192 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 52 



without leaving place for any doubt, the human remains found on the 

 borders of the Carcarana are fossil and are derived at the least from the 

 yellow loess, and it may also well be that they come from the Inter- 

 mediary Pampean formation (brown loess)." 



Finally Lehmann-Nitsche (1909), notwithstanding the facts that he 

 has not seen the material and that he knew of the objection to the 

 theory of antiquity of the Seguin specimens by Moreno andBurmeister, 

 declares that "the fossil nature of the human debris from the banks 

 of the Carcarana can not be questioned." 



And further on (p. 213) he saj^s, following his quotation of Roth's 

 above-given remarks: ''Consequently, without leaving place for any 

 doubt, the human remains from the border of Carcarana are fossil 

 and come at least from the yellow loess, and it may well be possible 

 that they proceed from even the Intermediary Pampean (the brown 

 loess.)" In an even more recent publication^ this author still con- 

 siders the Carcarana bones as belonging to the Superior Pampean. 



Critical Remarks 



The foregoing details are given because they relate to the first alleged 

 discovery of ancient man in Argentina and also because this case is 

 typical of practically the whole line of subsequent reports on the 

 subject of early man in that country, as regards the defective nature 

 of the basal facts, the frequently arbitrary treatment of the evidence 

 that exists, and the strained reasoning indulged in on the basis of 

 this evidence. 



The actual facts of the Carcarana evidence may be critically 

 resumed as follows: 



1. The geographic data concerning the Carcarana find are unsatis- 

 factory, not precise enough for a case of any importance. 



2. Direct geologic data are entirely wanting and the circumstantial 

 evidence is inconclusive. 



3. The bones were gathered by a nonscientific collector, whose 

 discrimination regarding the essential details of the discovery at best 

 would be open to doubt. The further fact that the presence of fossil 

 human remains, in the knowledge of the collector would heighten the 

 value or facilitate the sale of the collection of animal bones can not 

 be disregarded in the case of one who collected only to sell. 



4. The quantity of human bones, with the statement in the cata- 

 logue of the collection that they were parts of four skeletons, points to 

 the probability that the remains were derived from either several con- 

 tiguous burials, or from a common secondary grave of a number of 

 individuals; such graves were quite common in recent times farther 

 south in Argentina. The facts that the bones were in fragments or 



1 Lehmann-Nitsche, R., El hombre f6sil pampeano; in Bol. Ofic. Nac. Est., La Paz, Bolivia, vi, 1910^ 

 pp. 363-366. 



