480 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 19 35 



segment of the culture curve phenomenon represented in America, 

 viz. the Neolithic phase and what follows, its counterpart in the Old 

 World has never been estimated to range beyond 20,000 years,^^ while 

 of late the figure has by some been reduced to about 7,500 years.^^ 

 Unless, therefore, we choose to assume that the American Neolithic, 

 with all it implies, arose full fledged out of nothing, it must have 

 been derived from Old World beginnings and consequently be of 

 somewhat later date, because time and space are both important 

 factors in the normal spread of organic phenomena. 



Before leaving this topic of circumstantial evidences it should be 

 remarked that the general question of the antiquity of man in 

 America was long ago tentatively settled by European students. To 

 them the demonstrated geologic age of man and of his immediate 

 precursors in the Old World has seemed sufficient warrant for claim- 

 ing approximately equal human antiquity for the New World. And 

 certainly, if a tool-using primate did actually exist in Eurasia, as is 

 claimed by Rutot and others, so far back as early or even middle 

 Tertiar}'' times, it becomes rather hazardous to dispute the probability 

 of this creature's entrance into the two Americas. Especially is this 

 true when it is known not only that some of the contemporary animal 

 species, like the horse, the camel, and the elephant, migrated both 

 to and from the New World, but also that the present floral and 

 faunal genera and even species of Eurasia and North America are 

 in large part identical.^* Naturally, therefore, the recent discovery 

 of the Peking man in northeastern China has somewhat strengthened 

 this broad claim. But, in reality, the existence of middle Tertiary 

 man in the Eastern Hemisphere is problematic, and the unique geo- 

 graphic isolation of the American Continent, together with the glacial 

 conditions which served presumably as a climatic barrier during much 

 of Pleistocene times, cannot be ignored. Nevertheless, Sir Arthur 

 Keith has lately reaffirmed his belief in the existence of evidence in 

 America of truly ancient man ; ^^ and one might go on indefinitely 

 citing similar opinions, but it must suffice to add merely that such 

 experienced authorities as L. Capitan and M. Boule have both frankly 

 accepted some of our questionable North American artifact discov- 

 eries as not only Paleolithic in form but as actually Pleistocene in 

 date. In the circumstances we can do no less than turn to a brief 

 consideration of these alleged discoveries. 



^ Breasted, J. H. Scientific Monthly, 1919, p. 308. Similar estimates made by O. 

 Montelius, R. Purapelly, and others. 



^^ Peake, H., and Fleure, H. J., in The Corridors of Time, vol. 3, pp. 140-143, Oxford, 

 1927 ; Childe, V. G., The Most Ancient East, p. 13, New York, 1929. 



"Farrand, L., Basis of American history, chapter 4, New York, 1904. 



^^ Keith, Sir Arthur, New discoveries relating to the antiquity of man, p. 29, New 

 York, 1931. 



