2 86 DAVEXPORT ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES. 



"Each of the papers appended to this report has its proper place in the general 

 scheme, the scope of which they, together with the other publications before noted, 

 seem to indicate, and each was prepared with a special purpose." 



In the light of this announcement, it will be instructive to carefully 

 read, in connection with the monograph of Mr. Henshaw, that of Mr. 

 Holmes, to which reference has already been made. In describing 

 their respective discoveries, they were compelled to traverse the same 

 ground. The shells under consideration by Mr. Holmes were also 

 relics of the Mound-builders. Among these remarkable relics recov- 

 ered from ancient mounds were engraved gorgets. These shells were 

 probably worn about the neck or on the breast. In another depart- 

 ment they were the complements of our "inscribed tablets," and were 

 discovered in similar tumuli in other parts of the country. On them 

 are rei)resented the cross, birds, spiders, serpents, and the human face 

 and form. By a series of comparisons with Mexican and Peruvian art, 

 Mr. Holmes traces the origin of these interesting relics to the Aztecs 

 of ancient Mexico. The concluding thoughts of Mr. Holmes are as 

 follows : '" 



".As an ornament, this Missouri gorget is a member of a great family that is prob- 

 ably northern; but the design engraved upon it (ij/i/iafcs with the art of Mexico, and 

 so close and striking are the resemblances that accident cannot account for them, 

 and we are forced to the conclusion that it must be the offspring of the same beliefs 

 and customs and the same culture as the art of Mexico.'''' 



These conclusions of Mr. Holmes appear in singular contrast with 

 the labored eftbrt of Mr. Henshaw to disprove the Mexican origin of 

 the animal carvings found in the mounds; and, with all due deference 

 to Major Powell, the perplexed reader will find it difificult to discover a 

 "proper place" for these two important papers in any "general scheme." 

 A popular scientific magazine thus refers to these conflicting deduc- 

 tions : + 



"It seems almost aggravating that in the same volume wherein Mr. Henshaw 

 [denie.s]:}: and effectually disproves the Mexican origin of many animal forms in the 

 mound-pipes, new forms should be described, concerning which the author says that 

 they ' must be the offspring of the same beliefs and customs and the same culture as 

 tlie arts of Mexicc).' " § 



* Second Annual Report Bureau of Ethnoloijy, iSSo-Sj, p. 305. 



T America >i Xa/iirutist, September, 1SS4. 



± .Misprint. 



S Major I'owtll himself was evidently im])resscil with this remarkable parallel, drawn hy 

 .Mr. Holmes, between the relics from the mounds and the art of .Mexico; and, in presenting- this 

 masterly monojjfaph to the public, as if feeling the necessity of tempering it to some show of 

 consistency with liis own theories, the Director thoiufhtfuUv adds the folUiwinj; reservation: 



