limestone. It is supposed to
+represent the toucan&mdash;a tropical bird, and one
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page136" id="page136">[Pg 136]</a></span>
+
+not known to exist
+anywhere within the limits of the United States. If we are not
+mistaken in supposing it to represent this bird, the remarks made
+respecting the sculptures of the manitus will here apply with
+double force.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image12" id="image12"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figright" style="width: 545px;">
+<img src="images/image12.jpg" width="545" height="250"
+alt="Fig. 15.&mdash;Toucan of Squier and Davis."
+title=">Fig. 15.&mdash;Toucan of Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 15.&mdash;Toucan of Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>This sculpture is fortunately easy of identification. Among several
+ornithologists, whose opinions have been asked, not a dissenting voice
+has been heard. The bird is a common crow or a raven, and is one of the
+most happily executed of the avian sculptures, the nasal feathers, which
+are plainly shown, and the general contour of the bill being truly
+corvine. It would probably be practically impossible to distinguish a
+rude sculpture of a raven from that of a crow, owing to the general
+resemblance of the two. The proportions of the head here shown are,
+however, those of the crow, and the question of habitat renders it
+vastly more likely that the crow was known to the Mound-Builders of
+Ohio than that the raven was. What possible suggestion of a toucan is to
+be found in this head it is not easy to see.</p>
+
+<p>Turning to page 266 (Fig. 178) another and very different bird is held
+up to view as a toucan.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image13" id="image13"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 699px;">
+<img src="images/image13.jpg" width="699" height="350"
+ alt="Fig. 16.&mdash;Toucan of Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 16.&mdash;Toucan of Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 16.&mdash;Toucan of Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Squier and Davis remark of this sculpture:</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">From the size of its bill, and the circumstance of its having two
+toes before and two behind, the bird intended to be represented
+would seem to belong to the zygodactylous order&mdash;probably the
+toucan. The toucan (Ramphastos of Lin.) is found on this continent
+only in the tropical countries of South America.</p>
+
+<p>In contradiction to the terms of their description their own figure, as
+will be noticed, shows <i>three</i> toes in front and two behind, or a total
+of five, which makes the bird an ornithological curiosity, indeed.
+However,
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page137" id="page137">[Pg 137]</a></span>
+
+as the cast in the Smithsonian collection shows three toes in
+front and one behind, it is probably safe to assume that the additional
+hind toe was the result of mistake on the part of the modern artist, so
+that four may be accepted as its proper quota. The mistake then
+chargeable to the above authors is that in their discussion they
+transferred one toe from before and added it behind. In this curious way
+came their zygodactylous bird.</p>
+
+<p>This same pipe is figured by Stevens in Flint Chips, p. 426, Fig. 5. The
+wood-cut is a poor one, and exhibits certain important changes, which,
+on the assumption that the pipe is at all well illustrated by the cast
+in the Smithsonian, reflects more credit on the artist's knowledge of
+what a toucan ought to look like than on his fidelity as an exact
+copyist.</p>
+
+<p>The etchings across the upper surface of the base of the pipe, miscalled
+fingers, are not only made to assume a hand-like appearance but the
+accommodating fancy of the artist has provided a roundish object in the
+palm, which the bird appears about to pick up. The bill, too, has been
+altered, having become rounded and decidedly toucan-like, while the tail
+has undergone abbreviation, also in the direction of likeness to the
+toucan. In short, much that was lacking in the aboriginal artist's
+conception towards the likeness of a toucan has in this figure been
+supplied by his modern interpreter.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image14" id="image14"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figright" style="width: 431px;">
+<img src="images/image14.jpg" width="431" height="250"
+alt="Fig. 17.&mdash;Toucan as figured by Stevens." title="Fig. 17.&mdash;Toucan as figured by Stevens." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 17.&mdash;Toucan as figured by Stevens.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>This cut corresponds with the cast in the Smithsonian collection, in
+having the normal number of toes, four&mdash;three in front and one behind.
+This departure from the arrangement common to the toucan family, which
+is zygodactylous, seems to have escaped Stevens's attention. At least he
+volunteers no explanation of the discrepancy, being, doubtless,
+influenced in his acceptance of the bird as a toucan by the statements
+of others.</p>
+
+<p>Wilson follows the cut of Squier and Davis, and represents the bird with
+five toes, stating that the toucan is "imitated with considerable
+accuracy." He adds: "The most important deviation from correctness of
+detail is, it has three toes instead of two before, although the two are
+correctly represented behind." How Wilson is guided to the belief that
+the sculptor's mistake consists in adding a toe in front instead of one
+behind it would be difficult to explain, unless, indeed, he felt the
+necessity of having a toucan at all hazards. The truth is that, the
+question of toes aside, this carving in no wise resembles a toucan. Its
+long legs and proportionally long toes, coupled with the rather long
+neck and bill, indicate with certainty a wading bird of some kind, and
+in default of anything that comes nearer, an ibis may be suggested;
+though if intended by the sculptor as an ibis, candor compels the
+statement that the ibis family has no reason to feel complimented.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page138" id="page138">[Pg 138]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>The identification of this sculpture as a toucan was doubtless due less
+to any resemblance it bears to that bird than to another circumstance
+connected with it of a rather fanciful nature. As in the case of several
+others, the bird is represented in the act of feeding, upon what it
+would be difficult to say. Certainly the four etchings across the base
+of the pipe bear little resemblance to the human hand. Had they been
+intended for fingers they would hardly have been made to extend over the
+side of the pipe, an impossible position unless the back of the hand be
+uppermost. Yet it was probably just this fancied resemblance to a hand,
+out of which the bird is supposed to be feeding, that led to the
+suggestion of the toucan. For, say Squier and Davis, p. 266:</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">In those districts (<i>i.e.</i>, Guiana and Brazil) the toucan was
+almost the only bird the aborigines attempted to domesticate. The
+fact that it is represented receiving its food from a human hand
+would, under these circumstances, favor the conclusion that the
+sculpture was designed to represent the toucan.</p>
+
+<p>Rather a slender thread one would think upon which to hang a theory so
+far-reaching in its consequences.</p>
+
+<p>Nor was it necessary to go as far as Guiana and Brazil to find instances
+of the domestication of wild fowl by aborigines. Among our North
+American Indians it was a by no means uncommon practice to capture and
+tame birds. Roger Williams, for instance, speaks of the New England
+Indians keeping tame hawks about their dwellings "to keep the little
+birds from their corn." (Williams's Key into the Language of America,
+1643, p. 220.) The Zu&ntilde;is and other Pueblo Indians keep, and have kept
+from time immemorial, great numbers of eagles and hawks of every
+obtainable species, as also turkies, for the sake of the feathers. The
+Dakotas and other western tribes keep eagles for the same purpose. They
+also tame crows, which are fed from the hand, as well as hawks and
+magpies. A case nearer in point is a reference in Lawson to the
+Congarees of North Carolina. He says, "they are kind and affable, and
+tame the cranes and storks of their savannas." (Lawson's History of
+Carolina, p. 51.) And again (p. 53) "these Congarees have an abundance
+of storks and cranes in their savannas. They take them before they can
+fly, and breed them as tame and familiar as a dung-hill fowl. They had a
+tame crane at one of these cabins that was scarcely less than six feet
+in height."</p>
+
+<p>So that even if the bird, as has been assumed by many writers, be
+feeding from a human hand, of which fact there is no sufficient
+evidence, we are by no means on this account driven to the conclusion,
+as appears to have been believed, that the sculpture could be no other
+than a toucan.</p>
+
+<p>As in the Cass of the manatee, it has been thought well to introduce a
+correct drawing of a toucan in order to afford opportunity for
+comparison of this very striking bird with its supposed representations
+from the mounds. For this purpose the most northern representative of
+the family has been selected as the one nearest the home of the
+Mound-Builders.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page139" id="page139">[Pg 139]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>The particulars wherein it differs from the supposed toucans are so many
+and striking that it will be superfluous to dwell upon them in detail.
+They will be obvious at a glance.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image15" id="image15"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figright" style="width: 250px;">
+<img src="images/image15.jpg" width="250" height="305"
+alt="Fig. 18.&mdash;Keel-Billed Toucan of Southern Mexico (Rhamphastos carinatus.)"
+title="Fig. 18.&mdash;Keel-Billed Toucan of Southern Mexico (Rhamphastos carinatus.)" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 18.&mdash;Keel-Billed Toucan of Southern Mexico
+(<i>Rhamphastos carinatus</i>.)</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Thus we have seen that the sculptured representation of three birds,
+totally dissimilar from each other, and not only not resembling the
+toucan, but conveying no conceivable hint of that very marked bird,
+formed the basis of Squier and Davis' speculations as to the presence of
+the toucan in the mounds. These three supposed toucans have been copied
+and recopied by later authors, who have accepted in full the remarks and
+deductions accompanying them.</p>
+
+<p>At least two exceptions to the last statement may be made. It is
+refreshing to find that two writers, although apparently accepting the
+other identifications by Squier and Davis, have drawn the line at the
+toucan. Thus Rau, in The Archæological Collections of the United States
+National Museum, pp. 46-47, states that&mdash;</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">The figure (neither of the writers mentioned appear to have been
+aware that there was more than one supposed toucan) is not of
+sufficient distinctness to identify the original that was before
+the artist's mind, and it would not be safe, therefore, to make
+this specimen the subject of far-reaching speculations.</p>
+
+<p>Further on he adds, "Leaving aside the more than doubtful toucan, the
+imitated animals belong, without exception, to the North American
+fauna." Barber, also, after taking exception to the idea that the
+supposed toucan carving represents a zygodactylous bird, adds in his
+article on Mound Pipes, pp. 280-281 (American Naturalist for April,
+1882), "It may be asserted with a considerable degree of confidence that
+no representative of an exclusively exotic fauna figured in the pipe
+sculptures of the Mound-Builders."</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page140" id="page140">[Pg 140]</a></span></p>
+
+<h3>PAROQUET.</h3>
+
+<p>The presence of a carving of the paroquet in one of the Ohio mounds has
+been deemed remarkable on account of the supposed extreme southern
+habitat of that bird. Thus Squier and Davis remark ("Ancient Monuments
+of the Mississippi Valley," p. 265, Fig. 172), "Among the most spirited
+and delicately executed specimens of ancient art found in the mounds, is
+that of the paroquet here presented."</p>
+
+<p>"The paroquet is essentially a southern bird, and though common along
+the Gulf, is of rare occurrence above the Ohio River." The above
+language would seem to admit of no doubt as to the fact of the decided
+resemblance borne by this carving to the paroquet. Yet the bird thus
+positively identified as a paroquet, upon which identification have,
+without doubt, been based all the conclusions that have been published
+concerning the presence of that bird among the mound sculptures is not
+even distantly related to the parrot family. It has the bill of a
+raptorial bird, as shown by the distinct tooth, and this, in connection
+with the well defined cere, not present in the paroquet, and the open
+nostril, concealed by feathers in the paroquet, places its identity as
+one of the hawk tribe beyond doubt.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image16" id="image16"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 377px;">
+<img src="images/image16.jpg" width="377" height="250"
+alt=">Fig. 19.&mdash;Paroquet of Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 19.&mdash;Paroquet of Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 19.&mdash;Paroquet of Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>In fact it closely resembles several of the carvings figured and
+identified as hawks by the above authors, as comparison with figures
+given below will show. The hawks always appear to have occupied a
+prominent place in the interest of our North American Indians,
+especially in association with totemic ideas, and the number of
+sculptured representations of hawks among the mound relics would argue
+for them a similar position in the minds of the Mound-Builders.</p>
+
+<p>A word should be added as to the distribution of the paroquet. The
+statement by Squier and Davis that the paroquet is found as far north as
+the Ohio River would of itself afford an easy explanation of the manner
+in which the Mound-Builders might have become acquainted with the bird,
+could their acquaintance with it be proved. But the above authors appear
+to have had a very incorrect idea of the region inhabited by this once
+widely spread species. The present distribution, it is true, is
+decidedly southern, it being almost wholly confined to limited areas
+within the Gulf States. Formerly, however, it ranged much farther north,
+and there is positive evidence that it occurred in New York,
+Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Nebraska. Up to
+1835 it was extremely abundant in Southern Illinois, and, as Mr. Ridgway
+informs the writer, was found there as late as 1861. Specimens are in
+the Smithsonian collection from points as far north as Chicago and
+Michigan. Over much of the region indicated the exact nature of its
+occurrence is not understood, whether resident or a more or less casual
+visitor. But as it is known that it was found as far north as
+Pennsylvania in winter it may once have ranged even farther north than
+the line just indicated, and have been found in Southern Wisconsin and
+Minnesota.</p>
+
+<p>Occurring, as it certainly did, over most of the mound region, the
+peculiar habits of the paroquet, especially its vociferous cries and
+manner
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page141" id="page141">[Pg 141]</a></span>
+
+of associating in large flocks, must, it would seem, have made
+it known to the Mound-Builders. Indeed from the ease with which it is
+trapped and killed, it very probably formed an article of food among
+them as it has among the whites and recent tribes of Indians. Probable,
+however, as it is that the Mound-Builders were well acquainted with the
+paroquet, there appears to be no evidence of the fact among their works
+of art.</p>
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" />
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page142" id="page142">[Pg 142]</a></span></p>
+
+<h2>KNOWLEDGE OF TROPICAL ANIMALS BY MOUND-BUILDERS.</h2>
+
+<p>The supposed evidence of a knowledge of tropical animals possessed by
+the ancient dwellers of the Mississippi Valley which has just been
+discussed seems to have powerfully impressed Wilson, and in his
+Prehistoric Man he devotes much space to the consideration of the
+matter. His ideas on the subject will be understood from the following
+quotation:</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">By the fidelity of the representations of so great a variety of subjects
+copied from animal life, they furnish evidence of a knowledge in the
+Mississippi Valley, of the fauna peculiar not only to southern, but to
+tropical latitudes, extending beyond the Isthmus into the southern
+continent; and suggestive either of arts derived from a foreign source,
+and of an intimate intercourse maintained with the central regions where
+the civilization of ancient America attained its highest development: or
+else indicative of migration, and an intrusion into the northern
+continent, of the race of the ancient graves of Central and Southern
+America, bringing with them the arts of the tropics, and models derived
+from the animals familiar to their fathers in the parent-land of the
+race. (Vol. 1, p. 475.)</p>
+
+<p>The author subsequently shows his preference for the theory of a
+migration of the race of the Mound-Builders from southern regions as
+being on the whole more probable. Wilson does not, however, content
+himself with the evidence afforded by the birds and animals which have
+just been discussed, but strengthens his argument by extending the list
+of supposed exotic forms known to the Mound-Builders in the following
+words (vol. 1, p. 477):</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">But we must account by other means for the discovery of accurate
+miniature representations of it (<i>i.e.</i> the Manatee) among the
+sculptures of the far-inland mounds of Ohio; and the same remark
+equally applies to the jaguar or panther, the cougar, the toucan;
+to the buzzard possibly, and also to the paroquet. <i>The majority of
+these animals are not known in the United States; some of them are
+totally unknown to within any part of the North American
+continent.</i> (Italics of the present writer.) Others may be classed
+with the paroquet, which, though essentially a southern bird, and
+common in the Gulf, does occasionally make its appearance inland;
+and might possibly become known to the untraveled Mound-Builder
+among the fauna of his own northern home.</p>
+
+<p>The information contained in the above paragraph relative to the range
+of some of the animals mentioned may well be viewed with surprise by
+naturalists. To begin with, the jaguar or panther, by which vernacular
+names the <i>Felis onca</i> is presumably meant, is not only found in
+Northern Mexico, but extends its range into the United States and
+appears as far north as the Red River of Louisiana. (See Baird's Mammals
+of North America.) Hence a sculptured representation of this animal in
+the mounds, although by no means likely, is not entirely out of the
+question. However, among the several carvings of the cat family
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page143" id="page143">[Pg 143]</a></span>
+
+that have been exhumed from the mounds and made known there is not one which
+can, with even a fair degree of probability, be identified as this
+species in distinction from the next animal named, the cougar.</p>
+
+<p>The cougar, to which several of the carvings can with but little doubt
+be referred, was at the time of the discovery of America and is to-day,
+where not exterminated by man, a common resident of the whole of North
+America, including of course the whole of the Mississippi Valley. It
+would be surprising, therefore, if an animal so striking, and one that
+has figured so largely in Indian totemism and folk-lore, should not have
+received attention at the hands of the Mound-Builders.</p>
+
+<p>Nothing resembling the toucan, as has been seen, has been found in the
+mounds; but, as stated, this bird is found in Southern Mexico.</p>
+
+<p>The buzzard is to-day common over almost the entire United States, and
+is especially common throughout most of the Mississippi Valley.</p>
+
+<p>As to the paroquet, there seems to be no evidence in the way of carvings
+to show that it was known to the Mound-Builders, although that such was
+the case is rendered highly probable from the fact that it lived at
+their very doors.</p>
+
+<p>It therefore appears that of the five animals of which Wilson states
+"the majority are not known in the United States," and "some of them are
+totally unknown, within any part of the North American continent," every
+one is found in North America, and all but one within the limits of the
+United States, while three were common residents of the Mississippi
+Valley.</p>
+
+<p>As a further illustration of the inaccurate zoological knowledge to
+which may be ascribed no small share of the theories advanced respecting
+the origin of the Mound-Builders, the following illustration may be
+taken from Wilson, this author, however, being but one of the many who
+are equally in fault. The error is in regard to the habitat of the conch
+shell, <i>Pyrula (now Busycon) perversa</i>.</p>
+
+<p>After exposing the blunder of Mr. John Delafield, who describes this
+shell as unknown on the coasts of North and South America, but as
+abundant on the coast of Hindostan, from which supposed fact, coupled
+with its presence in the mounds, he assumes a migration on the part of
+the Mound-Builders from Southern Asia (Prehistoric Man, vol. 1, p. 219,
+<i>ibid.</i>, p. 272), Wilson states.</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">No question can exist as to the tropical and marine origin of the
+large shells exhumed not only in the inland regions of Kentucky and
+Tennessee, but in the northern peninsula lying between the Ontario
+and Huron Lakes, or on the still remoter shores and islands of
+Georgian Bay, at a distance of upwards of three thousand miles from
+the coast of Yucatan, on the mainland, <i>the nearest point where the
+Pyrula perversa is found in its native locality</i>. (Italics of the
+present writer.)</p>
+
+<p>Now the plain facts on the authority of Mr. Dall are that the <i>Busycon
+(Pyrula) perversa</i> is not only found in the United States, but extends
+along the coast up to Charleston, S.C., with rare specimens as far north
+as Beaufort, N.C. Moreover, arch&aelig;ologists have usually confounded
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page144" id="page144">[Pg 144]</a></span>
+
+this species with the <i>Busycon carica</i>, which is of common occurrence in the
+mounds. The latter is found as far north as Cape Cod. The facts cited
+put a very different complexion on the presence of these shells in the
+mounds.</p>
+
+
+<h3>OTHER ERRORS OF IDENTIFICATION.</h3>
+
+<p>The erroneous identification of the manatee, the toucan, and of several
+other animals having been pointed out, it may be well to glance at
+certain others of the sculptured animal forms, the identification of
+which</p>
+
+<p><a name="image17" id="image17"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 690px;">
+<img src="images/image17.jpg" width="690" height="300"
+alt="Fig. 20.&mdash;&quot;Owl,&quot; from Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 20.&mdash;&quot;Owl,&quot; from Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 20.&mdash;"Owl," from Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p><a name="image18" id="image18"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 250px;">
+<img src="images/image18.jpg" width="250" height="221"
+alt="Fig. 21.&mdash;&quot;Grouse,&quot; from Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 21.&mdash;&quot;Grouse,&quot; from Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 21.&mdash;"Grouse," from Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>by Squier and Davis has passed without dispute, with a view to
+determining how far the accuracy of these authors in this particular
+line is to be trusted, and how successful they have been in interpreting
+the much lauded "fidelity to nature" of the mound sculptures.</p>
+
+<p>Fig. 20 (Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley,
+p. 225, Fig. 123) represents a tube of steatite, upon which is carved,
+as is stated, "in high relief this figure of an owl, attached with its
+back to the tube." This carving, the authors state, is "remarkably bold
+and spirited, and represents the bird with its claws contracted and
+drawn up, and head and beak elevated as if in an attitude of defense and
+defiance."</p>
+
+<p>This carving differs markedly from any of the avian sculptures, and
+probably was not intended to represent a bird at all. The absence of
+feather etchings and the peculiar shape of the wing are especially
+noticeable. It more nearly resembles, if it can be said to resemble
+anything, a bat, with the features very much distorted.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page145" id="page145">[Pg 145]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>Fig. 21 (Fig. 170 from Squier and Davis) it is stated, "will readily be
+recognized as intended to represent the head of the grouse."</p>
+
+<p>The cere and plainly notched bill of this carving clearly indicate a
+hawk, of what species it would be impossible to say.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image19" id="image19"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 501px;">
+<img src="images/image19.jpg" width="501" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 22.&mdash;&quot;Turkey Buzzard,&quot; from Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 22.&mdash;&quot;Turkey Buzzard,&quot; from Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 22.&mdash;"Turkey Buzzard," from Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Fig. 22 (Fig. 171 from Squier and Davis) was, it is said, "probably
+intended to represent a turkey buzzard." If so, the suggestion is a very
+vague one. The notches cut in the mandibles, as in the case of the
+carving of the wood duck (Fig. 168, Ancient Monuments), are perhaps
+meant for serrations, of which there is no trace in the bill of the
+buzzard. As suggested by Mr. Ridgway, it is perhaps nearer the cormorant
+than anything else, although not executed with the detail necessary for
+its satisfactory recognition.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image20" id="image20"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 544px;">
+<img src="images/image20.jpg" width="544" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 23.&mdash;&quot;Cherry-bird,&quot; from Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 23.&mdash;&quot;Cherry-bird,&quot; from Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 23.&mdash;"Cherry-bird," from Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Fig. 23 (Fig. 173 from Squier and Davis) it is claimed "much resembles
+the tufted cherry-bird," which is by no means the case, as the bill
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page146" id="page146">[Pg 146]</a></span>
+
+bears witness. It may pass, however, as a badly executed likeness of the
+tufted cardinal grosbeak or red-bird. The same is true of Figs. 174 and
+175, which are also said to be "cherry-birds."</p>
+
+<p>Fig. 24 (Fig. 179 from Squier and Davis), of which Squier and Davis say
+it is uncertain what bird it is intended to represent, is an
+unmistakable likeness of a woodpecker, and is one of the best executed
+of the series of bird carvings. To undertake to name the species would
+be the merest guess-work.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image21" id="image21"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 574px;">
+<img src="images/image21.jpg" width="574" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 24.&mdash;Woodpecker, from Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 24.&mdash;Woodpecker, from Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 24.&mdash;Woodpecker, from Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>The heads shown in Fig. 25, which the authors assert "was probably
+intended to represent the eagle" and "are far superior in point of
+finish, spirit, and truthfulness to any miniature carving, ancient or
+modern, which have fallen under the notice of the authors," cannot be
+identified further than to say they are raptorial birds of some sort,
+probably not eagles but hawks.</p>
+
+<p>Fig. 26 (Fig. 180 from Squier and Davis), according to the authors,
+"certainly represents the rattlesnake." It certainly represents a snake,
+but there is no hint in it of the peculiarities of the rattlesnake;
+which, indeed, it would be difficult to portray in a rude carving like
+this without showing the rattle. This is done in another carving, Fig.
+196.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image22" id="image22"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figleft" style="width: 522px;">
+<img src="images/image22.jpg" width="522" height="250"
+alt="Fig. 25.--&quot;Eagle,&quot; from Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 25.--&quot;Eagle,&quot; from Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 25.--"Eagle," from Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>The extraordinary terms of praise bestowed by the authors on the heads
+of the hawks just alluded to, as well as on many other of the sculptured
+animals, suggest the question whether the illustrations given in the
+Ancient Monuments afford any adequate idea of the beauty and artistic
+excellence asserted for the carvings, and so whether they are fair
+objects for criticism. While of course for the purpose of this paper an
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page147" id="page147">[Pg 147]</a></span>
+
+examination of the originals would have been preferable, yet, in as much
+as the Smithsonian Institution contains casts which attest the general
+accuracy of the drawings given, and, as the illustrations by other
+authors afford no higher idea of their artistic execution, it would seem
+that any criticism applicable to these illustrations must in the main
+apply to the originals. With reference to the casts in the Smithsonian
+collection it may be stated that Dr. Rau, who had abundant opportunity
+to acquaint himself with the originals while in the possession of Mr.
+Davis, informs the writer that they accurately represent the carvings,
+and for purposes of study are practically as good as the originals. The
+latter are, as is well known, in the Blackmore Museum, England.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image23" id="image23"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 696px;">
+<img src="images/image23.jpg" width="696" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 26.&mdash;&quot;Rattlesnake,&quot; from Squier and Davis."
+title="Fig. 26.&mdash;&quot;Rattlesnake,&quot; from Squier and Davis." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 26.&mdash;"Rattlesnake," from Squier and Davis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Without going into further detail the matter may be summed up as
+follows: Of forty-five of the animal carvings, including a few of clay,
+which are figured in Squier and Davis's work, eleven are left unnamed by
+the authors as not being recognizable; nineteen are identified
+correctly, in a general way, as of a wolf, bear, heron, toad, &amp;c.;
+sixteen are demonstrably wrongly identified, leaving but five of which
+the species is correctly given.</p>
+
+<p>From this showing it appears that either the above authors' zoological
+knowledge was faulty in the extreme, or else the mound sculptors'
+ability in animal carving has been amazingly overestimated. However just
+the first supposition may be, the last is certainly true.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page148" id="page148">[Pg 148]</a></span></p>
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" />
+
+<h2>SKILL IN SCULPTURE OF MOUND-BUILDERS.</h2>
+
+<p>In considering the degree of skill exhibited by the mound sculptors in
+their delineation of the features and characteristics of animals, it is
+of the utmost importance to note that the carvings of birds and animals
+which have evoked the most extravagant expressions of praise as to the
+exactness with which nature has been copied are uniformly those which,
+owing to the possession of some unusual or salient characteristic, are
+exceedingly easy of imitation. The stout body and broad flat tail of the
+beaver, the characteristic physiognomy of the wild cat and panther, so
+utterly dissimilar to that of other animals, the tufted head and
+fish-eating habits of the heron, the raptorial bill and claws of the
+hawk, the rattle of the rattlesnake, are all features which the rudest
+skill could scarcely fail to portray.</p>
+
+<p>It is by the delineation of these marked and unmistakable features, and
+not the sculptor's power to express the subtleties of animal
+characteristics, that enables the identity of a comparatively small
+number of the carvings to be established. It is true that the contrary
+has often been asserted, and that almost everything has been claimed for
+the carvings, in the way of artistic execution, that would be claimed
+for the best products of modern skill. Squier and Davis in fact go so
+far in their admiration (Ancient Monuments, p. 272), as to say that, so
+far as fidelity is concerned, many of them (<i>i.e.</i>, animal carvings)
+deserve to rank by the side of the best efforts of the artist
+naturalists in our own day&mdash;a statement which is simply preposterous. So
+far, in point of fact, is this from being true that an examination of
+the series of animal sculptures cannot fail to convince any one, who is
+even tolerably well acquainted with our common birds and animals, that
+it is simply impossible to recognize specific features in the great
+majority of them. They were either not intended to be copies of
+particular species, or, if so intended, the artist's skill was wholly
+inadequate for his purpose.</p>
+
+<p>Some remarks by Dr. Coues, quoted in an article by E. A. Barber on Mound
+Pipes in the American Naturalist for April, 1882, are so apropos to the
+subject that they are here reprinted. The paragraph is in response to a
+request to identify a bird pipe:</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">As is so frequently the probable case in such matters, I am
+inclined to think the sculptor had no particular bird in mind in
+executing his rude carving. It is not necessary, or indeed,
+permissible, to suppose that particular species were intended to be
+represented. Not unfrequently the likeness of some marked bird is
+so good as to be unmistakable, but the reverse is oftener the case;
+and in the present instance I can make no more of the carving than
+you have done, excepting that if any particular species may have
+been in the carver's mind, his execution does not suffice for its
+determination.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page149" id="page149">[Pg 149]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>The views entertained by Dr. Coues as to the resemblances of the
+carvings will thus be seen to coincide with those expressed above.
+Another prominent ornithologist, Mr. Ridgway, has also given verbal
+expression to precisely similar views.</p>
+
+<p>So far, therefore, as the carvings themselves afford evidence to the
+naturalist, their general likeness entirely accords with the supposition
+that they were not intended to be copies of particular species. Many of
+the specimens are in fact just about what might be expected when a
+workman, with crude ideas of art expression, sat down with intent to
+carve out a bird, for instance, without the desire, even if possessed of
+the requisite degree of skill, to impress upon the stone the details
+necessary to make it the likeness of a particular species.</p>
+
+
+<h3>GENERALIZATION NOT DESIGNED.</h3>
+
+<p>While the resemblances of most of the carvings, as indicated above, must
+be admitted to be of a general and not of a special character, it does
+not follow that their general type was the result of design.</p>
+
+<p>Such an explanation of their general character and resemblances is,
+indeed, entirely inconsistent with certain well-known facts regarding
+the mental operations of primitive or semi-civilized man. To the mind of
+primitive man abstract conceptions of things, while doubtless not
+entirely wanting, are at best but vaguely defined. The experience of
+numerous investigators attests how difficult it is, for instance, to
+obtain from a savage the name of a class of animals in distinction from
+a particular species of that class. Thus it is easy to obtain the names
+of the several kinds of bears known to a savage, but his mind
+obstinately refuses to entertain the idea of a bear genus or class. It
+is doubtless true that this difficulty is in no small part due simply to
+the confusion arising from the fact that the savage's method of
+classification is different from that of his questioner. For, although
+primitive man actually does classify all concrete things into groups,
+the classification is of a very crude sort, and has for a basis a very
+different train of ideas from those upon which modern science is
+established&mdash;a fact which many investigators are prone to overlook.
+Still there seems to be good ground for believing that the conception of
+a bird, for instance, in the abstract as distinct from some particular
+kind or species would never be entertained by a people no further
+advanced in culture than their various relics prove the Mound-Builders
+to have been. In his carving, therefore, of a hawk, a bear, a heron, or
+a fish, it seems highly probable that the mound sculptor had in mind a
+distinct species, as we understand the term. Hence his failure to
+reproduce specific features in a recognizable way is to be attributed to
+the fact that his skill was inadequate to transfer the exact image
+present in his mind, and not to his intention to carve out a general
+representative of the avian class.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page150" id="page150">[Pg 150]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>To carry the imitative idea farther and to suggest, as has been done by
+writers, that the carver of the Mound-Building epoch sat down to his
+work with the animal or a model of it before him, as does the accurate
+zoological artist of our own day, is wholly insupported by evidence
+derivable from the carvings themselves, and is of too imaginative a
+character to be entertained. By the above remarks as to the lack of
+specific resemblances in the animal carvings it is not intended to deny
+that some of them have been executed with a considerable degree of skill
+and spirit as well as, within certain limitations heretofore expressed,
+fidelity to nature. Taking them as a whole it can perhaps be asserted
+that they have been carved with a skill considerably above the general
+average of attainments in art of our Indian tribes, but not above the
+best efforts of individual tribes.</p>
+
+<p>That they will by no means bear the indiscriminate praise they have
+received as works of art and as exact imitations of nature may be
+asserted with all confidence.</p>
+
+
+<h3>PROBABLE TOTEMIC ORIGIN.</h3>
+
+<p>With reference to the origin of these animal sculptures many writers
+appear inclined to the view that they are purely decorative and
+ornamental in character, <i>i.e.</i>, that they are attempts at close
+imitations of nature in the sense demanded by high art, and that they
+owe their origin to the artistic instinct alone. But there is much in
+their general appearance that suggests they may have been totemic in
+origin, and that whatever of ornamental character they may possess is of
+secondary importance.</p>
+
+<p>With, perhaps, no exceptions, the North American tribes practiced
+totemism in one or other of its various forms, and, although it by no
+means follows that all the carving and etchings of birds or animals by
+these tribes are totems, yet it is undoubtedly true that the totemic
+idea is traceable in no small majority of their artistic
+representations, whatever their form. As rather favoring the idea of the
+totemic meaning of the carvings, it may be pointed out that a
+considerable number of the recognizable birds and animals are precisely
+the ones known to have been used as totems by many tribes of Indians.
+The hawk, heron, woodpecker, crow, beaver, otter, wild cat, squirrel,
+rattlesnake, and others, have all figured largely in the totemic
+divisions of our North American Indians. Their sacred nature too would
+enable us to understand how naturally pipes would be selected as the
+medium for totemic representations. It is also known to be a custom
+among Indian tribes for individuals to carve out or etch their totems
+upon weapons and implements of the more important and highly prized
+class, and a variety of ideas, superstitious and other, are associated
+with the usage; as,
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page151" id="page151">[Pg 151]</a></span>
+
+for instance, in the case of weapons of war or
+implements of the chase, to impart greater efficiency to them. The
+etching would also serve as a mark of ownership, especially where
+property of certain kinds was regarded as belonging to the tribe or gens
+and not to the individual. Often, indeed, in the latter case the
+individual used the totem of his gens instead of the symbol or mark for
+his own name.</p>
+
+<p>As a theory to account for the number and character of these animal
+carvings the totemic theory is perhaps as tenable as any. The origin and
+significance of the carvings may, however, involve many different and
+distinct ideas. It is certain that it is a common practice of Indians to
+endeavor to perpetuate the image of any strange bird or beast,
+especially when seen away from home, and in order that it may be shown
+to his friends. As what are deemed the marvellous features of the animal
+are almost always greatly exaggerated, it is in this way that many of
+the astonishing productions noticeable in savage art have originated.
+Among the Esquimaux this habit is very prominent, and many individuals
+can show etchings or carvings of birds and animals exhibiting the most
+extraordinary characters, which they stoutly aver and doubtless have
+come to believe they have actually seen.</p>
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" />
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page152" id="page152">[Pg 152]</a></span></p>
+
+<h2>ANIMAL MOUNDS.</h2>
+
+<p>As having, for the purposes of the present paper, a close connection
+with the animal carvings, another class of remains left by the
+Mound-Builders&mdash;the animal mounds&mdash;may next engage attention. As in the
+case of the carvings, the resemblance of particular mounds to the
+animals whose names they bear is a matter of considerable interest on
+account of the theories to which they have given rise.</p>
+
+<p>The conclusion reached with respect to the carvings that it is safe to
+rely upon their identification only in the case of animals possessed of
+striking and unique characters or presenting unusual forms and
+proportions, applies with far greater force to the animal mounds.
+Perhaps in none of the latter can specific resemblances be found
+sufficient for their precise determination. So general are the
+resemblances of one class that it has been an open question among
+arch&aelig;ologists whether they were intended to represent the bodies and
+arms of men, or the bodies and wings of birds. Other forms are
+sufficiently defined to admit of the statement that they are doubtless
+intended for animals, but without enabling so much as a reasonable guess
+to be made as to the kind. Of others again it can be asserted that
+whatever significance they may have had to the race that built them, to
+the uninstructed eyes of modern investigators they are meaningless and
+are as likely to have been intended for inanimate as animate objects.</p>
+
+<p>There are many examples among the animal shapes that possess
+peculiarities affording no hint of animals living or extinct, but which
+are strongly suggestive of the play of mythologic fancy or of
+conventional methods of representing totemic ideas. As in the case of
+the animal carvings, the latter suggestion is perhaps the one that best
+corresponds with their general character.</p>
+
+
+<h3>THE "ELEPHANT" MOUND.</h3>
+
+<p>By far the most important of the animal mounds, from the nature of the
+deductions it has given rise to, is the so-called "Elephant Mound," of
+Wisconsin.</p>
+
+<p>By its discovery and description the interesting question was raised as
+to the contemporaneousness of the Mound-Builder and the mastodon, an
+interest which is likely to be further enhanced by the more recent
+bringing to light in Iowa of two pipes carved in the semblance of the
+same animal, as well as a tablet showing two figures asserted by some
+arch&aelig;ologists to have been intended for the same animal.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page153" id="page153">[Pg 153]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>Although both the mound and pipes have been referred in turn to the
+peccary, the tapir, and the armadillo, it is safe to exclude these
+animals from consideration. It is indeed perhaps more likely that the
+ancient inhabitants of the Upper Mississippi Valley were autoptically
+acquainted with the mastodon than with either of the above-named
+animals, owing to their southern habitat.</p>
+
+<p>Referring to the possibility that the mastodon was known to the
+Mound-Builders, it is impossible to fix with any degree of precision the
+time of its disappearance from among living animals. Mastodon bones have
+been exhumed from peat beds in this country at a depth which, so far as
+is proved by the rate of deposition, implies that the animal may have
+been alive within five hundred years. The extinction of the mastodon,
+geologically speaking, was certainly a very recent event, and, as an
+antiquity of upwards of a thousand or more years has been assigned to
+some of the mounds, it is entirely within the possibilities that this
+animal was living at the time these were thrown up, granting even that
+the time of their erection has been overestimated. It must be admitted,
+therefore, that there are no inherent absurdities in the belief that the
+Mound-Builders were acquainted with the mastodon. Granting that they may
+have been acquainted with the animal, the question arises, what proof is
+there that they actually were? The answer to this question made by
+certain arch&aelig;ologists is&mdash;the Elephant Mound, of Wisconsin.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image24" id="image24"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 530px;">
+<img src="images/image24.jpg" width="530" height="351"
+alt="Fig. 27.&mdash;The Elephant Mound, Grant County, Wisconsin."
+title="Fig. 27.&mdash;The Elephant Mound, Grant County, Wisconsin." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 27.&mdash;The Elephant Mound, Grant County,
+Wisconsin.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Recalling the fact that among the animal mounds many nondescript shapes
+occur which cannot be identified at all, and as many others which have
+been called after the animals they appear to most nearly resemble, carry
+out their peculiarities only in the most vague and
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page154" id="page154">[Pg 154]</a></span>
+
+general way, it is a
+little difficult to understand the confidence with which this effigy has
+been asserted to represent the mastodon; for the mound (a copy of which
+as figured in the Smithsonian Annual Report for 1872 is here given) can
+by no means be said to closely represent the shape, proportions, and
+peculiarities of the animal whose name it bears. In fact, it is true of
+this, as of so many other of the effigies, the identity of which must be
+guessed, that the resemblance is of the most vague and general kind, the
+figure simulating the elephant no more closely than any one of a score
+or more mounds in Wisconsin, except in one important particular, viz,
+the head has a prolongation or snout-like appendage, which is its chief,
+in fact its only real, elephantine character. If this appendage is too
+long for the snout of any other known animal, it is certainly too short
+for the trunk of a mastodon. Still, so far as this one character goes,
+it is doubtless true that it is more suggestive of the mastodon than of
+any other animal. No hint is afforded of tusks, ears, or tail, and were
+it not for the snout the animal effigy might readily be called a bear,
+it nearly resembling in its general make-up many of the so-called bear
+mounds figured by Squier and Davis from this same county in Wisconsin.
+The latter, too, are of the same gigantic size and proportions.</p>
+
+<p>If it can safely be assumed that an animal effigy without tusks, without
+ears, and without a tail was really intended to represent a mastodon, it
+would be stretching imagination but a step farther to call all the
+large-bodied, heavy-limbed animal effigies hitherto named bears,
+mastodons, attributing the lack of trunks, as well as ears, tusks, and
+tails, to inattention to slight details on the part of the mound artist.</p>
+
+<p>It is true that one bit of good, positive proof is worth many of a
+negative character. But here the one positive resemblance, the trunk of
+the supposed elephant, falls far short of an exact imitation, and, as
+the other features necessary to a good likeness of a mastodon are wholly
+wanting, is not this an instance where the negative proof should be held
+sufficient to largely outweigh the positive?</p>
+
+<p>In connection with this question the fact should not be overlooked that,
+among the great number of animal effigies in Wisconsin and elsewhere,
+this is the only one which even thus remotely suggests the mastodon. As
+the Mound Builders were in the habit of repeating the same animal form
+again and again, not only in the same but in widely distant localities,
+why, if this was really intended for a mastodon, are there no others
+like it? It cannot be doubted that the size and extraordinary features
+of this monster among mammals would have prevented it being overlooked
+by the Mound-Builders when so many animals of inferior interest engaged
+their attention. The fact that the mound is a nondescript, with no
+others resembling it, certainly lessens the probability that it was an
+intentional representation of the mastodon, and increases the likelihood
+that its slight resemblance was accidental; a slide of earth from the
+head, for instance, might readily be interpreted by the modern
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page155" id="page155">[Pg 155]</a></span>
+
+artist
+as a trunk, and thus the head be made to assume a shape in his sketch
+not intended by the original maker. As is well known, no task is more
+difficult for the artist than to transfer to paper an exact copy of such
+a subject. Especially hard is it for the artist to avoid unconsciously
+magnifying or toning down peculiarities according to his own conceptions
+of what was originally intended, when, as is often the case, time and
+the elements have combined to render shape and outlines obscure.
+Arch&aelig;ologic treatises are full of warning lessons of this kind, and the
+interpretations given to ancient works of art by the erring pencil of
+the modern artist are responsible for many an ingenious theory which the
+original would never have suggested. It may well be that future
+investigations will show that the one peculiarity which distinguishes
+the so-called Elephant Mound from its fellows is really susceptible of a
+much more commonplace explanation than has hitherto been given it.</p>
+
+<p>Even if such explanation be not forthcoming, the "Elephant Mound" of
+Wisconsin should be supplemented by a very considerable amount of
+corroborative testimony before being accepted as proof positive of the
+acquaintance of the Mound-Builders with the mastodon.</p>
+
+<p>As regards likeness to the mastodon, the pipes before alluded to, copies
+of which as given in Barber's articles on Mound Pipes in American
+Naturalist for April, 1882, Figs. 17 and 18, are here presented, while
+not entirely above criticism, are much nearer what they have been
+supposed to be than the mound just mentioned.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image25" id="image25"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 696px;">
+<img src="images/image25.jpg" width="696" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 28.&mdash;Elephant Pipe, Iowa"
+title="Fig. 28.&mdash;Elephant Pipe, Iowa" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 28.&mdash;Elephant Pipe, Iowa</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Of the two, figure 29 is certainly the most natural in appearance, but,
+if the pipes are intentional imitations of any animal, neither can be
+regarded as having been intended for any other than the mastodon. Yet,
+as pointed out by Barber and others, it is certainly surprising that if
+intended for mastodons no attempt was made to indicate the tusks, which
+with the trunk constitute the most marked external peculiarities of all
+the elephant kind. The tusks, too, as affording that most important
+product in primitive industries, ivory, would naturally be the one
+peculiarity of all others which the ancient artist would have relied
+upon to fix the
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page156" id="page156">[Pg 156]</a></span>
+
+identity of the animal. It is also remarkable that in
+neither of these pipes is the tail indicated, although a glance at the
+other sculptures will show that in the full-length figures this member
+is invariably
+shown. In respect to these omissions, the pipes from Iowa are strikingly
+suggestive of the Elephant Mound of Wisconsin, with the peculiarities of
+which the sculptor, whether ancient or modern, might almost be supposed
+to have been acquainted. It certainly must be looked upon as a curious
+coincidence that carvings found at a point so remote from the Elephant
+Mound, and presumably the work of other hands, should so closely copy
+the imperfections of that mound.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image26" id="image26"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 554px;">
+<img src="images/image26.jpg" width="554" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 29.&mdash;Elephant Pipe, Iowa."
+title="Fig. 29.&mdash;Elephant Pipe, Iowa." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 29.&mdash;Elephant Pipe, Iowa.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>In considering the evidence afforded by these pipes of a knowledge of
+the mastodon on the part of the Mound-Builders, it should be borne in
+mind that their authenticity as specimens of the Mound-Builders' art has
+been called seriously in question. Possibly the fact that the same
+person was instrumental in bringing to light both the pipes has had
+largely to do with the suspicion, especially when it was remembered that
+although explorers have been remarkably active in the same region, it
+has fallen to the good fortune of no one else to find anything conveying
+the most distant suggestion of the mastodon. As the manner of discovery
+of such relics always forms an important part of their history, the
+following account of the pipes as communicated to Mr. Barber by Mr. W. H.
+Pratt, president of the Davenport Academy (American Naturalist for
+April, 1882, pp. 275, 276), is here subjoined:</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">The first elephant pipe, which we obtained (Fig. 17) a little more
+than a year ago, was found some six years before by an illiterate
+German farmer named Peter Mare, while planting corn on a farm in
+the mound region, Louisa County, Iowa. He did not care whether it
+was elephant or kangaroo; to him it was a curious 'Indian stone,'
+and nothing more, and he kept it and smoked it. In 1878 he removed
+to Kansas, and when he left he gave the pipe to his brother-in-law,
+a farm laborer, who also smoked it. Mr. Gass happened to hear of
+it, as he is always inquiring about such things, hunted up the man
+and borrowed the pipe to take photographs and casts from it. He
+could not buy it. The man said his brother-in-law gave it to him
+and as it was a curious thing&mdash;he wanted to keep it. We were,
+however, unfortunate, or fortunate,
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page157" id="page157">[Pg 157]</a></span>
+
+enough to break it; that
+spoiled it for him and that was his chance to make some money out
+of it. He could have claimed any amount, and we would, as in duty
+bound, have raised it for him, but he was satisfied with three or
+four dollars. During the first week in April, this month, Rev. Ad.
+Blumer, another German Lutheran minister, now of Genesee, Illinois,
+having formerly resided in Louisa County, went down there in
+company with Mr. Gass to open a few mounds, Mr. Blumer being well
+acquainted there. They carefully explored ten of them, and found
+nothing but ashes and decayed bones in any, except one. In that one
+was a layer of red, hard-burned clay, about five feet across and
+thirteen inches in thickness at the center, which rested upon a bed
+of ashes one foot in depth in the middle, the ashes resting upon
+the natural undisturbed clay. In the ashes, near the bottom of the
+layer, they found a part of a broken carved stone pipe,
+representing some bird; a very small beautifully formed copper
+'axe,' and this last elephant pipe (Fig. 18). This pipe was first
+discovered by Mr. Blumer, and by him, at our earnest solicitation,
+turned over to the Academy.</p>
+
+<p>It will be seen from the above that the same gentleman was instrumental
+in bringing to light the two specimens constituting the present supply
+of elephant pipes.</p>
+
+<p>The remarkable arch&aelig;ologic instinct which has guided the finder of these
+pipes has led him to even more important discoveries. By the aid of his
+divining rod he has succeeded in unearthing some of the most remarkable
+inscribed tablets which have thus far rewarded the diligent search of
+the mound explorer. It is not necessary to speak in detail of these
+here, or of the various theories to which they have given rise and
+support, including that of phonetic writing, further than to call
+attention to the fact that by a curious coincidence one of the tablets
+contains, among a number of familiar animals, figures which suggest in a
+rude way the mastodon again, which animal indeed some arch&aelig;ologists have
+confidently asserted them to be. The resemblance they bear to that
+animal is, however, by no means as close as exhibited by the pipe
+carvings; they are therefore not reproduced here. Both figures differ
+from the pipes in having tails; both lack trunks, and also tusks.</p>
+
+<p>Arch&aelig;ologists must certainly deem it unfortunate that outside of the
+Wisconsin mound the only evidence of the co-existence of the
+Mound-Builder and the mastodon should reach the scientific world through
+the agency of one individual. So derived, each succeeding carving of the
+mastodon, be it more or less accurate, instead of being accepted by
+arch&aelig;ologists as cumulative evidence tending to establish the
+genuineness of the sculptured testimony showing that the Mound-Builder
+and mastodon were coeval, will be viewed with ever increasing suspicion.</p>
+
+<p>This part of the subject should not be concluded without allusion to a
+certain class of evidence, which, although of a negative sort, must be
+accorded very great weight in considering this much vexed question. It
+may be asked why if the Mound-Builders and the mastodon were
+contemporaneous, have no traces of the ivory tusks ever been exhumed
+from the mounds? No material is so perfectly adapted for the purposes of
+carving, an art to which we have seen the Mound-Builders were much
+addicted, as ivory, both from its beauty and the ease with which it is
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page158" id="page158">[Pg 158]</a></span>
+
+worked, to say nothing of the other manifold uses to which it is put,
+both by primitive and civilized man. The mastodon affords an abundant
+supply of this highly prized substance, not a particle of which has ever
+been exhumed from the mounds either in the shape of implements or
+carving. Yet the exceedingly close texture of ivory enables it to
+successfully resist the destroying influences of time for very long
+periods&mdash;very long indeed as compared with certain articles which
+commonly reward the search of the mound explorer.</p>
+
+<p>Among the articles of a perishable nature that have been exhumed from
+the mounds are large numbers of shell ornaments, which are by no means
+very durable, as well as the perforated teeth of various animals;
+sections of deers' horns have also been found, as well as ornaments made
+of the claws of animals, a still more perishable material. The list also
+includes the bones of the muskrat and turtle, as of other animals, not
+only in their natural shape, but carved into the form of implements of
+small size, as awls, etc. Human bones, too, in abundance, have been
+exhumed in a sufficiently well preserved state to afford a basis for
+various theories and speculations.</p>
+
+<p>But of the mastodon, with which these dead Mound-Builders are supposed
+to have been acquainted, not a palpable trace remains. The tale of its
+existence is told by a single mound in Wisconsin, which the most ardent
+supporter of the mastodon theory must acknowledge to be far from a
+facsimile, and two carvings and an inscribed tablet, the three latter
+the finds of a single explorer.</p>
+
+<p>Bearing in mind the many attempts at arch&aelig;ological frauds that recent
+years have brought to light, arch&aelig;ologists have a right to demand that
+objects which afford a basis for such important deductions as the coeval
+life of the Mound-Builder and the mastodon, should be above the
+slightest suspicion not only in respect to their resemblances, but as
+regards the circumstances of discovery. If they are not above suspicion,
+the science of arch&aelig;ology can better afford to wait for further and more
+certain evidence than to commit itself to theories which may prove
+stumbling-blocks to truth until that indefinite time when future
+investigations shall show their illusory nature.</p>
+
+
+<h3>THE "ALLIGATOR" MOUND.</h3>
+
+<p>Although of much less importance than the mastodon, a word may be added
+as to the so-called alligator mound, more especially because the
+alligator, owing to its southern habitat, is not likely to have been
+known to the Mound-Builders of Ohio. That it may have been known to them
+either through travel or hearsay is of course possible. A copy of the
+mound from the "Ancient Monuments" is subjoined.</p>
+
+<p>The alligator mound was described under this name for no other reason
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page159" id="page159">[Pg 159]</a></span>
+
+than because it was known in the vicinity as such, this designation
+having been adopted by Squier and Davis, as they frankly say, "for want
+of a better," adding "although the figure bears as close a resemblance
+to the lizard as any other reptile." (Ancient Monuments, p. 99.)</p>
+
+<p>In truth it bears a superficial likeness to almost any long-tailed
+animal which has the power of curling its tail&mdash;which, the alligator has
+not&mdash;as, for instance, the opossum. It is, however, the merest
+guess-work to attempt to confine its resemblances to any particular
+animal. Nevertheless recent writers have described this as the
+"alligator mound" without suggesting a word of doubt as to its want of
+positive resemblance to that saurian.</p>
+
+<p><a name="image27" id="image27"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 594px;">
+<img src="images/image27.jpg" width="594" height="450"
+alt="Fig. 30.&mdash;&quot;Alligator&quot; Mound."
+title="Fig. 30.&mdash;&quot;Alligator&quot; Mound." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 30.&mdash;"Alligator" Mound.</p>
+</div>
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" />
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page160" id="page160">[Pg 160]</a></span></p>
+
+<h2>HUMAN SCULPTURES.</h2>
+
+<p>The conclusion reached in the foregoing pages that the animal sculptures
+are not "exact and faithful copies from nature," but are imitations of a
+general rather than of a special character, such as comport better with
+the state of art as developed among certain of the Indian tribes than
+among a people that has achieved any notable advance in culture is
+important not only in its bearing on the questions previously noticed in
+this paper, but in its relation to another and highly interesting class
+of sculptures.</p>
+
+<p>If a large proportion of the animal carvings are so lacking in artistic
+accuracy as to make it possible to identify positively only the few
+possessing the most strongly marked characters, how much faith is to be
+placed in the ability of the Mound sculptor to fix in stone the features
+and expressions of the human countenance, infinitely more difficult
+subject for portrayal as this confessedly is?</p>
+
+<p>That Wilson regards the human sculptures as affording a basis for sound
+ethnological deductions is evident from the following paragraph, taken
+from Prehistoric Man, vol. 1, p. 461:</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">Alike from the minute accuracy of many of the sculptures of
+animals, hereafter referred to, and from the correspondence to well
+known features of the modern Red Indian suggested by some of the
+human heads, these miniature portraits may be assumed, with every
+probability, to include faithful representations of the predominant
+physical features of the ancient people by whom they were executed.</p>
+
+<p>Short, too, accepting the popular idea that they are faithful and
+recognizable copies from nature, remarks in the North Americans of
+Antiquity, p. 98, <i>ibid.</i>, p. 187:</p>
+
+<p class="blockquot">There is no reason for believing that the people who wrought stone
+and clay into perfect effigies of animals have not left us
+sculptures of their own faces in the images exhumed from the
+mounds;" and again, "The perfection of the animal representations
+furnish us the assurance that their sculptures of the human face
+were equally true to nature.</p>
+
+<p>Squier and Davis also appear to have had no doubt whatever of the
+capabilities of the Mound-Builders in the direction of human
+portraiture. They are not only able to discern in the sculptured heads
+niceties of expression sufficient for the discrimination of the sexes,
+but, as well, to enable them to point out such as are undoubtedly
+ancient and the work of the Mound-Builders, and those of a more recent
+origin, the product of the present Indians. Their main criterion of
+origin is, apparently, that all of fine execution and finish were the
+work of the Mound sculptors, and those roughly done and "immeasurably
+inferior to the relics of the mounds," to use their own words, were the
+handicraft of the tribes found in the country by the whites. Conclusions
+so derived, it may strike some, are open to criticism, however well
+suited they may be to meet the necessities of preconceived theories.</p>
+
+<p>After discussing in detail the methods of arranging the hair, the paint
+lines, and tattooing, the features of the human carvings, Squier
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page161" id="page161">[Pg 161]</a></span>
+
+and
+Davis arrive at the conclusion that the "physiological characteristics
+of these heads do not differ essentially from those of the great
+American family."</p>
+
+<p>Of later writers some agree with Squier and Davis in believing the type
+illustrated by these heads to be Indian; others agree rather with
+Wilson, who dissents from the view expressed by Squier and Davis, and,
+in conformity with the predilections visible throughout his work, is of
+the opinion that the Mound-Builders were of a distinct type from the
+North American Indian, and that "the majority of sculptured human heads
+hitherto recovered from their ancient depositories do not reproduce the
+Indian features." (Wilson's Prehistoric Man, vol. 1, p. 469.) Again,
+Wilson says that the diversity of type found among the human sculptures
+"proves that the Mound-Builders were familiar with the American Indian
+type, but nothing more."&mdash;<i>Ibid.</i>, p. 469.</p>
+
+<p>The varying type of physiognomy represented by these heads would better
+indicate that their resemblances are the result of accident rather than
+of intention. For the same reason that the sculptured animals of the
+same species display great differences of form and expression, according
+to the varying skill of the sculptors or the unexacting demands made by
+a rude condition of art, so the diversified character of the human faces
+is to be ascribed, not to the successful perpetuation in stone by a
+master hand of individual features, but simply to a want of skill on the
+part of the sculptor. The evidence afforded by the animal sculptures all
+tends to the conclusion that exact individual portraiture would have
+been impossible to the mound sculptor had the state of culture he lived
+in demanded it; the latter is altogether improbable. A glance at the
+above quotations will show that it is the assumed fidelity to nature of
+the animal carvings and their fine execution which has been relied upon
+in support of a similar claim for the human sculptures. As this claim is
+seen to have but slight basis in fact the main argument for asserting
+the human sculptures to be faithful representations of physical
+features, and to embody exact racial characters falls to the ground, and
+it must be admitted as in the last degree improbable that the art of the
+mound sculptor was adequate for the task of accurate human portraiture.
+To base important ethnologic deductions upon the evidence afforded by
+the human sculptures in the present state of our knowledge concerning
+them would seem to be utterly unscientific and misleading.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page162" id="page162">[Pg 162]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>Copies of several of the heads as they appear in "Ancient Monuments"
+(pp. 244-247) are here subjoined to show the various types of
+physiognomy illustrated by them:</p>
+
+<p><a name="image28" id="image28"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 543px;">
+<img src="images/image28.jpg" width="543" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 31."
+title="Fig. 31." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.</span> 31.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p><a name="image29" id="image29"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 527px;">
+<img src="images/image29.jpg" width="527" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 32."
+title="Fig. 32." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 32.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p><a name="image30" id="image30"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 685px;">
+<img src="images/image30.jpg" width="685" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 33. Human Carvings from the Mounds."
+title="Fig. 33. Human Carvings from the Mounds." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 33.<br />Human Carvings from the Mounds.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page163" id="page163">[Pg 163]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><a name="image31" id="image31"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 410px;">
+<img src="images/image31.jpg" width="410" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 34."
+title="Fig. 34." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 34.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p><a name="image32" id="image32"></a></p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 767px;">
+<img src="images/image32.jpg" width="767" height="350"
+alt="Fig. 35. Human Carvings from the Mounds."
+title="Fig. 35. Human Carvings from the Mounds." />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig</span>. 35.<br />Human Carvings from the Mounds.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Could the many other stone and terra-cotta sculptures of the human face
+which have been ascribed to the Mound-Builders be reproduced here it
+would be seen that the specimens illustrated above are among the very
+best. In not a few, traces of the grotesque are distinctly visible, and
+there is little in their appearance to suggest that they had a different
+origin or contain a deeper meaning than similar productions found among
+present Indians. As each of the many carvings differ more or less from
+every other, it will at once be perceived that the advocates of
+different theories can readily find in the series abundant testimony in
+support of any and all assumptions they may choose to advance.</p>
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" />
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="page164" id="page164">[Pg 164]</a></span></p>
+
+<h2>INDIAN AND MOUND-BUILDERS' ART COMPARED.</h2>
+
+<p>Turning from special illustrations of the artistic skill of the
+Mound-Builders, brief attention may be paid to their art in its more
+general features, and as compared with art as found among our Indian
+tribes.</p>
+
+<p>Among some of the latter the artistic instinct, while deriving its
+characteristic features, as among the Mound-Builders, from animated
+nature, exhibits a decided tendency towards the production of
+conventional forms, and often finds expression in creations of the most
+grotesque and imaginative character.</p>
+
+<p>While this is true of some tribes it is by no means true of all, nor is
+it true of all the art products of even those tribes most given to
+conventional art. But even were it true in its broadest terms, it is
+more than doubtful if the significance of the fact has not been greatly
+overestimated. Some authors indeed seem to discern in the introduction
+of the grotesque element and the substitution of conventional designs of
+animals for a more natural portrayal, a difference sufficient to mark,
+not distinct eras of art culture merely, but different races with very
+different modes of art expression.</p>
+
+<p>To trace the origin of art among primitive peoples, and to note the
+successive steps by which decorative art grew from its probable origin
+in the readily recognized adornments of nature and in the mere
+"accidents of manufacture," as they have been termed, would be not only
+interesting, but highly instructive. Such a study should afford us a
+clew to the origin and significance of conventional as contrasted with
+imitative art.</p>
+
+<p>The natural process of the evolution of art would seem to be from the
+purely imitative to the conventional, the tendency being for artistic
+expression of a partially or wholly imaginative character to supplant or
+supplement the imitative form only in obedience to external influences,
+especially those of a religious or superstitious kind. In this
+connection it is interesting to note that even among tribes of the
+Northwest, the Haidahs, for instance, whose carvings or paintings of
+birds and animals are almost invariably treated in a manner so highly
+conventional or are so distorted and caricatured as to be nearly or
+quite unrecognizable, it is still some natural object, as a well known
+bird or animal, that underlies and gives primary shape to the design.
+However highly conventionalized or grotesque in appearance such artistic
+productions may be, evidences of an underlying imitative design may
+always be detected; proof, seemingly, that the conventional is a later
+stage of art superimposed upon the more natural by the requirements of
+mythologic fancies.</p>
+
+<p>As it is with any particular example of savage artistic fancy, so is it
+with the art of certain tribes as a whole. Nor does it seem possible
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page165" id="page165">[Pg 165]</a></span>
+
+that the growth of the religions or mythologic sentiment has so far
+preceded or outgrown the development of art as to have had from the
+first a dominating influence over it, and that the art of such tribes as
+most strongly show its effect has never had what may be termed its
+natural phase of development, but has reached the conventional stage
+without having passed through the intermediate imitative era.</p>
+
+<p>It is more natural to suppose, so far, at least as the North American
+Indians are concerned, that the road to conventionalism has always led
+through imitation.</p>
+
+<p>The argument, therefore, that because a tribe or people is less given
+than another to conventional methods of art, it therefore must
+necessarily be in a higher stage of culture, is entitled to much less
+weight than it has sometimes received. Squier and Davis, for instance,
+referring to the Mound-Builders, state that "many of these (<i>i.e.</i>,
+sculptures) exhibit a close observance of nature such as we could only
+expect to find among a people considerably advanced in the minor arts,
+and to which the elaborate and laborious, but usually clumsy and
+ungraceful, not to say unmeaning, productions of the savage can claim
+but a slight approach."</p>
+
+<p>It is clearly not the intention of the above authors to claim an entire
+absence of the grotesque method of treatment in specimens of the
+Mound-Builder's art, since elsewhere they call attention to what appears
+to be a caricature of the human face, as well as to the disproportionate
+size of the heads of many of the animal carvings. Not only are the heads
+of many of the carvings of disproportionate size, which, in instances
+has the effect of actual distortion, but in not a few of the sculptures
+nature, instead of being copied, has been trifled with and birds and
+animals show peculiarities unknown to science and which go far to prove
+that the Mound-Builders, however else endowed, possessed lively
+imaginations and no little creative fancy.</p>
+
+<p>Decided traces of conventionalism also are to be found in many of the
+animal carvings, and the method of indicating the wings and feathers of
+birds, the scales of the serpent, &amp;c., are almost precisely what is to
+be observed in modern Indian productions of a similar kind.</p>
+
+<p>Few and faint as are these tendencies towards caricaturing and
+conventionalizing as compared with what may be noted in the artistic
+productions of the Haidahs, Chinooks, and other tribes of the Northwest,
+they are yet sufficient to show that in these particulars no hard and
+fast line can be drawn between the art of the Indian and of the
+Mound-Builder.</p>
+
+<p>As showing how narrow is the line that separates the conventional and
+imitative methods of art, it is of interest to note that among the
+Esquimaux the two stages of art are found flourishing side by side. In
+their curious masks, carved into forms the most quaint and grotesque,
+and in many of their carvings of animals, partaking as they do of a half
+human, half animal character, we have abundant evidence of what authors
+have characterized as savage taste in sculpture. But
+
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="page166" id="page166">[Pg 166]</a></span>
+
+the same tribes
+execute carvings of animals, as seals, sea-lions, whales, bears, &amp;c.,
+which, though generally wanting in the careful modeling necessary to
+constitute fine sculpture, and for absolute specific resemblance, are
+generally recognizable likenesses. Now and then indeed is to be found a
+carving which is noteworthy for spirited execution and faithful
+modeling. The best of them are far superior to the best executed
+carvings from the mounds, and, are much worthier objects for comparison
+with modern artistic work.</p>
+
+<p>As deducible from the above premises it may be observed that, while the
+state of art among primitive peoples as exemplified by their artistic
+productions may be a useful index in determining their relative position
+in the scale of progress, unless used with caution and in connection
+with other and more reliable standards of measurement it will lead to
+very erroneous conclusions. If, for instance, skill and ingenuity in the
+art of carving and etching be accepted as affording a proper idea of a
+people's progress in general culture, the Esquimaux of Alaska should be
+placed in the front rank of American tribes, a position needless to say
+which cannot be accorded them from more general considerations. On the
+other hand, while the evidences of artistic skill left by the Iroquoian
+tribes are in no way comparable to the work produced by the Esquimaux,
+yet the former have usually been assigned a very advanced position as
+compared with other American tribes.</p>
+
+<h3>GENERAL CONCLUSIONS.</h3>
+
+<p>The more important conclusions reached in the foregoing paper may be
+briefly summed up as follows:</p>
+
+<p>That of the carvings from the mounds which can be identified there are
+no representations of birds or animals not indigenous to the Mississippi
+Valley.</p>
+
+<p>And consequently that the theories of origin for the Mound Builders
+suggested by the presence in the mounds of carvings of supposed foreign
+animals are without basis.</p>
+
+<p>Second. That a large majority of the carvings, instead of being, as
+assumed, exact likenesses from nature, possess in reality only the most
+general resemblance to the birds and animals of the region which they
+were doubtless intended to represent.</p>
+
+<p>Third. That there is no reason for believing that the masks and
+sculptures of human faces are more correct likenesses than are the
+animal carvings.</p>
+
+<p>Fourth. That the state of art-culture reached by the Mound Builders, as
+illustrated by their carvings, has been greatly overestimated.</p>
+
+<hr style="width: 95%" />
+
+<h2>INDEX.</h2>
+
+<table cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2" summary="index" width="60%">
+
+<tr>
+<td>Animal carvings from mounds of the Mississippi Valley, by H. W. Henshaw</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page117">117</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Bat, Carving of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page144">144</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Birds domesticated by Indians</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page138">138</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Buzzard, Range of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page142">142</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Carvings, Animal, from mounds</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page117">117</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>"Cherry Bird", Carving of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page145">145</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Cincinnati tablet</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page133">133</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Conch shell, Range of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page143">143</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Coues, Dr. E., on bird carvings from mounds</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page148">148</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Cougar, Range of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page142">142</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Crow, Carvings of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page136">136</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Cushing, F. H., on Zu&ntilde;i fetiches</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page145">145</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Dall, W. H., on the conch shell (<i>Pyrula</i>)</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page143">143</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Eagle, Carvings of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page146">146</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>"Elephant mound"</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page152">152</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">pipes</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page155">155</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>"Grouce," Carving of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page144">144</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Henshaw, H. W., Animal Carvings from Mounds of the Miss. Valley</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page117">117</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Human sculptures</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page160">160</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Jaguar, Range of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page142">142</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Manatee, Sculptures of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page125">125</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Mound-builders' art <i>vs.</i> Indian art</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page164">164</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">carvings</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page117">117</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">skill in sculpture</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page148">148</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">methods in art</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page149">149</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Mounds, Animal</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page152">152</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Otter, Carvings of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page125">125</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Owl, Carvings of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page144">144</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Panther, Range of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page142">142</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Paroquet, Carving of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page139">139</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">, Range of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page140">140</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Pipe sculpture of the mounds builders</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page124">124</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Pipes, "Elephant"</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page155">155</a>, <a href="#page157">157</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td><i>Pyrula perversa</i>, Range of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page143">143</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>"Rattlesnake," Carving of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page147">147</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Skill in sculpture of the Mounds Builders</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page148">148</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Squirrel, Ground, Carving of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page128">128</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Totemism</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page150">150</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Tropical animals known to Mound Builders</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page142">142</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>"Turkey" Buzzard, Carving of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page145">145</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td></td>
+<td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>White, C. A., Unios identified by</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page129">129</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Wilson on the conch shell (<i>Pyrula</i>)</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page143">143</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td style="padding-left: 2em">carvings of tropical animals</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page142">142</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr>
+<td>Woodpecker, Carvings of the</td>
+<td align="right"><a href="#page146">146</a></td>
+</tr>
+
+</table>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Animal Carvings from Mounds of the
+Mississippi Valley, by Henry W. Henshaw
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANIMAL CARVINGS FROM MOUNDS ***
+
+***** This file should be named 18184-h.htm or 18184-h.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/1/8/1/8/18184/
+
+Produced by Verity White, PM for Bureau of American
+Ethnology and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
+generously made available by the Bibliothèque nationale
+de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr)
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+*** END: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+
+
+</pre>
+
+</body>
+
+</html>
+
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image1.jpg b/18184-h/images/image1.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..20db827
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image1.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image10.jpg b/18184-h/images/image10.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b805060
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image10.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image11.jpg b/18184-h/images/image11.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..607f40a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image11.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image12.jpg b/18184-h/images/image12.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f1d12bf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image12.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image13.jpg b/18184-h/images/image13.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2460735
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image13.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image14.jpg b/18184-h/images/image14.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7ad71d7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image14.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image15.jpg b/18184-h/images/image15.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e78cd42
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image15.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image16.jpg b/18184-h/images/image16.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fff272b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image16.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image17.jpg b/18184-h/images/image17.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..edfeb6f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image17.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image18.jpg b/18184-h/images/image18.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..85ccf31
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image18.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image19.jpg b/18184-h/images/image19.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d2ad8ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image19.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image2.jpg b/18184-h/images/image2.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..64213f7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image2.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image20.jpg b/18184-h/images/image20.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a43fab7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image20.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image21.jpg b/18184-h/images/image21.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..53a023e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image21.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image22.jpg b/18184-h/images/image22.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a26c6e8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image22.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image23.jpg b/18184-h/images/image23.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..11ac6ff
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image23.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image24.jpg b/18184-h/images/image24.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..87ea77a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image24.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image25.jpg b/18184-h/images/image25.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7de40c5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image25.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image26.jpg b/18184-h/images/image26.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3b77f87
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image26.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image27.jpg b/18184-h/images/image27.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2b837ce
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image27.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image28.jpg b/18184-h/images/image28.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..aef35c0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image28.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image29.jpg b/18184-h/images/image29.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..98c7801
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image29.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image3.jpg b/18184-h/images/image3.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..688a850
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image3.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image30.jpg b/18184-h/images/image30.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..86d31bb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image30.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image31.jpg b/18184-h/images/image31.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f7991d1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image31.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image32.jpg b/18184-h/images/image32.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..68a8625
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image32.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image4.jpg b/18184-h/images/image4.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5d3c4a5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image4.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image5.jpg b/18184-h/images/image5.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e89954a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image5.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image6.jpg b/18184-h/images/image6.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..754c7a5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image6.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image7.jpg b/18184-h/images/image7.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6078a8a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image7.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image8.jpg b/18184-h/images/image8.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..671e78c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image8.jpg
diff --git a/18184-h/images/image9.jpg b/18184-h/images/image9.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8a863d3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184-h/images/image9.jpg
diff --git a/18184.txt b/18184.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..38d5a08
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2331 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Animal Carvings from Mounds of the
+Mississippi Valley, by Henry W. Henshaw
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: Animal Carvings from Mounds of the Mississippi Valley
+       Second Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the
+       Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1880-81,
+       Government Printing Office, Washington, 1883, pages 117-166
+
+Author: Henry W. Henshaw
+
+Release Date: April 17, 2006 [EBook #18184]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANIMAL CARVINGS FROM MOUNDS ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Verity White, PM for Bureau of American
+Ethnology and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
+generously made available by the Bibliotheque nationale
+de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION----BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.
+
+ANIMAL CARVINGS
+
+FROM
+
+MOUNDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY.
+
+BY
+
+HENRY W. HENSHAW.
+
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS.
+
+Introductory                                     123
+  Manatee                                        125
+  Toucan                                         135
+  Paroquet                                       139
+Knowledge of tropical animals by Mound-Builders  142
+  Other errors of identification                 144
+Skill in sculpture of the Mound-Builders         148
+  Generalization not designed                    149
+  Probable totemic origin                        150
+Animal mounds                                    152
+  The "Elephant" mound                           152
+  The "Alligator" mound                          158
+Human sculptures                                 160
+Indian and mound-builders' art compared          164
+  General conclusions                            166
+
+
+
+
+
+ILLUSTRATIONS.
+
+Fig. 4.--Otter from Squier and Davis                    128
+     5.--Otter from Squier and Davis                    128
+     6.--Otter from Rau. Manatee from Stevens           129
+     7.--Manatee from Stevens                           129
+     8.--Lamantin or Sea-Cow from Squier and Davis      130
+     9.--Lamantin or Sea-Cow from Squier                130
+    10.--Manatee (_Manatus Americanus_, Cuv.)           132
+    11.--Manatee (_Manatus Americanus_, Cuv.)           132
+    12.--Cincinnati Tablet--back. From Squier and Davis 133
+    13.--Cincinnati Tablet--back. From Short            134
+    14.--Toucan from Squier and Davis                   135
+    15.--Toucan from Squier and Davis                   135
+    16.--Toucan from Squier and Davis                   136
+    17.--Toucan as figured by Stevens                   137
+    18.--Keel-billed Toucan of Southern Mexico          139
+    19.--Paroquet from Squier and Davis                 140
+    20.--Owl from Squier and Davis                      144
+    21.--Grouse from Squier and Davis                   144
+    22.--Turkey-buzzard from Squier and Davis           145
+    23.--Cherry-bird                                    145
+    24.--Woodpecker                                     146
+    25.--Eagle from Squier and Davis                    146
+    26.--Rattlesnake from Squier and Davis              147
+    27.--Big Elephant Mound in Grant County, Wisconsin  153
+    28.--Elephant Pipe. Iowa                            155
+    29.--Elephant Pipe. Iowa                            156
+    30.--The Alligator Mound near Granville, Ohio       159
+    31.--Carvings of heads                              162
+    32.--Carvings of heads                              162
+    33.--Carvings of heads                              162
+    34.--Carving of head                                163
+    35.--Carving of head                                163
+
+
+
+
+
+ANIMAL CARVINGS FROM MOUNDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY.
+
+BY H. W. HENSHAW.
+
+
+
+
+INTRODUCTORY.
+
+
+The considerable degree of decorative and artistic skill attained by the
+so-called Mound-Builders, as evidenced by many of the relics that have
+been exhumed from the mounds, has not failed to arrest the attention of
+archaeologists. Among them, indeed, are found not a few who assert for
+the people conveniently designated as above a degree of artistic skill
+very far superior to that attained by the present race of Indians as
+they have been known to history. In fact, this very skill in artistic
+design, asserted for the Mound-Builders, as indicated by the sculptures
+they have left, forms an important link in the chain of argument upon
+which is based the theory of their difference from and superiority to
+the North American Indian.
+
+Eminent as is much of the authority which thus contends for an artistic
+ability on the part of the Mound-Builders far in advance of the
+attainments of the present Indian in the same line, the question is one
+admitting of argument; and if some of the best products of artistic
+handicraft of the present Indians be compared with objects of a similar
+nature taken from the mounds, it is more than doubtful if the artistic
+inferiority of the latter-day Indian can be substantiated. Deferring,
+however, for the present, any comparison between the artistic ability of
+the Mound-Builder and the modern Indian, attention may be turned to a
+class of objects from the mounds, notable, indeed, for the skill with
+which they are wrought, but to be considered first in another way and
+for another purpose than mere artistic comparison.
+
+As the term Mound-Builders will recur many times throughout this paper,
+and as the phrase has been objected to by some archaeologists on account
+of its indefiniteness, it may be well to state that it is employed here
+with its commonly accepted signification, viz: as applied to the people
+who formerly lived throughout the Mississippi Valley and raised the
+mounds of that region. It should also be clearly understood that by its
+use the writer is not to be considered as committing himself in any way
+to the theory that the Mound-Builders were of a different race from the
+North American Indian.
+
+Among the more interesting objects left by the Mound-Builders, pipes
+occupy a prominent place. This is partly due to their number, pipes
+being among the more common articles unearthed by the labors of
+explorers, but more to the fact that in the construction of their pipes
+this people exhibited their greatest skill in the way of sculpture. In
+the minds of those who hold that the Mound-Builders were the ancestors
+of the present Indians, or, at least, that they were not necessarily of
+a different race, the superiority of their pipe sculpture over their
+other works of art excites no surprise, since, however prominent a place
+the pipe may have held in the affections of the Mound-Builders, it is
+certain that it has been an object of no less esteem and reverence among
+the Indians of history. Certainly no one institution, for so it may be
+called, was more firmly fixed by long usage among the North American
+Indians, or more characteristic of them, than the pipe, with all its
+varied uses and significance.
+
+Perhaps the most characteristic artistic feature displayed in the pipe
+sculpture of the Mound-Builders, as has been well pointed out by Wilson,
+in his Prehistoric Man, is the tendency exhibited toward the imitation
+of natural objects, especially birds and animals, a remark, it may be
+said in passing, which applies with almost equal truth to the art
+productions generally of the present Indians throughout the length and
+breadth of North America. As some of these sculptured animals from the
+mounds have excited much interest in the minds of archaeologists, and
+have been made the basis of much speculation, their examination and
+proper identification becomes a matter of considerable importance. It
+will therefore be the main purpose of the present paper to examine
+critically the evidence offered in behalf of the identification of the
+more important of them. If it shall prove, as is believed to be the
+case, that serious mistakes of identification have been made, attention
+will be called to these and the manner pointed out in which certain
+theories have naturally enough resulted from the premises thus
+erroneously established.
+
+It may be premised that the writer undertook the examination of the
+carvings with no theories of his own to propose in place of those
+hitherto advanced. In fact, their critical examination may almost be
+said to have been the result of accident. Having made the birds of the
+United States his study for several years, the writer glanced over the
+bird carvings in the most cursory manner, being curious to see what
+species were represented. The inaccurate identification of some of these
+by the authors of "The Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley" led
+to the examination of the series as a whole, and subsequently to the
+discussion they had received at the hands of various authors. The
+carvings are, therefore, here considered rather from the stand-point of
+the naturalist than the archaeologist. Believing that the question first
+in importance concerns their actual resemblances, substantially the same
+kind of critical study is applied to them which they would receive were
+they from the hands of a modern zoological artist. Such a course has
+obvious disadvantages, since it places the work of men who were in, at
+best, but a semi-civilized condition on a much higher plane than other
+facts would seem to justify. It may be urged, as the writer indeed
+believes, that the accuracy sufficient for the specific identification
+of these carvings is not to be expected of men in the state of culture
+the Mound-Builders are generally supposed to have attained. To which
+answer may be made that it is precisely on the supposition that the
+carvings were accurate copies from nature that the theories respecting
+them have been promulgated by archaeologists. On no other supposition
+could such theories have been advanced. So accurate indeed have they
+been deemed that they have been directly compared with the work of
+modern artists, as will be noticed hereafter. Hence the method here
+adopted in their study seems to be not only the best, but the only one
+likely to produce definite results.
+
+If it be found that there are good reasons for pronouncing the carvings
+not to be accurate copies from nature, and of a lower artistic standard
+than has been supposed, it will remain for the archaeologist to determine
+how far their unlikeness to the animals they have been supposed to
+represent can be attributed to shortcomings naturally pertaining to
+barbaric art. If he choose to assume that they were really intended as
+imitations, although in many particulars unlike the animals he wishes to
+believe them to represent, and that they are as close copies as can be
+expected from sculptors not possessed of skill adequate to carry out
+their rude conceptions, he will practically have abandoned the position
+taken by many prominent archaeologists with respect to the mound
+sculptors' skill, and will be forced to accord them a position on the
+plane of art not superior to the one occupied by the North American
+Indians. If it should prove that but a small minority of the carvings
+can be specifically identified, owing to inaccuracies and to their
+general resemblance, he may indeed go even further and conclude that
+they form a very unsafe basis for deductions that owe their very
+existence to assumed accurate imitation.
+
+
+MANATEE.
+
+In 1848 Squier and Davis published their great work on the Mounds of the
+Mississippi Valley. The skill and zeal with which these gentlemen
+prosecuted their researches in the field, and the ability and fidelity
+which mark the presentation of their results to the public are
+sufficiently attested by the fact that this volume has proved alike the
+mine from which subsequent writers have drawn their most important
+facts, and the chief inspiration for the vast amount of work in the same
+direction since undertaken.
+
+On pages 251 and 252 of the above-mentioned work appear figures of an
+animal which is there called "Lamantin, Manitus, or Sea Cow,"
+concerning which animal it is stated that "seven sculptured
+representations have been taken from the mounds." When first discovered,
+the authors continue, "it was supposed they were monstrous creations of
+fancy; but subsequent investigations and comparison have shown that they
+are faithful representations of one of the most singular animal
+productions of the world."
+
+These authors appear to have been the first to note the supposed
+likeness of certain of the sculptured forms found in the mounds to
+animals living in remote regions. That they were not slow to perceive
+the ethnological interest and value of the discovery is shown by the
+fact that it was immediately adduced by them as affording a clew to the
+possible origin of the Mound-Builders. The importance they attached to
+the discovery and their interpretation of its significance will be
+apparent from the following quotation (p. 242):
+
+     Some of these sculptures have a value, so far as ethnological
+     research is concerned, much higher than they can claim as mere
+     works of art. This value is derived from the fact that they
+     faithfully represent animals and birds peculiar to other latitudes,
+     thus establishing a migration, a very extensive intercommunication
+     or a contemporaneous existence of the same race over a vast extent
+     of country.
+
+The idea thus suggested fell on fruitful ground, and each succeeding
+writer who has attempted to show that the Mound-Builders were of a race
+different from the North American Indian, or had other than an
+autochthonous origin, has not failed to lay especial stress upon the
+presence in the mounds of sculptures of the manatee, as well as of other
+strange beasts and birds, carved evidently by the same hands that
+portrayed many of our native fauna.
+
+Except that the theories based upon the sculptures have by recent
+writers been annunciated more positively and given a wider range, they
+have been left almost precisely as set forth by the authors of the
+"Ancient Monuments," while absolutely nothing appears to have been
+brought to light since their time in the way of additional sculptured
+evidence of the same character. It is indeed a little curious to note
+the perfect unanimity with which most writers fall back upon the above
+authors as at once the source of the data they adduce in support of the
+several theories, and as their final, nay, their only, authority. Now
+and then one will be found to dissent from some particular bit of
+evidence as announced by Squier and Davis, or to give a somewhat
+different turn to the conclusions derivable from the testimony offered
+by them. But in the main the theories first announced by the authors of
+"Ancient Monuments," as the result of their study of the mound
+sculptures, are those that pass current to-day. Particular attention may
+be called to the deep and lasting impression made by the statements of
+these authors as to the great beauty and high standard of excellence
+exhibited by the mound sculptures. Since their time writers appear to be
+well satisfied to express their own admiration in the terms made use of
+by Squier and Davis. One might, indeed, almost suppose that recent
+writers have not dared to trust to the evidence afforded by the original
+carvings or their fac-similes, but have preferred to take the word of
+the authors of the "Ancient Monuments" for beauties which were perhaps
+hidden from their own eyes.
+
+Following the lead of the authors of the "Ancient Monuments," also, with
+respect to theories of origin, these carvings of supposed foreign
+animals are offered as affording incontestible evidence that the
+Mound-Builders must have migrated from or have had intercourse, direct
+or indirect, with the regions known to harbor these animals. Were it
+not, indeed, for the evident artistic similarity between these carvings
+of supposed foreign animals and those of common domestic forms--a
+similarity which, as Squier and Davis remark, render them
+"indistinguishable, so far as material and workmanship are concerned,
+from an entire class of remains found in the mounds"--the presence of
+most of them could readily be accounted for through the agency of trade,
+the far reaching nature of which, even among the wilder tribes, is well
+understood. Trade, for instance, in the case of an animal like the
+manatee, found no more than a thousand miles distant from the point
+where the sculpture was dug up, would offer a possible if not a probable
+solution of the matter. But independently of the fact that the
+practically identical character of all the carvings render the theory of
+trade quite untenable, the very pertinent question arises, why, if these
+supposed manatee pipes were derived by trade from other regions, have
+not similar carvings been found in those regions, as, for instance, in
+Florida and the Gulf States, a region of which the archaeology is fairly
+well known. Primitive man, as is the case with his civilized brother,
+trades usually out of his abundance; so that not seven, but many times
+seven, manatee pipes should be found at the center of trade. As it is,
+the known home of the manatee has furnished no carvings either of the
+manatee or of anything suggestive of it.
+
+The possibility of the manatee having in past times possessed a wider
+range than at present seems to have been overlooked. But as a matter of
+fact the probability that the manatee ever ranged, in comparatively
+modern times at least, as far north as Ohio without leaving other traces
+of its presence than a few sculptured representations at the hands of an
+ancient people is too small to be entertained.
+
+Nor is the supposition that the Mound-Builders held contemporaneous
+possession of the country embraced in the range of the animals whose
+effigies are supposed to have been exhumed from their graves worthy of
+serious discussion. If true, it would involve the contemporaneous
+occupancy by the Mound-Builders, not only of the Southern United States
+but of the region stretching into Southern Mexico, and even, according
+to the ideas of some authors, into Central and South America, an area
+which, it is needless to say, no known facts will for a moment justify
+us in supposing a people of one blood to have occupied
+contemporaneously.
+
+Assuming, therefore, that the sculptures in question are the work of
+the Mound-Builders and are not derived from distant parts through the
+agency of trade, of which there would appear to be little doubt, and,
+assuming that the sculptures represent the animals they have been
+supposed to represent--of which something remains to be said--the theory
+that the acquaintance of the Mound-Builders with these animals was made
+in a region far distant from the one to which they subsequently migrated
+would seem to be not unworthy of attention. It is necessary, however,
+before advancing theories to account for facts to first consider the
+facts themselves, and in this case to seek an answer to the question how
+far the identification of these carvings of supposed foreign animals is
+to be trusted. Before noticing in detail the carvings supposed by Squier
+and Davis to represent the manatee, it will be well to glance at the
+carvings of another animal figured by the same authors which, it is
+believed, has a close connection with them.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 4.--Otter. From Ancient Monuments.]
+
+Figure 4 is identified by the authors of the "Ancient Monuments" (Fig.
+156) as an otter, and few naturalists will hesitate in pronouncing it to
+be a very good likeness of that animal; the short broad ears, broad head
+and expanded snout, with the short, strong legs, would seem to belong
+unmistakably to the otter. Added to all these is the indication of its
+fish-catching habits. Having thus correctly identified this animal, and
+with it before them, it certainly reflects little credit upon the
+zoological knowledge of the authors and their powers of discrimination
+to refer the next figure (Ancient Monuments, Fig. 157) to the same
+animal.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 5.--Otter of Squier and Davis.]
+
+Of a totally different shape and physiognomy, if intended as an otter it
+certainly implies an amazing want of skill in its author. However it is
+assuredly not an otter, but is doubtless an unfinished or rudely
+executed ground squirrel, of which animal it conveys in a general way a
+good idea, the characteristic attitude of this little rodent, sitting
+up with paws extended in front, being well displayed. Carvings of small
+rodents in similar attitudes are exhibited in Stevens's "Flint Chips,"
+p. 428, Figs. 61 and 62. Stevens's Fig. 61 evidently represents the same
+animal as Fig. 157 of Squier and Davis, but is a better executed
+carving.
+
+In illustration of the somewhat vague idea entertained by archaeologists
+as to what the manatee is like, it is of interest to note that the
+carving of a second otter with a fish in its mouth has been made to do
+duty as a manatee, although the latter animal is well known never to eat
+fish, but, on the contrary, to be strictly herbivorous. Thus Stevens
+gives figures of two carvings in his "Flint Chips," p. 429, Figs. 65 and
+66, calling them manatees, and says: "In one particular, however, the
+sculptors of the mound-period committed an error. Although the lamantin
+is strictly herbivorous, feeding chiefly upon subaqueous plants and
+littoral herbs, yet upon one of the stone smoking-pipes, Fig. 66, this
+animal is represented with a fish in its mouth." Mr. Stevens apparently
+preferred to credit the mound sculptor with gross ignorance of the
+habits of the manatee, rather than to abate one jot or tittle of the
+claim possessed by the carving to be considered a representation of that
+animal. Stevens's fish-catching manatee is the same carving given by Dr.
+Rau, in the Archaeological Collection of the United States National
+Museum, p. 47, Fig. 180, where it is correctly stated to be an otter.
+This cut, which can scarcely be distinguished from one given by Stevens
+(Fig. 66), is here reproduced (Fig. 6), together with the second
+supposed manatee of the latter writer (Fig. 7).
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 6.--Otter of Rau; Manatee of Stevens.]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 7.--Manatee of Stevens.]
+
+To afford a means of comparison, Fig. 154, from the "Ancient Monuments"
+of Squier and Davis, is introduced (Fig. 8). The same figure is also to
+be found in Wilson's Prehistoric Man, vol. i, p. 476, Fig. 22. Another
+of the supposed lamantins, Fig. 9, is taken from Squier's article in the
+Transactions of the American Ethnological Society, vol. ii, p. 188. A
+bad print of the same wood-cut appears as Fig. 153, p. 251, of the
+"Ancient Monuments."
+
+It should be noted that the physiognomy of Fig. 6, above given, although
+unquestionably of an otter, agrees more closely with the several
+so-called manatees, which are represented without fishes, than with the
+fish-bearing otter, first mentioned, Fig. 4.
+
+Fig. 6 thus serves as a connecting link in the series, uniting the
+unmistakable otter, with the fish in its mouth, to the more clumsily
+executed and less readily recognized carvings of the same animal.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 8.--Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier and Davis.]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 9.--Lamantin or sea-cow of Squier.]
+
+It was doubtless the general resemblance which the several specimens of
+the otters and the so-called manatees bear to each other that led
+Stevens astray. They are by no means facsimiles one of the other. On the
+contrary, while no two are just alike, the differences are perhaps not
+greater than is to be expected when it is considered that they doubtless
+embody the conceptions of different artists, whose knowledge of the
+animal, as well as whose skill in carving, would naturally differ
+widely. Recognizing the general likeness, Stevens perhaps felt that what
+one was all were. In this, at least, he is probably correct, and the
+following reasons are deemed sufficient to show that, whether the
+several sculptures figured by one and another author are otters or not,
+as here maintained, they most assuredly are not manatees. The most
+important character possessed by the sculptures, which is not found in
+the manatee, is an external ear. In this particular they all agree. Now,
+the manatee has not the slightest trace of a pinna or external ear, a
+small orifice, like a slit, representing that organ. To quote the
+precise language of Murie in the Proceedings of the London Zoological
+Society, vol. 8, p. 188: "In the absence of pinna, a small orifice, a
+line in diameter, into which a probe could be passed, alone represents
+the external meatus." In the dried museum specimen this slit is wholly
+invisible, and even in the live or freshly killed animal it is by no
+means readily apparent. Keen observer of natural objects, as savage and
+barbaric man certainly is, it is going too far to suppose him capable of
+representing an earless animal--earless at least so far as the purposes
+of sculpture are concerned--with prominent ears. If, then, it can be
+assumed that these sculptures are to be relied upon as in the slightest
+degree imitative, it must be admitted that the presence of ears would
+alone suffice to show that they cannot have been intended to represent
+the manatee. But the feet shown in each and all of them present equally
+unquestionable evidence of their dissimilarity from the manatee. This
+animal has instead of a short, stout fore leg, terminating in flexible
+fingers or paws, as indicated in the several sculptures, a shapeless
+paddle-like flipper. The nails with which the flipper terminates are
+very small, and if shown at all in carving, which is wholly unlikely, as
+being too insignificant, they would be barely indicated and would
+present a very different appearance from the distinctly marked digits
+common to the several sculptures.
+
+Noticing that one of the carvings has a differently shaped tail from the
+others, the authors of the "Ancient Monuments" attempt to reconcile the
+discrepancy as follows: "Only one of the sculptures exhibits a flat
+truncated tail; the others are round. There is however a variety of the
+lamantin (_Manitus Senigalensis_, Desm.) which has a round tail, and is
+distinguished as the "round-tailed manitus." (Ancient Monuments, p.
+252.) The suggestion thus thrown out means, if it means anything, that
+the sculpture exhibiting a flat tail is the only one referable to the
+manatee of Florida and southward, the _M. Americanus_, while those with
+round tails are to be identified with the so-called "Round-tailed
+Lamantin," the _M. Senegalensis_, which lives in the rivers of
+Senegambia and along the coast of Western Africa. It is to be regretted
+that the above authors did not go further and explain the manner in
+which they suppose the Mound-Builders became acquainted with an animal
+inhabiting the West African coast. Elastic as has proved to be the
+thread upon which hangs the migration theory, it would seem to be hardly
+capable of bearing the strain required for it to reach from the
+Mississippi Valley to Africa.
+
+Had the authors been better acquainted with the anatomy of the manatees
+the above suggestion would never have been made, since the tails of the
+two forms are, so far as known, almost exactly alike. A rounded tail is,
+in fact, the first requisite of the genus _Manatus_, to which both the
+manatees alluded to belong, in distinction from the forked tail of the
+genus _Halicore_.
+
+Whether the tails of the sculptured manatees be round or flat matters
+little, however, since they bear no resemblance to manatee tails, either
+of the round or flat tailed varieties, or, for that matter, to tails of
+any sort. In many of the animal carvings the head alone engaged the
+sculptor's attention, the body and members being omitted entirely, or
+else roughly blocked out; as, for instance, in the case of the squirrel
+given above, in which the hind parts are simply rounded off into
+convenient shape, with no attempt at their delineation. Somewhat the
+same method was evidently followed in the case of the supposed manatees,
+only after the pipe cavities had been excavated the block was shaped off
+in a manner best suited to serve the purpose of a handle. Without,
+however, attempting to institute farther comparisons, two views of a
+real manatee are here subjoined, which are fac-similes of Murie's
+admirable photo-lithograph in Trans. London Zoological Society, vol. 8,
+1872-'74. A very brief comparison of the supposed manatees, with a
+modern artistic representation of that animal, will show the
+irreconcilable differences between them better than any number of pages
+of written criticism.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 10.--Manatee (_Manatus Americanus_, Cuv.).
+Side view.]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 11.--Manatee (_Manatus Americanus_, Cuv.).
+Front view.]
+
+There would seem, then, to be no escape from the conclusion that the
+animal sculptures which have passed current as manatees do not really
+resemble that animal, which is so extraordinary in all its aspects and
+so totally unlike any other of the animal creation as to render its
+identification in case it had really served as a subject for sculpture,
+easy and certain.
+
+As the several sculptures bear a general likeness to each other and
+resemble with considerable closeness the otter, the well known
+fish-eating proclivities of this animal being shown in at least two of
+them, it seems highly probable that it is the otter that is rudely
+portrayed in all these sculptures.
+
+The otter was a common resident of all the region occupied by the
+Mound-Builders, and must certainly have been well known to them.
+Moreover, the otter is one of the animals which figures largely in the
+mythology and folk-lore of the natives of America, and has been adopted
+in many tribes as their totem. Hence, this animal would seem to be a
+peculiarly apt subject for embodiment in sculptured form. It matters
+very little, however, whether these sculptures were intended as otters
+or not, the main point in the present connection being that they cannot
+have been intended as manatees.
+
+Before leaving the subject of the manatee, attention may be called to a
+curious fact in connection with the Cincinnati Tablet, "of which a
+wood-cut is given in The Ancient Monuments" (p. 275, Fig. 195). If the
+reverse side as there shown be compared with the same view as presented
+by Short in The North Americans of Antiquity, p. 45, or in MacLean's
+Mound-Builders, p. 107, a remarkable discrepancy between the two will be
+observed.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 12.--Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From Squire
+and Davis.]
+
+In the former, near the top, is indicated what appears to be a shapeless
+depression, formless and unmeaning so far as its resemblance to any
+special object is concerned. The authors remark of this side of the
+tablet, "The back of the stone has three deep longitudinal grooves, and
+several depressions, evidently caused by rubbing,--probably produced in
+sharpening the instrument used, in the sculpture." This explanation of
+the depressions would seem to be reasonable, although it has been
+disputed, and a "peculiar significance" (Short) attached to this side of
+the tablet. In Short's engraving, while the front side corresponds
+closely with the same view given by Squier and Davis, there is a notable
+difference observable on the reverse side. For the formless depression
+of the Squier and Davis cut not only occupies a somewhat different
+position in relation to the top and sides of the tablet, but, as will be
+seen by reference to the figure, it assumes a distinct form, having in
+some mysterious way been metamorphosed into a figure which oddly enough
+suggests the manatee. It does not appear that the attention of
+archaeologists has ever been directed to the fact that such a resemblance
+exists; nor indeed is the resemblance sufficiently close to justify
+calling it a veritable manatee. But with the aid of a little
+imagination it may in a rude way suggest that animal, its earless head
+and the flipper being the most striking, in fact the only, point of
+likeness. Conceding that the figure as given by Short affords a rude
+hint of the manatee, the question is how to account for its presence on
+this the latest representation of the tablet which, according to Short,
+Mr. Guest, its owner, pronounces "the first correct representations of
+the stone." The cast of this tablet in the Smithsonian Institution
+agrees more closely with Short's representation in respect to the
+details mentioned than with that given in the "Ancient Monuments."
+Nevertheless, if this cast be accepted as the faithful copy of the
+original it has been supposed to be, the engraving in Short's volume is
+subject to criticism. In the cast the outline of the figure, while
+better defined than Squier and Davis represent it to be, is still very
+indefinite, the outline not only being broken into, but being in places,
+especially toward the head, indistinguishable from the surface of the
+tablet into which it insensibly grades. In the view as found in Short
+there is none of this irregularity and indefiniteness of outline, the
+figure being perfect and standing out clearly as though just from the
+sculptor's hand. As perhaps on the whole the nearest approach to the
+form of a manatee appearing on any object claimed to have originated at
+the hands of the Mound-Builders, and from the fact that artists have
+interpreted its outline so differently, this figure, given by the
+latest commentators on the Cincinnati tablet, is interesting, and has
+seemed worthy of mention. As, however, the authenticity of the tablet
+itself is not above suspicion, but, on the contrary, is believed by many
+archaeologists to admit of grave doubts, the subject need not be pursued
+further here.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 13.--Cincinnati Tablet. (Back.) From
+Short.]
+
+
+TOUCAN.
+
+The _a priori_ probability that the toucan was known to the
+Mound-Builders is, of course, much less than that the manatee was, since
+no species of toucan occurs farther north than Southern Mexico. Its
+distant habitat also militates against the idea that the Mound-Builders
+could have acquired a knowledge of the bird from intercourse with
+southern tribes, or that they received the supposed toucan pipes by way
+of trade. Without discussing the several theories to which the toucan
+pipes have given rise, let us first examine the evidence offered as to
+the presence in the mounds of sculptures of the toucan.
+
+It is a little perplexing to find at the outset that Squier and Davis,
+not content with one toucan, have figured three, and these differing
+from each other so widely as to be referable, according to modern
+ornithological ideas, to very distinct orders.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 14.--Toucan of Squier and Davis.]
+
+The first allusion to the toucan in the Monuments of the Mississippi
+Valley is found on page 194, where the authors guardedly remark of a
+bird's head in terra cotta (Fig. 79), "It represents the head of a bird,
+somewhat resembling the toucan, and is executed with much spirit."
+
+This head is vaguely suggestive of a young eagle, the proportions of the
+bill of which, until of some age, are considerably distorted. The
+position of the nostrils, however, and the contour of the mandibles,
+together with the position of the eyes, show clearly enough that it is a
+likeness of no bird known to ornithology. It is enough for our present
+purpose to say that in no particular does it bear any conceivable
+resemblance to the toucan.
+
+Of the second supposed toucan (Ancient Monuments, p. 260, Fig. 169)
+here illustrated, the authors remark:
+
+     The engraving very well represents the original, which is
+     delicately carved from a compact limestone. It is supposed to
+     represent the toucan--a tropical bird, and one not known to exist
+     anywhere within the limits of the United States. If we are not
+     mistaken in supposing it to represent this bird, the remarks made
+     respecting the sculptures of the manitus will here apply with
+     double force.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 15.--Toucan of Squier and Davis.]
+
+This sculpture is fortunately easy of identification. Among several
+ornithologists, whose opinions have been asked, not a dissenting voice
+has been heard. The bird is a common crow or a raven, and is one of the
+most happily executed of the avian sculptures, the nasal feathers, which
+are plainly shown, and the general contour of the bill being truly
+corvine. It would probably be practically impossible to distinguish a
+rude sculpture of a raven from that of a crow, owing to the general
+resemblance of the two. The proportions of the head here shown are,
+however, those of the crow, and the question of habitat renders it
+vastly more likely that the crow was known to the Mound-Builders of
+Ohio than that the raven was. What possible suggestion of a toucan is to
+be found in this head it is not easy to see.
+
+Turning to page 266 (Fig. 178) another and very different bird is held
+up to view as a toucan.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 16.--Toucan of Squier and Davis.]
+
+Squier and Davis remark of this sculpture:
+
+     From the size of its bill, and the circumstance of its having two
+     toes before and two behind, the bird intended to be represented
+     would seem to belong to the zygodactylous order--probably the
+     toucan. The toucan (Ramphastos of Lin.) is found on this continent
+     only in the tropical countries of South America.
+
+In contradiction to the terms of their description their own figure, as
+will be noticed, shows _three_ toes in front and two behind, or a total
+of five, which makes the bird an ornithological curiosity, indeed.
+However, as the cast in the Smithsonian collection shows three toes in
+front and one behind, it is probably safe to assume that the additional
+hind toe was the result of mistake on the part of the modern artist, so
+that four may be accepted as its proper quota. The mistake then
+chargeable to the above authors is that in their discussion they
+transferred one toe from before and added it behind. In this curious way
+came their zygodactylous bird.
+
+This same pipe is figured by Stevens in Flint Chips, p. 426, Fig. 5. The
+wood-cut is a poor one, and exhibits certain important changes, which,
+on the assumption that the pipe is at all well illustrated by the cast
+in the Smithsonian, reflects more credit on the artist's knowledge of
+what a toucan ought to look like than on his fidelity as an exact
+copyist.
+
+The etchings across the upper surface of the base of the pipe, miscalled
+fingers, are not only made to assume a hand-like appearance but the
+accommodating fancy of the artist has provided a roundish object in the
+palm, which the bird appears about to pick up. The bill, too, has been
+altered, having become rounded and decidedly toucan-like, while the tail
+has undergone abbreviation, also in the direction of likeness to the
+toucan. In short, much that was lacking in the aboriginal artist's
+conception towards the likeness of a toucan has in this figure been
+supplied by his modern interpreter.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 17.--Toucan as figured by Stevens.]
+
+This cut corresponds with the cast in the Smithsonian collection, in
+having the normal number of toes, four--three in front and one behind.
+This departure from the arrangement common to the toucan family, which
+is zygodactylous, seems to have escaped Stevens's attention. At least he
+volunteers no explanation of the discrepancy, being, doubtless,
+influenced in his acceptance of the bird as a toucan by the statements
+of others.
+
+Wilson follows the cut of Squier and Davis, and represents the bird with
+five toes, stating that the toucan is "imitated with considerable
+accuracy." He adds: "The most important deviation from correctness of
+detail is, it has three toes instead of two before, although the two are
+correctly represented behind." How Wilson is guided to the belief that
+the sculptor's mistake consists in adding a toe in front instead of one
+behind it would be difficult to explain, unless, indeed, he felt the
+necessity of having a toucan at all hazards. The truth is that, the
+question of toes aside, this carving in no wise resembles a toucan. Its
+long legs and proportionally long toes, coupled with the rather long
+neck and bill, indicate with certainty a wading bird of some kind, and
+in default of anything that comes nearer, an ibis may be suggested;
+though if intended by the sculptor as an ibis, candor compels the
+statement that the ibis family has no reason to feel complimented.
+
+The identification of this sculpture as a toucan was doubtless due less
+to any resemblance it bears to that bird than to another circumstance
+connected with it of a rather fanciful nature. As in the case of several
+others, the bird is represented in the act of feeding, upon what it
+would be difficult to say. Certainly the four etchings across the base
+of the pipe bear little resemblance to the human hand. Had they been
+intended for fingers they would hardly have been made to extend over the
+side of the pipe, an impossible position unless the back of the hand be
+uppermost. Yet it was probably just this fancied resemblance to a hand,
+out of which the bird is supposed to be feeding, that led to the
+suggestion of the toucan. For, say Squier and Davis, p. 266:
+
+     In those districts (_i.e._, Guiana and Brazil) the toucan was
+     almost the only bird the aborigines attempted to domesticate. The
+     fact that it is represented receiving its food from a human hand
+     would, under these circumstances, favor the conclusion that the
+     sculpture was designed to represent the toucan.
+
+Rather a slender thread one would think upon which to hang a theory so
+far-reaching in its consequences.
+
+Nor was it necessary to go as far as Guiana and Brazil to find instances
+of the domestication of wild fowl by aborigines. Among our North
+American Indians it was a by no means uncommon practice to capture and
+tame birds. Roger Williams, for instance, speaks of the New England
+Indians keeping tame hawks about their dwellings "to keep the little
+birds from their corn." (Williams's Key into the Language of America,
+1643, p. 220.) The Zunis and other Pueblo Indians keep, and have kept
+from time immemorial, great numbers of eagles and hawks of every
+obtainable species, as also turkies, for the sake of the feathers. The
+Dakotas and other western tribes keep eagles for the same purpose. They
+also tame crows, which are fed from the hand, as well as hawks and
+magpies. A case nearer in point is a reference in Lawson to the
+Congarees of North Carolina. He says, "they are kind and affable, and
+tame the cranes and storks of their savannas." (Lawson's History of
+Carolina, p. 51.) And again (p. 53) "these Congarees have an abundance
+of storks and cranes in their savannas. They take them before they can
+fly, and breed them as tame and familiar as a dung-hill fowl. They had a
+tame crane at one of these cabins that was scarcely less than six feet
+in height."
+
+So that even if the bird, as has been assumed by many writers, be
+feeding from a human hand, of which fact there is no sufficient
+evidence, we are by no means on this account driven to the conclusion,
+as appears to have been believed, that the sculpture could be no other
+than a toucan.
+
+As in the Cass of the manatee, it has been thought well to introduce a
+correct drawing of a toucan in order to afford opportunity for
+comparison of this very striking bird with its supposed representations
+from the mounds. For this purpose the most northern representative of
+the family has been selected as the one nearest the home of the
+Mound-Builders.
+
+The particulars wherein it differs from the supposed toucans are so many
+and striking that it will be superfluous to dwell upon them in detail.
+They will be obvious at a glance.
+
+Thus we have seen that the sculptured representation of three birds,
+totally dissimilar from each other, and not only not resembling the
+toucan, but conveying no conceivable hint of that very marked bird,
+formed the basis of Squier and Davis' speculations as to the presence of
+the toucan in the mounds. These three supposed toucans have been copied
+and recopied by later authors, who have accepted in full the remarks and
+deductions accompanying them.
+
+At least two exceptions to the last statement may be made. It is
+refreshing to find that two writers, although apparently accepting the
+other identifications by Squier and Davis, have drawn the line at the
+toucan. Thus Rau, in The Archaeological Collections of the United States
+National Museum, pp. 46-47, states that--
+
+     The figure (neither of the writers mentioned appear to have been
+     aware that there was more than one supposed toucan) is not of
+     sufficient distinctness to identify the original that was before
+     the artist's mind, and it would not be safe, therefore, to make
+     this specimen the subject of far-reaching speculations.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 18.--Keel-Billed Toucan of Southern Mexico
+(_Rhamphastos carinatus_.)]
+
+Further on he adds, "Leaving aside the more than doubtful toucan, the
+imitated animals belong, without exception, to the North American
+fauna." Barber, also, after taking exception to the idea that the
+supposed toucan carving represents a zygodactylous bird, adds in his
+article on Mound Pipes, pp. 280-281 (American Naturalist for April,
+1882), "It may be asserted with a considerable degree of confidence that
+no representative of an exclusively exotic fauna figured in the pipe
+sculptures of the Mound-Builders."
+
+
+PAROQUET.
+
+The presence of a carving of the paroquet in one of the Ohio mounds has
+been deemed remarkable on account of the supposed extreme southern
+habitat of that bird. Thus Squier and Davis remark ("Ancient Monuments
+of the Mississippi Valley," p. 265, Fig. 172), "Among the most spirited
+and delicately executed specimens of ancient art found in the mounds, is
+that of the paroquet here presented."
+
+"The paroquet is essentially a southern bird, and though common along
+the Gulf, is of rare occurrence above the Ohio River." The above
+language would seem to admit of no doubt as to the fact of the decided
+resemblance borne by this carving to the paroquet. Yet the bird thus
+positively identified as a paroquet, upon which identification have,
+without doubt, been based all the conclusions that have been published
+concerning the presence of that bird among the mound sculptures is not
+even distantly related to the parrot family. It has the bill of a
+raptorial bird, as shown by the distinct tooth, and this, in connection
+with the well defined cere, not present in the paroquet, and the open
+nostril, concealed by feathers in the paroquet, places its identity as
+one of the hawk tribe beyond doubt.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 19.--Paroquet of Squier and Davis.]
+
+In fact it closely resembles several of the carvings figured and
+identified as hawks by the above authors, as comparison with figures
+given below will show. The hawks always appear to have occupied a
+prominent place in the interest of our North American Indians,
+especially in association with totemic ideas, and the number of
+sculptured representations of hawks among the mound relics would argue
+for them a similar position in the minds of the Mound-Builders.
+
+A word should be added as to the distribution of the paroquet. The
+statement by Squier and Davis that the paroquet is found as far north as
+the Ohio River would of itself afford an easy explanation of the manner
+in which the Mound-Builders might have become acquainted with the bird,
+could their acquaintance with it be proved. But the above authors appear
+to have had a very incorrect idea of the region inhabited by this once
+widely spread species. The present distribution, it is true, is
+decidedly southern, it being almost wholly confined to limited areas
+within the Gulf States. Formerly, however, it ranged much farther north,
+and there is positive evidence that it occurred in New York,
+Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Nebraska. Up to
+1835 it was extremely abundant in Southern Illinois, and, as Mr. Ridgway
+informs the writer, was found there as late as 1861. Specimens are in
+the Smithsonian collection from points as far north as Chicago and
+Michigan. Over much of the region indicated the exact nature of its
+occurrence is not understood, whether resident or a more or less casual
+visitor. But as it is known that it was found as far north as
+Pennsylvania in winter it may once have ranged even farther north than
+the line just indicated, and have been found in Southern Wisconsin and
+Minnesota.
+
+Occurring, as it certainly did, over most of the mound region, the
+peculiar habits of the paroquet, especially its vociferous cries and
+manner of associating in large flocks, must, it would seem, have made
+it known to the Mound-Builders. Indeed from the ease with which it is
+trapped and killed, it very probably formed an article of food among
+them as it has among the whites and recent tribes of Indians. Probable,
+however, as it is that the Mound-Builders were well acquainted with the
+paroquet, there appears to be no evidence of the fact among their works
+of art.
+
+
+
+
+KNOWLEDGE OF TROPICAL ANIMALS BY MOUND-BUILDERS.
+
+
+The supposed evidence of a knowledge of tropical animals possessed by
+the ancient dwellers of the Mississippi Valley which has just been
+discussed seems to have powerfully impressed Wilson, and in his
+Prehistoric Man he devotes much space to the consideration of the
+matter. His ideas on the subject will be understood from the following
+quotation:
+
+    By the fidelity of the representations of so great a variety of
+    subjects copied from animal life, they furnish evidence of a
+    knowledge in the Mississippi Valley, of the fauna peculiar not only
+    to southern, but to tropical latitudes, extending beyond the Isthmus
+    into the southern continent; and suggestive either of arts derived
+    from a foreign source, and of an intimate intercourse maintained
+    with the central regions where the civilization of ancient America
+    attained its highest development: or else indicative of migration,
+    and an intrusion into the northern continent, of the race of the
+    ancient graves of Central and Southern America, bringing with them
+    the arts of the tropics, and models derived from the animals
+    familiar to their fathers in the parent-land of the race. (Vol. 1,
+    p. 475.)
+
+The author subsequently shows his preference for the theory of a
+migration of the race of the Mound-Builders from southern regions as
+being on the whole more probable. Wilson does not, however, content
+himself with the evidence afforded by the birds and animals which have
+just been discussed, but strengthens his argument by extending the list
+of supposed exotic forms known to the Mound-Builders in the following
+words (vol. 1, p. 477):
+
+     But we must account by other means for the discovery of accurate
+     miniature representations of it (_i.e._ the Manatee) among the
+     sculptures of the far-inland mounds of Ohio; and the same remark
+     equally applies to the jaguar or panther, the cougar, the toucan;
+     to the buzzard possibly, and also to the paroquet. _The majority of
+     these animals are not known in the United States; some of them are
+     totally unknown to within any part of the North American
+     continent._ (Italics of the present writer.) Others may be classed
+     with the paroquet, which, though essentially a southern bird, and
+     common in the Gulf, does occasionally make its appearance inland;
+     and might possibly become known to the untraveled Mound-Builder
+     among the fauna of his own northern home.
+
+The information contained in the above paragraph relative to the range
+of some of the animals mentioned may well be viewed with surprise by
+naturalists. To begin with, the jaguar or panther, by which vernacular
+names the _Felis onca_ is presumably meant, is not only found in
+Northern Mexico, but extends its range into the United States and
+appears as far north as the Red River of Louisiana. (See Baird's Mammals
+of North America.) Hence a sculptured representation of this animal in
+the mounds, although by no means likely, is not entirely out of the
+question. However, among the several carvings of the cat family that
+have been exhumed from the mounds and made known there is not one which
+can, with even a fair degree of probability, be identified as this
+species in distinction from the next animal named, the cougar.
+
+The cougar, to which several of the carvings can with but little doubt
+be referred, was at the time of the discovery of America and is to-day,
+where not exterminated by man, a common resident of the whole of North
+America, including of course the whole of the Mississippi Valley. It
+would be surprising, therefore, if an animal so striking, and one that
+has figured so largely in Indian totemism and folk-lore, should not have
+received attention at the hands of the Mound-Builders.
+
+Nothing resembling the toucan, as has been seen, has been found in the
+mounds; but, as stated, this bird is found in Southern Mexico.
+
+The buzzard is to-day common over almost the entire United States, and
+is especially common throughout most of the Mississippi Valley.
+
+As to the paroquet, there seems to be no evidence in the way of carvings
+to show that it was known to the Mound-Builders, although that such was
+the case is rendered highly probable from the fact that it lived at
+their very doors.
+
+It therefore appears that of the five animals of which Wilson states
+"the majority are not known in the United States," and "some of them are
+totally unknown, within any part of the North American continent," every
+one is found in North America, and all but one within the limits of the
+United States, while three were common residents of the Mississippi
+Valley.
+
+As a further illustration of the inaccurate zoological knowledge to
+which may be ascribed no small share of the theories advanced respecting
+the origin of the Mound-Builders, the following illustration may be
+taken from Wilson, this author, however, being but one of the many who
+are equally in fault. The error is in regard to the habitat of the conch
+shell, _Pyrula (now Busycon) perversa_.
+
+After exposing the blunder of Mr. John Delafield, who describes this
+shell as unknown on the coasts of North and South America, but as
+abundant on the coast of Hindostan, from which supposed fact, coupled
+with its presence in the mounds, he assumes a migration on the part of
+the Mound-Builders from Southern Asia (Prehistoric Man, vol. 1, p. 219,
+_ibid._, p. 272), Wilson states.
+
+     No question can exist as to the tropical and marine origin of the
+     large shells exhumed not only in the inland regions of Kentucky and
+     Tennessee, but in the northern peninsula lying between the Ontario
+     and Huron Lakes, or on the still remoter shores and islands of
+     Georgian Bay, at a distance of upwards of three thousand miles from
+     the coast of Yucatan, on the mainland, _the nearest point where the
+     Pyrula perversa is found in its native locality_. (Italics of the
+     present writer.)
+
+Now the plain facts on the authority of Mr. Dall are that the _Busycon
+(Pyrula) perversa_ is not only found in the United States, but extends
+along the coast up to Charleston, S.C., with rare specimens as far north
+as Beaufort, N.C. Moreover, archaeologists have usually confounded this
+species with the _Busycon carica_, which is of common occurrence in the
+mounds. The latter is found as far north as Cape Cod. The facts cited
+put a very different complexion on the presence of these shells in the
+mounds.
+
+
+OTHER ERRORS OF IDENTIFICATION.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 20.--"Owl," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+The erroneous identification of the manatee, the toucan, and of several
+other animals having been pointed out, it may be well to glance at
+certain others of the sculptured animal forms, the identification of
+which by Squier and Davis has passed without dispute, with a view to
+determining how far the accuracy of these authors in this particular
+line is to be trusted, and how successful they have been in interpreting
+the much lauded "fidelity to nature" of the mound sculptures.
+
+Fig. 20 (Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley,
+p. 225, Fig. 123) represents a tube of steatite, upon which is carved,
+as is stated, "in high relief this figure of an owl, attached with its
+back to the tube." This carving, the authors state, is "remarkably bold
+and spirited, and represents the bird with its claws contracted and
+drawn up, and head and beak elevated as if in an attitude of defense and
+defiance."
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 21.--"Grouse," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+This carving differs markedly from any of the avian sculptures, and
+probably was not intended to represent a bird at all. The absence of
+feather etchings and the peculiar shape of the wing are especially
+noticeable. It more nearly resembles, if it can be said to resemble
+anything, a bat, with the features very much distorted.
+
+Fig. 21 (Fig. 170 from Squier and Davis) it is stated, "will readily be
+recognized as intended to represent the head of the grouse."
+
+The cere and plainly notched bill of this carving clearly indicate a
+hawk, of what species it would be impossible to say.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 22.--"Turkey Buzzard," from Squier and
+Davis.]
+
+Fig. 22 (Fig. 171 from Squier and Davis) was, it is said, "probably
+intended to represent a turkey buzzard." If so, the suggestion is a very
+vague one. The notches cut in the mandibles, as in the case of the
+carving of the wood duck (Fig. 168, Ancient Monuments), are perhaps
+meant for serrations, of which there is no trace in the bill of the
+buzzard. As suggested by Mr. Ridgway, it is perhaps nearer the cormorant
+than anything else, although not executed with the detail necessary for
+its satisfactory recognition.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 23.--"Cherry-bird," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+Fig. 23 (Fig. 173 from Squier and Davis) it is claimed "much resembles
+the tufted cherry-bird," which is by no means the case, as the bill
+bears witness. It may pass, however, as a badly executed likeness of the
+tufted cardinal grosbeak or red-bird. The same is true of Figs. 174 and
+175, which are also said to be "cherry-birds."
+
+Fig. 24 (Fig. 179 from Squier and Davis), of which Squier and Davis say
+it is uncertain what bird it is intended to represent, is an
+unmistakable likeness of a woodpecker, and is one of the best executed
+of the series of bird carvings. To undertake to name the species would
+be the merest guess-work.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 24.--Woodpecker, from Squier and Davis.]
+
+The heads shown in Fig. 25, which the authors assert "was probably
+intended to represent the eagle" and "are far superior in point of
+finish, spirit, and truthfulness to any miniature carving, ancient or
+modern, which have fallen under the notice of the authors," cannot be
+identified further than to say they are raptorial birds of some sort,
+probably not eagles but hawks.
+
+Fig. 26 (Fig. 180 from Squier and Davis), according to the authors,
+"certainly represents the rattlesnake." It certainly represents a snake,
+but there is no hint in it of the peculiarities of the rattlesnake;
+which, indeed, it would be difficult to portray in a rude carving like
+this without showing the rattle. This is done in another carving, Fig.
+196.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 25.--"Eagle," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+The extraordinary terms of praise bestowed by the authors on the heads
+of the hawks just alluded to, as well as on many other of the sculptured
+animals, suggest the question whether the illustrations given in the
+Ancient Monuments afford any adequate idea of the beauty and artistic
+excellence asserted for the carvings, and so whether they are fair
+objects for criticism. While of course for the purpose of this paper an
+examination of the originals would have been preferable, yet, in as much
+as the Smithsonian Institution contains casts which attest the general
+accuracy of the drawings given, and, as the illustrations by other
+authors afford no higher idea of their artistic execution, it would seem
+that any criticism applicable to these illustrations must in the main
+apply to the originals. With reference to the casts in the Smithsonian
+collection it may be stated that Dr. Rau, who had abundant opportunity
+to acquaint himself with the originals while in the possession of Mr.
+Davis, informs the writer that they accurately represent the carvings,
+and for purposes of study are practically as good as the originals. The
+latter are, as is well known, in the Blackmore Museum, England.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 26.--"Rattlesnake," from Squier and Davis.]
+
+Without going into further detail the matter may be summed up as
+follows: Of forty-five of the animal carvings, including a few of clay,
+which are figured in Squier and Davis's work, eleven are left unnamed by
+the authors as not being recognizable; nineteen are identified
+correctly, in a general way, as of a wolf, bear, heron, toad, &c.;
+sixteen are demonstrably wrongly identified, leaving but five of which
+the species is correctly given.
+
+From this showing it appears that either the above authors' zoological
+knowledge was faulty in the extreme, or else the mound sculptors'
+ability in animal carving has been amazingly overestimated. However just
+the first supposition may be, the last is certainly true.
+
+
+
+
+SKILL IN SCULPTURE OF MOUND-BUILDERS.
+
+
+In considering the degree of skill exhibited by the mound sculptors in
+their delineation of the features and characteristics of animals, it is
+of the utmost importance to note that the carvings of birds and animals
+which have evoked the most extravagant expressions of praise as to the
+exactness with which nature has been copied are uniformly those which,
+owing to the possession of some unusual or salient characteristic, are
+exceedingly easy of imitation. The stout body and broad flat tail of the
+beaver, the characteristic physiognomy of the wild cat and panther, so
+utterly dissimilar to that of other animals, the tufted head and
+fish-eating habits of the heron, the raptorial bill and claws of the
+hawk, the rattle of the rattlesnake, are all features which the rudest
+skill could scarcely fail to portray.
+
+It is by the delineation of these marked and unmistakable features, and
+not the sculptor's power to express the subtleties of animal
+characteristics, that enables the identity of a comparatively small
+number of the carvings to be established. It is true that the contrary
+has often been asserted, and that almost everything has been claimed for
+the carvings, in the way of artistic execution, that would be claimed
+for the best products of modern skill. Squier and Davis in fact go so
+far in their admiration (Ancient Monuments, p. 272), as to say that, so
+far as fidelity is concerned, many of them (_i.e._, animal carvings)
+deserve to rank by the side of the best efforts of the artist
+naturalists in our own day--a statement which is simply preposterous. So
+far, in point of fact, is this from being true that an examination of
+the series of animal sculptures cannot fail to convince any one, who is
+even tolerably well acquainted with our common birds and animals, that
+it is simply impossible to recognize specific features in the great
+majority of them. They were either not intended to be copies of
+particular species, or, if so intended, the artist's skill was wholly
+inadequate for his purpose.
+
+Some remarks by Dr. Coues, quoted in an article by E. A. Barber on Mound
+Pipes in the American Naturalist for April, 1882, are so apropos to the
+subject that they are here reprinted. The paragraph is in response to a
+request to identify a bird pipe:
+
+     As is so frequently the probable case in such matters, I am
+     inclined to think the sculptor had no particular bird in mind in
+     executing his rude carving. It is not necessary, or indeed,
+     permissible, to suppose that particular species were intended to be
+     represented. Not unfrequently the likeness of some marked bird is
+     so good as to be unmistakable, but the reverse is oftener the case;
+     and in the present instance I can make no more of the carving than
+     you have done, excepting that if any particular species may have
+     been in the carver's mind, his execution does not suffice for its
+     determination.
+
+The views entertained by Dr. Coues as to the resemblances of the
+carvings will thus be seen to coincide with those expressed above.
+Another prominent ornithologist, Mr. Ridgway, has also given verbal
+expression to precisely similar views.
+
+So far, therefore, as the carvings themselves afford evidence to the
+naturalist, their general likeness entirely accords with the supposition
+that they were not intended to be copies of particular species. Many of
+the specimens are in fact just about what might be expected when a
+workman, with crude ideas of art expression, sat down with intent to
+carve out a bird, for instance, without the desire, even if possessed of
+the requisite degree of skill, to impress upon the stone the details
+necessary to make it the likeness of a particular species.
+
+
+GENERALIZATION NOT DESIGNED.
+
+While the resemblances of most of the carvings, as indicated above, must
+be admitted to be of a general and not of a special character, it does
+not follow that their general type was the result of design.
+
+Such an explanation of their general character and resemblances is,
+indeed, entirely inconsistent with certain well-known facts regarding
+the mental operations of primitive or semi-civilized man. To the mind of
+primitive man abstract conceptions of things, while doubtless not
+entirely wanting, are at best but vaguely defined. The experience of
+numerous investigators attests how difficult it is, for instance, to
+obtain from a savage the name of a class of animals in distinction from
+a particular species of that class. Thus it is easy to obtain the names
+of the several kinds of bears known to a savage, but his mind
+obstinately refuses to entertain the idea of a bear genus or class. It
+is doubtless true that this difficulty is in no small part due simply to
+the confusion arising from the fact that the savage's method of
+classification is different from that of his questioner. For, although
+primitive man actually does classify all concrete things into groups,
+the classification is of a very crude sort, and has for a basis a very
+different train of ideas from those upon which modern science is
+established--a fact which many investigators are prone to overlook.
+Still there seems to be good ground for believing that the conception of
+a bird, for instance, in the abstract as distinct from some particular
+kind or species would never be entertained by a people no further
+advanced in culture than their various relics prove the Mound-Builders
+to have been. In his carving, therefore, of a hawk, a bear, a heron, or
+a fish, it seems highly probable that the mound sculptor had in mind a
+distinct species, as we understand the term. Hence his failure to
+reproduce specific features in a recognizable way is to be attributed to
+the fact that his skill was inadequate to transfer the exact image
+present in his mind, and not to his intention to carve out a general
+representative of the avian class.
+
+To carry the imitative idea farther and to suggest, as has been done by
+writers, that the carver of the Mound-Building epoch sat down to his
+work with the animal or a model of it before him, as does the accurate
+zoological artist of our own day, is wholly insupported by evidence
+derivable from the carvings themselves, and is of too imaginative a
+character to be entertained. By the above remarks as to the lack of
+specific resemblances in the animal carvings it is not intended to deny
+that some of them have been executed with a considerable degree of skill
+and spirit as well as, within certain limitations heretofore expressed,
+fidelity to nature. Taking them as a whole it can perhaps be asserted
+that they have been carved with a skill considerably above the general
+average of attainments in art of our Indian tribes, but not above the
+best efforts of individual tribes.
+
+That they will by no means bear the indiscriminate praise they have
+received as works of art and as exact imitations of nature may be
+asserted with all confidence.
+
+
+PROBABLE TOTEMIC ORIGIN.
+
+With reference to the origin of these animal sculptures many writers
+appear inclined to the view that they are purely decorative and
+ornamental in character, _i.e._, that they are attempts at close
+imitations of nature in the sense demanded by high art, and that they
+owe their origin to the artistic instinct alone. But there is much in
+their general appearance that suggests they may have been totemic in
+origin, and that whatever of ornamental character they may possess is of
+secondary importance.
+
+With, perhaps, no exceptions, the North American tribes practiced
+totemism in one or other of its various forms, and, although it by no
+means follows that all the carving and etchings of birds or animals by
+these tribes are totems, yet it is undoubtedly true that the totemic
+idea is traceable in no small majority of their artistic
+representations, whatever their form. As rather favoring the idea of the
+totemic meaning of the carvings, it may be pointed out that a
+considerable number of the recognizable birds and animals are precisely
+the ones known to have been used as totems by many tribes of Indians.
+The hawk, heron, woodpecker, crow, beaver, otter, wild cat, squirrel,
+rattlesnake, and others, have all figured largely in the totemic
+divisions of our North American Indians. Their sacred nature too would
+enable us to understand how naturally pipes would be selected as the
+medium for totemic representations. It is also known to be a custom
+among Indian tribes for individuals to carve out or etch their totems
+upon weapons and implements of the more important and highly prized
+class, and a variety of ideas, superstitious and other, are associated
+with the usage; as, for instance, in the case of weapons of war or
+implements of the chase, to impart greater efficiency to them. The
+etching would also serve as a mark of ownership, especially where
+property of certain kinds was regarded as belonging to the tribe or gens
+and not to the individual. Often, indeed, in the latter case the
+individual used the totem of his gens instead of the symbol or mark for
+his own name.
+
+As a theory to account for the number and character of these animal
+carvings the totemic theory is perhaps as tenable as any. The origin and
+significance of the carvings may, however, involve many different and
+distinct ideas. It is certain that it is a common practice of Indians to
+endeavor to perpetuate the image of any strange bird or beast,
+especially when seen away from home, and in order that it may be shown
+to his friends. As what are deemed the marvellous features of the animal
+are almost always greatly exaggerated, it is in this way that many of
+the astonishing productions noticeable in savage art have originated.
+Among the Esquimaux this habit is very prominent, and many individuals
+can show etchings or carvings of birds and animals exhibiting the most
+extraordinary characters, which they stoutly aver and doubtless have
+come to believe they have actually seen.
+
+
+
+
+ANIMAL MOUNDS.
+
+
+As having, for the purposes of the present paper, a close connection
+with the animal carvings, another class of remains left by the
+Mound-Builders--the animal mounds--may next engage attention. As in the
+case of the carvings, the resemblance of particular mounds to the
+animals whose names they bear is a matter of considerable interest on
+account of the theories to which they have given rise.
+
+The conclusion reached with respect to the carvings that it is safe to
+rely upon their identification only in the case of animals possessed of
+striking and unique characters or presenting unusual forms and
+proportions, applies with far greater force to the animal mounds.
+Perhaps in none of the latter can specific resemblances be found
+sufficient for their precise determination. So general are the
+resemblances of one class that it has been an open question among
+archaeologists whether they were intended to represent the bodies and
+arms of men, or the bodies and wings of birds. Other forms are
+sufficiently defined to admit of the statement that they are doubtless
+intended for animals, but without enabling so much as a reasonable guess
+to be made as to the kind. Of others again it can be asserted that
+whatever significance they may have had to the race that built them, to
+the uninstructed eyes of modern investigators they are meaningless and
+are as likely to have been intended for inanimate as animate objects.
+
+There are many examples among the animal shapes that possess
+peculiarities affording no hint of animals living or extinct, but which
+are strongly suggestive of the play of mythologic fancy or of
+conventional methods of representing totemic ideas. As in the case of
+the animal carvings, the latter suggestion is perhaps the one that best
+corresponds with their general character.
+
+
+THE "ELEPHANT" MOUND.
+
+By far the most important of the animal mounds, from the nature of the
+deductions it has given rise to, is the so-called "Elephant Mound," of
+Wisconsin.
+
+By its discovery and description the interesting question was raised as
+to the contemporaneousness of the Mound-Builder and the mastodon, an
+interest which is likely to be further enhanced by the more recent
+bringing to light in Iowa of two pipes carved in the semblance of the
+same animal, as well as a tablet showing two figures asserted by some
+archaeologists to have been intended for the same animal.
+
+Although both the mound and pipes have been referred in turn to the
+peccary, the tapir, and the armadillo, it is safe to exclude these
+animals from consideration. It is indeed perhaps more likely that the
+ancient inhabitants of the Upper Mississippi Valley were autoptically
+acquainted with the mastodon than with either of the above-named
+animals, owing to their southern habitat.
+
+Referring to the possibility that the mastodon was known to the
+Mound-Builders, it is impossible to fix with any degree of precision the
+time of its disappearance from among living animals. Mastodon bones have
+been exhumed from peat beds in this country at a depth which, so far as
+is proved by the rate of deposition, implies that the animal may have
+been alive within five hundred years. The extinction of the mastodon,
+geologically speaking, was certainly a very recent event, and, as an
+antiquity of upwards of a thousand or more years has been assigned to
+some of the mounds, it is entirely within the possibilities that this
+animal was living at the time these were thrown up, granting even that
+the time of their erection has been overestimated. It must be admitted,
+therefore, that there are no inherent absurdities in the belief that the
+Mound-Builders were acquainted with the mastodon. Granting that they may
+have been acquainted with the animal, the question arises, what proof is
+there that they actually were? The answer to this question made by
+certain archaeologists is--the Elephant Mound, of Wisconsin.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 27.--The Elephant Mound, Grant County,
+Wisconsin.]
+
+Recalling the fact that among the animal mounds many nondescript shapes
+occur which cannot be identified at all, and as many others which have
+been called after the animals they appear to most nearly resemble, carry
+out their peculiarities only in the most vague and general way, it is a
+little difficult to understand the confidence with which this effigy has
+been asserted to represent the mastodon; for the mound (a copy of which
+as figured in the Smithsonian Annual Report for 1872 is here given) can
+by no means be said to closely represent the shape, proportions, and
+peculiarities of the animal whose name it bears. In fact, it is true of
+this, as of so many other of the effigies, the identity of which must be
+guessed, that the resemblance is of the most vague and general kind, the
+figure simulating the elephant no more closely than any one of a score
+or more mounds in Wisconsin, except in one important particular, viz,
+the head has a prolongation or snout-like appendage, which is its chief,
+in fact its only real, elephantine character. If this appendage is too
+long for the snout of any other known animal, it is certainly too short
+for the trunk of a mastodon. Still, so far as this one character goes,
+it is doubtless true that it is more suggestive of the mastodon than of
+any other animal. No hint is afforded of tusks, ears, or tail, and were
+it not for the snout the animal effigy might readily be called a bear,
+it nearly resembling in its general make-up many of the so-called bear
+mounds figured by Squier and Davis from this same county in Wisconsin.
+The latter, too, are of the same gigantic size and proportions.
+
+If it can safely be assumed that an animal effigy without tusks, without
+ears, and without a tail was really intended to represent a mastodon, it
+would be stretching imagination but a step farther to call all the
+large-bodied, heavy-limbed animal effigies hitherto named bears,
+mastodons, attributing the lack of trunks, as well as ears, tusks, and
+tails, to inattention to slight details on the part of the mound artist.
+
+It is true that one bit of good, positive proof is worth many of a
+negative character. But here the one positive resemblance, the trunk of
+the supposed elephant, falls far short of an exact imitation, and, as
+the other features necessary to a good likeness of a mastodon are wholly
+wanting, is not this an instance where the negative proof should be held
+sufficient to largely outweigh the positive?
+
+In connection with this question the fact should not be overlooked that,
+among the great number of animal effigies in Wisconsin and elsewhere,
+this is the only one which even thus remotely suggests the mastodon. As
+the Mound Builders were in the habit of repeating the same animal form
+again and again, not only in the same but in widely distant localities,
+why, if this was really intended for a mastodon, are there no others
+like it? It cannot be doubted that the size and extraordinary features
+of this monster among mammals would have prevented it being overlooked
+by the Mound-Builders when so many animals of inferior interest engaged
+their attention. The fact that the mound is a nondescript, with no
+others resembling it, certainly lessens the probability that it was an
+intentional representation of the mastodon, and increases the likelihood
+that its slight resemblance was accidental; a slide of earth from the
+head, for instance, might readily be interpreted by the modern artist
+as a trunk, and thus the head be made to assume a shape in his sketch
+not intended by the original maker. As is well known, no task is more
+difficult for the artist than to transfer to paper an exact copy of such
+a subject. Especially hard is it for the artist to avoid unconsciously
+magnifying or toning down peculiarities according to his own conceptions
+of what was originally intended, when, as is often the case, time and
+the elements have combined to render shape and outlines obscure.
+Archaeologic treatises are full of warning lessons of this kind, and the
+interpretations given to ancient works of art by the erring pencil of
+the modern artist are responsible for many an ingenious theory which the
+original would never have suggested. It may well be that future
+investigations will show that the one peculiarity which distinguishes
+the so-called Elephant Mound from its fellows is really susceptible of a
+much more commonplace explanation than has hitherto been given it.
+
+Even if such explanation be not forthcoming, the "Elephant Mound" of
+Wisconsin should be supplemented by a very considerable amount of
+corroborative testimony before being accepted as proof positive of the
+acquaintance of the Mound-Builders with the mastodon.
+
+As regards likeness to the mastodon, the pipes before alluded to, copies
+of which as given in Barber's articles on Mound Pipes in American
+Naturalist for April, 1882, Figs. 17 and 18, are here presented, while
+not entirely above criticism, are much nearer what they have been
+supposed to be than the mound just mentioned.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 28.--Elephant Pipe, Iowa]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 29.--Elephant Pipe, Iowa.]
+
+Of the two, figure 29 is certainly the most natural in appearance, but,
+if the pipes are intentional imitations of any animal, neither can be
+regarded as having been intended for any other than the mastodon. Yet,
+as pointed out by Barber and others, it is certainly surprising that if
+intended for mastodons no attempt was made to indicate the tusks, which
+with the trunk constitute the most marked external peculiarities of all
+the elephant kind. The tusks, too, as affording that most important
+product in primitive industries, ivory, would naturally be the one
+peculiarity of all others which the ancient artist would have relied
+upon to fix the identity of the animal. It is also remarkable that in
+neither of these pipes is the tail indicated, although a glance at the
+other sculptures will show that in the full-length figures this member
+is invariably shown. In respect to these omissions, the pipes from Iowa
+are strikingly suggestive of the Elephant Mound of Wisconsin, with the
+peculiarities of which the sculptor, whether ancient or modern, might
+almost be supposed to have been acquainted. It certainly must be looked
+upon as a curious coincidence that carvings found at a point so remote
+from the Elephant Mound, and presumably the work of other hands, should
+so closely copy the imperfections of that mound.
+
+In considering the evidence afforded by these pipes of a knowledge of
+the mastodon on the part of the Mound-Builders, it should be borne in
+mind that their authenticity as specimens of the Mound-Builders' art has
+been called seriously in question. Possibly the fact that the same
+person was instrumental in bringing to light both the pipes has had
+largely to do with the suspicion, especially when it was remembered that
+although explorers have been remarkably active in the same region, it
+has fallen to the good fortune of no one else to find anything conveying
+the most distant suggestion of the mastodon. As the manner of discovery
+of such relics always forms an important part of their history, the
+following account of the pipes as communicated to Mr. Barber by Mr.
+W. H. Pratt, president of the Davenport Academy (American Naturalist for
+April, 1882, pp. 275, 276), is here subjoined:
+
+     The first elephant pipe, which we obtained (Fig. 17) a little more
+     than a year ago, was found some six years before by an illiterate
+     German farmer named Peter Mare, while planting corn on a farm in
+     the mound region, Louisa County, Iowa. He did not care whether it
+     was elephant or kangaroo; to him it was a curious 'Indian stone,'
+     and nothing more, and he kept it and smoked it. In 1878 he removed
+     to Kansas, and when he left he gave the pipe to his brother-in-law,
+     a farm laborer, who also smoked it. Mr. Gass happened to hear of
+     it, as he is always inquiring about such things, hunted up the man
+     and borrowed the pipe to take photographs and casts from it. He
+     could not buy it. The man said his brother-in-law gave it to him
+     and as it was a curious thing--he wanted to keep it. We were,
+     however, unfortunate, or fortunate, enough to break it; that
+     spoiled it for him and that was his chance to make some money out
+     of it. He could have claimed any amount, and we would, as in duty
+     bound, have raised it for him, but he was satisfied with three or
+     four dollars. During the first week in April, this month, Rev. Ad.
+     Blumer, another German Lutheran minister, now of Genesee, Illinois,
+     having formerly resided in Louisa County, went down there in
+     company with Mr. Gass to open a few mounds, Mr. Blumer being well
+     acquainted there. They carefully explored ten of them, and found
+     nothing but ashes and decayed bones in any, except one. In that one
+     was a layer of red, hard-burned clay, about five feet across and
+     thirteen inches in thickness at the center, which rested upon a bed
+     of ashes one foot in depth in the middle, the ashes resting upon
+     the natural undisturbed clay. In the ashes, near the bottom of the
+     layer, they found a part of a broken carved stone pipe,
+     representing some bird; a very small beautifully formed copper
+     'axe,' and this last elephant pipe (Fig. 18). This pipe was first
+     discovered by Mr. Blumer, and by him, at our earnest solicitation,
+     turned over to the Academy.
+
+It will be seen from the above that the same gentleman was instrumental
+in bringing to light the two specimens constituting the present supply
+of elephant pipes.
+
+The remarkable archaeologic instinct which has guided the finder of these
+pipes has led him to even more important discoveries. By the aid of his
+divining rod he has succeeded in unearthing some of the most remarkable
+inscribed tablets which have thus far rewarded the diligent search of
+the mound explorer. It is not necessary to speak in detail of these
+here, or of the various theories to which they have given rise and
+support, including that of phonetic writing, further than to call
+attention to the fact that by a curious coincidence one of the tablets
+contains, among a number of familiar animals, figures which suggest in a
+rude way the mastodon again, which animal indeed some archaeologists have
+confidently asserted them to be. The resemblance they bear to that
+animal is, however, by no means as close as exhibited by the pipe
+carvings; they are therefore not reproduced here. Both figures differ
+from the pipes in having tails; both lack trunks, and also tusks.
+
+Archaeologists must certainly deem it unfortunate that outside of the
+Wisconsin mound the only evidence of the co-existence of the
+Mound-Builder and the mastodon should reach the scientific world through
+the agency of one individual. So derived, each succeeding carving of the
+mastodon, be it more or less accurate, instead of being accepted by
+archaeologists as cumulative evidence tending to establish the
+genuineness of the sculptured testimony showing that the Mound-Builder
+and mastodon were coeval, will be viewed with ever increasing suspicion.
+
+This part of the subject should not be concluded without allusion to a
+certain class of evidence, which, although of a negative sort, must be
+accorded very great weight in considering this much vexed question. It
+may be asked why if the Mound-Builders and the mastodon were
+contemporaneous, have no traces of the ivory tusks ever been exhumed
+from the mounds? No material is so perfectly adapted for the purposes of
+carving, an art to which we have seen the Mound-Builders were much
+addicted, as ivory, both from its beauty and the ease with which it is
+worked, to say nothing of the other manifold uses to which it is put,
+both by primitive and civilized man. The mastodon affords an abundant
+supply of this highly prized substance, not a particle of which has ever
+been exhumed from the mounds either in the shape of implements or
+carving. Yet the exceedingly close texture of ivory enables it to
+successfully resist the destroying influences of time for very long
+periods--very long indeed as compared with certain articles which
+commonly reward the search of the mound explorer.
+
+Among the articles of a perishable nature that have been exhumed from
+the mounds are large numbers of shell ornaments, which are by no means
+very durable, as well as the perforated teeth of various animals;
+sections of deers' horns have also been found, as well as ornaments made
+of the claws of animals, a still more perishable material. The list also
+includes the bones of the muskrat and turtle, as of other animals, not
+only in their natural shape, but carved into the form of implements of
+small size, as awls, etc. Human bones, too, in abundance, have been
+exhumed in a sufficiently well preserved state to afford a basis for
+various theories and speculations.
+
+But of the mastodon, with which these dead Mound-Builders are supposed
+to have been acquainted, not a palpable trace remains. The tale of its
+existence is told by a single mound in Wisconsin, which the most ardent
+supporter of the mastodon theory must acknowledge to be far from a
+facsimile, and two carvings and an inscribed tablet, the three latter
+the finds of a single explorer.
+
+Bearing in mind the many attempts at archaeological frauds that recent
+years have brought to light, archaeologists have a right to demand that
+objects which afford a basis for such important deductions as the coeval
+life of the Mound-Builder and the mastodon, should be above the
+slightest suspicion not only in respect to their resemblances, but as
+regards the circumstances of discovery. If they are not above suspicion,
+the science of archaeology can better afford to wait for further and more
+certain evidence than to commit itself to theories which may prove
+stumbling-blocks to truth until that indefinite time when future
+investigations shall show their illusory nature.
+
+
+THE "ALLIGATOR" MOUND.
+
+Although of much less importance than the mastodon, a word may be added
+as to the so-called alligator mound, more especially because the
+alligator, owing to its southern habitat, is not likely to have been
+known to the Mound-Builders of Ohio. That it may have been known to them
+either through travel or hearsay is of course possible. A copy of the
+mound from the "Ancient Monuments" is subjoined.
+
+The alligator mound was described under this name for no other reason
+than because it was known in the vicinity as such, this designation
+having been adopted by Squier and Davis, as they frankly say, "for want
+of a better," adding "although the figure bears as close a resemblance
+to the lizard as any other reptile." (Ancient Monuments, p. 99.)
+
+In truth it bears a superficial likeness to almost any long-tailed
+animal which has the power of curling its tail--which, the alligator has
+not--as, for instance, the opossum. It is, however, the merest
+guess-work to attempt to confine its resemblances to any particular
+animal. Nevertheless recent writers have described this as the
+"alligator mound" without suggesting a word of doubt as to its want of
+positive resemblance to that saurian.
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 30.--"Alligator" Mound.]
+
+
+
+
+HUMAN SCULPTURES.
+
+
+The conclusion reached in the foregoing pages that the animal sculptures
+are not "exact and faithful copies from nature," but are imitations of a
+general rather than of a special character, such as comport better with
+the state of art as developed among certain of the Indian tribes than
+among a people that has achieved any notable advance in culture is
+important not only in its bearing on the questions previously noticed in
+this paper, but in its relation to another and highly interesting class
+of sculptures.
+
+If a large proportion of the animal carvings are so lacking in artistic
+accuracy as to make it possible to identify positively only the few
+possessing the most strongly marked characters, how much faith is to be
+placed in the ability of the Mound sculptor to fix in stone the features
+and expressions of the human countenance, infinitely more difficult
+subject for portrayal as this confessedly is?
+
+That Wilson regards the human sculptures as affording a basis for sound
+ethnological deductions is evident from the following paragraph, taken
+from Prehistoric Man, vol. 1, p. 461:
+
+     Alike from the minute accuracy of many of the sculptures of
+     animals, hereafter referred to, and from the correspondence to well
+     known features of the modern Red Indian suggested by some of the
+     human heads, these miniature portraits may be assumed, with every
+     probability, to include faithful representations of the predominant
+     physical features of the ancient people by whom they were executed.
+
+Short, too, accepting the popular idea that they are faithful and
+recognizable copies from nature, remarks in the North Americans of
+Antiquity, p. 98, _ibid._, p. 187:
+
+     There is no reason for believing that the people who wrought stone
+     and clay into perfect effigies of animals have not left us
+     sculptures of their own faces in the images exhumed from the
+     mounds;" and again, "The perfection of the animal representations
+     furnish us the assurance that their sculptures of the human face
+     were equally true to nature.
+
+Squier and Davis also appear to have had no doubt whatever of the
+capabilities of the Mound-Builders in the direction of human
+portraiture. They are not only able to discern in the sculptured heads
+niceties of expression sufficient for the discrimination of the sexes,
+but, as well, to enable them to point out such as are undoubtedly
+ancient and the work of the Mound-Builders, and those of a more recent
+origin, the product of the present Indians. Their main criterion of
+origin is, apparently, that all of fine execution and finish were the
+work of the Mound sculptors, and those roughly done and "immeasurably
+inferior to the relics of the mounds," to use their own words, were the
+handicraft of the tribes found in the country by the whites. Conclusions
+so derived, it may strike some, are open to criticism, however well
+suited they may be to meet the necessities of preconceived theories.
+
+After discussing in detail the methods of arranging the hair, the paint
+lines, and tattooing, the features of the human carvings, Squier and
+Davis arrive at the conclusion that the "physiological characteristics
+of these heads do not differ essentially from those of the great
+American family."
+
+Of later writers some agree with Squier and Davis in believing the type
+illustrated by these heads to be Indian; others agree rather with
+Wilson, who dissents from the view expressed by Squier and Davis, and,
+in conformity with the predilections visible throughout his work, is of
+the opinion that the Mound-Builders were of a distinct type from the
+North American Indian, and that "the majority of sculptured human heads
+hitherto recovered from their ancient depositories do not reproduce the
+Indian features." (Wilson's Prehistoric Man, vol. 1, p. 469.) Again,
+Wilson says that the diversity of type found among the human sculptures
+"proves that the Mound-Builders were familiar with the American Indian
+type, but nothing more."--_Ibid._, p. 469.
+
+The varying type of physiognomy represented by these heads would better
+indicate that their resemblances are the result of accident rather than
+of intention. For the same reason that the sculptured animals of the
+same species display great differences of form and expression, according
+to the varying skill of the sculptors or the unexacting demands made by
+a rude condition of art, so the diversified character of the human faces
+is to be ascribed, not to the successful perpetuation in stone by a
+master hand of individual features, but simply to a want of skill on the
+part of the sculptor. The evidence afforded by the animal sculptures all
+tends to the conclusion that exact individual portraiture would have
+been impossible to the mound sculptor had the state of culture he lived
+in demanded it; the latter is altogether improbable. A glance at the
+above quotations will show that it is the assumed fidelity to nature of
+the animal carvings and their fine execution which has been relied upon
+in support of a similar claim for the human sculptures. As this claim is
+seen to have but slight basis in fact the main argument for asserting
+the human sculptures to be faithful representations of physical
+features, and to embody exact racial characters falls to the ground, and
+it must be admitted as in the last degree improbable that the art of the
+mound sculptor was adequate for the task of accurate human portraiture.
+To base important ethnologic deductions upon the evidence afforded by
+the human sculptures in the present state of our knowledge concerning
+them would seem to be utterly unscientific and misleading.
+
+Copies of several of the heads as they appear in "Ancient Monuments"
+(pp. 244-247) are here subjoined to show the various types of
+physiognomy illustrated by them:
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 31. Fig. 32. Fig. 33. Human Carvings from the
+Mounds.]
+
+[Illustration: Fig. 34. Fig. 35. Human Carvings from the Mounds.]
+
+Could the many other stone and terra-cotta sculptures of the human face
+which have been ascribed to the Mound-Builders be reproduced here it
+would be seen that the specimens illustrated above are among the very
+best. In not a few, traces of the grotesque are distinctly visible, and
+there is little in their appearance to suggest that they had a different
+origin or contain a deeper meaning than similar productions found among
+present Indians. As each of the many carvings differ more or less from
+every other, it will at once be perceived that the advocates of
+different theories can readily find in the series abundant testimony in
+support of any and all assumptions they may choose to advance.
+
+
+
+
+INDIAN AND MOUND-BUILDERS' ART COMPARED.
+
+
+Turning from special illustrations of the artistic skill of the
+Mound-Builders, brief attention may be paid to their art in its more
+general features, and as compared with art as found among our Indian
+tribes.
+
+Among some of the latter the artistic instinct, while deriving its
+characteristic features, as among the Mound-Builders, from animated
+nature, exhibits a decided tendency towards the production of
+conventional forms, and often finds expression in creations of the most
+grotesque and imaginative character.
+
+While this is true of some tribes it is by no means true of all, nor is
+it true of all the art products of even those tribes most given to
+conventional art. But even were it true in its broadest terms, it is
+more than doubtful if the significance of the fact has not been greatly
+overestimated. Some authors indeed seem to discern in the introduction
+of the grotesque element and the substitution of conventional designs of
+animals for a more natural portrayal, a difference sufficient to mark,
+not distinct eras of art culture merely, but different races with very
+different modes of art expression.
+
+To trace the origin of art among primitive peoples, and to note the
+successive steps by which decorative art grew from its probable origin
+in the readily recognized adornments of nature and in the mere
+"accidents of manufacture," as they have been termed, would be not only
+interesting, but highly instructive. Such a study should afford us a
+clew to the origin and significance of conventional as contrasted with
+imitative art.
+
+The natural process of the evolution of art would seem to be from the
+purely imitative to the conventional, the tendency being for artistic
+expression of a partially or wholly imaginative character to supplant or
+supplement the imitative form only in obedience to external influences,
+especially those of a religious or superstitious kind. In this
+connection it is interesting to note that even among tribes of the
+Northwest, the Haidahs, for instance, whose carvings or paintings of
+birds and animals are almost invariably treated in a manner so highly
+conventional or are so distorted and caricatured as to be nearly or
+quite unrecognizable, it is still some natural object, as a well known
+bird or animal, that underlies and gives primary shape to the design.
+However highly conventionalized or grotesque in appearance such artistic
+productions may be, evidences of an underlying imitative design may
+always be detected; proof, seemingly, that the conventional is a later
+stage of art superimposed upon the more natural by the requirements of
+mythologic fancies.
+
+As it is with any particular example of savage artistic fancy, so is it
+with the art of certain tribes as a whole. Nor does it seem possible
+that the growth of the religions or mythologic sentiment has so far
+preceded or outgrown the development of art as to have had from the
+first a dominating influence over it, and that the art of such tribes as
+most strongly show its effect has never had what may be termed its
+natural phase of development, but has reached the conventional stage
+without having passed through the intermediate imitative era.
+
+It is more natural to suppose, so far, at least as the North American
+Indians are concerned, that the road to conventionalism has always led
+through imitation.
+
+The argument, therefore, that because a tribe or people is less given
+than another to conventional methods of art, it therefore must
+necessarily be in a higher stage of culture, is entitled to much less
+weight than it has sometimes received. Squier and Davis, for instance,
+referring to the Mound-Builders, state that "many of these (_i.e._,
+sculptures) exhibit a close observance of nature such as we could only
+expect to find among a people considerably advanced in the minor arts,
+and to which the elaborate and laborious, but usually clumsy and
+ungraceful, not to say unmeaning, productions of the savage can claim
+but a slight approach."
+
+It is clearly not the intention of the above authors to claim an entire
+absence of the grotesque method of treatment in specimens of the
+Mound-Builder's art, since elsewhere they call attention to what appears
+to be a caricature of the human face, as well as to the disproportionate
+size of the heads of many of the animal carvings. Not only are the heads
+of many of the carvings of disproportionate size, which, in instances
+has the effect of actual distortion, but in not a few of the sculptures
+nature, instead of being copied, has been trifled with and birds and
+animals show peculiarities unknown to science and which go far to prove
+that the Mound-Builders, however else endowed, possessed lively
+imaginations and no little creative fancy.
+
+Decided traces of conventionalism also are to be found in many of the
+animal carvings, and the method of indicating the wings and feathers of
+birds, the scales of the serpent, &c., are almost precisely what is to
+be observed in modern Indian productions of a similar kind.
+
+Few and faint as are these tendencies towards caricaturing and
+conventionalizing as compared with what may be noted in the artistic
+productions of the Haidahs, Chinooks, and other tribes of the Northwest,
+they are yet sufficient to show that in these particulars no hard and
+fast line can be drawn between the art of the Indian and of the
+Mound-Builder.
+
+As showing how narrow is the line that separates the conventional and
+imitative methods of art, it is of interest to note that among the
+Esquimaux the two stages of art are found flourishing side by side. In
+their curious masks, carved into forms the most quaint and grotesque,
+and in many of their carvings of animals, partaking as they do of a half
+human, half animal character, we have abundant evidence of what authors
+have characterized as savage taste in sculpture. But the same tribes
+execute carvings of animals, as seals, sea-lions, whales, bears, &c.,
+which, though generally wanting in the careful modeling necessary to
+constitute fine sculpture, and for absolute specific resemblance, are
+generally recognizable likenesses. Now and then indeed is to be found a
+carving which is noteworthy for spirited execution and faithful
+modeling. The best of them are far superior to the best executed
+carvings from the mounds, and, are much worthier objects for comparison
+with modern artistic work.
+
+As deducible from the above premises it may be observed that, while the
+state of art among primitive peoples as exemplified by their artistic
+productions may be a useful index in determining their relative position
+in the scale of progress, unless used with caution and in connection
+with other and more reliable standards of measurement it will lead to
+very erroneous conclusions. If, for instance, skill and ingenuity in the
+art of carving and etching be accepted as affording a proper idea of a
+people's progress in general culture, the Esquimaux of Alaska should be
+placed in the front rank of American tribes, a position needless to say
+which cannot be accorded them from more general considerations. On the
+other hand, while the evidences of artistic skill left by the Iroquoian
+tribes are in no way comparable to the work produced by the Esquimaux,
+yet the former have usually been assigned a very advanced position as
+compared with other American tribes.
+
+
+GENERAL CONCLUSIONS.
+
+The more important conclusions reached in the foregoing paper may be
+briefly summed up as follows:
+
+That of the carvings from the mounds which can be identified there are
+no representations of birds or animals not indigenous to the Mississippi
+Valley.
+
+And consequently that the theories of origin for the Mound Builders
+suggested by the presence in the mounds of carvings of supposed foreign
+animals are without basis.
+
+Second. That a large majority of the carvings, instead of being, as
+assumed, exact likenesses from nature, possess in reality only the most
+general resemblance to the birds and animals of the region which they
+were doubtless intended to represent.
+
+Third. That there is no reason for believing that the masks and
+sculptures of human faces are more correct likenesses than are the
+animal carvings.
+
+Fourth. That the state of art-culture reached by the Mound Builders, as
+illustrated by their carvings, has been greatly overestimated.
+
+
+
+
+INDEX.
+
+
+  Animal carvings from mounds of the Mississippi Valley,
+                      by H. W. Henshaw, 117
+  Bat, Carving of the, 144
+  Birds domesticated by Indians, 138
+  Buzzard, Range of the, 142
+  Carvings, Animal, from mounds, 117
+  "Cherry Bird", Carving of the, 145
+  Cincinnati tablet, 133
+  Conch shell, Range of the, 143
+  Coues, Dr. E., on bird carvings from mounds, 148
+  Cougar, Range of the, 142
+  Crow, Carvings of the, 136
+  Cushing, F. H., on Zuni fetiches, 145
+  Dall, W. H., on the conch shell (_Pyrula_), 143
+  Eagle, Carvings of the, 146
+  "Elephant mound", 152
+     pipes, 155
+  "Grouce," Carving of the, 144
+  Henshaw, H. W., Animal Carvings from Mounds of the
+                     Miss. Valley, 117
+  Human sculptures, 160
+  Jaguar, Range of the, 142
+  Manatee, Sculptures of the, 125
+  Mound-builders' art _vs._ Indian art, 164
+     carvings, 117
+     skill in sculpture, 148
+     methods in art, 149
+  Mounds, Animal, 152
+  Otter, Carvings of the, 125
+  Owl, Carvings of the, 144
+  Panther, Range of the, 142
+  Paroquet, Carving of the, 139
+     , Range of the, 140
+  Pipe sculpture of the mounds builders, 124
+  Pipes, "Elephant", 155,157
+  _Pyrula perversa_, Range of the, 143
+  "Rattlesnake," Carving of the, 147
+  Skill in sculpture of the Mounds Builders, 148
+  Squirrel, Ground, Carving of the, 128
+  Totemism, 150
+  Tropical animals known to Mound Builders, 142
+  "Turkey" Buzzard, Carving of the, 145
+  White, C. A., Unios identified by, 129
+  Wilson on the conch shell (_Pyrula_), 143
+     carvings of tropical animals, 142
+  Woodpecker, Carvings of the, 146
+
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Animal Carvings from Mounds of the
+Mississippi Valley, by Henry W. Henshaw
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANIMAL CARVINGS FROM MOUNDS ***
+
+***** This file should be named 18184.txt or 18184.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/1/8/1/8/18184/
+
+Produced by Verity White, PM for Bureau of American
+Ethnology and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
+generously made available by the Bibliotheque nationale
+de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr)
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+*** END: FULL LICENSE ***
+
diff --git a/18184.zip b/18184.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..24911e2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/18184.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f02bd83
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #18184 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/18184)