682 ROLLIN T. CHAM BERLIN 



just where such line should be drawn, and of changes of opinion 

 once formed; in view of the natural doubt as to whether two such 

 deposits measuring together only about six feet could in fact remain 

 altogether unmixed and distinct; and in view of the observed fact 

 that the stream, in its later action, actually did cut entirely through 

 its own earlier deposits and into the marine formation below, it 

 would seem that grave doubts as to the trustworthiness of correla- 

 tions of this stream material may well be entertained. Perhaps it 

 is obligatory that they should be entertained. The balance of evi- 

 dence seems to lie in favor of including all doubtful horizons in the 

 upper fill, since the upper fill does penetrate deep into the lower 

 fill at so many points. The human bones and relics would seem 

 to the present writer to belong to the upper creek deposit, which 

 was contemporaneous with the . human occupation of Florida. 

 This interpretation would allow the correctness of Dr. Sellards' 

 contention that the bones of the extinct vertebrates well down in 

 the undisturbed part of the lower creek deposit are fossils primary 

 to that deposit. With this revision of the stratigraphic view, the 

 testimony of the inherent character of the human relics rises into 

 scarcely less than decisive importance. 



Now, among the human relics, the pottery seems to carry the 

 most telling testimony as to the time when the aborigines dwelt 

 on the banks of Van Valkenburg's Creek. The association of the 

 pottery with the human bones may well be regarded as peculiarly 

 significant, for the pottery was a human product and it carries a 

 time relation. Fragments of pottery, in more or less abundance, 

 were found on the second visit at as low a horizon in the creek 

 deposits as were any of the human bones. The writer saw no evi- 

 dence of any human race earlier than the pottery-makers, and no 

 such earlier race has been claimed. Now, as MacCurdy, 1 Hrdlicka, 2 

 and Holmes 3 have pointed out, the pottery belongs to the type which 

 was used by the mound-building Indian tribes of Florida. Such 

 pottery was in common use in the middle or later Neolithic age. 

 This pottery, of itself, would not therefore be assigned a date 

 earlier than mid-Recent. Even in Europe, where the presence and 



1 Symposium, pp. 60-62. 



2 Ibid., pp. 47-50. 3 Ibid., p. 51. 



