224 THE INSCRIPTIONS AT COPAN. 
STELA B—continued. 
References—cont’d: Galindo, 1834, Appendix XI, p. 598. 
Goodman, 1897, p. 130. 
Gordon, 1896, p. 35. 
Gordon, 1902, p. 167. 
Maudslay, 1889-1902, vol. I of text, pp. 42, 43. 
Morley, 1915, pp. 167-169. 
Seler, 1902-1908, vol. I, pp. 751, 752. 
Spinden, 1913, pp. 157-159, and table 1. 
Stephens, 1841, vol. 1, p. 156. 
Thomas, 1900, pp. 776, 801. 
Stela B stands near the center of the Great Plaza facing east. It is 3.58 
meters high and more than a meter wide. The front is sculptured with a 
human figure of heroic size, whose somewhat Mongoloid cast of counte- 
nance has given rise to a flood of ill-considered speculations regarding the 
possible Asiatic origin of the Maya civilization. One of the more recent sup- 
porters of this extravagant hypothesis, long since relegated to the rubbish- 
pile of scientific discards, is Arnold, who writes concerning this monument 
as follows: 
“Here as pointed out on page 268 are carvings so strikingly Oriental that one 
can not doubt their origin. The faces of the figures on the stelz are the faces one 
can see today in Cambodia and Siam. The dress, the ornamentation, the turban- 
shaped head-dress (found on no other carvings but these) are all purely ancient 
Indo-Chinese.”” 
Even as sober and restrained a writer as Stephens, who calls this monu- 
ment N in his map, was led astray by the apparent resemblance of certain 
decorative elements on this monument to elephant trunks: ‘‘The two 
elements at the top appear like the trunks of an elephant, an animal unknown 
in that country.” 
More recently Elliot Smith has revived this highly improbable identi- 
fication, finding detailed anatomical similarities between this decorative 
element on Stela B and the trunk of an elephant. He has been ably answered, 
however, by Tozzer, Spinden, and Means.’ 
It is hardly necessary to point out that any attempt which seeks to 
establish direct cultural connection between the Maya and any old-world 
civilization, either Egyptian or Mongolian, is quite at variance with the 
results of modern research in this field. And yet the superficial similarities 
of the Maya to these civilizations are such as to win for this now-exploded 
hypothesis new adherents from time to time. 



1 Arnold, 1909, p. 284. 
2 Stephens, 1841, vol. 1, p. 156. Spinden was the first to point out the true nature of this element, which is 
the beak ot the blue macaw somewhat exaggerated in length. 
3 This controversy arose through the publication by Elliot Smith in Nature for November 25, 1915 (Smith, 
1915-1916, pp. 340, 341), of an article entitled “ Pre-Columbian Representations of the Elephant in America,” and 
additions in Nature for December 16, 1915 (ibid., p. 425). Tozzer (1916, p. 592), Spinden (1916, pp. 592, 593), 
and Means (1916, pp. 533, 534) hastened to refute this extraordinary hypothesis, in which the writer believes they 
were successful; Spinden (op. cit.) shows clearly that the element in question is the beak of the blue macaw. Other 
Elliot Smith contributions to the discussions are, 1915-1916, pp. 593-595, and 1916-1417, pp. 190-195, 241-246. 
