Animal Carvings from Mounds of the Mississippi Valley | Page 3

taken by many prominent archæologists with respect to the
mound sculptors' skill, and will be forced to accord them a position on
the plane of art not superior to the one occupied by the North American
Indians. If it should prove that but a small minority of the carvings can
be specifically identified, owing to inaccuracies and to their general
resemblance, he may indeed go even further and conclude that they
form a very unsafe basis for deductions that owe their very existence to
assumed accurate imitation.
MANATEE.
In 1848 Squier and Davis published their great work on the Mounds of
the Mississippi Valley. The skill and zeal with which these gentlemen
prosecuted their researches in the field, and the ability and fidelity
which mark the presentation of their results to the public are
sufficiently attested by the fact that this volume has proved alike the
mine from which subsequent writers have drawn their most important
facts, and the chief inspiration for the vast amount of work in the same

direction since undertaken.
On pages 251 and 252 of the above-mentioned work appear figures of
an animal which is there called "Lamantin, Manitus, or Sea Cow,"
concerning which animal it is stated that "seven sculptured
representations have been taken from the mounds." When first
discovered, the authors continue, "it was supposed they were monstrous
creations of fancy; but subsequent investigations and comparison have
shown that they are faithful representations of one of the most singular
animal productions of the world."
These authors appear to have been the first to note the supposed
likeness of certain of the sculptured forms found in the mounds to
animals living in remote regions. That they were not slow to perceive
the ethnological interest and value of the discovery is shown by the fact
that it was immediately adduced by them as affording a clew to the
possible origin of the Mound-Builders. The importance they attached to
the discovery and their interpretation of its significance will be
apparent from the following quotation (p. 242):
Some of these sculptures have a value, so far as ethnological research is
concerned, much higher than they can claim as mere works of art. This
value is derived from the fact that they faithfully represent animals and
birds peculiar to other latitudes, thus establishing a migration, a very
extensive intercommunication or a contemporaneous existence of the
same race over a vast extent of country.
The idea thus suggested fell on fruitful ground, and each succeeding
writer who has attempted to show that the Mound-Builders were of a
race different from the North American Indian, or had other than an
autochthonous origin, has not failed to lay especial stress upon the
presence in the mounds of sculptures of the manatee, as well as of other
strange beasts and birds, carved evidently by the same hands that
portrayed many of our native fauna.
Except that the theories based upon the sculptures have by recent
writers been annunciated more positively and given a wider range, they
have been left almost precisely as set forth by the authors of the

"Ancient Monuments," while absolutely nothing appears to have been
brought to light since their time in the way of additional sculptured
evidence of the same character. It is indeed a little curious to note the
perfect unanimity with which most writers fall back upon the above
authors as at once the source of the data they adduce in support of the
several theories, and as their final, nay, their only, authority. Now and
then one will be found to dissent from some particular bit of evidence
as announced by Squier and Davis, or to give a somewhat different turn
to the conclusions derivable from the testimony offered by them. But in
the main the theories first announced by the authors of "Ancient
Monuments," as the result of their study of the mound sculptures, are
those that pass current to-day. Particular attention may be called to the
deep and lasting impression made by the statements of these authors as
to the great beauty and high standard of excellence exhibited by the
mound sculptures. Since their time writers appear to be well satisfied to
express their own admiration in the terms made use of by Squier and
Davis. One might, indeed, almost suppose that recent writers have not
dared to trust to the evidence afforded by the original carvings or their
fac-similes, but have preferred to take the word of the authors of the
"Ancient Monuments" for beauties which were perhaps hidden from
their own eyes.
Following the lead of the authors of the "Ancient Monuments," also,
with respect to theories of origin, these carvings of supposed foreign
animals are offered as affording incontestible evidence that the
Mound-Builders must have migrated from or have had intercourse,
direct or