Elephant pipes and inscribed tablets in the Museum of the Academy of natural sciences, Daveport, Iowa / by Charles E. Putnam.

  • Charles Edwin Putnam
Date:
1885
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Elephant pipes and inscribed tablets in the Museum of the Academy of natural sciences, Daveport, Iowa / by Charles E. Putnam. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    42/100 (page 40)
    the elephant mound, concerning which he doubts whether an effigy without ears, tail, tusks, or extended trunk can stand for a mastodon. The author throtus dis- credit upon the authejiticity of the elephant pipesT To the Davenport Academy, however, the hippant criticism of Mr. Henshaw has more serious import, and, uncontradicted, it might inflict irreparable injury. It has been well remarked, “that not the least misfortune of a prominent falsehood is the fact that tradition is apt to repeat it for truth.’' Shielded under the respectable name of the Smithsonian Institution, Mr. Henshaw insinuates his slanders into the ear of the world. Not by a frank and open statement, with good rea- sons assigned, does this “naturalist” condemn our elephant pipes and accuse their discoverer; but; as seeking to escape responsibility, with a nod and a wink, he merely hints, as it were, in a sly whisper, “that their authenticity as specimens of the Mound-builder’s art has been seriously called in question.” Thereupon a prominent scientific jour- nal, caught in the snare, innocently takes up the whispered story and reports to the vast company of its readers that Mr. Henshaw, an ac- credited representative of the Bureau of Ethnology, “throws discredit upon the authenticity of the elephant pipes!” and this without a word of disapproval of its base and unfounded insinuations. Nor is this all. We have before us the work u])on “Prehistoric America,” by the Mar- quis de Nadaillac, just issued from the press, and therein we find this reference to the relics in question: '■'Quite recently^ in Io%oa, a pipe has been founds made of rather soft sandstone, 70hieh is claimed to represent an elephant. It is to be observed, however, that such identifications generally owe much to the natural desire to recognize something strange or unu.sual, and also to the want of a sufficient knowledge of natural history. A recently published investigation of bird-pipes and carvings, by a well-known orni- thologist, has resulted in demolishing the foundation of much theorizing which has been based on the identical specimens examined. Forgeries are also too common.'''' * And the distinguished author gives as his authority for these strong statements, “H. W. Henshaw, Second Annual Rej)ort Bureau of Eth- nology, Washington, 1884.” The mischief is now done. The “de- * “ Prehistoric America,” by Xadiiillac, ]>p. 161-162. From the fact that the above reference to the elephant pipes has no appropriate settinjj;^ in the text, it may be reasonably set down as an interpolation by the American editor. It gives occasion for siir])rise that so excellent an arch;eol- ogist as Mr. Dali should thus have given a prominent place in scientific literature to statements of so great importance without careful verification. In an e.xcellent review of this work, the Nation thus notices the want of harmony between its autbor and editor: “ .Vvailing himself of the liberty judiciously allowed him as editor, Mr. Dali has not only rewritten the chapter (X.) on the origin of man in America, but he has so ‘ modified and revised ’ other portions of the work as to lead to conclusions that were but little dreamed of in the original publication.’L {Nation, March 12th, 1.^85.)