HOLMES.] COMPARISON OK TURD OOKGETS. 285 



Altlioiigli the heads represented on these siieeiiuens do certainly in 

 some respects suggest that of tlie turkey, the characters arc not suffi- 

 ciently pronounced to make it impossible that some other bird was 

 intended, so that the original in the mind of the ancient artist may 

 ha\e been the same as that from which the examples o:< shell were 

 drawn. 



In comparing the northern examples with those of Tennessee I ob- 

 serve another feature that is more conclusive as to the identity of origin 

 than the rather obscure resemblance of the birds' heads delineated. I 

 have not had the opportunity of examining the specimen illustrated in 

 Fig. 4; but in the cut given by Dr. Abbott a rather indefinite ligure 

 can be traced which has a striking resemblance to the loo])ed rectangle 

 characteristic of the designs on shell. This resemblance could hardly 

 be owing to accident, and if the peculiar figure mentioned is actually 

 found in conjunction with the bii'ds' heads upon the New Jersey speci- 

 men, it will certainly be safe to conclude that the bone, stone, and shell 

 objects belonged to the same people, and that they constituted the to- 

 tems of^the same clan, or were the insignia of corresponding ofiBces or 

 orders.' 



As bearing upon the question of the species of bird represented in 

 the xireceding specimens, I present in Plate LX an illustration pub- 

 lished by Dr. Ran in the Smithso:;ian Eeport for 1877. This remark- 

 able ornament (rei)resented in Fig. 3) was obtained from a mound in 

 Manatee County, Florida. It is a thin blade of gold, pointed at one end 

 and terminating at the other in a highly conventionalized representa- 

 tion of a bird's head, the general characteristics of which are much 

 like, those of the examples engraved upon shell. The crest is espe- 

 cially characteristic, and, as pointed out by Dr. Eau, suggests a proto- 

 type in the ivory-billed woodpecker, an inhabitant of the Gulf States. 



The significance of the looped figure which forms so prominent a 

 feature in the designs in question has not been determined. I would 

 offer the suggestion, however, that, from the manner of its occurrence, 

 it may rejireseut an inclosure, a limit, or boundary. It may be well to 

 point out the fact that a similar looped rectangle occurs several times 

 in the ancient Mexican manuscripts. One example, from the Vienna Co- 

 dex,^ is presented in Fig. 5, Plate LIX. It is not a little remarkable 

 that a cross occupies the inclosed area in all these examples. 



I shall close this very hasty review of the bird in the art of the 

 Mound Builders bj' presenting the remarkable example of shell carving 

 shown in Fig. 1, Plate LX. Like so many of the National Mnseum 

 specimens, it is practically without a record — a stray. It is labeled "B. 

 Pybas, Tuscumbia, Ala." It is old and fragmentary, the shell substance 

 being, however, quite well preserved. It is the right haud half of a 



' Since tliis paragrapli has been iu tyjie I have seen the si>ecinien, and liud that the 

 looped figure is clearly defined. 

 2 Kingaborongh : vol. II, Plate 20. 



