Frank Hamilton Cushing, brings before us something entirely new. The facts correspond, however, to others which we have already noticed among the emblematic mounds, and show that a common system existed among all the tribes. We are delighted with this article as much as if the information was an original discovery made by ourselves. We next read the "Myths of the Iroquois," by Mrs. Erminnie A. Smith. Here we find the native mythology brought before us in a charming style, reminding us of the ancient tales of Greece and the far famed Scandinavian myths, but more conformed to the scenes of nature and to primitive superstition. They form another chapter in the great mythologic history of our country, and remind us as to how much we have lost by allowing so many tribes to pass away without telling us their stories. We next read the article by Mr. Henry W. Henshaw, "Animal Carvings from the Mounds of the Mississippi Valley." We recognize the cuts, which have become so familiar, and agree with the writer in many of his conclusions, but prefer to leave some questions open. He is certainly insinuating a great deal when the writer says that the discoverer of the elephant pipes and the inscribed tablet at Davenport had a remarkable "archæologic instinct, and the aid of his divining rod," when making his discoveries, as if he was guilty of an intentional fraud. We should consider it a libel if it was said of us. We pass on to the "Navajo Silversmiths," by Dr. Washington Matthews, U. S. A., and find that the native artists, with their rude contrivances, are able to work out many fine specimens of art, and are led to admire the skill of the native American. The next article is by Mr. W. H. Holmes, on “Art in Shell of the Ancient Americans." Mr. Holmes is an excellent draughtsman, and has exercised his skill in representing the rude drawings and carvings, so that the figures may come before the eye and appear as they are in the shells. These figures are in the shape of crosses, serpents, dragons, birds and various nondescript creatures. The question arises, are they altogether of native American origin, or are they signs of an intruded cultus, such as might come from Christian countries. The cross might indeed be pre-Christian, and the serpent might have been a primitive symbol of the Aryan race, but the position which the author takes, in com. mon with others, that they were of native origin, is, in our opinion, at least, open to doubt. The Suastika is as clearly seen in some of these figures as it is in the whorls found by Schliemann in the mound at Hissarlik, and there is no reason for denying its prevalence in America. It is only because men are held to a theory that they are so tenacious of the native origin of everything in America. Castellani recognized primitive Aryan symbols in American art when he was in this country, and we may as well keep our minds open to conviction as to say that it is a foregone conclusion that everything in America is and must be native American. The report of Col. Stephenson on the "Collections obtained from the Indians in New Mexico and Arizona, in 1879," is a valuable paper, and shows that in these regions aboriginal art was advanced very much beyond that of the mound-bullders.

But we would say in reference to the volume as a whole, that it indicates very thorough work both in the director and in the assistants, and is very creditable to the scholarship of the gentlemen connected with the Bureau. There is a rich field in America, and it is to be hoped that it will continue to be worked. We have unbounded admiration for thorough and honest work, and believe that the Bureau is destined to accomplish great things in American archæology-at least this is the impression which we get from the Second Annual Report.

The Odyssey of Homer, Books I-X-II. The Text, and and an English Version in Rythmic Prose, by GEORGE HERBERT PALMER, Professor of Philosophy, in Harvard University. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1884. This is a charming book. It is an actual luxury to take it up and look at it, as everything about it is in such excellent taste-type, paper, binding and all. The Greek type is beautiful, and the translation is on the opposite page, the two correspoding remarkably in their place on the page. The translation is elegant. It is a perfect delight to read such a translation, with its perfect diction, and yet so literal and so true to the meaning of the original Greek. It is a wonderful book-one out of a thousand.

Pre-Historic America, by the MARQUIS DE NADAILLAC. New York and London: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1884.

One of the strongest evidences that Archæology is making great progress in this country, is the fact that so many books are being published on the subject. Seven years ago, when this Journal was started, there was scarcely any. thing which could furnish reliable information to the inquiring public. Foster's Pre-historic races was then on sale, but it was nearly out of date. Wilson's last edition, in two volumes, had appeared but it was very expensive. Other than these, there was nothing except the government publications, such as "Smithsonian Reports," Smithsonian Contributions, Simpsons Explorations, The Pacific R. R. Survey, Hayden's Survey and one or two volumes of Powell's Survey. These were bulky and difficult for the ordinary reader to secure. There appeared soon after, however, the two or three little volumes written by Rev. J. P. McLean. The book on “Vanished Races,” by Conant, and last but not least, the valuable work by Prof. J. T. Short, on the North Americans of Antiquity. About this time there were several societies in France which were making a specialty of Archæology. As a result of these and the interest which had been awakened on the two continents, the Marquis de Nadaillac prepared the volume whose title is given above, and the work seems to be a valuable summary or compilation, so valuable, in fact, that the author and the American editor and publisher thought it best to bring out a translation of it for American readers. Maj. J. W. Dall was selected as the editor. He has not translated, but has revised the original edition, adding to it such material as might be gathered upon this side of the water. This was well, for the author, notwithstanding his intelligence in matters pertaining to American Archæology in a broad and general sense was necessarily more or less ignorant of the investigators who were making discoveries, but whose names had not become prominent in Europe. Maj. Dall was more familiar with these, though he, owing to his long residence upon the northwest coast, does not seem to be fully informed in reference to the more recent investigations. His acquaintance is extensive on the Atlantic coast, but is lacking as far as the interior is concerned. As a result certian important points have been left out of the book, especially those concerning the latest classification of the mounds and the relics which have been discovered in them. Still the book proves to be an interesting one. It is written with the French briliancy and with American caution. There are some points which are taken for granted which would have better been left as mere tentative theories, or as as suppositions which might be overthrown or confirmed as the science should advance. Certainly the position that man in America has been found associated with extinct animals and is of undoubted extreme antiquity, is far from being proven, and if it were proven, it does not follow that this "primitive man made his home under the shells of the gigantic glyptodon. This is the visionary fancy of the French author. The naturalist, Lund, discovered bones of man in caves in Brazil, and in the same caves were bones of the extinct animals, but they belonged to different horizons. Pre glacial man in America is not a certainty, even if the Paleolethics found in the gravel beds at Trenton are quoted as evidence, The book is splendidly printed and contains many valuable engravings. It treats of the antiquities of North America as well as South America, and is written in a fascinating style, and will undoubtedly be sought for by American Archaeologists as the latest and the best contribution to the science.

Siam and Laos, as seen by our American Missionaries. Philadelphia, Presbyterian Board of Publication, No. 1334, Chestnut St.

The description of Siam has been given many times but, generally in expensive books. The Presbyterian Board has brought together into an attractive volume, a series of essays upon the country, written by different missionaries. The volume begins with an account of the geographical and archæological features of the country. This is not the most interesting, but the most valuable part of the book. There is in it a description of the “Cambodian Ruins" of Nagkon Wat. The structure cover an area of overs ten acres. It rises in three quadangular tiers of thirty feet. Out of the highest central point springs a great tower 180 feet high, and four inferior corner towers. It has been suggested that Mt. Meru, the center of the Budhist Universe, with its sacred rock circles, is symbolized.

The stone graves so common in some sections of our country, will, when properly studied, furnish the Antiquarian with an apparently unbroken chain, linking some, at least, of the veritable mound-builders with well-known modern Indian tribes. The evidence they furnish bearing upon the question now under discussion is peculiarly valuable, as it will probably explain in part some of the troublesome riddles of the mounds, and also throw some rays of light into the dark mystery that still enshrouds the history of one important and still existing tribe. These graves, as is well known, are formed of rough unhewn slabs or flat pieces of stone.

First, In a pit dug for the purpose, some two or three feet deep and of the desired dimensions, a layer is placed to form the floor; next, similar pieces are set on edge for the sides and ends, over which other slabs are laid flat, forming the covering, the whole, when finished, making a rude box-shaped coffin or sepulcher. Sometimes one or more of the six faces. are wanting, occasionally the bottom consists of a layer of water-worn boulders; sometimes the top is not a single layer, but other pieces are laid over the joints, and sometimes they are placed shingle fashion. These graves vary in length from fourteen inches to eight feet, and in width from nine inches to three feet. It is not an unusual thing to find a mound containing a number of these cists, arranged in two, three,

*The first paper appeared in the American Antiquarian, March, 1884, the second, March, 1885.

or more tiers. As a general rule, those not in mounds are near the surface of the ground, and in some instances I have observed them even projecting above it. It is probable that no one who has examined them has failed to note their strong resemblance to the European mode of burial. Even Dr. Joseph Jones, who attributed them to some "ancient race," was forcibly reminded of this resemblance, as he remarks: "In looking at the rude stone coffins of Tennessee, I have again and again been impressed with the idea that in some former age this ancient race must have come in contact with Europeans and derived this mode of burial from them."1

As the geographical distribution of the graves of this particular type may assist us in determining who were their authors, I give here a list of the localities in which they have been observed.

Valley of the Delaware, in the vicinity of the Delaware Water Gap, and Lancaster county, Pennsylvania.

Shenandoah Valley, West Virginia, and Lee county, Vir

ginia.

Habersham and Barton counties, Georgia.

In various parts of middle Tennessee, especially in the Cumberland Valley, where they are found in great numbers.

At several points in Kentucky, but a number of those discovered in this State are not of the peculiar type we are now considering.

At various points in Southern Illinois.

In several localities in Ohio.

In St. Louis and Bollinger counties, Missouri.

These localities are somewhat widely scattered, on which account we might reasonably infer that several tribes were accustomed to this mode of burial, but a somewhat careful study of the subject leads me to the conclusion that they are the work of some two or three cognate tribes.

In the first place this mode of sepulture is so marked in its peculiarities as to warrant us in believing it to be an ethnic type, limited in its use to a single stock or a few tribes. So thoroughly did this fact impress itself on the mind of Dr. Jones that we find him remarking, after a very complete examination, "It is evident that the ancient race of Tennessce is distinguished from all others by their peculiar method of interment in rude stone coffins."

Mr. Carr, after a careful study of the crania from these stone. graves, and comparison with the skulls of various aboriginal tribes, remarks that the absence of any evidence of the custom of anterior flattening "would seem to exclude from the list of possible builders of these stone graves, the Chickasaws, Natchez,

1 Aboriginal Remains of Tennessee, pp. 34-5. 2 Abor. Remains Tenn., p. 34.

Choctaws, and any and all other tribes in which the custom of intentionally depressing the frontal bone can be shown to have prevailed." i

In the same connection he suggests the possibility of the Shawnee Indians, who formerly resided in the Cumberland valley, being the authors of the stone graves of this kind in that region. But it is due to Mr. C. C. Jones to state that he had previously made the same suggestion.

This suggestion, I believe, is in the proper direction, and I will present briefly my reasons for adopting it.

It is not my intention to enter upon the discussion of the puzzling history of these Indians, in reference to whom Parkman remarks: "Their eccentric wanderings, their sudden appearances and disappearances, perplex the antiquary and defy research,"--especially as this task has been as fully performed as the historical materials warrant, by M. F. Force' and C. C. Royce, but there are a few points bearing upon this suggestion to which I desire to call attention.

We have undoubted historical evidence that they resided in the region of the Cumberland, from the earliest notice we have of that section, until their final departure therefrom at a comparatively recent date; and as Mr. Force correctly remarks, "We first find the Shawnee in actual history about the year 1660, and living along the Cumberland river, or the Cumberland and Tennessee."

It is well known that some bands of the tribe emigrated to eastern Pennsylvania near the close of the seventeenth century, and remained there for a long time in intimate and friendly relation with the Delawares, and that they were ethnically related to this latter tribe is also well known.

That the graves of this character found in the Delaware region are to be attributed to the Delawares and Shawnees, is clearly proven by the following evidence:

The positive statement by Loskiel that they were accustomed to bury in this manner: "They buried their dead by digging a grave of the required size and about one or two feet deep, they put flat stones at the bottom and set others at each end and each side on the edge; then laid the body in, generally on the back at full length, covered the grave with the same kind of stone laid as closely together as practicable, without cement, sometimes laying smaller stones over the joints or cracks to keep the earth from falling into the grave. Then they covered the grave with earth, not generally more than two or three feet high."

111th Rep. Peab. Museum, p. 366. Life of Pontiac, Vol. I., p. 32 Some early notices of the Indians of Ohio.

4 An inquiry into the identity and

history of the Shawnee Indians, in Amer. Antiq., April, 1881.

blc., p. 40.

6 Hist. Mission, United Brethren, p.

I 20.