[Page 112], second paragraph from bottom, fifth line: “witnessed many of these dances”, should be “witnessed many different dances”. [Page 217]. It was necessary to omit a special chapter devoted to agriculture for the reason that in various places in the book the industries of modern Indians were commented on at length. In [Chapter XXXIII], Farming and Stock Raising, it was thought best to omit the bibliography. Therefore, the last sentence in the paragraph should read, “These cover, in a general way, all phases of education.” [Page 247]. Last paragraph. “John T. Shelton” should be, “William T. Shelton”. [Page 252], center of page: Parquette, should be Paquette. ----- Footnote 1: A bibliography of these will be found in “The Stone Age in North America.” Vol. II, pages 408–410. CHAPTER I. TWO POINTS OF VIEW The American Indian may be regarded from two wide and divergent points of view; that of the scientist, and that of the humanitarian. Under the former should be grouped all study of the Indian, past and present, falling under the general science of anthropology, and its various divisions and sub-divisions. This includes the study of the Indian as a primitive man belonging to the Red Race, and different from all other races on the face of the earth. This view comprises archaeology, physical anthropology, ethnology, folklore, religion, etc. The second, under the general title of humanitarianism, includes all progress, education, missionary endeavor, and that which may be summed up under the title Civilization, or as the modernists have it, “Social Service.” After much thought, it occurs to me that we must view the Indian from these two and quite opposed angles—the scientific, the philanthropic. The average man or woman is not interested in the Indian from the point of view of the scientist. This is quite natural. But, persons of intelligence are interested in the Indian as a strange and peculiar individual. He appeals to their imagination. The public has had presented to it during past years, great numbers of books, pamphlets and articles all dealing with the Indian, and most of them regard him from what is known as “the popular point of view.” Having read, or glanced through scores of these, it is my firm conviction that, after all, we have not properly understood the Indian.