THE PROBLEMS OF ARCHEOLOGY 539 



and bundles of cords, or llama-halters, with the hoofs of llamas tied 

 up in them, to designate, it would seem (on the principle of pars 

 pro toto), the herds of llamas which the dead man possessed, or was 

 to possess in the other world. 



Whether here, as some have contended, the presence of men in 

 a very remote geological epoch can be demonstrated is a question 

 which as yet should not be rashly answered. Even in North America 

 it has not yet been possible to prove beyond a doubt the coexist- 

 ence of man with the great mammals which are now either extinct 

 or vanished from American soil, or to push back the antiquity of 

 human habitation as far as the time when the glaciers of the north 

 stretched down to the Delaware and the Ohio. The problem cannot 

 be solved alone by archeology, but needs the cooperation of geo- 

 logy; though it is a noteworthy fact that it is precisely the geolo- 

 gists who have answered this question in the affirmative. Whatever 

 discussions may still arise, it is quite to be expected that, next to 

 archeology, which occupies itself with tribes that come down into 

 historical times, an important place will be filled by the branch of 

 science which concerns itself strictly with prehistoric ages in America, 

 as that which is capable of demonstrating the existence of man in 

 the geological era. 



American archeology in general is on firmer ground. It will not, 

 however, be unprofitable for us, while we are revieAving what has 

 been accomplished, to seek to show how this science has been and 

 how it ought to be pursued. Archeology, which forms only a part 

 of anthropology, is an empirical science, and ought never to forget 

 this character. This it has often done in the past; preconceived 

 opinions have been allowed to influence conclusions, and have 

 accounted for the frequently unsatisfactory character of the latter. 

 We all know that the study of antiquity has a special interest for 

 many men just because it is the study of antiquity, and that the inter- 

 est grows in proportion as one is able to ascribe a greater age to the 

 things which form the subject of study. We also know that men 

 are naturally inclined to consider as obvious a common single 

 cause for similar or related phenomena, and to presuppose this even 

 where no grounds exist to support such a theory. These two tend- 

 encies have for a long time worked a great deal of harm to Ameri- 

 can archeology. Instead of working on the material facts at hand, 

 people have exhausted their energies in theorizing as to how this 

 continent was settled and whence it received its civilization, and 

 in violent efforts to connect the civilizations which have arisen here 

 with those of the Old World. In whatever part of the continent 

 ancient remains have been found which offered no explanation on 

 their face, they have assumed the presence of ancient races which 

 have long ago vanished or migrated to other parts of the world; 



