On limitations to the use of some anthropologic data

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.

J. W.

POWELL,

DIRECTOR.

ON LIMITATIONS TO THE USE

ANTHROPOLOGIC ^DATA.

J.

W. POWELL.

71

ON LIMITATIONS TO THE USE OF SOME ANTHROPOLOGIC DATA,

By

J. W. Powell.

ARCHAEOLOGY.

Investigationsin thisdepartment are of great interest,

and

haveat- tracted tothe field a host ofworkers; buta general review of the

mass

of published matter exhibitsthe fact that the uses to which the mate- rial hasbeen put have notalwaysbeen wise.

In the

monuments

of antiquityfound throughout North America, in

camp aud

village sites, graves, mounds, ruins,

and

scattered works of art, the origin

and

development of artin savage

and

barbariclife

may

be satisfactorily studied. Incidentally, too, hints of customs

may

be discovered, but outside of this, the discoveries

made

have often been illegitimately used, especially for the purpose of connecting thetribes of North

America

with peoples or so-called races of antiquityin other portions of the world.

A

^{brief review of}

^some

conclusions that

must

be accepted inthe presentstatus of the science will exhibitthe futility of these attempts.

Itis

now

anestablished fact that

man was

widely scattered over the earthat least as earlyas the beginning of thequaternary period, and, perhaps, inpliocenetime.

If

we

accept the conclusion that there Is but onespecies of man, as species are

now

defined by biologists,

we may

reasonablyconclude that thespecieshas beendispersed from

some common

^center, as theability tosuccessfully carry on thebattle of life in all climesbelongs onlytoa highly developedbeing; butthisoriginal

home

has not yetbeenascer- tained with certainty, aud

when

discovered, lines of migration there- from cannot be

mapped

until thechanges in the physicalgeographyof the earthfrom thatearlytime tothe present have been discovered,and these

must

besettled upon purely geologic

aud

paleoutologicevidence.

The

^migrations of

mankind

from that original

home

cannot beintelli-

gently discussed until that

home

hasbeendiscovered,and,further, until thegeology ofthe globeisso thoroughly

known

that thedifferentphases of its geography can bepresented.

The

^dispersionof

man must

have been anterior to the development of any but the rudest arts. Since that time the surface of the earth

73

74 LIMITATIONS TO THE USE OP ANTHROPOLOGIC

DATA.

has undergone

many and

importantchanges. All

known camp and

vil-

lagesites, graves,

mounds, and

ruinsbelongto that portionof geologic time

known

as the present epoch,

and

are entirelysubsequentto the periodof the original dispersion as

shown by

geologicevidence.

In the study of these antiquities, there has been

much

unnecessary speculationinrespecttotherelationexistingbetweenthe peopletowhose existencethey attest,

and

the tribes of Indians inhabiting the country during thehistoric period.

It

may

be said that in the Pueblos discovered in the southwestern portion oftheUnited States

and

farther souththrough Mexico

and

per- haps into Central

America

tribes are

known

having a culturequite as far advancedas any exhibitedin the discoveredruins. Inthis respect, then, there is no needto search foran extra-limital origin through lost tribes for

any

artthere exhibited.

With

regardtothe

mounds

sowidely scatteredbetweenthetwooceans, it

may

alsobe said thatmound-buildiugtribeswere

known

inthe early history ofdiscovery ofthis continent, and that the vestiges of artdis-

covered donot excelin anyrespect thearts of the Indian tribes

known

to history. There is, therefore, noreason for us^tosearchforan extra- limitaloriginthrough losttribes forthe artsdiscovered in the

mounds

ofNorth America.

The

tracing ofthe originoftheseartstothe ancestors of

known

tribes orstocksof tribes is

more

legitimate,but it has limitations which are widely disregarded.

The

tribeswhich

had

attainedtothe highestculture inthe southern portion ofNorth

America

are

now

^well

known

tobelong to several different stocks, and, if, for example, an attempt ^is

made

to connect the

mound

builders with the PuebloIndians, no resultbeyond confusioncan be reacheduntiltheparticularstockofthesevillagepeoples

isdesignated.

Again,itiscontainedin therecorded history ofthecountry that sev- eraldistinctstocks of the present Indianswere mound-buildersand tbe wide extentand vast

number

of

mounds

discoveredintheUnited States should lead usto suspect, atleast,that themound-buildersofprehistoric timesbelonged to

many and

diversestocks.

With

thelimitationsthus indicated theidentification ofmound-buildingpeoples as distinct tribes or stocksis a legitimate study,but

when we

consider the further fact

now

established,that arts extend beyond the boundaries of linguistic stocks, the most fundamental divisions

we

are yet able to

make

ofthe peoplesoftheglobe,

we may more

properlyconclude thatthisfieldprom-

ises butameagerharvest^; but theorigin

and

development ofarts

and

industriesisin itselfa vast

and

profoundlyinteresting

theme

of study, and

when

North

American

archaeologyispursuedwith thisendinview, the results willbeinstructive.

ETCHINGS —

^PAINTINGS.

⁷⁵

PICTURE-WRITING

.

The

pietographs ofNorth

America

were

made

on divers substances.

The

bark oftrees,tablets ofwood,the skins of animals,

and

thesurfaces of rocks wereall usedfor this purpose; but the great

body

of picture- writing as preservedtousisfoundonrocksurfaces, asthesearethemost enduring.

Prom

Dightou

Rock

tothecliffsthatoverhang^thePacific,these records arefound

—

on bowlders fashioned

by

the

waves

ofthe sea, scattered

by

riverfloods,or polished

by

glacial ice; on stones buried ingraves

and mounds

^; onfacesofrock thatappearinledges

by

the streams^; on canon wallsand towering^cliffs; on mountain^crags

and

theceilingsof caves

—

whereversmoothsurfaces ofrockare tobe foundinNorth America,there

we may

expectto find pietographs. So widelydistributed

and

sovast in number,itis well to

know what

purposes they

may

servein anthro- pologicscience.

Many

^ofthesepietographs aresimplypictures,rudeetchings,orpaint- ings,delineating naturalobjects, especiallyanimals,andillustratesimply the beginningofpictorial art; others

we know

were intended to com-

memorate

events or torepresent other ideas entertained

by

theirauthors;

buttoa large extent theseweresimply

mnemonic —

^{notconveyingideas}

of themselves,but designed

more

thoroughly to retain in

memory

cer- tainevents or thoughts

by

persons

who

were alreadycognizant of the

same

through currenthearsay or tradition. If once the

memory

ofthe thoughtto bepreservedhas passed fromthe mindsof men, the record

ispowerless torestoreits

own

subject-mattertotheunderstanding.

The

great

body

ofpicture-writingsisthus described; yetto

some

slight extentpietographs arefound with characters

more

orless conventional, and the

number

of suchisquite large in Mexico

and

Central America.

Yet

even theseconventional characters are used with others less con- ventional insucha

manner

^thatperfectrecords werenevermade.

Hence

^itwill beseen that it is illegitimate to use

any

pictographic matter of a dateanterior to thediscovery of the continentby

Columbus

for historicpurposes; butithas a legitimateuse of profound interest, asthese pietographsexhibitthebeginning of writtenlanguage

and

the beginningof pictorial art, yet undifferentiated;

aud

if the scholars of

America

will collect

and

study the vast

body

of this material scattered everywhere

—

^{over thevalleys}

^and

^{onthe mountain sides}

—

^{fromit can}

bewritten oneof themostinteresting chapters in the early historyof mankind.

76 LIMITATIONS TO THE USE OF ANTHROPOLOGIC

DATA.

HISTORY, CUSTOMS, AM) ETHNIC CHARACTERISTICS.

Wheu America was

discovered by Europeans,it

was

inhabited

by

great

numbers

of distincttribes, diverseinlanguages,institutions,

and

customs. This fact has neverbeen fully recognized,

and

wiiters have too often spokenof the North

American

Indians as a body, supposing thatstatements

made

ofonetribewould applytoall. Thisfundamental error in the treatment of the subjecthasled to greatconfusion.

Agaiu, the rapid progress in the settlement

and

occupation of the countryhasresulted in the gradual displacement of the Indiantribes, so thatvery

many

have been

removed

from their ancient homes,

some

of

whom

have beenincorporatedinto othertribes,

and some

have been absorbed into the

body

of civilizedpeople.

The names by

which ^tribes have been designated have ^rarelybeen

names

used by themselves, and the

same

tribe has often been desig- nated

by

different

names

in different periods of its historyand

by

dif- ferent

names

in the

same

period of its history

by

colonies of people having different geographic relations to them. Often, too, different tribeshave been designated

by

the

same

name.

Without

enteringinto an explanation of the causeswhich haveled to this condition of things, it issimply necessary to assert that this has led to greatconfusionof nomenclature. Therefore the student of Indian history

must

be ^con- stantly onhis guardin accepting thestatements of anyauthor relating to any tribe of Indians.

It willbeseen thattofollowany^tribeofIndiansthroughpost-Colum- bian times isa task of nolittle difficulty. Yet this portion of history isof importance,

and

the scholars of

America

havea great

work

before them.

Three centuriesof intimate contact with a civilized race has

had

no smallinfluence

upon

the pristinecondition of thesesavageandbarbaric tribes.

The

most speedy

and

radical change was thateffected in the arts,industrialandornamental.

A

^steelknife

^was

^{obviouslybetterthan}

a stoneknife; firearmsthan

bows and

arrows; and textilefabrics from the loomsof civilized

meu

are at once seen to be

more

beautiful and

more

^useful than the rude fabrics

and

undressed skins with which the

Indians clothed themselvesinthatearlierday.

Customs and

institutions changedlessrapidly. Yet thesehavebeen

much

modified. Imitation and vigorous propagandisin havebeenmore orless efficientcauses. Migrations

and

enforcedremovalsplaced tribes underconditions of strange environmentwhere

new

customs andinsti tutionswerenecessary,

and

in this conditioncivilization

had

a greater influence,

and

the progress of occupation by white

men

within the^ter- ritoryof theUnited States, atleast,has reached snch a stage that ^sav- agery and barbarism have no

room

for theirexistence,and even customs

poweli..I HISTORY,

CUSTOMS,

ETC.

77

and institutions must ina brieftime becompletely changed,and what

we

areyet tolearn of thesepeople

must

belearnednow.

But

inpursuingthese studies thegreatest caution

must

be observed

in discriminating

what

is primitivefrom

what

has been acquired from

civilized

man by

the various processes of acculturation.

ORIGIN OF MAN.

Working

naturalistspostulate evolution. Zoological research ^islargely directed to the discovery of the genetic relationsof animals.

The

evo- lution oftheanimal

kingdom

^isalong multifarious lines and bydiverse specializations.

The

particularline whichconnects

man

with thelowest forms, throughlong successions of intermediate forms,is aproblem of great interest. This specialinvestigation has todeal chiefly with rela- tionsof structure.

From

^the

many

facts already recorded, itis proba-

ble,that

many

detached portions of this linecan be drawn,

and

such a construction,

though

in fact it

may

not be correctin all itsparts. yel serves a valuable purposein organizingand directing research.

The

truthorerrorof such hypothetic genealogyin no

way

affectsthe validityof the doctrines of evolutionin themindsofscientificmen, but onthe other

hand

the value of the tentative theory isbroughtto final

judgment

underthe laws ofevolution.

It

would

bevainto claim that the course of zotilogicdevelopment is fullyunderstood, oreventhatallofitsmostimportantfactorsareknown.

So the discovery offactsand relations guided

by

thedoctrines ofevolu- tion reacts

upon

these doctrines, verifying, modifying,

and

enlarging them.

Thus

itis that while thedoctrines lead the

way

to

new

fieldsof discovery, the

new

discoveries lead again to

new

doctrines. Increased knowledge widens philosophy; wider philosophy increases knowledge.

Itisthe test oftruephilosophy thatit leadstothediscovery offacts,

and factsthemselvescan only be

known

as such; that is, can onlybe properly discerned

and

discriminated by being relegatedto theirplaces in philosophy.

The

whole progress of science depeuds primarily upon

this relation betweenknowledge

and

philosophy.

Intheearlier history of

mankind

philosophy

was

the product of sub- jective reasoning, givingmythologies

and

metaphysics.

When

^it

was

discovered that thewhole structure of philosophy was without founda- tion, a

new

order ofprocedure

was recommended —

^theBaconian method.

Perception

must

precede reflection^; observation

must

precedereason.

Thisalso

was

afailure.

The

earliergavespeculations; the latergive.;

a

mass

of incoherent facts

and

falsehoods.

The

error in the earlier philosophy

was

not in the order of procedurebetween perception and

reflection, but in the method, it being subjective instead of objective.

The method

of reasoningin scientificphilosophy ispurely objective; the

method

ofreasoninginmythology and metaphysicsis subjective.

78 LIMITATIONS TO THE USE OF ANTHROPOLOGIC

DATA.

The

^differencebetween

man

and the animals mostnearlyrelatedto

him in structureis great.

The

connecting- forms arenolonger extant.

This subject of research, therefore,belongsto thepaleontologists rather than theethnologists.

The

biological factsare embracedinthe geologi- cal record, and thisrecord

up

to thepresent time has yieldedbut scant materials to serveinits solution.

It is

known

that man, highly differentiated from lower animals in morphologic characteristics, existedin earlyQuaternary and perhaps in Pliocenetimes,

and

herethe discovered recordends.

LANGUAGE.

In philology, North

America

presents the richestfield in the world, forhereis found the greatest

number

of languages distributed

among

the greatest

number

of stocks.

As

the progress of research is neces- sarilyfrom the

known

tothe

unknown,

civilizedlanguageswerestudied by scholars before thelanguagesofsavage

and

barbarictribes. Again, the higherlanguages are written and are thus immediatelyaccessible.

For such reasons, chief attention has been given to the

most

highly developed languages.

The

problems presented to the philologist, in the higherlanguages, cannot be properly solved without a knowledge of the lowerforms.

The

linguist studies alanguagethathe

may

useit

as aninstrumentfortheinterchange ofthought; thephilologist studies alanguage touse its data in the construction of a philosophy of lan- guage. Itisin thislattersense that thehigherlanguagesare

unknown

until the lower languages are studied, and it is probable that

more

lightwill be thrown

upon

the former

by

astudyof the latterthan

by more

extendedresearchin thehigher.

The

vast fieldof unwrittenlanguageshasbeen explored but notsur- veyed. In a general

way

itis

known

that there are

many

such lan- guages,

and

the geographicdistribution ofthe tribesof

men who

speak

them

isknown,butscholars havejust

begun

the study of the languages.

That the knowledgeof thesimple and

uncompouuded must

precede theknowledgeof the complex

and

compounded, thatthelatter

may

be rightly explained,is an axiom wellrecognizedin biology,andit applies equally wellto philology.

Hence

any system of philology, asthe term

is hereused,

made

from a survey of the higher languagesexclusively, will probablybea failure. "

Which

of you

by

taking thoughtcan

add

one cubit unto his stature,"

and

which of you

by

taking thought can add theantecedent

phenomena

necessaryto au explanation of the lan-

guage of Platoor of Spencer1

The

study of astronomy, geology, physics, and biology, is in the hands of scientific

men

^; objective methods of research are employed and metaphysicdisquisitions findno placein the acceptedphilosophies

;

powelu]

LANGUAGE. 79

but to a large extent philology remains in the hands of the meta- physicians, and subjective

methods

of thoughtareused iuthe explana- tion of the

phenomena

observed. If philology is to be a science it

must

have an objective philosophy

composed

of a homologic classifica- tion and orderly arrangement of the

phenomena

of the languages of theglobe.

Philologic research began with the definite purpose in view to dis- cover ⁱⁿthediversities of language

among

the peoples of the earth a

common

elementfrom which they wereall supposedto have been de- rived, an ^original speech, the parent of alllanguages. Iu this philolo- gists

had

greathopesof success atonetime, encouraged

by

thediscov- ery ofthe relation between the diverse branchesof the

Aryan

^stock, but in this very

work

methods of research were developed

and

doc- triues estabhshedby which unexpected results werereached.

Instead of relegating thelanguagesthat

had

beforebeenunclassified to the

Aryan

family,

new

familiesor stockswere discovered,

and

this process hasbeen carried on fromyear to yearuntil scoresor even hun- dreds offamilies are recognized,and until

we may

reasonably conclude that there

was

no singleprimitive speech

common

tomankind, butthat

man had

multiplied and spreadthroughoutthe habitable earth anterior to the development of organized languages; that is, languages have sprung from innumerable sourcesafterthe dispersion of mankind.

The

progressin languagehas notbeenbymultiplication,whichwould be but aprogress iudegradation underthe

now

well-recognized laws of evolution; butithasbeeninintegrationfrom a vastmultiplicitytoward aunity. True, allevolution has notbeen in this direction. There has often been degradation as exhibited in the multiplicity of languages and dialectsof the

same

stock,but evolutionhasinthe aggregatebeen integration

by

progress towards unity of speech,

and

differentiation (which

must

always bedistinguished from multiplication)

by

specializa- tion of the gratnmatic process and the development ofthe parts of speech.

When

a peopleonce

homogeneous

are separated geographicallyin such a

manner

^thatthoroughinter-communicationisnolonger preserved,

allofthe agencies

by

which languages changeactseparatelyin thedis- tinctcommunities and produce different changes therein,

and

dialects areestablished. Ifthe separation continues, suchdialects become^dis- tinctlanguagesin the sense that the people of one

community

areuna- ble tounderstand the people of another.

But

such adevelopment of languages is notdifferentiation in the sensein which this term ishere used,

and

oftenused in biology, but is analogous to multiplicationas understoodiu biology.

The

differentiation of an organis itsdevelop-

ment

for a special purpose, i.c, the organic specialization is concomi- tant with functionalspecialization.

When paws

are differentiated into hands

and

feet, with the differentiation of the organs, there isa con comitantdifferentiation iu the functions.

80 LIMITATIONS TO TRE USE OF ANTHROPOLOGIC

DATA.

When

one language becomestwo, the

same

functionis performed

by

each,

and

^is

marked

by the fundamental characteristicof multiplica- tion, i. e.,degradation; for the people originallyable tocommunicate with each othercan no^longerthuscommunicate; so thattwo languages do not serve as valuable apurpose asone.

And,

further,neither of the two languages has

made

the progress one would have made, for one would

have

been developedsufficientlyto serve all thepurposes of the united peoplesinthelargerarea inhabited

by

them, and,cceterisparibus, thelanguage spoken

by many

people scattered over a large area

must

besuperiortoone spoken

by

afew people inhabiting a smallarea.

Itwould have beenstrange, indeed,

had

the primitiveassumptionin philology been true,

and

the historyof language exhibited universal degradation.

In theremarks on the "Origin ofMan," thestatement

was made

that

mankind was

distributed throughoutthe habitableearth, in

some

geo- logicalperiodanterior to the present

and

anterior to the development ofother than the rudestarts. Here,again,

we

reach the conclusion that

man was

distributedthroughout the earth anterior tothe development of organized speech.

In the presenceofthesetwogreatfacts,thedifficultyoftracinggenetic relationship

among human

racesthrougharts,customs,institutions,

and

traditions willappear, for all of these

must

have been developed ^after the dispersion of mankind. Analogies

and

homologiesin thesephe-

nomena must

be accounted for in

some

other way. Somatologyproves the unity of the

human

species^; thatis, the evidenceupon which this conclusion isreachedis morphologic; butin arts, customs, institutions,

and

traditions

abundant

corroborative evidence is found.

The

indi- viduals of the one species,though iuhabiting diverse climes, speaking diverselanguages, and organized intodiverse communities, have^pro- gressedⁱⁿ a broad

way by

the

same

stages,have

had

the

same

arts,cus- toms, institutions, and traditions in the

same

order, limitedonly

by

the degree of progress to which the several tribes haveattained,and modi- tied onlyto a limited extent

by

variations inenvironment.

If

any

ethnicclassificationof

mankind

^is tobe established

more

fun- damental than that based

upon

language, ^it

must

be uponphysical characteristics, and such

must

have beenacquiredby profounddifferen- tiation anterior to the developmentoflanguages, arts, customs,institu- tions,

and

traditions.

The

classifications hitherto

made

onthisbasisare unsatisfactory,

and

no one

now

receives wide acceptance. Perhaps furtherresearch will clear

up

doubtful matters and givean acceptable grouping; orit

may

bethat such research ^willresult onlyin exhibiting thefutility oftheeffort.

The

historyof man, from the lowest tribal condition to the highest national organization,has been ahistoryof constant

and

multifarious admixtureof strains of blood; of admixture, absorption,

and

destruc- tion oflanguageswith general progress toward ^{unity; of the diffusion}

powell.]

LANGUAGE. 81

ofartsby various processes ofacculturation; and of admixture

and

re- ciprocal diffusion of customs, institutions,

and

traditions. Arts, cus- toms, institutions,

and

traditions extend

beyond

the boundariesof lan-

guages

and

servetoobscuretheru,andtheadmixtureofstrainsofblood has obscured primitive ethnicdivisions, ifsuchexisted.

Ifthe physicalclassificationfails,the most fundamental grouping^left

isthatbased on language^; but forthe reasons alreadymentionedand others oflikecharacter, the classificationoflanguages isnot,to thefull extent, aclassification ofpeoples.

It

may

bethat the unity ofthe

human

raceis afactso profound that

all attemptsatafundamentalclassificationtobe used^{in all}the depart- mentsof anthropology willfail,and thattherewill remain multifarious groupings for the multifarious purposes of the science^; or, otherwise expressed, that languages, ^arts, customs, institutions,

and

^traditions

may

be classified,

and

that the

human

^family willbeconsidered as one

iace.

MYTHOLOGY.

Here

again

America

presents arichfield for the scientific explorer.

Itis

now known

^thateachlinguistic stockhasa^distinctmythology,

and

asin

some

of these stocks there are

many

languagesdiffering toa greater orless extent, sothere are

many

likediffering mythologies.

As

ⁱⁿ language, so in mythology, investigation has proceeded from the

known

to the

unknown —

^{from the higher to the} lower mythologies.

In each step of the progress of opinion on this subjecta particular

phenomenon may

be observed.

As

each lower status of mythologyis

discovered itisassumed tobe thefirst inorigin,the primordial mythol- ogy,

and

all lower but imperfectlyunderstood mythologies are inter- pretedas degradations,from this

assumed

original belief; thuspolythe- ismwas interpretedas adegeneracy from monotheism; nature worship, from psychotheism^; zoolotry, from ancestor worship; and, in order, monotheismhasbeenheldtobetheoriginalmythology,then polytheism, then physitheism ornature worship, then ancestor worship.

With

a large body ofmythologists nature worshipis

now

accepted as the primitive ^religion; and with another body, equally as respectable, ancestor worship isprimordial.

But

nature worship

and

ancestor wor- ship areconcomitantpartsof the

same

religion,

and

belongtoastatus of culture highlyadvanced

and

characterized

by

the invention of con- ventional pictographs. In North

America we

have scores or even hun- dreds ofsystemsofmythology,all belonging to alowerstateofculture.

Letushopethat

American

studentswill notfalliutothis lineoferror by assumingthat zootheism istheloweststage,becausethisisthestatus ofmythology

most

widely spreadon the continent.

Mythology isprimitive philosophy.

A

mythology

—

^{thatis, the}

^body

6

A E

82 LIMITATIONS TO THE USE OF ANTHROPOLOGIC

DATA.

of

myths

current

among any

people

and

believed

by them —

^{comprises a}

system of explanations of all the

phenomena

of the universe discerned by

them

^; but such explanationsarealways

mixed

with

much

extraneous matter, chieflyincidents in thehistoryof the personages

who

werethe heroes ofmythologicdeeds.

Every

mythology hasfor its basisa theology

—

^{asystemof gods}

^who

are the actors, and to

whom

are attributed the

phenomena

to beex- plained

—

^forthefundamentalpostulate in mythologyis

"some

onedoes

it," such being theessential characteristicofsubjective reasoning.

As

peoplespass from one stage of culture to another, thechange is

made by

developing a

new

sociology withall its institutions,

by

the develop-

ment

of

new

arts,

by

evolution oflanguage, and, ina degreeno^less, by achangein philosophy; buttheold philosophy^isnot supplanted.

The

change^is

made by

internalgrowth and externalaccretion.

Fragments

of the olderarefound in the newer. This older material in the

newer

philosophy is often used for curiouspurposes

by many

scholars.

One

such useIwishtomentionhere.

The

nomenclaturewhich hassurvived fromtheearlierstate^is supposed tobe deeplyand occultly symbolic

and

themythicnarrativesto be deeply

and

occultly allegoric.

In this

way

search is

made

for

some

profoundlymetaphysic cosmogony;

some

ancientbeginning of the mythology^is soughtin which mysteryis

wisdom and wisdom

^ismystery.

The

objectiveor scientific

method

of studying amythology ^is tocol- lectand collate its

phenomena

simply asitis stated and understood by the peopleto

whom

^{it belongs.} In tracingback the threads of itshis- torical developmentthe studentshould expecttofindit

more

simple

and

childlike inevery stageof his progress.

Itisvain to search fortruth inmythologic philosophy, butit is im- portantto search for veritable philosphies, that they

may

be properly

compared and

that the products ofthe

human mind

initsvarious stages of culture

may

be

known;

importantinthe reconstruction of thehistory ofphilosophy^;and importantinfurnishing necessarydatatopsychology.

Xo

^laborcan be

more

fruitless than the searchin mythologyfor true philosophy^;

and

theefforts to build

up

from the terminologyand narra- tivesof mythologiesan occult symbolism and systemof allegory isbut to createa

new and

^fictitious

body

of mythology.

There^isasymbolism ^inherentin language

and

found inall philoso- phy, true orfalse,and such symbolism wascultivated asan occult artin theearly history ofcivilization

when

picture-writingdeveloped into con- ventional writing,

and

symbolism ^isan interestingsubjectforstudy, but

it has been

made

a beast of burden tocarry packsof metaphysicnon- sense.

powkll|

SOCIOLOGY PSYCHOLOGY. 83

SOCIOLOGY.

Here

again North

America

presents awide and interesting fieldto the investigator, for itliaswithinitsextent

many

^distinctgovernments, and thesegovernments, so far as investigationsLave been carried, are found to belong to a type

more

primitive than anyof the feudalities from which the civilized nations of the earth sprang, as

shown by

con- currentlyrecorded history.

Yetin thishistory

many

facts

have

been discovered suggesting that feudalities themselves

had

an origin in something

more

primitive. In thestudyofthe tribesof the worlda multitude ofsociologic institutions

and

customs have beendiscovered,

and

in reviewing the history offeu- dalitiesitis seen that

many

of their important elementsaresurvivals from tribal society.

So importantarethese discoveries that all

human

historyhas tobe rewritten,thewholephilosophy of historyreconstructed.

Government

does not begininthe ascendencyofchieftainsthrough prowess in war, butin the slow specialization ofexecutive functions from

communal

associations based onkinship. Deliberative assembliesdo notstartin councilsgathered

by

chieftains, butcouncilsprecedechieftaincies.

Law

does not begin in contract, but is the developmentofcustom.

Land

tenure does not begin in grants from the

monarch

or the feudallord, but a system oftenurein

common

by gentesor tribesisdeveloped into asystemoftenureinseveralty. Evolutionin societyhas notbeen from militancy to industrialism, but from organization based on kinship to organization basedou property,

and

alongside of thespecializations of tbe industriesofpeace the artsofwar have been specialized.

So, one

by

one,the theories of metaphysical writerson sociology air overthrown, and the facts of history are taking their place,

and

the philosophy ofhistory isbeing erected out of materials accumulating by objective studiesof

mankind

PSYCHOLOGY.

Psychology has hitherto been chiefly inthe hands of subjective phi- losophers

and

isthelast branch of anthropologytobe treated

by

scien-

tific methods.

But

of late years sundry important labors havebeen

performed with theend ⁱⁿ view togivethisdepartmentof philosophy a basis of objective facts; especially the organ of the

mind

has been studiedaud themental operations of animalshave been

compared

with

84 LIMITATIONS TO THE USE OF ANTHROPOLOGIC

DATA.

those of men,

and

invarious other

ways

the subject isreceivingscien- tificattention.

The new

psychologyin process of constructionwill have athreefold basis^:

A

^{physical basis} on

phenomena

presented

by

the organ of the

mind

as

shown

in

man and

thelower animals; a^linguistic basis as pre- sentedⁱⁿ the

phenomena

of language, whichis theinstrumentofmind;

afunctional basis as exhibitedin operations of themind.

The phenomena

^ofthethird class

may

be arranged^inthreesubclasses.

First,the operations of

mind

exhibited inindividualsin various stages ofgrowth, various degrees of^culture,

and

invariousconditions, normal

and

abnormal; second, the operations of

mind

as exhibited in technol- ogy, arts,

and

industries^; third, the operations of

mind

as exhibited in philosophy; and theseare the explanations given of the

phenomena

of theuniverse.

On

such abasis ascientificpshycology

must

be^erected.

As

methodsofstudyarediscovered,a vastfieldopenstotheAmerican scholar.

Now,

as at all timesin thehistory of civilization, there has been no lack ofinterestinthis subject,

and

nolack ofspeculativewrit- ers; butthere is agreat

want

of trained observers and acuteinvesti- gators.

If

we

lay asidethe

mass

ofworthlessmatter which has beenpublished,

and

consideronly the materialused

by

the mostcareful writers,

we

find on every

hand

that conclusions are vitiated

by

a multitude oferrors of factof a character the

most

simple. Yesterday Iread an articleon the

"

Growth

ofSculpture,"

by

GrantAllen,that

was

charming; yet,there- in Ifoundthis statement:

SofarasIknow, thePolynesiansandmanyothersavages havenot progressed be- yondthefull-facestage ofhumanportraiture ahovodescribed. Nextin rankcomes the drawing ofaprofile, aswefind it among theEskimos and the bushmen. Our ownchildrensoon attain to thislevel, whichis one degree higher thanthat of the fullface,asitimpliesaspecialpoint of view, suppresses half thefeatures, andisnot diagrammaticorsymbolical of all the separate^parts. Negroes and North American Iudianscannot understand^profile; theyaskwhathasbecomeof the othereye.

PerhapsMr. Allen derives^hisidea of the inability of the Indians to

understand profilesfrom a statement of ^Catlin, whichI haveseenused

for this and other purposes

by

different anthropologists untilit seems tohave

become

afavoritefact.

Turning ^to Catlin's Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs, and Condition of the North American Indians, (vol. _2, page 2)

we

^find

^him

saying:

AfterIhad paintedthese,andmanymore

whom

Ihavenottimeatpresenttoname,

I painted theportraitof a celebrated warrior of the Sioux,bythename ofMah-to- chee-ga (the LittleBear),whowas unfortunately ^{slain in} afew moments afterthe picturewas doue by one of hisowntribe; and whichwas very near costingme

my

life,forhavingpainted asideviewofhis face,leaving one-half ofitout of thepicture,

powell]

SPECULATIVE

WRITING.

85

whichhad beenthe cause of theaffray; and supposedbythewholetribe tohave been intentionallyleftoutbyme, as" goodfornothing." Thiswasthe^lastpicturethatI paintedamongsttho Sioux, andthe^last, undoubtedly, thatIshallever paintinthat place. So tremendous and^soalarmingwasthe excitementabout it that

my

brushes wereinstantlyput away, andIembarkedthenextday outhesteamerforthesources oftheMissouri,and wasgladtogetnnderweigh.

Subsequently, Mr. Catlin elaborates thisincidentinto the " Story of the

Dog"

^{(vol. '2,} page188^etseq).

Now,

^{whatsoeverof truth orof} fancy there

may

be^{in this story, it} cannot be used as evidence that the Indians could not understandor interpret profilepictures, forMr. Catliu himself gives several platesof Indian pictographs exhibiting profile faces. In

my

cabinet of picto-

graphs Ihave hundreds ^ofsideviews

made by

Indians of the

same

tribe ofwhich Mr. ^Catliu

was

speaking.

Itshouldneverbe forgotten that accounts oftravelers

and

otherper- sons

who

writeforthe sake of

making good

^stories

must be

usedwith theutmostcaution. Catliuis onlyoneof athousand such

who

caube used with safety only

by

persons so thoroughly acquainted with the subjectthat theyare abletodividefacts actuallyobserved fromcreations of fancy.

But

Mr. Catliu

must

notbe^lieldresponsiblefor illogical de- ductionseven from hisfacts. I

know

not

how

^Mr. Allen arrivedat his conclusion, butI do

know

that pictographs inprofile are found

among

very many,ifnot all, thetribes ofNorth America.

Now,

for another example. Peschel,in The Races of

Man

(page151), says

:

Thetransatlantic history ofSpain has nocasecomparableininiquitytotheact oftho Portuguesein Brazil, whodeposited the^clothesofscarlet-feveror small-pox patients onthehunting groundsofthenatives, inordertospread the pestilenceamong them

;

andoftheNorthAmericans,whoused strychninetopoisonthe wells whichthe Red- skinswereinthehabit ofvisiting inthedesertsofUtah; ofthewivesof Australian settlers,who,intimes of famine,mixed arsenic with the meal which theygaveto starvingnatives.

In afoot-noteouthe

same

page,

Burton

is given as authorityfor the statement that the people of theUnited States poisoned thewells ofthe redskins.

Referring ^to Burton, in The City of ^{the Saints} (page 474),

we

find

him

saying:

TheYutaclaim, likethe Shoshonee, descentfrom anancient people thatimmigrated into theirpresent seatsfromthe Northwest. Duringthe last thirty yearsthey have considerably decreased, according to the mountaineers, and have been demoralized mentallyandphysicallybythe emigrants. Formerly they were friendly,now they areoftenatwarwiththeintruders. Asin Australia,arsenicandcorrosivesublimate inspringsandprovisionshave diminishedtheirnumber.

Xow, why

^didBuxton

make

this statement"? In the

same volume

he describesthe Mountain

Meadow

^{massacre,andgivesthe}story as related by ^theactors therein. ^Itiswell

known

thatthe

men who

were engaged inthis affairtried to shield themselves

by

^diligentlypublishing that ^it

was

amassacre

by

Indians incensed^at the travelersbecausethey

had

poisonedcertainsprings atwhich the Indianswere wont toobtaintheir

8G

LIMITATIONS

TO THE USE OF ANTHROPOLOGIC

DATA.

suppliesof water.

When

Mr.Burton

was

in Salt

Lake

City be, doubt-

Less, heard thesestories.

So the falsehoodsof a murderer, told to hide hiscrime,have gone intohistoryas factscharacteristicofthe people of theUnited Statesin their treatment of theIndians. In the paragraph quoted from Burton

some

othererrors occur.

The

Utes

and

Shoshonis donot claimtohave descended from an ancient people that immigrated into theirpresent seatsfromthe Northwest.

Most

of thesetribes,perhapsall,have

myths

of theircreation in the veryregions

now

inhabited

by

them.

Again, theseIndianshave not beendemoralized mentally or physic ally

by

the emigrants, but have

made

^great progress towardciviliza- tion.

The

wholeaccount of theUtes

and

Shoshonis givenin thisportion of thebookisso mixed with error as tobe^valueless, and bears intrinsic evidence of having beenderivedfrom ignorant frontiersmen.

Turning

now

to the firstvolume of Spencer's Principles of Sociology (page149),

we

find

him

saying:

Andthus prepared,we need feelnosurpriseon being told that the Zuni Indians require"muckfacialcontortionandbodily gesticulationtomaketheirsentencesper- fectly intelligible ;"that the languageofthe Bushmanneeds so manysigns to eko out itsmeaning,that "theyare unintelligible inthedark^;" andthat theArapahos

"canhardly conversewith one anotherinthe dark."

When

people of different languages meet, especiallyif theyspeak languages of different stocks, a

means

of communication is rapidlyes-

tablished between them, composed partly of signs

and

partlyof oral words,thelattertaken from oneorbothof the languages,butcuriously modifiedso as hardlytobe recognized.

Such

conventional languages areusuallycalled "jargons,"

and

theirexistence^is ratherbrief.

When

peoplecommunicatewith each otherinthismanner,oral speech

isgreatly assisted

by

signlanguage,

and

it is true that darkness im- pedes theircommunication.

The

great

body

offrontiersmen in

America who

associate

more

orless with the Indians

depend upon

jargon meth- ods of communicationwith

them

^;

and

so

we

find thatvariouswriters

and

travelers describe Indian tongues

by

the characteristics of this jargon speech. Mr. Spencerusuallydoes.

The

Zuni andthe

Arapaho

Indians havea language with acomplex

grammar

and copious vocabulary well adaptedtothe expression of the thoughtsincident to theircustomsandstatusofculture,

and

theyhave no

more

difficultyinconveying theirthoughtswiththeirlanguage

by

night than Englishmen have ⁱⁿ conversing without gaslight.

An

example from each of three eminent authors hasbeen taken to illustrate the worthlessness of a vast

body

of anthropologic material to which even the bestwriters resort.

Anthropology needstraineddevotees with philosophic methods and keen observation to study everytribe

and

nation of the globe almost denovo;

and

from materials thuscollectedascience

may

beestablished.