464 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLVII. No. 1219 



southern influence as well as tliat of tlie 

 Plains. The fact is, that the convenient lump- 

 ing together of all the tribes of the northeast 

 of the continent in one area can hardly be 

 justified, and this region, territorially great 

 and culturally quite varied, must be split up 

 if we are to keep true to the facts. A sim- 

 ilar difficulty arises in the attempt to bring 

 all the peoples of the southern tip of South 

 America together in one area. This involves 

 the collocation of such different types as the 

 Yaghan and Alikalui, with the Araucanian 

 and Guycuru, tribes which had little or 

 nothing in common except the fact that they 

 were non-agricultural. 



Similar questions may well be raised in 

 regard to Archeology. Thus it is not clear 

 why the extreme southwest corner of the 

 North Atlantic Area should be taken as the 

 type for the whole region, when a large pro- 

 portion of the characteristic elements given 

 are demonstrably even more typical of the 

 areas to the west and south. The map (Fig. 

 76) again, does not agree with the text in the 

 limits given to the South Atlantic Area. The 

 discussion of the Mississippi-Ohio Area is 

 quite inadequate, as no attempt is made to 

 give an idea of the more characteristic and 

 peculiar types of mounds and earthworks in 

 the Ohio Valley. In areas SIX. and XX. 

 no mention whatever is made of the very 

 abundant and characteristic well and cham- 

 bered graves, whose importance in relation to 

 cultures north and south is considerable, and 

 which constitute perhaps the most striking 

 single feature of this whole region. 



In the chapter on linguistic classification, 

 it is most unfortunate that a mmiber of 

 serious errors have crept into the map. Fig. 

 87, reproduced from that of Chamberlain, 

 whose initials are incorrectly given. In Dr. 

 Wissler's map five stocks given in his list are 

 entirely omitted, viz., the Corabecan, Curaean- 

 ecan, Mainan, Puquinan, and Sanavironan; 

 the following stocks are wrongly placed, No. 

 55, Ocoronan should be 65, Puquinan; 'No. 

 33, Enimagan should be 33, Curucanecan; 

 No. 15, Canichanan should be 55, Ocoronan; 

 No. 18 Caririan (in Northern Bolivia only) 



should be 15, Canichanan. Errors of this sort 

 seem rather inexcusable, when the map is 

 merely a direct copy of Chamberlain's orig- 

 inal. 



In Chapter XIX., in speaking of the "mi- 

 gration factor," the author makes statements 

 for which it seems difficult to give any justi- 

 fication. He says (p. 335) "migration is ex- 

 ceptional " and that when migrations do occur, 

 " they all . . . are circumscribed movements 

 in a single area." To speak of migratory 

 movements extending over thousands of miles, 

 as in the case of the Eskimo, Athabascan, 

 Tupi, Arawak, Carib, etc., as " circumscribed " 

 is in itself rather staggering, but to declare 

 that such movements of peoples were con- 

 fined to a " single area " is simply a gross 

 mis-statement of fact. If by " area " is meant 

 " culture area," the cases of tribal movement 

 from one to another are too numerous and too 

 well known to need mention; if, as the re- 

 mainder of the paragraph seems to indicate, 

 Dr. Wissler means by " areas," regions of 

 similar environment, the instances of trans- 

 gression of these bounds by migrating tribes 

 are still numerous. To take but a single case : 

 just how does the author propose to make the 

 known distribution of the Siouan tribes fit 

 with his statement? Certainly the Biloxi of 

 the sub-tropical Gulf coast, the Totero, Sara 

 and Monacans of the Alleghanies of Virginia 

 and North Carolina, the Crow of Montana and 

 the "Winnebago of Wisconsin can hardly be 

 said to have been living in a " single area " ! 



A last word of criticism may perhaps be 

 allowed in regard to the map at the end of 

 the volume, showing the location of the more 

 important North American tribes. There is 

 no statement anywhere as to the date or period 

 represented, but it is to be assumed that the 

 intention was to show the locations at the 

 time of the first European contact. If so, 

 the map contains numerous errors. Thus the 

 Ojibwa are shown far out in the plains west 

 of Lake Winnipeg, while the Cree are ex- 

 tended almost to the base of the Rocky 

 Mountains. These positions are certainly 

 not those given by the earliest accounts which 

 we have of these tribes, which are there con- 



