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. We have next to determine what were the characteristics of 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.