Page 202 of 376
3-26-139.) [p. 165] Stone ax found at Birchwood, Wisconsin--exhibited in the collection of the Missouri Historical Society-- found with "the pointed end embedded in the soil"--for all | know, may have dropped there--28 inches long, 14 wide, 11 thick--weight 300 pounds. Or the footprints, in sandstone, near Carson, Nevada--each print 18 to 20 inches long. (Amer. Jour. Sci., These footprints are very clear and well-defined: reproduction of them in the Journal--but they assimilate with the System, like sour apples to other systems: so Prof. Marsh, a loyal and unscrupulous systematist, argues: "The size of these footprints and specially the width between the right and left series, are strong evidence that they were not made by men, as has been so generally supposed." So these excluders. Stranglers of Minerva. Desperadoes of disregard. Above all, or below all, the anthropologists. I'm inspired with a new insult--someone offends me: | wish to express almost absolute contempt for him--he's a systematistic anthropologist. Simply to read something of this kind is not so impressive as to see for one's self: if anyone will take the trouble to look up these footprints, as pictured in the Journal, he will either agree with Prof. Marsh or feel that to deny them is to indicate a mind as profoundly enslaved by a system as was ever the humble intellect of a medieval monk. The reasoning of this representative phantom of the chosen, or of the spectral appearances who sit in judgment, or condemnation, upon us of the more nearly real: That there never were giants upon this earth, because gigantic footprints are more gigantic than prints made by men who are not giants. We think of giants as occasional visitors to this earth. Of course--Stonehenge, for instance. It may be that, as time goes on, we shall have to admit that there are remains of many tremendous habitations of giants upon this earth, and that their appearances here were more than casual--but their bones--or the absence of their bones--