nected with the religion and superstitions of their builders. Throughout they sustain many and obvious resemblances, consisting of elevated platforms or truncated pyramids, ascended directly by broad flights of steps, or circuitously by winding paths; they scarcely differ except in the materials of which they are constructed, or the greater labor and skill displayed upon them. The builders of the temple mounds of the Mississippi valley seem to have been governed by the same principles which controlled the architects of the majestic teocallis of Mexico; their ruder structures being only the evidences of their ruder or earlier state. Instead of being faced with stone, elaborately carved with the symbols of their religion, the green turf covered the high places of the mound-builders; they ascended them by graded avenues or winding paths, not by broad and imposing stairways; and the wooden temple roofed with bark supplied the place of the massive edifices which still rear their crumbling, spectral fronts amid the forests of Central America. The features of resemblance between a large part of the monuments of America and many of the most ancient of those of the old world early attracted the attention of Humboldt, who seems to have been strongly impressed with their indentity, yet, with characteristic caution, unwilling to follow the connections to their ultimate results. That the practice of erecting these colossal, montiform temples was necessarily derivative, cannot be admitted. The primitive temples of every people on the globe seem to have been constructed much upon the same plan, and consisted of great enclosures of earth or upright stones, often, if not always, symbolizing in their forms the leading conceptions connected with the worship to which they were dedicated. The primitive altars, or shrines of the heathen gods, corresponded in rudeness and size with their vast open temples, and like them sustained everywhere a general resemblance. This resemblance to a certain degree may be regarded as accidental, inasmuch as an eminence or high place would naturally suggest itself as the most fitting spot whereon to render up homage to those superior powers which were supposed to dwell above, in the skies, or among the stars. It may also have resulted in no small degree from the very general primitive superstition that mountains and hills were the abiding places of the gods.
AMERICAN INDIANS. When America was discovered by Columbus, it was supposed by him and his contemporaries to be a part of the region vaguely termed India beyond the Ganges; and the newly discovered lands were thenceforth styled Indies, and the native inhabitants to this day are called Indians. The names by which Indian tribes are known to us are a strange medley. Some are nicknames given by the whites, such as Hurons, Iroquois, Nez Percés, Gros Ventres, Diggers, Blackfeet, Flatheads; others are derived from some locality near which they resided, as the Delawares, River Indians, Montagnais, Athabascans, &c. A great many tribes are known to us by the names applied to them by other Indian tribes. Thus the words Mohawk, Sioux, Esquimaux, Assiniboins, Arkansas, and Nottoway are not the real names of tribes, but all Algonquin terms; so too Adirondacks is the Mohawk term of contempt for the Montagnais on the St. Lawrence. As a general rule Indians when asked their name give the term Men or Real Men. This is the meaning of Onkwe Honwe, used by the Hurons and Iroquois; Renappi, Lenni, Illiniwek, Irini, Nethowuck, used by Algonquin tribes; Tinne, used by the Athabascans; and apparently of Apache. But this meant the tribe as composed of individuals: each tribe as a unit, a body politic, had a name, generally that of the animal or object which was the totem of the tribe. Thus the five Iroquois nations were called as one Hotinnonsionni or Hodenosaunee, a cabin; the Mohawk was the Ganniagwari, the she bear; the Illinois were called Anoka.—The whole continent was occupied by scattered tribes, from the lowest stage of barbarism to a semi-civilized state, corresponding to the stone and bronze ages of the old world, for iron was nowhere wrought. Agriculture was confined to a few plants—maize, squashes, beans, tobacco, plantains, cassava, &c. Manufactures were confined to the making of canoes from bark or hollowed trees, lodges of bark or skins, garments of skins, and in some parts basket work and rude weaving, weapons, and images carved and occasionally hammered or moulded. There seems to be an identity of race throughout the continent. Lawrence gives their general character as follows: skin brown or cinnamon-hued; iris dark; hair long, black, and straight; beard scanty; eyes deep-seated; nose broad, but prominent; lips full and rounded; and face broad across the cheeks, which are prominent, but less angular than in the Mongolian, and with the features distinct. The general shape of the head is square, with low but broad forehead, back of head flattened, top elevated, face much developed, and powerful jaws. The parietal region is much developed, the orbits are large, the feet and hands small and well proportioned, and the teeth white and sound; the facial angle about 75°. The average stature is no greater than in other races. The muscular development is not great, and there is a tendency to grow very fat when food is abundant and the habits of life are lazy. Though active and agile in sports and pursuits of short duration, the Indian is inferior to the white race in labors requiring compactness of muscle and long-continued exertion. The complexion varies from the dark brown of the California tribes to the almost white of the Mandans and the Chinooks. The beard is scanty, except among the Athabascans, and is prevented from appearing by the custom of plucking it out. The Indian has a dull, sleepy, half-closed eye, with little fire,
