HOLMES ANNIVERSARY VOLUME 



of the available data. The striking agreement between culture and 

 artifact areas cannot be due merely to one being continuous with the 

 other, but must signify that cultures were scarcely ever moved from 

 their habitats. Languages seem to have traveled more, but the 

 suggestion is that the somatic type was stable, or at least able to 

 submerge all intruders. According to this interpretation, cultures, 

 somatic types, and to a considerable extent languages as well, grew 

 up in single geographical areas, a condition giving us a kind of acci- 

 dental correlation. We say accidental because there are no observable 

 reasons why specific types of culture should accompany certain types 

 of language or anatomy. What we seem to have is a tendency toward 

 identity within each definite geographical area, strongly marked in 

 case of culture, far less noticeable in language, but still in evidence. 

 Thus, the explanation for each specific case of correlation is to be 

 sought in historical data. 



Returning now from this digression to our main consideration, the 

 correlation of prehistoric and historic culture areas, one is first of all 

 puzzled that there should be such close agreement between them be- 

 cause the traditions of our subject call for a veritable and constant 

 flux of migrations. While it is now apparent that migration is ex- 

 ceptional rather than universal, still the logical necessities of the case 

 require it. One can scarcely conceive of the peopling of the New 

 World except by the expansion and spread of its population gradually 

 from one area to another. It may be, however, that this is not the 

 important point here. Thus, when we consider the best known or 

 most probable cases of migration, they all seem to have one common 

 character, since they are circumscribed movements in a single area. 

 For example, the Eskimo, whose first appearance in the New World 

 must have been in Alaska, spread only along the Arctic coast-belt to 

 its ultimate limits. Yet, since they are the sole possessors of this terri- 

 tory, they offer a far less suggestive example than can be found else- 

 where. We now have satisfactory data for the northern movement 

 of the Iroquois, but if we superimpose the Powell map and one show- 

 ing topography, we see clearly that whichever way the tribes of 

 Iroquoian stock moved, they kept close to the Atlantic highlands. 

 On the other hand, the Algonkins expanded in lands of less elevation, 

 500 to 2000 feet, but chiefly in a wooded lake and portage region. In 

 like manner we may follow out the Siouan, Athapascan, Salish, 

 Muskhogean, Shoshonean, Mayan, Arawak, Carib, and other stocks. 

 It cannot be an accident that all the Muskhogean peoples lived at an 

 elevation less than 500, that the Algonkin were with few exceptions 

 between 500 and 2000, that the Athapascans are chiefly in land be- 



[488] 



