appendix: elephant pipes and inscribed tablets. 277 



A'int/i. Dr. Holmes made a communication to the Philadelphia Academy of 

 Sciences, several years since, in which he described the occurrence of fragments of 

 pottery in connection with the bones of the mastodon and megatherium. 



These are among the earlier discoveries, familiar to architologists, 

 tending to prove the coexistence of man and mastodon on this conti- 

 nent. While ample for our purpose, the list might be considerably ex- 

 tended. The details of these discoveries can be found in any respect- 

 able work on archteology.* While it may be claimed that the authen- 

 ticity of soine of the relics in the foregoing list has been "seriously 

 called in question," it will be found impracticable, by any process of 

 "destructive criticism," however sweei)ing, to entirely destroy their 

 weight as evidence, more or less valuable, upon this important ques- 

 tion. Until succes-sfully controverted, they must stand as at least 



* Foster's " Prehistoric Races in the United States," pp. 52, 78. 



Lubbock's " Prehistoric Times," pp. 2S6-2SS. 



" Prehistoric America," by Nadailhic, pp. 33-45. 



Baldwin's "Ancient America," pp. 47-36. 



"Mastodon, Mammoth, and Man," by MacLean. pp. 13-20. 



MacLean's "Mound-builders," p. 136. * 



Nott and Gliddon^s "Types of Mankind," p. 352. 



"Antiquity of Man," by Sir Charles Lyell, pp. 43, 203. 



Dana's " Manual of Geolosjy," pp. 577. 57S. 



Transactions of St. Louis Academy, \'ol. I., p. 61, 1.S57. 



"Smithsonian Contributions to Knowlcdirc," No. 24.S, "On the Geolog-v of Lower Louis- 

 iana, and the Salt Deposit on Petit Anse Island," by E. W. Hilgard, p. 14. 



Southiill's "Recent Orii»-in of Man." pp. 550-560. 



Short's "North .\mencans of .\ntiquitv." pp. 112-130. 



Winchell's " Pre-.\d:imites," pp. 435. 436. 



" .Mesozoic and Ca;nozoic Geolojjy and PaUEontolo^y,"" by S. A. Miller, journal of the 

 Cincinnati Society of Natural History, Vol. IV., p. 215. 



"Contributions to the Geolojjy of Ohio," by Col. Cliarles Whittlesey, pp. lo-i^. 



"Evidences of the Antiquity of Man in the L'nited .States," bv Col. Chai-les Whittlesey, a 

 paper read before the Association for the .\dvancement of Science, at Chicag-o, in iS'JS, pp. 13-15. 



"Antiquity of the North American Indians,'" by C"harles C. Jones, Jr., Xorth American 

 Reviezv for January, 1S74. In this well-considered paper. Col. Jones, after a careful review 

 of the evidence above g'iven, thus clearly states his conclusions: "While we cannot at pres- 

 ent ascertain, and perhaps never will be able to determine, the antiquity of the North .Amer- 

 ican Indians, we think it may now be affirmed with considerable confidence — /.«/, that the prim- 

 itive peoples of the Mississippi V^alley and of the south-eastern portions of the North American 

 continent were domiciled here when the mammoth, the mastodon, and other extinct animals 

 roamed the primeval forests; 2d, that many of the grave -mounds and earth -works of the red race 

 are fully a thousand years old, while others may well claim an antiquity fiir greater than this: 

 jrf, and lastly, that the Indian occupancy in various portions of this continent was very ancient, 

 probably dating as far back as the earliest traces of man in Western Europe." 



Encyclopagdia Britannica, 9th ed., title "American Indians," pp. 691, ^^92, cites above stated 

 discoveries to establish the great antiquity of man in .\merica. 



These .are only- a portion of the citations which might be made from well-known scientific 

 writers, and yet Mr. Henshaw seems to have written his paper in profound ignor.mce of the 

 existence of this extensive literature. 



[Proc. D. a. N. S., Vol. IV.] HI [Dec. 8, 1885.] 



