The North Americans of Antiquity: Their origin, migrations, and type of civilization consideredShort, John T. (John Thomas)
History
The North Americans of Antiquity: Their origin, migrations, and type of civilization considered
Short, John T. (John Thomas)
Indians -- Origin; Indians of Mexico -- Antiquities; Indians of North America -- Antiquities
If all the indications were verified, we should be justified in
assigning man a much greater antiquity in the Rocky Mountain region
and on the Pacific slope than in any other part of North America.
Mr. E. L. Berthoud collected numerous stone implements in what he
considers to be tertiary gravel on Crow Creek and in the region of
the South Platte River, Lat. 40 N., Long. 104 W. Two shells secured
in the same locality by him have been pronounced a _corbicula_ and a
_rangia_ respectively, and are thought to belong to the older Pliocene
or possibly to the Miocene.[143] The evidence in this case is, however,
unsatisfactory, and cannot be admitted to be of scientific value
without further authentication.
In 1857 a portion of a human cranium was found associated with bones
of the mastodon at the depth of one hundred and eighty feet below the
surface in a mining shaft at Table Mountain, California. Dr. C. F.
Winslow sent this fragment to the Boston Natural History Society, but
no importance was attached to it, since no other evidence other than
that furnished by workmen in the mine could be obtained. Subsequently,
when an entire skull was reported to have been found in the gold drift
near Angelos in Calaveras County, in a shaft one hundred and fifty
feet deep, the intelligent portion of the community pronounced the
finder guilty of a scientific fraud, and it is not yet a certainty
that their decision was incorrect. However, Professor Whitney, of the
State Geological Survey, upon hearing of the case examined the mine,
and found that the shaft passed through five beds of lava and volcanic
tufa and four beds of auriferous gravel. It was in one of these beds
that the skull was said to have been found. Some of the cemented gravel
was still adhering to the skull when it came into the Professor’s
possession, and Professor Wyman, to whom it was submitted subsequently,
refers to the difficulty which he had in removing the incrustation.
Professor Whitney, on the testimony of the possessor of the skull,
pronounced it an authentic “find,” and while his decision has been
acquiesced in by a number of scientific gentlemen of repute, Professor
Wyman among them, still the great majority, we believe, are unwilling
to rest their faith on such slender evidence. Though no crack was
apparent through which the skull might have fallen from the surface,
such might have existed at an earlier period. In a region which is the
product of volcanic action there is room for suspicion, especially in
cases like both of these, where, as Sir Charles Lyell has said, no
geologist was present at the moment of discovery to see the fossil
_in situ_ and extricate it with his own hands from the matrix which
contained it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account