A PROBLEM IN AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGY. 481 



and changing and vanishing in South America. Unquestionably of 

 veiy great antiquity, this art, developed in the neolithic period of cul- 

 ture, reached to the age of metals, and had already begun to decline 

 at the time of the Spanish conquest. How this remarkable develop- 

 ment came to exist amid its different environments we can not yet fully 

 understand; but the question arises: Was it of autochthonous origin 

 and due to a particular period in man's development, or was it a pre- 

 viously existing phase modified by new environment? For the pres- 

 ent this question should be held in abeyance. To declare that the 

 resemblance of this art to both Asiatic and Egyptian art is simply a 

 proof of the psychical unity of man is assuming too much and is cut- 

 ting off all further consicleratioli of the subject. 



The active field and museum archseologist who knows and maintains 

 the association of specimens as found, and who arranges them in their 

 geographical sequence, becomes intimately in touch with man's work 

 under different phases of existence. Fulh^ realizing that the natural 

 working of the human mind under similar conditions will to a certain 

 extent give uniform results, he has before him so man}' instances of 

 the transmission of arts, sj^mbolic expressions, customs, beliefs, myths, 

 and languages that he is forced to consider the lines of contact and 

 migration of peoples as well as their psychical resemblances. 



It must be admitted that there are important considerations, both 

 physical and mental, that seem to prove a close affinity between the 

 brown type of eastern Asia and the ancient Mexicans. Admitting 

 this affinity, the question arises: Could there have been a migration 

 eastward across the Pacific in neolithic times, or should we look for 

 this brown tj-pe as originating in the Eurafric region and passing on 

 to Asia from America ? This latter theory can not be considered as a 

 baseless suggestion when the views of several distinguished anthro- 

 pologists are given the consideration which is due to them. On the 

 other hand, the theory of an early migration from Asia to America 

 may also be applied to neolithic time. 



However this may have been, what interests us more at this time, 

 and in this part of the country, is the so-called "Mound Builder" of 

 the Ohio Valley. Let us first clear away the mist which has so long 

 prevented an understanding of this subject by discarding the term 

 "Mound Builder." Many peoples in America, as well as on other 

 continents, have built mounds over their dead, to mark important 

 sites and great events. It is thus evident that a term so generally 

 applied is of no value as a scientific designation. In North America 

 the term has been applied even to refuse piles. The kitchen middens 

 or shell heaps which are so numerous along our coasts and rivers 

 have been classed as the work of the ••:\Iound Builder." :Many of 

 these shell heaps are of great antiquity, and we know that they are 

 formed of the refuse gathered on the sites of the early peoples. 



SM 90 — ;n 



