American Origins—Fossil Man in America—The Lagoa-Santa Race—Physical Type in North America—Cranial Deformation—The Toltecs—Type of N.W. Coast Indians—Date of Migrations—Evidence from Linguistics—Stock Languages—Culture—Classification—By Linguistics—Ethnic Movements—Archaeological Classification—Cultural Classification—Eskimo Area—Material Culture—Origin and Affinities—Physical Type—Social Life—Mackenzie Area—The Déné—Material Culture—Physical Type—Social Life—North Pacific Coast Area—Material Culture—Physical Type—Social Life—Plateau Area—Material Culture—Interior Salish—Social Organisation—Californian Area—Material Culture—Social Life—Plains Area—Material Culture—Dakota—Religion—The Sun Dance—Pawnee—Blackfeet—Arapaho—Cheyenne—Eastern Woodland Area—Material Culture—Central Group—Eastern Group—Iroquoian Tribes: Ojibway—Religion—Iroquois—South-eastern Area—Material Culture—Creeks—Yuchi—Mound-Builders—South-western Area—Material Culture—Transitional or Intermediate Tribes—Pueblos—Cliff Dwellings—Religion—Physical Type—Social Life.
American Origins—Fossil Man in America—The Lagoa-Santa Race—Physical Type in North America—Cranial Deformation—The Toltecs—Type of N.W. Coast Indians—Date of Migrations—Evidence from Linguistics—Stock Languages—Culture—Classification—By Linguistics—Ethnic Movements—Archaeological Classification—Cultural Classification—Eskimo Area—Material Culture—Origin and Affinities—Physical Type—Social Life—Mackenzie Area—The Déné—Material Culture—Physical Type—Social Life—North Pacific Coast Area—Material Culture—Physical Type—Social Life—Plateau Area—Material Culture—Interior Salish—Social Organisation—Californian Area—Material Culture—Social Life—Plains Area—Material Culture—Dakota—Religion—The Sun Dance—Pawnee—Blackfeet—Arapaho—Cheyenne—Eastern Woodland Area—Material Culture—Central Group—Eastern Group—Iroquoian Tribes: Ojibway—Religion—Iroquois—South-eastern Area—Material Culture—Creeks—Yuchi—Mound-Builders—South-western Area—Material Culture—Transitional or Intermediate Tribes—Pueblos—Cliff Dwellings—Religion—Physical Type—Social Life.
Distribution in Past and Present Times.
Present Range.N. W. Pacific Coastlands; the shores of the Arctic Ocean, Labrador, and Greenland; the unsettled parts of Alaska and the Dominion; Reservations and Agencies in the Dominion and the United States; parts of Florida, Arizona, and New Mexico; most of Central and South America with Fuegia either wild and full-blood, or semi-civilised half-breeds.
Physical Characters.
Hair,black, lank, coarse, often very long, nearly round in transverse section; very scanty on face and practically absent on body;Colour,differs, according to localities, front dusky yellowish white to that of solid chocolate, but the prevailing colour is brown;Skull,generally mesaticephalous (79), but with wide range from 65 (some Eskimo) to 89 or 90 (some British Columbians, Peruvians); theos Incaemore frequently present than amongst other races, but theos linguae(hyoid bone) often imperfectly developed;Jaws,massive, but moderately projecting;Cheek-bone,as a rule rather prominent laterally, and also high;Nose,generally large, straight or even aquiline, and mesorrhine;Eyes,nearly always dark brown, with a yellowish conjunctiva, and the eye-slits show a prevailing tendency to a slight upward slant;Stature,usually above the medium 1.728 m. (5 ft. 8 or 10 in.), but variable—under 1.677 m. (5 ft. 6 in.) on the western plateaux (Peruvians, etc.), also in Fuegia and Alaska; 1.829 m. (6 ft.) and upwards in Patagonia (Tehuelches), Central Brazil (Bororos) and Prairie (Algonquians, Iroquoians); the relative proportions of the two elements of the arms and of the legs (radio-humeral and tibio-femoral indices) are intermediate between those of whites and negroes.
Mental Characters.
Temperament,moody, reserved, and wary; outwardly impassive and capable of enduring extreme physical pain; considerate towards each other, kind and gentle towards their women and children, but not in a demonstrative manner; keen sense of justice, hence easily offended, but also easily pacified. The outward show of dignity and a lofty air assumed by many seems due more to vanity or ostentation than to a feeling of true pride. Mental capacity considerable, much higher than the Negro, but on the whole inferior to the Mongol.
Speech,exclusively polysynthetic, a type unknown elsewhere; is not a primitive condition, but a highly specialised form of agglutination, in which all the terms of the sentence tend to coalesce in a single polysyllabic word; stock languages very numerous, perhaps more so than all the stock languages of all the other orders of speech in the rest of the world.
Religion,various grades of spirit and nature worship, corresponding to the various cultural grades; a crude form of shamanism prevalent amongst most of the North American aborigines, polytheism with sacrifice and priestcraft amongst the cultured peoples (Aztecs, Mayas, etc.); the monotheistic concept nowhere clearly evolved; belief in a natural after-life very prevalent, if not universal.
Culture,highly diversified, ranging from the lowest stages of savagery through various degrees of barbarism to the advanced social state of the more or less civilised Mayas, Aztecs, Chibchas, Yungas, Quichuas, and Aymaras; amongst these pottery, weaving, metal-work, agriculture, and especially architecture fairly well developed; letters less so, although the Maya script seems to have reached the true phonetic state; navigation and science rudimentary or absent; savagery generally far more prevalentand intense in South than in North America, but the tribal state almost everywhere persistent.
I.Eskimo.II.Mackenzie Area.Déné tribes.1 Yellow Knives, 2 Dog Rib, 3 Hares, 4 Slavey, 5 Chipewyan, 6 Beaver, 7 Nahane, 8 Sekani, 9 Babine, 10 Carrier, 11 Loucheux, 12 Ahtena, 13 Khotana.III.North Pacific Area.14 Tlingit, 15 Haida, 16 Kwakiutl, 17 Bellacoola, 18 Coast Salish, 19 Nootka, 20 Chinook, 21 Kalapooian.IV.Plateau Area.22 Shahapts or Nez Percés, 23 Shoshoni, 24 Interior Salish, Thompson, 25 Lillooet, 26 Shushwap.V.Californian Area.27 Wintun, 28 Pomo, 29 Miwok, 30 Yokut.VI.Plains Area.31 Assiniboin, 32 Arapaho, 33 Siksika or Blackfoot, 34 Blood, 35 Piegan, 36 Crow, 37 Cheyenne, 38 Comanche, 39 Gros Ventre, 40 Kiowa, 41 Sarsi, 42 Teton-Dakota (Sioux), 43 Arikara, Hidatsa, Mandan, 44 Iowa, 45 Missouri, 46 Omaha, 47 Osage, 48 Oto, 49 Pawnee, 50 Ponca, 51 Santee-Dakota (Sioux), 52 Yankton-Dakota (Sioux), 53 Wichita, 54 Wind River Shoshoni, 55 Plains-Ojibway, 56 Plains-Cree.VII.Eastern Woodland Area.57 Ojibway, 58 Saulteaux, 59 Wood Cree, 60 Montagnais, 61 Naskapi, 62 Huron, 63 Wyandot, 64 Erie, 65 Susquehanna, 66 Iroquois, 67 Algonquin, 68 Ottawa, 69 Menomini, 70 Sauk and Fox, 71 Potawatomi, 72 Peoria, 73 Illinois, 74 Kickapoo, 75 Miami, 76 Abnaki, 77 Micmac.VIII.South-eastern Area.78 Shawnee, 79 Creek, 80 Chickasaw, 81 Choctaw, 82 Seminole, 83 Cherokee, 84 Tuscarora, 85 Yuchi, 86 Powhatan, 87 Tunican, 88 Natchez.IX.South-western Area.Pueblo tribes.89 Hopi, 90 Zuñi, 91 Rio Grande, 92 Navaho, 93 Pima, 94 Mohave, 95 Jicarilla, 96 Mescalero.
I.Eskimo.II.Mackenzie Area.Déné tribes.1 Yellow Knives, 2 Dog Rib, 3 Hares, 4 Slavey, 5 Chipewyan, 6 Beaver, 7 Nahane, 8 Sekani, 9 Babine, 10 Carrier, 11 Loucheux, 12 Ahtena, 13 Khotana.III.North Pacific Area.14 Tlingit, 15 Haida, 16 Kwakiutl, 17 Bellacoola, 18 Coast Salish, 19 Nootka, 20 Chinook, 21 Kalapooian.IV.Plateau Area.22 Shahapts or Nez Percés, 23 Shoshoni, 24 Interior Salish, Thompson, 25 Lillooet, 26 Shushwap.V.Californian Area.27 Wintun, 28 Pomo, 29 Miwok, 30 Yokut.VI.Plains Area.31 Assiniboin, 32 Arapaho, 33 Siksika or Blackfoot, 34 Blood, 35 Piegan, 36 Crow, 37 Cheyenne, 38 Comanche, 39 Gros Ventre, 40 Kiowa, 41 Sarsi, 42 Teton-Dakota (Sioux), 43 Arikara, Hidatsa, Mandan, 44 Iowa, 45 Missouri, 46 Omaha, 47 Osage, 48 Oto, 49 Pawnee, 50 Ponca, 51 Santee-Dakota (Sioux), 52 Yankton-Dakota (Sioux), 53 Wichita, 54 Wind River Shoshoni, 55 Plains-Ojibway, 56 Plains-Cree.VII.Eastern Woodland Area.57 Ojibway, 58 Saulteaux, 59 Wood Cree, 60 Montagnais, 61 Naskapi, 62 Huron, 63 Wyandot, 64 Erie, 65 Susquehanna, 66 Iroquois, 67 Algonquin, 68 Ottawa, 69 Menomini, 70 Sauk and Fox, 71 Potawatomi, 72 Peoria, 73 Illinois, 74 Kickapoo, 75 Miami, 76 Abnaki, 77 Micmac.VIII.South-eastern Area.78 Shawnee, 79 Creek, 80 Chickasaw, 81 Choctaw, 82 Seminole, 83 Cherokee, 84 Tuscarora, 85 Yuchi, 86 Powhatan, 87 Tunican, 88 Natchez.IX.South-western Area.Pueblo tribes.89 Hopi, 90 Zuñi, 91 Rio Grande, 92 Navaho, 93 Pima, 94 Mohave, 95 Jicarilla, 96 Mescalero.
Map of Areas of Material Culture in North America.Map of Areas of Material Culture in North America(after C. Wissler,Am. Anth.XVI.1914).
Main Divisions.
North America:Eskimauan(Innuit, Aleut, Karalit);Athapascan(Déné, Pacific division, Apache, Navaho);Koluschan;Algonquian(Delaware, Abnaki, Ojibway, Shawnee, Arapaho, Sauk and Fox, Blackfeet);Iroquoian(Huron, Mohawk, Tuscarora, Seneca, Cayuga, Onondaga);Siouan(Dakota, Omaha, Crow, Iowa, Osage, Assiniboin);Shoshonian(Comanche, Ute);Salishan;Shahaptian;Caddoan;Muskhogean(Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Seminole);Pueblo(Zuñian, Keresan, Tanoan).
Central America:Nahuatlan(Aztec, Pipil, Niquiran);Huaxtecan(Maya, Quiché);Totonac;Miztecan;Zapotecan;Chorotegan;Tarascan;Otomitlan;Talamancan;Choco.
South America:Muyscan(Chibcha);Quichuan(Inca, Aymara);Yungan(Chimu);Antisan;Jivaran;Zaparan;Betoyan;Maku;Pana(Cashibo, Karipuna, Setebo);Ticunan;Chiquitan;Arawakan(Arua, Maypure, Vapisiana, Ipurina, Mahinaku, Layana, Kustenau, Moxo);Cariban(Bakaïri, Nahuqua, Galibi, Kalina, Arecuna, Macusi, Ackawoi);Tupi-Guaranian(Omagua, Mundurucu, Kamayura, Emerillon);Gesan(Botocudo, Kayapo, Cherentes);Charruan;Bororo;Karayan;Guaycuruan(Abipones, Mataco, Toba);AraucanianorMoluchean;PatagonianorTehuelchean(Pilma, Yacana, Ona);Enneman(Lengua, Sanapana, Angaites);Fuegian(Yahgan, Alakaluf).
American Origins.
It is impossible to dissociate the ethnological history of the New World from that of the Old. The absence from America at any period of the world's history not only of anthropoid apes but also of theCercopithecidae, in other words of the Catarrhini, entirely precludes the possibility of the independent origin of man in the western hemisphere. Therefore the population of the Americas must have come from the Old World. In prehistoric times there were only two possible routes for such immigration to have taken place. For the mid-Atlantic land connection was severed long ages before the appearance of man, and the connection of South America with Antarctica had also long disappeared[737]. We are therefore compelled to look to a farther extension of land between North America and northern Europe on the one hand,and between north-west America and north-east Asia on the other. We know that in late Tertiary times there was a land-bridge connecting north-west Europe with Greenland, and Scharff[738]believes that the Barren-ground reindeer took this route to Norway and western Europe during early glacial times, but that "towards the latter part of the Glacial period the land-connection ... broke down." Other authorities are of opinion that the continuous land between the two continents in higher latitudes remained until post-glacial times. Brinton[739]considered that it was impossible for man to have reached America from Asia, because Siberia was covered with glaciers and not peopled until late Neolithic times, whereas man was living in both North and South America at the close of the Glacial Age. He acknowledged frequent communication in later times between Asia and America, but maintained that the movement was rather from America to Asia than otherwise. He was therefore a strong advocate of the European origin of the American race. There is no doubt that North America was connected with Asia in Tertiary times, though some geologists assert that "the far North-west did not rise from the waves of the Pacific Ocean (which once flowed with a boundless expanse to the North Pole) until after the glacial period." In that case "the first inhabitants of America certainly did not get there in this way, for by that time the bones of many generations were already bleaching on the soil of the New World[740]." The "Miocene Bridge," as the land connecting Asia and America in late geological times has been called, was probably very wide, one side would stretch from Kamchatka to British Columbia, and the other across Behring Strait. If, as seems probable, this connection persisted till, or was reconstituted during, the human period, tribes migrating to America by the more northerly route would enter the land east of the great barrier of the Rocky Mountains. The route from the Old World to the New by the Pacific margin probably remained nearly always open. Thus, while not denying the possibility of a very early migration from North Europe to North America through Greenland, it appears more probable that America received its population from North Asia.
Fossil Man in America.
We have next to determine what were the characteristicsof the earliest inhabitants of America, and the approximate date of their arrival. There have been many sensational accounts of the discoveries of fossil man in America, which have not been able to stand the criticism of scientific investigation. It must always be remembered that the evidence is primarily one of stratigraphy. Assuming, of course, that the human skeletal remains found in a given deposit are contemporaneous with the formation of that deposit and not subsequently interred in it, it is for the geologist to determine the age. The amount of petrifaction and the state of preservation of the bones are quite fallacious nor can much reliance be placed upon the anatomical character of the remains. Primordial human remains may be expected to show ancestral characters to a marked degree, but as we have insufficient data to enable us to determine the rate of evolution, anatomical considerations must fit into the timescale granted by the geologist.
Apart from pure stratigraphy associated animal remains may serve to support or refute the claims to antiquity, while the presence of artifacts, objects made or used by man, may afford evidence for determining the relative date if the cultural stratigraphy of the area has been sufficiently established.
Fortunately the fossil human remains of America have been carefully studied by a competent authority who says, "Irrespective of other considerations, in every instance where enough of the bones is preserved for comparison the somatological evidence bears witness against the geological antiquity of the remains and for their close affinity to, or identity with those of the modern Indian. Under these circumstances but one conclusion is justified, which is that thus far on this continent, no human bones of undisputed geological antiquity are known[741]." Hrdlička subsequently studied the remains of South America and says, "A conscientious, unbiased study of all the available facts has shown that the whole structure erected in support of the theory of geologically ancient man on that continent rests on very imperfectly and incorrectly interpreted data and in many instances on false premises, and as a consequence of these weaknesses must completely collapse when subjected to searching criticism.—As to the antiquity of the various archaeological remains from Argentina attributed to early man, allthose to which particular importance has been attached have been found without tenable claim to great age, while others, mostly single objects, without exception fall into the category of the doubtful[742]."
The conclusions of W. H. Holmes, Bailey Willis, F. E. Wright and C. N. Fenner, who collaborated with Hrdlička, with regard to the evidence thus far furnished, are that, "it fails to establish the claim that in South America there have been brought forth thus far tangible traces of either geologically ancient man himself or of any precursors of the human race[743]." Hrdlička is careful to add, however, "This should not be taken as a categorical denial of the existence of early man in South America, however improbable such a presence may now appear."
According to J. W. Gidley[744]the evidence of vertebrate paleontology indicates (1) That man did not exist in North America at the beginning of the Pleistocene although there was a land connection between Asia and North America at that time permitting a free passage for large mammals. (2) That a similar land connection was again in existence at the close of the last glacial epoch, and probably continued up to comparatively recent times, as indicated by the close resemblance of related living mammalian species on either side of the present Behring Strait. (3) That the first authentic records of prehistoric man in America have been found in deposits that are not older than the last glacial epoch, and probably of even later date, the inference being that man first found his way into North America at some time near the close of the existence of this last land bridge. (4) That this land bridge was broad and vegetative, and the climate presumably mild, at least along its southern coast border, making it habitable for man.
The Lagoa-Santa Race.
Rivet[745]points out that from Brazil to Terra del Fuegia on the Atlantic slope, in Bolivia and Peru, on the high plateaux of the Andes, on the Pacific coast and perhaps in the south of California, traces of a distinct race are met with, sometimes in single individuals, sometimes in whole groups. This race of Lagoa Santa is animportant primordial element in the population of South America, and has been termed by Deniker the Palaeo-American sub-race[746].
The men were of low stature but considerable strength, the skull was long, narrow and high, of moderate size, prognathous, with strong brow ridges, but not a retreating forehead. There is no reliable evidence as to the age of these remains. Hrdlička, after reviewing all the evidence says, "Besides agreeing closely with the dolichocephalic American type, which had an extensive representation throughout Brazil, including the Province of Minas Geraes, and in many other parts of South America, it is the same type which is met with farther north among the Aztec, Tarasco, Otomi, Tarahumare, Pima, Californians, ancient Utah cliff dwellers, ancient north-eastern Pueblos, Shoshoni, many of the Plains Tribes, Iroquois, Eastern Siouan, and Algonquian. But it is apart from the Eskimo, who form a distinct subtype of the yellow-brown strain of humanity[747]."
Rivet[748]adds that an examination of the present distribution of the descendants of the Lagoa-Santa type shows that they are all border peoples, in East Brazil, and the south of Patagonia and Terra del Fuegia, where the climate is rigorous, in desert islands of west and southern Chili, on the coast of Ecuador, and perhaps in California. This suggests that they have been driven out in a great eccentric movement from their old habitat, into new environment producing fresh crossings.
There is an absence of this high narrow-headed type throughout the northern part of South America, and a prevalence of medium or sub-brachycephalic heads which are always low in the crown. These are now represented by the Caribs and Arawaks, but there was more than one migration of brachycephalic peoples from the north.
Physical Type in North America.
To return to North America. As we have just seen Hrdlička recognises a dolichocephalic element in North America, and various ethnic groups range to pronounced brachycephaly. Nevertheless he believes in the original unity of the Indian race in America, basing his conclusions on the colour of the skin, which ranges from yellowish white to dark brown, the straight black hair, scanty beard, hairless body, brown and often more or less slantingeye, mesorrhine nose, medium prognathism, skeletal proportions and other essential features. In all these characters the American Indians resemble the yellowish brown peoples of eastern Asia and a large part of Polynesia[749]. He also believes that there were many successive migrations from Asia.
The differences of opinion between Hrdlička and other students is probably more a question of nomenclature than of fact. The eastern Asiatics and Polynesians are mixed peoples, and if there were numerous migrations from Asia, spread over a very long period of time, people of different stocks would have found their way into America. "It is indeed probable," Hrdlička adds, "that the western coast of America, within the last two thousand years, was on more than one occasion reached by small parties of Polynesians, and that the eastern coast was similarly reached by small groups of whites; but these accretions have not modified greatly, if at all, the mass of the native population[750]."
The inhabitants of the plains east of the Rocky Mountains and the eastern wooded area are characterised by a head which varies about the lower limit of brachycephaly, and by tall stature. This stock probably arrived by the North Pacific Bridge before the end of the last Glacial period, and extended over the continent east of the great divide. Finally bands from the north, east and south migrated into the prairie area. The markedly brachycephalic immigrants from Asia appear to have proceeded mainly down the Pacific slope and to have populated Central and South America, with an overflow into the south of North America. It is probable that there were several migrations of allied but not similar broad-headed peoples from Asia in early days, and we know that recently there have been racial and cultural drifts between the neighbouring portions of America and Asia[751]. Indeed Bogoras[752]suggests that ethnographically the line separating Asia and America should lie from the lower Kolyma River to Gishiga Bay.
Owing to these various immigrations and subsequent minglings the cranial forms show much variation, and are not sufficiently significant to serve as a basis of classification. In parts of North America the round-headed mound-builders andothers were encroached upon by populations of increasingly dolichocephalic type—Plains Indians and Cherokees, Chichimecs, Tepanecs, Acolhuas. Even still dolichocephaly is characteristic of Iroquois, Coahuilas, Sonorans, while the intermediate indices met with on the prairies and plateaux undoubtedly indicate the mixture between the long-headed invaders and the round-heads whom they swept aside as they advanced southwards. Thus the Minnetaris are highly dolicho; the Poncas and Osages sub-brachy; the Algonquians variable, while the Siouans oscillate widely round a mesaticephalous mean.
Cranial Deformation.
The "Toltecs."
The Athapascans alone are homogeneous, and their sub-brachycephaly recurs amongst the Apaches and their other southern kindred, who have given it an exaggerated form by the widespread practice of artificial deformation, which dates from remote times. The most typical cases both of brachy and dolicho deformation are from the Cerro de las Palmas graves in south-west Mexico. Deformation prevails also in Peru and Bolivia, as well as in Ceara and the Rio Negro on the Atlantic side. The flat-head form, so common from the Columbia estuary to Peru, occurs amongst the broad-faced Huaxtecs, their near relations the Maya-Quichés, and the Nahuatlans. It is also found amongst the extinct Cebunys of Cuba, Hayti and Jamaica, and the so-called "Toltecs," that is, the people of Tollan (Tula), who first founded a civilised state on the Mexican table-land (sixth and seventh centuriesA.D.), and whose name afterwards became associated with every ancient monument throughout Central America. On this "Toltec question" the most contradictory theories are current; some hold that the Toltecs were a great and powerful nation, who after the overthrow of their empire migrated southwards, spreading their culture throughout Central America; others regard them as "fabulous," or at all events "nothing more than a sept of the Nahuas themselves, the ancestors of those Mexicans who built Tenochtitlan,"i.e.the present city of Mexico. A third view, that of Valentini, that the Toltecs were not Nahuas but Mayas, is now supported both by E. P. Dieseldorff[753]and by Förstemann[754]. T. A. Joyce[755]suggests that the vanguard of the Nahuas on reaching the Mexican valley adopted and improved the cultureof an agricultural people of Tarascan affinities whose culture was in part due to Mayan inspiration, whom they found settled there. Later migrations of Nahua were greatly impressed with the "Toltec" culture which had thus arisen through the impact of a virile hunting people on more passive agriculturalists.
Type of North-west Coast Indians Variable.
On the North-west Pacific Coast similar ethnical interminglings recur, and Franz Boas[756]here distinguishes as many as four types, the Northern (Tsimshian and others), the Kwakiutl, the Lillooet of the Harrison Lake region and the inland Salishan (Flat-heads, Shuswaps, etc.). All are brachycephalic, but while the Tsimshians are of medium height 1.675 m. (5 ft. 6 in.) with low, concave nose, very large head, and enormously broad face, exceeding the average for North America by 6 mm., the Kwakiutls are shorter 1.645 m. (5 ft. 4¾ in.) with very high and relatively narrow hooked nose, and quite exceptionally high face; the Harrison Lake very short 1.600 m. (5 ft 3 in.) with exceedingly short and broad head (C. I. nearly 89), "surpassing in this respect all other forms known to exist in North America"; lastly, the inland Salish of medium height 1.679 m. (5 ft. 6 in.) with high and wide nose of the characteristic Indian form and a short head.
Date of Migrations.
It would be difficult to find anywhere a greater contrast than that which is presented by some of these British Columbian natives, those, for instance, of Harrison Lake with almost circular heads (88.8), and some of the Labrador Eskimo with a degree of dolichocephaly not exceeded even by the Fijian Kai-Colos (65)[757]. But this violent contrast is somewhat toned by the intermediate forms, such as those of the Tlingits, the Aleutian islanders, and the western (Alaskan) Eskimo, by which the transition is effected between the Arctic and the more southern populations. It is not possible at present to indicate even in outline the chronology of any of the ethnic movements outlined above. Warren K. Moorehead[758]agrees with the great majority of American archaeologists in holding the existence of palaeolithic man in North America as not proven[759], the so-called palaeoliths beingeither rejects or rude tools for rough purposes. When man migrated to America from North and East Asia whenever that period may have been, he appears to have been in that stage of culture—or rather of stone technique—which we term Neolithic, and the drifting movement ceased before he had learnt the use of metals.
Evidence from Linguistics.
A further proof of the antiquity of the migrations is afforded by linguistics. A. F. Chamberlain asserts[760]that "it may be said with certainty, so far as all data hitherto presented are concerned, that no satisfactory proof whatever has been put forward to induce us to believe that any single American Indian tongue or group of tongues has been derived from any Old World form of speech now existing or known to have existed in the past. In whatever way the multiplicity of American Indian languages and dialects may have arisen, one can be reasonably sure that the differentiation and divergence have developed here in America and are in no sense due to the occasional intrusion of Old World tongues individually oren masse.... Certain real relationships between the American Indians and the peoples of north-eastern Asia, known as 'Paleo-Asiatics,' have, however, been revealed as a result of the extensive investigations of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition.... The general conclusion to be drawn from the evidence is that the so-called 'Paleo-Asiatic' peoples of north-eastern Asia,i.e.the Chukchee, Koryak, Kamchadale, Gilyak, Yukaghir, etc. really belong physically and culturally with the aborigines of north-western America.... Like the modern Asiatic Eskimo they represent a reflex from America and Asia, and notvice versa.... It is the opinion of good authorities also that the 'Paleo-Asiatic' peoples belong linguistically with the American Indians rather than with the other tribes and stocks of northern or southern Asia. Here we have then the only real relationship of a linguistic character that has ever been convincingly argued between tongues of the New World and tongues of the Old."
It is not merely that the American languages differ from other forms of speech in their general phonetic, structural and lexical features; they differ from them in their very morphology, as much, for instance, as in the zoological world class differsfrom class, order from order. They have all of them developed on the same polysynthetic lines, from which if a few here and there now appear to depart, it is only because in the course of their further evolution they have, so to say, broken away from that prototype[761]. Take the rudest or the most highly cultivated anywhere from Alaska to Fuegia—Eskimauan, Iroquoian, Algonquian, Aztec, Tarascan, Ipurina, Peruvian, Yahgan—and you will find each and all giving abundant evidence of this universal polysynthetic character, not one true instance of which can be found anywhere in the eastern hemisphere. There is incorporation with the verb, as in Basque, many of the Caucasus tongues, and the Ural-Altaic group; but it is everywhere limited to pronominal and purely relational elements.
But in the American order of speech there is no such limitation, and not merely the pronouns, which are restricted in number, but the nouns with their attributes, which are practically numberless, all enter necessarily into the verbal paradigm. Thus in Tarascan (Mexico):hopocuni= to wash the hands;hopodini= to wash the ears, fromhoponi= to wash, which cannot be used alone[762]. So in Ipurina (Amazonia):nicuçacatçaurumatinií= I draw the cord tight round your waist, fromni, I;cuçaca, to draw tight;tça, cord;túruma, waist;tini, characteristic verbal affix;í, thy, referring to waist[763].
We see from such examples that polysynthesis is not a primitive condition of speech, as is often asserted, but on the contrary a highly developed system, in which the original agglutinative process has gone so far as to attract all the elements of the sentence to the verb, round which they cluster like swarming bees round their queen. In Eskimauan the tendency is shown in the construction of nouns and verbs, by which other classes of words are made almost unnecessary, and oneword, sometimes of interminable length, is able to express a whole sentence with its subordinate clauses. H. Rink, one of the first Eskimo scholars of modern times, gives the instance: "Suérúkame-autdlásassoq-tusaramiuk-tuningingmago-iluarín-gilát = they did not approve that he (a) had omitted to give him (b) something, as he (a) heard that he (b) was going to depart on account of being destitute of everything[764]." Such monstrosities "are so complicated that in daily speech they could hardly ever occur; but still they are correct and can be understood by intelligent people[765]."
He gives another and much longer example, which the reader may be spared, adding that there are altogether about 200 particles, as many as ten of which may be piled up on any given stem. The process also often involves great phonetic changes, by which the original form of the elements becomes disguised, as, for instance, in the Englishhap'oth= half-penny-worth. The attempt to determine the number of words that might be formed in this way on a single stem, such asigdlo, a house, had to be given up after getting as far as the compoundigdlorssualiortugssarsiumavoq= he wants to find one who will build a large house.
Stock Languages.
It is clear that such a linguistic evolution implies both the postulated isolation from other influences, which must have disturbed and broken up the cumbrous process, and also the postulated long period of time to develop and consolidate the system throughout the New World. But time is still more imperiously demanded by the vast number of stock languages, many already extinct, many still current all over the continent, all of which differ profoundly in their vocabulary, often also in their phonesis, and in fact have nothing in common except this extraordinary polysynthetic groove in which they are cast. There are probably about 75 stock languages in North America, of which 58 occur north of Mexico.
But even that conveys but a faint idea of the astonishing diversity of speech prevailing in this truly linguistic Babel.J. W. Powell[766]points out that the practically distinct idioms are far more numerous than might be inferred even from such a large number of mother tongues. Thus, in the Algonquian[767]linguistic family he tells us there are about 40, no one of which could be understood by a people speaking another; in Athapascan from 30 to 40; in Siouan over 20; and in Shoshonian a still greater number[768]. The greatest linguistic diversity in a relatively small area is found in the state of California, where, according to Powell's classification, 22 distinct stocks of languages are spoken. R. B. Dixon and A. L. Kroeber[769]show however that these fall into three morphological groups which are also characterised by certain cultural features. It is the same, or perhaps even worse, in Central and in South America, where the linguistic confusion is so great that no complete classification of the native tongues seems possible. Clements R. Markham in the third edition of his exhaustive list of the Amazonian tribes[770]has no less than 1087 entries. He concludes that these may be referred to 485 distinct tribes in all the periods, since the days of Acuña (1639). Deducting some 111 as extinct or nearly so, the total amounts to "323 at the outside" (p. 135). But for such linguistic differences, large numbers of these groups would be quite indistinguishable from each other, so great is the prevailing similarity in physical appearance and usages in many districts. Thus Ehrenreich tells us that, "despite their ethnico-linguistic differences, the tribes about the head-waters of the Xingu present complete uniformity in their daily habits, in the conditions of their existence, and their general culture[771]," though it is curious to note that the art of making pottery is restricted here to the Arawak tribes[772].Yet amongst them are represented three of the radically distinct linguistic groups of Brazil, some (Bakaïri and Nahuqua) belonging to the Carib, some (Auetö and Kamayura) to the Tupi-Guarani, and some (Mehinaku and Vaura) to the Arawak family. Obviously these could not be so discriminated but for their linguistic differences. On the other hand the opposite phenomenon is occasionally presented of tribes differing considerably in their social relations, which are nevertheless of the same origin, or, what is regarded by Ehrenreich as the same thing, belong to the same linguistic group. Such are the Ipurina, the Paumari and the Yamamadi of the Purus valley, all grouped as Arawaks because they speak dialects of the Arawakan stock language. At the same time it should be noted that the social differences observed by some modern travellers are often due to the ever-increasing contact with the whites, who are now encroaching on the Gran Chaco plains, and ascending every Amazonian tributary in quest of rubber and the other natural produce abounding in these regions. The consequent displacement of tribes is discussed by G. E. Church[773].
In the introduction to his valuable list Clements Markham observes that the evidence of language favours the theory that the Amazonian tribes, "now like the sands on the sea-shore for number, originally sprang from two or at most three parent stocks. Dialects of theTupilanguage extend from the roots of the Andes to the Atlantic, and southward into Paraguay ... and it is established that the differences in the roots, between the numerous Amazonian languages, are not so great as was generally supposed[774]." This no doubt is true, and will account for much. But when we see it here recorded that of the Carabuyanas (Japura river) there are or were 16 branches, that the Chiquito group (Bolivia) comprises 40 tribes speaking "seven different languages"; that of the Juris (Upper Amazons) there are ten divisions; of the Moxos (Beni and Mamoré rivers) 26 branches, "speaking nine or, according to Southey, thirteen languages"; of the Uaupés (Rio Negro) 30 divisions, and so on, we feel how much there is still left to be accounted for. Attempts have been made to weaken the force of the linguistic argument by the assumption, at one time much in favour, that the American tongues are of a somewhat evanescent nature, in an unstable condition, often changing their form and structurewithin a few generations. But, says Powell, "this widely spread opinion does not find warrant in the facts discovered in the course of this research. The author has everywhere been impressed with the fact that savage tongues are singularly persistent, and that a language which is dependent for its existence upon oral tradition is not easily modified[775]." A test case is the Delaware (Leni Lenapé), an Algonquian tongue which, judging from the specimens collected by Th. Campanius about 1645, has undergone but slight modification during the last 250 years.
In this connection the important point to be noticed is the fact that some of the stock languages have an immense range, while others are crowded together in indescribable confusion in rugged upland valleys, or about river estuaries, or in the recesses of trackless woodlands, and this strangely irregular distribution prevails in all the main divisions of the continent. Thus of Powell's 58 linguistic families in North America as many as 40 are restricted to the relatively narrow strip of coastland between the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific, ten are dotted round the Gulf of Mexico from Florida to the Rio Grande, and two disposed round the Gulf of California, while nearly all the rest of the land—some six million square miles—is occupied by the six widely diffused Eskimauan, Athapascan, Algonquian, Iroquoian, Siouan, and Shoshonian families. The same phenomenon is presented by Central and South America, where less than a dozen stock languages—Opatan, Nahuatlan, Huastecan, Chorotegan, Quichuan, Arawakan, Gesan (Tapuyan), Tupi-Guaranian, Cariban—are spread over millions of square miles, while many scores of others are restricted to extremely narrow areas. Here the crowding is largely determined, as in Caucasia, by the altitude (Andes in Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia; Sierras in Mexico).
Culture.
It is strongly held by many American ethnologists that the various cultures of America are autochthonous, nothing being borrowed from the Old World. J. W. Powell[776], who rendered such inestimable services to American anthropology, affirmed that "the aboriginal peoples of America cannot be allied preferentially to any one branch of the human race in the Old World"; that "there is no evidence that any of the arts of the American Indians were borrowed from the Orient"; that "the industrial arts of Americawere born in America, America was inhabited by tribes at the time of the beginning of industrial arts. They left the Old World before they had learned to make knives, spear and arrowheads, or at least when they knew the art only in its crudest state. Thus primitive man has been here ever since the invention of the stone knife and the stone hammer." He further contended that "the American Indian did not derive his forms of government, his industrial or decorative arts, his languages, or his mythological opinions from the Old World, but developed them in the New"; and that "in the demotic characteristics of the American Indians, all that is common to tribes of the Orient is universal, all that distinguishes one group of tribes from another in America distinguishes them from all other tribes of the world."
This view has been emphasised afresh by Fewkes[777], though of recent years it has met with vigorous opposition. At the conclusion of his article "Die melanesische Bogenkultur und ihre Verwandten[778]" Graebner attempts to trace the cultural connection of South America with South-east Asia rather than with the South Seas, the main links being represented by head-hunting, certain types of skin-drum and of basket, and in particular three types of crutch-handled paddle. According to him the spread of culture has taken place by the land route and Behring Strait, not across the Pacific by way of the South Seas, a view to which he adheres in his later work. An ingenious and detailed attempt has also been made by Pater Schmidt[779]to trace the various cultures determined for Oceania and Africa in South America. Apart from the great linguistic groups usually adopted as the basis of classification, Schmidt would divide the South American Indians according to their stage of economic development into collectors, cultivators, and civilised peoples of the Andean highlands. Though this series may have the appearance of evolution, in point of fact "each group is composed of peoples differing absolutely in language and race, who brought with them to South America in historically distinct migrations at all events the fundamentals of their respective cultures.... As we pass in review the cultural elements of theseparate groups, their weapons, implements, dwellings, their sociology, mythology, and religion we discover the innate similarity of these groups to the culture-zones of the Old World in all essential features[780]." The author proceeds to work out his theory in great detail; the earlier cultures he too considers have travelled by the enormously lengthy land route by way of North America, only the "free patrilineal culture" (Polynesia and Indonesia) having reached the west coast directly by sea[781].
W. H. Holmes[782]draws attention to analogies between American and foreign archaeological remains, for example the stone gouge of New England and Europe. He hints at influences coming from the Mediterranean and even from Africa. "Even more remarkable and diversified are the correspondences between the architectural remains of Yucatan and those of Cambodia and Java in the far East. On the Pacific side of the American continent strange coincidences occur in like degree, seeming to indicate that the broad Pacific has not proved a complete bar to intercourse of peoples of the opposing continents ... it seems highly probable considering the nature of the archaeological evidence, that the Western World has not been always and wholly beyond the reach of members of the white, Polynesian, and perhaps even the black races."
Walter Hough[783]gives various cultural parallels between America and the other side of the Pacific but does not commit himself. S. Hagar[784]brings forward some interesting correspondences between the astronomy of the New and of the Old Worlds, but adopts a cautious attitude.
More recently the problem has been attacked with great energy by G. Elliot Smith[785]. His investigations into the processes of mummification and the tombs of ancient Egypt led him to comparative studies, and he notes that certain customs seem to be found in association, forming what is known as a culture-complex. For example, "in most regions the people who introduced the habit of megalithic building and sun worship also brought with them the practice of mummification." Also associated with these are:—stories of dwarfs and giants, belief in the indwelling of gods and great men in megalithicmonuments, the use of these structures in a particular manner for special council, the practice of hanging rags on trees in association with such monuments, serpent worship, tattooing, distension of the lobe of the ear, the use of pearls, the conch-shell trumpet, etc. In a map showing the distribution of this "heliolithic" culture-complex he indicates the main lines of migration to America, one across the Aleutian chain and down the west coast to California, the other and more important one, across the Pacific to Peru, and thence to various parts of South America, through Central America to the southern half of the United States. Contrary to Schmidt, Elliot Smith postulates contact of cultures rather than actual migrations of people; he considers it possible that a small number of aliens arriving by sea in Peru, for example, might introduce customs of a highly novel and subversive character which would take root and spread far and wide. The Peruvian custom of embalming the dead certainly presents analogies to that of ancient Egypt, and Elliot Smith is convinced that "the rude megalithic architecture of America bears obvious evidence of the same inspiration which prompted that of the Old World." In a later paper Elliot Smith[786]adduces further evidence in support of his thesis "that the essential elements of the ancient civilization of India, Further Asia, the Malay Archipelago, Oceania, and America were brought in succession to each of these places by mariners, whose oriental migrations (on an extensive scale) began as trading intercourse between the Eastern Mediterranean and India some time after 800B.C.and continued for many centuries." This dissemination was in the first instance due to the Phoenicians and there are "unmistakable tokens that the same Phoenician methods which led to the diffusion of this culture-complex in the Old World also were responsible for planting it in the New[787]some centuries after the Phoenicians themselves had ceased to be" (l.c.p. 27). Further evidence along the same lines is offered by W. J. Perry[788]who has noted the geographical distribution of terraced cultivation and irrigation and finds that it corresponds to a remarkable extent with that of the "heliolithic" culture-complex, and by J. WilfridJackson[789]who has investigated the Aztec Moon-cult and its relation to the Chank cult of India, the money cowry as a sacred object among North American Indians[790], shell trumpets and their distribution in the Old and New World[791]and the geographical distribution of the shell purple industry[792]. He points out that we have ample evidence of the practice of this ancient industry in several places in Central America, and refers to Zelia Nuttall's interesting paper on the subject[793]. Elliot Smith also discusses "Pre-Columbian Representations of the Elephant in America[794]" and remarks "coincidences of so remarkable a nature cannot be due to chance. They not only confirm the identification of the elephant in designs in America, but also incidentally point to the conclusion that the Hindu god Indra was adopted in Central America with practically all the attributes assigned to him in his Asiatic home." Elliot Smith believes that practically every element of the early civilisation of America was derived from the Old World. Small groups of immigrants from time to time brought certain of the beliefs, customs, and inventions of the Mediterranean area, Egypt, Ethiopia, Arabia, Babylonia, Indonesia, Eastern Asia and Oceania, and the confused jumble of practices became assimilated and "Americanised" in the new home across the Pacific as the result of the domination of the great uncultured aboriginal populations by small bands of more cultured foreigners. These highly suggestive studies will force adherents of the theory of the indigenous origin of American culture to reconsider the grounds for their opinions and will lead them to turn once more to the writings of Bancroft[795], Tylor[796], Nuttall[797], Macmillan Brown[798], Enoch[799]and others.