Handbook of Indians of Canada - ElectricCanadian.com

28 DEPARTMENT OF MARINE AND FISHERIES
number of geologists respecting the value of
The most extraordinary
these finds (McGee) .
discoveries of human remains in connection
with geological formations are those from the
auriferous gravels of California (Whitney,
Holmes). These finds are numerous and are
reported from many localities and from depo-
sits covering a wide range of time. So convincing
did the evidence appear to Whitney,
state geologist of CaKfornia from 1860 to 1874,
that he accepted without hesitation the con-
clusion that man had occupied the auriferous
gravel region during pre-Glacial time, and other
students of the subject still regard the testimony
as convincing; but consideration of the
extraordinary nature of the conclusions dependent
on this evidence should cause even the
most sanguine advocate of great human antiquity
in America to hesitate (see Calaveras Man)
Geologists are practically agreed that the gra-
vels from which some at least of the relics of
man are said to come are of Tertiary age.
These relics represent a polished-stone culture
corresponding closely to that of the modern
tribes of the Pacific slope. Thus, man in
America must have passed through the savage
and well into the barbarous stage while the
hypothetical earUest representative of the
human race in the Old World, Pithecanthropus
erectus of Dubois, was still running wild in the
forests of Java, a half-regenerate "Simian.
Furthermore, the acceptance of the auriferous-
gravel testimony makes it necessary to place
the presence of man in America far back toward
the beginning of the Tertiary age, a period to
be reckoned not in tens but in hundreds of
thousands of years. (See Smithson. Rep. for
1899). These and other equally striking con-
siderations suggest the wisdom of formulating
conclusions with the utmost caution.
Caves and rock shelters representing various
periods and offering dwelling places to the
tribes that have come and gone, may reason-
ably be expected to contain traces of the peoples
of all periods of occupancy; but the deposits
forming their floors, with few exceptions, have
not been very fully examined, and up to the
present time have furnished no very tangible
evidence of the presence of men beyond the
limited period of the American Indian as
known to us. The University of CaUfornia has
conducted excavations in a cave in the N. part
of the state, and the discovery of bones that
appear to have been shaped by human hands,
associated with fossil fauna that probably
represent early Glacial times, has been reported
2 GEORGE v., A. 1912
(Sinclair) ; but the result is not decisive. The
apparent absence or dearth of ancient human
remains in the caves of the country furnishes
one of the strongest reasons for critically
examining all testimony bearing on antiquity
about which reasonable doubt can be raised.
It is incredible that primitive man should have
inhabited a country of caverns for ages without
resorting at some period to their hospitable
shelter; but research in this field is hardly
begun, and evidence of a more conclusive
nature may yet be forthcoming.
In view of the extent of the researches carried
on in various fields with the object of adducing
evidence on which to base a scheme of human
chronology in America, decisive results are
surprisingly meager, and the finds so far made,
reputed to represent a vast period of time
stretching forward from the middle Tertiary to
the present, are characterized by so many
defects of observation and record and so many
apparent incongruities, biological, geological,
and cultural, that the task ol the chronologist
is stiU largely before him.
For archaeological investigations and scientific
discussion relating to the antiquity of man
within the limits of the United States, see
Abbott (1) in Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist.,
XXIII, 1888, (2) in Proc. A. A. A. S., xxxvii,
1888; Allen, Prehist. World, 1885; Bancroft,
Native Races, iv, 1882; Becker in BuU. Geol.
Soc. Am., II, 1891; Blake in Jour. Geol. vii,
no. 7, 1899; Brower, Memoirs, v, 1902;
Chamberlin (1) in Jour. Geol., x, no. 7, 1902,
(2) in The Dial, 1892; Claypole in Am. Geol.,
xvin, 1896; Dall (1) in Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci.
Phila., 1899, (2) in Cont. N. Am. Ethnol., i,
1877; Emmons in Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist.,
xxrv, 1889; Farrand, Basis of Am. Hist., 1904;
Foster, Prehist. Races, 1878; Fowke, Archeol.
Hist. Ohio, 1902; Gilbert in Am. Anthrop., ir,
1889; Haynes in Winsor, Narr. and Crit. Hist.
Am., I, 1889; Holmes (1) in Rep. Smithson.
Inst. 1899, 1901, (2) ibid. 1902, 1903, (3) in
Jour. Geol., i, nos. 1, 2, 1893, (4) in Am. Geol,
XI, no. 4, 1893, (5) in Science, Nov. 25, 1892,
and Jan. 25, 1893; Hrdlicka (1) in Am. Anthrop.,
n. s., V, no. 2, 1903, (2) in Bull. Am.
Mus. Nat. Hist., xvi, 1902; Kummel in Proc.
A. A. A. S., XLVi, 1897; Lapham in Smithson.
Cont., VII, 1855; Lewis, ibid., xxix, 1880;
McGee (1) in Am. Anthrop., ii, no. 4, 1889; v,
no. 4, 1892; vi, no. 1, 1893, (2) in Pop. Sci.
Mo., Nov., 1888, (3) in Am. Antiq., xiii, no. 7,
1891; Mercer (1) in Proc. A. A. A. S., xlvi,
1897, (2) in Am. Nat., xxvii, 1893, (3) in Pubs.