laim is
seen to have but slight basis in fact the main argument for asserting
the human sculptures to be faithful representations of physical
features, and to embody exact racial characters falls to the ground, and
it must be admitted as in the last degree improbable that the art of the
mound sculptor was adequate for the task of accurate human portraiture.
To base important ethnologic deductions upon the evidence afforded by
the human sculptures in the present state of our knowledge concerning
them would seem to be utterly unscientific and misleading.
Copies of several of the heads as they appear in "Ancient Monuments"
(pp. 244-247) are here subjoined to show the various types of
physiognomy illustrated by them:
[Illustration: Fig. 31. Fig. 32. Fig. 33. Human Carvings from the
Mounds.]
[Illustration: Fig. 34. Fig. 35. Human Carvings from the Mounds.]
Could the many other stone and terra-cotta sculptures of the human face
which have been ascribed to the Mound-Builders be reproduced here it
would be seen that the specimens illustrated above are among the very
best. In not a few, traces of the grotesque are distinctly visible, and
there is little in their appearance to suggest that they had a different
origin or contain a deeper meaning than similar productions found among
present Indians. As each of the many carvings differ more or less from
every other, it will at once be perceived that the advocates of
different theories can readily find in the series abundant testimony in
support of any and all assumptions they may choose to advance.
INDIAN AND MOUND-BUILDERS' ART COMPARED.
Turning from special illustrations of the artistic skill of the
Mound-Builders, brief attention may be paid to their art in its more
general features, and as compared with art as found among our Indian
tribes.
Among some of the latter the artistic instinct, while deriving its
characteristic features, as among the Mound-Builders, from animated
nature, exhibits a decided tendency towards the production of
conventional forms, and often finds expression in creations of the most
grotesque and imaginative character.
While this is true of some tribes it is by no means true of all, nor is
it true of all the art products of even those tribes most given to
conventional art. But even were it true in its broadest terms, it is
more than doubtful if the significance of the fact has not been greatly
overestimated. Some authors indeed see
|