diff options
Diffstat (limited to '18184.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 18184.txt | 2331 |
1 files changed, 2331 insertions, 0 deletions
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 *** + |